HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Rush's take on Gingrich s...

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 03:49 PM

 

Rush's take on Gingrich sleeze

Now, if Newt can hold onto enough of the Republican base, he might take 20% of the Democrat vote with this. You know how this stuff is a resume enhancement in the Democrat Party. I wouldn't make too many snap judgments here. I don't understand why the media's pretending to be so upset about these charges coming from Marianne. I mean, it's all about sex and how many times are we told that somebody's sex life, even if they're president, doesn't matter. It's nobody's business as long as it doesn't affect the job. And how about all the sex stories from Obama's former girlfriends? That's right, what stories, what former girlfriends? In fact, have we ever found out anything about any of his students when he supposedly taught law at the University of Chicago or buddies at Harvard Law Review? I mean, we still don't know anything. "Mr. Limbaugh, this is very clever of you trying to disguise the fact that Mr. Gingrich is..." No, I'm just reacting here. In fact. I got a great note.

I got a great note from a friend of mine. "So Newt wanted an open marriage. BFD. At least he asked his wife for permission instead of cheating on her. That's a mark of character, in my book. Newt's a victim. We all are. Ours is the horniest generation. We were soldiers in the sex revolution. We were tempted by everything from Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice to Plato's retreat, Deep Throat to no fault divorce. Many of us paid the ultimate price, AIDS, abortion, or alimony for the cultural marching orders we got. Hell, for all I know we should be getting disability from the government." That's from a good friend of mine, "Newt's slogan ought to, 'Hell, yes, I wanted it.'" (laughing) I'm sharing with you how some people are reacting to this.

Now, of course, we're not gonna get ABC News -- in a race, by the way, with NBC now. ABC, how about this. We were told ABC had been very concerned about the ethical implications of airing their hit piece on a Republican candidate right before an important primary election. I almost wrenched my back laughing at that, that the ABC suits were in an ethical fight, in a conundrum? I wonder, oh, my God, what to do, what's the ethical thing to do here? If there was any debate at ABC, it was over when would be the best time to do it so as to cause the most harm. That was the only debate.

13 replies, 2490 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rush's take on Gingrich sleeze (Original post)
Fuzz Jan 2012 OP
Mz Pip Jan 2012 #1
get the red out Jan 2012 #3
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #2
rurallib Jan 2012 #6
gratuitous Jan 2012 #4
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2012 #12
Ron Green Jan 2012 #5
AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #7
madmom Jan 2012 #8
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2012 #9
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2012 #10
BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2012 #11
Fuzz Jan 2012 #13

Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 03:54 PM

1. Imagine if this were Obama.

Newt would be frothing at the mouth with every negative stereotype he could throw out there. FOrget dog whistles; he'd be using a bullhorn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mz Pip (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 03:59 PM

3. That's a given

What makes me shake my head is that the religious right seriously doesn't care about Republican sexual exploits. It becomes more and more apparent that morality is extremely fluid when it comes to people who want to control the morality of others, and their supporters accept that.

So long as you are reasonably racist, sexist, and homophobic; go screw whoever you want whenever you want and you will still be a great and Godly candidate. That's the message I get.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 03:56 PM

2. Did Rush just use the "At least he asked his wife for permission instead of cheating on her" excuse?

Jeez, idiots will believe anything. Yeah Rush, I'm sure he really asked permission first.

The stupid things people say sometimes, and the GOPs idiot base eats it all up. Hey Rush, where were you when Weiner was showing his Weiner? Isn't that his private life that doesn't affect his job performance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:05 PM

6. said it was a sign of "character"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:00 PM

4. "hit piece on a Republican candidate"

Really, Mr. Limbaugh? And who would give a flying fig if Newt had just decided to remain a highly-paid housing historian instead of deciding to run for president? Besides, since this whole episode is strictly intramural, what's your beef? Mr. Gingrich will have to explain himself to his faithful Republican base, not the general electorate and those nasty Democrats. And by your own twisted admission, it's Republicans who are most likely to have a major problem with Mr. Gingrich's loose zipper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gratuitous (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:38 PM

12. It's funny that actual reporting

is now considered a "hit piece". It's a lot like how Sarah Palin began the annoying habit of labeling ANY question posed to her by the media (even sympathetic media) that she didn't have snap answers for as "gotcha" questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:04 PM

5. What a windbag.

What. A. Windbag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:10 PM

7. Rachel pegged it right: IOKIYAR

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:15 PM

8. LOL was reading this to hubby and he said, and I quote....

"I'm glad he got that pimple on his ass fixed...now he's a perfect asshole!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:17 PM

9. Where have all of the talk of "Family Values" gone?

It was such the buzz in the 1990's and the reason that we couldn't trust Bill Clinton and how he was responsible for corrupting our youth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:31 PM

10. the parallel between the repuke party and playground bullies/cliques

They're very similar. They want to control the opinions of the rest of the class, and they want to encourage hostility against the chosen scapegoats.

They want to form a clique around themselves, and they drum up enthusiasm through threats and attacks on the scapegoats. They always attack scapegoats for various behaviors, and always exonerate themselves for the same behaviors.

It's highly interesting to me that in an age where twisted, immature bullying like this among the body politic is taken as a corollary of life-with-media, we are at the same time, stunned at the explosion of incivility, bullying and violence in society as a whole.

I see it as a reflection of the present state of human life. When people are treated with disrespect, in whatever millions of possible ways that we see prevalent in everyday life, it absolutely will corrupt their inner selves and their and behaviors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 04:37 PM

11. Ooo, Oxyrush is doing some pretty desperate gyrations

to keep the water he carries for the repuke party from sloshing out all over their fat corrupt laps.

F. U. C. K.

Y.O.U.

Pigboy.

Go take another sex-tourism vacay to buy little boys. Fun fun FUN, eh? IOIYAR

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuzz (Original post)

Thu Jan 19, 2012, 05:28 PM

13. He also said investing in the Cayman islands is like investing in Montana

 

Yeah. If you read all the way to the end of the ABC story, then you got the news that it was all legal, that there was nothing unusual about it, and that many Americans park money in the Caymans and pay taxes on it.

The people who park money in the Caymans and don't pay US taxes are, quote, unquote, foreigners. But investing in the Caymans is like investing in Montana. It's like investing anywhere else. It's after-tax dollars that you put there, and you invest, and they grow, and ABC points all this out. So here's what I think. Here's what I think was going on. I think that ABC, in a race with NBC to curry favor with Obama, and to also hold onto the mantel of taking out Republicans. Remember it was ABC and Brian Ross, our old buddy ABC and Brian Ross who took out Mark Foley over the page stuff in 2006. Well, we haven't heard from him much since. They don't investigate Democrats. And so now it's the Republican primary and then we got this mess out of Iowa where it looks like Santorum won it. There are eight caucus areas where they just said, "Ah, to hell with it. We don't know where the votes are. We agreed here that before the end of this thing was over that Romney's gonna be the winner."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread