Annoying, Irrelevant Gnats Will Now Seek Third Party Candidate…

The #NeverTrump team, specifically the punditry within it, are doing what the professionally republican clans do every time they lose.  They pout, gnash their teeth, stomp their feet and eventually carry off their football.

They are annoying insignificant gnats full of self-importance that can be cast into a pit of irrelevance.  These are the same voices who rejoiced when the were granted audience with President-elect Obama in 2008.

These are also the same insufferable small-minded dolts who stand up at CPAC and applaud House Speaker Omnibus Paul Ryan, while never even thinking about -let alone reconciling- the reality of the last federal budget being passed in 2007.

Never trump crowd

When was the last time this group assembled their efforts to protest congress spending the 2009 Stimulus year-after-year-after-year.   Have you ever even heard them mention it?  Did you know our treasury re-spends the trillion dollar ARRA stimulus every year?

Conservatives? Yeah, enough said.

Yes, this group it also includes the intellectually dishonest radio screamer and crony-constitutionalist professional book seller Mark Levin; along with the cheeto-faced religious sycophant and professionally hypocritical Glenn Beck; and we can’t leave out the infamous master of professionally obtuse gaslighting, Rush Limbaugh.

Thanks to Donald Trump, each of these voices are now left flailing wildly in a vain effort to retain their relevance while selling Super Beets.

There is an expression:

“I will leave you naked before your enemies”…

A proactive assertion essentially stating: if you chose to engage in war with me – not only do I promise your defeat against my interests, but I will lay you open to exposure from all adversaries – who will then take advantage of your new vulnerability.

We noted in September of last year how presidential candidate Donald Trump was doing a remarkable job filling the role behind this proclamation.

In a seismic political shift, Trump has gone far beyond drawing a line in the sand. He  openly dug a trench on his pre-selected battle space within conservative/republican encampments.

Without any apology or hidden motive, he filled the trench with a highly explosive electorate fuel (the result from years of Republican lies and deceit) and he openly stood behind his common sense formation twirling a Zippo while looking toward the deceivers.

As a direct result of his approach the enemy inside the wire were being forced to expose themselves.

The various “Robert’s-The Bruce”, per se’, were put in a precarious position of attacking Trump in a vain effort to retain their career ruse.  However, when they attacked the very principles they previously claimed were core tenets to their own beliefs, they also exposed their own alignment with the usurping powers within the GOPe machine.

goldberg headshotIn September of 2015 Jonah Goldberg writing for National Review penned an outline encapsulating his disappointment toward those who support Donald Trump. After a few days of reflection we, coincidentally along with John Nolte via Breitbart, responded.

Our initial response, “An Open Letter To Jonah Goldberg“, was not advancing the proposition that Donald Trump was the be-all end-all harbinger of conservatism, it was never our intent.

Exactly the opposite is true, which is profoundly evident in my own expressed motives “Why I Support Donald TrumpPart I, Part 2 and Part 3. The key word in that prior paragraph is “motive”; we stand open with our motive – the opponents do not.

We used the metaphor our constitutional republic was akin to the most beautiful classic car ever created, a beauty that is now in desperate need of restoration.

This metaphor allowed me to present the question:

Do we begin restoration to remove the rust with a ground up painstaking process intended to regain the full value, but will be exceedingly costly; or, do we as a nation once again put bondo over the rot and give it an appearance only paint job to maintain the impression?

My supported position, given all the rot and disrepair we know exists, was not to ignore the growing insufferable issues evident by hiding problems (McConnell, Boehner, Ryan, U.S. CoC) under layers of shiny paint (Romney, Jeb, Kasich, Cruz et al).

Instead we proposed, and many like-minded agreed, we tear it down (using Trump) and begin an arduous but worthy process of rebuilding.

Given that proposition, it would be silly to think we should take Lady Liberty to the restoration “finisher”.

We first need to take her to the world class “body team”, Donald Trump, who have the ability to take her down to the frame, cut out the rust, and rebuild the original foundation. This is the essential element in a proper restoration.  Make America Great Again !

rich lowryJonah Goldberg, and to a larger extent NRO’s Editor Rich Lowry, have always been presenting a conflated argument.

They decry the laying of facts for why it is better to take Lady Liberty down to the foundation (removal of the rot), by arguing the body team is not experienced enough in the art of finishing.

Either they don’t want to see the rot and rust, or those voices are comfortable with the rot and rust.

However, they defend years of associations with vested interests (Beltway DC political crowd) who hold a like-minded view of the body politic (bondo just fine), by claiming restoration opponents are not delivering an appropriate curriculum vitae for the chosen “finishing” contractor.

However, worse than just defending the “status quo” approach, they try to hide their agenda and self-interest; thus they become “the enemy inside the wire” that Donald Trump is exposing.

How do we know this to be true?

It’s really not that difficult.

First, you’ll never see Goldberg or Lowry pen an opinion “why I support”, or “why I don’t support”, and then begin to outline their advocacy. Nope, they wouldn’t actually advocate for something they’d be held accountable for; that’s too risky.

Instead, each prefers to float in that weird space where personal stake (financial livelihood) is viewed through the prism of risk.

What if their Lords and Masters take exception? What happens then?

Secondly, we give you factual examples from NRO which carries a specific intent.

Headline: “The Great Trumpian Divide“, and the original coded headline message:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423901/donald-trump-conservatives-war (<– note “conservatives war”)

Beyond the headline’s inherent message, “conservatives war”, and considering the Lords and Masters, look closely at the article, and compare to the article they are refuting, and you’ll find something revealing:

National Review screengrabScreengrab from NRO

When you identify what’s missing – SEE HERE – you can see what Goldberg and Lowry chose to specifically leave out.

There’s a conscious act here. They didn’t just copy/paste the bullets, they intentionally chose to leave out two bullets that are between the circled bullet points they could accept.

Why?

What is it about those two hidden truths that represents such risk?

Why did Jonah Goldberg and Rich Lowry view those two specifically removed points as too uncomfortable to present in their publication? The motive is brutally evident.

nro missingAnyone who has followed politics for any length of time knows who the vested interests are behind that intentional omission.

The Lords and Masters:

shameful seven 1

McConnell and Boehnertom donohue

What these dolts don’t seem to understand is our opposition is not just toward President Obama and the professional leftists.  Our opposition is also toward the insufferable UniParty aspect of the GOPe, the professionally republican.

Yes indeed, Donald Trump has left all America’s adversaries naked to their enemy, and for the first time in decades we were afforded an awakening to see who the enemy is “inside the wire”.

Many masks were removed:

Never trump crowd

Once you see the strings on the marionettes it becomes impossible to watch the show and not see them any longer.

Gnats.

It’s virtually guaranteed this group of gnats will stomp off and find another larger gnat to represent them.  They have to, because Donald Trump will:

  • stop illegal immigration
  • enforce existing immigration laws to include deportation
  • build a wall on the Southern border
  • force congress to pass a budget
  • tear up anti-American trade deals
  • create U.S. jobs
  • support the middle-class, and
  • Look out for America’s best interests.

These gnats just can’t allow that agenda to go unchallenged.

humor-in-nature8

 

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Ted Cruz, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

500 Responses to Annoying, Irrelevant Gnats Will Now Seek Third Party Candidate…

  1. rebel53blog says:

    Out with the Old and In with the Trump — MAGA

    Liked by 10 people

    • And the reason it….Ya know listening to Mark Levin’s show on my way home from work, I was ever so disappointed in this author of great works and supporter of Reagan’s, He kept asking “Well where are Trump’s plans, how does he plan on instituting, he just speaks walls and jobs but not how he is going to do it” WELL GREAT ONE, ya ever hear of reading???? Mr. Trump HAS released his hows and ways on his website and in books he himself has written-wow, and this guy claims to be so smart, be glad you did not hear him, he continues to either want a third party, or even supports those that would vote for Hillary (?) This is a conservative? This is a man that supports the Constitution? That keeps up the divide? All you Trumpsters need to remain on your game, because I have a great feeling they are pushing for a contested convention and they are feeding the anger of the Cruz supporters and do not realize that Trump is the nominee by VOTES, by the people. I can no longer tolerate this man, he is so in the tank for Cruz, stating that Trump told lies and that is why Cruz lost-NO CRuz lost because of Cruz,you want to talk about Trump being nasty, well what was Cruz’s tone, every interview for awhile now, in order to answer a question (which he did not) he just slammed, slaughtered and lied about Trump! and here is Mark Levin continuing these lies even after he is the presumption nominee, so instead of trying to heal the party to bring it together, he is talking about a write in campaign and for Cruz to try again (if he does not get the brokered) in 2020…Sorry about Rush, I have not listened to him in years, I occasional read some of his transcripts. I have never ever seen such sore losers in all my life! They scream CONSTITUTION!!! CONSERVATIVE!! and yet lead their listeners down to road to vote for either Bernie or Hillary (oh we haven’t learned our lesson-yet “we need to feel more pain” is their excuse!) Wow you go from super “right” to super “left” explain how that makes sense !!!!!

      Liked by 2 people

      • Bella Southland says:

        My exact thoughts! These morons have ruined the term Conservative. I don’t ever want to wear that label again! Kevin lied to people who genuinely trust him and turned them into Cruzbots. Wild raging manic Cruzbots. Why? For money and book sales. What a horrible Israel Firster !

        Like

  2. Keln says:

    You know, something has been bothering me lately, and it concerns Rush Limbaugh. And that is the negativity about him I see around here. Granted, I don’t like Rush. I stopped listening to him years ago and never looked back. The only time I see anything he says is the odd link to a transcript from Drudge or elsewhere. So I can only guess he’s been up and down when it comes to Trump. All that I’ve read seems he has been relatively fair.

    He’s also admitted finally he was a Cruz guy. And I heard that he was a little too forgiving of Cruz today on his radio show. But when I compare him to what I’ve heard from guys like Levin and Beck, and the typical Cruzbot, Limbaugh is pretty tame. And more importantly, he seems to actually understand Trump and the Trump movement, even if he doesn’t agree with it.

    Which I am fine with. I am always fine with honest disagreement. Drudge just posted another Limbaugh transcript that seems to further support my opinion that at least Rush understands Trump and Trump supporters. You can read the whole thing here.

    Of particular note is the quote:

    “Against a message like Trump’s, if your counter message is, “I’m the most conservative guy running,” that’s not going to work.

    Even if you are, and even if you’re good at it, it’s not gonna make a dent. Because none of this is about ideology right now.”

    We know this. It is about Nationalism vs. Globalism. It is about the power of the people vs. the power of elitism and the establishment. It is about us.

    Rush gets it. He was on the wrong side. He may continue to doubt Trump. I am OK with that. It won’t make me listen to him, but lumping him into the same category as Levin or Beck? Come on. Those guys are clueless koolaid drinkers. They have no relevant opinion. They are just angry idiots. Hot anger vs. Cold. Emotion vs. Reason.

    Rush also poo poos the morons (like Levin and Beck) who are so anti-Tump they are willing to let Hillary win. Again, he is not in the same class as them.

    And he isn’t friendly to Trump. But he predicts he’ll win in a landslide even so.

    I don’t want anyone to like Rush. I don’t. But grouping him with the “gnats”? Cmon. He’s more honest than most of these morons we’ve had to deal with for months.

    Having said all of that, I will reiterate: I’ve had limited exposure to Rush this campaign. If I am wrong, please point out some transcripts or video/audio where he has been as bad as Levin or Beck.

    The point of this whole post is, for now we need to focus our energy on getting Trump to the White House. But after that, there will be a reckoning. And there will be those who got caught up in the turmoil, and those who caused it. And we need to know who just got caught up and who were the causes of it. I don’t think Rush was a significant cause, based on what I’ve read and heard. I think he was just an honest dissenter. And if I’m wrong, fine. I am good with that. But I’d like to see some evidence. It’s not that I plan to be a Ditto Head again. It’s just that I want to know who I can at least trust halfway in the future vs. who I should absolutely tune out.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Gman says:

      You are 100% correct. It is ridiculous to lump Rush in with these other idiots. He has never ever tried to dissuade people from voting Trump. He has been very fair. Yeah maybe his guy was Cruz but he didn’t really let anyone know.

      Liked by 1 person

    • wheatietoo says:

      Rush supported Ted Cruz.

      Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President.
      He knows it and lied about it, using his claim to be a “constitutional scholar” to give credence to his lie.

      Ted Cruz created a terrible new Precedent by getting himself elected & sworn in to the US Senate.
      Now…any foreign citizen can claim they are eligible to be a US Senator, based on this new ‘Cruz Precedent’.

      And yet, Rush supported Ted Cruz.

      Rush does not care about this country.
      He has been laid bare and exposed…by his own actions.

      Liked by 18 people

      • Keln says:

        I used to support Cruz. It happens. This does not answer my question.

        Like

        • wheatietoo says:

          You mean your question: “Is it fair to lump Rush in the same category as these other gnats?”

          Yes. It is fair.
          My reply above addressed why it is fair.

          Liked by 7 people

          • Keln says:

            Your reply amounted to “I disagree with him therefore it is fair to put him in the same category as people who have been insulting people like me for months”.

            That is not logical.

            Your feelings are overriding your reasoning. Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

            Liked by 1 person

            • wheatietoo says:

              Stating that Cruz is not eligible and pointing out the terrible Precedent that Cruz has created…are not “feelings”.
              They are facts.

              They are facts that illustrate how Ted Cruz has subverted the Constitution in his quest for power.

              If Rush were being ‘fair’ he would have pointed these things out…but instead he gaslighted us about Cruz being a “constitutional conservative”.

              Liked by 10 people

          • Yes, in a way he was even worse because he was much sneakier. Insane Beck and Levin NEVER tried to play both ends against the middle.

            Liked by 10 people

          • nole2016 says:

            Rush Limbaugh tried his best to change/influence the trajectory of the Cruz campaign in the final weeks. IMO, his picture should be with all the other anti-Trump vermin. He also took heavy shots at Trump voters/supporters. He also called Rubio a full-throated conservative and tried to explain away his gang of eight leadership position. The man will be forever dead to me.

            Liked by 10 people

            • ladypenquin says:

              I had been a faithful Rush listener for years. At first he seemed to be “fair” – but in the last month it became clear how far he was willing to go defending Cruz, starting after the Colorado heist. We received a lecture everyday about the “rules” – I sent him a message telling him that manipulating rules to obtain a desired outcome will still a violation of the spirit of the rules, if not the “law” of them. I also reminded him that also ignoring the fact that Cruz was using all of the states’ GOP-E political machinery to exclude Trump supporters as delegates was also disingenuous on his part… Voters were being disenfranchised, people who had voted in “good faith” with the GOP – expecting that their voted counted. Kind of like the General Election…when the GOP comes begging for our votes…

              Though Rush might have done a better job disguising his Cruz support, the fact he called us, “Trumpsters” and didn’t name the “Cruzbots” made it clear we were 2nd class to him.

              Liked by 10 people

        • georgiafl says:

          Yes, lump Rush with Levin and Beck, but he should have the biggest photo in the middle – simply because he has acted even more deceptively than the rest of them in regard to this election.

          Plus, he is a fat old cigar-chewing hedonistic reprobate to boot.

          No respect or excuses for Rush

          Liked by 8 people

      • Daz says:

        I agree , we can debate all sorts pov on rush. but being a conservative voice on radio and has been in this for many years. He knew Cruz isn”t eligible to be president. It boils down to are we going to uphold our Constitution or not. Rush by supporting a foreigner knowingly doing so, makes him a traitor.

        I don”t care what some NJ judge says Cruz is eligible, The Supreme Court has ruled 4 times Both parents must be American citizens, and native born.or filed born abroad as a US citizen at birth.

        Just because Rush maybe isnt as flamboyant as Levin or Beck doesn”t erase his betrayal at supporting a foreigner by our law isn”t eligible.

        Liked by 10 people

        • wheatietoo says:

          Thanks.
          And actually…I don’t think that NJ judge ruled that Cruz is eligible, he just tossed it out court and didn’t rule on it one way or another.

