Was Rush Limbaugh a G.W. Bush supporter throughout his Presidency?

So in otherwords. no apology for infering I was a liar. Got it...

Care to address my actual post, not the hack job you quoted?


We provided proof, the Onus is on you now. Keep moving goal post Lerxst. It is entertaining. :lol:

Lerxst said:

Reverend, you make yourself look silly. You and so many others know how you are regularly handed your ass on this forum by a myriad of different posters. Just because you say it didn't happen, doesn't mean it didn't, it just means you are being you. The rest of grin and then roll our eyes and wait to see what you will do next. Just look at who is in here backing your play. The extremists from the right.

Now, begin your whining and I'll wait for you to break tradition and actually post some evidence that backs your opinion.

Click to expand...

Oh look, Lerxt is having a tantrum.... Poor Lerxst....


You infered I was lying, for like the 4th time you look silly.


Proof was provided, and like an inmature child you stick your fingers in your ears and scream "nuh, uh".... Then start a peurile attack on me...



Shocking. :roll:

Lerxst said:

Nope, I just want him to provide some proof. I don't find the Reverend to be an honest debater and I don't find Rush to be honest either. Too much injection of of hyperbole, vitriol, and opinion as fact on both their parts.

Click to expand...

Now this is absurd.

This type of person is a lost cause for Conservatives.

The proof he claimed he wanted to see was staring him right in the yap.
He has no curiosity and with such a rejection of the obvious one wonders if you possess the ability to add single digits together.

Any takers on the bet owe me $50.
With the FACTS, a perfect quote from the man himself, confirming what The Good Rev stated... and you could not believe bring yourself to the obvious conclusion?

That's why your kind will be known as those that Lerxst Left.
Hardcore, eyes closed foot soldiers of the Obama Army.

zimmer said:

Now this is absurd.

This is the type of person is a lost cause for Conservatives.

The proof he claimed he wanted to see was staring him right in the yap.

Any takers on the bet owe me $50.
With the FACTS, a perfect quote from the man himself, confirming what The Good Rev stated... and you could not believe bring yourself to the obvious conclusion?

That's why your kind will be known as those that Lerxst Left.
Hardcore, eyes closed foot soldiers of the Obama Army.

Click to expand...

It is amazing, but you know lerxst is caught when he dives into the "nobody likes you anyway" hissy fit, ignoring facts, and demonstrating his character by not apologizing for infering another poster when he is caught with egg on his face.


:lol:

Lerxst said:

You guys can try again. When the evidence is there, present it. Until then, I'll let you all continue your round robin defense of the indefensible. No begin your pompous chortling and backslapping and tell yourself it'll be okay.

Click to expand...

Why do you continue to refuse to accept the truth that Rush has indeed critizied Bush (and the GOP) on several different issues?

bhkad said:

The Sullivan Group has audited him as being accurate 98.9% of the time until recently when he jumped 1/10th of a point to 99% accurate.

Click to expand...

Thomas Sullivan.
Tom Sullivan on Fox.
The Sullivan Group.

Wow a right wing conservative talk show host and Fox guy says Rush is 99% correct. I didn't know investment firms were also auditors of radio talk show accuracy ratings. Neato! Who else have they audited for accuracy? John Gibson?

Nice ace up your sleeve there Bhkad. What's next...you gonna post a video of Ann Coulter saying "Rush Limbaugh is right most of the time."

By all means, keep bringing this awesome evidence.

zimmer said:

With the FACTS, a perfect quote from the man himself, confirming what The Good Rev stated... and you could not believe bring yourself to the obvious conclusion?

Click to expand...

So Limbaugh's verbal denial of the obvious is now a documented fact is it? You see the problem yet? Now, as I have requested NUMEROUS times, simply go back to a time during the Presidency, and show some evidence of where Rush was actually directly critical of the PRESIDENT. I know you probably haven't followed the entire debate in the two threads, but that has been my request from jump street. Reverend stated he was critical of Bush on numerous issues and highly critical at the end over the bailouts. This should be simple.

Oh Lerxst....


2004


"I don't think Bush will ever pay a price for this politically, but it's possible that Republicans will for a long, long time down the road. We'll get to that in due course"

"Bush is apparently intent upon offering some kind of amnesty proposal hidden in a guest worker program. Now, the AP story doesn't say that there's anything hidden here. I mean it offers maybe some hope for this, but it's a lot of work involved to secure it."

Rush Limbaugh: "Immigration Proposal Roils America"





Who want's to take bets on what lerxst's next excuse will be? :lol:

Lerxst, he is not lying.

I used to be a Republican and a neocon. I used to listen to Rush back in 2002-2004. I remember many times that Rush did not support Bush on quite a few things. The 2 that stick out most in my mind was the immigration policy and the Medicaid entitlement. Rush was very adamant.

