Tag: Rush Limbaugh

Time for a Tea Party

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

Now that we’re a couple of days removed from the advent of the biggest tax increase in our nation’s history, I sit here still turning Chief Justice Roberts’ ruling over in my feeble mind.

If you hang out on a certain Conservative website, as I do, you probably noticed an influx of Liberals, Paulnuts, and “Fiscal Conservatives” (i.e. Moderates), since ObamaTax was declared Constitutional.

While the presence of these postulating posters is nothing unique, their reaction certainly has been.

Allow me to elucidate.

The Paulnuts believe that not only was Robert’s ruling Unconstitutional, but every other American is stupid, we should all be smoking dope (like they seem to be), and Dr. Paul is still going to win the nomination.

And, that’s the intelligent ones.

The “Fiscal Conservatives” (i.e. Moderates, or Liberals in hiding)  seem to believe that Roberts made a brilliant decision and he was playing 67th dimensional chess…or something.  Also, we need to cut our Defense Budget to make up for ObamaTax, and just wait for Robert’s masterful plan to kick in, because, after all, the Tea Party is sooo gauche, aren’t they? 

I’ve noticed that these posters tend to believe that they are smarter than Conservatives and are quite enamored with themselves over their unique point-of-view.

Well, geniuses, being unique is one thing. Being a eunuch is another thing, entirely.

And finally, there are the Liberals.

Why a Liberal would want to hang out on a site founded by a Reagan Conservative is a question that has always bothered me.  Are they masocists by nature? But…I digress.

The Libs on this site were strangely subdued.  Yeah, they seemed happy enough, but not out-of-control-go-ride-their-unicorn happy.

Even the Libs in Washington seemed subdued.

Yeah, San Fran Nan threw a par-tay, but, with this sort of victory, I expected her to go streaking around the Washington Monument.

Try getting that image out of your head now. I dare ya.

It’s almost like they know that now, they’ve got to convince their brain-dead sycophants that it’s not a tax.

As he oft-times seems to do, Rush Limbaugh spoke what I was thinking about this bizarre situation during his program yesterday:

Okay, folks. I now know what happened yesterday. I’ve had time to dig into this. Time that I did not have prior to yesterday’s program and did not have during the program. And I can’t tell you how sick I am. I am literally sick over what happened yesterday. I don’t know how else to describe it. Literally sick. …

A giant total fraud was perpetrated on this country yesterday. The Supreme Court as an institution is forever tarnished. There are now no limits anywhere on the size, scope, the growth of government. We were the victims of a purposeful, intentional fraud yesterday. There is no way, were anybody in Washington concerned about the Constitution, there is no way Obamacare gets anywhere close to being law in this country. There is no way it even approaches constitutionality. And the chief justice of the US Supreme Court knew that. He felt it was his duty, however, to save the legislation.I don’t even care about motivation. I don’t care if it’s because he wants the New York Times and Washington Post in love with him. I don’t care if he wants to be the next John Marshall. I don’t care. All I know is that we were defrauded in front of our eyes, wide open. We were taunted, defrauded, mocked, laughed at. I guess 5-4 court decisions are perfectly fine now. Oh yeah, hey, we’ll take whatever we can get, we’ll take it however we can get it. Even if they have to invent law, even if they have to rewrite a statute that was so poorly written, it wouldn’t have gotten past a first grader who understood the Constitution.

Folks, having now learned what happened, and by the way, I can’t take much more reading the faint praise for Justice Roberts. There are a lot of conservatives who are trying to find some comfort in all of this by pointing out that justice Roberts ruled that the Commerce Clause isn’t a catchall that justifies anything Congress wants to do. “Hey, Rush, we got to look at what we won here.” I understand that theory. You do want to try to take the best of things that you can. But this is theft! Theft of liberty and freedom right in front of our eyes. Okay. So the Commerce Clause has been limited, so? Now we get to pay a tax for something we don’t do. But it’s worse than that. It really is akin to going into a 7-Eleven, and saying to the clerk, “No, I really don’t want to buy any gum.”