          Liked by 5 people

          • Daz says:

            Either way Cruzbots love to throw that up when talking about eligiblity .it”s time we clear the smoke on it before it even gets brought up.Not saying anyone here is trying to, but we get trolls sometimes trying to justifie nonsence.

            Liked by 1 person

            • chris says:

              IMHO..
              1) Mr. Cruz himself easily could have laid this whole NBC issue to rest some time ago by unsealing his records. Without doing so there will always be this nagging question rolling around in the back of the peoples mind.
              Waiting on some court somewhere to determine His eligibility without unsealing the info is a lawyers canard, lawyers inserting words to re-direct the narrative. and setting it on a shelf for a judge or series of judges later. Without the info unsealed, what judge can move forward on the issue?

              After all, with Vattels Laws of Nations ” , who would serve with his country’s best interest in mind ?
              Isn’t the question , why did the founders decide to include the final wording of NBC in the constitution?
              Are we to expect a judgement on this issue,..OR even expect one to move successfully through the court systems.. maybe on up to the Supreme Court to debate the NBC without a case built upon the facts revealed once Unsealed?..Am I wrong or is this a text book definition of obfuscation ?

              “The “precedent” ,,,or ruse, has already been successfully played out with the OBAMA NBC example. How long did that issue actually take to settle?
              Is it really settled to everyone’s satisfaction today?

              Liked by 2 people

          • It was said that the Judge did not even look at papers or documents, nor even asked (never mind demanded) papers. It was just ruled that since he IS a senator and IS on the ballot-then he can run, no declaration that Cruz ISNBC, just that he is “eligible”

            Liked by 1 person

        • skifflegirl says:

          I find Rush Limbaugh to be more insidious than the obvious Levin and Beck. He plays both sides, he protects himself the same as Sundance’s piece describes Goldberg and Lowry.

          Rush is under contract with Bain Capital, owned by Mitt Romney. Limbaugh has to seemingly not offend the vast Trump base of support, while at the same time must be able to sidle back to his master and the smaller group of ‘never Trump.’

          He hides his motives. That is much, much worse than being obvious. It is lying to your public. For money.

          Limbaugh plays people for fools.

          Liked by 10 people

          • ladypenquin says:

            In a way, Rush represents the worst about the Republican Party – hypocrisy. The Democrats are fairly straightforward about their goals, though not exactly honest about how they’ll achieve them. OTOH, the Republicans pretend they’re fighting against the Democrats, all the while enabling enacting the progressive agenda. That’s worse, deceiving the base voters, and maybe that’s the real reason why the Republican brand is so damaged – the people know something is wrong when a party touts principles but then doesn’t demonstrate they believe in them.

            Didn’t know about Rush’s Bain Capital/Romney connection…

            Liked by 3 people

            • skifflegirl says:

              Bain Capital owns iHeart media, they own all the distribution and most of the radio stations. I think Michael Savage is with Westinghouse, not sure, but that’s probably why he’s more independent. It’s a racket.

              Like

          • flova says:

            Limbaugh’s duplicitous talk is worse than the straight up annoying gnats trashing Trump. Poison is poison no matter how much you mix it with food. Sneaky bastard.

            Liked by 1 person

        • StuckinCa says:

          It’s not just the eligibility issue. The conservative credentials of Cruz were carefully constructed falsehoods. Rush knew this. Rubio had no such credentials. Rush darn well knew this! Yet he tried to get his trusting audience to accept his Word they are both true Conservatives. He abused the trust placed in him to manipulate us away from the truth and toward a lie of a choice.

          Perhaps he’ll try to play it off as one of his old “can you tell I’m jiving you” games.

          As my Scottish Great Aunt used to say, Rush, “pull the other leg, it’s got bells on it.” IOW we do not believe a word you say anymore, Rush; you’re gnat.

          Liked by 6 people

        • 7delta says:

          I don”t care what some NJ judge says Cruz is eligible, The Supreme Court has ruled 4 times Both parents must be American citizens, and native born.or filed born abroad as a US citizen at birth.

          Small nitpick here, but it’s an important one. SCOTUS has also upheld that regardless of citizen parents, any person born abroad can only be made a citizen under Congress’ Constitutional authority “to establish uniform rules of naturalization.”

          Citizen parents must meet certain legal requirements in order to claim citizenship for their born-abroad child. If they do, Congress has provided a simpler pathway to citizenship for the child, but that child is technically and legally not a citizen at the moment of birth. Citizenship is applied for by registration at a U.S. embassy, with proof of meeting parental requirements. Despite talking heads’ assertions, there is a process. If all is in order, citizenship is granted retroactive to the day of birth, but that child is still a naturalized citizen for Constitutional purposes.

          If we think through the whole picture of nations, rights and jurisdiction, it’s all very logical. Nations are sovereign. No country has any jurisdiction or natural rights on the soil of another sovereign nation, therefore, no nation can claim something occurring on foreign soil as natural to its jurisdiction. Its own citizens on foreign soil are subject to the civil jurisdiction of that foreign country while on its soil. U.S. citizenship is not forfeited, so the citizen’s political ties remain with the U.S., but the U.S. still has no jurisdiction on foreign soil because its citizen is there. Problems and disputes are a diplomatic issue.

          To recognize someone born abroad or not under the sole jurisdiction of the U.S. (civil and political) as a citizen, a law has to be constructed that gives that person a pathway, should they meet set requirements and should they choose it. Citizenship is not automatic in these cases, not an act of nature and not a part of the inherent compact that exists between citizens and their government when their children are born within their country’s jurisdiction.

          Cruz, Rubio, Haley and Jindal are statutory citizens, naturalized by the authority granted to Congress by the Constitution. (Includes the 14th Amendment, which was not intended to create anchor babies.)

          Now, wonder why all these “legal” experts, etc. would want to blur the lines by removing sovereignty and the distinctions of jurisdictional rights from the equation?

          Liked by 1 person

        • shadowcole says:

          Yeah, to me it was even worse because he didn’t come out and say he supported Cruz. In fact, he said he never endorsed in primaries but I was a long-time listener and I knew he was for Cruz. He used certain situations and manipulated them. I cannot remember what he said and when, I quit listening about 2 months ago. I don’t like being manipulated. He should have just come out for Cruz and been honest about it. I don’t have a problem with that disagreement. I will never listen to Rush again. I never listened to Levin or Beck so Rush’s betrayal was the worst to me.

          Like

        • It’s important to understand that SCOTUS issues opinions only, not decisions. We call them decisions and those implications have been very detrimental to critical thought.

          To Levin, he authored a group of amendments that most do the opposite of what he claims they do. Why would a so-called “constitutionalist” feel the need to make so many amendments to the charter they swear allegiance to?

          Beck simply does not have his bubble in the middle.

          Rush is a free thinker when it comes to radio broadcasting for the purpose of entertaining. But when he speaks of the Constitution, beware because he does not know what he’s talking about in some instances.

          Like

      • oldgrunt68 says:

        Tell me genius, what naturalization PROCESS did Cruz go through to become an American citizen?

        You see if he didn’t go through any process, not any….. that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth.

        Just please explain the process he went through …… clearly.

        Like

        • His mother should have registered his birth at an American embassy while in Canada-IF, that is IF she did, those papers or documents or records have never been presented. So many questions about a simple process, simply answered by “A Lawyer sealing his records” and simple question for this lawyer is “Why, what was the need to do as such”

          Liked by 2 people

        • wheatietoo says:

          We don’t know what naturalization process Cruz went through…his records are sealed and he refuses to unseal them.

          A ‘Natural Born Citizen’ does not need to go through a naturalization process.
          And only natural born citizens are eligible to be President.
          Naturalized citizens are not eligible.

          His mother became a Canadian citizen when they lived in Canada.
          This would have required her to renounce her US citizenship…because Canada did not allow dual citizenship at that time.
          His father became a Canadian citizen too, according to him.

          So Ted was born in Canada, to parents who were Canadian citizens.
          He is a natural born Canadian citizen.

          The only type of US citizen he could possibly be, is a naturalized citizen, which makes him ineligible to be President.

