RUSH: Folks, listen to this next segment. Well, you know what? I’m not gonna be able to squeeze it all in here with all the audio sound bites before the next bottom-of-the-hour time-out, so I’ll wait ’til afterwards. What it is: Jon Huntsman announced his candidacy today for the Republican presidential nomination, and he took a page from the book of the esteemed and the great Ronaldus Magnus. He went out there and made his announcement in front of the Statue of Liberty, and he’s got a logo (a red rectangle with his name, “Jon Huntsman;” and then white with “JonHuntsman.com”). and somebody observed to me that it looks like a designer label that you might find in clothes. His logo does, his icon.
But it’s interesting. I’ll give you a little hint, a setup. He channels Ronaldus Magnus, does Huntsman. He basically says, “Look, we gotta go out there and we have to respect President Obama! I deeply respect President Obama. I am not going to run down anyone’s reputation,” and, by the way, the chattering classes both on our side and the left are going nuts here. I have a little media montage of the State-Run Media orgasmic over Huntsman making his announcement at the same place as Reagan frequently appeared. But it just illustrates exactly what we were talking about yesterday.
The Republican Party is still convinced that in order to secure the support of independents, that they have to be boring. They have to be serious and Milquetoast and cannot be confrontational, cannot be partisan, cannot go into attack mode. Somehow this is going to cause the independents to get nervous and send them running right back to Obama. Now, of course, that’s flat-out BS, it’s totally wrong. The elections of last November demonstrate that in a real world, real life example. But then there’s also this. We’re told — and this is a trap, by the way, the left puts this out. It’s designed to get us to be boring. It’s designed to get us not to contrast ourselves with the left.
They put out this notion, “These independents, these moderates, they don’t mess around. They’re cut above! And they start hearing this deep partisanship and they’re just gonna run away from you guys. They’re gonna run right back to the Democrats.” Right. Now, the Democrat Party and anybody in it that you want to name today is the most vicious and mean-spirited and exemplifies the politics of personal destruction unlike I’ve ever seen it practiced in my lifetime. I know it’s been bad in the nation’s history. If go back to the days of the founding, the pamphleteering and the media then, it was brutal — which is actually also the point.
We’ve never had this utopian-type existence where everybody was totally respectful of one another, even our opponents and we had intelligent, civic-minded debate back then. We’ve never had that! It’s what the left wants ’cause they desperately want to us shut up and not tell the truth about them. Our side falls for it and believes it! “Yeah, these independents, they don’t like partisanship. Yeah, they’re gonna run to people like Barney Frank. Oh, yeah! They’re gonna run back to people like Anthony Weiner, who was one of the most partisan people in town, one of the most mean-spirited people in town.” It doesn’t wash, folks.
RUSH: All right, Jon Huntsman, the former ambassador to the ChiComs for Obama — the former governor of Utah — has announced his intention to seek the Republican presidential nomination. He did it this morning using the Statue of Liberty. Yesterday and this morning we have a montage of the State-Controlled Media orgasmic over this. Listen to this.
WILLIE GEIST: Jon Huntsman set today to do his best Ronald Reagan impression.
CAROL COSTELLO: Jon Huntsman channeling Ronald Reagan.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: …the same spot Ronald Reagan kicked off his 1980 general e…election campaign.
F. CHUCK TODD: …wants to channel Ronald Reagan themes of American renewal.
JOHN HARRIS: Obviously an attempt to invoke the imagery of Ronald Reagan.
JIM ACOSTA: This is the spot where Ronald Reagan announced his presidential bid in 1980.
JOHN HEILEMANN: Invoking the memory of the sainted Ronald Reagan.
WILLIAM KRISTOL: Ronald Reagan. That’s what they’re hoping to evoke.
RUSH: Right. Symbolism here, ladies and gentlemen. Announcing in the same place as Ronaldus Magnus does not make one Ronaldus Magnus. You know, there’s somebody else announced there. You guys ought to know this. (There are Californians, of course, watching the program on the other side of the glass.) Do you know who else announced their presidential intentions at the Statue of Liberty? Three… two…one… Any guesses? Want to make a guess? Pete Wilson. Yes, the former Governor, the former Senator Pete Wilson did so — and he was also attempting to claim the Ronaldus Magnus mantle, the symbolism. Here is Huntsman. Let’s listen to Huntsman — and, folks, this is not… Well, I don’t want to say it’s not gonna be pretty. It’s gonna be interesting, ’cause we’re gonna play Huntsman, you are a gown hear Huntsman describe how we have to go after Obama, what we can’t do and what we must do, and we’re gonna do all this as Reagan would have done it.
