October 13, 2011


  1:42 pm

Per Hot Air, here is Rush Limbaugh’s endorsement of Mitt Romney in 2008:

RUSH: I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. The social conservatives are the cultural people. The fiscal conservatives are the economic crowd: low taxes, smaller government, get out of the way.

Of course, the foreign policy crowd is obviously what it is. I don’t think there’s anybody on our side who doesn’t care about national security, which is why I found it amazing that McCain gets the bulk of those, because the idea that Romney or Huckabee are going to punt national security? In Huckabee’s case, you might just say the things he’s saying about it represent an ignorance born of inexperience in the subject. I don’t think Huckabee has any deleterious intentions about the country. When it comes to the fiscal side, you cannot say — you just cannot say — that John McCain is interested. He’s even admitted he’s not interested in the social side. He’s not interested in the economic side. He said this, and when he has spoken up about it, he sides more often with liberal Democrats on fiscal issues than he does with his own side. That’s problematic. This is why I think — and why I have said — that the Republican Party, not conservatism, but the Republican Party is in big trouble if it is empowered and gets elected by attracting people who also hold liberal Democrat views simply because they like McCain because of his character, his honor, his prisoner of war story, and they don’t like Hillary or Obama.

Implicit in the second bolded sentence is Rush’s contention that Romney’s potential victory would not be the triumph of a liberal candidate.

A somewhat humorous reminder that every public statement made these days is preserved forever.



by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

DeMint, Cain, and a lot of conservatives were strongly out there for Romney in 2008. It's funny to see them so very anti-Romney in 2012.


Michele Bachmann endorsed Romney in 2008 as well. So did Tom Tancredo.


I appreciate you posting this Kavon. I hope this gets posted far and wide and forces Rush to address it.


Pathetic. These guys are all absolutely pathetic.


I would change the title though. Something that says, "Limbaugh's Romney Flip-Flop" or something. Search engines will pick it up a lot better.


New CNN Poll of Polls

Romney 23%

Cain 20%

Perry 14%

Paul 10%

Gingrich 6%

Bachman 5%

Santorum 2%

Huntsman 2%

Other/Undecided 18%


Is this poll just a compilation of other polls? Is this similar to the RCP averages?


From Drudge:

Obama to FOXNEWS reporter: 'I didn't know you were spokesman for Mitt Romney'...


Looks like FNC and Obama know who the competitor for Obama will be ... lol


Rush certainly is driving me insane...but not unlike Cain, he's not someone who I want to have to completely destroy to win this thing.

He remains, for better or worse, one of the best advocates of the Conservative movement and ideology.



I am too much in awe of Limbaugh's contribution to conservatism to call him out like that. Rush is probably one of the three most important American conservatives who have ever lived.

He's wrong on this one... But he's human after all.


"It’s funny to see them so very anti-Romney in 2012." Hello, there is a different set of candidates out there this time around.


As I said, a lot of people endorsed Romney in 2008. The only one I saw address it was Cain here with an amusing anecdote at the end.


He's as important as Goldwater, Reagan, and Buckley?


SORRY, All I Got Is 999 cain

The only thing cain has is his 999 plan that won’t work. OBAMA WILL CRUSH CAIN!!!


Rush Limbaugh is no longer conservative!\

He changed the meaning of the word to mean, "Anything But Romney". He can't do that! It is a betrayal of what conservative really means. Rush Limbaugh has lost his core.


#10 - OHIO JOE - It's true, there are and I'm a Cain fan myself. That said, Romney hasn't changed from 2008 to 2012. The vitriol some are throwing at him now, some of whom were supportive of him in '08, seems odd.


I remember in 2008 driving in my car listening to Rush say he was headed to the polls to vote for Romney..

Absolutely slays me to hear him Flip Flop.

He has an alterior motive.


I didn't mean the slash to have any meaning at all in that last post. My nails hit the key...



Is Perry and Huntsman any more Conservative than Giuliani, Huckabee or McCain? Is Cain more Conservative than Fred Thompson? Is Santorum or Bachmann more Conservative than Brownback?

I don't see much difference.



No Rush Limbaugh is now worthless. His lies have been exposed. I grant him as much room as he grants Romney. He claims Romney is a liar, I say, Rush Limbaugh is a liar!!!! And not conservative.


Heh is right.

There's a bunch of these out there. Freaking hypocrites.


Rush is pathetic....He brags that he's 99.9% correct....Well, to have his collegues call him out for hypocricy must be a big embarrassment.



I was actually thinking about this early this morning, from a slightly different angle.

In 2008, the conservative talk radio cabal fixed their crosshairs firmly on John McCain and threw everything at him they could. They did not want him to get the nomination. But he did, proving that they do not speak for, nor lead, a majority of our party.

