I like Kathleen Parker’s columns in general and it’s almost not fair to call her a Villager, but her latest column about how Obama made a mistake in taking on Rush Limbaugh is a perfect example of Villager thinking:
Never start a land war with Asia. Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel (or who owns the patent on the microchip). Never let rabble-rousers get under your skin — especially those whose popularity in some circles compares favorably with your own and whose earnings make bailed-out bank presidents envious.
While we’re at it, tread very carefully around the implication that conservatives cling to their talk-show hosts out of anger and frustration.
That may be true, but the backfire Obama felt in West Virginia was a gentle zephyr compared to the blowback that can be bellowed by El Rushbo.
One of the most cherished beliefs among Beltway insiders is that the massive talk radio audience swings elections…or something like that. Since all the Ditto Heads vote Republican anyway, Parker et al. can’t really believe that, can they? I think what they actually believe, in some form or another, is that if all the Rushbo Strike Force all send balls or silly putty or whatever to Obama, then Obama will have to surrender to the power of Greater Wingnuttia. Of course, Greater Wingnuttia only constitutes about 20% of the population, as Nate Silver points out:
Most fundamentally of all, the McCain campaign radically overestimated the importance of appealing to the base. House Republicans may be replicating their mistake. Self-described conservative Republicans represent only about 20 percent of the population. This base is not necessarily becoming smaller; it’s still alive and kicking. What is true, however, is that the (1) base has never been sufficient to form a winning electoral coalition, and (2) that there are fewer and fewer non-base (e.g. moderates, libertarian Republicans, Republican leaning-independents). As these moderates have fled the GOP, the party’s electoral fortunes have tanked. But simultaneously, they have had less and less influence on the Republican message.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
Parker not a Villager?
Put down the crack pipe.
She’s a media elite, conservative by choice, therefore, it’s her job to convince the masses that her ideology is better for their personal well being and the well being of the country.
TheHatOnMyCat
Loada crap. Limbaugh railed at Clinton for four years, and Clinton was reelected by a landslide AFTER Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster and all the rest of it.
Limbaugh is a fucking buffoon and does not have all the "power" the blatheratti say he has.
Zifnab
Ultimately, fighting with Rush is like wrestling a pig. You both get dirty and only the pig likes it. (see, I know truisms too!)
So the idea that Obama can go toe-to-toe with Limbaugh and win seems somewhat absurd. Limbaugh only earns more listeners (and more money) with this kind of exposure and he doesn’t have to worry about running for reelection so he has far more room to act like an asshole.
Ordinarily, Parker would be right. The Clintons tried to tackle Limbaugh with the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(tm) line, and it didn’t end particularly well for them.
So I can definitely see why Villagers balk at the idea of taking on the biggest of Talking Heads. He’s an ugly beast to conquer.
Media Browski
Day after day we treat GOP commentators inability to digest the impact of the past 8 years like it’s news. The only thing that’s news is the media’s inability to find commentators who aren’t stuck repeating the tropes of the previous decade.
Deborah
This has gotten quite comical. For one thing, the glitterati are vastly overstating things. Obama hasn’t challenged Rush to a series of debates in pubic fora; he mentioned him by name. Added a little goose to the Republicans’ own spokesmodel selection, letting it firm up in the national consciousness–when we look to see who speaks for the Republican party, even Republicans admit it’s Rush.
With this many people clutching their pearls and shrieking "Oh no to mention Rush’s name is to fall on his mighty sword!!!!" well, I think Obama must be onto something. (Still, not a bad idea to get that puppy soon. People can only inveigh against the White House chefs for so long.)
Fencedude
@Zifnab:
Its not about taking on Rush though, as has been stated many times in other threads about this. Its about hanging Rush around the neck of the Republican Congresscritters.
Scott H
And don’t mess with Mickey Mouse. Because he will shank you.
TheHatOnMyCat
No, Zifnab, you are wrong. Limbaugh’s legacy is the Dem sweep of 2008.
Do you really think that after the last few years people are suddenly going to go, "Oh wait, Rush was right all along. Yeah, that’s it!"
