As the resident devil's advocate, I feel I must point out that Christians do not have it quite that easy else we would not have thousands of different denominations rather than the one that Jesus originated.

In fact, it can even be difficult to agree on who has the right to call themselves a Christian - it has become such a generic name that it is loosely used for any group that claims to follow Jesus (& we have even reached the point that our POTUS uses it to describe his allegedly altruistic atheist mother without mainstream correction )

Dear resident Devil's advocate.
My point exactly. The lines are being blurred in every avenue of life and culture.
It's no longer easy to discern what used to be a given......

I believe this should by "Why Rush didn't like Mike." Because in my opinion the rest don't count.

Let me explain why. These others: Hannity, Ingram, Hewitt, etc. are in a specific business. That business is: SELLING A PRODUCT TO RUSH LIMBAUGH'S AUDIENCE!

When Rush started in on Mike in late 2007-early 2008, the others had to follow suit. Rush sets their template, and they may try to put their spin on it, but Rush's template is Mike isn't conservative. So being that these other talkers sell their product (their shows) to Rush's audience, they follow suit. The question should be about Rush's motivations... the others are parrots. I once heard a guy name Rusty Humphries (guy on our talk station who's a typical example of a Rush parrot) talking about Mike when the whole Maurice Clemmons thing came out. I'll always remember his quote... "I just don't like Mike Huckabee. I don't know why, I just don't like him." Now you can say a lot of things about Mike, but 'unlikable' is not one of them. It was a classic example of someone toeing the talk radio line.

Anyway, it's been very interesting to listen to Rush in these past few weeks. I think he personally learned something from the way he treated Mike in 2008. He's been VERY careful to always let callers criticize a candidate or to just bring up questions about them. If you listen closely it's always orchestrated so he can have deniability about ruining a candidate's chances. He'll never overtly criticize like he did with Mike: "he's not conservative", "he'll ruin the republican party", etc.

He never directly criticized Daniels for the week he talked about him... just asked 'questions'. Same with Romney, letting callers attack him. Same with Newt.

I just wish he had been a little more tactful with Mike in 2008

_________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." ~ Ronald Reagan


You say "Conspiracy Theorist"?? Call me Agenda Analyst.

You bring up quite an interesting point I had not thought of. A bunch of parrots, it seems. It reminds me of the game of "gossip" we used to play. Or the power of peer pressure.

_________________