Friday, December 16, 2011

Limbaugh: Romney Not Bombastic

It is very difficult for policy wonks to understand the Republican voter these days. Sure, it is understandable if conservative voters shy away from Romney, since the former MA governor has deviated from the Path a few times in his career. What is not understandable is why some of those same conservative voters would jump on the Newt Gingrich bus. No rational person would determine, after laying all of Newt's past positions side by side with all of Mitt's past positions, that Gingrich is more conservative. It's just not possible. Both men have charted their own paths on occasion. So why does Newt have an aura (though, fading) of conservatism surrounding his gigantic cranium and Romney is the icky, moderate one?

Rush Limbaugh knows why. It's because Romney is not bombastic and prefers to shy away from red meat. You simply must read this monologue from Rush's website. He really does explain modern day conservatism. For Rush Limbaugh, conservatism IS bombastic rhetoric. If you can understand Limbaugh's point in his incoherent harangue, you can really understand why he is so nervous about a Romney presidency. Limbaugh's entire career and earthly riches have depended on his ability to use bombastic rhetoric. That's why he prefers a bomb thrower as the nominee. Limbaugh rightly perceives that Romney is not going to play along with Rush Limbaugh conservatism (read rhetoric).

I really encourage every Romney fan to read that Limbaugh ramble. When you are finished, please tell me if what he is describing is your kind of conservatism. It's time to turn the table on Gingrich/Limbaugh conservatism (rhetoric) and begin a new chapter with Romney conservatism (effective government). We ought to reward doers, not talkers.

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pablo,

Thanks but no thanks, I stopped listening to Rush a long time ago.

Anonymous said...

Pablo, one of the great things about a Romney presidency is that it will marginalize Rush and Co. As you say, we need a party that actually implements conservatives ideas, rather than just brawling and calling names.

And anyway, Rush is wrong. Romney has gone after Obama hard on his record. Rush is ignoring this. The fact that Mitt won't do the 'anti-colonial born in Kenya' garbage is exactly what is needed. Rush rails at libs who play that game, be he himself wants every candidate to play it too! Romney is right. The independents are turned off by the bombast from BOTH sides.

There's so much to say about that transcript, but who has the time. Rush is fast becoming a has-been, and that's good.

-Martha

Slick-Willy said...

Rush is such a tool. In this transcript he clearly equates "bombastic speech" to "conservatism." He also claims that because Mitt has disavowed "red meat speech," that he's unwilling to attack Obama. Where has this clown been? Did he not see the debate last night? Mitt has been by far the most harsh critic of Obama w/in the entire field for the last year.

One other funny note in his dialogue is when Rush claims the "establishment" wants Mitt because of money and power. LOL Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

When Mitt wins the nomination a devastating blow will be dealt to that chubby, drug-abusing clown.

leighrow said...

I personally associate bombastic rhetoric with drama queens. We do not need another drama queen who will divide the country and get nothing done and who will further vilify the Republican party.

It has been written that Gingrich when in office used this "bombastic" rhetoric and drove people away from the Republican party and Gingrich did not follow through with his rhetorical threats.

Anonymous said...

Rush has his place...he's got to hold onto his business and his base is decidedly the ABR crowd. I was listening to him earlier this week and he was pointing out things that Axelrod and WShultz were saying and that our nominee has to take it to Obama full throttle because the left uses that same tool...problem with that analogy is that those people are surrogates...Obama really doesn't use bombs like that, he tells on others to do it for him. We have plenty of people to do that for us next year, Rush himself being a key member of that surrogate group for us. Getting red meat into the electorate next year won't be the problem.

Gordon

leighrow said...

Gordon

I completely agree. This is where I am lost when people use the debates as the reason why Gingrich should be the nominee. The far right has to realize that the election will be won with the middle not by the far right.

A defiant bombastic Gingrich in a presidential debate will turn off independents and moderates. If Gingrich is the nominee, he will already have a problem with securing the women's vote.

People also are overestimating the power of the 2-3 presidential debates. The MSM will be organizing these debates. The MSM will be setting up the debate format and the questions. Since the MSM is pro-Obama and since both campaigns have to approve the debate formats then I think one can safely say that these debates will be structured to protect Obama.

When Red Meat is thrown during the presidential elections it is usually more effective if it is thrown by effective surrogates. The potential presidential candidate can never be seen as losing their composure and must look presidential and above it all at all times. Dick Cheney was a great surrogate for Bush.

Terrye said...

Rush has an over all approval rating of about 19%...maybe there are not as many red meat conservatives out there he thinks there are..Most conservatives are thoughtful people..not blowhards who rake in millions on talk radio.

Jed M. Merrill said...

Another reason to vote for Mitt: He's not Rush.

There's a reason Limbauugh's ratings fell dramatically after he started speaking against Mitt.

Anonymous said...

Romney was my governor and I'm very conservative! Try being even a "moderate" conservative in a very blue socialist like state like Mass. -- or rather more in the Boston area where the state capitol is.

Romney did an EXCELLENT job of governing! He eliminated a $3 BILLION deficit wracked up by the Democrats (85% Dem's while Romney was governor! It's one of the most Democratic legislature in the nation!). He did this all without raising taxes one cent, just as he had promised.

He also vetoed the in-state tuition bill for illegals. He signed an executive order requiring all Mass. state troopers to check the immigration status of all persons ARRESTED. He is a man of character and integrity. He is even tempered also...he doesn't let a lot rattle him, or at least he doesn't show it, unlike Newt Gingrich. Gingrich is like a timebomb ready to go off! Plus, Gingrich has so much baggage in so many areas, the liberals are salivating at him being the GOP nominee! Have you heard any real negative issues on Romney to date? NO! That's because there isn't any because if tehre were, it would have come out by now. Obama and gang will dig up dirt on anybody and play nasty. When are people on the right going to get that?!? thnk GENERAL ELECTION!!!!!! ROMNEY/BACHMANN 2012! The principled ticket that could win...