I know I love it!

*dances jig*

It doesn't matter how tough you supposedly are or how convinced you are of the justness of your position, it matters how many votes you have. And if you limit the Republicans to thinly veiled phobics who think Democrats have the sinister goal of destroying America while the real problem is that we have a government in the first place (except for the military and police), then there simply won't be enough votes.

Today is the day the LORD hath made; I shall rejoice and be glad in it.

Keep spinning cons. I know it hurts to get so thoroughly pwnd.

This whole Rush Limbaugh business of the past week or so is just about my favorite thing of all time ever.

Color me impressed by Rush's endless ability to keep Dem's unsatisfied. I will dare to speculate that the androgynous, left-of-the-dial libs will blow their chance. Heeeeeeeeeeeeeelarous!

Now, I'll buy that sometimes people like Rush can be bastards. Of younger and younger political figures coming into prominence however Rush is still the king of the hill! Come on!

I can't hardly wait for this whole ... whatever the fark it is, to develop further. The Republicans are achin' to beat the libs in the 2010 elections. If the dems think they can just coast on Obama's victory, they're blind.

On the other hand I hope the GOP can take advantage of the lib's ineffectualness. We're marganilized and out of power; anywhere's better than here.

Eat_At_Milliways: I can't hardly wait for this whole ... whatever the fark it is, to develop further. The Republicans are achin' to beat the libs in the 2010 elections. If the dems think they can just coast on Obama's victory, they're blind.

If the conservatives think they can win the elections with Rush, they're blind.

Ryan2065: Eat_At_Milliways: I can't hardly wait for this whole ... whatever the fark it is, to develop further. The Republicans are achin' to beat the libs in the 2010 elections. If the dems think they can just coast on Obama's victory, they're blind.

If the conservatives think they can win the elections with Rush, they're blind.

AND stupid.

While unlike Republicans I'm capable of distinguishing the DNC from the Democrats in Congress and the President, I think they're doing the wrong thing by making a big deal about this Rush Limbaugh thing.

If Republicans want him to be their party's ideological leader, I say go for it. Drawing attention to that is like making fun of the retarded kid.

limbaugh encourages hatred and racism, and then fringe right wingers go out and murder, like that former republican volunteer that shot up the chilean student dorm a couple days ago in north florida.

only McCain had the balls to stand up to this racist noise, when he pushed back slightly on that woman that thought Obama was an arab.
Palin sure didnt -- she thrived on crowds calling Obama a terrorist.

limbaugh, hannity, glen beck, and some others. while the policies they favored got us into war and got us into debt, they scream about immigration and how "Democrats" were to blame.

Fixing eight years of run amok bad business decisions is taking time and effort, and it would be nice if Republicans could contribute something besides racism and hatred to the mix. We do need a two party system. Unfortunately, one of our two parties is in the hands of a fat hypocrite pill addict that takes sex tourism jaunts to the Dominican Republican, all the while holding his carcass up as an example of patriotism and moral strength.

Republicans you are failing America, yet again. You're supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility. For either years under Bush, you abandoned that role, and ran up the greatest debt we've ever had. Now you find it more important to attack Obama because of his magic negro status than you do to hold rational, reasoned debate about how to fix the economy.

Why should any Democratic pol associate with you racist gits right now? Your leader is a racist, your leader is a hypocrite drug addict, your leader has nothing of value to offer. Its entertaining, I'm sure, but so's watching car crashes on NASCAR sometimes. If thats all you guys have right now, good to know, we'll get back to work, and you can keep screaming at the world how the mess you made is everyones fault but your own.

The Icelander: If Republicans want him to be their party's ideological leader, I say go for it.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the case.
It does seem as though the democratic party is doing their best to push this vision of the right though.
It's really just a waste of time.

McFifenstein: I'm pretty sure this isn't the case.

No, just the national party leaders have to apologize for criticizing him, lest they be kicked to the curb.

cameroncrazy1984: McFifenstein: I'm pretty sure this isn't the case.

No, just the national party leaders have to apologize for criticizing him, lest they be kicked to the curb.

There are quite a few republicans in office that are weak pussies.
On the other hand, there really aren't a whole lot of people on the left challenging their own party.
the more people challenging the government the better, I say.

Really, if you hate the guy so much, there is a dial on your radio.

McFifenstein: I'm pretty sure this isn't the case.

It might not be the case now, but the party is drifting, looking for an ideology that will get them elected since the last one has failed so dramatically.

The fact that Steele had to apologize to Rush shows that he holds more sway in the party than a newly elected chair.