Now in 2012, they are targeting Mitt Romney - the guy they all propped up and supported as the conservative alternative to John McCain last time - and throwing everything they've got at him. And once again, they will fail in stopping Romney from getting the nomination. Perhaps it will be this time around that proves to them, for better or worse, that they don't have the seat of power that their egos tell them they do...


THIS. This is why I flipped Rush the bird yesterday! I remember that exact moment--it was February 2008, the day before Super Tuesday, and he gave Romney the endorsement all too late. Now he's flopped on Romney.

Let's just hope that all his Perry-pushing leads to Perry failing as well.

So long, Rush.


I wrote about this same thing back in April ...


I expect more and more people to fall in line as things shape up, but it's been interesting to watch.


I've been reminding anyone who would listen that Rush had all but endorsed Romney in 2008. In fact, I remember Rush saying, "I should have broken my no endorsement rule in primaries so the Romney could win." (it was something along that line)

In any case, stating that Romney meets all three legs of Conservatism is a pretty strong endorsement. The nice thing is it is true. Romney hasn't changed in many years, and especially not in 5 years.



Amen brother. I've been thinking that exact same thing. If the gasbags on talk radio want to go anti-Romney, well, the result would be (if 2008 repeats itself) that Romney is our nominee. Only this time, America wins with Romney.


It would be one thing if Romney had changed since 2008, but he hasn't changed on bit. If anything, he has gotten more conservative on the issues that Rush is lambasting him over right now.

As I have said before, I like Rush. I used to respect him. I think he is a smart man. He is being a complete hypocrite with regards to Romney though.


Yes... Rush is equally as important as William F. Buckley. It's not even a question.


Rush was a HUGE fan of Chris Christie as well which he has now thrown under the bus. I'll bet you could find plenty of quotes of him praising Christie in the past.


"He’s as important as Goldwater, Reagan, and Buckley?"

I don't know about this...but he is importnat. nobody else has done as much to bring Conservatism to the average man. and unlike the three you mentioned, Rush is still alive.

I mean really, without Rush - its not like we've got a clear alternative, is it?


So if Rush thinks Romney's a big liberal and that the right is "pushing" him to act more Conservative, by the same token could you not say that Rush is really a big liberal too when he supported Romney in 2008, but is now "faking it" because the right is pushing him now?



As someone who has studied Goldwater rather extensively, my conception of Goldwater's place in the history of the movement has less to do with the man himself than the people who mobilized in his name and ended up changing the world. People like Pat Manion and Richard Viguerie (among many others) helped make Goldwater the Goldwater we think of today.


Now how do you get the press to report on it..Instead of ignoring it..as if it never happened..

A great story here for someone..


YEA, IDK WATS UP WITH THESE NEW POLLS trying to make cain look like a huge winner or everything,(like they did with perry) but look at the polls that show romney way way wayyyy! ahead, and over the 25 percent thing that people say he never beats, but now he is beating it.

Quinnipiac Poll: Romney with comfortable lead over GOP and puts New Jersey in play for the general election

GOP Nomination:

Mitt Romney 28%

Herman Cain 17%

Ron Paul 11%

Rick Perry 7%

Newt Gingrich 5%

Michele Bachmann 4%

Jon Huntsman 2%

Rick Santorum 1%

Someone else (vol.) 3%

Wouldn't vote (vol.) 2%

Don't know 18%


Barack Obama 47%

Mitt Romney 41% (-6)

Barack Obama 47%

Herman Cain 38% (-9)

Barack Obama 49%

Rick Perry 36% (-13)

From October 5 - 10, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,186 registered voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.9 percentage points. Live interviewers call land lines and cell phones.


28 - I agree. I would say he is even more important than Buckley. No one has done as much as Rush has over the last 20 years.

Conservative Gladiator

I respect conservatism. I respect everyone that advances it in any form. Rush was a leading voice, but now he's not. With an ego as big as Rush' he's chosen his path and I'm sure he will fight his hypocrisy to the bitter end. Fight away!!! It's wrong and it doesn't matter who did it.


33 - I wouldn't be surprised to see someone pick it up. If there is one thing the liberal press loves more than bashing generic conservatives, it is bashing Rush Limbaugh. In this case, I hope they do it.


"Is Perry and Huntsman any more Conservative than Giuliani, Huckabee or McCain?" No, but the rest of the field is.


I know after the loss in the last cycle, Mitt went down and met with rush in Florida for a day or two to discuss what went right and wrong and to thank him for his support. At least early on Mitt was getting his and others opinions. Rush probably got his feelings hurt since Mitt has been moving on without him and succeeding just fine. Rush is the great flip flopper now.


Ahh...radio talk show folks. Forever in support of that nonexistent, perfect, underdog.