Jesus, man.
BFR
Yeah, but the idea is not to defeat Rush’s policy points per se, it’s to establish the notion that Rush speaks for the GOP.
In the short-term, it’s probably not a great strategy because it elevates an opposing view/opponent and all that but there are lots of other battles to be fought.
brantl
Obama isn’t going to go toe-to-toe with Limbaugh (you’d have to have size 50 feet to go toe-to-toe with Limbaugh, even if you’re as skinny as Obama is), he mentioned the pilonidyl cyst once, for chrissakes. He’s going to leave Rush choking on his dust. Which reminds me of a joke: What’s the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenburg? One’s a nazi, flaming, overinflated gasbag and the other is just a blimp! Using your pig analogy, Obama just said, "See that in the sty over there? Some people think that’s a political analyst, but I have to point out that it’s just a pig."
Laertes
I was surprised when a few days ago Obama name-checked Limbaugh. That only raises Limbaugh’s stature. And sure enough, then followed a cheeky WSJ op-ed from Rush. It’s embarrassing that the guy thinks he’s Obama’s debate partner…
And now, of course, it’s clear what was going on. In the campaign, Obama dressed McCain up in a Bush costume. Now, by name-checking Limbaugh, and getting exactly the reaction he surely knew he’d get, he’s helped Limbaugh reassert himself as the face of the GOP.
As the deeply unpopular face of the GOP.
And Limbaugh can be counted on to play along. Limbaugh as the voice of the GOP is bad for the GOP, but it’s very good for Limbaugh personally, and we can count on him to put self ahead of party.
Best part is: Obama’s fingerprints aren’t anywhere near the knife.
amorphous
Only? One in five is a shit ton of wingnuts.
Incertus
I think these people are still partying like it’s 1994. That’s when Limbaugh really got his rep, after all. Newt Gingrich was crowing about how Limbaugh had mobilized all these people to put Republicans in power and so on. Couldn’t have had anything to do with a generational shift, with the fact that the Dems had gotten lazy or corrupt–no, it was all Rush and the new conservatism.
But you know the villagers–they get a thought in their heads and it doesn’t make way for a new one.
TTT
Obama is smarter than Rush, better at communicating ideas, has a bigger audience, and is much more popular. There’s one person involved in this fight who shouldn’t want to be there, and it’s NOT Obama.
How did that ‘Operation Chaos’ thing work out for the Republicans, anyway? Or ‘playing to the base’? Obama’s like the Matrix Architect predicting all their failures because he’s beaten them before and they don’t even remember.
KCinDC
Zifnab, it’s quite possible for both Obama and Limbaugh to win. Hell, Limbaugh was no doubt secretly delighted that Obama won the election, since his audience will be larger than it would have been under a McCain presidency. The point is that the congressional Republicans lose by being forced to bind themselves tightly to Limbaugh. They need to play to a broader audience than he does — an audience that includes a substantial number of people who are disgusted by the guy, and become more disgusted every time he spews out a new bit of bigoted ignorance.
dm
Democrats probably owe their narrow 2006 majority in the Senate to Rush Limbaugh. His offensive on-air parody of Michael Fox’s Parkinson’s disease probably won the election for Democratic candidate (and stem-cell research supporter) Claire McCaskill.
Echoing a number of others above, I’d be reluctant to second-guess Obama at anything political. I expect he sees the GOP tying themselves to Rush Limbaugh’s boorishness as a gift. Why get yourself covered in muck wrestling with a pig when you can get your opponent to crawl into the sty and embrace it?
mary coogam
I’m not sure if Rush really believes the bile he spits out every day but I do know that he makes a lot of money doing it. Why should he change? Let the R. follow his lead, let them "play to their base." With every word of hate, with every illogical argument those who think that R. should be negotiated with will diminish and fall away.
The Republican agenda has failed. After twenty years of listening to hateful lies and illogical platforms it is time for the "base" to fold.