McFifenstein: The Icelander: If Republicans want him to be their party's ideological leader, I say go for it.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the case.
It does seem as though the democratic party is doing their best to push this vision of the right though.
It's really just a waste of time.

Rush Limbaugh brought a cheering crowd to its feet several times Saturday at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington as he called on fellow conservatives to take back the country.

I bet those crafty dems snuck in and changed the agenda to show Rush as a speaker. Then the conservatives could either let Rush speak or have their agenda's all screwed up. Obviously they chose the lesser of two evils.

McFifenstein: Really, if you hate the guy so much, there is a dial on your radio.

I've heard probably an hour total of Rush in my life. But what I'm worried about is your party aligning ideologically with him. Rush is, to use Steele's words, "incendiary" and "ugly."

If that's what Republicans want to be, I say go for it.

McFifenstein: On the other hand, there really aren't a whole lot of people on the left challenging their own party.

Practically no one.

Is there anyone more repellent than Rish Limbaugh? Even if you ignore the content of his words, everything about him is...ick.

McFifenstein: there really aren't a whole lot of people on the left challenging their own party

I beg to differ... I think the fact that there is so much infighting within the Democratic Party is the reason they can't often draw a general consensus...

Bush was sooooooo bad, that he essentially grouped Democrats (and some Republicans) together to form a consensus against the possibility of reelecting a possible clone in McCain

That picture of him in the article is hilarious. I'm reminded of that wailing fat kid .gif.

The Icelander: McFifenstein: Really, if you hate the guy so much, there is a dial on your radio.

I've heard probably an hour total of Rush in my life. But what I'm worried about is your party aligning ideologically with him. Rush is, to use Steele's words, "incendiary" and "ugly."

If that's what Republicans want to be, I say go for it.

I never said he isn't any of those things.
but the democrats are putting a whole hell of a lot of effort into demonizing him, when polls already showed most people have actually found the radio dial.

and for your entertainment, and further flaming...
ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the new symbol of the GOP.

:P

The thing is what gave this whole thing legs is the fact that Steele gave a rather mild criticism of Limbaugh, then had to back down and beg forgiveness when it ignited a shiatstorm.

If this were just something the DNC came up with out of nowhere, then, yeah, I could see it as being unfair. But the RNC have made the point for the DNC themselves.

McFifenstein: I never said he isn't any of those things.
but the democrats are putting a whole hell of a lot of effort into demonizing him, when polls already showed most people have actually found the radio dial.

Eh, already 11% of republicans consider him the head of the GOP. The question is will his numbers go up or down after he has time to sink in with the rest of the group. I'd like to say his numbers would go down but with all the support Palin got, I'm not too sure.

Ryan2065: Eh, already 11% of republicans consider him the head of the GOP.

wow, that's a whole lot of people, enough to call it a majority anyways...

11% of my body is an arm, I am an arm.

McFifenstein: and for your entertainment, and further flaming...
ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the new symbol of the GOP.

A turd with legs?

McFifenstein: On the other hand, there really aren't a whole lot of people on the left challenging their own party.

Obama just won and got in, and his budget looks like an ideal progressive budget. Do you want liberals to pick fights? If you look around online, it's not that hard to find prominent liberal critics of Obama on certain issues - Krugman on the stimulus, Greenwald on civil liberties, Ezra Klein on Ag policy. What do you want to see?

The Icelander: McFifenstein: and for your entertainment, and further flaming...
ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the new symbol of the GOP.

A turd with legs?

well, it was the hulk, but poorly executed.

Man, I hope this guy runs for president with Palin in 2012. The Daily Show will have to be on 24/7 in order to cover the suck.

McFifenstein: well, it was the hulk, but poorly executed.

You know, that sounds pretty much like the Republican party.

A poorly executed Incredible Hulk that ends up looking like a turd with legs.

DamnYankees: What do you want to see?

I would like to see the whitehouse pay less attention to a loud citizen and focus on the important issues of the day.

McFifenstein: Ryan2065: Eh, already 11% of republicans consider him the head of the GOP.

wow, that's a whole lot of people, enough to call it a majority anyways...

11% of my body is an arm, I am an arm.

Rush hasn't had the spotlight as the head of the GOP for much time and already 11% of the republicans think he is the head. Republican's shouldn't turn a blind eye to this and democrats would be foolish to not bring it up. This isn't just a democrat fabrication.

McFifenstein: I would like to see the whitehouse pay less attention to a loud citizen and focus on the important issues of the day.

That has nothing to do with your previous point.

Also, you have no evidence and no reason to believe this has taken any focus away from anything the White House is doing. Stop making up reasons to dislike them. If you think this is actually a bad strategic move, that's fine, but lets not pretend like this is actually taking time away from Obama's day.