Don’t forget that. Here’s the first of our many sound bites:
HUNTSMAN: Let me say something about civility.
RUSH: Oh, yes.
HUNTSMAN: For the sake of the younger generation —
RUSH: Ah, yes.
HUNTSMAN: — it concerns me that civility, humanity, and respect are sometimes lost in our interactions as Americans. Our political debates today are corrosive and not reflective of the belief that Abe Lincoln espoused. I don’t think you need to run down someone’s reputation in order to run for the office of president. I respect the President of the United States. He and I have a difference of opinion on how to help a country we both love, but the question each of us wants the voters to answer is “Who will be the better president?” not who’s the better American.
RUSH: You see where this is. This is reminiscent of McCain getting rid of anybody in his campaign who dared use Obama’s own middle name. Even that was considered to be provocative. So you don’t need to run down anybody’s reputation. “I respect the president of the United States.” This is Consultants 101 — and I’m sure Huntsman believes this himself. As a moderate, this is what they all believe. By the way… I don’t know this for sure, I should say. My best guess is that he does not want to be considered a conservative, because being considered a conservative is all those cliches.
I’m sure the consultants have said to him, “Stick to policies. Don’t be critical of Mr. Obama. Don’t! Don’t attack Obama. He’s a great American, blah, blah, blah. The American people will not put up with it.” You take a look at polling data, folks. There are people angry as they can be at this president. There are people who think his reputation deserves to be questioned, his policies, everything. I don’t know how you separate the man from his policies. When you go vote, it’s not the policies on the ballot. It’s the candidate’s name. This is so much hogwash. This is how we penalize ourselves, but this is what political consultants bring to the table. Here’s more. This is Huntsman again telling us how he’s gonna operate his campaign and various other things associated with it.
HUNTSMAN: Behind me is our most famous symbol of the promise of America. President Reagan launched the 1980 general election campaign from this very spot. —
HUNTSMAN: It was a time of trouble, worry —
HUNTSMAN: — and difficulty.
HUNTSMAN: And he assured us that we could make America great again.
RUSH: Yes. Right.
HUNTSMAN: And through his leadership, he did. Today I stand in his shadow, as well as the shadow of this magnificent monument to our liberty.
RUSH: Okay. So, “Behind me, our most famous symbol, the promise of America. Reagan launched his campaign from this very spot. Time of trouble, worry, difficulty,” and so forth. Now, one of the things… You have to forgive me here but I’m a little resentful of people who are nothing like Reagan trying to be Reagan. Mr. Huntsman’s not said it but the mind-set that he evokes has told us countless times through very many different people and voices that the era of Reagan is over. But when it’s time to go out and get votes, isn’t it amazing? Even Obama tries to channel Reagan! They all do. Reagan was an unapologetic conservative, and there was none of this talk about civility and all of this, and now the image that we’ve got here so far in Mr. Huntsman’s announcement is, “We’re going to be civil. We respect the president. We are not gonna attack his reputation. We are going to be like Ronaldus Magnus. We don’t want to tear down anybody’s reputation.”
Well, listen to how it’s done by Ronald Reagan. This is September 1st, 1980, Liberty State Park behind the Statue of Liberty kicking off his general election campaign.
REAGAN: The Carter record is a litany of despair, of broken promises, of sacred trusts abandoned and forgotten. His answer to all this misery? He tries to tell us that we’re only in a recession, not a depression — as if definitions — words — relieve our suffering. Let it show on the record that when the American people cried out for economic help, Jimmy Carter took refuge behind a dictionary. Well, if it’s a definition he wants, I’ll give him one: A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his!