          You can read more about it here:

          Liked by 2 people

        • 7delta says:

          Oldgrunt, please see my explanation above about the process. I got this from SCOTUS, the laws, records, the concepts of sovereingty and the jurisdictional rights of sovereignty.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Agreed. I really like Rush. Been listening to him for years. But he has been a big disappointment during this whole primary process. Beck, Levin, etc. are all a bunch of idiots, no loss there. But Rush, well, I just can’t listen to him anymore. And that bums me out!

      Liked by 6 people

      • Same here. Done with Rush. Laura Ingraham is much better – she’s been fabulous. I’ve been listening to Rush since 1988.

        Liked by 3 people

      • nnud says:

        Jennifer, just like Donald Trump you are doing the right thing.

        Donald Trump is a once in lifetime and more opportunity to do the right thing and Limbaugh blew it.

        Just like Donald Trump and many others you are an American hero.

        Everyone that is willing to throw the scales off their eyes for the good of America is a hero just like Donald Trump!

        Liked by 3 people

        • skifflegirl says:

          I’ve seen Cruz supporters come out on social media saying that, after a day of stomping feet and being angry, they are respecting the voting majority and jumping on the Trump train. They want to stop Hillary and support the Republican nominee even though he was not their first choice.

          I’ve made a point of telling these patriots that I admire them and regard them with much respect as people of honor.

          As Sundance has said many times, not everybody has the time or inclination to dig in to Ted Cruz’s actual record and see for themselves he is not what he claims to be. Plus, some people just don’t like Donald Trump. It is to their credit when they adjust to reality.

          These brave souls need our support because cruzbots are out to trash them, using guilt trips, trying to convince them to still vote for Cruz and somehow steal the nomination or go third party.

          Like

    • datagooroo says:

      Rush is okay, but I lost a lot of respect for him when the George W era ended and he said, “finally I can stop carrying water for the Republicans.” I thought, “what did you make a deal with them, not to criticism them.” He could have shined a light on a lot of things the Republicans were doing back them, but he was carrying their water. Now it sounds like again he made a deal with Ted, or someone, to go soft and offer cover. He could have put a stop to the nonsense (or at least threw his weight around and try and stop it) a while ago.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Keln says:

        Yup. Exactly why I stopped listening to him. He battles with his conscience too much. If he was just honest all the time, I would not have stopped listening to him.

        Like

      • Lindy says:

        I remember this same comment, and it has stuck with me all these years. I don’t remember him specifically saying “Republicans,” but it was understood. I don’t think he had an agreement with them, maybe just that he didn’t feel free to fairly criticize any of them. I have been quite disappointed in him. You can hear him sneer when he say says “Trumpers” or “Trumpsters.”

        Liked by 1 person

      • Marc Bahn says:

        Rush was fabulous in the 90s against the Clintons. I ditched him when he jumped on board the Dubya bandwagon, since there was no difference whatsoever in policy.

        Like

    • rodney says:

      Rush supported and heavily promoted NAFTA on his show decades ago. That is unforgivable. That agreement was tantamount to treason.

      His refusal to condemn Ryan and the GOP immigration lobby or expose Cruz’s roll in it.

      His supporting of Rubio calling him a “full throated conservative”. Who was nothing but a shameless amnesty proponent and totally ineligible to be POTUS.

      Sorry but I’m not buying what you are selling.

      Look Rush is entertaining, but he’s a total establishment hack. Don’t listen to him. His job was and is to sell people on frauds like Cruz, Boehner and the rest of scumbags. Here’s the thing, if he spoke the truth, he’d have never been allowed to become as famous and wealthy as he is now.

      He would have been punished like Lou Dobbs. Who BTW is a real decent and honest man who cares for the country.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Keln says:

        I also supported NAFTA. Many on the right did. We didn’t know then what we know now. Is Rush any different?

        Look, what I am trying to discern is who is a real shill, and who was just fooled. I was fooled. A lot of people were fooled. Who did the foolin’ ?

        You need to understand, a lot of us supporting Trump now, didn’t always do so. We have “figured it out” finally. So when you attack people who weren’t on board “decades ago”, you are attacking a lot of current Trump supporters.

        Who are the real shills, and who are the ones that were fooled? That is what I want to know. Getting lied to is easy. Separating the fiction from fact is hard. Especially when you have more immediate personal concerns to deal with in everyday life.

        Like

      • ladypenquin says:

        Have only recently started watching Lou Dobbs, though hubby knew him for the financial stuff. Now it is the one FOX show I will watch, and look forward to it. He is a good and decent man, and has been a wonderful voice of reason during the Trump saga. He also is very selective with his guests because he won’t tolerate Trump bashing.

        I had thought Cavuto would have been, but was wrong on that count. Dobbs only now, though I see comments here and there about the fairness of Greta and Hannity, and do think they’ve done a better job than the true shills on FOX. We’re done with FOX overall though. I call them the “FIX is in Network.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Observing says:

      I agree with ‘Keln’ that Rush is totally unlike Beck or Levin — those two are both raving nuts. Considering extremely negative recent comments on Rush here, call me gaslighted if you wish, but I listen often to Rush and consider him intelligent, articulate and thoughtful. I usually find him informative. There have been times when I have been very disappointed by his dodging issues but so what? All in all I think he is an genuine asset. I hope that this does not result in my being flamed here, but I like Rush and I am not a ditto-head.

      Nothing that Rush has said has changed me from supporting and working for Trump – . he had my vote from the moment he said he would build the border wall.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Keln says:

        You may be lambasted for your views. It happens.

        Look, I don’t like Rush Limbaugh. I haven’t for years. But my personal opinion on the man isn’t important.

        What is important is who we should hold accountable for being absolute shills for the establishment. I think we all agree that the establishment has been a severe disservice to us.

        What I don’t want to see is attacking anyone who could be perceived as anti-Trump. That includes people who have been honest and fair. Just because someone didn’t like the guy, doesn’t mean they are the embodiment of evil or something.

        Rush is Rush. He’s human, believe it or not. He’ll make bad decisions and have lousy shows. But at the end of the day, is he as bad as Levin and Beck? That was my question. Those two are, in my mind, the epitome of shill-hood.

        Does Rush measure up to that? If he does, then so be it. If not, then tone down the rhetoric. Those who were need to be held to account for it. Those who weren’t really…give them a pass and just be careful of what they say.

        This isn’t just about Rush specifically. It’s about who we need to really hold accountable.

        Like

        • Mike says:

          Rush has more than four strike outs, trying to throw the game. Just because Levin and Beck have more and worse isn’t good enough. He’s oouuuuuttttt of there, and banned if I get any say.

          Liked by 1 person

      • ladypenquin says:

        No “flaming” here. Many have similar thoughts, and I “want” to like Rush – and probably will again – because on many issues he does a fairly good job. But until we get past him calling us “Trumpsters” – I’m going to keep my blood pressure in check and avoid listening to him. I do think that this primary is making the point that the listening and informed public is being a lot more discerning than in years past. Expect that to grow each year.

        Liked by 1 person

        • thurmrob says:

          Name calling is really childish and that is a complete turnoff. That being said, when I get angry sometimes all rational thought stops and the paint blistering begins.
          I am sick and tired of everyone and everything being labelled. A lot of it started when they ordained special rights to groups. Our rights come from God.

          Liked by 1 person

    • geoffb5 says:

      I got into this a bit here, and in another older comment. The Rush problem is his pushing constantly that Cruz is the very definition of conservative when he should know that his actions have shown that he is not.

      Yes he, Rush, has not been pounding the table, like some others, for Cruz but what he has done is manufacture this idea of Cruz as the measure of what it is to be conservative. That is destructive of conservatism.

      Once you enter the mind world where Cruz is conservative and Trump is something else, maybe something progressive-left or crony-capitalist, then you fall into the thinking that leads you to this place. A wonderland filled with fun-house mirror images of reality.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Keln says:

        Excellent points. I’ve made several posts about this concept of “true conservatism”. Perhaps Rush does fall into that trap.

        Liked by 1 person

        • StuckinCa says:

          And then there’s my local host who’s refused to take sides, despite heat from both. In email exchange he at least was honest: his job is to bring in as large an audience as possible. Siding will ailienate some. That showed more wisdom and integrity than Rush. But it led him to not vet deeply, and oversimplify their identities, outsider vs constitutional conservative. and that’s not true about Cruz.

