09 March 2009

Much Ado


Apparently there is some sort of hubbub regarding a statement that Rush Limbaugh made.

That in itself isn't so surprising. Rush Limbaugh often makes statements that raise a ruckus. It's what he does, it's what he has been doing for the better part of a quarter century.

Being on vacation, I was on a self-imposed blackout because I wanted to enjoy my time off, so I missed the whole beginning of the spat. I did catch the original statement, but the follow-up completely escaped my attention.

The upshot is that the Democratic Party is all butt-hurt about Limbaugh saying "I hope he (Obama) fails" and wants to steer the conversation in that direction. What they conveniently leave out, however, is what Limbaugh wants Obama to fail at.

Here, from the transcript, is what Rush hopes Obama fails at: "Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." "

And now, conservative and neo-conservative pundits are busting Rush's chops for how he said what he said. They are falling for the Democrat's plans hook line and sinker, they are ignoring what was said because of how it was said. And any time you engage the enemy on ground of his choosing, you are at a disadvantage.

What Conservatives should do is say "You were upset over how he said what he said. Poor baby. Now let's talk about what he said instead of how he said it." And then we should force the conversation to stay on that topic, WHAT was said, not HOW it was said. So far all I see is EPIC FAIL.

I want Obama to fail also. I want Obama to fail at implementing his socialist policies. I want him to fail at socializing medicine. I want him to fail at nationalizing the banks and auto industry. I want him to fail at destroying the coal industry. I want him to fail at absorbing my 401K into the Socialist Security system. I want him to fail at any socialist policy that he brings up, because history has shown that socialism is a dismal failure everywhere it's been tried. Anyone who is truly a Conservative, or a Libertarian Conservative, should want the same thing.

Yes, I hear you talking about the socialism lite that pervades much of Europe. Let me ask you a simple question, if Europe had to provide for their own defense instead of relying on the US, how successful would their socialism lite be? If the US were to withdraw all military and foreign aid, how long would they last? Their socialism exists and works only because we, the USA, has enabled it. What happens when we become one of the takers instead of the giver? What happens when Atlas shrugs?

Limbaugh, Colter, Boortz and Hannity are entertainers. They do what they do for the specific purpose of selling more books and attracting a larger listening and (in Hannity's case) viewing audience to garner higher ratings. It's how they make their living, and they are good at it. That does not make them "spokespeople" for the Republican party, but the Republican party should keep in mind that they are not talking to themselves. They are not selling books to themselves. They are not appearing at functions all by themselves to speak to empty rooms. What they are doing is providing the voice of conservative America, and if you are campaigning to conservative America you should listen to what they are saying. But they are not the leaders of the Republican party.

The people that should concern you are the elected ones that wish to be our masters. They, not Rush, are the ones who pass the laws. They, not Colter, are the ones that (selectively) enforce those laws. They, not Hannity, are the ones who levy, collect, and spend taxes. They, not Boortz, are the ones that make the decisions that affect each and every one of us on a daily basis.

Let's get back on target.

UPDATE: I could have said it like this guy, but this is a G rated blog. Mostly.

UPDATE II: Patterico and some others are missing the point entirely. Apparently they are engrossed in the either/or option, the two options being either 1) Rush hopes Obama fails to get the policies enacted, but hopes the policies succeed if they are enacted or 2) Rush hopes Obama fails to get the policies enacted, and hopes the policies fail if they are enacted.

Here's option 3 cupcakes. Rush (and me, and Gonz, and, going by the comments, Annie and BoBo, and - well, just about everyone that doesn't have his or her head up their own ass or who isn't furtively contemplating their own navels) hopes that Obama fails to get his policies enacted. Period. Full stop.

We hope he fails.

There is no "but if the policies are enacted he hopes that..." because if they do get passed it won't make a flying fornication at a rolling pastry what who hopes afterwards.

If the policies are enacted, they are GOING to fail, and fail BIG TIME, because that's what socialist policies do EVERY TIME there isn't someone with deep pockets to pay the bill. And America has no one left behind them to pay the bills.

Ergo, Options 1 and 2 are bullshit and not worth squabbling about.

Like I said before.

Back.

On.

Target.

UPDATE III: I just had to put up the picture of the Dem's new billboard. I like it! Hat tip to the Rott.

14 comments:

AnnieMcPhee said...

All very well stated, Larry.

"Let me ask you a simple question, if Europe had to provide for their own defense instead of relying on the US, how successful would their socialism lite be? If the US were to withdraw all military and foreign aid, how long would they last? Their socialism exists and works only because we, the USA, has enabled it."

I have tried for some time to pound that into the heads of the left, but they just. don't. get. it. It's absolutely true, though.

It wasn't an accident that Obama failed to mention Limbaugh until after the inauguration, when he inexplicably used Limbaugh to bludgeon a bunch of senators during a legislative session. Now to most of us that sounds insane, the guy's a civilian. But it was clear what was meant, and what was meant was the all-out media assault, beginning with Rahmbo's claim that Rush is the leader of the party and continuing through the entire MSM, print & broadcast, through the blogosphere, etc. Culminating in a DNC campaign to erect a billboard (submit your slogans at the DNC website) to tell Rush what you think of him.

Rush Limbaugh does not have the power to levy a tax, to put me in prison, to sentence me to death, to shoot me, to send my son to war. But apparently he possesses the power to scare the hell out of one particular Messiah. Go figure.

Oh and by the way, there was a poll in 2006 in which people were asked if they wanted Bush to fail - 51 percent of Dims said yes. So what the hell ever. They're lying hypocrites and I have no patience whatever for their crap.

