Media claim White House has thrust Limbaugh into limelight -- but Limbaugh and GOP have done this for years
SUMMARY: Recently, many in the media have echoed the charge by the GOP that the White House is shining the spotlight on Rush Limbaugh in order to distract attention from the country's problems. In fact, Limbaugh and the GOP have demonstrated repeatedly over the years that they don't need assistance from Democrats for the spotlight to shine on Limbaugh. The party has honored and defended him repeatedly, the media have praised him, and Limbaugh has thrust himself into the spotlight countless times through his outrageous comments and conduct.
Recently, media figures have echoed the charge made by Republican leaders that the White House has cast a spotlight on Rush Limbaugh in order to distract attention from the nation's economic situation. In fact, Limbaugh himself, and Republican Party officials have repeatedly thrust him into the spotlight -- Limbaugh with outrageous commentary, and the GOP by emphasizing his importance to the Republican Party and the conservative movement. The media have also praised or promoted him repeatedly.
Citing a March 4 Politico article that stated that "top Democrats" are "depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party," Time White House correspondent Michael Scherer wrote in a March 4 Swampland blog post that "[a]t a time of unprecedented threats to the United States," the White House has "asked the American people to focus their attention not on solving the problems, but on a big-mouthed entertainer in Florida." Scherer continued: "This may be smart politics. But it is also the same petty strategy that John McCain employed during the presidential campaign, the one that our new president promised to rise above." Similarly, Fox News host Sean Hannity said on March 4: "Now, it took quite a bit of coordination between the White House and the liberal media, but they have succeeded in distracting the attention of the American people away from President Obama's freewheeling spending spree and towards Rush Limbaugh and the leadership of the Republican Party." And Limbaugh himself said on March 4: "It is on the record -- thanks to Politico.com -- since last fall, the White House, led by Rahm Emanuel, the chief of staff to Barack Obama, has been targeting me, your host, your harmless, lovable little fuzzball. Their standard operating procedure: They need a demon to distract and divert from what their agenda is."
In fact, for the last 15 years at least, Limbaugh and the GOP have needed no help from the Democratic Party to thrust Limbaugh into the spotlight.
As far back as the early years of the Clinton presidency, Limbaugh was commanding attention from Republicans:
- In a September 6, 1993, article, headlined "The Leader of the Opposition," National Review reported that following then-President George H.W. Bush's 1992 re-election defeat, former President Ronald Reagan sent Limbaugh an "unsolicited note" in which he called Limbaugh "the Number One voice for conservatism in our Country" and stated, "Keep up the good work. America needs to hear the way things ought to be." The article also quoted then-Vice President Dan Quayle saying of Limbaugh: "I know the Republican Party listens to him. He's got the pulse of our rank and file."
- Following the GOP's takeover of Congress in 1994, the freshman class of House Republicans reportedly made Limbaugh an honorary member and reportedly gave him credit for their victory.
- Prominent Republicans, including then-President George W. Bush, former President George H.W. Bush, then-Vice President Dick Cheney, Republican House whip Eric Cantor (VA), and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have appeared on Limbaugh's show.
Limbaugh has received favorable attention from the media as well. For example:
- In a December 26, 2004, interview, NBC News managing editor and Nightly News anchor Brian Williams stated, "I think it's my duty to listen to Rush," adding: "I think Rush has actually yet to get the credit he is due." As Media Matters for America noted at the time, Limbaugh was repeatedly featured on the MSNBC and CNBC programs Williams hosted before Williams became Nightly News anchor. In 2006, Limbaugh was one of the first persons featured on the CBS Evening News' short-lived "Free Speech" segment, in which he attacked unnamed Americans who did not conform to his definition of "patriotism."
- On January 29, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Limbaugh on the economic recovery package in which he offered his own "Bipartisan Stimulus" plan for the economy. Limbaugh's op-ed drew praise from CNBC host Erin Burnett, who said Limbaugh had "serious things to say" and offered "interesting ideas," such as "cutting the corporate tax" and "slashing capital gains [taxes]." Unmentioned by Burnett were the numerous economists who do not view corporate tax rate cuts and capital gains tax rate cuts as particularly "serious" or effective methods for stimulating the economy. In addition, on January 29, under the headline "Limbaugh Wants Meeting With Obama," Time editor-at-large Mark Halperin stated on his Time.com website, The Page: "The talk radio king says Thursday he wants to personally present a stimulus proposal to the president." Halperin frequently publishes snippets of Limbaugh's commentary on his Time.com website.
