Posted on 10/21/2009 9:27:17 AM PDT by marstegreg
"President Obama is working systematically to marginalize the most powerful forces behind the Republican Party, setting loose top White House officials to undermine conservatives in the media, business and lobbying worlds.
With a series of private meetings and public taunts, the White House has targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the biggest-spending pro-business lobbying group in the country; Rush Limbaugh, the country’s most-listened-to conservative commentator; and now, with a new volley of combative rhetoric in recent days, the insurance industry, Wall Street executives and Fox News"
Meanwhile Obama has soaring job approval ratings..... (-13% today)
obama might as well try to marginalize Mount Everest.
Rush IS. He WAS before obama was ever heard of and he’ll still be when obama is just a bad memory of American history.
A real “unifier” huh?
Nice dupe job on America
That strategy has the potential of making those so marginalized more powerful, especially as Obama becomes less popular.
Have you noticed, the more Obama do just that, the more Rush is more popular?
Declaring war on Rush Limbaugh, FOX News, the Chamber of Commerce, all the while screwing the military, spending trillions of dollars and trying to take over our health care.
Republicans “should” have it in the bag next year. Sadly, they’re running far too many Rhinos.
I’m in no way a conspiracy theorists, but I absolutely believe that Rush was set up to fail in the NFL fiasco. There’s no doubt in my mind it was orchestrated by Axelrod and Emmanuel.
If Obama silences his critics, then we won't be able to tell that we don't have a job, prices are going sky high, and we can't afford to buy gasoline to drive our old cars.
Sounds like Cuba to me.
The more he engages in totalitarian behavior, the more he alienates the average American. He has yet to figure out that the Chicago Way is NOT, and never will be, the American Way. Unfortunately he has surrounded himself with autocratic thugs and admirers of tyrants. The nation is turning against him.
I hope this will translate next year into Republican majorities in Congress. And THIS time, GOP, when the Donks come to you with “minority power sharing,” you remember how they acted when they got the majority and tell them to go p*** up a rope.
"Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel." ..... Mark Twain
It’s the Chicago way!
Go ahead socialist!....DIG YOUR OWN GRAVE!
Great comments!
It really would resemble a Soviet-style op back in the day. Thus, I believe it is very much feasible given the players.
“Meanwhile Obama has soaring job approval ratings..... (-13% today)”
That whole thing has me confused. Rassmussen reports -13. Others fudge their numbers. People I talk to in my everyday life are either oblivious, or quite content with “the one”. If Obama truely is slipping in approval, the Obama administration is doing a great job of keeping it out of the news, and stopping the snowball effect.
At this point, the Obama/Alinsky plan seems to be working.
It seems that Obama and Osama’s favorable ratings rise and fall at the same time, doesn’t it?
Really?
Funny. All I see is 0bozo and his Chicago gangster mafia style family, hunkered down like Hitler in his Berlin bunk house, as 0bozo’s poll numbers continue in a free fall, while 0bozo’s strong critics like Limbaugh and Beck grab huge ratings, and become vastly more powerful and influential.
0bama has never won any real fight in his life(I don't consider Mr “Friends, there is no need for you to worry about electing 0bama president “ McCain, to be a real fight. This is one fight he is going lose and lose big. He is going to get crushed!
My 89 yo German mother agrees with you.
I believe the Obama Administration needs to create a distraction from their failures. Paul Krugman referred to that ‘mystery’ factor that eludes them. They’ve done everything to bring back the ‘economy’, but the economy shuns them? What gives? Why isn’t their program working?
Alas, they still don’t believe that they cannot control the ‘economy’. Many parrallels to FDR during this time too. I’m very amused. I hope someone is taking notes this time. There is very little written about the failures of FDR and his brain trust of ‘fellow travelers’.
‘This is one fight he is going lose and lose big. He is going to get crushed!’
Agreed.
His administration will fall on its on merits.
I agree. there is NOTHING nefarious that I would put past that bunch of criminals. I'm counting the days to the 2010 election...
"Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel." ..... Mark Twain
That is the theory under which the Democrats always operate. You don't see them picking a fight with ABC or CBS or The New York Times in this case, and you don't see those organs of monopoly journalism picking on the Democrats, either. To the contrary, they are stonewalling the best they can as the ACORN scandals break.The Democrats always make common cause with monopoly journalism; that is precisely the reason they have positive labels such as "progressive" and "liberal," and their opponents get negative labels like "conservative" or "right wing." You don't think "liberal" is a positive label? True, it has been run into the ground - but in 1920 everyone in America was liberal. Everyone, worldwide, understood that "liberalism" was about liberty.
But in America, "liberalism" was given its American Newspeak - essentially inverted - meaning in the 1920s (source: Safire's New Political Dictionary). The fact that the American socialists have acquired a word to exploit is bad enough; the real disaster is that we do not now have a word which truly descriptive of our own political perspective. We only have the smear words which the socialists have assigned to us. And make no mistake, in America "conservative" is inherently a negative connotation just as surely as marketers love to boldly proclaim that the product which they are flogging is NEW!
Monopoly journalism is "liberal" for the simple reason that they have no reason not to be - liberalism is criticism and second guessing of those who work to a bottom line, and that is journalism's natural incentive. Journalists don't do anything but talk, why would you expect them to promote the people who do things over the people like themselves who only talk about them?
I was just thinking that if we were using the Alinsky rules, it would certainly seem like it. If it depends on using the "isolate, polarize, etc" rule, it seems like it would be working like a charm. He is RUNNING SCARED. Keep pressing in, folks. :o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.