“Well, okay, tax on that is $2.35.”

That’s what’s happened here. I see all these people running around now thinking they’ve got free health care, and for the next year-and-a-half that’s what it’s gonna look like. Michelle Obama, “Guess what, contraception is now free.” She’s got a list of all the things that are free. AP has a list of all the things that are free for everybody. What happened here basically is that Justice Roberts stretched the limits to avoid being accused of activism. He wanted to avoid being accused of activism. Activism, in this case, would have been finding the law as it is unconstitutional. So he succumbed to fear that doing that, upholding the Constitution, would have resulted in him being accused of activism. So what he did, he stretched the limits to avoid being accused of activism, and in the process, he became more activist than any justice in recent memory.

In other words, Roberts said to America,

My name’s Bennett and I ain’t in it. Here’s the book. Here’s the phone. See ya later. You’re on your own.

That’s fine, Mr. Chief Justice. As I wrote yesterday, our weapons will be our ballots.  November 6th will be OUR time. See ya at the polls.

Rush Limbaugh and the Liberal Blitzkrieg

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

In their unfettered zeal to get rid of one of the most effective barriers to the re-election of their false messiah and the continued existence of the political status quo, Liberals in both political parties and the Main Stream Media have launched a Liberal Blitzkrieg against Rush Limbaugh over his comments concerning Professional Activist Sandra Fluke.

What’s a Blitzkrieg, you ask?

Per historylearningsite.co.uk:

Blitzkrieg means “lightning war”. Blitzkrieg was first used by the Germans in World War Two and was a tactic based on speed and surprise and needed a military force to be based around light tank units supported by planes and infantry (foot soldiers). The tactic was developed in Germany by an army officer called Hans Guderian. He had written a military pamphlet called “Achtung Panzer” which got into the hands of Hitler. As a tactic it was used to devastating effect in the first years of World War Two and resulted in the British and French armies being pushed back in just a few weeks to the beaches of Dunkirk and the Russian army being devastated in the attack on Russia in June 1941.

Rush Limbaugh addressed the situation and why he issued an apology last weekend to Ms. Fluke as he opened his show yesterday:

I want to explain why I apologized to Sandra Fluke in the statement that was released on Saturday. I’ve read all the theories from all sides, and, frankly, they are all wrong. I don’t expect — and I know you don’t, either — morality or intellectual honesty from the left. They’ve demonstrated over and over a willingness to say or do anything to advance their agenda. It’s what they do. It’s what we fight against here every day. But this is the mistake I made. In fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them.

Against my own instincts, against my own knowledge, against everything I know to be right and wrong I descended to their level when I used those two words to describe Sandra Fluke. That was my error. I became like them, and I feel very badly about that. I’ve always tried to maintain a very high degree of integrity and independence on this program. Nevertheless, those two words were inappropriate. They were uncalled for. They distracted from the point that I was actually trying to make, and I again sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for using those two words to describe her. I do not think she is either of those two words. I did not think last week that she is either of those two words.

The apology to her over the weekend was sincere. It was simply for using inappropriate words in a way I never do, and in so doing, I became like the people we oppose. I ended up descending to their level. It’s important not to be like them, ever, particularly in fighting them. The old saw, you never descend to the level of your opponent or they win. That was my error last week. But the apology was heartfelt. The apology was sincere. And, as you will hear as I go on here, it was not about anything else. No ulterior motive. No speaking in code. No double entendre or intention. Pure, simple, heartfelt. That’s why I apologized to Sandra Fluke on Saturday, ’cause all the theories, all the experts are wrong.

What’s gone on since and what really is going on here is what we all know to be true. Our president, Barack Obama, has a socialist agenda when it comes to health care, when it comes to birth control, when it comes to virtually every aspect of his agenda. In this case, Barack Obama wants the government, his government, making moral decisions about what treatments, prescriptions, pills you pay for through your insurance premiums. He isn’t willing to let you or the market make that decision for yourself.