Limbaugh himself has claimed great influence over the media:
- In his interview printed in Bernard Goldberg's A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media (Regnery), Limbaugh claimed credit for the expansion of talk radio, Fox News Channel's prime-time programming, as well as "the mainstream media's behavior today." From A Slobbering Love Affair:
LIMBAUGH: Bernie, I honestly believe the following: I believe that I, Rush Limbaugh, am responsible for the mainstream media's behavior today because they think I am the one who destroyed their monopoly beginning in 1988 when I started my show. Back then, we had the three nets, CNN, and the big papers. They owned commentary. Now they don't. I believe the creation of the New Media has made the mainstream media now openly competitive with the New Media, which is why they are so open now about choosing sides.
This is not my ego speaking, Bernie, but since I started in 1988, look at what has happened. There were 125 talk stations in 1988. Now there are over 2,000. Right-wing blogs have sprung up. Fox News prime time is simply talk radio on TV.
Even recently, Republicans have genuflected:
- Days after calling Limbaugh "an entertainer" whose commentary can be "incendiary" and "ugly," Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele apologized, telling the Politico: "I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh. ... I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. ... There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership." Later in a March 4 appearance on NBC's Today, co-host Matt Lauer asked about being "put in a position where you've got to run and apologize to him." Steele responded, "Look, that's the nature of this job, baby." Later that day, Steele denied attacking Limbaugh altogether.
- In a March 2 appearance on CNN's Larry King Live, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) stated, "I think Rush is a great leader for conservatives. I think he articulates what a lot of people are concerned about."
- As blogger Greg Sargent noted, after Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) stated that "it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks," Gingrey issued a statement in which he sought to "clarify" his comments by stating, in part, that Republicans "need to articulate a clear conservative message that distinguishes our values and our approach from those of liberal Democrats." In his statement, Gingrey described Limbaugh as one of the "conservative giants [who] are the voices of the conservative movement's conscience." Also, as Think Progress noted, Gingrey called into Limbaugh's radio show to express his "very sincere regret for those comments." Gingrey reportedly said: "I clearly ended up putting my foot in my mouth on some of those comments. ... I regret those stupid comments."
- At the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), sponsored by the American Conservative Union, Limbaugh gave the keynote address and received CPAC's "Defender of the Constitution" award. In presenting the award, author Brad O'Leary stated that "the only way we will be successful is if we listen to Rush Limbaugh."
Limbaugh has also thrust himself in the spotlight time and again, including with numerous outrageous comments and actions:
- During the campaign for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, Limbaugh launched "Operation Chaos" with the stated goal of creating a lengthy campaign battle between Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Clinton in order to benefit the Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, by urging supporters to vote for Clinton in Democratic primaries and caucuses.
- In September 2007, Limbaugh characterized service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers." He later argued he had been taken out of context by Media Matters and claimed he was not talking about "the anti-war movement generally," but rather about "one soldier ... Jesse MacBeth." To support this, Limbaugh purported to air the "entire" segment in question from the September 26, 2007, broadcast of his show, but, in fact, the clip he aired had been selectively edited. Limbaugh later included Rep. Jack Murtha (D-PA), a Vietnam veteran, in the group of "phony soldiers." As Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert noted, numerous Republicans defended Limbaugh over the remarks. For instance, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN) supported legislation that commended Limbaugh following his "phony soldiers" crack. Cantor even unveiled a "Stand With Rush" e-petition, urging "conservatives around the country" to fight for Limbaugh.
- Following the disclosure of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib, Limbaugh claimed in 2004 that the U.S. military personnel involved were just "having a good time," and that their actions served as an "emotional release." Limbaugh called the abuse "hazing," referred to it as "an out-of-control fraternity prank," and agreed with a caller that the abuse "was like a college fraternity prank." Citing Limbaugh's remarks about Abu Ghraib and the fact that portions of Limbaugh's show are broadcast on Armed Forces Radio, Sen. Tom Harkin sponsored an amendment in 2004 expressing the sense of the Senate that Armed Forces Radio programming should "present[] all sides of important public questions fairly and with balance." The Senate passed the amendment by voice vote.