SUPPORTERS: (cheers and applause)
RUSH: Ho! Oh, my God, how vicious! Can you believe how mean-spirited Reagan was? Why, he went right after the reputation of Jimmy Carter. My God, he was making fun of Jimmy Carter. He was making fun of him! He was laughing about Jimmy Carter being no different than a dictionary. Why, I can’t believe how uncivil Reagan was! I didn’t hear Reagan talk about how much he respected Carter’s reputation. I heard him talk about how damaging Carter was — and Reagan was just getting warmed up.
REAGAN: Call this human tragedy whatever you want. Whatever it is, it’s Jimmy Carter’s. He caused it, he tolerates it, and he’s going to appearance to the American people for it.
RUSH: Wow, can you believe this? How… Reagan, why, he was going after Jimmy Carter here! Jimmy Carter, this is misery. Whatever this human tragedy is, it’s Jimmy Carter’s. Meanwhile, the Republican consultants of today are advising every Republican, “Don’t! Don’t do that! Don’t go out there and make this about Obama. You gotta attack the policies, but you can’t mention Obama. Don’t do that! You gotta be like Reagan.”
Well, here’s Reagan.
You’re gonna be like Reagan? Listen to Reagan.
You notice, by the way, the energy that Reagan is exhibiting here. There’s no boredom. There’s no soft-spoken intellectual seriousness. There’s passion! There is deep passion here! Nobody listening to Ronald Reagan make this announcement in 1980 had any doubt what he wanted to do and what he thought about what was happening to the country. He was dead serious about fixing this because he cared deeply about the misery and the destruction that one man had brought about: Jimmy Carter! He was unabashed and unafraid to lay the blame for all of it at the feet of one man: The sitting president at the time, Jimmy Carter. Ronald Reagan won two land landslide victories, yet they tell us gotta be like Reagan to win the election. But no! The advice these people are being given (and maybe they don’t even need the advice; maybe they believe it themselves without the consultants) is they can’t do this in this era. “You can’t! You can’t go after Obama this way.” Now, here’s the line that Huntsman quoted from Reagan in context. It’s a little different than the way it sounded from Huntsman.
REAGAN: This country needs a new administration with a renewed dedication to the dream of America, an administration that will give that dream new life and make America great again.
RUSH: Okay. So that’s the context of “running down the reputation” of one Jimmy Carter that Huntsman said he wasn’t gonna do. It’s perfectly clear here to me who Ronald Reagan thought the problem was. It’s perfectly clear to me what Ronald Reagan thought the solution to the problem was. The problem was Jimmy Carter. The problem was not just his policies, because you can’t separate them. Reagan didn’t distinguish. He didn’t run around and say, “You know, I like Jimmy Carter. Jimmy is a great guy, but his policies are causing misery.” He didn’t say that. He went for the throat. I marvel here, folks, at how all these experts are telling us how the Republicans need to act and how they need to campaign to win, and they hearken back to the great civil days of Reagan. I’m not saying this is uncivil, but politics is what it is. It’s a hard-hitting business — and if you get into these races to win them, you have to go after the people you want to replace; and we are where we are precisely because of Barack Obama. But if we’re gonna run a campaign which tries to (sigh) mention that without mentioning it, well, it’s gonna be that much more difficult to pull off.
RUSH: I love the contrast that we just shared with you exclusively here on the EIB Network. Ronald Reagan being Ronald Reagan, Ronaldus Magnus as Ronaldus Magnus compared to a RINO pretending to be Reagan. And the contrast is dramatic, as I’m sure you’ll agree, those of you who heard it. If I didn’t hear we’re gonna play these again throughout the program this afternoon. It’s too important; it’s too crucial. Folks, this notion that the independents are where elections are won and lost, that’s 20, 25% of the electorate. You’ve got people advising candidates, “Go out and get those people and you’ve got this in the bag. You gonna get 40% of Republicans voting for you automatically, 40% Democrats voting for Obama.” The problem with this is Ronald Reagan didn’t campaign to specific groups.
Reagan campaigned to every American as an American. He didn’t care if they were hyphenated, didn’t care what their gender, their sexual orientation, whether they liked animals, it didn’t matter. And as we noted, the pure passion. It wasn’t boring. He didn’t try to make himself sound serious. And folks, if you were not paying attention back then, if you weren’t old enough paying attention, or if you just don’t remember, do not doubt me when I tell you that even back then — in 1976 Reagan lost the Republican nomination. Gerald Ford won it. The Republican establishment in ’76 did not like Reagan, just like they don’t like conservatives of today. Even after Reagan was elected, a lot of them were not happy. Reagan was unabashedly conservative. He was unafraid to say that he was conservative. Mr. Huntsman doesn’t want to be called a conservative.
New York Times on June 20th: “Huntsman refused to describe himself as a conservative. Huntsman said he didn’t like political labels, but if he had to pick one, he considered himself a ‘pragmatic problem-solver.'” Well, Ronaldus Magnus had no problem describing himself as a conservative. He did so proudly. He had literally no shame whatsoever in identifying himself that way. When I start talking this way, a number of you independents, I know you get a little peeved. In fact, we’ve got one on hold. We actually have an independent who has called the program, and that person is on hold, and thinks that I broad brush them. In other words, speak in generalities.
To those of you who are independent or call yourselves independents, let me really specify something. When talking about you, I actually am bouncing off how you are thought of by so-called political experts, and particularly on the Republican side. I do happen to think that a lot of independents relish calling themselves independents because the notion is that they’re not partisan, that they’re open-minded, that they discuss things and decide things issue by issue, they’re far, far more intelligent than these committed ideologues on the right or the left. But my main bone of contention with independents is how you are portrayed and how you are sought and how you are pursued by political professionals.
RUSH: So I checked the e-mail during the top-of-the-hour break, “What do you got against Huntsman?” I don’t have anything against Huntsman. Folks, I guess I’m glad for the question. It gives me the opportunity to specify. I don’t know Jon Huntsman, and everything I’ve seen about the guy, he’s a prince, a prince of a person, a nice fellow. (interruption) I’d play golf with him, sure. My comments here have to do with campaign technique, tactics, and strategery, and I don’t know if the way Huntsman’s going about this is what he really thinks is the best way to do it or whether he’s getting advice. Either way I disagree with it. I know these guys are getting this kind of advice, “Go milquetoast. Don’t be anything that’s partisan. You don’t want to be confrontational, independents don’t like it.”
I get so fed up with being on defense, particularly where independent voters are concerned. Independents are perfectly fine with the country being destroyed. What would really tick off the independents is if you get mad at the people doing it. I’m sorry, it doesn’t compute. And if I were you independents I’d be a little bit upset that you’re being portrayed this way, that you’re perfectly fine with everything going to hell in a handbasket but when somebody gets very pointed in saying so, that’s when you get mad. What is that?
Now, let me give you a quote of something that Huntsman said today, and again, within the context of Mr. Huntsman saying, “I’m not gonna go attack anybody, and I’m not gonna destroy anybody’s reputation. I have profound respect for President Obama.” Okay, here’s something he said at his announcement at the Statue of Liberty today. He said, “For the first time in our history we’re about to pass down to the next generation a country that is less powerful, less compassionate, less competitive, and less confident than the one we got.” Okay. That matters to me. That’s a pretty big indictment. For the first time in our history? This is not insignificant. He’s right, and I assume he believes it. Not only is it not insignificant, it’s profound.
“For the first time in our history we are about to pass down to the next generation a country that’s less powerful –” this less compassionate business, I don’t know what that means. We’re going broke being compassionate. We’re bankrupting the next generation and the generation after that, and the following generation. We’re bankrupting all those people with our compassion. And make no mistake, that’s how way too many people define compassion: how much money are you willing to throw at people. How much money are you willing to redistribute. That’s what goes for compassion these days. “We’re passing down a country that’s less competitive and less confident.” Sorry. Somebody’s responsible for that. Somebody and their policies are responsible for that. And if you don’t want to say that one person is, clearly a political party can be said to be responsible for it, clearly the policies of a political party.
Even if you say, “I’m not gonna attack the guy, but we gotta go after his policies.” Well, that’s pretty profound stuff here. These are very destructive policies. If you really believe this you gotta attack this with a little passion. But how can you say, “For the first time in our history we’re about to pass down to the next generation a country that’s less powerful, less compassionate, less competitive, less confident,” and at the same time say, “I’m not gonna attack anybody.” Contest here on who’s a better president, not who’s a better American. Who’s a better American is not on the ballot anyway. Where did that come from? I mean this kind of stuff bothers me. It doesn’t offend me. This less powerful, he’s basically saying the same thing that the Defense Secretary Robert Gates said over the weekend, except for the competitive and the compassionate part.
