Rush Tells It Like It Is At Televised CPAC

[Soul Crusher]

On a personal side, I will cut back on expenses, look for a job in Mcdonald&burgerking&anywhere else to keep my children feed.

On a global side, it is quite different, not only do you have to cut expenses to the bone, you have to get the economy going so that the people don't run to the banks pulling money out and stuffing the mattresses.
So, say the gov. cuts expenses and the bleeding doesn't stop?  No buying of bad mortgages, no corporation bailouts, everybody sink or swim.
What do you think would happen on a national scale?
I am all for personal responsibility.  I actually didn't want corporations bailed out,  I wanted to see capitalism at work.
Sandra

if you let people have more of their own money back and dont hammer them with taxes, people will shore up their finances, which will help the banks.

By saving $$$, people will strengthen the banks.

We are in this mess because of too few savings and too much spending on credit. 

[MCWAY]

I thought you supported George Bush?

Even voted for him twice?

I did. But, that's not the point of my previous statements.

The gist of my posts was to inform Lurker that it was just four years ago that the roles of the GOP and Democratic party were REVERSED. At this time 4 years ago, the Dems were bitter, divided, and in a royal mess. They were making excuses for two straight defeats (losses in the House and Senate in '02, followed by more of such in '04, and especially with "W" getting re-elected).

The Dems had no idea what they were doing or where they were going. Yet, they won in 2006, because the GOP started acting a fool with the finances, betraying the very fiscally conservative principles, which they were supposed to uphold.

If all this spending causes more grief than it solves problems, contrary to Lurker's wacky belief, the Dems may on the receiving end of the same political beating in '10 that the GOP took in '06.

[LurkerNoMore]

Rush Limbaugh doesn't lead the GOP. The liberals want to paint him as such, in hopes of securing their own political fortunes.

If that is the case, then it would be wise to find a voice very soon.  After all, Rush said he is too ashamed of the GOP to even think of being it's voice.  HAHAHA  The only spokesperson  that side has doesn't even look favorable on the current crop.  Sad.

Mainstream America wants the economy fixed. If Obama and his administration can't do that, they will be shown the door.

And if they do, guess who didn't vote for it.  Yep, same party currently being shown the door.

Scandals are on BOTH sides of the aisle. But those among the party in power get highlighted more.

Actually, there were over twice as many from 2004-2008 on the Repub side.  I would even say 4x as many.   Which exposed your party as nothing more than closet queers and pedophiles. 

One response to a presidental speech hardly spells the end for the political career of Bobby Jindal (and that's under the gross assumption that he was being "groomed" to be the 2012 candidate, anyway). The point you missed was Clinton was "groomed" to be the 2008 candidate. But, guess who's the President now.

Oh you deny that he was being groomed?  Well I guess AFTER his little robotic sing song Sesame Street speech that won't be the case anymore.

In what bizarro world were you, during the campaign. McCain did NOT surge ahead of Obama in the polls, until he picked Palin, because she did the one thing that he could not do: Energize the base of conservatives. McCain's doom came as a result of the economic crisis. He seemed to have no answer for it. And, since Obama did (or at least, appeared to do so), he got the momentum back and won it all.

Bullshit.  McCain was already falling back down in the polls BEFORE the economic crisis simply from Palin getting pwned by 3rd grade questions in the Katie interview.  Even without the economic crisis Palin had turned off the moderate voters wtih her backwooded hillbilly logic and beliefs.

And, unless you start that revisionist history again, you will note that the Democrats were in the EXACT SAME SPOT four years ago: Reeling from losses in the House and Senate and the re-election of "W".

And that amounted to WHAT?  An ending to Dubyas  term where even his own party started distancing themselves from his loser ways at the end.  When your own party rejects you, that says a lot.  Don't exactly see this happening to Obama.

Thing is.. the market WILL come back.  No doubt about that.  It is just a matter of waiting.  No matter what happens or what actions are taken, when it rebounds within in the next 4 years, all credit and applause are going to Obama and the Dems.  The GOP can't even find a direction to face and they are going to have an answer for THAT?   Don't think so.

[LurkerNoMore]

I did. But, that's not the point of my previous statements.

If you voted for Bush twice but hate spending, then you really hate yourself.

[Soul Crusher]

Cramer said last night that the market will not come back so long as Obama and Pelosi are in control and that they will destroy everything they touch.

Jim Cramer is a democrat and even he called Obama and Pelosi radical communists last night on his show.  