I don't know why people try to say if someone supports someone they support everything they stand for. This is not true at all.

I dislike the Republicans as much as Democrats and was a member of both parties at one time or another. I have no vested interest in either party anymore so I have nothing to gain by lying or putting on some partisan front.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

Oh Lerxst....


2004


"I don't think Bush will ever pay a price for this politically, but it's possible that Republicans will for a long, long time down the road. We'll get to that in due course"

"Bush is apparently intent upon offering some kind of amnesty proposal hidden in a guest worker program. Now, the AP story doesn't say that there's anything hidden here. I mean it offers maybe some hope for this, but it's a lot of work involved to secure it."

Rush Limbaugh: "Immigration Proposal Roils America"





Who want's to take bets on what lerxst's next excuse will be? :lol:

Click to expand...

Oh my was this YOUR ace up your sleeve Reverend? Did you actually read the entire transcript? Oh I doubt it because it's clearly a call for the Republicans to not jump to conclusions as this is a tactic by the Bush administration to push the Democrats into an unpopular position. He's telling everyone to stay calm because this proposal really doesn't affect anything other than forcing the hand of the Democrats. Sweet Jesus, 99% of the article is Rush trying to convince Republicans not to get angry, that this is a POLITICAL POSITIONING tactic by the administration to make the Dems appear to be extremists basically by demanding "more more more" and it doesn't do anything but offer hope.

He's defending the man. That last sliver you posted is at the very end and the problem, there's nothing else to it. He says "Bush is apparently intent upon offering some kind of amnesty proposal hidden in a guest worker program. Now, the AP story doesn't say that there's anything hidden here. I mean it offers maybe some hope for this, but it's a lot of work involved to secure it." That's it. That's not a criticism, in fact he acknowledges that the article even says there is nothing hidden. He is simply speculating that there is some "hope for this" but nothing more. He doesn't think it will fly. He basically said that throughout the article while he was reassuring the GOP that Bush was playing a political gambit here.

This quote sums up Rush's position in this specific article...

The Republicans are either going to line up behind Bush, which would be good for garnering Hispanic votes, or demand tougher restrictions, which is good for the Republican base, which is good for Bush.

Click to expand...

You've been schooled...AGAIN.

Back to work Reverend.

Pay attention lerxst. It is good for the Republican base if Bush's position fails....


Fails, like you, over and over again...

The Republicans are either going to line up behind Bush, which would be good for garnering Hispanic votes, or demand tougher restrictions, which is good for the Republican base, which is good for Bush.

Click to expand...

Do you know what the word "or" means?

So much failure so little time.



And no the ace was yesterdays show trascript......


Back to work indeed, Lerxst. You are wrong, as usal, and you show your character by infering I am a liar, and not apologizing when you are proved wrong.

Blackdog said:

Lerxst, he is not lying.

I used to be a Republican and a neocon. I used to listen to Rush back in 2002-2004. I remember many times that Rush did not support Bush on quite a few things. The 2 that stick out most in my mind was the immigration policy and the Medicaid entitlement. Rush was very adamant.

I don't know why people try to say if someone supports someone they support everything they stand for. This is not true at all.

I dislike the Republicans as much as Democrats and was a member of both parties at one time or another. I have no vested interest in either party anymore so I have nothing to gain by lying or putting on some partisan front.

Click to expand...

Let me be clear about this. I'm not convinced he was directly critical of Bush. I'm asking for proof. The above article is typical of what the Reverend does. He misrepresents things and calls it evidence, then he cries foul when he's debunked. He's dishonest.

I never said Rush didn't disagree with Bush. There however is a big difference between just disagreeing on an issue and being critical of the President. That was the Reverends claim. Rush was critical on numerous issues and highly critical at the end. Many don't believe it, I'm one of them.

I fully agree that you can support someone and not agree with all their positions. That is my specific position with Obama. But that is NOT the argument here. This spun off from the other thread. Reverends plight here is a direct result of him failing at his own game. He tried to go very specific on willrockwell, the problem was when other go specific on him he can't deal with it. And this happens. Regularly.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

Pay attention lerxst. It is good for the Republican base if Bush's position fails....


Fails, like you, over and over again...





Do you know what the word "or" means?

So much failure so little time.



And no the ace was yesterdays show trascript......


Back to work indeed, Lerxst. You are wrong, as usal, and you show your character by infering I am a liar, and not apologizing when you are proved wrong.

Click to expand...

:spin::spin::spin:

Sorry Reverend, your spin isn't working. That isn't what he is saying at all. He's saying either/or is good. He gave two scenarios both of which are good for the GOP and Bush. Read the article.

Lerxst, below is the guts of your initial post.

Rush did everything he claimed, and he took on some yesterday that Lerxst Left in an attempt to put an halt to the bull**** parade.