But I mean this stuff matters. It’s not saying for the first time in our history we’ve got a national debt of $14 trillion. Okay, fine. First time in our history we’re a nation in decline. That’s serious stuff. Somebody’s responsible for that. That just didn’t happen, folks. Sorry to say, it’s not just an evolutionary cycle. The evolutionary cycle that is this country is one of growth, is one of power, is one of liberation for the oppressed all over the world. The evolutionary cycle of this country is greatness. And now we have people running for office, acknowledging that for the first time in our history — so it’s not part of a cycle — for the first time in our history we are in decline. Well, you can’t just ho-hum that. If you ho-hum it, nobody’s gonna believe you mean it.
It’s like trying to fight a war on terrorism without daring to use the word “terrorist,” which, by the way, this current regime has tried to do. You gotta be willing to name your enemies. You have to be willing to define your enemies, and you have to be willing to tell people why they are the enemy. But I don’t think we even have people willing to describe the Democrats as our enemy. “No, they are our worthy opponents, Mr. Limbaugh, the Democrats are our worthy opponents. That’s how we independents look at it, they are worthy opponents.” Fine, worthy opponents. Let me make something very clear. Barack Obama and his buds look at us as the enemy. Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm, and his party look at us as much bigger enemies than they see Al-Qaeda as an enemy, make no mistake about it.
So this is all that I mean. If you’re gonna run around and talk about how for the first time ever we’re a nation in a state of decline, it’s not a ho-hummer. It’s not a “oh, by the way.”
RUSH: You want to save the US economy? You roll back the Obama revolution. Pure and simple. That’s how you save the US economy. You want to sit around and worry about respecting somebody’s reputation or what have you? You know, Obama once told us we should be mad, except he told us we should be mad at people like AIG, or people on Wall Street. So even our esteemed Dear Leader told us, “It’s okay to get mad at people,” but we? We’re not supposed to be mad at Obama! We’re not supposed to be mad at a party which is systematically destroying — and admittedly here by even Mr. Huntsman, it’s the first time in our history we are a nation in decline being presided over as such, happily, by the Democrat Party and its leaders and emissaries.
All right, to the phones we go. We’re gonna start White Plains, New York. This is Rich. Thank you for calling, sir. Appreciate your patience in waiting. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks for taking my call, and congratulations on your 80 score.
RUSH: Thank you. Oh, it was exciting. It was fun. I was ready for an emergency nine.
CALLER: I know you’re feeling good. Rush, I think it’s most critical for the liberal Drive-By Media to try and push a moderate like Huntsman as the Republican candidate 2012 because of that poll that shows that a generic Republican candidate will beat Obama. What that means is it translates into a lot of Republicans won’t be holding their noses and voting for a moderate because they’re worried about his or her electability in the general election. They’ll vote their conservative ideology and not settle for less. I guarantee you’re gonna watch the scare tactics from the lamestream liberal media left and right to try to convince Republicans, “You know, don’t do it. Don’t. Don’t vote in that, quote, ‘extremist conservative candidate’ or you’ll lose!”
RUSH: Yeah. That’s right. In fact, the whole notion of a Republican candidate and extremism is already being formulated. Axelrod and some of the Obama people are starting to allude to it even now. So you’re dead on right. I’ll tell you something like this, folks. He’s talking about the generic ballot where an unnamed Republican beats Obama. The generic ballot, it’s a funny thing to follow in polling. Generally in the generic ballot, Democrats in the past (if I’m not getting confused about this) traditionally have always done well in generic polling. However, lately it has been Republicans. What it means is, an unnamed Republican would beat Obama. Anybody. Elmer Fudd, as long as he were a Republican, would beat Obama.