- Limbaugh has repeatedly referenced Fort Marcy Park, invoking right-wing conspiracy theories that the Clintons were involved in the death of then-deputy White House counsel Vince Foster, whose body was found in that park on July 20, 1993. Multiple official investigations have determined Foster committed suicide. On July 8, 2008, while discussing reports that a plane carrying then-Sen. Obama had been forced to make an emergency landing in St. Louis, Limbaugh referred to Obama's flight "aboard Fort Marcy Airlines." Limbaugh went on to say that the incident, along with other things, presented "a ripe opportunity here for Operation Chaos."
- In October 2006, Limbaugh accused actor Michael J. Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, of "exaggerating the effects of the disease" in a campaign advertisement for Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), who was then a Senate candidate. In the ad, Fox endorsed McCaskill for supporting embryonic stem cell research, which her opponent at the time, then-incumbent Republican Sen. Jim Talent, opposed. Noting that Fox is "moving all around and shaking" in the ad, Limbaugh declared: "And it's purely an act. This is the only time I have ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has." Limbaugh later added that "this is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting, one of the two." Later in the broadcast, Limbaugh stated, "I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act, especially since people are telling me they have seen him this way on other interviews and in other television appearances." However, Limbaugh subsequently returned to criticizing Fox, stating that "Michael J. Fox is using his illness as a way to mislead voters into thinking that their vote for a single United States senator has a direct impact on stem cell research in Missouri. It doesn't, and it won't."
Limbaugh has frequently served as an unofficial spokesperson for conservatives and the Republican Party:
- Following the Republicans' loss of control of Congress in 2006, Limbaugh claimed to "feel liberated" because he was "no longer going to have to carry the water for people who I don't think deserve having their water carried." Limbaugh added that the Republican Congress had produced "some of this legislation coming out of there that I have just cringed at, and it has been difficult coming in here, trying to make the case for it when the people who are supposedly in favor of it can't even make the case themselves -- and to have to come in here and try to do their jobs." Limbaugh also said: "I understand what this program has become in America and I understand the leadership position it has. I was doing what I thought best, but at this point, people who don't deserve to have their water carried, or have themselves explained as they would like to say things but somehow don't be -- aren't able to, I'm not under that kind of pressure."
- During the recent congressional debate over Obama's economic recovery plan, Limbaugh -- along with Fox News host Sean Hannity -- devoted much of his show to advancing Republican talking points and misinformation about the plan. On February 10, Limbaugh took credit for spreading a false story about health care provisions in the recovery plan, telling listeners: "I found it. I detailed it for you, and now it's all over mainstream media. Well, it's -- it headlined Drudge for a while last night and today. Fox News is talking about it."
From the March 4 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: It is on the record -- thanks to Politico.com -- since last fall, the White House, led by Rahm Emanuel, the chief of staff to Barack Obama, has been targeting me, your host, your harmless, lovable little fuzzball. Their standard operating procedure: They need a demon to distract and divert from what their agenda is. They need a demon about whom they can lie so as to persuade average Americans that they're the good guys, the benevolent good guys, and the mean SOBs are their enemies stopping -- trying to stop this great young little president from doing miraculous and wonderful things.
From the March 4 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: And our headline on this Wednesday night, day number 44 of government expansion, the "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy." Now, it took quite a bit of coordination between the White House and the liberal media, but they have succeeded in distracting the attention of the American people away from President Obama's freewheeling spending spree and towards Rush Limbaugh and the leadership of the Republican Party.















I agree Bruce1Ace,
The White House got the ball rolling on making the claim the Rush is the defacto leader of the GOP... now... it is time for them to sit back and watch the GOP fall all over itself and simply go back to fixing all the damage done the last 29 years.
If the WH makes anymore official statements on this, it could come back and bite them... as long as GOP leadership keeps sucking up to El Rushbo... this will be a gift that will keep on giving.