Rush also had something to say concerning the advertisers who have acquiesced to the Liberal Blitzkrieg: 

The left, folks — the media — are giddy that some advertisers have said they’re leaving the program. And I’m sorry to see ’em go. They have profited handsomely from you. These advertisers who have split the scene have done very well due to their access to you, my audience, from this program. To offer their products and services to you through this venue is the best opportunity that they have ever had to advertise their wares. Now they’ve chosen to deny themselves that access, and that’s a business decision, and it’s theirs alone to make.

They’ve decided they don’t want you or your business anymore.

So be it.

For me, this program is always about you. You talk to anybody that knows me who asks me about this program, and I always say, “It’s all for the audience,” because if you’re not there, all the rest of this is academic. This show is about you. It’s not about the advertisers. I knew the political inclinations of these people. They didn’t care when they were profiting — and I didn’t, either. Everybody’s able to put these things aside for the sake of mutual beneficial business activity. No radio broadcast will succeed by putting business ahead of the needs of its loyal audience, and that audience is you. My success has come from you. My focus has always been, and always will be, on you.

…As I was saying, ladies and gentlemen, this show has always been about you. It has always been about meeting and surpassing your expectations as an audience on any level that I can imagine, on any level for which I have empathy. If this program were about the advertising… (laughing) you don’t know the kind of commercials you’d be treated to. I reject millions of dollars of advertising a year, much to the chagrin of my hardworking sales staff. Millions, folks, including, I might add, General Motors. What would you have thought, if, after the government took over General Motors, I started advertising General Motors? I made the decision not to accept that because you, the audience, come first. Because no successful program puts the audience second or third.

See, I understand my successes come from you. During the year, many of you regale me with how much the program has meant to you personally, your family, over the years. Every Thanksgiving and Christmas I take time out to tell you that no matter what this program’s meant to you, it can’t compare to what you have meant to me and my family. In fact, I have no adequate way to express my gratitude to you. Just doesn’t exist. It’s how great my gratitude for all of you is. Without you, advertisers would have no need to participate in this program. So what we’re gonna do is replace those that leave, those that no longer want access to you, those advertisers who no longer want your business, fine. We’ll replace them. It’s simple, really.

Advertising’s a business decision. It’s not a social one. Only the leftists try to use extortion, pressure, threats to silence opposing voices. We don’t do that. Never, ever, do any of us on our side of the aisle try to suppress the speech or the voices of those with whom we disagree, and we never will. So, as you’ve always done, you make your own business decisions about the products and services you buy. But don’t be like the opposition. That was my mistake last week. Don’t make it yours.

Rush will survive this.  Conservatives, such as myself, will not desert him, nor our political ideology.

I have noticed that since this story broke on the Conservative websites, the Vichy Republicans, otherwise known as Moderates, have aligned themselves with the Liberal Blitzkrieg…and the overwhelming majority of them seem to be Romney supporters.

Coincidence?  I think not.

Rush Apologizes to an Activist

On By kingsjesterIn Politics28 Comments

Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh issued the following statement on his website, rushlimbaugh.com:

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

Let’s stop for a moment and consider just whom it is that Rush has issued this apology to:

Mr. Sandra Fluke, who is attending Georgetown Law School, is a 30 year old Women’s Rights (i.e., Abortion) Activist, who was originally described by the Main Stream Media as a “23 year old co-ed”.

She revealed that she was actually 30 years old in a Today Show interview on Friday morning with host Matt Lauer.

What she did not say was that she is a past President of the Georgetown Law School Chapter of Law Sudents for Reproductive Justice.

In a statement titled LSRJ Proudly Stands With Sandra Fluke, the organization voices its support for her:

We are proud of our member and past president of Georgetown LSRJ, Sandra Fluke, for her courage and commitment in the face of cruelty. Fluke is the Georgetown law student whose contraceptive access advocacy has been called into question with language that falls, as Fluke said in her press statement, “far beyond the acceptable bounds of civil discourse.” Such personal attacks are intended to shame women out of advocacy and into silence, but Fluke refuses to back down, ”No woman deserves to be disrespected in this manner. This language is an attack on all women, and has been used throughout history to silence our voices.”

