Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

hank scorpio wrote:Romney picked as 2012 GOP front-runner

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/28/cpac/index.html

houndawg wrote:

hank scorpio wrote:Romney picked as 2012 GOP front-runner

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/28/cpac/index.html

Romney/Palin wouldn't do much in the United States, but in Dumbfookistan they'd be a huge hit.

(CNN) – Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh fired back at Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele Monday, suggesting on his radio show the GOP leader appears to be supporting President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

"Why do you claim to lead the Republican Party when you seem obsessed with seeing to it President Obama succeeds?" Limbaugh addressed Steele.

"I frankly am stunned that the chairman of the Republican National Committee endorses such an agenda. I have to conclude that he does because he attacks me for wanting it to fail," said Limbaugh.

Late last week, Steele told CNN's D.L. Hughley that Limbaugh is an "entertainer" whose comments are "ugly."

Also on his radio program Monday, Limbaugh said Steele is being used by the "liberal media."

"Michael Steele has been around long enough to know that the liberal media will use him by twisting what I say or what others say," he said. "He took the bait, he bit down hard on the bait, he launched an attack on me, even though the premise of what was said to him was false."

ASUMountaineer wrote:Limbaugh is an entertainer. He's also a hypocritical, fatass, druggie who is nowhere close to being a "conservative." Not that Steele is a conservative either, but I don't think Steele meant he wants Obama to succeed, but he wants America to succeed. Limbaugh is trying to stay relevant.

hank scorpio wrote:

(CNN) – Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh fired back at Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele Monday, suggesting on his radio show the GOP leader appears to be supporting President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

"Why do you claim to lead the Republican Party when you seem obsessed with seeing to it President Obama succeeds?" Limbaugh addressed Steele.

"I frankly am stunned that the chairman of the Republican National Committee endorses such an agenda. I have to conclude that he does because he attacks me for wanting it to fail," said Limbaugh.

Late last week, Steele told CNN's D.L. Hughley that Limbaugh is an "entertainer" whose comments are "ugly."

Also on his radio program Monday, Limbaugh said Steele is being used by the "liberal media."

"Michael Steele has been around long enough to know that the liberal media will use him by twisting what I say or what others say," he said. "He took the bait, he bit down hard on the bait, he launched an attack on me, even though the premise of what was said to him was false."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Backflips for Rush: Rush Limbaugh might not be the “voice and intellectual force” behind the Republican Party, as Rahm Emanuel asserted on Sunday. But this has become increasingly true: When Limbaugh says jump, Republican officials quickly respond, “How high?” First, Georgia Rep. Phil Gingrey (R) criticized Limbaugh back in January, but then immediately called into to apologize after receiving a slew of complaints from Rush listeners. "I regret and apologize for the fact that my comments have offended and upset my fellow conservatives,” Gingrey told Limbaugh. Now, after RNC chair Michael Steele told CNN over the weekend that Limbaugh is an entertainer who can be “ugly” and “incendiary” -- and after Limbaugh gladly returned the fire -- the chairman called Limbaugh to smooth things over. “My intent was not to go after Rush,” Steele told Politico. “I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh. I was maybe a little bit inarticulate… There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.” Of course, there is now an open invitation for some ambitious Republican to become the first to have the guts to stand up to Rush.

travelinman67 wrote:The GOP is foolish for bringing Rush forward at CPAC and allowing him to become a distractor from the current early failures during Obama's rein. So far, Obama is batting .000, and that should be the discussion, but the Dems will be only too happy to use their "polarizing/lightening rod" Saint of Vilification, Limbaugh to distract the public.
Limbaugh is an entertainer, whose remarks DO NOT represent the opinions of most conservatives. The fact his commentary so upsets liberals merely is a validation that Donks allow emotion to control their rational process.
Back to B.O.

Batter up!

Appaholic wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:The GOP is foolish for bringing Rush forward at CPAC and allowing him to become a distractor from the current early failures during Obama's rein. So far, Obama is batting .000, and that should be the discussion, but the Dems will be only too happy to use their "polarizing/lightening rod" Saint of Vilification, Limbaugh to distract the public.
Limbaugh is an entertainer, whose remarks DO NOT represent the opinions of most conservatives. The fact his commentary so upsets liberals merely is a validation that Donks allow emotion to control their rational process.
Back to B.O.

Batter up!

Agree.....while Conks, in their calm, cool and deliberate manner, hold a match to a pile of Dixie Chick albums......

Would you prefer crow or foot with that statement?

travelinman67 wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Agree.....while Conks, in their calm, cool and deliberate manner, hold a match to a pile of Dixie Chick albums......

Would you prefer crow or foot with that statement?

That was a simple decision by Capitalists choosing to exercise their market privilege to redress fv(ked up people puking hateful statements.

Much like we have done with AGS.

Donks have the right to do the same with Limbaugh, which they've attempted to do with futility.

Appaholic wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:The GOP is foolish for bringing Rush forward at CPAC and allowing him to become a distractor from the current early failures during Obama's rein. So far, Obama is batting .000, and that should be the discussion, but the Dems will be only too happy to use their "polarizing/lightening rod" Saint of Vilification, Limbaugh to distract the public.
Limbaugh is an entertainer, whose remarks DO NOT represent the opinions of most conservatives. The fact his commentary so upsets liberals merely is a validation that Donks allow emotion to control their rational process.
Back to B.O.

Batter up!

Agree.....while Conks, in their calm, cool and deliberate manner, hold a match to a pile of Dixie Chick albums......



Would you prefer crow or foot with that statement?

travelinman67 wrote:Top one is a kid, not a conservative, mouthing off...

Second one is just wierd...what the hell is a "Dromedary Hump" anyway?

Third is a photoshop.

Next.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Agree.....while Conks, in their calm, cool and deliberate manner, hold a match to a pile of Dixie Chick albums......



Would you prefer crow or foot with that statement?

Yeah, but WE'RE perfectly justified in our emotion.

Wedgebuster wrote:How to apologize to Rush-

http://www.dccc.org/content/sorry