Author Topic: Defeatist Beltway GOP Cannot See the Long-Term Benefits of an Honorable Fight  (Read 393 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,522

Defeatist Beltway GOP Cannot See the Long-Term Benefits of an Honorable Fight
October 15, 2013


BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, what is the state of play now? Even I, ladies and gentlemen, your know-everything, in-touch host, even I mere moments ago was still trying to get the lay of the land on where we are on what's going on in Washington vis-a-vis the supposed shutdown, vis-a-vis continuing resolution, vis-a-vis the debt limit. I think I've got it nailed down, and I've also learned something else. Actually, I didn't learn it. We know it. I just had it confirmed, and it's about the Republican attitude, and it's so unnecessary. It's so defeatist.



 The Republican attitude is because they're total prisoners of what goes on in the Beltway. They're total prisoners of the Beltway narrative. I'm not kidding, especially in the House, they think the last 15 days have eliminated any chance they've got of winning any elections in 2014 and 2016, and I am not kidding. They think Cruz and Lee and the people that led this have doomed them, and they are defeated. They are out of strategies. It's just mind-boggling that they don't have the long view, that they don't understand the seeds that they're planting right now.

Pat Buchanan has a really good column today in which he concedes (paraphrasing), "Yeah, the Republicans are gonna lose this, but it would be wise for them to remember history and losing with honor." He cites the Goldwater era versus the RINO lib Republicans led by Nelson Rockefeller and the gang and how even back in 1964, Goldwater didn't have a prayer because they were coming off the Kennedy assassination. Kennedy had been martyred. JFK had like a 70-point advantage in the polls, and it makes the point that Nixon was even campaigning harder. And this is the point. Other than Reagan, Nixon was the only nationally known Republican at the time that stood by Goldwater and campaigned even harder for Goldwater than Goldwater campaigned for himself.

Buchanan's point is, look at what happened to Nixon versus what happened to all of those RINOs that threw in against Rockefeller. They were never heard from. Nelson Rockefeller never got the nomination. Scranton, all of these guys, George Romney, they never amounted to anything in the party. They never won anything, particularly nationally, after they abandoned Goldwater in '64. Now, I know a lot of you people, "Come on, Rush, 1964, that's long ago." You know, history, they say, repeats itself in ways. It's not necessarily true, but you certainly can learn from it. The fact is they're doing the right thing here, whether they've been dragged into it or not, they're doing the right thing.


more at:  http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/10/15/defeatist_beltway_gop_cannot_see_the_long_term_benefits_of_an_honorable_fight

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

"You can lead a liberal to the Truth, but you can't make them Think" - damned if I know

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Quote
Buchanan's point is, look at what happened to Nixon versus what happened to all of those RINOs that threw in against Rockefeller.

When Rush Limbaugh is quoting Pat Buchanan, who thinks that Richard Nixon is a profile in courage, you know our goose is cooked.

Nixon was not a RINO?  He gave us the EPA, grew the size of government, and imposed price controls as a way to control inflation.

And was, indeed, a crook.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf