Newt Gingrich vs. Rush Limbaugh: Another KO for Limbaugh

Limbaugh by a KO, once again.


I no longer have any respect for New Gingrich. My mother (a Bush hater) wanted Gingrich to run for President, and has hardly heard of Rush Limbaugh. She has lost respect for Gingrich.


Now you might wonder why I did not lose respect for Gingrich when he resigned from Congress, basically in disgrace, because of flagrant infidelity. Well, I lost some respect for him as a man back then, but I have (correctly) told you that I oppose this Democratt/media double standard on hunan frailty, which assumes that Republican have higher standards than leftist Democrats, and should be punished for violating them. I agree Republicans have higher standards. I don't agree that means that Democrats are allowed to get away with personal misconduct while Republicans are not. To me, that assertion is worse "hypocrisy" (leftrists generally being the worst, most sanctimonious hypocrites to ever walk the Earth).


Therefore, I did not think Gingrich should be forced to give up being Speaker of the House, or forced to give up his seat in Congress, for persoanl infedelity. It had nothing to do with his public performance (and did not represent sex wtih an intern in the Oval Office, followed by perjury under oath--Clinton).


No, it is not personal misconduct that has caused me to totally lose respect for Gingrich. . Nor is it his comments on Rush Limbaugh, bad as those were. I have come down on Gingrich, in fact, before Rush delivered the knockout punch today.


For some time, Newt has obviously been out for Newt--principle be hanged. I have expressed severe doubts about Newt's "American solutions" project on this blog, and thouse doubts have crystalized into strong oppostion to the "concept". The idea of a "non-partisan" group formed to come up with a "consensus of pragmatic "solutions" to our problems is a fundamtally leftist idea (form over substance), and fundamentally stupid. I have seen no results from this "project" that have impressed me, although some of the "ideas" have been fine--if not new.


Even "American Solutions" could almost be forgiven as something worth "trying"--arrogant as the idea was and is. But Newt has become a "kiss up" to the mainstream media--as bad as McCain ever was. That I can't stand or forgive. R.I.P. Newt. To me, you are dead. I will remember fondly 1994, even though you have betrayed that reovlution in a number of ways (including the abandonment of the term limits idea once you got to power). I will always remember that Newt was more responsible than any other person for the prosperity of the Clinton years, and for the "failure" of Bill and Hillary Clinton that was a success for America (and made the Clinton years a successful Presidency, desptie Monica).


Yes, Newt has become a leftist style, sanctimonious, suck up hypocrite. If anyone can call this to the attention of Newt, feel free. I am intentionally calling Newt out, and intend to do so. Newt has become the poster child of what is wrong with Repubican politicians these days--even most who call themselves "conservative". Rush Limbaugh is a principled conservative. Newt has no principles at all, other than the advancement of Newt. Newt has finally convinced me of that.


Let us go to the audiotape. As I said, this is only the latest example of Newt Gingrich kissing up to the mainstream media, but it was the last straw for me. You can look at the archives of this blog for my gradual disenchantment with Newt, which has gotten stronger in recent weeks.


On Sunday, on Meet the Press, Newt Gingrich was having a love fest with mainstream media peole trashing Rush Limbaugh (the new "in" thing for establishment Republicans seeking favor with the mainstream media to do, which was also the old "in" thing for Republicans--like McCain--seeking favor with the mainstream media to do).


Gingrich played into the mainstream media template on Rush Limbuagh by actually saying that Rush was "irrational" for saying that he wanted President Obama to fail. That was a LIE by Newt--an outright, deliberate, bald faced lie, and Newt knows it. After Michael Steele said something less offensive, and apologized. Thus, this was someting that Newt did deliberately, with malice aforthought, and it was a lie. I don't forgive deliberate, premeditated liars sucking up to the mainstream media, and Gingrich has shown himself to be one.


What is the lie? The lie is the reference to what Rush has said. Gingrich went on to say that Rush is "irrational" because "failure" for the President means failure for the country. Although it is okay to oppose policies o the President, in Newt's view, it is wrong to suggest that you want the President to "fail". What rot. Newt, you should be ashamed, but you no longer have any shame. In Rush's words, you are now an unprincipled "butt-boy" (tubby, flabby kind), and I would no longer vote for you for dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas (small town where I spent my childhood).


Does Newt know he was lying? Of course he does. Rush Limbaugh clearly said, and has said--in context and over and over again--that IF Obama wishes to impose socialistic policies on this country, then Limbaugh wants Obama to fail. That is really no different than what Gingrich said. Read that marvelous (sarcasm) paraphrase above of the stupid thing that Gingrich actually said. If you want the President's policies to fail, how is it again, Newt, that you want the Persident to succeed? You say tht the President has to "succeed" for the country to succeed? You re a LIAR Newt. I amy meet you in Hell, along with all of the mainstream media people I expect to meet there. And you know you are a liar.


Let us go back to 2993. Newt Gingrich was perfecting his guerilla tactics that that would cause Bill Clinto to FAIL, and cause Repubicans to gain control of the House. Was that Newt Gingrich trying to help Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton pass that universal health care program that they intended to be their main "legacy"? Not on your life. Newt Gingrich was out to make Bill Clinton FAIL, and he did.