          In the end we can all thank Trump for breaking us free from our bonds of trusting the Conservative Matrix of paid radio shills.

          Liked by 4 people

          • My local early morning host supported Trump since last year. I noticed he no longer has his show.

            Like

            • shadowcole says:

              I live in Missouri but listen to Tom Marr in Baltimore on WCBM from 9-12 eastern time. He’s been on board with Trump from the beginning. I found him about 5 years ago when I was looking for a station other than KMOX in StL to listen to Rush and he leads up to Rush.

              Like

    • Doc says:

      I started listening to Rush fall of 1989 and officially quit listening to him a couple of months ago. I quit because I found him to be disingenuous in supporting Cruz in spite of Cruz’s intelligibility, and lying, as was the case with Obama. Rush talked down Obama constantly. He was dead pan quiet regarding Cruz. Rush didn’t hammer Cruz over Goldman-Sachs or The links to CFR. The only one who has addressed my concers is Trump. Also, I now put Rush right in there with Levin and the Mormon whiner, Beck, because of his own whining and degrading of people like me who support Trump. I occasionally turn on his program, as in the other day when he said Trump supporters are “brain dead”. I am a voracious reader and can give an account for my decisions. I do not let talking heads on the radio tell me what to think.

      Liked by 8 people

    • grumpy70 says:

      TRUST is what you have when you listen to talk radio, we listen to Rush for 20+ years because we trusted him as a conservative voice, even if we didn’t agree with everything he said. At the beginning of the campaign he praised the way Trump handled the media and was honest in his commentary until the middle of December when he got his marching orders from the GOP, right after the debate. He started pushing Cruz as the new Regan conservative, claimed that Rubio was conservative, and then he became the MSM’s echo by repeating every negative comment made about Trump and more or less agreeing with them, he also selected only Cruz supporter’s calls and allowed the callers to blast Trump without correcting the false statements made.
      Levin and Beck were honest when they came out for Cruz and they knew that they will lose a large portion of their listeners, but Rush tried to “gaslight” his audience with the “conservative Cruz” and becoming the MSM echo, I found that to be most dishonest.
      Last night we celebrated Trump’s victory at our local VFW and an old timer declared that “the 3rd of May was the day that talk radio died” because they were exposed by Trump and their influence is gone!

      Liked by 5 people

    • singtune says:

      OK~”Keln”~~I Often agree with you & do make good Points~!

      But RUSH is “Worse” than the Others~! Reason is: that RUSH is a YUGE DECEIVER! To me that is much “Worse” than Being “Blatant & Outright Nasty”~~ like Levin & Beck~! That is WHAT i First SAW in Cruz that was so AWFUL~! The Daily Lying & Deceiving People that are quickly Fooled, because they are “Not up to Date:~~ like the Great People on this Wonderful Website. These People that these Deceiver/Pundit’s Influence, are just like SOME of the People here, that were FOOLED by Ted Cruz, at first~!

      I want Everyone to KNOW about RUSH too, .because even though I Stopped Listening to RUSH 8 years ago,~~It took me at least 8 Years to Figure him out~! I was NOT able to do that until I Retired from teaching, & had a LOT of time to do Research! I think People Need to be WARNED about his ILK~!

      Liked by 1 person

    • daizeez says:

      Rush was pretty fair-handed with his callers until it got closer to NY primary and the east coast states. He’d suggest that Trump supporters were all emotional and referred to them never as supporters, but Trumpsters. Cruz had supporters, Trump did not. Rush had his carefully screened callers do the dirty work of proving his point that Trump supporters were just a bunch of emotional followers. Any Trump supporter with good points was usually put on right before the commercial break. Rush still doesn’t consider Trump a conservative. Today Rush said that Cruz was 100% moral. I thought that kind of perfection only happened once.
      Rush always said he’d go with the nominee and never Hillary, but he gave it everything he had to get Cruz to be that nominee short of saying the words “I endorse”. Rush is a businessman first and he is definitely better at that Beck and Levin. I don’t like the way Rush manipulates his audience so I only listen to aggravate myself and just to see what he’s telling everyone.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Nahanni says:

      I wouldn’t trust any of them as far as I c an throw them.

      Like

    • I agree with your sentiment re R.Limbaugh. Been listening to him for nearly thirty years, and think he always gave full disclosure about his ‘circles’, and tried to stay neutral in the GOP Primary.

      It is concerning, though, that he didn’t discuss T.Cruz’s support of TPP and shaky position on the illegal immigration issue.

      Like

    • TheLastConservative says:

      Rush is a business. He doesn’t really care about anyone but Rush. That’s one of the main reasons I stopped listening to him some time ago. He may not be as psychotic as Levin or Beck but he’s in the same boat. Perhaps he’s even worse to an extent because he pretends to somewhat moderate, playing both sides. At least with Beck and Levin you know right where they stand.

      Like

    • Big D says:

      I haven’t listened to rush for a decade, at least.
      He attempts to lead you away by subtle guile, rather than be in your face.
      Like the pied piper, he weaves together a sweet, non threatening / non aggressive narrative.
      There were times that he spoke the truth about President Trump and us.
      What was his motive for doing so ?
      I would suggest it was to get you to swallow the poison pill that he was offering, rather than being intellectually honest.
      He belongs in the category of gnat posers.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Steve says:

      Keln,
      Your post seems sincere, but my point about Rush would be this, you cited his statement:
      ““Against a message like Trump’s, if your counter message is, “I’m the most conservative guy running,” that’s not going to work.”
      Yet that’s the message he continued, along with the others, to push.
      You know Rush is smart enough to realize that from the beginning; so he was pushing a false narrative then and admitting it now. That’s why I have dismissed him some time ago.
      He, Levin, Beck etc attacked Trump early on about using liberal tactics against Cruz when the DT/TC fights began. But I didn’t hear any criticism of Cruz for using the same liberal tactics; i.e. blaming DT for the Chicago violence, or slamming DT/Lewindowski for the Michele Fields episode before all the videos were in, so much for law and order conservative. As someone pointer out in an earlier response Rush is sneaky, I don’t like sneaky.

      Like

    • AdamSelene says:

      Rush spent the entire campaign sandbagging Trump and gargling whatever the establishment candidate du jour was (“Marco Rubio is a full-throated conservative!”).

      He is every bit as gnattish, just better at hiding it.

      Like

    • I thought Rush was pretty fair also until the last 3 weeks before the Indiana primary. Rush to a major shift towards Cruz but the big thing I noticed was the denigrating tone he took towards Trump supporters and his use of the words Trumpettes, Trumpeteers, Trumptards.

      Like

    • meme says:

      I have never been a big fan of Rush because I always thought he was a phony thats just the way he struck me. I listened to him a few minutes each day this past cycle and he came across to me as a paid speaker for the GOP .

      He states now that Cruz was his guy but at what point did that come about ? When the GOP had no choice and picked Cruz?

      Plus I have strong distaste to people who call me a “Trumpkin”

      Like

  3. I was a sucker for listening to many of these folks until one day I realized many of the people and their groups were making LOTS of money but nothing was changing…. It has all turned out to be a big scam..

    Liked by 6 people

    • Bull Durham says:

      Free yourself. Drop the ideology and go with common sense Patriotism.
      Make Every American Great Again.
      Buy American.
      America First.

      They have divided us, set us against one another, weakened us, robbed us, indebted us and frightened us.

      Now, they are the frightened ones. They can’t deal with the Truth.

      Trump is coming to clean them out of power.

      The People have found their voice when they heard Trump’s message.

      Never let them talk over you. You have the Truth now. They have the Lies.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Erick Dee says:

        The new label I came up for myself rather than conservative, or Tea Party, or Paleoconservative, or Reaganite, or any of that stuff is I was thinking I should call myself a national populist. So unless I just made a major faux pas, I’ll stick with that one since it seems kinda new and refreshing to me.

        Liked by 2 people

        • nnud says:

          Yes, National (America First), Populist (Americans First).