As for bowing to Rush, the few who are left have to bow or their voters (obviously as base as they can get) will throw them out and find another knuckle dragger to take his place.
mary coogam
I’m not sure if Rush really believes the bile he spits out every day but I do know that he makes a lot of money doing it. Why should he change? Let the R. follow his lead, let them "play to their base." With every word of hate, with every illogical argument those who think that R. should be negotiated with will diminish and fall away.
The Republican agenda has failed. After twenty years of listening to hateful lies and illogical platforms it is time for the "base" to fold.
As for bowing to Rush, the few who are left have to bow or their voters (obviously as base as they can get) will throw them out and find another knuckle dragger to take his place.
BFR
Right – that’s the key point. Technically speaking, Obama and Cantor (for example) both share the same goal, they want to get re-elected.
It’s important not to lose sight of the fact that Obama’s goal isn’t to revitalize the economy or build the green infrastructure, etc. He’s a politician, therefore his primary goal is getting re-elected in 2012.
Elevating Rush probably hurts from a pure policy standpoint but I’d assume this has more to do with the 2010 mid-terms and beyond than an individual policy question.
TheHatOnMyCat
Not really. And the size of the wingnut slice hasn’t changed much in decades. It’s the same slice we used to call the "Jesus freaks" years ago. The people who show up at Gettysburg and weep in front of the Robert E. Lee statue.
The folks who put "My God is an Awesome God" stickers on their cars.
The thing is, the size of the slice is not growing. And if you look at the NYT map of GOP shift in the recent election, you will see how marginalized that base has become.
Darius
Precisely. And it’s working magnificently.
That’s the Village for you – always about 15 years behind the times.
Media Browski
@Zifnab: Speaking of people who missed the implications of the past 8 years . . .
@amorphous: Are those metric shit-tons?
Keith
I’m somewhat amused by this notion that Obama’s single mention of Limbaugh in a closed-door meeting somehow equates to Obama going to war with Limbaugh. Fox n Friends was the best – they kept wondering aloud the wisdom of Obama spending his time fighting with Rush instead of fighting with terrorists and the economy – but it still amazes me that the meme is that Obama’s in some ongoing verbal battle with Rush.
sgwhiteinfla
Here is the other problem with the "base" only making up 20% of the population. They aren’t scattered all over the country in different states. Their number might make up 20% of the population but if thats concentrated in a few southern states like Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina then it really has no bearing on any national race and would only affect those Congresspersons from those particular states. The Republicans in Congress that hail from more moderate states are going to learn the perils of going along with their wingnut bretheren from the deep South. You would think it was pretty evident by the last two election seasons but some people never learn.
On another topic I hope at some point the Dems get enough Senators where we can drop Ben Nelson like a bad habit. Whats the use of saying he is a Dem when he votes Republican?
jake 4 that 1
Shorter KP: "Ooo! Fight! Fight!"
Snore.
Echoes without Bunnies or Men
Count me as one who thinks it was a subtle, yet brilliant move by Obama to bring the bloated pigfucker into the picture.
Now the GOP is saddled with Rush, and from what we’ve seen last week, they are all to happy and proud to lick his fat ass as often as he wants them to.
Rush=GOP, GOP=Rush. There’s no difference from what the impotent windbag says, and what the leading GOP senators say. Hell, he’s even penning op-eds on the economy! As if Rush is some sort of expert on economics? How pitifully sad it is for the GOP to have this failed pillhead as their spokesperson. Are they really that bankrupt for leadership?
And Limpballs does NOT have 20 million listeners, not even 15. I’d say 5-7 at most, because Arbitron ratings are so fucking skewed and slanted they cannot be relied on as an accurate gauge of individual listeners.
Shawn in ShowMe
"I’m holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers an article from that turncoat Kathleen Parker. Seems like she’s got second thoughts about hopping on the Obama bandgwagon.
She says that the Messiah has made a big mistake in taking on yours truly, referring to me as rabble rouser. So I guess that makes you rabble, huh folks? And this lady called herself a conservative!
Back to my main point, she warns Obama to tone down the rhetoric if he’s going to go mano a mano with yours truly. If he can’t even stand an honest debate with me, how’s he supposed to stare down Putin? Already the cracks in this administration are starting to show. We’ve got them on the run, my friends! Back after a break!"