Firecracker (Romney/West)

People we need to get people to e-mail Rush and slam him on this! What a hypocrite!!


39 - Bingo! This is about ring kissing more than anything else.


14 petunia makes a good point.


The reason I trust Romney over Limbaugh is because although they are both really smart, Romney is conservative in his personal life, Rush is liberal. I go with the conservative core.

Conservative Gladiator

Buckley was more important to conservatism than Rush. He started the movement to bring it a voice. Rush advanced it through his medium and Fox News picked up on it as an alternative to the MSM. Conservatism is about common sense and principle. It's much bigger than the people who've advanced it. Everyone has a bit of conservatism in them. Even the most liberal of liberals. Hypocrisy is anti-conservatism.


44 - So the fact that Romney is at best "politically negotiable" doesn't bother you, so long as he sticks to decaf?

Conservative Gladiator

46 - show us where Romney didn't lead his blue ass state as a conservative? Romneycare? You wanna go that route? Keep trying. Follow Rush' line of questioning. Romney will hit you upside your head like he did to Perry. He doesn't apologize for it. Live with it! He wasn't being a hypocrite about it.


I don't give a rat's rear end who Rush endorses, it's the reasons he endorsed Romney in 2008' that matter.


47 - A billion dollars in "fees" to balance the budget and then sneakily using that as an excuse to say he never raised taxes. The $50 abortions in the legislation. I don't care about the court mandated coverage - because he never needed to sign the bill anyway. 93%+ were already insured.

I don't know if the $50 abortions were part of his claiming that he'd "never waiver" on a woman's right to choose or if the collective Rombottery simply forgot about it when they claim that he heroically could never sign legislation increasing abortions as governor during his miraculous Road To Des Moines conversion.

Then of course there is Mitt's lie that he was tough on immigration. He didn't squat on Sanctuary Cities until Deval Patrick had already been elected. Then Romney lied and pretended to be tough on immigration in a debate with Giuliani.

If Romney did such a great job with his "blue ass state" then he should have just stayed there and not attempted to foist his idea of "conservatism" on the 80 percent of the party that just can't bring themselves to vote for him.


So, how can Rush ever say anything about the DNC/Liberal talking points when he's been using them for the last three days to destroy Romney, who BTW is still his fellow Republican.


50 - Because in a primary contest this is where the battles are fought.

If Romney is the nominee then Rush will support Romney in the general election with Obama.

Just like Rush supported McCain after McCain won the nomination.



You are wrong on your facts.

1. RomneyCare DID NOT have the $50 abortion provision in it when Mitt Romney signed the bill. It was added after.

2. If you think that fees on individual products for people who CHOOSE to buy them are the same thing as a tax on EVERYONE whether they choose to buy or not is the same thing, I can't help you.


52 - Oh okay. So Romney just KNEW that when he signed the bill into law that the courts would mandate an expansion of abortion coverage.

Got it.



"If Romney did such a great job with his “blue ass state” then he should have just stayed there and not attempted to foist his idea of “conservatism” on the 80 percent of the party that just can’t bring themselves to vote for him."

When Romney signed MassCare, about 80% of the party loved his Health Care plan. How can Romney help the fact that the party was about to do a 180 degree flip-flop on the idea of health care mandates?



Don't waste your time--Sojo's not open to reason, just outright hatred of Romney. Because apparently that works 😛

Conservative Gladiator

51 - of course he will but not after he frames Romney negatively through distortions and blatant lies and calling him things he is not. Btw, why are these things that you're saying about Romney not being brought up by the other candidates themselves? Please don't tell me because he's a good debater. Aside from Perry they do just fine.



"52 – Oh okay. So Romney just KNEW that when he signed the bill into law that the courts would mandate an expansion of abortion coverage."

He didn't know, smart ass. MITT ROMNEY SIGNED THE BILL WITHOUT THE $50 ABORTION COVERAGE IN IT. Blame Romney for his own sins, not the sins of others.



That's funny, because more than 80% of the country wont vote for your guy!


54 - Assume that's true that the problem is that the "party flipped".

So what? The party platforms can't evolve with time? Because Mitt Romney supported a health care mandate, the GOP has to be stuck with a nominee who likes the idea?

King Mitt gets to decide what "conservatism" is and the millions of rubes have to dutifully oblige?

But even if 80 % of MASSACHUSETTS politicians loved the idea, no one was ever too keen on it going national. And once it did and it turns out that Romney's buddies were instructing on Obama how to best install the program, conservatives had a right to steer clear.


58 - Actually that's not true. Put a conservative (who can actually talk) against Romney in a one on one contest - and it really IS no contest.


