November 9, 2012

rl-2012-11-09-rush-talk

On whether the election results constitute a rejection of conservatism by the electorate…

If the three million votes, the three million Republicans that everybody thought would turn out had turned out, three million Republicans did not vote, the statistical analysis is that if those three million had voted for Romney, Romney would have won the popular vote by a couple hundred thousand. We didn't lose this because of immigration. We didn't lose this because of women. We lost it because we didn't turn out the base. There were eight million Obama voters who did not vote this year as opposed to 2008. There was not more enthusiasm for Obama in this country. It was not conservatism that lost. It was not our ideals that lost. It was our campaign strategy. That's where this was lost. Reagan's words ring true. Don't give up your ideals. Recognize there are millions and millions of Americans who want what you want.

__Spacer (37x50)great-colleges__Spacer (50x50)limbaugh-radio-2

October 8, 2012

radio-limbaugh-2012-10-08

On Mitt Romney’s foreign-policy address at the Virginia Military Institute…

As I listen to these Romney sound bites, it reminds me of when I was listening to the speech live. It was exactly an hour ago. When you just listen to what Romney is saying about our position in the world and how he's saying it, and you compare it to what Obama says about our position in the world. I just can't get over the stark contrast and the stark difference. I mean, you ask the question, "Who is more presidential? Who should be our commander-in-chief?" and the option is these two guys. I mean, there's no comparison. It is competent, confident leadership versus rank amateur cliched liberalism. Not even informed and educated by three years on the job, just cliched liberalism.

__Spacer (37x50)2012-10-08-talk-radio__Spacer (50x50)2012-10-08-rush-radio


April 20, 2012

politics

Mark Davis is filling in for Rush today… On choosing a governing philosophy for the nation…

I’ve always believed, let conservatism and liberalism come to the table with their best ideas. Let the right come unapologetically with its best ideas. Let the left come unapologetically with their best ideas. Let the voters decide which way they want to go. And then go that way and see how it works. And if people aren’t liking the way it works then go the other way. Rather than this watered-down, mushy, middle ground, moderate, middle-of-the-roadism that gets us precisely nowhere… If you think of it geographically: you are in Chicago. You are in Chicago. And there are two people who have your attention. One of them wants to take you to New York and the other wants to take you to Los Angeles. What is the compromise position there? There’s no compromise position! Somebody wants to take you east and somebody wants to take you west. You gots to pick one! … And what is the middle ground, what is the common ground position between the two forces, one of which loves expansionist, collectivist government, and the other side which seeks to dismantle that and bring us closer to the kind of government the founders envisioned. What is the compromise position there? There is none. You’ve got to do one or the other.


220x108-Movie-Actor-Best-Ofs__Spacer220x108-MurderMysteryEvents6

December 12, 2011

radio-limbaugh

On the creeping, incremental growth of the state, how it benefits the Democrat party, and how difficult it is for conservatives to oppose it…

What are we trying to do? We’re trying to defend against this profligate spending, but we’re not on offense. We’re just trying to stop it. We’re like at The Alamo. We’re just trying to stop it. We’re constantly on defense. Everywhere. ‘cause we don’t use government the way they do. They’re constantly on offense. Constantly making a move, constantly trying to make it bigger. We’re just saying “Stop! Stop, dammit, stop!” We’re not even trying to advance anything… So this is how it works you see. If you feed them – if you feed the children, three square meals a day, during the school year, how can you expect them to feed themselves in the summer? So you start out with breakfast for the kids that can’t afford that… and then of course it expanded, and we learned – now it includes dinner! … Okay and then school ends. And of course how can we expect them to feed themselves in the summer, when they haven’t had to for nine months. So, this is how it works. They demand to be fed during the summer. Or their acolytes demand that they be fed, during the summer. Because after all, we’ve conditioned them to not feeding themselves. Plus their parents don’t have to take responsibility of feeding them. And their parents don’t have to take the responsibility of paying, not directly… Wanton little waifs and serfs, dependent on the state. Pure and simple.