Punchy
Does Limbaugh have any kids? I mean, besides the ones he purchases in the Dominican?
/yes, expecting others to wiki for me
aimai
BFR,
Can you explain to me how you think Obama reminding the Republicans that governing is different from yelling at the radio is hurting him in terms of policy *right now?* Its become very clear that between elections, in their currently crippled format, the Republicans can’t win either the publicity sweepstakes or the policy sweepstakes by listening to Rush. If they’d listened to obama’s caution he would have gotten them to vote with him (bad for Rush’s side of the party which only gains when Republicans win elections or Rush wins listeners) and if they react into a "flight backwards" and fall into defending Rush’s policy perspectives they tie themselves to the portion of the electorate that is least able to govern and probably least able to organize a successful election strategy at either the local or the national level. To paraphrase I forget whom "How many battalions does Rush command?" The answer to that is "less than 28 percent" of the voting population.
aimai
TheHatOnMyCat
The first map here is the one I referred to earlier.
It’s a picture of Limbaugh’s effect on the electorate.
That thin red streak through the Bible Belt? That’s it.
Tom Hilton
To paraphrase JamFan from the other thread, it didn’t elevate Limbaugh’s stature; it diminished the the congressional Republicans’ stature.
sgwhiteinfla
Here is the funny part, watching the talking heads running around with their hair on fire and the print journos pumping out their bullshit, you would think that President Obama had a State of the Union address where he devoted 45 minutes to talking about Rushbo’s fat ass. Did I miss something or didn’t President Obama just mention him all of once in a closed door meeting? And not even directly but to cast aspersions on the Rethugs?
Thats power when you can mention a guy once and then he gets face time for over a week. But the same kind of power that can bring him up can also smack him down and there is no doubt about that.
BFR
Sure – because the GOP has enough votes to alter the outcome of the stimulus bill and make it less effective. The changes made to woo Republicans in the House isn’t likely to be the only time where this plays out.
Folks like Limbaugh can affect public opinion enough to at least partly control not only the votes of Republican congresspeople but also conservative Democrats as well.
So, when you amplify Limbaugh, you amplify his ability to influence those on the fence – be they left leaning GOPers or right leaning Democrats.
John Cole
@TheHatOnMyCat: Jesus those people are thick at Newsbusters. He is whinging about the color of the map, but not even understanding what the legend means. In that map, the shades of blue indicated whether or not the district voted more Democratic in 2008 than it did in 2004. It does not mean, as that jackass believes, that it went to the Democrats.
timb
Punchy — no. He’s impotent
Speaking of impotence, KP is dead wrong. This is a man representing a "movement" within the Republican Party who couldn’t even defeat JOHN MCCAIN for the Republican nomination. They all hated McCain in the primaries (anyone remember how Laura Ingraham embarrassed herself at the stupid conservative convention by introducing Romney as the "only conservative"? as a shot at McCain and roughly 32 seconds before Romney withdrew and endorsed McCain?), yet they couldn’t even turn their own party around!
Kathleen’s problem is that like most half-wits in the media, she only remembers success and forgets failure. Limbaugh’s "success" was 15 years ago; his failure was ten months ago. Yet, she can’t remember it.
Zandar
If Limbaugh gets called out for being virtually powerless, what does that make the Village Idiots?
Gwendy
Remember how Rush and Hannity railed against McCain in the primaries? They can’t even drive the debate within the GOP anymore, except for the radical right that constitutes the hugely diminished House Republicans and of course, the Villagers.
timb
Gwendy, first!
The Grand Panjandrum
If the Republicans want to kiss Rush fat, wrinkled ass let them. I don’t care how many listeners he has, most of the people would NEVER vote for a Democrat and damn sure won’t vote for Barack Hussein Obama. If the Republican Congressional caucus wants the Limbaugh anchor around their necks, I say let them all drown with Mr. Limbaugh. Rush is being bated and he will say something so completely stupid and offensive it will make his Michael J. Fox shenanigans look like good natured ribbing. The guy will cross the line because it’s in his nature,
The skinny black guy with the funny name and big ears is taking these chumps to the hoop so he can dunk on them. Chicago-style.
