Conn Carroll, quoting an Ann Althouse quip fed through the Instapundit filter, should know that two wrongs don’t make a, um, Next Right:
The White House, the DNC, and Americans United for Change are all apparently about to double down on their "Republicans equal Limbaugh" strategy. My thoughts on this are summed up by a comment on Ann Althouse’s blog highlight by Instapundit: "Does anyone really think Team Obama’s focus on Limbaugh reflects their success so far in office."
This should be the only talking point when conservative surrogates are brought on TV to talk about this compleltely [sic] fake controversy: The only reason the Obama White House is attacking Rush Limbaugh is because Obama already has been a complete failure in office. Since his election in November the market has lost 25% of its value and every single one of his policy announcements has only been followed by hundreds of thousands of more lost jobs.
Obama, the Democrats, and the left desperately want to change the subject from Obama’s performance. That is why they are investing time, resources, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in demonizing Rush. How does any of this help the American people?
Representative John Boehner (Rushlickin’ – OH) seems to be reading off of the same fax (via Benen):
[I]n a carefully calculated campaign, operatives and allies of the Obama administration are seeking to divert attention toward radio host Rush Limbaugh, and away from a debate about our alternative solutions on the economy and the irresponsible spending binge they are presiding over. This diversionary tactic will not create a single job or help a single family struggling in today’s economic crisis. And that is where our focus should be.
“Calculated campaign?” “Operatives and allies?” Puh-leez! The most calculated, orchestrated part of this whole hullabaloo is the daily gust of ill wind blowing from the blowhard himself—and Rush is going to ride the breeze for as long as he can.
The establishment media, never one to turn down an easy story controversy slap fight might be focused on Limbaugh—they are the ones that have asked questions of Gibbs, Emanuel, etc., after all—but "Team" Obama seems focused on fixing the fucking the disaster left to them by "Team" Bush-Cheney. The Recovery Act, the budget fixes—hell, the whole damn budget—today’s healthcare summit, Clinton’s Mideast initiative, the initiative to cut military waste, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, this week’s release of the OLC memos. . . that’s what the White House is focusing on.
Where is the Republican "loyal" opposition focusing? They are busy fearmongering about "socialism," saying "no" without proposing any implementable alternatives, and seeing who can kiss Rush’s butt closest to his anus.
And how’s that workin’ for ya’? As the latest NBC/WSJ poll will tell you, not very well:
President Obama’s favorability rating is at an all-time high. Two-thirds feel hopeful about his leadership and six in 10 approve of the job he’s doing in the White House.
. . . .
By comparison, the Republican Party — which resisted Obama’s recently passed stimulus plan and has criticized the spending in his budget — finds its favorability at an all-time low. It also receives most of the blame for the current partisanship in Washington and trails the Democrats by nearly 30 percentage points on the question of which party could best lead the nation out of recession.
Which goes straight to bolstering an observation made today by Steve Benen:
I don’t think Boehner fully appreciates the point of "diversionary tactics." As the Minority Leader sees it, Democrats don’t want to talk about their economic policies, so they’re talking about Limbaugh.
But here’s the follow-up question: why would Democrats be reluctant to talk about their economic policies? Americans like the Democrats’ economic policies. The policies make sense, especially when compared to Republican rhetoric about spending freezes, tax cuts, deficit reduction, and a balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Put it this way: with Democrats enjoying a huge advantage on economic policy in the midst of an economic crisis, and with the GOP’s economic agenda coming straight out of the Hoover playbook, what possible incentive does the majority party have in mulling "diversionary tactics"? Why engage in a "change-the-subject campaign" when your side is winning the most important economic debate in generations?
Not that this White House hasn’t demonstrated an ability to walk and chew gum at the same time—so, when asked about the rush to Rush, most on the Democratic side of the aisle seem to have an idea of just how toxic this “leadership” fight is for the Party of No.
As for that party, since the Republicans are not in the governing business, but, as Boehner confessed in January, are instead “in the communications business,” then I guess it makes sense to worship a guy whose driving force/life purpose/raison d’etre is to drive up his own Arbitron ratings.
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Repuplicans can’t answer the question “Who’s your daddy?”
Wait til Lush comes out with his new book paying homage to their savior Ayn Rand. It’s call “Fatass Drugged.”