The problem with Rush, Levin, and Hannity are they aren't what they profess to be. They are the phonies in this arena. They change faster with the tide then the politicians do. If Mitt Romney was a conservative in 2008, then he is now. They all three said it (5 Feb 2008) Chris Christie is absolutely regarding Romneycare. I don't care how many of Mitt's old staff the President used to craft Obamacare, he failed to ask Mitt. Massachusetts has had it for several years now, and somehow the citizens still like it even though it has changed since Mitt did it.

It seems the closer Mitt gets to securing the nomination, the more this vial venom comes vomits from the mouths of people I've always viewed as political friends. Right now Limbaugh, Levin and Hannity support Axelrod and Obama. They are all saying the same thing. Isn't it funny how quickly the conservative movement and the liberal wing of the democratic party come together. If you set back and look at it from 30,000 feet. Everyone is saying the same thing. Hate Mitt.

Mitt may not be a purest hardcore Southern Conservative, however he is a solid conservative. In fact Levin, Hannity, and Limbaugh said so in 2008. His core values are conservative, Levin, Hannity, and Limbaugh said so in 2008. Now it is 2011 and I agree with them completely. He is a conservative. He has the best plan for our country.



Are you ready to admit that Ronald Reagan is a Liberal then? He's the one that passed Amnesty for millions of illegals not knowing that the there would be no law securing the border after it. He's the one who signed a mandate for EMTALA services requiring Doctors to service people.

Funny how I don't hear Reagan skewered by the far right these days even though the party has flip-flopped from his stances.



Your missing it again (on purpose) Romney didn't want it to go National, end of story. You Perry cultist don't care what the truth is.



Got a poll backing that up? Last I checked Romney is neck and neck against Herman Cain, and CLOBBERS the rest of the field in a one-on-one poll.

Conservative Gladiator

60 - you have conservatives that can talk. Cain, Bachmann, Santorum and Newt. All four of them with their conservative credentials can go after him at one time and this last debate they had their chance. Then you have Romney himself who is conservative who makes Perry look like a liberal.



They won't go after Mitt because they know it's "DISHONEST" to do so, just as Chris Christie stated.


57 - So Romney had no idea that the Commonwealth Care Authority would do this? According to Politifact, the Commonwealth Care was his pet project and he took credit for it.

Indeed, abortions are covered

Fred Thompson's campaign is trying to take the much-touted health insurance program that Mitt Romney helped create as governor of Massachusetts and turn it into a liability with conservative Republican voters who dominate the party's primary elections.

The Thompson campaign, which has been playing up the former U.S. senator's antiabortion stances, sent out this e-mail in November 2007:

"So what sort of services does Romney's health care plan provide? Per the state Web site: $50 co-pay for abortions.

"While court mandate requires Massachusetts to cover 'medically necessary' abortions in state-subsidized health plans, Mitt Romney's plan covers ALL abortions -- no restrictions."

And it's true.

One of the crowning moments of Mitt Romney's tenure as governor of Massachusetts was the creation of Commonwealth Care, a state-run, state-subsidized health insurance program for people making up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level. Although private insurers provide the coverage, the state helps pay the bills and determines what services must be covered.

That list includes abortion. And the co-pay is indeed $50.

Romney has recently sought to distance himself from some details of the plan, but he has touted it in debates and interviews as a model for the nation.

"I love it. It's a fabulous program," Romney said during a May 3, 2007, Republican debate in Simi Valley, Calif. "Now I know there's some people who wonder about it. Sen. Kennedy at the signing of the bill, we were all there together, he said, 'You know, if you've got Mitt Romney and Ted Kennedy agreeing to the same bill, that means one thing -- one of us didn't read it.'

"But I helped write it. And I knew it well. ...The market can work to solve our health care needs, and 27 other states are working on health care programs now. It's a great program, a great opportunity for the entire country."

Romney's campaign counters that the decision about what services to cover was ultimately left up to the independent Commonwealth Care Authority.

But Romney was well-represented: Of the six policy-making members of the authority's 10-member board, half are appointed by the governor, and half by the state attorney general. Half of the ex-officio members also are appointed by the governor, including the chairman -- the governor's secretary of administration and finance -- and the state insurance commission.

Although Romney shares responsiblity with the state legislature and the program's board, Commonwealth Care was his pet project, and he takes credit for it. We find Thompson's claims true.



62 - I didn't hear Reagan disingenuously attacking Ford as being too liberal on immigration, like Romney did to Giuliani.

That's a big difference.



the decision about what services to cover was ultimately left up to the independent Commonwealth Care Authority.

Romney didn't sign the bill with $50 abortions in it. Until you can provide proof that Romney pushed the INDEPENDENT board to provide $50 abortions after the bill was signed, you're full of it.

Try again.


If the race came down to a two way match between Cain and Romney, Cain leads 48-36. Cain would pick up Bachmann, Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum's supporters.