McFifenstein: I would like to see the whitehouse pay less attention to a loud citizen and focus on the important issues of the day.

DNC != White House.

\I notice you conservatives tend to eliminate capitalization and spaces when you get in a lather
\\Like with the "healthcare" debate yesterday

McFifenstein: but the democrats are putting a whole hell of a lot of effort into demonizing him, when polls already showed most people have actually found the radio dial.

You keep talking about changing the radio dial. His radio show is fairly tangential to this conversation. It's like saying if you don't like Bush, you can refrain from listening to his speeches. Rush has injected himself into the public stage, and so long as the Republicans respect his position there, 'changing the dial' is immaterial.

The fact of the matter is that many Republicans think he's the ideological head of the party. And no one of the official leadership dares challenge him, which they continually reinforce by criticizing him, then begging forgiveness.

When the ideological head of your party is an entertainer, you are in trouble.

DamnYankees: Also, you have no evidence and no reason to believe this has taken any focus away from anything the White House is doing. Stop making up reasons to dislike them. If you think this is actually a bad strategic move, that's fine, but lets not pretend like this is actually taking time away from Obama's day.

him and hannity are the focus of the proposed fairness doctrine.
maybe not obama's day, but other parts of the government, which is still too much.

McFifenstein: him and hannity are the focus of the proposed fairness doctrine.

The one Obama said he doesn't support? The thing no one freaking supports? The thing which just lost badly as a proposed amendment to a bill? Are you still wagging this dog?

McFifenstein: maybe not obama's day, but other parts of the government, which is still too much.

Again, no part of government. You are making up a strawman.

hillbillypharmacist: The fact of the matter is that many Republicans think he's the ideological head of the party. And no one of the official leadership dares challenge him, which they continually reinforce by criticizing him, then begging forgiveness.

yes... 11%
I don't consider him the head, but you may believe that if you wish.

DamnYankees: Again, no part of government. You are making up a strawman.

google "Debbie Stabenow"

McFifenstein: DamnYankees: Again, no part of government. You are making up a strawman.

google "Debbie Stabenow"

Did you know Richard Shelby talked about how Obama wasn't born in America? Clearly this is an institutional problem in government. We need to make it into an issue.

The flap with Rush represents a very real struggle within the GOP to find a cohesive identity in the party.

We got our asses handed to us--and rightly so. We threw up Quayle-Bot 2000 in GW, and got a President that was malleable to the interests that had bought into the party, and were looking to get their agendas through, damn the cost. We had Newt's revolution, and we got control of the House and Senate, and pushed through legislation that was beholden to the folks who payed for the privilege.

And they got it, and now we're left to pay for it, and clean up after those folks got exactly what they wanted. It was a disastrous agenda for the country, but it lined a lot of pockets. And those who think that the Religious Right is just about a theocratic agenda, have to come to grips with the sheer amount of cash that these folks wield, and often, tax free.

The power that the Religious Right wields is not just in the numbers of folks that they can throw down at the polls, and the discipline to keep pushing buttons on issues that they don't really understand, but vote for anyway, but in the amount of tax free cash that they get and can spend. That they use this cash to advance issues that are often at strict odds with the teachings of their religion, but instead with a populist spin, they turn it into a "moral" decision shows how well these folks wield both fear of change and fear of displacement.

The GOP has traded on fear. Democrats too, but the GOP has made the politics of fear a firm platform for a while. War on Drugs. War on Crime. War on Terror. War on the Family. War on Christmas. War on whatever you want to name, it's trading on the fear of change and the fear of loss.

The faux-populism is coupled with this. And Rush is just a cog in that. It connects folks who would otherwise feel disconnected to the GOP.

Rush and the Religious Right have connections, not so much in rhetoric, but in an appeal to less educated voters. It is necessary to have Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, and Rush there, to boil down issues in a quick and easy way, and to avoid any thought on the matter, because thought might cause folks to question why they supporting a particular policy or cause, when it seems to violate the principles of the party.

We are watching the party try to sort itself out. And the elements that have had power these last 15 years or so, are now faced with the very real consequences of disastrous policy, but are addicted to holding onto power, and the tools for building that power, are still in their hands.

Rush is a tool. Hannity is a tool. Coulter is a tool. They aren't lights or speakers for the party, they are symptoms. They are the tools to manipulate and inform the most vulnerable and least stable of the coalition that is in power in the GOP, and thus they have to marshal a lot of folks, and keep them on message, or the whole thing goes loopy.

