Rush Limbaugh's barn-burner at CPAC this weekend drew a line in the sand, once again, for Republicans: either they want President Obama to fail, or they don't. RNC Chairman Michael Steele, subsequently, walked a tightrope on the issue last night in an interview with D.L. Hughley on CNN.
Conservative and liberal blogs alike Monday picked up on Steele's response, some blasting Steele and others promoting a fight between the two GOP heavyweights. But Steele's answer to Limbaugh, and its political implications, were a bit more complicated.
First came the question of Steele's status as party leader. Hughley
challenged the RNC chairman, asserting that Limbaugh is the GOP's de
facto leader. "No he's not," Steele responded. "I'm the de facto leader
of the Republican Party."
On the philosophy behind Limbaugh's "fail" assertion, Steele supported
the conservative commentator; on the rhetoric of it, Steele stood
opposed to Rush:
"How is that any different than what was said about George Bush during
his presidency?" Steele asked, making a point Limbaugh himself made
during the CPAC speech, in response to Hughley's blasting of Limbaugh's
"incendiary" rhetoric.
"Let's put it in the context here," Steele said. "Rush Limbaugh is an
entertainer. His whole thing is entertainment...yes, it's incendiary,
yes, it's ugly." And that's the line that has gotten the idea of Steele
vs. Rush so much play in the blogosphere today.
The complexity of Steele's response stands in stark opposition to that of House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, who, speaking
on ABC's "This Week" yesterday, clearly distanced himself from the
radio commentator's claim: "Nobody--no Republican, no Democrat--wants
this president to fail, nor do they want this country to fail or the
economy to fail," Cantor said.
While Cantor and Steele both attacked the rhetoric, there are big
differences between their political situations: Cantor, as a prominent
leader in the House GOP, has to work with Obama; Steele, as the party's
top political officer, has to generate campaign cash, balance the
interests of the GOP's base--much of which, evidently, strongly agrees
with Limbaugh--all the while asserting himself as political top dog in
the GOP against claims that Limbaugh is the party's de facto leader.
Steele has put forth a vision for a more inclusive GOP--not necessarily
inclusive to the idea of working with Democrats, but inclusive to new
voting demographics--and "incendiary" rhetoric like Limbaugh's may seem
to threaten his chance at bringing in new votes. Then again, nothing
generates campaign donations like passionate support, and nothing
generates passionate support like "incendiary" opposition to Democrats.
The idea of Steele attacking Rush likely isn't one the RNC wants floating around the blogosphere--after all, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) ended up calling Limbaugh to apologize for criticizing him in January--but Steele stood behind Rush's desire for Obama to "fail." He may not be reaping the media-coverage benefits for doing so, but the distinction highlight's Steele's position between Limbaugh, Cantor, and the GOP donor base.
I wish that Chicken Hawk Rush Limpball would run for office. Currently, he mouths off and does not have to worry about responsibility, let alone research. It took eight years for the Republican Reactionary Neo-Cons to create this economic depression, and it will take a few years to resolve it.
If you believe the Reactionary Neo-Marxists will fix anything by practicing the very same policies as the Neo-Cons, you're only fooling yourself. Pull your head out of the sand, there is no "change" here.
You are correct! As long as the Republicans have a de facto veto in Congress, the only change will be the extension of the slide into depression. Please note, the definitions of recession and depression are a retroactive perspective based upon the economic decline in a previous time period.
Chris Good, it's just like you as a 'journalist' to lie. Not putting the context around Rush's "fail" remarks is a lie by omission.
He explicitly stated that he wanted Obama's socialist policies to fail.
It's little wonder 'journalists' are held in such low esteem; you are nothing but a bunch of liars.
Larry Linn, that's funny, I didn't know Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton were neo-cons (whatever you people think that word means).
Each of them was all about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac backing loans to people who could not afford them. Each of them has a lot of responsibility for the housing bubble and the current economic problems.
George Neo-con Bush appointed the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and the Chairman of the Security Exchanges Commission, and Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton were to blame for the current economic depression?
Are you truly that dense?
The housing bubble is the reason for this crisis.