Who were the three Romney appointed to the board?

How did they vote?


Rasmussen today:

Romney 42%

Cain 43%

Is this what you call

really IS no contest.



71 - Haha. Are you, like, a cartoon character or something?

I don't like illegal immigration. But I dislike EVEN MORE Romney's attempt to pretend to be tough on immigration and lecture the other candidates when he is weak, weak, weak on the topic himself.

Weakness on immigration is bad. Disingenuous pandering is worse.


73 - Well, I like my PPP poll better.

48-36 for Cain.

The guy with no money and no political experience beats the guy who has been running since 2004 by double digits.



Again, I need a quote or proof Romney explicitly pushed the $50 abortions.


He’s wrong on this one… But he’s human after all.

Kavon - I appreciate the sentiment - but there are a number of sheep that listen to him and believe 100% of what he says regardless of how it seems to fly in the face of something he's said before. Try telling him he's wrong - he'll find a way to prove that he's still "all knowing & all seeing".


And even if you want to bury your hand in the sand (because we both know that Romney's appointees were pro-choicers) it just goes to show the law of unintended consequences of signing liberal legislation into law.

reginald from texas

72. The governor does not get to select his/her own nominees in Massachusetts.



"And even if you want to bury your hand in the sand (because we both know that Romney’s appointees were pro-choicers) it just goes to show the law of unintended consequences of signing liberal legislation into law."

Actually, it just goes to show that you have no evidence of anything. Your hate for Romney has clouded your senses, and no amount of proof or reason will change that.

Firecracker (Romney/West)


Anita Perry boo-hoos over the fact that her husband has been "brutalized" over his religion:


Hey Anita, that what happens when you (1) pander to Evangelicals for votes by praying in front of 30,000 at the National Day of Prayer just DAYS before launching your Presidential campaign, and (2) have a bigotted Pastor attack one of your political opponents solely on the issue of religion while simultaneously disparging a large segment of the Republican party.

Hey Anita, if you don't want to be attacked on your faith, don't exploit it to get votes or use it as a weapon against others for political gain. What a cow!


79 -

Of the six policy-making members of the authority’s 10-member board, half are appointed by the governor, and half by the state attorney general

So who were the Romney Three?


81- Not at all. Romney had to have known what the liberal legislature was going to do with his legislation. And he must have known who he was going to appoint to the board.

A pro-lifer, a real pro-lifer, would never have allowed $50 abortions to come to pass.



"Romney had to have known"

Spoken like a true story teller. How far do you think that line would get you in a court of law?



"A pro-lifer, a real pro-lifer, would never have allowed $50 abortions to come to pass."

Guess that rules Ronald Reagan out as Governor of California.


“Democratic California state senator Anthony Beilenson introduced the “Therapeutic Abortion Act,” in an effort to reduce the number of “back-room abortions” performed in California.[74] The State Legislature sent the bill to Reagan’s desk where, after many days of indecision, he signed it.”


Guess that makes Reagan far more liberal than Romney since Reagan actually DID SIGN an abortion bill with his own hand.


85 - Story teller my ass. Romney knew that Planned Parenthood would have a say on that board. You know it and I know it.

The only reason you prop this guy up is because of your weird religious fetish that you want the world to know of Joseph Smith. You admitted as much.

If Huckabee did this, you'd call him a baby killer.

Anything to promote Mormonism.

You're a weird weird dude.


Romney knew that Planned Parenthood would have a say on that board. You know it and I know it.

But have no direct proof of this. You're simply pushing something you want to believe.


I just want you to show me direct evidence showing Romney literally had a hand in pushing $50 abortions onto that board and influenced the court to work it into the bill after it was signed.

That's all I'm asking. Can you prove that?


2006: Romneycare guarantees Planned Parenthood a seat at the table. Romney’s legislation created an advisory board and guarantees, by law, that Planned Parenthood has a seat at the table. Romney’s plan established a MassHealth payment policy advisory board, and one member of the Board must be from Planned Parenthood. No pro-life organization is represented.


Section 16M. (a) There shall be a MassHealth payment policy advisory board. The board shall consist of the secretary of health and human services or his designee, who shall serve as chair, the commissioner of health care financing and policy, and 12 other members: 1 member appointed by the speaker of the house; 1 member appointed by the president of the senate; 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts Hospital Association;? 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts Medical Society; 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts Extended Care Federation; 1 member appointed by Mass Aging Services Association, 1 member appointed by the Home Care Alliance of Massachusetts; 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers; 1 member appointed by Mental Health and Substance Abuse Corporations of Massachusetts; 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts Medicaid Policy Institute; 1 member appointed by the Massachusetts Association of Behavioral Health Systems; 1 member appointed by Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts; and 2 members appointed by the governor, 1 member representing managed care organizations contracting with MassHealth and 1 member being an expert in medical payment methodologies from a foundation or academic institution.