Now, it changes once you start giving people named choices. Normally when you start putting names in there the advantage gets even bigger. But I think even the idea of calling Huntsman a “moderate” is an illustration of media manipulation. I think that’s part of the whole strategy. The whole idea he’s a moderate is, again, how we’re being manipulated — and, of course, “Moderates are what we want! That’s what we’re told will win,” and who is it that tells us this? Our opponents, the Democrats tell us. So we have the Democrats trying to pick our nominee again (with their willing accomplices in the media), and they always say what we need are moderates.
Take a look at who loses our elections. I went through this yesterday. The reason why the Republicans get hamstrung on this is ’cause they can’t get over the landslide defeat of Barry Goldwater in 1964. Goldwater, of course, was an unapologetic conservative — and they think that what led to his defeat was the fact that he was unapologetically conservative. “So if we just avoid that, we got a better chance.” Look at who it is that actually loses our elections and who it is that wins them. Ronaldus Magnus won twice in landslides. Not only did he say that he was a conservative. He did it with great enthusiasm and passion.
He wasn’t embarrassed to say he was a conservative at all, nor was he embarrassed about conservatism. George W. Bush won twice espousing conservative principles, policies, and ideals. The people on our side that lose elections are these vaunted “moderates,” the RINOs or the liberal Republicans: George H. W. Bush in ’92, Bob Dole, McCain. So is it any wonder that the left and the media would come along and suggest, “You guys, you better nominate a moderate. That’s the only chance you’ve got.” They know full well what beats them. They know. They have a crystal clear definition and answer of what beats them.
RUSH: This is Amy in Powhatan, Virginia, it’s great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Boy, it’s an honor to speak with you.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: I was listening to the show this morning and heard Huntsman speaking, and then I heard Reagan speaking, of course, no comparison, but I came up with kind of a theory of what I think the strategy is. And before I say my theory I wanted to tell you if I was running for office —
CALLER: — I wouldn’t even need a strategist because I would just listen to Rush Limbaugh and it would be a slam dunk.
RUSH: I totally understand that. If you are running for office, if you are really passionate, why do you need a policy advisor? I mean I can understand a tactical strategerist advisor, but I never understood why you need an advisor to help you with policy, if it’s really in your heart.
RUSH: That’s just me.
CALLER: Yeah. Anyway, what I was thinking was, from listening to all of these things, I’m thinking the left is going to attack via who’s killing the American dream, so the right is going to come back with who is killing the American dream, and I think that’s going to be like the political battle for the election, like who’s the good guy and who’s the bad guy.
RUSH: Wait a minute. I must respectfully disagree.
RUSH: I don’t think the left thinks the American dream is being attacked.
CALLER: They’re going to say the GOP is going to kill the American dream.
RUSH: They are going to say the GOP is killing jobs.
RUSH: But they don’t think the American dream is being killed. Obama is saving it; Obama is revitalizing. I can’t tell you the number of liberals I talk to who don’t think there’s anything really dramatically wrong with the country right now. They think we’re making much to do about nothing here. This is just a standard, ordinary business cycle, economic cycle.
CALLER: I think that as it approaches the election, that’s going to be the battle cry is that if you elect a Republican, they’re going to kill the American dream, that we have to keep going with Obama. And I think Huntsman’s people are kinda trying to get in front of that, and he just has a really sucky delivery.
RUSH: Look, what they’re going to say is that the economy was in much worse shape than even they realized, worse than they even knew and it’s gonna take their policies even longer. But their policies, they’re going to say, are starting to work now, starting to get traction, and we can’t change horses in the middle of the stream. They’re already saying it. I don’t know that the Republican candidate is going to be willing to say that Obama’s destroying the American dream. That’s the point.
RUSH: It was just referenced by our independent caller. In the first hour of this program, we played audio sound bites of Jon Huntsman at his announcement seeking the Republican presidential nomination today at the Statue of Liberty, the same place Ronaldus Magnus announced his candidacy in 1980. Now, this is very instructive. Mr. Huntsman, channeling Reagan, goes to the Statue of Liberty and saying (summarized): “I’m gonna be like Reagan. We’re not gonna be uncivil. I respect the president of the United States. I respect Obama. I’m not gonna attack his reputation. We can’t be seen attacking Obama! That’s not the way to win,” and all of this. So we’re gonna listen to Huntsman, and then we’ll take you back to 1980, to Reagan announcing his candidacy against Jimmy Carter. And you tell me, after you hear this, if you think Reagan soft-pedaled it all. If you think Reagan didn’t attack and was not critical of Carter, period; much less his reputation. You will hear Ronald Reagan blame Jimmy Carter personally for the economic disaster that Jimmy Carter caused back in 1980. First, Governor Huntsman from Utah at the Statue of Liberty. He’s the first of two sound bites we have.
