Who will replace Rush?

[ARealGannTrader]

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/06/limbaugh-powell-2/

On Monday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said that he believed the Republican party is in “deep trouble,” “getting smaller,” and being led by polarizing figures like Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) and Rush Limbaugh. Powell said further that the party must realize that “Americans do want to pay taxes for services.” Of Limbaugh specifically, Powell said, “I think what Rush does as an entertainer diminishes the party and intrudes or inserts into our public life a kind of nastiness that we would be better to do without.”

Today on his radio show, Limbaugh responded by calling Powell “just another liberal.” Limbaugh said Powell should “close the loop” and leave the Republican party instead of “claiming” to be interested in reforming it. Additionally, Limbaugh reiterated his previous claim that Powell endorsed Obama only because of his race:

LIMBAUGH: [Powell] is out there saying I am killing the republican party while he endorsed and voted for Obama. … He’s just mad at me because I’m the one person in the country who had the guts to explain his endorsement of Obama. It was purely and solely based on race! There can be no other explanation for it. What Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat instead of claiming to be a Republican interested in reforming the Republican party.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5Qfs8wgX_n0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5Qfs8wgX_n0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Greg Sargent concludes, “The optics of this one are not good.” Indeed, congressional Republicans are working extremely hard to ensure their rebranding effort is tailored to Limbaugh’s liking. Will they spoil their efforts by denouncing Limbaugh’s latest rant?

 

[Eight]

I'll never vote democrat until they stop encouraging gender confused men from f%^king each other in their hairy stinking @ssholes. They create a diseased subculture that threatens the entire population. And the baby killing thingy, that's sick.. otherwise, they are doing a better job with the economy and jobs for Americans stuff than Bush ever would... dang, there was a tax break for corporations that move jobs offshore... yeah, go Republicans.. move the jobs out and cut back on welfare, who does that benefit??

 

[ARealGannTrader]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090504/pl_politico/22059_1

GOP leaders give Palin cold shoulder

Jonathan Martin
Sun May 3, 10:47 pm ET
In the latest instance of a high-profile GOP member taking a passing swipe at the party's 2008 vice-presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Governor and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney jokingly dismissed Sarah Palin’s inclusion on TIME’s list of influential people in an interview broadcast Sunday.
He asked, was “the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?”
Romney, appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union,” was replying to a question from moderator John King on whether TIME’s inclusion of Palin and talk show host Rush Limbaugh on their list of “The World’s Most Influential People” was good or bad for the Republican Party.
Romney, who has not ruled out another White House bid, said he wanted more influential Republicans on the list before adding pointedly: “I think there are a lot more influential Republicans than that would suggest.”
“But was that the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?” he continued. “I'm not sure. If it's the most beautiful, I understand. We're not real cute.”
Asked about Romney’s comment, Palin didn’t respond to the reference to her appearance.
"I think there are 100 influential Republicans alone who have tremendous ideas and I hope that we can all work together to accomplish what we believe is best for America,” Palin said through a spokeswoman.
Romney, who was appearing with House Minority Whip Eric Cantor as part of a party re-launch the two are organizing with other prominent Republicans under the banner of the National Council for a New America, was laughing and smiling as he said it. His spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, called it only “a self-deprecating joke as to why there weren't more Republicans on the list.”
But Romney’s quip reflects the deep unease among many in the GOP establishment about the continued high-profile of Limbaugh and especially Palin. There is almost a sense of exasperation among many party elites over the media coverage the two polarizing figures get – attention which, in Palin’s case, is widely seen as a product largely of her good looks and tabloid-fodder family troubles.
“She’s bigger in the media than in reality,” lamented GOP consultant Mike Murphy, a longtime friend and adviser to John McCain.
“Palin," he said, "is the only Republican politician right now who is interesting, a little different, connected to the last campaign and related to an occasional story in the National Enquirer.”
Another GOP strategist carped, "The media is still obsessed with the Tina Fey impersonations and intra-campaign drama."
Romney’s comments were striking because such grumbling is rarely expressed in public by high-ranking Republicans. Instead, GOP officials typically strive to ignore Palin, routinely leaving her off lists of the party’s rising stars even though she still retains a significant following among grassroots conservatives and may run for president in 2012.
The euphemistic mantra is that the party has to rebuild based on policy solutions – not the “personalities” the media insists on focusing their attention on.
Responding to King’s question first, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor said “there are some who like to make it all about personalities, but it's about ideas.”
Former Gov. Jeb Bush, who is also playing a prominent role in the Council, similarly said to POLITICO Saturday after the group's launch in Arlington, Va., that the group hopes “to make the next election about ideas and not about personalities.”
Bush, while not responding to a Palin question, expressed frustration at the press wanting to cover the who’s-up-who’s-down political horserace, rather than policy.
Palin was initially not included on the Council because she didn’t respond to requests, but Sen. John McCain said in a conference call with reporters that he hoped she would be involved with the group.
"They would rather just ignore Palin," said Murphy of the GOP mainstream, "but the media won’t let them."