DougJ
@Zifnab
That’s actually part of the idea. Rush gets more listeners, Democrats get to make Republicans look like the party of Rush, and Republicans…look like the party of Rush. Everyone wins except the Republican party.
It’s not about silencing Rush. The more the guy talks the more he hurts Republicans. Give him a few more stations.
Tony J
I read Parker’s Op-Ed earlier today, and like the earlier barf from Cohen on how Americans collectively pre-excused torture by rallying around George Bush in 2001, most of the reason I bothered was to see how weak an argument they’d make. In neither case did they disappoint.
I particularly like the way she claims that Rush was right to say that everyone is making too much of Obama’s historical uniqueness as the first biracial President (because that’s all he was trying to say – natch), and only "simply mistaken" in naming this as the reason Americans want him to succeed.
There are simply too many contortions in just that example of brain-death for me to continue.
+6, and counting.
KCinDC
@BFR:
I think the conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans need to worry more about the people in the middle than about the Limbaugh fanatics. And the people in the middle are the ones being further alienated from the Republican Party when it falls into Limbaugh worship.
When the Republicans in general are falling over themselves to embrace Limbaugh, do you really think that makes it more likely that Olympia Snowe or Arlen Specter (now that he’s not worried about Toomey) or even Judd Gregg are going to vote with the Republicans, when they’re going to be facing an electorate that went overwhelmingly for Obama?
BFR
We’ll see about that. They’re clearly going to hammer on the message that McCain was a lousy choice and that they were proven right & that next time, Republicans would do well to listen to their consel.
Ed in NJ
It’s really amazing to watch this unfold. Obama has hung Limbaugh around the necks of every Republican, and they can’t do a think about it. Look what happened to Gingrey. He wasn’t even allowed to rebuke Rush’s criticism of McConnell and Boehner without incurring the wrath of the dittoheads. Had to king the ring of the mighty Rushbo and now he’s politically weakened.
Think about it. The Republicans are stuck with the 20% who faithfully ascribe to whatever idiocy Limbaugh is spewing today, and have no way of attracting new voters without pissiing off their current constituency. It’s a beautiful zero sum game that Obama has masterfully goaded them into.
NonyNony
@DougJ:
DING! And the beauty of it is – it works because Rush gets his way. The more Rush gets his way, the more the Republicans look like backwards-looking troglodytes, the more disturbing they look to the citizenry as a whole, and the more Rush tries to push them even further. Because his schtick doesn’t work unless he’s outraged.
The Republicans end up with two options – follow Rush off a cliff and have their asses handed to them again in 2010, or back away from Rush, lose the wingnuts and start catering to the center of the country again. Either of those ends up being a win for Obama (in fact, I’d bet he would consider the latter more of a win than the former, because he wouldn’t have to wait to 2010 to have people to work with him).
The problem with the GOP right now isn’t that they’re an opposition party – opposition parties are good for democratic debate. The problem is that they’re a particularly noxious form of opposition that just reflexively opposes without considering what’s good for the people they’re supposed to be representing. One way or another, that has to change. And I personally think the strategy of wrapping Limbaugh around they’re necks like a rotting chicken has a lot of merit to it. (And it has the delicious irony of being the same thing that the wingnuts have done to Democrats for years with more spurious connections – as anyone who recalls the "party of Jane Fonda" crap can see. At least Fonda was never getting the Dem leadership to kiss her ass the way Limbaugh always manages).
Shawn in ShowMe
@BFR
Sure – because the GOP has enough votes to alter the outcome of the stimulus bill and make it less effective.
No, they don’t. The bill already passed the House to the Senate, even without GOP support. And Repub Senators in blue states don’t have the luxury of fiddling while Rome burns, unlike their House counterparts with very narrow constituencies.
If anything the bill will be more effective because there’s no longer a need to include the concessions intended to pacify the House GOPers.
PaminBB
Parker is still smarting from the all-out attack on her by the wingers when she dissed their prom queen Sarah. So she’s the last one to go after Rushbo.
