[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Who Killed Charlie Kirk? the Case Against Israel Sen. Grassley announces a whistleblower has exposed the FBI program “Arctic Frost” for targeting 92 Republican groups Keto, Ivermectin, & Fenbendazole: New Cancer Treatment Protocol Gains Momentum Bill Ackman 'Hammered' Charlie Kirk in August 'Intervention' for Platforming Israel Critics "I've Never Experienced Crime Of This Magnitude Before": 20-Year Veteran Austrian Police Spox The UK is F*CKED, and the people have had enough No place for hate apeech America and Israel both told Qatar to allow Hamas to stay in their country Video | Robert Kennedy brings down the house. Owner releases video of Trump banner ripping, shooting in WNC Cash Jordan: Looters ‘Forcibly Evict’ Millionaires… as California’s “NO ARRESTS” Policy BACKFIRES Dallas Motel Horror: Immigrant Machete Killer Caught America has been infiltrated and occupied Netanyahu 1980 Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears Visualizing The Number Of Farms In Each US State Let her cry The Secret Version of the Bible You’re Never Taught - Secret History Rocker defames Charlie Kirk threatens free speech Paramount Has a $1.5 Billion South Park Problem European Warmongers Angry That Trump Did Not Buy Into the ‘Drone Attack in Poland’ Grassley Unveils Declassified Documents From FBI's Alleged 'Political Hit Job' On Trump 2 In 5 Young Adults Are Taking On Debt For Social Image, To Impress Peers, Study Finds Visualizing Global Gold Production By Region RFK Jr. About to DROP the Tylenol–Autism BOMBSHELL & Trump tweets cryptic vaccine message Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March Something BIG is happening (One Assassination Changed Everything) The Truth About This Piece Of Sh*t Breaking: 18,000 Epstein emails just dropped. Memphis: FOUR CHILDREN shot inside a home (National Guard Inbound)

(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: Limbaugh Urges Republicans to Vote for Hillary
Source: Newsmax
URL Source: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/ ... 79.html?s=al&promo_code=4616-1
Published: Feb 28, 2008
Author: Jim Meyers
Post Date: 2008-02-28 12:58:38 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 787
Comments: 73

It may be sound unbelievable, but conservative Rush Limbaugh is urging Republicans to cross party lines this Tuesday in primaries in Ohio and Texas and vote for Hillary Clinton.

During his No. 1 rated radio show and on his Web site, www.rushlimbaugh.com, the former Clinton archenemy has told listeners to “pimp themselves” for just one day vote by voting for Hillary to keep the Democratic Party “at war with itself.”

Citing a story in a Texas newspaper headlined “Many Republicans to Vote for Obama," Limbaugh told listeners this week: “I understand I've got a big challenge here to try to get Republicans to change their minds on this and vote for Hillary to keep her in the race, to keep that party at war with itself . . .

“It's clear that Republicans in Texas have been listening to this program where we have advised Republicans to pimp themselves for a day and go vote in the Democrat primary . . . I just think, at this stage, the longer Hillary can stay in this, the better for us.”

Limbaugh said he wants to see Hillary and Barack Obama continue battling, noting that the battle will end if Hillary is vanquished and Obama can focus completely on presumptive GOP nominee John McCain.

“I know I'm fighting an uphill battle . . . vote for Hillary to keep this campaign going, this 'uncivil war,'” Rush said.

“Remember what this is, this is about us winning. You have to understand, it's not about Hillary winning; It's about us winning. It's about our party winning. It's about those people losing. They've got some problems in the Democratic Party. It's not all sweetness and light over there . . .

“If Hillary loses this thing, all of that's going to come to a screeching halt. We want all the disruption in that party as possible. It's about us winning.”

Poster Comment:

This is the kiss of death for Hillary. She has the endorsement of Ann Coulter because she is better on torture and more defensive of what Bush has been doing in Gitmo than McCain. Now she has the endorsement of Rush Limbaugh. Hillary is toast. But this does not make me happy.

I will refuse to vote for either Obama or McCain.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

#1. To: Horse (#0)

Well, the "politics of hope" sounds trite, but this is the ultimate "politics of cynicism."

My money is always on the latter winning out.

Limpballs has played a major role over the past 20 years in destroying the United States as we knew it at its height and in its heyday. I think historians will say it peaked around the time JFK came into office.