This is the $hit that Romney signed into law.

Don't tell me that when you sign a bill to increase health care coverage that guarantees Planned Parenthood at the table, you're shocked that abortions are made more readily available.

So no. Romney doesn't get to plead ignorance on this.


Today, for the first time since I first started listening to him, I decided to turn off Rush's radio program. He seems to be a broken record criticizing Mitt Romney although in 2008 he supported his candidacy. Rush should explain his change of heart since all of the criticisms of Romney today were around in 2008.


Where were the pro-life organizations guarenteed a seat that the table?

Answer: there were none.


Yesterday John Gibson played the audio of Rush's endorsement of Mitt in 2008, here's the audio: http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/10/is-rush-limbaugh-hippocrit-or-rino.html



That still isn't proof that Romney made those people put $50 abortions into the bill.


And i'll put it another way. Romney got to appoint three members. The attorney general got to appoint three. Romney knew the atty general was a pro-choicer and he DAMN WELL knows that the Planned Parenthood mandated member is.

So Romney knowingly signed off on a bill with an advisory board stacked with pro-choicers who g ot to say what "procedures" would be covered.


95 - Weak. Weak weak weak. He knew EXACLTY what he was getting when he signed this bill into law.



So if Planned Parenthood is guaranteed power in this deal, how did that happen?

Was it a concession of dealing with the liberal legislature? And if it was, then what did Romney think the Democrats had in mind by putting Planned Parenthood on the board?

Or was it Romney's idea, since he donated to Planned Parenthood prior to that anyway?



I have no idea who's idea it was or why they put the $50 abortion thing into the health care program. All I know it wasn't Romney who did it. That's evidence I'm trying to get from you, that you can't seem to provide me.


I like Rush too, but remember his saying all this.

I think Rush is holding out for someone MORE conservative that Mitt. I'm still unclear why he seems to favor an unrepentant immigrant magnet like Perry. Mitt at least has changed on his shortcomings.

But it goes to show that if Rush had to run for office, he'd have flip-flopping charges to deal with.

Let's not turn on Rush, but maybe cut him some slack.


#51 - "Just like Rush supported McCain after McCain won the nomination." Yes - but by that time, the damage had already been done and that is why we got stuck with Obama.


99 - Haha. Okay. I just provided you irrefutable evidence that Romney knowkingly packed that advisory board with pro-choicers and even signed the bill into law that gave Planned Parenthood a power seat at the table.

Mitt didn't know whether he was going to get expanded abortions with a $50 co-pay or a $20 co-pay. But he knew what he would be getting. And if you're honest with yourself you'd concede such. If you can't do that then you pretty much forfeit the right to question Perry's intelligence.


101 - Maybe, but doesn't that seem like a stretch?

Was ANY Republican going to win that year after the war fatigue and the econmic slump?

I doubt it.


I've been a loyal Rush listener for 20 years. Before that I was a liberal school teacher. After listening to Rush I've been a hard-core conservative for 20 years. But I'm not giving him a pass on this. I believe he's lost his mind. Maybe he sees the conservative movement going down the drain if another Establishment Republican (after Bush I & II) get in. Maybe he's right. But Rush acts like Romney is Satan himself.

The fact of the matter is none of the more conservative candidates have laid out their plans for the presidency well in advance. If Rush wanted a super-conservative to win, he should have done like Bill Ayers and started grooming one that could win well in advance of this election.

Maybe it's Rubio, but it's too soon for him. So go with the army you have and run Rubio in the future.

I know; I know. People believe it's now or never; the country is toast. Well, the country could well be toast no matter what. A bunch of poison stuff is baked in the cake (or the bread). There really is no real way to fix it.

What does Rush want? Perry? He comes across like a dunce. He can't save the country. Cain? His 9-9-9 plan will never be passed and it hurts the poor in the short run to save the country in the long run. Who is Rush's savior? He doesn't say.

He just wants to throw an angry hissy fit and obliterate Romney because Rush et al didn't bother to raise up an electable, effective conservative created after their own image.


SoJO...go watch the Huckabee interview with Mitt...you won't believe his explanation of course, but he answers the question regarding $50 abortions. The Mass. supreme court was responsible for that and it was a decision that was already in place before the law was even crafted.

Trying To Be Pragmatic

Sojo is now spamming the boards with repetitious "give me an explanation" posts when everything has already been explained to him many times.

Sojourner Truth has taken his que for the OWS crowd, and he is staging an "Occupy Race42012."

Ban Sojourner Truth !

Ban Sojourner Truth !

Ban Sojourner Truth !

Ban Sojourner Truth !