Jon H
@BFR: "The changes made to woo Republicans in the House isn’t likely to be the only time where this plays out."
I wouldn’t be surprised if the Dems walk that back a bit while reconciling the House and Senate versions.
BFR
Well, I think the hope (from Obama that is) would be that Specter/Snowe/Gregg DO spend more time listening to Rush & voting the party line because they’re still afraid of primary challenges.
It’s not totally unreasonable – not that many people vote in primaries and with the overall size of the GOP in decline, real right-wingers are going to have even more say.
It may make for grim electoral prospects but you can’t win in the general if you can’t get past the primary after all.
Comrade Jake
I think people forget that Rush was one of Sarah Palin’s bigger champions.
That VP selection really hurt Obama, didn’t it?
Barbar
Heh. Indeed.
BFR
@Shawn in ShowMe
Theoretically, sure but I’d be surprised if the concessions were removed. They’re probably fairly popular with conservative Democrats who Obama would rather keep around.
That and they give him the opportunity to hit on the message that he’s trying to cooperate with the opposition, which the administration seems to think is important.
KCinDC
Why would he want that? Because he hopes to defeat them in 2010? He needs them to get things passed now, which is why making identifying with the Republican Party less palatable to them is a good thing.
Jon H
@sgwhiteinfla: "Did I miss something or didn’t President Obama just mention him all of once in a closed door meeting? And not even directly but to cast aspersions on the Rethugs?"
Exactly, Obama didn’t act like a victim, he wasn’t even responding to Rush. He was just advising the GOP that Rush’s nonsense rhetoric – about anything – is not a sound basis for policymaking.
Obama’s tone suggested that he really didn’t care what Rush said, beyond the fact that it is likely to make compromise difficult and lead to poor national policy.
It was a bit like a doctor advising his patient not to rely on kooky magnetic bracelets to avoid the flu.
Jon H
@BFR: "Theoretically, sure but I’d be surprised if the concessions were removed. They’re probably fairly popular with conservative Democrats who Obama would rather keep around."
True. But they also provide an incentive for Senate GOP to not be obstructive, lest they lose the parts of the bill that they like.
that colored fella
Me thinks you can dismiss Parker’s missive as a suck up to the Wingnut base for dissin’ Sarah Palin as not ready for POTUS. It’s a piling on to kiss Rush’s larded behind, which is easier for Parker to do than to float a theory as to why Obama elevated Rush to leader of the Villagers.
gnomedad
ZOMG, Obama just lost the racist asshole vote!
Darius
Let’s see…
Obama – 66% Approval, 17% Disapproval
Limbaugh – 23% Favorable, 51% Unfavorable
Why should Obama be afraid of Rush again?
Shawn in ShowMe
So BFR, let me get this straight:
1. Hanging Rush around the GOP’s neck is bad for Obama because increasing Rush’s profile will swing likely Obama voters to the GOP.
2. Obama isn’t really interested in rebuilding the infrastructure or building a green economy. He just said those things to get elected.
3. It would be in Obama’s best interests if GOP moderates voted with their party.
Huh?
Xenos
@Tom Hilton: Exactly. Limbaugh wins, Obama wins, GOP loses, and loses, and loses. Or looses. Also.
Which is to say, like the proverbial prehistoric butterfly, Obama gently nudges the time-stream to make Palin a lock for the nomination.
TheHatOnMyCat
@John Cole:
That is correct, it shows trend, not outcome.
Tony J
You know, it’s also kind of funny that after years of seeing more or less everyone on BJ – including myself – complain that the problem with the Democratic Party was the perpetual unwillingness of its leadership to recognise that they could actually win elections by rejecting the crap spewed by Limburgh and Co, instead of turning off potential voters by trying to appease them, we’ve now got a sort of debate over whether it’s a good thing that it’s actually happening.