This was a brillient move by Obama. If Rush thinks for one minute that he'll get the chance to debate Obama--he's more stupid than anyone imagined. But, in the meantime Rush keeps crying that Obama won't debate him--sounding like a spoiled child. Meanwhile, the Republicans fell for the bait, and are apologizing to Rush--making him king of the Republican party.
There couldn't be anything better for Democrats than to have Rush as the Republican's front man. After Rush is fully vetted as the boss, he'll burn easier than a firworks factory built of straw drentched in gasoline. And even if he doesn't, there's plenty of Republican's who despise this fat lump of excrament.
"There couldn't be anything better for Democrats than to have Rush as the Republican's front man."
Well, if we can't have Coulter, Savage, Levin, or Cunningham, I guess we can settle for Limbaugh. The others would be FAR more damaging, IMO - Maybe there's a Shadow GOP co-chair position open for them?
They claim that the pre-demonized Begala, Carville, Rahm Clintonite conspiracy cooked this whole thing up. How did we get Rep Gingrey (R-GA) to dis and then come crawling to Rush to lick his boots and beg forgiveness - on video, for all to see? How did they get Mark Sanford, SC GOP guv, to make an apology to Rush? Or, worst of all, Steele, newly-elected GOP Chairman - after an off-hand remark on DL Hughley's show (part of his "hip-hop outreach"?) - has spent the week apologizing and ceding party control to RUSH?
WOW, Begala & Carville have some STRONG MAGIC goig for them - glad they're on OUR side!
;o)
I agree in part that those lesser, more vile, right wingers you mentioned would be effective leaders to take down. However, they're almost too far over the edge to garner any real following the way Fatboy has. He has been effective taking their sight off of the real issues by throwing up smoke screens for years. He's the one they follow like sheep over a cliff. Any undoing is by his own hand (mouth). Take away his effectiveness and the rest will scatter like rats on a sinking ship.
I was just saying that those I mentioned above would be somewhat more vile figure to be the GOP's emblem. Notice I didn't mention Hannity - who's just about on a par with Limbaugh, with a somewhat diferent (more women, young) audience.
I'm FINE with them wearing Rush armbands, and deathly afraid of saying anything that's not flattering enough about Limbaugh, let alone disagree with or criticize him. I was just remembering when CPAC said they wouldn't have Coulter back, after the Edwards smear comment, but there she was, up there with their "luminaries" Newt, Huckleberry, Bolton...
;o)
Thing is sir, they are ignoring Rush. Obama mentions him once, and some questions are asked of the press sec of Limbaugh and some others, and somehow that's a coordinated effort on behalf of the White House and the "liberal" media to thrust Limbaugh into some sort of spotlight? Nah. I don't think, or believe that the White House spends any time at all thinking about Limbaugh, and if they do. STOP IT!
Right, and when Obama mentioned Rush, he had a reason: Rush had issued marching orders to the Repubs to vote against the stimulus, no matter what was in it. It was part of an effort that they hope would humiliate Obama and bring down his poll numbers, and - as blabbed by Pat Buchanan (I love his loose lips!) - they see a straight line to a 1994-style of GOP takeovers of both houses, and then the wgite house in 2012, IF the economy shows no signs of recovery. All of their efforts in modifying that bill - which they deny they had ANY input into - are aimed at MINIMIZING any stimulative effects, oh, and you gotta love the GOP "moderates" (but no less partisan) cutting Obama's signiture tax cuts for middle & working cless tax cuts by 20% - count the days until Limbaugh, Hannity, et al, blast Obama for breaking his campaign pledge to give $500 and $1,000 tax cuts to singles/families, but only delivered $400 & $800!
SO, Rush is a direct obstacle to any bi-partisanship, so we have made them wear him around their necks - sort of how they were calling us the "MoveOn.org Democrat Party." The "Limbaugh Republicans" has a nice ring to it, no?
As far as I know, the total Democratic participation was one mention by Obama, one throw-away line from Emanuel, and a couple of replies to questions by Gibbs. If you believe the (RW) Politico's article, Begala and/or Carville mentioned the results of their poll on Limbaugh - taken at the height of his "Operation Chaos" - to the Obama team, who would have been interested for election purposes. And, I LOVE how they say Rahm and Gibbs ATTACKED Rush - by calling him the head of the GOP?