Here’s an interesting factoid, per LSRJ: 

In 2010, LSRJ launched a funded legal fellowship program for current 3Ls and recent law school graduates interested in working to advance reproductive justice through policy advocacy. Following a tremendous response from students and advocates in the field, LSRJ successfully selected and placed six Reproductive Justice (RJ) Fellows with six organizations in Washington, D.C. for the 2010-11 fellowship year.

The RJFP is intended to enhance capacity at reproductive justice organizations working to influence law and policy and to build a pipeline for future reproductive justice lawyers. The RJ Fellows are each paid $50,000 plus benefits and placed with placement organizations in Washington, D.C. for a year-long program (running August to August) that includes mentoring, professional development, training, and networking opportunities.

Ms. Fluke’s activism doesn’t stop there.  Her profile on the Georgetown Public Interest Law Scholars 2012 Graduates Page shows that:

Sandra Fluke’s professional background in domestic violence and human trafficking began with Sanctuary for Families in New York City. There, she launched the agency’s pilot Program Evaluation Initiative. While at Sanctuary, she co-founded the New York Statewide Coalition for Fair Access to Family Court, which after a twenty-year stalemate, successfully advocated for legislation granting access to civil orders of protection for unmarried victims of domestic violence, including LGBTQ victims and teens. Sandra was also a member of the Manhattan Borough President’s Taskforce on Domestic Violence and numerous other New York City and New York State coalitions that successfully advocated for policy improvements impacting victims of domestic violence.

As the 2010 recipient of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles Fran Kandel Public Interest Grant, she researched, wrote, and produced an instructional film on how to apply for a domestic violence restraining order in pro per. She has also interned with the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking; Polaris Project; Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County; Break the Cycle; the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project; NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund; Crime Victim and Sexual Assault Services; and the Human Services Coalition of Tompkins County.

Through Georgetown’s clinic programs, Sandra has proposed legislation based on fact-finding in Kenya regarding child trafficking for domestic work, and has represented victims of domestic violence in protection order cases. Sandra is the Development Editor of the Journal of Gender and the Law, and served as the President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, and the Vice President of the Women’s Legal Alliance. In her first year, she also co-founded a campus committee addressing human trafficking. Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.

Whether an apology from Rush may or may not appease the “Moderate” Republicans and the Liberal Democrats, remains to be seen.

The fact of the matter is, Ms. Fluke is not some innocent co-ed.  She is a 30 year old professional student/activist, who was probably planted at Georgetown Law School to do exactly what she did.

She most certainly has an agenda.

Just a Fluke?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

President Barack Hussein Obama has stuck his nose into a political firestorm of his own device.

Reuters.com has the story:

President Barack Obama called a law student on Friday to express his support after she was branded a “slut” by controversial right-wing talk-show host Rush Limbaugh for her outspoken support of Obama’s new policy on contraception coverage.

Sandra Fluke, a 30-year old student and women’s rights activist at Georgetown University in Washington, has been caught in the middle of a contentious election-year fight between Obama and Republicans over the policy, which requires health insurance plans to cover contraception.

Religious-affiliated organizations, the Roman Catholic Church and social conservatives have protested Obama’s new policy as an infringement on religious liberty. An effort by Republicans in the Senate to overturn it failed this week.

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in Congress, distanced his party from Limbaugh’s comments. A spokesman for Boehner called them “inappropriate” in a statement that also criticized Democrats for using the issue to raise funds before the November 6 election.

Fluke has spoken out against the Republican effort to scrap the birth control policy and advocated making contraception available to all women, drawing fire from Limbaugh and some other conservative commentators.

In an interview, Fluke told Reuters she was initially hurt, then outraged by Limbaugh’s remarks, but said she hoped the incident had raised awareness about the new policy.