HUNTSMAN: Let me say something about civility. For the sake of the younger generation it concerns me that civility, humanity, and respect are sometimes lost in our interactions as Americans. Our political debates today are corrosive and not reflective of the belief that Abe Lincoln espoused. I don’t think you need to run down someone’s reputation in order to run for the office of president. I respect the President of the United States. He and I have a difference of opinion on how to help a country we both love, but the question each of us wants the voters to answer is, “Who will be the better president?” not who’s the better American.
RUSH: (sigh) I’m just… I’m just gonna shut my mouth. I hear this kinda stuff and I get close to blowing a gasket. Now, they’re trying to say he’s Reagan. That’s the point. They’re trying to say he’s Reagan because he announced the same place Reagan did, and you’ll hear that there’s no similarity here at all. But what is this “civility” stuff? “For the sake of the younger generation, it concerns me…” Their country is being destroyed, for crying out loud! Their generation, our young people, you’re in such debt here that your chances for economic prosperity over. Huntsman himself said so in his own announcement. “We are, for the first time, a nation in decline,” and yet we’ve gotta not say so. We can’t say so. It might be impolite. Here’s the second bite. I don’t know what I’m gonna say.
HUNTSMAN: Behind me is our most famous symbol of the promise of America. President Reagan launched the 1980 general election campaign —
RUSH: Yeah, yeah. Right.
HUNTSMAN: — from this very spot.
HUNTSMAN: It was a time of trouble —
HUNTSMAN: — worry, and difficulty.
RUSH: Yes, it was.
HUNTSMAN: And he assured us that we could make America great again.
RUSH: That’s true.
HUNTSMAN: And through his leadership, he did. Today, I stand in his shadow, as well as the shadow of this magnificent monument to our liberty.
RUSH: All right, now we go to Reagan. It was September 1st, 1980, in Liberty State Park in Jersey City, New Jersey, there at the Statue of Liberty — and as you listen to these I want you to ask yourself if you’re hearing Reagan talk about the need for civility or he doesn’t want to run down somebody’s reputation. Look, it speaks for itself. Just listen.
REAGAN: The Carter record is a litany of despair, of broken promises, of sacred trusts abandoned and forgotten. His answer to all this misery?
RUSH: Stop the tape a second. I don’t know everything Huntsman said — I don’t have a transcript; I don’t have it in front of me — but my guess is he did not say one thing critical of Obama’s record, based on the sound bites we do have him saying. I could be wrong about that. But if he did say something about Obama’s record, I’m sure it wasn’t as hard-hitting is Reagan is talking. (Recue, by the way, Reagan to the top here.) I mean, folks, this is passion. This is 1980. This is Reagan, and back in 1980 a lot of people thought we were in the same place then that we are now. There was a big difference: Jimmy Carter was thought to be just an incompetent boob. Today, motivations are of a different opinion.
People are really, really worried about the objective of Obama. Carter was just bumbling through it all. But you listen to this and you’re going to hear a Reagan that doesn’t exist in these consultants’ minds, a Reagan that they don’t want you to think ever existed. This is just so powerful, it is so passionate — and it’s how you do it. Reagan was campaigning against somebody he thought was a disaster for the country and said so! Here we go.
REAGAN: The Carter record is a litany of despair, of broken promises, of sacred trusts abandoned and forgotten. His answer to all this misery? He tries to tell us that we’re only in a recession, not a depression, as if definitions — words — relieve our suffering. Let it show on the record that when the American people cried out for economic help, Jimmy Carter took refuge behind a dictionary. Well, if it’s a definition he wants, I’ll give him one: A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his!
SUPPORTERS: (cheers and applause)
RUSH: Right on, right on. Here’s Reagan now blaming Carter, bluntly, questioning his motivation.