 

[OPTIONAL777]

<img src=http://www.bartcop.com/pigboy-jabba-steele.jpg>

 

[jem]

Quote from IShopAtPublix:

Have you bought scotch tape in anticipation of a major terrorist attack?

How does republican party keep women and minorities down? Let's see... Republican party wants the woman to be nothing more than a baby making machine which is what she would be if you deprive her of the right to choose whether to carry a child or not. When you oppose civil rights legislation on "constitutional grounds" (like nutcase goldwater did), when you oppose affirmative action you keep minorities down.

Come on, electing Steele to RNC was a cheap publicity stunt. Everyone realizes it was a political move to get a token black there.

Lets translate -


You must be arguing you support the right of women to kill pre born
little girls. You call that a progressive stance? I call it barbaric. Hey its your right to be barbaric - but lets identify the human toll such action represents.

You support abortion - others believe it is murder. Its pathetic to argue the democrats side is pro woman. Not when 50% of the victims are female.

It was the democrats who opposed the civil rights act. The republicans were behind the civil rights act and womens sufferage and the party of lincoln was against slavery.

with repect to goldwater - wikipedia says "Goldwater supported the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard. Nationally, he supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. However, he opposed the much more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964[8]. While he did indeed support the civil rights cause in general, he believed that this act unconstitutionally extended the federal government's commerce power to private citizens in its drive to "legislate morality" and restrict the rights of employers."

Affirmative actions has been shown to keep minorities out of small businesses.

Very very few small businesses in CA do not live in fear of the problems created if they hire a minority and then have to fire a minority.

For numerous small businesses its a hell of a lot easier to not give the minority the chance in the first place.

 

[Mercor]

Good points! LolatBushites, Landis and the rest live at a level of prepubescent mentality.
Sophomoric thinking, crude and shallow minded. They cherry pick facts and have no core beliefs.
The don’t really support Obama much but wallow in their hatred of Bush. Certainly a sign of disturbed behavior.

 

[ARealGannTrader]

Quote from jem:

Lets translate -


You must be arguing you support the right of women to kill pre born
little girls. You call that a progressive stance? I call it barbaric. Hey its your right to be barbaric - but lets identify the human toll such action represents.

You support abortion - others believe it is murder. Its pathetic to argue the democrats side is pro woman. Not when 50% of the victims are female.

It was the democrats who opposed the civil rights act. The republicans were behind the civil rights act and womens sufferage and the party of lincoln was against slavery.

with repect to goldwater - wikipedia says "Goldwater supported the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard. Nationally, he supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. However, he opposed the much more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964[8]. While he did indeed support the civil rights cause in general, he believed that this act unconstitutionally extended the federal government's commerce power to private citizens in its drive to "legislate morality" and restrict the rights of employers."

Affirmative actions has been shown to keep minorities out of small businesses.

Very very few small businesses in CA do not live in fear of the problems created if they hire a minority and then have to fire a minority.

For numerous small businesses its a hell of a lot easier to not give the minority the chance in the first place.

Not to go all partisan or anything, but
wasn't it Nixon that mainstreamed Affirmative Action?

Wasn't Nixon a pub?

 

[Mercor]

Quote from ARealGannTrader:

Not to go all partisan or anything, but
wasn't it Nixon that mainstreamed Affirmative Action?

Wasn't Nixon a pub?

Nixon also started the EPA, tried wage and price controlls (like Obama)

Nixon was acting within the times of the day. Early 70's was the height of social liberism. Also Nixon was not a Goldwater/reagon conservitive

 

[gigsup]

Quote from ARealGannTrader:

Not to go all partisan or anything, but
wasn't it Nixon that mainstreamed Affirmative Action?

Wasn't Nixon a pub?

Huh, where did you come up with that?

Went over to Wiki and it stated that Kennedy sowed the seeds, but Johnson started implementation.

 

[ARealGannTrader]

Quote from gigsup:

Huh, where did you come up with that?

Went over to Wiki and it stated that Kennedy sowed the seeds, but Johnson started implementation.

I was just going from a dim and foggy memory. Nixon could have let it die on the vine, so to speak, but he actually pushed the program and gave it teeth.