More and more people are seeing the light about this marxist fraud in the WH, and soon you will too.  

[Soul Crusher]

If you voted for Bush twice but hate spending, then you really hate yourself.

You voted for Obama and claim to be anti- religious right and govt-church in bed with each other.  considering he is expanding the faith based iniiative office - do you hate yourself?

[MCWAY]

You voted for Obama and claim to be anti- religious right and govt-church in bed with each other.  considering he is expanding the faith based iniiative office - do you hate yourself?

Not to mention that, at least on the surface, he opposes gay “marriage”.

Anti-government-church in bed with each other??? If that's the case, Lurker may as well not vote at all, as nearly EVERY presidental candidate does the standard "Praise-the-Lord-and-vote-for-me" routine during the election campaign. Dems especially love hitting the black churches.

[LurkerNoMore]

You voted for Obama and claim to be anti- religious right and govt-church in bed with each other.  considering he is expanding the faith based iniiative office - do you hate yourself?

I made neither of those claims.  LOL!  Nice try.

[LurkerNoMore]

Not to mention that, at least on the surface, he opposes gay “marriage”.

Anti-government-church in bed with each other??? If that's the case, Lurker may as well not vote at all, as nearly EVERY presidental candidate does the standard "Praise-the-Lord-and-vote-for-me" routine during the election campaign. Dems especially love hitting the black churches.

Too bad your post is irrelevant as stated before I never made those claims.  Nice stretch though... but reaching that far still didn't accomplish anything.

LOL @ ignoring the Repubs actions of "God wants me to be President", "God told me to invade Iraq", "We are on a holy mission in Iraq".

Now that is really catering to the religious idiots.

[Soul Crusher]

I made neither of those claims.  LOL!  Nice try.

I am going to truly laugh my ass off at all the fools who make over 250k a year who voted for this "Radical communist" as Jim Cramer caleld him now that the new SS tax hike is being announced.

Not only is Obama raising their income tax, but now he is raising the SS tax as well.  

Honestly, I dont see where the "brilliance, intelligence, and thoughtfulness" is in Obama if he thinks this is going to work.

All that is going to happen is people like myself are going to make sure we are always under that cap and not subject to his success tax.

If he ever had a real job or spent a day with an announce of responsiblity in a business, he would know this.    

[LurkerNoMore]

Still didn't address why you thought I made those claims huh?

Typical.  Throw bullshit around since facts and logic are not available to you in hopes that something will stick.  When it doesn't, just ignore and move to the next pile of bullshit to throw.

Hard to make a statement that doesn't sound like a 3 year old in a temper tantrum.

So let's see what you can make up and claim I said next.

[Soul Crusher]

Still didn't address why you thought I made those claims huh?

Typical.  Throw bullshit around since facts and logic are not available to you in hopes that something will stick.  When it doesn't, just ignore and move to the next pile of bullshit to throw.

Hard to make a statement that doesn't sound like a 3 year old in a temper tantrum.

So let's see what you can make up and claim I said next.

Damn right I am having a tantrum.  This "Radical Communist" is destroying the wealth of millions of people single handildy. with his war on wealth and the private economy. 

[MCWAY]

Too bad your post is irrelevant as stated before I never made those claims.  Nice stretch though... but reaching that far still didn't accomplish anything.

LOL @ ignoring the Repubs actions of "God wants me to be President", "God told me to invade Iraq", "We are on a holy mission in Iraq".

Now that is really catering to the religious idiots.

What part of "IF that's the case...." don't you understand? But, based on your previous posts, 33386's claim may have some merit to it.

And, it appears you also don't grasp the "EVERY PRESIDENTAL CANDIDATE does the standard "Praise-the-Lord-and-vote-for-me" routine during the election campaign" part of my statement. That would include Republicans.

As for "catering to religious idiots", again you're engaging in that old liberal tradition of revisionist history. It was around this time in 2005 that Dems were blaming the evangelicals (especially in light of the 11 marriage amendments passed on election day) for Bush getting re-elected. But, guess what they ended up doing........."Catering" to those same "religious idiots" in order to swing the votes their way. Wasn't it Howard Dean who kept flapping his gums about how Democrats needed to reach out more to evangelical voters?

[Straw Man]

Bahahahah - did anyone hear that bloated, drug addict thinking he was quoting the Constitution when really he was mis-quoting the Declaration of Indepence.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=219518&title=cpac-after-party

[LurkerNoMore]

The abundance of frustration displayed here amuses me.