Rush Limbaugh: Gingrich Only In Race Now To Target Romney
Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday that Newt Gingrich is no longer campaigning for the presidency.
Instead, Limbaugh believes the former Speaker of the House is now just attacking Mitt Romney as payback for all the negative ads placed against him in Iowa (video follows with transcript):
NEWT GINGRICH SPEAKING TO FOX NEWS'S MEGYN KELLY: If we identify capitalism with rich guys looting companies, we're gonna have a very hard time protecting it. I am totally committed to capitalism. I am totally committed to Main Street. I am totally committed to people's right to start companies; I am committed to their right to fail. But I think it has to be fair, it has to be out in the open. This is why you have this underlying anger about the financial class. Because people look over there and they go, "Wait a second. How come I lost my mortgage and you stayed a millionaire? How come I lost all my savings and you stayed a millionaire?"
RUSH LIMBAUGH: No, no, no. If anything they're saying, "How come I lost my mortgage and Fannie Mae paid YOU a million dollars?" I mean, it works both ways here. I don't understand why the Occupy Wall Street are protesting Newt. They're singing from the same hymnal on this. This is right out of the New York Times. Newt is parroting what the New York Times is writing about Romney on this: Six rich guys taking over. "But if we identify capitalism with rich guys looting companies..." Folks, it is clear here (to me, anyway) what's really going on. This is not a campaign for the presidency. That's not what this is anymore. This is payback time. This is Newt. It drove him nuts that series of ads the Romney super PAC ran against him in Iowa, and this is the result of it. That's why we are where we are. (interruption) No, no. I'm not making excuses, don't misunderstand. I'm just explaining. I'm not defending anybody. I just think this is very unfortunate. This is... (sigh) This is not the kind of stuff you want said by Republicans. I mean, even the establishment Republicans don't go after conservatives this way. Here is one final bite. Megyn Kelly says to Newt, "What is your goal in New Hampshire?"
GINGRICH: My goal in New Hampshire is to have done well enough -- which I think we already have, frankly. Uh, if you look at the energy level we have, you look at the size of our crowds, you look at the level of news coverage, we're doing just fine. My real goal was to make sure that Romney did not win here by a big enough margin to develop real momentum.
LIMBAUGH: All right. So that's it: My purpose here is Romney. I've taken out Romney. You can almost say that Newt is going Perot. You know, when Perot got involved in 1992 everybody was saying, "What the heck is this? Where did Perot come from?" and I found out. Do you remember, Snerdley? Do you remember the story? (interruption) Yeah, but why? (interruption) It was get Bush. Exactly. I'll tell you what happened. If you have forgotten, here's what happened. Ross Perot was a huge supporter of the military. He always has been. Loves them. At some point in the Reagan years, the administration wanted to investigate claims that there were American POWs in North Vietnam, but it was long after the war was over, and they needed private sector funds to do this.
So from what I was told, the Reagan White House dispatched George H. W. Bush to go to Perot and explain what they wanted, what they needed; and they asked for Perot to help fund the potential rescue mission -- and Perot was willing to; but he said he wanted to go, he wanted to be part of it, he wanted to be on the front lines and they said, "Oh, no, no, no. You can't go. Nobody can know. No, no, no. You can't have any role in this," and a couple of other things, and Perot felt -- (sigh) what's the word? -- slighted, betrayed, what have you, 'cause that was after. They told him after they got the money that he wasn't gonna be able to be involved in it anyway, and from what I was told -- and it was by somebody in the inner circle of Bush -- that that led to the desire of Perot to wage payback.
When I learned that, that's why I've felt all along that Perot never really wanted to win that campaign. He just wanted to deny it to Bush. He just wanted to deny reelection of George H. W. Bush in 1992. So you might say that Newt now has adopted the Perot stance, because he just said it: "I'm gonna make sure that Romney doesn't come out of New Hampshire with any momentum whatsoever," and he's using language that the left uses, and he's attempting to make hay with this. You know, he's trying to dredge up and have long-lasting negatives, attach to Romney (this is what's so unsettling about this) in the same way the left would say it. You could, after all these bites, say, "I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message."
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
sure sounds like it Noel
Submitted by shawn. on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 5:08pm.
I have always said there is nothing wrong with criticizing somebody even they are from you own party
However nothings is to be gained if you are doing something out of spite
Spite of Self-Defense?
Submitted by Winghunter on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 6:17pm.
Can't survive a fight by just standing and taking Willard's punches http://bit.ly/t7Xv26
You know, he's trying to
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 6:03pm.
You know, he's trying to dredge up and have long-lasting negatives, attach to Romney
Because no one's trying to dig up or attach negatives to him, right?
Losing my taste for Rush. Gingrich was just his whipping boy of that day. He does it to all of them.
MB
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 10:57pm.