From the Vietnam/Watergate etc. era on, it's been in decline.

“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston

Sam Houston  posted on  2008-02-28   13:11:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

All the party GOP'ers calculated long ago that Hillary would be the presumptive winner. As that hope fades to Obama, their strategy is out the window. The specter of an old, disabled, potential overtly nutty McCain vs. a young, well spoken Obama spells total disaster for the Grand Old Poltroon's. Thus the vote for Hillary strategy. It's fun seeing them this desperate as the Frankenstein monster they created is now refusing to leave the village peacefully.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-28   13:20:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Any Republicans who follow Limbaugh's advice won't be voting in the Republican primaries. I wonder what effect that will have on the McCain-Huckabee race.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-02-28   14:04:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

the United States as we knew it at its height and in its heyday. I think historians will say it peaked around the time JFK came into office.

From the Vietnam/Watergate etc. era on, it's been in decline.

Yeah, I read a piece somewhere and it said that a lot of historians, scientists, well, a lot of smart folks got together...they all agreed we peaked as a nation around 1962.

Sodie Pop  posted on  2008-02-28   15:00:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

they all agreed we peaked as a nation around 1962.

The year before JFK was assassinated.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-02-28   15:02:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

All the party GOP'ers calculated long ago that Hillary would be the presumptive winner.

Correct. It's time for the old party flip-flop farce; the GOP will self destruct on cue just like the Dole fiasco. This nonsense is being perpetrated by those who will profit from the destruction of America.

eskimo  posted on  2008-02-28   15:03:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

All the party GOP'ers calculated long ago that Hillary would be the presumptive winner. As that hope fades to Obama, their strategy is out the window. The specter of an old, disabled, potential overtly nutty McCain vs. a young, well spoken Obama spells total disaster for the Grand Old Poltroon's. Thus the vote for Hillary strategy. It's fun seeing them this desperate as the Frankenstein monster they created is now refusing to leave the village peacefully.

The funny thing is that McLame could not even beat Hitlery in the (s)Election and he sure as hell can't beat the Blackchurian candidate.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   15:12:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Hillary is unpopular enough so that she would not win in a landslide.

If Obama ends up getting the nomination, a landslide victory is eminently possible.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-02-28   15:16:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

and he sure as hell can't beat the Blackchurian candidate.

Have you thought that through?

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   15:17:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

they all agreed we peaked as a nation around 1962.

The year before JFK was assassinated.

Then the sh** really hit the fan in 1965:

LBJ started the big escalation in Vietnam.

The copper-clad coins replaced the silver ones, presaging the coming inflation.

And the Mantle-Maris Yankees collapsed.

MUDDOG  posted on  2008-02-28   15:32:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

McLame could not even beat Hitlery in the (s)Election

Some say a black or woman can not win the election.

angle  posted on  2008-02-28   15:34:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

A moron can though, if his brother's governor of Florida.

MUDDOG  posted on  2008-02-28   15:49:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

the Blackchurian candidate

Fair warning, OI. I'm stealing the above line :)

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-28   15:50:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

And the Mantle-Maris Yankees collapsed.

The 1st blow was struck in 1960 by Bill Mazeroski. That still hurts.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-28   15:54:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

A moron can though

So can a black or a woman. Diebold and the SC trumps voter will.

angle  posted on  2008-02-28   16:00:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

It's time for the old party flip-flop farce; the GOP will self destruct on cue just like the Dole fiasco

Same play, different actors.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-28   16:00:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

In 1962 I had the most spendable money of my working career at $8000 per year.

Gasoline was 22 cents. My mortgage was $65 a month. From there it has been downhill.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   16:01:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

So, the freak is 100% against McCain but he wants McCain to win. Is this Marxist-Maoist dialectic or what?

Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'

a vast rightwing conspirator  posted on  2008-02-28   16:08:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

In '68 I was a police trainee, making $4500 a year. I bought a new VW for cash ($1800 - gas 33 cents a gal) and rented both a ski house in the winter and a summer house in the Hampton Bays for the summer (with a group of friends). Life was good, even in a city where the cost of living was more expensive than most.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-28   16:10:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

The 1st blow was struck in 1960 by Bill Mazeroski. That still hurts.

My brother cried.