She said had received “an avalanche” of supportive emails from women and men around the United States, including many from women who said they needed contraception to respond to medical conditions such as seizures, not just to prevent pregnancy.

The president called “to offer his support and thank me for helping to make heard the voices of all the women who will benefit from this regulation,” Fluke said. “He just wanted to clearly express his distaste for the types of comments that have been made about me. He was very kind.”

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama thinks Limbaugh’s comments were reprehensible.

“It is disappointing that those kinds of personal and crude attacks could be leveled against someone like this young law school student, who was simply expressing her opinion on a matter of public policy,” Carney said.

On his program on Friday, Rush Limbaugh replied to this rapidly-escalating mess:

What can I do to the women of America?

Do I have the power to raise their taxes? I do not.

Do I have the power to regulate their behavior? I do not.

Do I have the power to make health care decisions for them? I do not.

Do I have the power to withhold birth control pills from them? I do not.

Do I have the power to audit their tax returns? I do not.

Do I have the power to take their little four-year-old kindergarten student’s lunch and throw it away and make ’em eat something else? I do not.

Do I have the power to look into their personal life and leak the information to the media? I do not.

Is there one bit of freedom that I can deny them? Can I raise their taxes?

They want to blame me as being the person they should fear, when in fact the people doing all these things I just said I have no power to do, the Democrat Party is doing. That’s who everybody’s afraid of in this country. You know that story about the four-year-old girl who had her lunch taken by the federal agent? When those stories happen, have you noticed the people involved don’t want their names known? Who are they afraid of? They’re afraid of Democrat Party. They’re afraid of the Obama administration. The Obama administration will take away your birth control, and if you let ’em do that, they’ll tell you when you can and can’t take it. And then they’ll tell you when you can and can’t have sex, and then they will tell you when you can or cannot have an abortion!

You give them this power, that’s what they want.

I can’t do any of this.

So, to recap, it turns out that the “sweet little co-ed” has turned out to be a 30 year old “Women’s Right’s” (i.e., Abortion) Activist, who entered Georgetown, a Catholic University, with a dual purpose:  to achieve notoriety and advance her political ideology.

Stepping back from all the “Who Shot John” and the P.T. Barnum-esque nature of this whole contentious media-driven exercise, starting with the opening salvo, i.e., the forcing of Catholic Hospitals to acquiesce to offer the “Holy Sacraments” (birth control pills and the morning after abortion pill) of the Obama Administration, I’m reminded of the words of one Karl Marx from A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (December 1843-January 1844):

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

One of his most famous quotes was:

Religion is the opium of the masses.

He also said:

Anyone who knows anything of history knows that great social changes are impossible without feminine upheaval. Social progress can be measured exactly by the social position of the fair sex, the ugly ones included.

And, of course:

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

Evidently, Ms. Fluke is very needy.

Santorum/Romney: The Country Mouse and the City Mouse

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

I’m sick and tired of reading posters on Conservative websites and hearing from contributors on the Cable News Channels, including Fox News, pushing the idea that the Republican Primary is done, Mitt Romney is the winner, and there is no need for any more states to participate in the Republican Primary.

Rush Limbaugh (per usual) had a spot-on take on this on his Wednesday program:

…Oh, no, no, no. It’s not time to put a stop to it, anoint anybody and say that we’re done. Newt’s not getting out. He’s gonna stay in through Super Tuesday. That’s where he’s got all of his money banked. This thing could go on as far as May. Santorum’s not going anywhere. Santorum doesn’t have a lot of money even now. Romney outspent Santorum six to one in Michigan. I mean just some facts about Michigan. Romney won by nine points in 2008. He won by three points last night but got more votes last night than he did in 2008. But the percentage of his victory in 2008 was nine. It was three points last night. Santorum — and this is preliminary, I’ve gotta double-check this all, but this is what I have now — Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties.