Nope, the GOP and Rush did this to themselves. All the Democrats did was comment on their obvious relationship.
;o)
Bet you wish the White House would let up, let Limbaugh's idiocy fester in the dark minds of the lunatic right. Can't blame ya. Rush, like conservatism itself, is pathetic, bloated and addicted to control.
This Limbaugh is the GOP hook-up is a stroke of brilliance that should make Rove himself swell with pride. The Democrats have learned how to take the right's greatest strength, their media monopoly and it's head guy, and turn it into it's greatest weakness. And don't bet on this strategy being a liability for the left. Not until Republicans of every stripe reject Limbaugh publicly, without contrition or fear of retribution.
The spotlight is on the heart and soul of the Republican Party now. Too bad for you guys, too, because it's giving the non-partisans, the persuadable middle, a very good look at the true ideology of the right. You see, real conservatism doesn't play very well with most of the rest of the country.
The funniest aspect of all this is that, while all the electoral and political victories were rolling in for the right, things were hunkie-dorey with Rush: "He's just kidding, he wasn't serious; but he has a point," was the constant refrain. Now that the right are getting thumped, he's not so funny. In fact, he's an embarrassment.
Too bad righties. Take up some of that personal responsibility you're so quick to whip out (when it suits your case), acknowledge that the GOP is rife with idiots and kick Limbaugh and his horde of media zombie pals to the curb.
Foreclose on their defaulted contract with America.
Limbaugh is clearly getting more play in the media cable shows because the White House has engaged him. To say otherwise is just not credible.
That's just not true at all.
It wasn't Obama who had 1-hour plus coverage of Limbaugh's CPAC "speech." The media was pimping for the guy all week.
Then, when White House people get asked about the guy, the media goes nuts about why the Administration is talking about him !
Have they "engaged" him? I think answering the questions when they are asked is completely acceptable. Rush is not keeping the administration from getting anything done.
I think, politically, it is a masterstroke. Very few people, if any, in the media have the kind of negative approval numbers that Rush has. To make him the face of the Republican opposition is perfect. What is truly amazing, in my opinion, is that the Republicans continue to play along. Once again proving their lack of testicular fortitude to make the tough calls.
Who made Rush Limbaugh say he hoped Barack Obama failed as President?
Who made Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) apologize to Rush Limbaugh?
Who made Richard Steele say that Limbaugh was an entertertainer and that his show was incendiary and ugly?
Who made Steele apologize to Limbaugh?
Rahm Emanuel? Barack Obama? James Carville? Paul Begala?
Allow me to add another anecdote about Limbaugh, one which I have not seen reported but which did the trick for me in terms of concluding that Limbaugh is a truly reprehensible character beyond redemption. I listened to Limbaugh for years telling his listeners that liberals (Democrats) were intrinsically bad people, but one episode in particular just went way over the top. One day I heard Limbaugh tell his listeners that liberals (folks like you and me) were happy when tragic events like the Columbine massacre occurred...that we wanted events like that to occur, because it gave us arguments in favor of gun control. Can you imagine that? We want to see innocent teenagers die violent deaths (happy about it) just so we can argue for gun control? Limbaugh is a despicable piece of garbage who foments hatred. I wish more people saw that, too.
Irony
Limbaugh is a despicable piece of garbage who foments hatred. Iwish morepeople saw that ,to
I think that's why the W.H. has put him in the limelight, and I agree with Captainfostwe, we don't need to say anything else
I agree that from a strategic standpoint it is best to let Rush Limbaugh self-destruct...the Republican Party has already self-destructed and Rush Limbaugh only represents a faction that is on life support. However, please indulge me my rants about Limbaugh because I find him so personally offensive that it is difficult not to ventilate. I am not a religious person but I am of the belief that if there are places such as heaven and hell in a hereafter existence that a spot in the latter is reserved for Rush Limbaugh for the hateful, divisive insult to humanity that this man has propagated. In short, I'm not a big fan... ;>)
Maybe. Letting Republicans march in unison to Limbaugh's drumbeat may not be a great idea. Forcing them to take a stand on Limbaugh could put them in an uncomfortable position. If they criticize him, they probably have to retract what they say anyway (supporting the impression of Limbaugh as the leader of the party) or actually have to hope for Obama to succeed and come up with ideas of their own. If they embrace him, then they're taking on the burden of his past deeds and his unpopularity among the general population, as well as supporting the charge of being led by a radio personality.