          Liked by 3 people

        • ladypenquin says:

          I have several “conservative” friends, who are conservative about different issues. We all ended up defining ourselves as “Nationalists” – so you’re not alone. It’s simply the recognition that our country is first, our people first, etc. Without our sovereign nation, we cannot have any of the issues important to us.

          I’ve said this before; when I put the flag up on my house, I’m not thinking about abortion, gay marriage, the economy, etc. For me, the flag symbolizes what’s most important: God and Country, and the freedom to love both.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. YvonneMarie says:

    Trust Trump. ‘His people’. All the rest is just noise.

    Liked by 3 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      “Noise” is a good choice. All the pundits and the GOP themselves are out there giving advice now to what Donald Trump “has to do.” First laugh I’ve had in awhile. Trump isn’t going to listen to them – if he had, he wouldn’t have just been a footnote name in the GOP primary list of history. He’s smart enough to realize, he’ll listen to trusted and smart folks – and he has some of the best and genuine minds around him, take his own counsel and do what he knows is going to be best.

      I expect we’ll see some more meltdowns in the malignant media and the Establishment GOP (and Dems). 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  5. southernbychoice says:

    “…Gnats will now seek 3rd party candidate”
    Could it possibly be Ted Cruz?

    Like

    • Kathleen Rady says:

      You know, I was wondering that too.

      Like

    • mightyconservative says:

      I don’t think he can run third party….the “sore loser” law would apply to him. IF he can run, it has to be under an established party already on the ticket…ie, the Liberterian.

      Like

  6. Coltman45 says:

    Rush and all of the rest are trying to board the Trump train to save their ass. Too late. Elvis has left the building. Not calling Trump, Elvis by any means. lol That was just a saying at the end of Elvis’s concerts. His fans wanted more but a guy would come on stage and say…..”.Elvis has left the building. ” I am so pumped up for Trump. Going to be a pleasure to sit back and watch him clean house and work his mojo.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. I feel a lot better today. A month ago I wasted 3 hours in my first CO caucus only to see the results already fixed for Cruz. In my group there were 5 for Trump and 24 for Cruz and the delegate was already predisposed to Cruz. Well COGOP, your efforts were wasted as well as anyone dumb enough to donate to you. But come November, I will be able to vote for Trump and I will look very carefully at the down ticket.

    Liked by 10 people

    • b4im2old says:

      AGREE ^^^^ More TRUTH exposed! The uniparty is naked… and even if the liars want to jump on board the TT, I’ll still be looking closely down ticket to vote the RINOs/GOPe OUT. Why on earth would we ever trust them again to do what they say they will? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice ,shame on me, fool me 3 x’s… not a snowball’s chance in h*ll on my watch, or should I say the “silent majority’s watch”! I agree with reconciliation amongst the voters… many of us were fooled before, too. But as for the elites and RINOs… “Get ’em out!”

      Liked by 4 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      As a previous resident of your beautiful state, I’m hoping you all can make the Colorado GOP pay for that heist and voter disenfranchisement.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. wheatietoo says:

    Great post, Sundance.

    I would only add…We will never forget.
    These people will now try to claw back some of their credibility and relevance.
    But we will not forget that they were against Mr. Trump…and against Us.

    Liked by 5 people

  9. Riddick says:

    Both frauds dropping out at same time may actually make sense now since filing deadline for third party run is when, June? This gives them a month to file and get ready.

    GOPee is more than fine with Killary, they are probably thinking that running 3rd party candidate will pilfer enough votes from Trump to throw GE to Killary. Their only solution left, if this solution will actually work. Works for Dems as well, obviously. GOPee in US Congress then can keep playing same game they do now, Our hands are tied with Dem President. Works for GOPee.

    Next few weeks will be very interesting to watch.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, it does meet their needs while allowing them to claim they presented a TRUE conservative alternative.

      Like

    • skifflegirl says:

      Meanwhile, the RNC can claim they supported Trump while back room deals are made to head off the insurgency with a third party candidate on whom cruzbots and never Trump dolts will waste their vote.

      Like

      • chris says:

        skifflegirl,.. good point, while a 3rd party run, with back-room dealing is plausible ,
        couldn’t that dealing be done ‘without’ a 3rd party run? why spend the time, effort and money? Since the republican elites are on record admitting they would rather vote for Hillary,Never vote for Trump, or stay home election day in order keep their bowls filled
        with rice.

        The US government and alpha-bet agencies have a long a long history of setting up organizations across the World to topple governments they deem ‘unfriendly . All the while making it “appear” the people are indeed making a grassroots change in politics, then quietly installing the opposition who they really wanted in power.
        “Deception” of the masses is a closely guarded, never admitted black art .
        Consider the tacit approval by both parties in regards to the weaponization of the IRS against the Tea Party as an example. Or the obvious republican Elite creation and participation in Never-Trump movement .
        Nope.. I will hold on to the Cold Frosty Anger for a while longer.
        Better to watch and see actual STRONG- WHOLE-HEARTED republican Party Trump support. , Convention through the general election than to take them at their word.. “DECEPTION”! it’sbeen their modis of operandi. a liar does not quit lying over-nite.
        Always be on guard , Freedom requires Vigilance !
        NEVER Quit! NEVER give up !
        Trust but verify..

        I fully expect it will take several election cycles to rid our system of the corruption, and re-instill the lost integrity, moral values the founders of the constitution intended for it’s people.
        I personally hold no illusions that a simple suspension of campaigns by cruz or Kasich means the republican Party is ready to support Trump whole-heartedly..

        .. They rolled over like a puppy looking for a belly-rub.. Too Easy!
        How do you tell what’s in some-ones heart?
        By their ACTIONS and DEEDS!!.. SHOW ME !!
        (stepping off soap-box)

        Liked by 1 person

        • chris says:

          As a great example, I just caught a clip of Andea Mitchell with Bill Kristol on CNN in a 3min tirade why Trump should not be President. He starts off saying he just doesn’t like trump… yada yada..
          then goes on to recommend the GOP run a ‘real conservative’ with a 3rd party run. Despite what you may think of the feasibility or reality of such a move. remember .
          The intention is and ALWAYS will be to deny Trump. Upon which all else is based. The intent is Alive and Well.. at any cost. Always their plan “B” They will NOT go away quietly. They have very DEEP ROOTS.

          It is NOT over folks!,, the Elite will do ANYTHING to retain power. Even if it means throwing the election for Hillary!! By hook or Crook, Chicanery, .. whatever,.. all is fair in love and war.. and to them this is WAR
          We cannot let off the gas, ..”keep your eyes on the road and your hands upon the wheel”
          Be Vigilant !
          NEVER give up !
          NEVER quit !
          We cannot relax until after the swearing in on Jan 20 2017
          You can take a deep breath at that time ..then pop a cold one !

          Liked by 1 person

          • countrychicken says:

            “the elites will do anything to retain power”…..You’re right Chris, they will and I’m wondering if Cruz doesn’t play a part in it. Why did he drop out so fast? What is he doing now? What if he still gets votes in the last of the primary races? Can he or will he manipulate the delegates????? I DON’T TRUST HIM!!!!!!!

            Like

        • skifflegirl says:

          I agree on all counts. If the elites developed a twisted, maniacal strategy to present false choices in our 17 member Republican candidate soup, they’re not giving up that easily (not saying they’ve made it easy for Trump – they haven’t). Already hearing on social media that Cruz is still seeking votes in upcoming primaries, still fundraising, quietly. The ballots have already been set for upcoming primaries. Cruzbots are still vowing to vote for him. It ain’t over yet. Everyone still needs to volunteer and vote for Trump to button this baby up.

          Like

    • Scott437 says:

      I think that would backfire OVERWHELMINGLY on the GOPe.

      The voters are smart enough to see right through their ploy, so it wouldn’t work for that reason alone.

      Even worse (for them), it would allow Trump to encourage his supporters to wipe out the GOPe candidates — of his choosing — down-ballot.

      Most House and Senate races are won or lost by 10% or less. So it would only take a fraction of Trump supporters to wipe out 200+ incumbent House GOPe traitors and all 15 incumbent GOPe Senators up for re-election.

      All Trump has to do is threaten to wipe out the entire GOP establishment through his supporters in November. He can threaten them quietly, behind closed doors.