C'mon uknow, the housing bubble occurred on someone's watch, didn't it? You may want to blame Fannie/Freddie, but, although they're certainly deserving of some blame, so was everyone else who participated in this fiasco. The homeowners who took out stupid loans. The bankers who underwrote those stupid loans. The I-bankers who packaged those stupid loans and the investors who snapped up the AAA (sic) result of that packaging. But at the end of the day, where does the buck stop? While the President's ability to control (and to understand) these issues may be limited, you cannot dodge the fact that we're dealing with a mess that occurred on Bush's watch. He's on the hook for this one, and stopping Fannie and Freddie would've only slowed down, but wouldn't have averted the mess.
Here is a question: when did the housing bubble start?
I'm willing to bet most serious economists will point to the Clinton years as the real start. Go back to the NYT's article from 1999 detailing how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were backing all sorts of sub-prime loans.
Sure Bush has some blame as well as Republicans like him who acted like Democrats and joined the Democrats' tinkering with the market to artificially inflate the number of people buying homes. All the resulting mess stems from the housing bubble. The private sector took what the government came up with and demanded and than ran with it. I think many of those banks were quite dumb to get in bed with the government. They deserve every disease they got.
All the backers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are to blame (Clinton, Frank, Dodd, Bush and others). As are all the folks who wanted a chicken in every pot and sought to lower the barriers of buying a home to such a level.
Why would any reasonable American want this president to succeed in his ambition to confiscate my personal property and destroy our means of production? I have no use for goverment programs, they do not feed my family, educate my children and they have neglected the infrastructure such that it is crumbling around us. I want this administration to fail because if they succeed, we will complete the transition from a representative republic to a dictatorial socialist state.
The RNC deserves the failures of the last election for not having practiced thier stated principles, I won't vote for another Republicrat, they represent the very type of collectivism that I oppose. There is little to no difference between the RNC and DNC so why would I support either? Both parties bicker and blame each other while doing nothing constructive other than re-arranging the deck chairs on this sinking ship. I expected the RNC to protect my family from the sticky fingers of the left but after the last administration....? and then the last nominee? sorry, you lost me when you ridiculed Ron Paul. (at least he sticks to his principles).
First off, President Obama is not a socialist and his policies do not resemble anything remotely socialist. He is, like every other president, a capitalist. Unfortunately, just about every president since Eisenhower has furthered the effort to sell off all our American industries to unaccountable corporations. Both the RNC and DNC are under this same corporate umbrella that has shipped all our production jobs and factories overseas. It seems like the only jobs left in the USA are service jobs. All Rush Limbaugh does is provide a service for angry malcontents who are too stupid or lazy to actually fact-check the nonsense that spews from his mouth. Unfortunately, there is a high enough population of idiots in the USA who will always band together, convinced that they are so goddamn right about everything, and actually maintain that Rush and all the Rush wannabes have valid viewpoints. Rush is just another illegal-alien-hirin', Oxycontin-poppin' hypocrite celebrity. He's always whining about celebrities voicing their opinions about politics, and he's one of them.
Also, if everybody would stop throwing around the terms Marxism and Marxist, it's really insulting to educated people that have actually read the writings of Karl Marx. For the record, Karl Marx was a sociologist that studied the patterns of human societies and civilization. He did not ascribe to any singular political philosophy as evidence by his last words, "Don't let anyone every say that I was a Marxist."
Karl Marx started a political party.
Why don't you back and actually read a little history?
You completely missed the point. Karl Marx was a philosopher and historian, not a politician. I've never heard an American politician reference Marx in proper context. They always use terms like Marxism and Marxist because it stirs up fears in ignorant minds of Soviet Bolshevism. Maybe you should read some history, or at least some of Marx's actual writing. And by the way, privatization and deregulation were the causes of the current economic crisis, the housing bubble bursting is just a symptom.
I've read more political philosophy than you.
Marx along with Hegel before him was the foundation for communist thought. Marx was more than a writer, he had political ambitions which are fairly obvious when starting a political party. You do a bad job making whatever your point is by ignoring glaring facts like that.