It’ll be so popular after this that we’ll be sorry for crossing the Mighty LimpOne. Now where’s my OxyC?
hehe.. I just got an email blast blaming San Diego’s (sorta Republican) Mayor for the citywide decline in property values, so I suppose its only fair to blame Obama’s “performance” for the Bush Depression. uh… wait a minute.. who the frack are these idiots and is anyone actually buying their crap.
It’s not working, even a Faux news poll shows the country in favor of Obama when compared to Reagan. Yet, the R’s insist on kissing his headstone and Rush’s ass.
Thanks Gregg
and LOLOL on the St Rush of CPAC pic
have any dems commented on rush in the past 2 days? or is it all MSM and Reps with the Dems standing to one side?
The Republicans proved that they were incapable of governing. The Democrats earned a chance to prove they can govern. Game over. No one is forgetting who got us into this mess or how quickly they can still make money disappear.
Republic spin seems to say that the ONLY thing going on inside the WH is the “Get Rush” campaign. Of course, that’s not true, but it’s all the Republics have.
Can they really believe that more than a small, wingnut minority will believe that they would cooperate with Obama if he would just stop being mean to Rush? One thing it does prove is that Rush is their real leader.
It’s really quite sad…
The right can’t run away from Rush – his gravitational pull is too strong!
*spew*
Let me understand this: Rush Limpballs starts proclaiming that he hopes Obama fails. (Antiamerican statement) The WH responds and this is all a WH plot. This is beginning to sound like a Flip Wilson script. The devil made me do it.
you’re welcome–but I owe twolf a major cocktail for his fine iconography.
But wait! The ever more arch-conservative St. Paul Pioneer Press printed the following editorial today:
Summary: Criticism of Rush Limbaugh is not deserved. Republicans are just a bunch of wild and crazy kids. The Democrats did it, whatever it was.
Rs always iso their next “great communicator”. . . & like in dating, you can smell desperation across a crowded room.
ot – djia down 4% today, 281.40 pts to 6,594.44
You are talking about Lush Rumpballs right!? Known as Zitcysts to his friends!
wheeee!
here’s what rove and the rest of the party are saying;
“when we attack you, you are not allowed to attack us”
sorry rove, sorry pundit, sorry anne, we’ve learned that lesson with clinton rushboy, we’ve learned that lesson with hillary and the entire rethug party, we’ve learned that lesson with kerry and rove.
obama has learned the lesson, anyone wants a piece of obama they’re gonna get their ass handed to them
by the way, has anyone noticed rove looks pretty much like a relative of rush?
probably seperated at birth me thinks
blub @ 17 – check out this pic (via cr)
http://dshort.com/charts/bears…..-large.gif
we know as a fact he has a “hard time” with women, he did have that viagra flap
I think his name should be “rush limpballs”
I wonder if rush gets it now, we WANT him to get the republicans groveling at his feet, we WANT him to get pissed they disagree with him and waddle back on their knees begging forgiveness
wut a putz
like I said.. wheee! enjoy the ride!
Frankly, as an ex-banker, I don’t see the point in following the markets anymore. My own earnings model says Dow 4500, so I threw it away.
i don’t follow the market – but i do care about what’s happening to the economy and the dow is one simple (if flawed) number to watch. that is all.
I know.. I wasn’t trying to flip. Just expressing the depths of my pessimism.
Flawed is right. My personal (non-finance-type) observations of the “market” are than when there is news that any reasonable, sensible (non-finance-type) person would think is bad news (unemployment goes up) the market goes up. And when there is good news, the opposite happens.
The finance pundits always have some explanation about ‘nervous’ investors and absolutely contravening reasons for why this is so.
But by my playbook (again, non-finance-type lurker), if the market goes down everytime Obama says or does anything – it must be really really happy!
wishful thinking or prescient dfh ???
whole diary here
OT Woo Hoo!!! Edit is back! Thanks backroom FDL workers!
Republicans are going to try to ride this “Obama is responsible for everything after November 4th, and before!” theme until their Party collapses. Of course they ignore that throughout the reign of George W. they constantly whined how everything was “Clintons fault”. 6 years into the Bush Presidency they kept saying that the economic problems were the result of a dot-com bubble being burst. They got six years to claim residual effects, Obama has to solve it yesterday. The MSM barely squeaked about Bush for six months, and then not at all after 9/11, for fear of being called nasty names.
Did Congressional critics of Bush get anywhere near the type of coverage that the much smaller minority Republicans in Congress are getting? No. They were given the equivalent treatment of a purged Russian sent into internal exile in Siberia. Did someone like Noam Chomskey get the media exposure and attention that Rush Limbaugh obtains? Not a chance!