Larry said...

What I can't figure out is why in the world are so-called "conservative" leaders still allowing the opposition to define the conversation!?!?

But then again, I've been disappointed in the Republican "leadership" for ages now. There seems to be a few up and comers that have a backbone, but most of the upper echelon are noodle-spined.

The BoBo said...

Well - you know that it's always been one-sided. For the last 8 years all we have heard from the media, congress, and the blogosphere is how much they hoped Bush would fail and especially how much they hoped the war in Iraq would fail. There was never an uproar because the media was complicit.

The only one's talking about their constant degrading of the President and the demoralization of our troops were we bloggers and conservative talk shows.

The party never once spoke out the entire time that I can remember. Now - we have one talk show host saying the same thing we heard all this time and now it's a national story? Not only that - but they took him out of context.

Criminy! Personally, I hope Obama fails too. It would be good for our country if he does.

Larry said...

Absolutely correct on all points BoBo, with the addendum: The Left's attacks on President Bush were mostly personal in nature, with only a passing reference to this or that program they didn't agree with. Rush's "attack" was directed at Obama's programs, and was not at all personal in nature.
And when you point out that the Republican party never spoke out against it (I can't remember them ever doing so either) I have an RCOB moment. Noodle-spines, every damn one of them.

Aaron said...

While I'm not much a fan of Rush, I gotta say I liked how worded it, knowing damn well how it would be taken.

If we were forced to put up with eight years of hearing about how evil/stupid/greedy/cunning/blundering * President Bush was, why are we not allowed to do the same to the current POTUS? Oh sure, by disposition we'll restrain ourselves from gratuitous personal attacks, threats, and moonbattish conspiracy theories, but vocal opposition none the less.

It all reminds me of rabid AmWay members. Yes, it's a scam. You buy into it, now your hopes and dreams are invested in it, and anyone trying to tell you you'll never get rich off it is an enemy.

Hell with them. I hope he fails too. At getting anything accomplished at all.
*(and how the hell is someone so supposedly dumb controlling the weather anyway?)

Larry said...

Vocal opposition, by all means, and not slipping into full frontal nuttery is vitally important. Too many places are slipping from previously well thought out debate to "OMG WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!:" and it's making me crazy.

Thanks for dropping by Aaron. I'm looking forward to the space opera when you get it published.

AnnieMcPhee said...

It's getting harder not to sound nutty when we're in the midst of such insanity, Larry. It's getting harder not to sound like a conspiracy theorist when they are so up-front about their, well, conspiracies. It's not even Orwellian; it's like these people can't resist rubbing our noses in the fact that they're purposely shitting on us, purposely destroying the economy (Cloward-Piven) and laughing at us all the while. I just...I'm stymied, Larry and honest to blog, I'm not trying to come off nutty, but it gets harder with each passing day. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. When I read about how Pelosi and Obama didn't have to discuss the stimulus because they both knew what had to be done, and saw the attack on Limbaugh come instantaneously from all quarters the minute Obama mentioned his name...I'm sorry, this is fucked up.

Larry said...

I don't have a problem with pointing out their conspiracies, as long as you have the facts to back it up. But you can report without going off the deep end.
For eight years we have pointed and laughed at the barking mad frothing moonbats, and rightly so. I just don't want us to become the barking mad frothing wingnuts.
Your "Helter Skelter" piece puts it nicely, they aren't even hiding it. The real problem, as I see it, is that the conservatives are in such disarray. That's the problem that we on the right side of the spectrum must deal with, and we aren't going to deal with it effectively by screeching and howling like a bunch of feces flinging monkeys. We have to keep our heads about us.
Something else that works against us is that we are individualists by nature and have a hard time becoming a collective. It's easier when we have someone to rally around, and that is what the Republican party so desperately needs, and is so sadly lacking...a leader.

AnnieMcPhee said...

No, you've put your finger on something I've been wanting to say - all the liberals' talk (and it is talk) about Rush being the "de facto leader" misses a key point...that we are individualists by nature, as you point out. We don't want to be led around by the nose; we don't want to be RULED - remember the infamous question in the debate between McCain and Obi-wan - "how will you RULE?" and half of us were screaming at our TVs and saying "If Obama agrees to RULE then CALL him on it; we don't WANT to be RULED; we want to be FREE to live our lives within the reasonable constraints of common law and free trade!

I don't dispute that we may need a galvanizing force, but it's not going to be an easy thing to come up with when the left is bent on the personal destruction of anyone who embodies anything like that for the conservatives and libertarians. And will stop at nothing to do that.

Thank you for not yet lumping me in with the barking wingnuts, but there are times when I get hopping mad and need to do a bit of barking, considering the things that are being done.

Larry said...

Like the Texas blacksmith, when the Englishman asked who his master was:

That sumbitch ain't been born!

AnnieMcPhee said...

"There is no "but if the policies are enacted he hopes that..." because if they do get passed it won't make a flying fornication at a rolling pastry what who hopes afterwards."

Haha! It's funny because it's true :D

Gotta love that billboard - did they get some really really clever conservative mole in there to make it up for them? Because there is no other excuse for that. Bad design, bad execution, ambiguous slogan...and that was with the entire intertubes COMPETING to make the best one they could? ZOMG that is horribly, horribly pathetic.

Larry said...

It is pathetic, but it seems to be par for the course.

Hammer said...

Rush has em running scared and I love it.

Larry said...

Hammer!!!!! Good to see you!