Whether it's absolutely necessary or not is a good question, but strategically it seems fairly sound to me.
Having watched good Democrat after good Democrat go down to defeat because they would not respond to Republican attacks, I'm of the opinion that we keep the pressure on Limbaugh. Don't give he and the GOP an inch of space between them. And absolutely, under no uncertain terms, should Limbaugh, or the GOP, have the opportunity to control the narrative because they will lie through their teeth to gain advantage in the minds of the public.
Force them to divorce themselves or we will restart the vicious cycle of Republican domination.
Who made Rush Limbaugh say he hoped Barack Obama failed as President?
Who made Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) apologize to Rush Limbaugh?
Who made Richard Steele say that Limbaugh was an entertertainer and that his show was incendiary and ugly?
Who made Steele apologize to Limbaugh?
Rahm Emanuel? Barack Obama? James Carville? Paul Begala?
The White House hasn't done anything to put Limbaugh in the spotlight. Back in January, it was Limbaugh who courted the attention when he said he hoped Obama failed. Four days later, Obama told GOP leaders that if they wanted to work together with him, they needed to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh, prudent advice given what had just happened. The Republicans kept this in the news with everything you outlined, including Limbaugh telling CPAC again and at length about how he hopes Obama fails, and the fight with Steele at RNC. Emanuel, the lynchpin of this ludicrous right-wing conspiracy theory that the White House is behind all of this, didn't even raise the matter of Limbaugh himself--he was asked a question during an interview, by an interiewer who had already threw out Limbaugh's name. That's the full extent of the administration's "involvement" in any of this.
Did I say Rcihard Steele? Of course, I meant Michael Steele. Sorry...
For some silly reason, some on the right are trying to claim that Limbaugh walked back that terrible thing he said (that he hoped that Obama would fail) by qualifying it that he wanted Obama's policies and actions to fail.
How is that different? How is that better? Obama's policies are going to be implemented. If they fail, he fails. And the nation suffers.
It seems to me that Limpaugh and the republicans have made this a bigger deal than anyone on the Left. They won't shut up about it. It's comical.
Exactly. Obama just said Repubs need to do more than just listen to Rush. They have proven his point over and over. Repubs and their media allies then turned it into an endless soap opera.
The GOP love affair with Rush is far from a recent phenomenon. They know this yet choose to portray the Democrats as some sort of prime mover looking to elevate Rush to a position of GOP adoration he has enjoyed since the 1990s. It's just with nobody running the party that the mantle of leadership naturally falls to him. That and nobody in their right mind wants to be the leader of the sad remnants of what was the Republican Party.
Randy
so the chairman of the republican party has to back down before the great and mighty rush and declare [in spite of obviously saying the opposite]: "there was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership". and bobby jindal, chosen to give the republican answer to a nationwide address by obama, and considered a major candidate for 2012, calls rush: "a great leader for conservatives". so who exactly is pushing the idea of him as a leader. lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
lie down with dogs, get up with fleas.
Today's Republican party, a bunch of flea bitten reprobates and proud of it. Salute!
The Republican Party is in disarray. They are a non factor. All the moderate Republicans got beat by moderate Democrats and the more conservative ones are way outnumbered.
So everyone around here should be happy about that. The election is over and it was decisive. Republicans cannot recover if Democrats do a good job. That's the whole deal moving forward. Your agenda is basically unstoppable.
JJ ,O AMEN TO THAT.
There are many thoughtful, humane, and moderate Republicans. (I have to believe that, oh god.) Where are they, now that their party is so embarrassed by the crazed extremists who worship at Limbaugh's throne? If the decent members of the GOP do not step up to combat this plague, the party is going to pay dearly. It already has. Why, in heaven's name, would ANYBODY apologize to that awful creep?
How many republicans voted against Bush in 2004? That's roughly how many "thoughtful, moderate" republicans there are.
If I recall, Bush pledged to cut the deficit in half just ONE YEAR after inheriting a surplus. Any conservative who wanted to promote actual conservatism should have known what was up right there.