And yet it’s not only Limbaugh…it’s a panoply of extremist Republican pundits. Chomsky never called for a revolution…yet you have that very idea, not only suggested, but fomented and justified on Fox’s “The War Room”.
the s&p500 is down 56% in 18 months. if you look at the graph i linked to you will see it compares the “four bad bears” – the 1929 crash, the 2000-2002 tech bubble crash and the 1973 oil crisis. we are on track with 1929.
i don’t think that means there is something to be happy about.
I guess I am just curious about why no one challenges these right-wingers on one thing: If their policies were just the right thing for the country – then why are we in this mess? They had 8 years to put into place every single thing they always wanted (well most of it anyway) and they have led us into this mess (don’t forget the war in Iraq too). So please explain to me one more time just how following that same set of policies is supposed to get us out of the mess you right-wingers created in the first place.
And only facts please. No name-calling.
Yeah, and I’ll be waiting a long time for an answer too.
the one bright spot (and, warning, it is not much of one at all) is that the world is much more interconnected than it was in 1929, and there are now other bigger economic engines that will likely see recovery before we do.. which introduces a great deal more uncertainty into the base scenario of total gloom and doom. Chinese manufacturing and consumer indicators are vaguely up, even before their latest round of fiscal loosening, and some Continental European numbers show a similar trend. India seems to be holding its own. Normally uncertainty (risk) is a bad thing, but in this case, I’ll take what I can get.
I should have included a snark tag.
You missed my point. The market goes up and down a lot for a lot of reasons that appear on the surface at least to be pretty nonsensical to the average person in this country. And my cynical eye detected a pattern that whenever a bad economic report came out, the market would go up. And vice versa.
I am not saying that we have anything to be happy about – or that the market does either at this point. But I do not think that Obama has as much effect on the markets as the right-wingers would like to think, in fact if he did – maybe he could figure out how to point it back in the up direction.
Using my (il)logic, once the stim was passed – tax cuts (right-wing Yay!) and lots of jobs to replace some of the ones that have been lost, that seems to be good news for us average joes. So the market’s response? It tanked. Which under my rules – was exactly to be expected. Any good news in the real world on main street – the market tanks.
End of snark.
True, but his Butt kept him from becoming one of our greatest heroes in Vietnam.
not no sure i see the globalization of financial markets as a good thing right now – india seems somewhat protected so far, but they didn’t integrate as much as others. europe looks like it has tremendous coordination problems and if eastern europe blows up i don’t see how it won’t take much of western europe with it. just too much debt. china i really don’t know and don’t have any really good sources yet.
but this is all (except for some trade related stuff) very new to me and like many i’m trying to educate myself a little bit. which just means i probably still have a lot of stuff wrong.
sheeeeet
ok. i’m not paying so much attention to what the right wingers say as my head hurts enough already *g*
Forcing the goopers to defend a guy who is extremely unpopular is certainly clever- but it’s getting boring.
I know, it is hard to believe.
not saying whether its a good thing or not, but merely that, for the moment, a strong recovery in China and even a tepid one in Europe would help us out at this point, since we are in much worse doodoo, fundamentally speaking, than they are… in effect, we’re screwing them, not the other way around, at this exact moment, so if they recover first, we get to derive a little benefit from their recovery, and that could boost us a bit. That option was not available in 1929. Its all in the math.
btw. OT but interseting.. Sanjay Gupta’s been withdrawn.
I too am over it.
Rush is ruining MSNBC programming for me. My friends-on-the-teevee, Rachel and Keith, seem obsessed. I want it to end. They both need to know that WE get it: Rush is the head of the GOP. Now let FOX spend time denying it.
Vetting?
what’s that? ;-P
After 8 years of dumming down america it is time to start raising intellectual levels. That ain’t gonna happen with Rush on front page.
Heads up to the West Coasties … Scott Horton is on KO tonight.
The comments on the Boehner op-ed in the Post are hysterical. I hadn’t planned on posting there but I just couldn’t resist. Did anyone else post there? I’d love to see your comments.
Here are my two posts:
THanks for the headsup. His show is getting ready to come on now.
Some very carefully chosen words from Mr. Horton … I’ll be looking at it again later.
I didn’t get to watch it so I’ll have to catch it on the rerun. Can you give me an idea?