As of now, Santorum, who lost the popular vote, won because of the way delegates are apportioned. Seven of the 14 congressional districts, Romney has won six. So that’s seven and six, a total 13 out of 14. One is still too close to call. Now, according to what I’m told, the 28 delegates, of those 28 delegates in Michigan, Santorum will either win 14 or 15, something like that, the way things get apportioned because of the number of delegates and counties, districts, so forth and he won in Michigan. So it’s not winner-take-all. So when you ask me if I should pronounce it over, it’s not my job to do that anyway.

I think the weakness that Romney has is not the conservatives won’t show up in November. They will. They want Obama out, and that will override everything. The problem is with the Reagan Democrats, the white working class that Obama lost in 2008 by I think about eight or ten points. You’ve gotta win that by 20 points, and you can do that. Some of the Republican candidates in theory could do that. Romney is weak with that segment. He knows it. That’s why he tries to do the everything and he keeps tripping over himself. If he wins that constituency, he wins the presidency, but that’s where he’s gotta work.He is just not all that good a candidate. So here are the numbers: Romney won by nine in 2008; he won 41-38 or three points last night.

Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. That’s an incredible percentage, and it reminds me of the map of the United States, red and blue by county, when you look at that after a presidential race. The whole country is red (signifying Republican) except LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Miami, Washington, New York, Boston, Chicago and Detroit. The Republicans win 80% of America’s counties and lose the White House. Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. And, as of now, Santorum, while losing the popular vote, has won seven of the 14 congressional districts; Romney won six; there’s still one at least right now (earlier this morning it was one) still too close to call. This means that, of those 28 delegates, Santorum will either win 14 (if the last district goes to Romney) and 16 if Santorum wins the last district.

So the delegate count from those 28 will be either a 14-14 tie or 16-12 Santorum.

The way that the state of Michigan was divided between the two candidates is a metaphor for the political blood bath currently going on between Conservatives and “Mitt Romney supporters” (which seems to encompass everyone from “Fiscal Conservatives” to Ron Paul tin foil hat wearing nutjobs) .

This whole primary battle reminds me of Aesop’s Fable  “The Country Mouse and the City Mouse”:

There once was a mouse who liked his country house until his cousin came for a visit.

“In the city where I live,” his cousin said, “we dine on cheese and fish and bread. Each night my dinner is brought to me. I eat whatever I choose. While you, country cousin, work your paws to the bone for humble crumbs in this humble home. I’m used to finery. To each his own, I see!”

Upon hearing this, the country mouse looked again at his plain brown house. Suddenly he wasn’t satisfied anymore. “Why should I hunt and scrape for food to store?” he said. “Cousin, I’m coming to the city with you!”

Off they went into the fine town house of the plump and prosperous city mouse.

“Shhh! The people are in the parlor,” the city mouse said. “Let’s sneak into the kitchen for some cheese and bread.”

The city mouse gave his wide-eyed country cousin a grand tour of the leftover food on the table. “It’s the easy life,” the city mouse said, and he smiled as he bit into a piece of bread.

Just as they were both about to bite into a chunk of cheddar cheese, In came the CAT!

“Run! Run!” said the city mouse. “The cat’s in the house!”

Just as the country mouse scampered for his life out of the window, he said, “Cousin, I’m going back to the country! You never told me that a CAT lives here! Thank you, but I’ll take my humble crumbs in comfort over all of your finery with fear!”

Conservatives, like myself, can identify with the Country Mouse.

We would rather hold on to our ethics and values, than compromise and elect a Left-leaning Moderate who will “reach across the aisle” to shake hands with Liberals.  

We feel that, if we elect a Conservative candidate, we won’t have to spend time worrying about the knifes that the Liberals are holding behind their backs with the other hand.

Romney: Meet the New Mod, Same as the Old Mod

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Republican Candidate for his party’s nomination, Mitt Romney, stuck his foot in his mouth again today.  Or was it intentional?

Here’s the quote from talkingpointsmemo.com:

It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments. We’ve seen throughout the campaign if you’re willing to say really outrageous things that are accusative, attacking of President Obama, that you’re going to jump up in the polls. I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am. I’m a person with extensive experience in the private sector, in the economy.