      And a third party run never happens.

      .

      Liked by 2 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      I’m fairly certain they couldn’t come up with a 3rd Party candidate who could take any more than a laughable few votes. Yesterday, Hannity had on Falwell, Jr. who spoke about the 60-70% of the evangelical Christians who had supported Trump – remember Cruz lost the South and evangelicals in most of the other contests that had a fair primary, so the others who might be part of that #NeverTrump group are not the majority of that portion of the base at all. And the Establishment GOP, media pundits? They’re going to protect their rice bowl – and it’s not protected running against the GOP nominee. It’s just noise right now, and as Trump said he doesn’t want those extreme anti-Trump pundits anyway. There are still enough Americans in this country who believe in Trump’s message and promise to them, and that includes, Dems, Independents, and folks who long ago gave up participating in the political process.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Apfelcobbler says:

    Bull cut right to the chase.

    As sysconfig wrote earlier, “At the end of the day, it’s not the actions of any particular individual that instills true fear in the U.S. establishment and deep state government. What really scares them is a population capable of critical thought beyond false left-right paradigm talking points, and both Sanders and Trump should be applauded for their roles in this regard.”

    When common sense collides with what any professional shaper insists, it probably means we are on to something profound.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. obeara says:

    I am a Trump supporter, and I have been since he announced he was running, and said he would build a wall.

    I listen to Rush Limbaugh, and I find him to be fair in his discussions of the candidates. My only disagreement with Rush has been about Rubio. Rush thinks Rubio made a mistake when he switched from anti-amnesty to pro-amnesty, but I think it was planned. Bait and switch. Mel Martinez tired it first, and quit when he failed, then Rubio did the same, but stayed on after switching sides again to run for President. I don’t forgive Rubio, Rush does. But for the other candidates, Rush and I have gotten along ok. I have been for Trump all along, but there were good things that could be said for the others (except Rubio), and Rush said what good could be said. Rush’s goal is to defeat Hillary. He says that is the most important goal, and we must keep our eyes on it. Our country won’t survive if the Progressives (Democrats or Socialists) win in 2016. For me the border is the most important issue, because if we don’t stop the illegal immigration the votes in the future will go totally Left.

    I do not listen to Levin or Beck. I know enough about Beck that I think of him as crazy. I thought Levin was rational, but I don’t listen to either of them. In recent times I have read about some of their rantings against Trump, and in support of Cruz, but in no way can you say that Limbaugh has been anti-Trump. He has been positive about Curz in areas were it was fair to be positive, and he has been positive about Trump too. I would not have been listening if he had been anti-Trump. And Limbaugh does not rant, not does he get off on religion as I know from reading that Beck does, and maybe Levin also.

    Limbaugh has clearly said he is not talking sides. He wants to talk about the good aspects of each candidate, and he wanted the voters to decide based on information, not on bias he would give if he endorsed one candidate. He wants the Republican Party to win, and the Democrat Party to lose, and he would be willing to endorse in the end whoever wins the nomination, because he says that we must beat the Democrats. This is reasonable. If he did not try to be fair, and I think he has been, the people who liked a candidate he did not speak well of would stop listening to his program, and then he would not influence a voter who might, for example, vote for Trump in November, but earlier in the year preferred one of the other 17. I think it was a wise way to do his program. And I think many listeners who originally did not like Trump have learned through Rush’s program why he is a good, some, like myself, would say the best, candidate.

    I listen to the beginning of Hannity on most days, because he is also good, and he comes on right after Limbaugh.

    I have a lot of respect for Treehouse, but the negative statements about Rush Limbaugh are totally biased and mistaken. He has been fair to Trump all along. He has been fair to the other candidates also. I think Trump has benefited from Limbaugh’s program. Actually, any of the candidates would benefit, Rush as been positive towards all of them, because he wants whoever wins the nomination to get the support to beat the Democrats. He wants whoever the candidate is to be liked by as many people as possible. So, he has been positive about them all.

    To put Limbaugh in the same box as Beck and Levin is absurd and unfair.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Batman says:

      He’s actually not in the picture box above. Personally, I have never liked or trusted him though. All these who make money this way are entertainers first. Kudos to them for their entertainment skills.

      I want to personally thank Charles Hurt, who I not only think has stood up for us from the beginning, but is one of us, and that’s why he got the Trump phenomenon right away. He wasn’t guessing. That poor donkey had tails pinned all over it from head to toe by professional prognosticators as of Tuesday, and some are still trying to nail the bum, but Charles quietly went over and popped it flat on the donkey’s buttocks in the beginning.

      He tore the NYT’s David Brooks to shreds here:
      ‘David Brooks should stay in his little bourgeois strata’ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/2/charles-hurt-david-brooks-should-stay-in-his-littl/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

      He says:
      “If in the Land of the Blind, the one-eyed man is king, then columnist David Brooks of the New York Times is blind, deaf and dumb inside the Beltway.

      In an election year where all the experts have been exactly wrong about absolutely everything, it really is something of a feat to be as spectacularly and enthusiastically wrong as Mr. Brooks.”

      I guess Ann Coulter got it, too, but she’s her own money generator, and I am not sure the same risks were involved for her.

      Liked by 1 person

    • grumpy70 says:

      This is our home obeara where we express our honest feelings, you have the right to agree or disagree about Rush and that’s okay, it won’t change the way we feel. Just remember that we come from different backgrounds and points of view, what unify us is our love of country and our support for Trump to restore America.

      Liked by 1 person

      • obeara says:

        An odd comment. If you are referring to the United States as “our home”, it is mine also. If you are referring to Legal Insurrection as “our home”, it is true I do not comment often, but that is no reason to not comment now. Of course I have the right to agree or disagree, and I am doing so. What is the issue with that? As for what unifies us being our love of country and our support for Trump, did you miss the first sentence of my comment? I have been a Trump supporter since he declared he was running. I have worked on his campaign in my state. And I think that Limbaugh, by supporting all the candidates, even though I did not, has helped Trump by keeping people with various views listening to his program where I feel he gave people good reasons to vote for Trump.

        Like

        • chris says:

          uhmm..obeara, ,, I could be wrong , but my impression is thinking grumpy 70 may be implying that ‘the ‘treehouse blog’ is “our home” context where we can voice our opinions,.. not the USA where we all reside/live context.. At least after re-reading the past couple of posts that’s my take.. certainly do not think grumpy70 questions your Patriotism or loyalty.
          I hope this helps others going forward in this thread. I always try to keep a mind open for different possibilities.
          The text could go either way I suppose.. I do not question anyone’s sense of Patriotism until given reason to do so.
          Here everyone is free to form and express an opinion , and we can learn, reason, ponder,agree or disagree.. life itself is a learning experience. Thousands, maybe millions of different voices blend to form our Freedom of thought and Free speech . language Nuances only broaden our perspectives. Thank you for your input.
          Ain’t it Great !

          Like

        • obeara says:

          No comments so far from others that I named the site incorrectly in my comment above. Before coming back into Treehouse to see if there were comments to my comment on Rush, I had been into Legal Insurrection to read what their writers thought about Trump being he last man standing. I guess LI was still on my mind when I came into Treehouse. I used to read the two sites together during the George Zimmerman situation. They were on the same page then, and both very informative. I have not been reading LI in recent times, but when I came upon a link to an article on their site about Trump, and what all their writers thought about him, I went into the site. I was surprised and disappointed to read how anti-Trump so many were. Looking at further comments here today I see I made a mistake, and I want to correct my incorrect bit in my 5:48 post.

          Like

    • Daz says:

      Wrong, it is not bias, absurd , or unfair when Rush is supporting a ineligible candidate that goes against the very Constitution were to uphold.. Stop acting like He”s misunderstood. He”s very informed and has chosen to lick the globalist feet. It’s time to clear out these Benedict Arnold’s,.

      Liked by 2 people

      • obeara says:

        Rush isn’t supporting anyone, that’s the point. He is just talking about them, and letting the listeners take what he says and think about it.