The housing bubble was created by interventionist government policies to actively encourage home ownership by those who could not afford them. This is what happens when the government interferes in the market. This is a direct result of democrat policies and Bush joined in those policies. Keep lying if you want and claim it was the 'free market' (this country has NEVER had a free market), but this was exactly what you get from government intervention. It will only get worse as Dear Leader Obama pushes for more government.
Wow. "Uknowbetter" is the most ironic handle... ever.
Uknow, don't try to squirm your greasy little way out from under the point your intellectual superior was making. Deregulation, O Holiest of the Reaganomics Holies, led to our current nightmare.
Ah, myth of free market perfection, how many lives have you ruined? You're like the mirage that leads travelers round and round in circles until they perish of thirst, or the desert highway scene painted on a brick wall that gets Wile E. Coyote every time.
eve, why don't you go read a book or two?
Do you know this country has never had a 'free market'?
Government intervention and tinkering with the market is the direct cause of the housing bubble. I know that's hard for Obama cheerleaders to understand. I will try to use small words for you.
At one point, lawmakers demanded that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac make sure that 50% of the loans they were backing were given to people under the median income of an area. Do you understand why that doesn't make sense and why that is a problem? I know thinking hurts and all.
American Sharecropper, let us pray that "I want Obama to fail" Limbaugh runs in 2012 and rescues our nation from current Obama policies of "Ending Iraq war, Funding education, Proper regulations for wall street and banks, No torture, Limit to executive pay, Healthcare to uninsured children, Equal pay for women, Choice for women, Green economy".
I would love to watch Limbaugh vs Obama in '12.
Personally, I applaud Rush for helping his own party to fail. While Michael Steele is struggling to make the party more diverse, Rush is bent on confining it to the angry white male. At this rate they will keep losing elections until the republican party is totally extinct. Don't believe me? Just wait until 2010.
Rush, please keep it up. There are still about 25% who still think that Bush was great and want Obama to fail. These bafoons do not care about the country. What they care about is making sure that Obama fails so that they can bring back Bush years to America.
As long as drugster Rush and his cronies continue with their "I want American president to fail" strategy the current admin has nothing to worry about since it will cruise to re-election because the other 75% population is still sane and will vote for the second term.
It is 25% extreme right Vs 75% sane middle of the road America.
Obama is running this country into the ground. After Bush ran up the deficit in years, Obama is running it up in weeks!
Obama's policies will fail because communism 1.0 didn't work and neither will communism 2.0.
Unfortunately the Republicans have missed the boat with Obama on the economy!
IMO, Back in September Obama told us about his great economic team, including Buffet, Volcker, O'neil, and a bunch of others.
IF Obama were a Statesman and not a Pork Bum, he would have gone to this team of advisers and asked them each for their 10 best ideas for fixing the economy QUICKLY and what price tag to affix to each idea.
This probably would have been about 50 pages, and he could have come to the American people and outlined this plan. If he had done this, he would have had the people behind him and Congress would have had to go along. Most likely he would have received votes from about 75% of each Party and it would have been a truly bi-partisan bill.
Instead, he had Nancy Pelosi write the more than 1,000 page bill that will take years to pay out, and probably do very little to help the economy.
IMO, that is what the RNC needs to point out, that Obama is nothing more than a puppet with Pelosi to pulling the strings.
Now, all you have are Steele and Rush debating amongst themselves over a few stupid words, and the Obama team getting the press time attaching the comments.
edge.
I posted this in an earlier area and will repeat the basic concepts.
As stated earlier, Limbaugh was very clear in stating that he wanted the Obama policies to fail. Those policies are diametrically opposite of conservative views and it should come as no surprise. I invite anyone who really wants to comment to either watch the speech or read the transcripts as posted on Limbaugh's website. Don't just rely on what liberal commentators tell you he said.
If you listen to the whole speech he acknowledges that Obama is one of the most gifted orators and motivators we have ever had in office. But then he takes it to a knew level by calling on the President to use that give to motivate people to become the best that they can be. Instead he sees the President promoting a welfare state where success is not celebrated but rather penalized by way of more taxes and by being ostracized for being "rich oppressors".
Finally, for those who do not believe that we are seeing socialism, look up the definition first....
"A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor."
-Websters Unabridged Dictionary
Now what part of redistribution of wealth as aspoused to Joe the Plumber does not fit that definition. That doesn't even include universal health care, the card check proposals, etc.