Conservative Talk Show King Rush Limbaugh had an excellent observation about Mitt’s latest gaffe:

All right. Gosh, these guys are making it so hard for me. So Romney’s not willing to say “incendiary” things about Obama to excite the base. Well, what does he say? Nice guy, just in over his head. What does this tell you that Romney thinks of the base? That it takes incendiary comments to turn you on. That all you want is somebody beating up on Obama. Somebody to come along and beat up Obama or set their hair on fire to get attention, something like that, and that’s all you care about. And maybe not all you care about, but that’s what really gets you off your duff. And Mitt Romney says, “I have got extensive experience in the private sector. I am not gonna criticize Obama.” If he’s not careful, you know how we joke about John Kerry, who, by the way, served in Vietnam — been pointing that out now for eight years — it isn’t gonna be long before everybody’s gonna say, “Mitt Romney, who had extensive experience in the private sector.”

Look, Romney people, you got to know, I love you. But I’m not the one saying what he’s saying. I did not raise the white flag in Michigan today. I didn’t say I’m not gonna say incendiary things just to attract the base. At least McCain waited until the general campaign to make it clear that anybody criticizing Obama would be fired. Here it’s happening in the primary. I’m not gonna make any incendiary comments to attract the base. I have extensive experience in the private sector. Obama can say whatever he wants about us and does, and the media can, and we’re not talking about incendiary, we’re talking about truth, I thought.

I’m getting this strange feeling of deja vu…all over again.  

And here’s the proof, courtesy of The Wall Street Journal, in an article posted June 5, 2008:

Barack Obama and John McCain spoke on the phone Wednesday night and agreed to engage in a “civil discussion in the campaign moving forward,” according to an Obama aide.

McCain initiated the call at 7:00pm EDT to congratulate Obama on securing the nomination after a hard-fought primary against Hillary Clinton.

This is the first time the opponents have spoken since Obama clinched the number of delegates needed to capture the nomination on Tuesday.

As of now, Obama and McCain have exchanged rhetoric that by most counts would not be characterized as “civil.” Obama has come down on his Republican rival over a gaffe he made about troop levels and has accused him of not understanding the economy. McCain, meanwhile, has attacked the Democratic nominee over his lack of foreign policy experience and his willingness to meet with leaders of rogue nations.

During his victory rally in St. Paul, Minn., on Tuesday, Obama praised McCain for his military service and said he is “a genuine American hero.” But criticized him for offering “four more years of the failed Bush policies.”

McCain has called for a series of ten joint town hall style meetings with Obama. The Illinois senator is also open to the proposal of joint appearances, and the two campaigns are in talks.

“The American people deserve a debate worthy of their concerns and hopes for the future. Everyone can celebrate today’s step toward that goal with an agreement, in spirit, between the McCain and Obama campaigns to participate in joint town hall appearances,” McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said in a statement.

Back on January 19, 2012 at the CNN Republican Candidate Debate, Romney said:

And — well, let’s see. I guess — I guess I also would go back and take every moment I spent talking about one of the guys on the stage and spent that time talking about Barack Obama because…the — the truth is that — that Barack Obama is just way over his head and he’s taking our country down a path that is very dangerous. He’s making us more and more like a European social welfare state. He’s making us an entitlement society. He’s taking away the rights of our citizens. He believes government should run this country.

Look, the right course for America is to return to our fundamental principles, and I would be talking about that more, and probably about my colleagues less because frankly, any one of them would be a better president than the one we’ve got.

Gov. Romney is right about one thing:  America needs to return to our fundamental principles.  However, in order to accomplish that, we will need a leader who will fight to restore them, not stick his finger up in the air to determine from which direction the wind is blowing, before he makes a presidential decision.

And, we need a Republican Candidate who will fight to win the Presidency.

We already tried nominating a Moderate in 2008….and we all remember how that fiasco turned out.