The problem with Rush and the other talk show hosts is that they have competing priorities and I'm not clear which trumps the other.

One is their business. What they do is a business. This business must have customers, provide a product/service, ensure revenue exceeds costs, etc. The product they supply must result in demand from the customer base. If there's no demand, revenue decreases along with profitability. Since the product is pretty much their commentary, it must be something that gets people to tune in. It must be something that gets people riled up.

Second, they are conservative and want the causes of conservatism to be furthered. If they can contribute to that, while at the same time they are taking care of their business, then great. In fact, they may also see it that in order to further the cause of conservatism, they must keep their business viable.

The problem is when there is a conflict between the two.


#83 PERRY? BRUTALIZED?? HIM brutalized by religion??? Talk about narcissistic!!! Now I could see Ann Romney being justified in doing this, but even Ann has a strong backbone. What a couple of panzies!


On the day Obama was elected, I held a personal day of mourning and saying mea culpas to my kids and grandkids. The country created by the Hand of God was over; it was just a matter of time until it was actually done. Then along came the Tea Party. A lot of people, including me, joined in and there appeared to be a ray of hope. It was a long shot, but still.......maybe things could be saved.

But.....on the other side there is still the Obama people out there, demanding their handouts. The Tea Party may have been a quixotic flash in the pan; the push-back forces are just too great.

I believe Levin and Limbaugh are just throwing a fit as they see their infant Tea Party hopes dying before their eyes.

Romney took heat for trying to be more conservative last time: inauthentic. This time he made the calculation to run more to the center. So far it's paid off, but he's getting clobbered for on the right because there is no viable candidate on the right.


Maybe Mitt should have been responsible for every suprem court decision in Mass. Or he could have just overturned it by himself by getting on Rush and stating that the Supreme Courts ruling sucks so He Mitt Romney will now overturn what they decided...Or maybe governors don't have the authority to control every supreme court decision...I think there might be something in the constitution about that...Something about separation of powers or something...Go read the mass law...there is nothing in there stating $50 abortions...But alas I'm just a wrong and ignorant Romney supporter


104, 107

You both explain the reason why we shouldn't hide this from people simply because Rush has been respected for so long as Kavon points out in #9.

Let the facts speak for themselves. When the "draft Christie" crap was going on and we had DAILY stories about all these rumors, the poster defended it by stating he was simply "posting the news".

Well, if the news of today is, "Rush Limbaugh Flip-Flops support of Romney", then why should that not be posted or hidden under the title, "Heh..."??


#108 Anita feels brutalized because of her religion?????? Now, that's hilarious!!!!!!! Time to get out of Texas, sweetie, and see how so-called born again Christians brutalize others. Oh my.

In fact, "good" So. Baptist mothers in Dallas refuse to allow their children to play with my little Mormon grandchildren.

And my "good" So Baptist neighbor stuffs the neighborhood mailboxes with anti-Mormon literature. Oh, honey. We need to talk.


Kavon W. Nikrad Says:

October 13th, 2011 at 1:51 pm


I am too much in awe of Limbaugh’s contribution to conservatism to call him out like that. Rush is probably one of the three most important American conservatives who have ever lived.

Please tell me this is a joke?



your ignorance and hatred is passing Craig/for any one's stupidity. Tell the truth, your really Mr. Jeffress, Right?


I am not sure why this was even published because it is not news. Rush Limbaugh exists for one reason and one reason alone: to make money for Rush Limbaugh. He knows how to further misinform the low information voters that make up his audience. The last thing that Rush wants is a President Romney because then he wouldn't be able to create fear among his listeners as effectively. I am quite certain that Rush would prefer an Obama presidency so he can spend another four years speaking in racial code to the base. Fear can be transformed into a another house and boat.


44 - can plants read? No, I said Romney is a conservative at home, Rush lives a liberal lifestyle. Bottom line on who you really are, I'm thinking. At least one of the CORE considerations. So.....take your Soros paycheck and go elsewhere.


Ok, repeat after me: William Buckley and Rush Limbaugh are not in the same zip code. They are not in the same country. One was an intellectual, the other flunked out of his first year at Missouri State University. One was thoughtful and understood public policy, the other ignorant racist who has turned the conservative movement into a sad, yet hilarious joke. I was talking with a gentlement from Connecticut last night who remarked that during Buckley's time, almost all of the intellectuals were conservative. Now it is the exact opposite. So, please, let's not throw Limbaugh in the same light as Buckley. They are on different planets.


114 - Well if that wasn't the most well thought out comment I don't know what was.

115 - Racial code? Didn't Romney ALL OF A SUDDEN find it to his benefit to "get tough" on illegals 3 years and 11 months into his term, simply to beat up on Giuliani and McCain?