But some people with Lerxst Disease, and incurable condition of Liberalism, press on oblivious to the repeated recollections by individuals and the host himself.

If he did lie about that you'll find corrections at media matters or Democraticundergourd.

This subject has been the discussion of some intense debate in this thread. (Limbaugh Rallies Conservatives to Fight Democrats, Find 'Right Candidate'). On the one hand you have folks like myself who believe that Rush Limbaugh was a staunch supporter of GWB throughout the Presidency. On the other hand you have guys like Reverend Hell Hound who claim Rush was critical of Bush on numerous issues and even highly critical of him towards the end. We absolutely found no common ground on this issue.

Mine is obviously that Rush Limbaugh supported Bush from start to finish. Despite claims that he was critical of Bush on many issues, I have yet to see evidence of this. I can't find any evidence that paints Rush as remotely a Bush critic. Has Limbaugh expressed disagreement with Bush on certain issues...sure, he's spoken out against certain legislation, the government, and even the Republican Party. But I've found really nothing in which he directly confronts Bush for his actions and holds him accountable for decisions Rush didn't agree with (during the Presidency).

Click to expand...

zimmer said:

Lerxst, below is the guts of your initial post.

Rush did everything he claimed, and he took on some yesterday that Lerxst Left in an attempt to put an halt to the bull**** parade.

But some people with Lerxst Disease, and incurable condition of Liberalism, press on oblivious to the repeated recollections by individuals and the host himself.

If he did lie about that you'll find corrections at media matters or Democraticundergourd.

Click to expand...

All this posting and yet nothing in which Rush takes on the President directly. If you type loud enough nobody will hear me right?

Lerxst said:

:spin::spin::spin:

Sorry Reverend, your spin isn't working. That isn't what he is saying at all. He's saying either/or is good. Read the article.

Click to expand...

You fail. I thought you had work to do. Prolly best for you to stop digging. :lol:



How many here say you are wrong?

Wasn't that the litmus test in one of your goofy attacks on me a few posts ago....


see china yet?

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

You fail. I thought you had work to do. Prolly best for you to stop digging. :lol:

Click to expand...

Of course you didn't get it. It was an admonishment for you to get back to work bailing water out of your Titanic of an argument.

How many here say you are wrong?

Click to expand...

Let's see, you, Goobieman, zimmer, American, sazerac....you seeing the trend here? Haha...oh probably not. Blackdog didn't prove me wrong, he said you weren't lying. I say he's wrong. He and I are even.

Wasn't that the litmus test in one of your goofy attacks on me a few posts ago....

Click to expand...

No it wasn't. Apples and oranges Reverend. Try again silly?

Or better yet go back and read your sources for the first time. You'd be surprised what you find...or don't.

Lerxst said:

All this posting and yet nothing in which Rush takes on the President directly. If you type loud enough nobody will hear me right?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry I'm not able to help with reading comprehension or Lerxst Disease.

I do know regular listeners agreed with his opposition to the president on his stated objections.

Perhaps it's a parallel universe thing you are living in.
You look familiar. Short, cute, hairy...? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Parallel Universe?


YouTube - Kokanee Commercial

zimmer said:

I'm sorry I'm not able to help with reading comprehension or Lerxst Disease.

I do know regular listeners agreed with his opposition to the president on his stated objections.

Perhaps it's a parallel universe thing you are living in.
You look familiar. Short, cute, hairy...? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Parallel Universe?


YouTube - Kokanee Commercial

Click to expand...

Okay, so you have nothing but your own personal experiences, nothing you can actually cite that corroborates them. Fine. Consider your position noted.

Lerxst said:

Of course you didn't get it. It was an admonishment for you to get back to work bailing water out of your Titanic of an argument.


Let's see, you, Goobieman, zimmer, American, sazerac....you seeing the trend here? Haha...oh probably not. Blackdog didn't prove me wrong, he said you weren't lying. I say he's wrong. He and I are even.


No it wasn't. Apples and oranges Reverend. Try again silly?

Or better yet go back and read your sources for the first time. You'd be surprised what you find...or don't.

Click to expand...

so hypocritical... :lol: who in your little tantrum attacking me agrees with you?



I have to thank you for the entertainment,. :rofl

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

so hypocritical... :lol: who in your little tantrum attacking me agrees with you?



I have to thank you for the entertainment,. :rofl

Click to expand...

I'm sorry Reverend, I didn't see the links to instances that corroborate your position in this argument. If you could please edit that would be great.

Lerxst said:

I'm sorry Reverend, I didn't see the links to instances that corroborate your position in this argument. If you could please edit that would be great.

Click to expand...

I could show you Rush himself with a notorized statment and you would still stick your fingers in your ear.