REAGAN: I have talked with unemployed workers all across this country. I’ve heard their views on what Jimmy Carter has done to them and their families. Let Mr. Carter go to their homes, look their children in the eyes, and argue with them that it’s only a recession that put Dad or Mom out of work. Let him go to the unemployment lines and lecture those workers who have been betrayed on what is the proper definition for their widespread economic misery. Human tragedy, human misery, the crushing of the human spirit. They do it need defining; they need action.
REAGAN: Call this human tragedy whatever you want. Whatever it is, it’s Jimmy Carter’s. He caused it, he tolerates it, and he’s going to have to answer to the American people for it.
RUSH: Yeah, but we can’t do that anymore. See, we gotta be civil. Reagan was being uncivil here, you know. Oh, yeah! According to current standards, as espoused by brilliant Republican leaders, that’s incivility. What you just heard is incivility. Why, he was too mean! He attacked Jimmy Carter personally! That’s no way to win. We can’t do that. The independents are gonna run away from us in droves if that happens and he only won 44 states. I also know this; I also know that Reagan never served in Jimmy Carter’s regime or administration. Jon Huntsman did serve in Obama’s; he was ambassador to the ChiComs. All right, we have one more sound bite here from the great Ronaldus Magnus.
REAGAN: I’m looking forward to meeting Mr. Carter in debate, confronting him with the whole sorry record of his administration — the record he prefers not to mention. If he ever finally agrees to the kind of first debate the American people want, which I’m beginning to doubt, he’ll answer to them and to me.
REAGAN: This country needs a new administration with a renewed dedication to the dream of America —
RUSH: Right on.
REAGAN: — an administration that will give that dream new life and make America great again.
RUSH: Right on! Right on, right on, right on. I checked the transcript here, and Mr. Huntsman did not mention Obama’s name once in his announcement today saying he was seeking the presidency of the United States. He did not mention Obama’s name once. The closest he came was when he said, “and I respect the president of the United States.”
RUSH: Scott from somewhere parts unknown in upstate New York.
RUSH: Hello, sir.
CALLER: Hello, Rush, first-time caller, longtime listener.
RUSH: Thank you, sir.
CALLER: Good to be on with you. I had a few things to say but I think if you could play that clip of Reagan over and over again, maybe somebody will listen to that and say, “That’s what I need to be saying.” Somebody needs to go after the Democrats. I don’t understand why this pacifism and this let’s just sit back and play nice. This is our country. This is what we’re fighting for and you can’t just have somebody sit back.
RUSH: Well, I know. Mr. Huntsman today in his announcement actually said that for the first time in our nation’s history we’re a nation in decline. You know, that’s not insignificant. That’s not a ho-hum thing. Why is it a nation in decline? Why? For the first time. But yet he respects Obama, and he respects Obama’s reputation. He also said near the end of his remarks announcing his candidacy today, he said everything is at stake. Okay, why is everything at stake? That’s not insignificant, either. Everything is at stake. Why? If you run for office and you’re going to be running against somebody, and you don’t — I don’t know. You know, I’m not out to be hated here. I really am not. I am not out to be despised and I’m not out here trying to make myself a target. I just don’t know how else to deal with this.
I’m not trying to make myself persona non grata to these people, but I swear, folks, you know, it’s not just the consultants who are advising our candidates to go squishy and mushy and so forth. It’s all the rest of us, too. You know, there are conservatives who don’t run for office. I happen to be one. And when we talk the way we talk, when we talk this way, they tell us that we’re too confrontational and we’re being too conservative and we are too provocative, too partisan. I don’t understand what’s motivating these people. It clearly isn’t winning ’cause this isn’t how you do it. So I would say to Mr. Huntsman, “What void are you filling here? If you respect the president, and yet we’re in a state of decline for the first time ever, and if everything’s at stake, what are you doing? What void are you filling?”
You don’t want to get into a contest who’s the better American, you want a contest who’s a better president. Well, if you’re gonna make the case you’re a better president than Obama you’re gonna have to start talking about why he’s a bad one, or are you gonna say, “He’s okay. He’s a nice president. I’m just gonna be better.” And maybe so. Maybe that’s gonna be the tack because as you all know, folks, we really can’t offend the independents. We can’t offend them.
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.