October 24, 2011

radio-limbaugh

On George F. Will’s comparison of Mitt Romney to Michael Dukakis…

It’s a profound insult to equate Romney with Dukakis and to say that the Republican party is happy with Romney, just as Democrats were with Dukakis. Woah! Now that may be true… we know that some of the so-called conservatives in the inside-the-beltway conservative media do believe in a big government, and an “active” executive, as they refer to the President… and they also believe that we Republicans and conservatives must support big government because the people, the voters, are signaling that’s what they want. We just must do it smarter. And so they’re looking at Romney as the steward. This is Will’s point. “Hey this guy’s a technocrat, this guy’s a policy wonk, this guy can do it.” And when George F. Will says that Romney’s not ideological, just like Dukakis wasn’t, what he’s essentially saying here is that Romney’s not conservative. He’s a technocrat. A policy guy. Which he is. But Dukakis, I say, was an active statist. When you think about it a technocrat is a statist because his selling point is that he can make the big government apparatus run more efficiently, which is what the David Brookses and his buddies on our side in the conservative media claim to support. And that’s the new definition of a Republican moderate.

September 16, 2011

limbaugh

On the awakening on the part of many voters to the destructive consequences of President Obama’s policies…

People are living the loss of their jobs, living the prospect of not finding one anytime soon, they’re living the loss of the value of their home, they’re living the loss of the value of their 401K. They’re living all of this. They are living, now, the inflation of the dollar. They are living all of this. They don’t need to be told. On the other side of that is the fix. The repair. And the repair is not a RINO in the White House. The repair is not a moderate Republican in the White House. The repair and the golden opportunity here is a conservative, a movement conservative. Somebody who’s proud of it, somebody who can proudly exclaim it, explain it, articulate it, happily, cheerfully, confidently, doesn’t have to have notes, doesn’t have to have a teleprompter, doesn’t have to be reminded what to say because it’s in his or her heart.

August 29, 2011

rush-limbaugh

On establishment Republican calls to conservatives to tone down their rhetoric…

It really frosts me, the idea… that conservatives, speaking openly and honestly about conservatism is somehow gonna cause independents to run away, and to where? A party populated by the meanest, most extreme bunch of people in American politics today. We’re told the independents want bipartisanship. We’re told the independents want people to get along. And so here comes a conservative who’s not combative, he’s just being honest…(“The independents don’t like that, you’re gonna send them right back to the Democrats…”) There’s no meaner political group of people in America today than today’s Democrats. There’s no more combative group of people in American politics today than America’s Democrats. There’s no more extreme group of people in American politics today than the Democrat party. Where is it written that these independents are gonna flock to that? They’re not flocking to that. They’re flocking away from it.

August 17, 2011

radio-limbaugh

On Barack Obama’s re-electability in 2012

We’ve got people on our side who think this guy is still invincible. And they think largely he’s invincible because he’s Obama… they’re still in awe of what Obama was, that imagery. But also the power of the presidency and this reported one billion dollars that he’s going to have to wage his campaign. But it’s patently obvious to you and me – you get somebody with a proud and cheerful and confidently articulated conservative message and agenda, and this guy is landslidable. He’s landslidable today… if the election were held today he’d lose in a landslide, and what’s gonna change? I know it’s politics, and things that no-one can predict can happen in a long period of time.

June 29, 2011

rush-limbaugh

On the political necessity of removing President Obama and the Democrats from power.

We must replace Barack Obama with a conservative Republican President. We must have as many conservative Republicans in congress, House and Senate, as we can. The way you increase jobs and growth and opportunity and wealth is through capitalism. We’ve just been through 29 months of Socialism. It’s miserable. It’s depressing. It’s stifling. It destroys the national mood. We need to contain the government. As long as Obama’s in the Oval Office – or on the golf course, or in some diner eating greasy hamburgers, or in charge of the Executive Branch – as long as his party controls any part of Congress – this nation can not recover. We do not have a chance... this country does not have a chance. With Barack Obama remaining in the Oval Office.