My thought was Rush was wrong about what Gingrich said. The context of what Newt said was what the masses might say about someone like, or actually being, Mitt Romney and his millions using the rules of capitalism to enrich himself while others get the short end of the stick. Romney had recently placed an albatross around his neck with a sound bite about enjoying firing people, context be damned their as well. So, it's no surprise Joe Six Pack would see inequities, stoked by the Media, between himself and Romney.
This is the class warfare sentiments out there and Newt is 100% correct. Missing from Rush's rush to judgment was Newt's declaring he thinks businesses have the right to fail! I take that to mean bad business models do not deserve propping up by the Fed. Great message if Newt carries through with it as President.
However, Rush, in his tangential commentary, is correct about how the masses characterize Newt for his earnings with Fan/Fred. I'm not sure of Rush's pretzel logic in trouncing Newt for a Newt's supposed anti-Capitalism message (Romney the greedy uncaring millionaire) while Rush himself utilizes an anti-Capitalism attack on Newt (earning from Fan/Fred) at the same time. This was a flawed Limbaugh moment. Fortunately, Rush rarely makes these stinkers.
I also think if I were a candidate and my opponent was forcasted to win big in New Hampshire, my goal, knowing I could not win that state, would be to deflate the sails of my opponent as much as possible in order to prevent, as it was said, potential unstoppable inertia as well as gain more traction myself. If Newt is on a scorched earth policy we will know in due time. Rush is fortunetelling and could be wrong.
Newt tried to run a clean campaign. Ron Paul, a dirty player at this point, and Romney's PAC buddies are the ones who deserve Gingrich's ire. I hope Gingrich throttles them. We need a junk yard dog who will be able to fight the dirt and underhanded war Obama and his supporters are going to wage. Paul is a kook and a danger to the safety and security of the USA. Romney, less a Conservative than Gingrich, is unable to fight the coming war.
Did you ever in your wildest imagination see Paul supporting Romney. Reminds me of the Huckabee/McCain tag team stupidity that helped bring us the (still) loser McCain.
Sorry Rush, You Jumped The Gun
Submitted by Winghunter on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 6:03pm.
Pointing out Bain took out $160M out of a company (investing only a couple million) who then shortly afterward went bankrupt is not bad-mouthing capitalism http://bit.ly/wdF9zq
Gingrich on FOX: 'Forsman was about improving the companies they bought up - not cutting & running with the money to let the company go bankrupt'
agree
Submitted by MidAmerica on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 6:46pm.
If Newt hasn't crossed the line he sure has a few toes on it. If Newt reaches a point where he cannot stand on the same stage and support the eventual nominee then he is now supporting the reelection of obama. Same way with any Republican, Conservative or not.
Romney is not our country's biggest problem. If fellow Conservatives look around they will notice we do not have a perfect and viable Conservative candidate to choose. Tearing the party apart now for a nonexistent perfect Conservative candidate is just political suicide.
I say this not as a Romney supporter but as one who is going to work with whoever the voters of the Party pick as the alternative to obama.
MidAmerica...Exactly, and...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 8:45pm.
I said essentially the same here yesterday. Next's toast, he knows he's toast, and now he's just in this to continue beating up and trashing Romney...Period. What a guy, huh? Just the kind of spiteful, nasty person we want in the WH...Thank you, but, no. And like you, I also am not a Romney supporter...I am sitting on the sidelines right now, and will support the party's nominee. For me, this race has become not about what conservative I would really like to see as president, but who of the crop of candidates that we are faced with, will have the best chance to beat Obama....I'm not thrilled about that, but I believe that is the reality of this election.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde
Submitted by MidAmerica on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 9:22pm.
When Newt was rising and was the sensible professorial candidate I began to lean Newt. No more. He has shown a lack of proper temperament to be a President.
A lot of insiders who know Newt warned us but we didn't want to hear it.
I've never been a Gingrich supporter just for the reasons...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 10:03pm.
that he's flaming out now...Throughout his career, I have seen and remembered this unfortunate side of him. He's a great idea man, but seems to have an almost fatally flawed character and personality. All the great ideas in the world cannot overcome a tendency to be mean, angry, and spiteful when crossed or under duress, and that is what we have seen and continue to see in Gingrich. He's had some good moments during this campaign, but I knew that sooner or later, the ugly side of him would eventually emerge, and it has...in spades. Newt Gingrich does not now and never has had the proper temperment to be president.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Didn't we kinda predict this?
Submitted by jon_torlin on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:56pm.
Didn't some of us predict this sometime in the last month or so? I think it was cajun and I and Scuba? Granted, we assumed it would happen after he presumably got the WH, but still, we predicted the ugly side of Newt would come out. Came out earlier, but there it is.
-Jon
Maybe he's a 'honeybadger'???
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 4:31am.
Maybe he's a 'honeybadger'???
Usually don't agree with
Submitted by goldwater89 on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 7:27pm.
Usually don't agree with Rush, but he's dead-on here. Newt knows he has no chance of winning the nomination nor the Presidency and if he can't win then he's not going to let Mitt. Newt has become a villain straight out of a Shakespeare play, conniving and vindictive.