I dunno, Pablo. Romney is the one giving Perry a hard time on his immigration stance purely for political gain. Rush Limbaugh hasn't said much of anything on the issue.




You might as well get used to it. Rick Perry is going to play the Mormon card although he will maintain plausible deniability. Think about it. He is terrible debater. He can't go toe to toe with Romney, because he isn't smart. So what else is there? There are scads of Southerners who gladly vote for Perry over Romney strictly upon the basis of religion. My mother is one of them.

The good news is that these people are older and no longer represent the bulk of the conservative movement. I don't expect Romney to lose the election because of his Mormonism. I just don't think he will win many Southern states.


117 - Why are you so preoccupied with race?

And what has Limbaugh ever done to prove he is racist? You're sounding ridiculous.


120 - And as to the "race" issue, doesn't Limbaugh like Cain over Romney?

You seem far more concerned with race than Limbaugh.



You have a valid point. I have no doubt that Romney couldn't give two squirts of warm piss about illegal immigration. He is using this issue because there was not many areas where he can attack Perry from his right flank. This happens to be the one issue that I agree with Perry on.

Nevertheless, you can't possibly compare Romney's use of the immigration issue, with Rush's consistent racially coded rhetoric over his many years behind the golden mic.


121. Oh really, what did Rush say after Cain took on Perry regarding the N-word? I am pretty sure Rush came down on Perry's side. He may eventually side with Cain, but if there is a racially-charged issue on the table, he is always going to side with his own.


122 - I don't agree with Rush all of the time and when I disagree with him I'll say so.

But Rush loves Rubio. Rush loves Thomas Sowell. I don't hear racially coded rhetoric from Rush any more than I do from Obama.


123 - CAIN eventually came down on Perry's side. He didn't have all the facts before he spoke.


but if there is a racially-charged issue on the table, he is always going to side with his own

Wait a minute now. Does that make Obama racist when he said that the Cambridge police officers acted stupidly?

What about the Mormons on these boards? Short of him actually axing someone to death, there are some on here that will never abandon him no matter what

EVERYONE has initial tendancies to side with their own. It might not be right, but it is what it is. And if that's racism or bigotry then just about everyone is guilty of it.


"121. Oh really, what did Rush say after Cain took on Perry regarding the N-word? I am pretty sure Rush came down on Perry’s side. He may eventually side with Cain, but if there is a racially-charged issue on the table, he is always going to side with his own." Hello, that is because Mr. Perry was in the right on that particular issue.


Some moderate Republicans act like everyone and everything to their left should be reasonably and irenically discussed, while everyone to their right is ignorant or bigoted and should be denounced, ridiculed and/or condescended to. Pablo seems like one of those. I have never seen him argue against anything to his left as passionately as he denounces the GOP's right wing.

Limbaugh's attacks on Romney go much too far, if he really attacks him like Rombots claim he does. I don't listen to talk radio; while it has done a good job of promoting conservatism, it does tend to be an echo chamber, and besides I prefer listening to music. The comparison between his opinion of Romney today and Romney in '08 is a good one. You guys should call and confront him about it.

I have to add, however, that Mitt has changed a bit from 2008. Last time around, he proclaimed himself Mr. Most Conservative Around; this time, he's the competent job creator and savior of Social Security. It may be a difference only in tone, but it's there.

I can't agree with the cynical idea that talk radio really doesn't want to beat Obama because it would be bad for business. Some cynicism is good but I'm just not that cynical. No, they want to beat Obama, but they have different ideas about what it will take to beat Obama (No more RINOs) and they have become more intolerant of any deviations from orthodoxy, whether in tone or substance. Like I said, talk radio can be an echo chamber.

Trying To Be Pragmatic

88. Sojo

Anything to promote Mormonism.

Either us Latter-day Saints are plotting to keep Republicans from being elected to the Senate so that Harry Reid will still be the majority leader, or you are simply wrong in your contention that Latter-day Saints are using the Presidential election to promote the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Trying To Be Pragmatic

126. Sojo

Wait a minute now. Does that make Obama racist when he said that the Cambridge police officers acted stupidly?

Yes, Obama showed his racism when he said the Cambridge police acted stupidly when they arrested a black guy behaving disorderly and telling the police to get out of his house.

Obama's professor friend brought up skin color in his tirade against the police officer investigating the break-in (the professor broke into his own house), which means the professor showed his racism, too.

And BTW, I doubt that any Mormons on this board side with Harry Reid on anything.


If I remember correctlly, Rush wasn't on the Romney bandwagon for the entire process in 2008. It was only after Thompson and even to a lesser extent Rudy dropped out that he went for Romney because he was the last man standing opposed to Huck and McCain, neither of whom he liked.

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Tweets by @Racefour

Search R4'16