Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Is Obama Playing Limbaugh?

There's been plenty of talk for the last few days about President Obama and Rush Limbaugh. First it was Limbaugh's idiotic diatribe hoping that Obama fails and rejecting the notion that other less extreme Republicans are defending Obama and hoping for his success because he's a black man and it's the politically correct/affirmative action thing to do. I suppose it had nothing to do with the fact that the nation is currently in the toilet.

Then it was President Obama meeting with Congressional Republicans and suggesting that they shouldn't listen to Limbaugh if they want to get anything done. Rush Limbaugh enjoyed the attention and the talking head pundits were wondering why Obama would give Limbaugh such credence.

But it would seem that there is yet another possible scenario in play. Obama is baiting Rush, not the other way around. And so far it looks like GOP mouthpieces are heeding Obama's advice and possibly marginalizing Limbaugh in the process.

I never thought I'd agree with Phil Gingrey (YEAH, I KNOW!) but here's his comment:

"I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach," Gingrey said. "I mean, it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don't have to try to do what's best for your people and your party. You know you're just on these talk shows and you're living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn't be or wouldn't be good leaders, they're not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."
Media critic Michael Wolff thinks Obama got under Limbaugh's skin by having a dinner with conservative journalists and pundits and conspicuously excluding poor, misunderstood Rush.

So is Obama playing Limbaugh like a big, fat fiddle? I don't know if there's any validity to the theory, but Obama is a shrewd character, and every time he was doubted during the campaign, he kept proving the doubters wrong. I'm wondering what the next step will be in the Rush Wars. It's silly, but kind of exciting instead of listening to the continual zombie drone of "more tax cuts."

(H/T HuffPo)


Ted said...

With the mounting job casualties, here's hoping SCOTUS either finds someone, somewhere, has standing to require BHO's birth certificate or fixes attention on a criminal indictment before he wins his War on Prosperity.

Broadway Carl said...

You're kidding, right? You're still fixated on the birth certificate myth that's been debunked and thrown out of court? You really have to do better than that.

It's time to get over it. President Obama is an American citizen, and no wingnut conspiracy is going to change that fact.

But perhaps you would have preferred a third George Bush term that just last year alone lost 2.6 MILLION jobs. What "War on Prosperity" are you talking about? The one that Bush looked over for the last eight years? And as far as criminal indictment, the first one I'd like to see is an indictment for members of the Bush administration for perpetrating war crimes.

Get your head out of the sand... or out of your ass.

chris said...

mounting job casualties

Wondering if Obama is responsible for the 1 million plus jobs lost in November & December or just the ones for this week?

Armadillo Hussein Joe said...

Hey Ted, I'm not even going to honor your "points" by de-bunking them. In the argument over, let's say, the Law of Gravity, there really aren't two sides.

Instead, I'm going right to the ad hominem attack. You spout Limbaugh-ed & Hannit-ized GOP talking points because you're a brain-washed, Fox News zombie. You obviously have a lot of time to surf the inter-web toobz picking fights because I see that since this summer, you have over 2400 page views of your profile.

Wow. You really should quit trolling and write a blog we can read and re-but. Otherwise, move out of your mom's basement and get a job.

Fraulein said...

RE: the "war on prosperity" -- that is now, and always has been, waged by the Republican party. Prosperity for the many (as we had for the most part under Bill Clinton, by the way) is bad news for the few -- the ultra-rich who control the Republican party. So over the last eight years, we've seen them wage their war against those of us whose incomes fall somewhat beneath the 9-figure level, and they've had remarkable success.

So I deem that argument an official FAIL.