I wonder how long it will take the governator to apologize.
Printable View
I wonder how long it will take the governator to apologize.
Why doesn't the GOP just come out and say Hush is the voice of the party? I am confused because when anyone criticizes the misinformer they have to run back and apologize to him.If he isn't someone of great imprtance to the GOP then why did the head of the RNC have to apologize to him?
I expect Arnie will totally disappear from Repug party due to him being a moderate with balls. The dickless Repug extremists are purging every moderate, while taking their marching orders from hate-radio.
This entire "voice of the party" "leader of the GOP" is all bullshit hype by the left media.
Principles should found the Conservatives. GOP moderates want to move in and give the people a different form of big government. To them and those who support them, I kindly give you a big Fuck You and GTFO.
The voice of the party was the year 2006 kicking out these worthless gop pricks. The voice of the party was not showing up in 2008 to vote for McLame. The voice of the party was millions of young people supporting Ron Paul not only on his "Iraq war is bullshit" but his fiscal conservatism.
Rush knows he is a fat ass. Awnold had THE best body in these last who knows how long (no homo). Who cares.
ok. here's how it works.
a you're a lousy governor.
b you hop on the bandwagon and attack someone that most everyone loathes
c now you have "balls"
nothing to see here. spector lite.
ahnold. you won't be back.
Attacking Rush gives you an honorary "media loves you" card for a couple weeks.
dickhead and RL are the voices of the Repug party, nobody else even comes close.
Rush is a radio talk show host.
The only people that keep saying he's the "voice" of the GOP are the media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
I'm pretty sure Keith Olbermann is a liberal.
Who do you say is the voice of the GOP?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Glen Beck -- duh!
No really -- who?
Funny how when Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, and HoHoHoHo Dean were spewing their bullshit before Obama came into the picture the media wasn't trying to label them as the voice of the Demoncats.
Funny how during the shitulus bill, when Pelosi was running the show the media wasn't labeling her the voice of the demoncats.
Funny how the media goes out of its way to describe rush as a MERE ENTERTAINER before every mention of his name and then devote their entire show to his words.
Funny how the media focuses on the ailing GOP WHEN THE FUCKING COUNTRY IS COLLAPSING!?!?!?!?!?!??!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkingWithBob
Pelosi was definitely labeled a main voice of the Democrats before Obama.
Who do you say is the the main voice of the GOP, micca?
So, are we talking "the voice" or "a main voice"? You're right, Pelosi was "a main voice" from 2002 until 2008. (Pelosi became leader of the House Democrats in 2002.) Actually, scratch that. She continues to be a main voice. It's just that Obama is clearly "the voice" of the Democratic Party.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
The Republicans are not in the White House, so there is no singular leader. That's normal for the minority opposition. (It happened to the Democrats for several years after Clinton.) The "main voices" of the party are Eric Cantor, Michael Steele, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and Dick Cheney. Maybe throw in Bobby Jindal and Mark Sandford. You may not like what they have to say, but they are the main voices.
Probably the most important voices right now are Dick Cheney and Eric Cantor. (Cheney on foreign policy, Cantor on domestic policy.)
Rush is a voice, too. There's no denying that.
Right, that's why I don't get why folks try to deny that. Rush is just much more well known than any of the other names you mentioned outside of Cheney.
Jon Stewart and Bill Maher are "the voice" of the Democratic party.
See how dumb that sounds?
They don't have party "leaders" apologizing to them when they disagree like Republicans do with Rush.
I still would say, as far as the party goes, Cheney and Cantor are the two top dogs right now. Their views and approaches hinge directly on how the Republican Party---as a dejected minority opposition party---proceeds to reestablish itself in the next few years. (Yes, I realize Cheney's career as an elected official is over.)Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Rush is outside the party and will believe whatever he wants believes, no matter what the Republicans do. If the party moves leftward, Rush will be Rush. If the Party moves rightward, Rush will be Rush. He's an entertainer whose audience happens to largely vote Republican. He's a voice, to be sure, of the conservative base of the party. He's definitely not "the voice" of the party, though.
In addition to those already mentioned, there are many different voices in the party: McCain, Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, Romney, Paul, Buchanan, Palin (God help us), etc. As we get closer to 2010, the Republicans will identify certain fundamental issues and develop a more uniform, simple message for the American voters. I have no doubt.
Why does it even matter who "the voice" of the GOP is?
The next president may be someone who is not well known right now. Anything can happen in four years. You could go from some obscure community organizer who can't even get into your own party's convention and four years later become POTUS.
It's good to have a voice -- and to know who the voices are -- if the GOP wishes to accomplish anything in the next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Good idea to hope for that, because the current Republican voices aren't doing well.Quote:
The next president may be someone who is not well known right now. Anything can happen in four years. You could go from some obscure community organizer who can't even get into your own party's convention and four years later become POTUS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
As opposed to people like Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, et al? :lol
You left someone out. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
The founding fathers, except the assholes like Hamilton, should be the voice for conservatives.
I wonder if Cornyn will apologize to Rush after what he said.
I used to listen to Rush because it was fun listening to somebody I disagreed with so much... but now that fat fuck has become so lame in his arguments that it defeats the purpose entirely. It's like trying to seek enlightenment from some mentally ill person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
hey sounding stupid is what chimp does best.
Rush is not the sharpest tool in the shed,but he covers stories and exposes stories that would never see the light of day so more information is always welcomed.I find it hard to listen to him,but if others can go for it.
What is interesting though is the intense, and well orginized assult on the guy, I mean that reporter just threw arnie the ball to run with . all these well known talking heads are being trotted out to bash this guy. The media is manufacturing consent they're promoting an attack on this guy,but what they're really attacking is dissent, and and idea floating around the entire conservative movment that the leadership of the GOP are just a bunch of neo cons the left calls them moderates the right calls them RHINO. It also seems the left after having won the election,and the imperial heavy handedness of Obama, now feels that they should control all political movements that they should pick the leaders of the GOP so you have every democrat on this site giving their opinions of who their opposition should be.When the left doesn't like somebody it is a pretty good indication your on the right track, where as if they admire someone like calling Arnie a moderate with balls you should be very wary.Once they can totally manufacture discredting the voice of rush (because he has such a large following) it will be easier to discredit all dissent.
It may also have something to do with the rising following rush and all conservative commentators are getting, and the unusual popularity of Mark Levins latest book which has been on the bestsellers list for such a long time. The old neo cons like bush and Mc lame are on the ropes, and what both parties fear is true populist movements that would upset the illusion we have a two party system, and not just two sides of the same coin.
Well, he either is pretty intelligent, or has intelligent people putting the ideas together. I rarely disagree with him when I hear him, I just have a hard time listening to him because he's such an arrogant ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by hope4dopes
I completely agree that he covers stories that the Alphabet News Networks fail to cover. If only the media would be neutral, and treat all sides equal, the liberals would be in big trouble with the voting populous.
There are also other libertarian and conservative talk show hosts that do the same. They just aren't as popular.