Nope. That was not a "failure" for the contry. In fact, Bill Clinton's Presidency was a failure to the very end, as far as passing Democratic policies--exactly what Rush Limgaugh has said he wants for President Obama. What was a personal failure of Bill Clinton was a success for the country. The idea that "success" for the President is "success" for the country is a new "concept" developed by the mainstream media just for President Obama. It is a lie, and these people know it is a lie. They are all (mainstream media) LIARS. CNN, of course, is officially known as the Liar Nework on this blog. You doubt me? Don't!!!


Did the mainstream media want President Bush to "succeed" in Iraq. I actaully think many of them wanted us to lose in Iraq (see archives of this blog). But they definitely wanted Bush policies to FAIL, and for Congress to block those policies (which Congress was too cowardly, luckily, to do). What was the leftist, mainstream media position on why they wanted President Bush's policies on Iraq to "fail"? You know it as well as I do.


They said that they were being true "patriots", because the best thing for the COUNTRY was for President Bush to admt failure in Iraq and withdraw. Now General Petraeus has proven the mainstream media, Obama, and other leftists wrong on admitting failure and defeat in Iraq. But this is all Limbaugh is now saing, in a situation not involving conceding defeat to a mortal enemy.


Rush Limbaugh is merely saying that it is best for the COUNTRY for President Obama to "fail" in successfully implementing his policies, just as the mainstream media adopted the leftist idea that it was best for the CONTRY for President Bush to admit failure in Iraq. In fact, the media went further, and said that we all "failed" by letting President Bush "succeed" in invading Iraq in the first place. Hypocrites. I tell you that leftists, including almost all in the mainstream media, are the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth--including Neanderthal Man (to be complete--not that I have any evidence that Neanderthals were hypocriites).


Did Rush just come out of the air and say he wanted President Obama to "fail" generally. Nope. And Newt knows it--liar that he is. Rush was annoyed (as was I) by the mainstream media trying to boost Obama by equating opposition to Obama with wanting the country to "fail" The original, hyped "controversy came after Limbaugh gave Sean Hannity an interview where Limabugh specifically prefaced his "fail" comment with "IF Obama pursues socialist policies, I want him to "fail"..


In the meantime, the manstream media was pushing the idea that the only oppostion to Obama was Rush Limbaugh, and a few nuts like him Thus, I stil remember the mainstream media stories about how even Republicans wanted Obama to "succeed" (which Gingrich repeated on Meet the Press). Limbaugh wanted to know, and I want to know, what that MEANS? Did that mean that only lunatics wanted any Obama to fail to get his leftist policies enacted? If so, why does the Republican Party even exist.


Nope. This was all a semantic game by the mainstream media to undercut opposition to Obama. Limbaugh knew it. I knew it. It annoyed Limbaugh. It annoyed me. It evidently did not annoy, and does not annoy, Newt as he conducts his "kiss up" campaign. This whole idea that there is something wrong with wanting the President to "fail" to get policies enacted that you think will hurt the country is un-Amerian. It is stupid. It is a semantic game, and that game gives me nothing but further contempt for the mainstream media and those who play that game--like Newt.


I have special contempt for Newt, because a better Newt once PROVED that what is good for the President is not necessarily good for the country, and that failure of the President (to get what the President wants) can be the very best thing for the country. That is why I know Newt LIES. He once took the very opposite positioin, and it was a very good thing for the country. And to falsely suggest that Limbaugh is suggesting something different--that he wants the country to "fail" under Obama, despite saying the exact opposite, is a terrible, mainstream media Big Lie. It was terrible for Gingrich to support that Big Lie, and I will not forgive him for it (although I was already down on him).


P.S. If you suspect that I merely worshp Limbaugh, you are wrong. Inf fact, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Newt Gingrich are the JOINT winners of the Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate this week for the absolutely terrible tax policies they are advocating. Funny, isn't it, that the "irrational " Limbaugh is supporting the very ssame bad tax policies that Gingrich is advocating. But Gingrich says Limbaugh is just an "entertainer--that old line dismissing Limbaugh that Steele trotted out. I can recognize jealousy when I see it. Gingrich is just jealous that Gingrich can't "entertain" anyone, even in his dreams. To "entertain" is not a bad thing. Notice I did not condemn Michael Seele to the point I am condemning Newt Gingrich. That is because Michael Steele has not yet shown that he has totally abandoned principle for media attention, although he has been showing disturbing signs of that. Bashing Limbaugh, especially when you are mousetrapped, is not enough to get me to disown you. I bash Limbaugh myself, but not in a way to kiss up to the mainstream media. Limbaugh is presently the only conservative/Republican showing consistent principles, outside of talk radio and outside of people not well known (like me and Bobby Jindal). That is why Limbaugh is becoming the main conservative/Republican voice. Newt Gingrich will only be that voice again
in his dreams.


P.S. 2: Above rant not spell checked or proofread (unlike earlier entries today where I made the effort). Newt is just no longer worth it. He is a has been, and it bovisouly gripes him. You will have to take the abovbe in all of its "stream of consciousness" glory.