It's been done for clinton; this 'president' won't get off any easier.
Posted on 03/03/2009 6:55:42 AM PST by kellynla
Here we go again. Rush Limbaugh is public enemy No. 1.
Liberal bloggers and media chin-strokers are aghast at Limbaugh's statement that he hopes Barack Obama fails.
Well, given what Obama wants to do, I hope he fails too. Of course I want the financial crisis to end -- who doesn't? But Obama's agenda is much more audacious. Pretty much every major news outlet in the country has said as a matter of objective analysis that Obama wants to repeal the legacy of Ronald Reagan and remake the country as a European welfare state. And yet people are shocked that conservatives, Limbaugh included, want Obama to fail in this effort?
What movie have they been watching? Because I could swear that conservatives opposing the expansion of big government is what conservatives do. It's Aesopian. The scorpion must sting the frog. The conservative must object to socialized medicine.
Besides, since when did hoping for the failure of ideological agendas you disagree with become unpatriotic? Liberals were hardly treasonous when they hoped for the failure of George W. Bush's Social Security privatization scheme.
Regardless, the war on Limbaugh from the left is a tired rehash. In 1995, Bill Clinton tried to blame the Oklahoma City bombing on Rush. In 2002, then-Sen. Tom Daschle, the leader of the Democratic opposition, claimed that Limbaugh's listeners weren't "satisfied just to listen." They were a violent threat to decent public servants like him.
In just the last month, Obama suggested that Republicans were in thrall to Rush. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has anointed him the GOP's leader. Rep. Barney Frank complained that Republicans didn't give Obama enough standing ovations during his address to Congress because they are afraid of Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Hey, Barney.....what did you say when all the black democrats, lead by Marxine Waters, never stood at all when GWB gave HIS State of The Union address, hmmm?
Message received loud and clear!
The more the MSM whines and complains about Rush Limbaugh’s comment, the more the average reader is going to ask himself “Why does Rush want Our Dearly Beloved Messiah to fail?” and, we can hope, that average reader will do his own homework and come to the conclusion that Rush is right, again!
The MSM thinks if they say “Rush Limbaugh is a threat to democracy” enough times the viewers will suddenly start nodding their heads and chant “Rush must be stopped, Rush must be stopped.” I know the BHO campaign did get a large number of dolts to say “Change we can believe in.” but that only lasted a few months.
Interesting to note so called Republican ‘moderates’ agree with the Obama administration on this.
Hence my tag line.
Thank you.
It's been done for clinton; this 'president' won't get off any easier.
Democrats are trying to create a scenario where the people will blame Rush/Republicans, rather than Obama, when it becomes clear Obama has failed (and worse yet has done great damage).
Liberals are renowned for their good manners? Has even Jonah been brainwashed by the liberal media?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
He may have a point. Even if they ran reruns of the old Firing Line it would provide a service of airing what Buckley used to call the conservative demonstration. There has been a gap ever since he stepped down as editor of National Review. The debates were always good on Firing Line at nailing down issues and the philosophical differences between conservatives and liberals. Those differences need to be addressed at the intellectual level and in formal philosophical debates.
#7 A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
Sol Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
(apology in advance if you're an ESL freeper)
Rush is one tough cookie and...he can take whatever they dish out to him because he stands on the side of right and the side of our country like the rest of us silent majority. The sleeping giant has been awoken once again!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Worked for them before, when people blamed Newt/Republicans, rather than Clinton in a struggle for a budget fiscal responsibility.
“William Buckley showed conservatism was a philosophy of common sense and good manners”
Correct. But who remembers this? Conservatism needs to be advocated again and again, in all possible formats.
Coulter, Levin or Savage, while all quite different (and successful!) are too brush to attract all those who as Rush says live the conservative lives while not voting conservative.
Bennett and Prager are great, but maybe too soft for some. Sean has enough detractors here, but he is relentless in pounding in simple messages. Rush is the best in reiterating conservative ideas (while also turning off possible converts by his shtick - he knows about it, btw, as he talked about it just the last week, but sticks to his guns).
If we can’t get a voice in MSM in any time soon, we need all the voices we can get.
Its less about updating the message in its core - I agree that its not needed - but providing different formats accessible and understandable by different people.
About age of Reagan - Hannity, Levin and others were broadcasting large pieces of his speeches. I can’t have enough of them. I think we can get 3 hours a day of just Reagan speeches (not just his presidential ones, but older as well) - tune in anytime and listen for a few moments.
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.