If the republicans were really serious about the economy, they would have written their own stimulus package that didn't just include tax cuts for everyone, especially the wealthy. If they had put out a thoughtful plan and were able to take it to the press and present it in a reasonable fashion the American people MAY have listened. What did they do instead? The cried and kicked their legs and threw tantrums on the House floor, didn't present an alternative plan and basically just looked like the party of bankrupted ideologies that they really are. They have no new or bold ideas, all they do is complain and call names. They'll be lucky if they ever win another election.
I'm a bit confused -- exactly what part of "more just and equitable" do you oppose?
Redistribution of wealth can take many forms -- if the policies espoused by Reagonomics, which was continued fitfully under Clinton and allowed to run free by Bush, allow for greater wealth to be concentrated in the highest 1 percent, is that not redistribution of wealth? To my mind, this supply side experiment has clearly been repudiated.
The policies Obama promotes nominally raises the cost of government to roughly 20 percent of GDP from 17 percent -- hardly socialism. I also find it disingenuous for conservatives who rail against raising the deficit when 1) it has been a stated policy of the RNC to "starve the beast" by increasing deficits in order to slash New Deal structures, and 2) the two periods of the largest deficit spending in the past 30 years were under Reagan and Bush 43.
Limbaugh is a gifted demagogue, but nothing more. There will always be mouthpieces for those believing politics is a zero-sum game akin to sports. (I thought his football analogy quite telling.) Although I make it a point to listen to him (yes, I watched the entire diatribe)his viewpoint is purely parochial -- those who listen to him would never vote other than far right. (It would be another matter if I believed he had a chance at power.) Fortunately, there exist many Conservatives who strengthen the polemic with thoughtful, reasoned views -- Brooks, Will, even Gingrich on occasion.
"No he's not," Steele responded. "I'm the de facto leader of the Republican Party."
If you have to tell people, you ain't.
Rush Limbaugh is a horrible embarrassment. The analogy is your bombastic, red-faced, obnoxious Uncle Ernie, who comes to your little league game and gets into it with some other kid's perfectly nice parents. And you're trying to pretend he's not your uncle. But everyone knows.
That's how I feel when I go abroad and someone brings up Limbaugh; I suddenly find myself wishing I'd said I was Canadian. When people from other countries look at the state of political discourse here, they get this picture of Americans as bloated with ignorance, red-faced with self-righteousness, and... well, dumb.
I'm not saying the Europeans don't have their share of fascist jerks. Of course they do. Some countries have way, way more than their fair share. It's just that Limbaugh is so gross and nasty about his fascism. No style at all. Gosh, he's embarrassing.
How about you go to one of those European countries and leave America to those who actually like freedom and don't like socialism?
Honestly, move to Canada or France and you can get quite a lot of what Dear Leader is promising.
Or you can stay and see how far you can push the freedom-loving part of this country. Let's see how well that works out.
Your slavish mentality would be appalling uknowbetter, were it not so ironically absurd. As the greatest freedom lover of all time, Mikhail Bakunin (the only person to ever escape from the Siberian gulags) said, "Liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality." So while you revel in your Orwellian "War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength" mindset, maybe you should chow down on that humble pie sitting in front of you and realize that your faith in the money that says "In God we trust" on it, is the very source of your blind submission. If you really want to be free, find a patch of land, build your own house, grow your own food, and if you can find the time (when you're not jerking off to the latest Clear Channel broadcast), evolve, you idiot!
You Stalinist scum, get out of my country.
Go live in Cuba or somewhere else where you can enjoy the joys of communism.
You probably have an IQ of about 80. Go read a book or two on economics.
When you and your ilk finally get your wish and run this country into the ground, you better watch out. There will be no one to protect you then. You can just assume the fetal position and enjoy your abortion.
What a dis-appointment Mr Steele has become.. I think we all had high hopes and now he has become just another Liberal trying to wear conservative clothes - he made the same mistake as many others that the Republican party is also the Conservative party - we seem to be getting further apart because of people like Steele - Go Rush - you seem to be about the only thing that holds my sanity together.
Scott Murphy for Congress Tax Liens