Remember what happened to Democrats who voted against Bush, actually, what is still being said about them. Don't support the troops. Love terrorists. Are communists. Wish for US failure (ironic that one isn't it?). And so on and so forth. The fact that republicans voted in line with their party, and their leader of their party (GW Bush), is not that surprising really. They had a majority in the House, and Senate, and a guy in the White House that did things the way that they wanted them done. What else were they to do actually? It totally and completely makes sense that they voted in line with what the President wanted at the time. Remember, there were a few that stepped out of line, and were quickly attacked because of it (Specter comes to mind, and Collins and Snowe also).
From now on all my friends are gonna be strangers.
I'm all through ever trusting anyone.
The only thing I can count on now is my fingers.
I was a fool believing in you and now you are gone.
That Merle Haggard song should be the new theme song of any thoughtful, humane and moderate Republicans. Yeah, there are probably some still out there. I know one or two. ;-)
I knew a few, too, and now they are gone. All they got left is their achy, breaky heart...
No they should not! This "Fool" spends his entire show lambasting Obama and it is important to point out every lie and insult that this "Fat College Drop-Out" spews! He is sooo stuck on himself that he really believes he has been sent here by "God" as he says on a daily basis! More like the Devil..though! Did you hear that tasteless remark about Ted Kennedy. As a private citizen, he can say those things without any penalty but if he ever ran for anything, he'd really find out how small his audience is in terms of SUPPORT!
Obama should have never mentioned Rush Limbaugh. I don't even like Rush Limbaugh because I think he only says what people want to hear. If it was more lucrative for him to be a liberal, I think he would switch in a "heartbeat". But Obama started this mess.
I'd like to see it documented how many times Obama or anyone from the current administration actually mentioned Limbaugh. Put in the context of not just the current administrations term, but the past year + that Rush and countless other right wing tv and radio mouthpieces have spent lying about and smearing Obama, it probably is pretty insignificant.
Rush, his imitators, and their defenders in the media are like the petty criminals who keep getting busted for the same crimes, and complaining that the cops shouldn't be wasting their time dealing with such trivial stuff.They know they do their business best with little scrutiny.
The positive publicity is fine, they can't get enough of that, it's just the occasional objective criticism that makes them panic.The mainstream media builds these clowns up, treating them as important commentators, and that's fine with the propaganda machine. As soon as the president or some "liberal" media source mocks them or points out their lies, they suddenly hate the spotlight.
Limbaugh loves his suckers and the millions of dollars they give to him. He loves being a household name, as long as there's no analysis about what he actually does, as long as he feels he's being taken seriously. It's only when he starts to get what he really deserves, ridicule, that he and his media pals start to complain.
So well said, thanks.
Problem is that conservatives feel the same way about Obama. They feel that everyone in the mainstream media is uncritical of Obama. There are plenty of examples that validate this concern.
And concern being your vocation, who knows better?
Problem is conservatives were beat the last two elections, and you barely held onto the presidency in 84. So who cares what a marginalized throwback movement to the 80's feels about Obama. Even David Frum says you need to change:http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279/page/1
yeah i saw frum on hardball last night......Rush will soon have him in his gunsights.
then why does the media or at least the loud biased part of the media(im talking fixed noise here) constantly and daily are crititcal of obama.
also what abou nearly every cable news network complaining about obama and earmark reform......and about the expiring tax cuts.
i think preisdent obama has recieved the most critical coverage of any president in our history.
But Obama started this mess.
Disagree... Obama only made a passing (private) remark to a Republican lawmaker that in order to accomplish what needs to be done they shouldn't be listening to Rush Limbaugh. The controversy that Rush Limbaugh started is an internecine one within his own party.
However what he said got out and that started the whole thing. He started it but not on purpose.
Well maybe the real issue isn't Rush Limbaugh or Obama but instead the media outlets that continue to make a big deal over Rush Limbaugh. Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats and Liberals need to be working together right now. Sometimes, it seems as if the mainstream media in this country wants us to fight on a constant basis. I would like to think we all agree on one thing: the economy needs help and we all want it to do better. We just have different opinions as to how that can happen.
Too funny. Conservatives are all about bi-partisanship now that they are solidly a regional minority Party.