MUDDOG  posted on  2008-02-28   16:12:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

In 1962 I had the most spendable money of my working career [...] From there it has been downhill.

Hmmmm... a 45-year downhill slide... It must have been a VERY gentle slope.

I can't think of any year where I was worse off than the year before but I can't say that I've been doing A LOT BETTER, year over year, in the past couple of years. I agree that 'the American dream' of today is more like hoping that things don't get a lot worse too fast.

Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'

a vast rightwing conspirator  posted on  2008-02-28   16:13:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Yeah, I read a piece somewhere and it said that a lot of historians, scientists, well, a lot of smart folks got together...they all agreed we peaked as a nation around 1962.

interesting...before the Kennedy assassination

christine  posted on  2008-02-28   16:17:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

I started at KIDL at $4080 in 1957, I had quit a $7500 a year job with Martin Aircraft because I was being forced to move either to Denver or Florida.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   16:18:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

They've got some problems in the Democratic Party. It's not all sweetness and light over there . . .

lol..as compared to your "sweetness and light (in the loafers)" party, rush.

christine  posted on  2008-02-28   16:30:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

'the American dream' of today is more like hoping that things don't get a lot worse too fast.

The American dream is no longer to be doing better but rather trying to maintain or hang on to ones present status.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   16:31:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

and he sure as hell can't beat the Blackchurian candidate.

Have you thought that through?

To some degree yes. My comment is predicated on a couple of thoughts:

1. McLame has a LOT of skeletons in his closet and they are beginning to rattle. The family mob connections, Keating 5, and increasing activisim on the part of some veterans groups to strip him of his "War Hero" status. In a General (s)Election they would come out.

2. The Hegelian Dialectic used by our semi-hidden rulers would seem to necessitate the (s)Election of a Demoncrat this time in order to push through the National Deathcare Initiative necessary for their eugenics programs.

3. I don't accept the line that it is impossible to elect a woman or a black. I believe it is now possible despite there being some resistance from a minority of whites and a sprinkling of others.

4. Diebold Delivers.

I am not touting this as a certainty by any means but something of medium to high probability.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   16:32:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

A moron can though, if his brother's governor of Florida.

that made me laugh ;)

christine  posted on  2008-02-28   16:33:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

2. The Hegelian Dialectic used by our semi-hidden rulers would seem to necessitate the (s)Election of a Demoncrat this time in order to push through the National Deathcare Initiative necessary for their eugenics programs.

{{{shiver}}}

christine  posted on  2008-02-28   16:35:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

In 1962 I had the most spendable money of my working career at $8000 per year.

Gasoline was 22 cents. My mortgage was $65 a month. From there it has been downhill.

Mine would have been the mid to late 80's - I was single, working in a technical field, and successful as a semi-pro Poker Player. I wasn't wealthy but had more than enough money for my needs and a lot of my wants.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   16:36:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

3. I don't accept the line that it is impossible to elect a woman or a black

How about a female and a black?????

Two things are skewing this primary thing, namely gender and race.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   16:37:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

2. The Hegelian Dialectic used by our semi-hidden rulers would seem to necessitate the (s)Election of a Demoncrat this time in order to push through the National Deathcare Initiative necessary for their eugenics programs.

{{{shiver}}}

Agreed.

The people we are being ruled over by ARE monsters.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   16:39:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

3. I don't accept the line that it is impossible to elect a woman or a black

How about a female and a black?????

Two things are skewing this primary thing, namely gender and race.

In both cases there is a baseline constituency who will not think and will vote for either or both merely because it is a woman or a black man.

There is another sizable group who will vote for them merely because they are Demoncrats.

The repulsion many people now seem to have developed for the Grand Old Pedophile Party appears to be real and many will vote AGAINST ANY Republican.

That constitutes a sufficient plurality to carry the (s)Election before the VoteFraud Machines are factored in.

The media will feed on McLame like Pirahnas on a luckless bovine in the Amazon Basin.

My "Crystal Ball" is a little cloudy as some confusion factors have been inserted into the existing scene, but if Hitlery is properly chastened in her independence I still think she will be "allowed" to win.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   16:47:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

It may be sound unbelievable, but conservative Rush Limbaugh is urging Republicans to cross party lines this Tuesday in primaries in Ohio and Texas and vote for Hillary Clinton.

