Support from Rush Limbaugh would be huge although I would find it quite weird to be on the same side as Rush... !
I am hopeful that Rush secretly does support Ron Paul but knows that he (Rush) is such a politically divisive person that openly supporting Ron Paul would cause anti-Rush folks to automatically not support him.
Maybe.
lol, Are you former democrat? I can see that being somehow unnerving, since he would have essentially been the hell hound in your eyes previously.Originally Posted by Zibblu
Ronpublicans unite!
Maybe, as much as I hate people who automatically hate things by association.
Ronpublicans unite!
Hey Rush!
Great to hear that old time conservativism! That was awesome! Reagan had a great one at the 1964 national convention too! You can find it online under the name “Reagan a time for choosing.”
Wish we had you on the Ron Paul wagon. I guess someone in your position isn’t allowed to go against the grain until Iowa voters can give you the political cover to do so. Hopefully the results in Iowa will allow you to back real conservativism, and you can use your airwaves to promote a conservative, rather than simply tearing down candidates who aren’t conservatives. I don’t really blame you though. It’s your livelihood that you’re messing with. Why anger a nation of Republicans for a conservative candidate whose conservativism casts him on the fringe of the party? You’re probably doing the right thing.
Hopefully enough conservatives will get out there for Paul to give you the kind of cover you need among your listenership to help us re-introduce genuine conservativism back into the party. Isn’t it funny that it’s going to take some of the democrats help to get conservativism back on track? I guess Reagan had “Reagan Democrats” too! Haha!
Regards,
I agree, as much as I have had issues with this man, his support would be the ultimate tipping of the scales in our favor. Nothing in the world would make me happier than to say to my neo-conned father and grandfather...."guys, Rush supports Ron Paul, please, it's time to join the revolution."
I also agree that in general it is the thought of joining with anyone "anti-war" that stops these neo-conned folks cold. But that is the biggest part of the con. Since when did pro-longed, undeclared, pre-emptive WAR become a conservative, christian or American value? They have been duped.
I have had to bite my tongue and become what I never thought I would.....a Republican, now, the others must bite theirs and become what they never thought they would......anti-war.
Peace wont hurt us, Peace is good for us all. Peace is not a dirty word.
"Weeeeeeeelllll, you'll come around."
Right, they are thinking a bit reflexively perhaps.
I laughed out loud when my dad made the point that all these democrats who clamor so loudly for our military intervention in Darfur for the sake of the people, seem to ignore the fact that just as many will probably die in the civil discord following our leaving Iraq. He says its not our place to intercede throughout the world. Which in turn allowed me to call out that hypocrisy. Oh sweet justice.
I think its only a matter of time before many of these people wake up to their hypocrisy, at least one can hope.
Ronpublicans unite!
Rush and the others are "locked into" thier listeners desires and wants. Thats how they make a living selling books and advertisements.
When its obvious that the pronation building listeners are less in number than the fiscal goldwater conservatives they will change their tune or quit. Simple as that. Rush would have called someone a liberal on the radio if they defended the intervetntion in bosnia, haiti or somalia back in 98.
USE THIS SITE TO LINK ARTICLES FROM OLIGARCH MEDIA:http://archive.is/ STARVE THE BEAST.
More Government = Less Freedom
Communism never disappeared it only changed its name to Social Democrat
Emotion and Logic mix like oil and water
All this and I didn't even post my own email: And the speech in question was the Reagan 1964 A Time for Choosing Speech (maybe I could have been clearer, but anyway, point stands) I think he was trying to get people to understand that people didn't know that was Reagan...
Rush - The speech you're quoting is:
A Time for Choosing - Reagan's Goldwater Endorsement speech
I've watched it on Google Video.
Rush, I don't think too many conservatives that I know and proudly call themselves conservatives have ever heard the speech or have even heard OF the speech.
Sad, I'm only 33 years old and I've seen it - and it was linked to OF ALL PLACES, Rush, from the Ron Paul Forums. Imagine that?! Many of us have watched it, believe it or not.
Rush, I was just listening to you in my car over lunch and you talked about "redefining" of conservatism. You also pined that you're a "purist" and want to return to the true spirit of conservatism. But that pains me, as I feel that that occurred after GWB's 2000 speeches. He attacked the policies of nation building, offensive wars into countries we had no place being in.... And now where are we? How did we get here? How do people NOT notice this inconsistency? Come on, Rush! Is this not exactly what you're talking about? A "redefining" of conservatism??
If we want to get back to the PURE roots of where our country came from, from its Constitutional framework, there is only one candidate and I think you know it already. Why won't you just admit it to yourself?
Join the Revolution Rush, there is room on the bandwagon for you.
PS - If you look up Ronald Reagan's views on his FRIEND, who was one of the first to stand with him when he ran for office, you might be surprised.
We should take our marching orders from the Constitution!
EXACTLY. If he's hinting at Ron now it's just hedging his bets for tomorrow and next week, so he can say he was right all along and just wasn't going to say the name then.
It is so common to have this attitude. I have a few friends who love "The Speech" and worship Ronald Reagan's speeches but they can't see Ron Paul because they are blinded by fear of "Islamo-facism". Neal Boortz is another great example of this. I wish these people could look past thier disagreements with Ron Paul much as I have on the abortion issue. My only answer to some of these people is that RP is not some sort of pacifist and WOULD go after terrrorist threats if they are a DIRECT threat to us and it was done constitutionally.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us