Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Chris Cillizza from the Washington Post blog, PostPolitics.com. He was on Andrea Mitchell (NBC News, Washington) this afternoon, and she said (impression) What do do in trying to sort this out? Where, Chris, do you come down?”

CILLIZZA: What he’s had at the moment, Andrea, is a relatively united front among conservatives. People like Rush Limbaugh basically saying this is the mainstream media trying to tear down a conservative. The problem with that story line and that narrative is that as it becomes clear that he’s remembering things he didn’t remember 24 hours ago — and let me just say out of my own personal reflection, it seems to me that these would be moments that you would not forget if there were these allegations made against you. I just don’t see it going away any time soon, Andrea, because of the tack he took. He said not true, 100% denial. Well, if it’s less than a hundred percent denial, even if it’s only a 95% denial, there’s still room there to ask questions and wonder what really happened.

RUSH: It’s fascinating to study this. They’re so hoping that there’s something there, so hoping that Herman Cain steps in it, and every time I hear one of these people go on and on and on about this… Let’s take what is the worst that coulda happened here? Done what? Done what? What? Okay. We’re talking about a gesture. By the women’s only admission there was “nothing overtly sexual,” right? So what is the worst thing that coulda happened here? Whatever the worst thing is, it pales when you compare it to anything done by Bill Clinton, John Edwards, or Ted Kennedy. Now, where, Chris Cillizza, is the sense of proportion? You people in media love to talk about the “sense of proportion.” Where is it in this story?

He keeps changing his story? Things he said then aren’t what he’s saying now? This is something you would never forget if you’d been accused of sexual harassment and he’s saying he didn’t remember it? If somebody accused me of sexual harassment and then said I had done nothing “overtly sexual,” I would be so confused I wouldn’t know what to do. I’d be scratching my head. “What the hell did I do?” If somebody said I sexually harassed them but whatever it was was “not overtly sexual,” how can you plead guilty to it? My friend Andy McCarthy has recently posted on this at National Review Online, and here’s what he says. I’m not. “I’m not sure how conflicting CainÂ’s statements about this nonsense are, and I frankly donÂ’t care. CainÂ’s made a number of conflicting statements on matters of substance (e.g., negotiating with terrorists, abortion, the propriety of killing al-Qaeda’s Anwar al-Awlaki, etc.).

“We’ve got abundant basis to probe how consistent he is, how deep his convictions are, and what all that says about his suitability — just like we ought to be probing conflicting positions taken by other candidates. But on the Politico sensation-out-of-nothing report, the real story is how confident the Left is that it has set the terms of (and the traps in) our public debate. Unfortunately, that confidence seems well placed.” So as far as Andy is saying here, the real thing to note is how confident the left is in their ability to set traps and nail somebody on the right, set traps and nail a conservative. There’s something seminal that has taken place now in this Herman Cain story, and it is this.

The press has given up on the crime. The press is no longer concerned with what Herman Cain did. Now they’re trying to get Herman Cain on the cover-up, even if they have to make up the cover-up. Their story today… I should have it in front of me; I’ve got it in the stack. In their story today basically, at the end of it, they’re asking these women to come forward. (paraphrased) “Damn it, help us here!” they’re saying. It’s about how much easier this would be, and about how important it is for these women to come forward, put their names to it and nail this down. “Damn it, the women won’t come forward. What are we gonna do?” Okay, so they have to give up on the crime. This is very important, folks. You just heard Chris Cillizza. Now they’re trying to nail Herman Cain on his “inconsistency,” on the cover-up, how his story is changing.


RUSH: Here’s the end of The Politico piece, by the way: “Republican strategists privately speculated Monday that CainÂ’s campaign could suffer grievous damage if one or both women come forward with new details…” They’re begging these women to come forward. I am more interested what you think of Kim Kardashian and Chris Humphries be forced to give back their wedding presents.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This