        Like

    • ladypenquin says:

      i appreciate what you’re saying, though not in full agreement. But that’s okay. 🙂

      Only point I want to make is about Rush calling Trump supporters, “Trumpsters” – and he did actually say Trump supporters were “uninformed.” It came across as a negative – since he never referred to Cruz supporters, as “Cruzbots” – and that’s where there was, IMHO, a snide marginalizing of people like us. If he stops using that term, it will actually confirm my opinion re: his bias for Cruz vs Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

      • obeara says:

        I don’t take the term “Trumpsters” as a negative. It does not sound negative to me. In fact, it sounds friendly to me. I rather like it. But anything with the ending “bots” sounds negative as it sounds as if it is indicating robots, ie non-thinking, acting on orders, or programmed by others.

        The only issue I have heard Rush use the term “uninformed” about Trump supporters was when he was trying to explain how Cruz collecting delegates as he was was not illegal, but just using the system as the GOP had set it up. We might not like it, we did not like it, but that did not make it illegal, and Rush was indicating we should learn more about it in order to understand how it was happening. I did not take that as an insult, but rather the giving of information to us.

        One thing, one of many, that I dislike about Leftists is that they can’t tolerate anything being said outside their comfort zone, and that zone is very small and narrow. This election is showing me, sadly, that although we are not as far gone as the Left, we are much more like them in our lack of toleration of others than I had realized. Limbaugh is an open to all on the right speaker, but those who are not getting the specific message they want, and that message only, seem to dislike him for it. It is one thing to not be interested, and not listen to him, but the hostility to him is not reasonable.

        Like

      • Lea says:

        In my 61 years I have been called many things, some good, some bad. I have lived most of my life with the notion that “You can call me anything, just don’t call me late for dinner”. My way of saying “I respect your 1A rights”.
        However, if anyone calls me anything for the last 11 months that begins with “Trump….” I stand tall and say “Damn straight!

        Like

        • obeara says:

          That’s right. I have my red “Make America Great Again”, and a red bumper sticker on my car so no one can miss where I stand. And I am always happy to tell them why.

          Like

      • meme says:

        he also used the term trumpkins, I took that as an insult

        Like

        • Lea says:

          You are probably right, it was meant as an insult. In turn, we Trump supporters call a Cruz follower a ‘Cruzbot’ or worse in an effort to insult them. Tit for tat
          1A all around.

          Like

  12. mboyko2k says:

    To #nevertrump Cruzers, I have only this to say:

    We offered you paradise. You would have experienced emotions a hundred times greater than what you call love. And a thousand times greater than what you call fun. You would have been treated like gods and lived forever in beauty. But now, because of your distrustful nature, that can never be.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. rcarrx15 says:

    Laura Ingraham on her radio show has been the fairest of all the hosts and pundits. If anything she has leaned more toward Trump. Especially agreeing with Trump on the big three: illegal immigration, failed global trade policies, and his hard stance against China.

    Like

  14. nitschke66 says:

    Nice article but you are missing a whole bunch more who are anti/never Trump – Hewitt, Medved, Krauthammer, Will, Kelly to some notables. Trump also has high priority on building the strongest Military, ripping up the horrible Iran deal (no nukes for Iran) and significantly improving the care our Veterans receive which should be much better than those that we provide for illegal aliens and frankly should be the best care provided period!

    Like

  15. cheri54 says:

    I tried to listen to Beck Radio today. Just to see what he was up to and he made the most outrageous claim….he said he has picked up 25 percent more listeners and that Fox lost half of it’s viewers because Fox supports Trump. Is this man completely nuts? He was bashing Hannity for being Trump’s friend. I always suspected Beck was against Trump for personal reasons and know I think so even more. Somewhere along the line Trump has mocked Beck for being the clownish beta male of Manhattan. Some dinner party or snobbish event they met and didn’t get along is my guess. I sure wish we could find out. I do know Beck hates Huckabee because Huck told him off once at Fox but neither has given all the details. I suspect it to be over religion though.

    Like

  16. geoffb5 says:

    All the media that does news and punditry are only viable if their audience trusts them. They don’t have to be right about everything, mistakes are made and must be admitted to as soon as they are known to the pundit. But they must not be caught out being deceptive, lying.

    A single lie discovered is enough to create contagious doubt in every truth expressed.

    “TrusTed” may end up being the most destructive campaign slogan of all time.

    Like

  17. Clint Brown says:

    I loved the part of the article about Super Beets. I have been reading the articles here for a few months now. You are saying exactly what I’ve been thinking!

    Like

  18. DelAware says:

    It’s not Trump they oppose.

    It’s we, the voters.

    WE are the ones they are trying to whip into line with threats and put-downs. Kind of like calling a white man racist for refusing to pick up the slack for his Affirmative Action hire co-workers.

    What’s shocking The Establishment is that the gig is up. We see the man behind the curtain. We see them all doing the bidding of a small cadre of global billionaires who wish to re-engineer the entire planet and all of humanity in their image of utopia.

    A welfare utopia where work is replaced by sucking on the teat of the state.

    A population pyramid where the older and experienced are replaced by billions of quickly produced young units demanding gibs.

    A hive matrix borg where every last one of your acts, motions, words, and thoughts is surveilled, documented, filed, categorized, and archived for later inquisition and punishment as needed.

    An anti-biological utopia where nature means nothing and society and politics means everything.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Hillbilly4 says:

    If you want to stop Rush..contact ant of his 30+ Sponsor….the list is here
    http://stoprush.net/rush_limbaugh_sponsor_list.php#current_a

    Don’t just bad-mouth him, start complaining to his sponsors. And, turn off the radio.

    Like

    • obeara says:

      Hillbilly4, your desire to take Rush off the air because you dislike him is acting like a Leftist, a Progressive. Destroy whatever does not fit your idea of how things should be. Rush has been unbiased in his coverage of our candidates, he wants to beat Hillary, and he has said so. He has not supported one candidate over the others. He did not endorse anyone. He wanted the discussion to be open. I have been a Trump supporter from day 1, and I listen to Rush. He has not been anti-Trump at all. He has not been pro-Trump either. He has stayed neutral, because he wanted the voters to choose our candidate. He has said a lot of good things about Trump, because there were a lot of good things to say about him. There were good things to say about the others also, and he said them. That is how a person is fair, and unbiased. Now that our candidate is chosen, he will be just pro-Trump, because, as he often says, beating the Democrats is what he wants. He would have supported any candidate the voters chose, because he believes that our country can’t survive the continual move to the left. Again, I want to point out that trying to take Rush off the air, because you do not like what he says, is Leftist, Progressive, behavior. Even the using of sponsors to do it is a Leftist tactic. You are trying to deprive others, because you don’t like him. Not the sort of thinking or behavior from someone who values freedom of thought and speech. Not what I expect at a site that supports Donald Trump who will say anything and everything he wants to say. If you don’t like Rush, don’t listen, but don’t try to keep me, and others, from listening to him.

      Like

    • Observing says:

      Hillbilly4, If you want to censor public discourse then I think CTH is the wrong place to be, unless you are trolling.

      Like

  20. v4ni11ista says:

    Trumpeters! Come out to play! Their Motive doth shine as bright as day! Leave your supper and leave your sleep and join your compatriots in the street! Come with a whoop and come with a call! Come with Goodwill or not at all! Up the Trump ladder and up on his wall! One less murder will serve us all! You audit the Fed and we’ll budget the Dollar and we’ll be sovereign again in an hour!

    Like

  21. barton2016 says:

    Bush Limbaughs face is missing. He was already ripping Trump today for some minimum wage bs.

    Like

  22. Marc Bahn says:

    Very disappointing to see that Ron Paul has signed onto the neverTrump list.

    Like

  23. Janet says:

    Don’t forget Michael Medved and Mitt Romney – they are unofficially starting the (Medved-coined) 3rd party — the Losertarians. They are good at winning at the small stuff, but lose on what really matters – character, sanity, and winning.

    Like

  24. obeara says:

    Here is an example of why I listen to Rush Limbaugh. Today Rush talked about The MacGuffin Effect, and the Republican primary, and questioned how it will play out in the general election. It was very interesting. I never heard of a MacGuffin before. Rush told us what it was, and how it applies in literature, movies, and in real life, like in the Republican primary. He ended with wondering how it would apply to the general election. It was most interesting.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s