I have proved it, others have as well. YOu failed, Why are you still digging?


:rofl:rofl:rofl

Lerxst said:

Okay, so you have nothing but your own personal experiences, nothing you can actually cite that corroborates them. Fine. Consider your position noted.

Click to expand...

That and the timely delivery of what you wanted as proof from the man himself.:Oopsie

One aspect little discussed of Lerxst Disease is Bad Karma.

Lerxst said:

Thomas Sullivan.
Tom Sullivan on Fox.
The Sullivan Group.

Wow a right wing conservative talk show host and Fox guy says Rush is 99% correct. I didn't know investment firms were also auditors of radio talk show accuracy ratings. Neato! Who else have they audited for accuracy? John Gibson?

Nice ace up your sleeve there Bhkad. What's next...you gonna post a video of Ann Coulter saying "Rush Limbaugh is right most of the time."

By all means, keep bringing this awesome evidence.

Click to expand...

I've been following this thread and am completely amused at the level of ignorance being displayed, once again, by our own resident Black Knight®.

Before I begin, I'd love to give a big shout out to zimmer, for coining a new and extremely accurate description of a fatal condition known as:

Lerxst Disease®

A condition in which reading comprehension is severely overpowered by ones ego when failure is eminent.

Let's examine the classic statements:

Lerxst said:

The only reference in that article was a warning to the administration to get it right. That's not a criticism. It's a warning.

Click to expand...

When you issue a warning, you're being critical of ones actions.

Lerxst said:

Mine is obviously that Rush Limbaugh supported Bush from start to finish. Despite claims that he was critical of Bush on many issues, I have yet to see evidence of this. I can't find any evidence that paints Rush as remotely a Bush critic.

Click to expand...

Note the wording, we'll refer to the above wording as the "goalpost".

Now, lets look at the following statements:

Lerxst said:

1)There is nothing in that article that cites Rush directly criticizing George W.

2)And I challenged you to show where Rush was ever directly critical of Bush

Click to expand...

Damn, the goalpost moved. The original argument being augmented with directly when Lerxst is proven wrong.

Lerxst said:

If Rush supported Bush 95% of the time, there is no way you can label him a critic of Bush.

Click to expand...

Sure you can, there's a 5% chance for being critical of Bush.

Lerxst said:

The conversation within this thread is obviously branching a bit, so not all comments will apply directly to the OP but get into the digestion of sub arguments. One of which is reasonably determining whether or not Rush was an actual critic of Bush. He was not.

Click to expand...

That's not a reasonable determination, that's a Lerxst determination.

Links are available throughout this thread giving one example after another of Limbaugh being critical of Bush, that are being ignored.

Lerxst said:

When your opponent breaks your argument down piece by piece, don't avoid his posts. Counter them with good information and facts. You don't get a pass because you say "well I already showed you evidence", especially when that evidence isn't evidence at all.

Click to expand...

That's precisely the point being made by multiple posters in this thread. You don't know when you're defeated. You either dismiss the evidence being presented as not factual, believable or not meeting your criteria.

Then comes your now famous, nuh uh defense.

Lerxst said:

I don't believe you.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Click to expand...

There's a surprise :doh

No you don't. Time and time again you dismiss the facts being presented to you.

Lerxst said:

Cool, when? Can you show me where he was critical of Bush? Sorry if I don't find you to be a credible source.

Click to expand...

Another typical response. You determining a credible source. So only sources that meet your criteria apply? :roll:

Lerxst said:

The rest of us grin and then roll our eyes and wait to see what you will do next. Just look at who is in here backing your play. The extremists from the right.

Click to expand...

The rest of us? I see you and one other, who bailed long ago after dribbling once or twice on his leg.

Extremists from the right? From your position that would make us slightly right of center.

Oh, and no need to back the Good_Reverends play, he's cratered you every step of the way.

We're just piling on and enjoying the spectacle of you screaming nuh uh. :lamo

Lerxst said:

Wow a right wing conservative talk show host and Fox guy says Rush is 99% correct. I didn't know investment firms were also auditors of radio talk show accuracy ratings. Neato! Who else have they audited for accuracy? John Gibson?

Nice ace up your sleeve there Bhkad. What's next...you gonna post a video of Ann Coulter saying "Rush Limbaugh is right most of the time."

By all means, keep bringing this awesome evidence.

Click to expand...

Again, you dismiss the facts because they prove you wrong in your feeble attempt with this ill thought out thread of yours.

Lerxst said:

Blackdog didn't prove me wrong, he said you weren't lying. I say he's wrong. He and I are even.

Click to expand...

The Lerxst Mentality®.

I know you don't see it, understand it and never will. The people are stopping in to link the simple proof that Rush was and sometimes still is critical of President Bush.

But most of all, it's to laugh at you and your stupid ass comments like the one above.