Rush Limbaugh: ‘Stunned’ by Fox News Acting as if ‘Jilted at the Altar’

by ALEX SWOYER27 Jan 2016Washington, DC3730

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaughsaid the GOP frontrunner will own the entire GOP primary debate hosted by Fox News on Thursday night, even without being there. He added that he was “stunned” watching Fox News last night and that the network is acting as if it was “jilted at the altar.”

“Donald Trump knows that by not showing up, he’s owning the entire event,” Limbaugh said of the GOP frontrunner refusing to participate in the Fox News debate because Megyn Kelly is a moderator – someone who Trump doesn’t think was fair to him in a past debate.

Some guy not even present will end up owning the entire event, and the proof of that is Fox News last night. I have to tell you, folks, this is where this gets tough for me. I was stunned watching Fox News last night. Fox News was acting like they had been jilted at the altar. If it had been me — and this is easy to say — if it had been me and Donald Trump makes a big to-do about not showing up for the debate, report the story and move on. Talk about Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Go talk about the other candidates. Go talk about Hillary and the FBI. There’s a lot of news out there. But don’t devote the rest of the night to how a candidate’s not showing up because of you. I mean, the network, not just Megyn Kelly.

Limbaugh also described the GOP frontrunner as “controlling the media”:

Trump is so far outside this game, he’s so far outside the rules, he’s never been a player in this game. He’s always been an outsider. I heard people on Fox last night talking about this. ‘Who does he think he is?  He can’t control the media.’  I got news for you: He is controlling the media, and it’s his objective. He is controlling the media.  He controls the media when he’s not on it. He controls the media when he is on it. He controls the media when he’s asleep. Nobody else has been able to do anything like this short of the Kennedys, and they’re pikers compared to the way Trump is doing this.

[1:55]

Limbaugh said what Trump is doing, his action of not participating in the debate, is laid out in his book The Art of the Deal.

“Trump is not that hard to understand if you pay attention to him and read his books,” Limbaugh explained. “In The Art of the Deal, one of the things that he makes a huge deal about is being able to know when to walk away and have the guts and the courage to do it.”

Trump had previously called for Kelly to be removed as a moderator, but Fox News did not comply.

“I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that,” Limbaugh added, about understanding Trump through the book The Art of the Deal.

I mean, there could be some personal things going on here that I don’t know about. But just from the standpoint of knowing Trump, reading his book, and seeing how he operates elsewhere, in his mind, screw the rules, screw what’s expected, screw ‘This is just the way you do it.’ I’m not gonna put myself in a position [to] go where I’m gonna be treated unfairly. I don’t have to. I’m Donald Trump. Anybody can do this.

LISTEN TO RUSH HERE

Trump appeared to approve of Limbaugh’s analysis and show topic,because he posted on Twitter, “Just got to listen to Rush Limbaugh — the guy is fantastic!”

Trump said he would host a fundraiser for veterans while Fox News holds the debate on Thursday night.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,FOX NEWS, Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh,GOP Debate

Donald Trump on Ted Cruz Debate Challenge: ‘Can We Do It in Canada?’

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

by MICHELLE FIELDS27 Jan 2016855

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump responded Wednesday to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’s debate challenge by mocking him.

Trump tweeted:

Even though I beat him in the first six debates, especially the last one, Ted Cruz wants to debate me again. Can we do it in Canada?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2016

The real estate mogul has been going after Cruz for several weeks by questioning his eligibility.

On Tuesday, Cruz challenged Trump to a debate after Trump announced he would not attend Fox News’ Thursday night debate. Cruz has been tweeting about it using the Twitter hashtag #DuckingDonald:

I challenged @realDonaldTrump to a one-on-one debate. Tell him to accept:https://t.co/wUZHtRpaj4#DuckingDonaldpic.twitter.com/xjCvjS7yyx

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 27, 2016

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, 2016 Presidential Race,FOX NEWS, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz,debate, #DuckingDonald

Debt Up $70,612.91 Per Household in Obama’s First 7 Years

$8,314,529,850,339.07:

cnsnews.com

(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

(CNSNews.com) - The debt of the federal government increased by $8,314,529,850,339.07 in President Barack Obama’s first seven years in office, according to official data published by the U.S. Treasury.

That equals $70,612.91 in net federal borrowing for each of the 117,480,000 households that the Census Bureau estimates were in the United States as of September.

During President George W. Bush’s eight years in office, the federal debt increased by $4,899,100,310,608.44, according to the Treasury. That equaled $44,104.65 in net federal borrowing for each of the 111,079,000 households that, according to the Census Bureau, were in the country as of Jan. 20, 2009, the day that Bush left office and Obama assumed it.

In the fifteen years from the beginning of Bush’s first term to the end of Obama’s seventh year in office, the federal debt increased $13,213,630,160,947.51.

That $13,213,630,160,947.51 increase in the debt during the Bush-Obama years equals $112,219.57 for each of the 117,748,000 households that were in the country as of September.

When Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001, the federal debt was 5,727,776,738,304.64. When Obama took office eight years later, on Jan. 20, 2009, the federal debt was 10,626,877,048,913.08.

As of Jan. 20, 2016, when Obama completed his seventh year in office, the federal debt was $18,941,406,899,252.15.

COMMENTS

How to End an Abortion Debate Quickly

Whenever I get into a lengthy discussion or debate with a eugenicist (oops, I mean "pro-choicer") about abortion, eventually we get to the argument that since the mother and father do not want this child, and in most cases will live in poverty, abuse, and/or an orphanage - in other words, a life not worth living, I recommend that you consider asking this question:

Can you describe to me a situation that could happen to you in your life that would cause you to actually commit suicide?

This should not be rhetorical. Make them tell you how bad it would have to get in oder for them to really do it. And I don't mean to describe a situation in which he or she would think about committing suicide, I really mean actually carrying it out.

If the pro-choicer begins to describe a situation, then you have the moral high ground. In fact, I would go as far as saying that the character of your debate opponent is so questionable that you could claim that he or she should have no right to have a say in government policy anyway.

But if they say "No," they cannot describe such a situation, as I believe most will, then you can point out the moral of this exercise:

An innocent life is a gift that should take precedence over any worldly situation that life may be confronted with.