Never mind the fact that Democrats are inviting Republicans to participate and the right are being petulant obstructionists, you are making a false equivalence. The Republican opinion on how to bend the trajectory of the economy upward is just more of the same old, same old Reaganomics that failed to bring broad prosperity to the U.S. in the first place.
No, Republicans are not making serious arguments or criticisms.
WALL ST IS THE NEW TAMMANY HALL, THERE PROBLEM IS THERE IS A NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE, WHAT THEY DID AND WHAT THERE DOING. ITS EITHER GOING TO BE PRESIDENT OBAMA OR THEM. LIMBAUGH IS THE SYMBOL OF THOSE WHO ARE ADAMENT THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL NOT SUCCEED.IMAGINE WHAT THEY LEFT OBAMA WITH .IMAGINE WHAT A DISGRACE THE OVERSIGHT WAS ON THESE FINANCIAL DEALINGS. LIMBAUGH IS FIGHTING TO PRESERVE THAT. PIGS GET FAT HUGS GET SLAUGHTERED. JOSEPH CAPRIO
Exactly. As I mentioned in a previous thread, this whole ordeal proves that the WH has the GOP and Con movement wrapped around their pinkies. All the WH had to do is merely mention Rushbo's name and the entire GOP and Con movement has imploded in a completge meltdown and hissy fit. Brilliant move. This is more proof of Obama's intelligence.
I'm glad that Rush is in the spotlight just so Stephen Colbert can roast him on a spit. If we could stick an apple in his mouth to complete the picture it would be perfect.
Damn straight. Colbert roasted him magnificently on Thursday night's show. It was hilarious.
I agree with nearly every comment here. But what I wanted to propose is a solution of sorts. Referencing the article above, the real reason Rush is even a factor is because Reagan repealed the Fairness Doctine abolishing the need to present balanced viewpoints over public airwaves, I urge everyone to pressure their state representatives to reinstate the Fairness doctrine. It would crimp the hateful echo chamber of the RNC by muzzling somewhat the Rush's, Becks, Savages, Hannitys ad nauseum that are out there. Rush has said some reprehensible thing but so have these other clowns. When they get called for it they deny it as if no one tapes these programs! We Medai Matters subscribers see it every single day!
I have contacted my reps and Changegov.org to voice my opinion. I urge you to do the same. We will not be able to restore enough confidence in the public's eye as long as these attack dogs of the RNC can spin their web of lies and misinformation to a vast segment of the US. I have engaged in many debates with conservatives and I honestly believe that at the core of the problem is that most people who follow these clowns feel that they can't really be lying as much as they do because if they were someone would shut them down. After all these are public airwaves and everyone knows you can't outright lie on the air-right? LOL. It gets aggravated because as soon as one pundit gets a little tractionwith the smear du jour they all jump on board. The whole Rove strategy of "tell the Big Lie" because people just refuse to believe public personalities or even "entertainers" can say outright falsehoods.
I mean think about it. if these right wing spin meisters really thought their philosophy and platforms and policies were so unassailable they'd welcome the Dems or liberals to their programs so they could embarrass them on the air. But they rarely do. They know that regularly offering any dissenting or moderate opinions side by side with their venomous drivel would be disastrous for them.
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE!
Yes, we can!
Alex
I tend to agree (with Alex). I've been reading, listening and watching our media over the past 30 years and it has swung far right. The oft repeated phrase used by the right wing referring to "the liberal media" is laughable. The situation got much worse during Dubya's reign of terror. Handing Michael Powell the rens of the FCC was one way to help muzzle the little independent expression critical of the administration. Extending the rights of corporate giants to own and control ever larger sectors of the media market was another way of stifling free expression. It's time to revisit this issue. By what logic is a network fined several hundered thousand dollars for permitting the public a less-than-a-second glimpse of a nipple while no one is fined for spewing hours of hatred and lies over our air-waves?
Sorry. The fairness doctrine was crushed last week. There will be no fd and good thing, too. It's the wrong approach to cracking conservative media monopolies. The key to cracking conservative media monopolies is cracking conservative media monopolies. repeal Clinton's bs telecommunications act and make it impossible for two or three people to own 90% of all media outlets.
are you sire sun tzu didnt say that?