Rush is Wrong - and Increasingly So ...

When I received this in email, I knew it needed posted on here.  Quit listening to both Rush and Hannity after their attacks on women who came forward against Cain.  They lost all credibility when they started attacking the women and defending Cain.  I have been wondering for weeks who pulls their strings. The astronomical worth of Limbaugh's eight-year pact: $400 million contract from Clear Channel at the same time Clear Channel was on its back and laying off thousands people.  That made no sense until you realize that Clear Channel is owned by Bain Capital, Romney's company which is supposed to be in blind trust.  If you believe that Romney doesn't know what is going on with Bain, then I still have some swampland for sale in AZ.

From Huffington Post in 2008 which also applies for 2012:

What would it cost to buy the support of just about every nationally-syndicated neocon talk show host in America? About $19.5 Billion, which is what Mitt Romney's private equity firm, Bain Capital, and Thomas H. Lee Partners have agreed to pay in a leveraged buyout agreement with Clear Channel Communications, the largest radio station owner in the country. 

Ed. Note -- The original story we posted on this topic inferred that Bain Capital had recently purchased Clear Channel Communications. That is not true. The transaction took place in November of 2006. The facts remain that Bain earns a share of Clear Channel's profits and that Mitt Romney, while a retired partner, still earns money from the private equity firm. 

Did Bain Capital buy Clear Channel in order to get Mitt Romney the Presidency?  It is a question that begs answering but Rush, Hannity, and Beck along with others don't even acknowledge when propping up Mitt that they work for Clear Channel that is owned by Bain Capital started by Romney and where a lot of his campaign donation bundlers are employed or have ties to Bain.  This is an interesting read on the situation from someone who actually is conservative:

Rush is Wrong - And Increasingly So ...by ThinkFirst 

Arrogance, pride, and isolating-fame and wealth seems to make for strange bedfellows.
Rush Limbaugh has made a recent pattern of curious, if not disturbing choices, often echoed in the afternoon by me-too talker Sean Hannity. 

I confess that I used to find both of these men entertaining and informative, and I used to think of them as core voices for the conservative movement, but no longer. I am hearing the same from other conservatives - not faux-Republican faux-conservative Libertarians, and not Tea Party self-promoters and fad-chasing fan-boys and fan-girls, and not single-issue zealots, but solid fiscal and social conservative Republicans who have many years of Party activism behind them.

The pattern includes defending the antics of inveterate self-promoter, faux-billionaire, and television clown Donald Trump in his effort to influence the GOP Primary. Somehow they never mention his bizarre financial and personal history and his non-conservative views on multiple issues. 

It also includes James Carville-like personal attacks on the women who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, and anyone who came to their aid, plus attacks on the woman who said she’d had an 11-year affair with him. Somehow they never get around to mentioning his support for non-conservative policies such as affirmative-action, his opposition to school choice vouchers, his church where the radical-Muslim Malcolm X is listed as a “major influence", that Godfather’s Pizza was never “near bankruptcy” before he took over, nor the fraud of 9-9-9 (which was really 9-9-9. 9-0-9, 3-3-3, and all of that mess a stalking-horse for an European-style 30% national sales tax). 

The pattern continued with a sneering attack on critics of faux-conservative Newt Gingrich; including even more-solid conservative men than Gingrich such as Senator Tom Coburn and Steve Largent. No mention of Gingrich’s history of preferring the company of fellow-adulterer Bill Clinton to fellow Republicans during his stint as Speaker, no mention of his apparent preference for Democrats following his sudden-resignation in the face of pending ethics violation investigations, no mention of his foolish endorsement of Hillary-care (a parallel socialist healthcare policy to Romneycare and Obamacare), and his equally-foolish endorsement of Al Gore’s global warming hoax alongside Nancy Pelosi. 

Meanwhile, the 11-year highly-experienced and successful conservative Republican Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, is ignored - or ridiculed - by these two men. The most-conservative candidate with the strongest resume and the fewest skeletons of the remaining serious candidates (Gingrich, Perry, and Romney) and they all-but dismiss and ignore him. Why?
Were Rush and Hannity to make as big of a thing of Perry (and aggressively defended him against attacks) as they have Cain and Gingrich, and even Romney before that, he’d already be back over 20%. 

One has to wonder what is the anti-Perry influence of Mormon-controlled ClearChannel, Romney-sympathetic Drudge, and Romney/Rove-controlled Fox on these men. Or is there some other explanation? 

One also has to wonder if either of them even remember what it means to be a genuine conservative with the desire to support a candidate whom one respects for their leadership and their lifestyle and not merely for their convenient campaign promises. 

Rush and Hannity disappoint so badly that, in-common with many fellow conservatives and former regular listeners, I almost never tune-in any more and when I do I soon just turn off ‘the noise’ and do something else. 

As the Internet comic goes “Disappointed, disappointed, disappointed …” 

Source:
http://nevils-station.com/qp_files/quam-plures/blog5.php/2011/12/05/rush-is-wrong-and-increasingly-so

Are Rush and Hannity along with other Clear Channel pundits doing the bidding of Clear Channel for Bain Capital who supports Romney 100%?  Time will tell, but would explain why they are ignoring other candidates to concentrate on Romney and Newt who are not conservative when you look at their records.

Cong Mike Pence (R-IN) Pence Discusses President's Iraq Speech on FoxNews' Hannity

Once again Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana has hit it out of the park. If he is not considering running for President in 2010, he should. There is no member of Congress who can say more in the one-minute speeches on the floor of the House than Mike Pence. No one has to parse Pence's speeches or wonder what does he mean because his message is always clear and concise. You know where he stands on issues and there is no putting a finger in the wind to see which way the wind is blowing. Mike Pence appeared on Sean Hannity's show after the President's speech with his reaction to the speech:



Washington, DC - U.S. Congressman Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, appeared on FoxNews’ Hannity to respond to President Obama’s speech on Iraq. The following are excerpts:

On the Surge

Congressman Pence: Two things, Sean. Number one, he didn't give credit where credit is due to his predecessor, who against withering domestic criticism refused to accept defeat in Iraq. And secondly, he used the word “victory” at the tail end of the speech, but it’s not at all clear he was actually referring to Iraq when he did it. It was something about “there are no ceremonies for surrender.” I thought this speech was wanting. I thought it lacked gratitude toward his predecessor. He said tonight that he and President George W. Bush disagreed about the war. Well, Sean, the American people know they didn't just disagree about the war. They disagreed about the surge. And then-Senator Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi were wrong about the surge and they were wrong to oppose it and the American people know it.

On Democrats’ Opposition to the War

Congressman Pence: …in late 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama was still saying that the surge wasn't working even though the evidence was overwhelming that it was. Look, I get it. I understand how difficult, with his left flank, it would be for him to acknowledge that he was wrong. That Nancy Pelosi was wrong. That Harry Reid was wrong. That the 10 votes they took in the House of Representatives for a timetable for withdrawal and essentially setting the table for surrender were wrong. At least he could have said tonight, that “George W. Bush and I disagreed on strategy and tactics but I admire his determination and his willingness as President of the United States to see this through, despite overwhelming public opposition.” He didn't say that. He didn't give credit where credit is due and I think that's a disappointment.

On the Economy

Congressman Pence: All across the country people are focused right now on jobs and spending but tonight on the final day of combat operations in Iraq, we were all looking for him to acknowledge the success of our military and to cast a vision. Where was the language about, “bear any burden, pay any price to ensure the survival of freedom?” Instead he was back to championing more spending, a national energy tax. It was a missed opportunity. It lacked vision. He didn't give credit where credit is due. I think the American people get that.

Source: Email from GOP.gov