Behold your works and tremble, Balloon Juicers. Your dreams have come true.
geg6
@BFR:
As a PA resident who has never NOT voted for Arlen Specter, let me reassure you that there is no real primary challenger coming from the wingnut side of the GOP to challenge him. They already know they are in deep, deep trouble here in the Keystone State and, in order to have a snowball’s chance in hell of holding that Senate seat, they couldn’t send flaming nutcase Pat Toomey up against him because Toomey would win a GOP primary and promptly go down in flames in the general because he’s a freaking lunatic who scares little children just by looking at them.
In fact, I am going to spend the next two years sending emails to Specter’s office telling him that I’m watching him like a hawk. And every time he spews some idiocy like he did today (telling Obama he needs to re-submit some Shrub judicial appointments to show his bi-partisanshipiness), he’s gonna get another one…from me and from my Election 2008 circle which is still intact and active…telling him that we don’t like it. We’re gonna keep him twisting and writhing and dancing until we finally vote his wuss ass out, all the while laughing at what a sucker he is.
BFR
1. No, it would be very good for Obama in the long term but it probably has negative policy implications for the short term because it limits the number of votes he’ll get on some legislation.
2. I don’t know what he thinks but he’s a politician, not a saint. I’m sure he said a lot of things he doesn’t really believe.
3. Yes, because it makes the GOP look really bad. I live in a fairly blue district with a GOP congressman. I’m sure he’d rather have Rush go away right now but isn’t sure what the consequences are for crossing him (in terms of primary challenges, fundraising etc). The more he votes the GOP line, the harder it’s going to be for him to continue to position himself as a moderate.
brian griffin
Rep. Gingrey has already demonstrated exactly what predicament this puts GOP house members in.
Rush will be sure to slam any Repub that disagrees with him. Columns like this, that build him up, could encourage him to go further, to slam any Repub that simpy doesn’t agree with him loud enough. His own ego will help keep this going.
So they’re either going to look like Rush’s patsies, or he’ll eviscerate them with their own base. Beautiful.
BFR
I’ve got to suspect that’s sort of the endgame here. The goal is to get a Palin/Joe the Plumber ticket lined up for 2012 and I don’t think you can do that without trying to catapult the wingnuts.
Also, it wouldn’t surprise me if Obama does a little dog-whistling now and then – stuff that most people don’t really notice much but drives the wingnuts up the wall.
Stuff like giving your first TV interview to an Arab news network for example.
DougJ
@BFR
And that’s why they’re afraid to take Rush on. Though I don’t think Rush makes any difference in a Senate race. But if you’re in the House and you’re a Republican, you might be well-advised to keep kissing Rush’s ass.
gwangung
Then Rush and the Republicans are TOTALLY irrelevant to this, then. Those conservative Democrats aren’t really a portion of the Rush base.
Mike from DC
I asked a question yesterday that reflected this sort of thinking. I think the flaw in my thinking then was that I didn’t take into account that Limbaugh was already as prominent as he could be. So, it’s not like people started turning into his program because they want to know just who this "Rush Limbaugh" character that Obama doesn’t like. He’s already pissed off the moderates and liberals, and the right wingers already love him, so the battlelines are already drawn and set.
So Obama’s comment gave Limbaugh a little boost to his already enormous ego, and nothing else.
In return, Obama got:
1) the republicans to act in a partisan manner. (by voting in a bloc against the stimulus). This makes his behavior, in comparison, as conciliatory and compromising. (remember, he didn’t just have that family planning provision struck from the bill, he did it in a very public manner, and it was reported by tons of media, demonstrating his willingness to deal)
2) enough republicans to publicly identify Limbaugh as their spokesman, which will drive even more moderates from the republican party.
Now, as a liberal, I’m deathly afraid that the dems will snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory (old habits die hard), but I’m also hopeful that they’ll do ok. (I’ve slowly been gaining trust in Obama’s political instincts. It’s hard, since I can still remember the late 70s and 80s, when the democratic party couldn’t effectively put together a pizza order much less an effective political opposition plan.)
mellowjohn
and to paraphrase vizzini (just in case no one else has done it): "never go in against rush limbaugh when stupidity is on the line."
Maus
Can’t we just call Limbaugh and the GOP’s bluff already?