Makes sense to me. The GOP is coming apart at the seams and needs another Clinton in office as their rallying cry. I figured that the "R"s would find some way to justify voting a "D" into office.

"The more I see of life, the less I fear death." - Me.

"If violence solved nothing, then weapons technology would have never advanced past crude clubs and rocks." - Me.

Pissed Off Janitor  posted on  2008-02-28   16:49:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

the Blackchurian candidate

Fair warning, OI. I'm stealing the above line :)

Please feel free - "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". :-)

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   16:51:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

OI...

I assume you have long been aware of this concerning the Rockefeller family and the Dulles brothers.

The last para is indeed chilling as John Foster was deep into eugenics when young.

"That same year, J.D. Rockefeller and Averell Harriman, a business partner of Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker in Brown Brothers Harriman, gave $11 million to create the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Built on Manhattan property owned by the Dulles brothers, it spawned America’s ground-breaking “eugenics” research and the world’s first “racial hygiene” laws.

By 1907, Rockefeller funding was heavily influencing America’s medical institutions. The Rockefeller Institute created the first genetics lab in 1909. The following year, the Eugenics Research Association and the Eugenics Records Office were founded near Cold Spring Harbor, New York, on land donated by the widow of Averell Harriman.

In 1911, John Foster Dulles summed up eugenics, saying that by eliminating “the weakest members of the population” a purer race could be created."

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   16:51:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

I assume you have long been aware of this concerning the Rockefeller family and the Dulles brothers.

The last para is indeed chilling as John Foster was deep into eugenics when young.

"That same year, J.D. Rockefeller and Averell Harriman, a business partner of Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker in Brown Brothers Harriman, gave $11 million to create the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Built on Manhattan property owned by the Dulles brothers, it spawned America’s ground-breaking “eugenics” research and the world’s first “racial hygiene” laws.

By 1907, Rockefeller funding was heavily influencing America’s medical institutions. The Rockefeller Institute created the first genetics lab in 1909. The following year, the Eugenics Research Association and the Eugenics Records Office were founded near Cold Spring Harbor, New York, on land donated by the widow of Averell Harriman.

In 1911, John Foster Dulles summed up eugenics, saying that by eliminating “the weakest members of the population” a purer race could be created."

Yes, I have been aware of the eugenics/depopulation agenda for a while. In the last couple of years I have spent more time on it and these Psychotics are serious. Of course they see their own inbred drooling lines as "superior".

Does anyone in their right mind regard Duhbya as a member of a "superior" caste?

What people don't seem to get despite the repetition is that Hitler got the ideas for his "racial purity" and "racial hygiene" programs from the English and the Americans. That has been thoroughly buried and is not talked about, except to spin it and discount it, in History Books or the "Popular" Media.

The Cold Springs Harbor "Lab" still exists although it has a new name for its eugenics programs. People might recall that one of their top researchers got canned last year for some improvident remarks that shed light on the "thinking" there.

"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken

Original_Intent  posted on  2008-02-28   17:01:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

i wasn't aware, Cyni. thanks for the info.

christine  posted on  2008-02-28   17:02:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

"Racial hygiene" and "racial purity" are not the only ideas Adolf Hitler got from this country. Not for nothing was Hitler a big fan of Karl May's Wild West novels in his youth. The whole idea of Lebensraum in the East, with the Jews killed off, the Slavs made slaves, and the Germans colonizing rulers, was in imitation of what had happened or he imagined had happened in our Wild West.

Much if not all of what Hitler espoused was a reaction to the German defeat in World War One. Britain had better propaganda, so the New Germany would have to do better propaganda. The U.S. with a continental economy had outproduced Germany, so Germany would have to create its own continental economy. The Jews (he thought) had subverted the German war effort, so this time he would have to make sure there were no Jews around to do it again.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-02-28   17:10:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

The Jews (he thought) had subverted the German war effort, so this time he would have to make sure there were no Jews around to do it again.

Odd since Chancellor Bruning said that the two largest and consistent donators to Hitler were...two Jewish bankers in Berlin...

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   18:12:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

They must not have read Mein Kampf.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-02-28   18:46:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Most at least were aware of what was in the book even if they had not read. The elite left in plenty of time. Many others went to Russia (surprise) and when the Russians came marching in, (surprise) the German Jews were with them.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-02-28   18:50:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Comments (42 - 73) not displayed.

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]