And there are still folks who want them out, and didn't welcome their inclusion in the first place. Not out of elitism, but out of the sad fact, that they don't represent the ideals of the party, but these folks came to us, because they can't very well have the Democrats represent their ideas, and there isn't another viable third party to get their message to.

So, they gravitated to the GOP, and our leadership welcomed them with open arms, for the opportunity to get back into power, but now we've had to pay that back, and we're left with the shreds of that Devil's Bargain, and the nation has to clean up the mess for that.

hillbillypharmacist: Rush has injected himself into the public stage, and so long as the Republicans respect his position there, 'changing the dial' is immaterial.

This.

Had Steele said "Yeah, Rush is incendiary and ugly. Attitude like his are why we got our asses handed to us," this whole thing wouldn't have happened.

Like it or not Rush Limbaugh has all but been declared the ideological leader of the Republican party.

DamnYankees: McFifenstein: DamnYankees: Again, no part of government. You are making up a strawman.

google "Debbie Stabenow"

Did you know Richard Shelby talked about how Obama wasn't born in America? Clearly this is an institutional problem in government. We need to make it into an issue.

so, if stabenow isn't an issue, and shelby isn't an issue... why would Rush be?
A clear minority of republicans think he's the leader.
Also... it's just a radio show.

Why would Democrats waste time talking about Rush? I'm not saying that because there are more important issues (there are, but people can multitask), but because it's three and a half years until the next election. I doubt Rush can hold Americans' attention for that long.

I suppose it could be attempt to distract people from something else, but it's hard to see what.

I hear by pledge my allegiance to Mark Levin.

McFifenstein: so, if stabenow isn't an issue, and shelby isn't an issue... why would Rush be?

Stabenow and Shelby are issues - and criticize them if you like. The problem is attributing their actions to larger institutions. So you speak as though Obama and the Democratic Party want to institute the fairness doctrine overwhelmlingly they don't. If this was a Debbie Stabenow thread, you'd have a point. Same with Shelby - he's an idiot, but hat partocular brand of idiocy is not representative of "Republicans" as an institution.

Rush is the issue exactly because he has become the institution. Party leaders are bowing down to him. He's becoming the spokesman for the GOP. You can either (1) argue that he's not, (2) defend him, or (3) try to fix the party. Try doing one of those things instead of setting up Democratic strawmen.

McFifenstein: A clear minority of republicans think he's the leader.

Who has more power than him within the GOP?

McFifenstein: I hear by pledge my allegiance to Mark Levin.

read a book, paper, attend a variety of lectures.... gather a wide variety of opinions and make up your own mind instead of letting an overpaid celebrity blowhard do it for you

/just my 2 cents

DamnYankees: Who has more power than him within the GOP?

actual politicians.
as it is now, the GOP is befuddled and unclear about its future.
That 11% of people that you are pretending is a majority are probably the same people that believe God put dinosaur bones in the ground to fool the non-believers.
Rush Limbaugh is a salve to make them feel better until the next election cycle.

Snarfangel: Why would Democrats waste time talking about Rush? I'm not saying that because there are more important issues (there are, but people can multitask), but because it's three and a half years until the next election. I doubt Rush can hold Americans' attention for that long.

I suppose it could be attempt to distract people from something else, but it's hard to see what.

Why?

Because it's easy to use the distraction.

The more air time devoted to this, the less for real criticism from either side of the aisle on the stimulus plan, or on other issues that might be more volatile. This is controllable flap--because it doesn't really mean anything, but appears to be important, because it gets some folks riled up.

But just because someone's riled up, doesn't mean that it's all that important. Just look at the gnashing of teeth during damn near any sporting event. Just look at how many stoopid fights you have with your girlfriend or wife about really inconsequential stuff. It's filler, but it's useful, because it eats up inches that could be devoted to something more important, and important is not what either side of the aisle really wants folks thinking about.

40yoVirgin: McFifenstein: I hear by pledge my allegiance to Mark Levin.

read a book, paper, attend a variety of lectures.... gather a wide variety of opinions and make up your own mind instead of letting an overpaid celebrity blowhard do it for you

/just my 2 cents

yes... I was being completely serious...

McFifenstein: actual politicians.

Like...

The Icelander: McFifenstein: actual politicians.

Like...

Pick anyone with an R next to their name.
I'm still not under the impression that Rush has any actual power.

McFifenstein: I'm still not under the impression that Rush has any actual power.

Then why apologize to him?

McFifenstein: actual politicians.

Such as...? Every politicians who has called out Rush has had to go back to apologize to him and call him a great leader. They don't have power over him. Quite the opposite.