We’ve had enough of progressives being portrayed as "running scared" as a media myth. Hell, we’ve had enough marginalization by our own politicians.
It’s time that the long-running fictional narratives of American sentiment are shattered.
Persia
You know, sometimes in these comments I really can’t tell who’s being satirical and who’s being sincere. Then I remember that I know most of the Republican pundits are sincere and I get a little frightened.
JoyceH
Every day I become more and more awed by Obama. The man is a political mastermind. I’m not kidding. This was sheer genius.
ONE sentence, that’s all he had to do. That, and the Republicans’ reaction to it has tied the GOP to Rush Limbaugh closer than Siamese twins. Now HIS outrages are THEIR outrages. HIS bigotry is THEIR bigotry. He is in fact if not in name the leader of the Republican Party.
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again – Obama doesn’t defeat his opponents. He gives them the opportunity to defeat themselves.
And he just did it again. To the entire Republican Party – and they don’t even know it.
Five hundred years from now, students of politics and policy will say if you mention the name, "Machiavelli WHO?"
They’ll all be studying Obama.
Chris Andersen
Parker’s read on this is worst than you realize. Yes, she is mistaken in thinking that the 20% who are devoted to Rush can "swing" an election. But along with that comes 20% of the voters who are so turned off by Rush that his association with any candidate will swing THEM away from that candidate.
terry chay
@sgwhiteinfla: Actually, it’s not in certain states, it’s in certain regions—rural. Also, even in those regions it’s mostly in retreat after you balance for education and culture. Most people (a la @TheHatOnMyCat pointing to the NYT map) think that this is the bible belt. I tend it to look at the parts of Appalachia that are least educated.
In any case, it’s the low information voter. That’s fine as long as FOX News and Limbaugh’s ratings are high and as long as those numbers are reflective. But just like you have a “broken windows” for crime, you have a similar nonlinear relationship for politics.
This crack doesn’t seem a problem if you’re in rural america and everyone disagrees with you. But then you get the Colbert Report and suddenly you start thinking you’re not going insane anymore and that split widens.
Chuck Butcher
Mastermind?
Oh for pete’s sake labeling has worked for the Republicans for decades. That’s not a put down of Obama, it is smart politics, but he’s not inventing the wheel here.
Damn people, politics of some form has been practiced longer than writing and there isn’ t much new in the game, variations on themes and technology are there but that doesn’t make something like labeling astonishing. It was a masterful play, no doubt, and he is very very good but that is something different. Obama’s oratorical abilities may put him in some pretty select company, but he’s not unique. Weaving populism, liberalism, and pragmatism together is not unique, no matter how well he does it.
Hell yes, as a one time candidate I’m envious of his skill set and abilities. But as an activist I have to know what tools exist and when I can piggyback off a master practitioner like Obama. That is a different thing.
You don’t have to have a poli-sci degree to know what is in the tool kit and to use it. You do have to have paid attention and to have absorbed some of the information historically available. If you want to be heard and to have an effect then you need to be effective and that means knowing how – not creating mythologies about a player or a play.
This doesn’t even begin to cover the piece of doing textbook stupidity in the face of not knowing the voters. Obama has largely avoided such a thing and you may have noticed that the McCain campaign repeatedly stepped into it.
Jeffro
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again – Obama doesn’t defeat his opponents. He gives them the opportunity to defeat themselves.
Loving this!
Maus
We can only hope that GOP egos eventually rise up over the fear of crossing Limbaugh now that it’s been exposed.
Hannity doesn’t have the charisma, Beck and his rapture-ready bomb iran speeches are still too "reasonable" for mainstream America. As Rush fans all die off due to old age, I could see Beck getting a greater market share.
Mnemosyne
Even better, get him on TV outside of Fox News. Have Katie Couric give him five minutes to do his rant on the CBS evening news. Put him back on Monday Night Football.
Every time Rush has been exposed to a larger audience — every single time — it’s been a disaster of epic proportions and he’s had to run back to radio with his tail between his legs. The man couldn’t even handle being heckled by David Letterman’s audience.
Raphael
"Never start a land war with Asia"? I thought there were only people who think Africa is a country.