Posted on 03/04/2009 3:18:37 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Inside the Dems' anti-Rush plan By: Jonathan Martin March 4, 2009 04:04 AM EST
Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House.
The strategy took shape after Democrats included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.
Soon it clicked: Democrats realized they could roll out a new GOP bogeyman for the post-Bush era by turning to an old one in Limbaugh, a polarizing figure since he rose to prominence in the 1990s.
Limbaugh is embracing the line of attack, suggesting a certain symbiosis between him and his political adversaries.
"The Administration is enabling me,” he wrote in an email to POLITICO. “They are expanding my profile, expanding my audience and expanding my influence. An ever larger number of people are now being exposed to the antidote to Obamaism: conservatism, as articulated by me. An ever larger number of people are now exposed to substantive warnings, analysis and criticism of Obama's policies and intentions, a ‘story’ I own because the [mainstream media] is largely the Obama Press Office.”
The bigger, the better, agreed Democrat James Carville. “It’s great for us, great for him, great for the press,” he said of Limbaugh. “The only people he’s not good for are the actual Republicans in Congress.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
We agree!
Oh come on... McCain’s problems far outweighed anything Rush could or couldn’t do. McCain doomed himself with his RINO ways, it’s laughable to think Rush could fix what was so unbelievably broken.
I think the biggest mistake the dims are making is that they are attacking a PRIVATE CITIZEN, not an elected official. Rush has the freedom to fight back. Elected officials (especially the RINOS) won't say a thing. The dims will continue their attacks on the right until public image of their tactic changes.
“We’re gonna drag Yosemite Sam (McCain), kicking and screaming, across the finish line.”
Rush had every right to chide, mock and ridicule McCain...
but not as the “leader” of the Republican party.
That is a devastating box to be put in (by the Dems/Soros/Alynski-ites)!
The Republican Party is not going to disappear. Things will remain the same-as it alyways has.
“Meet the new boss-same as the old boss” (The Who-circa 1971)
Does Obama think he’s still running for office? That he has to defeat the Republicans? I’ve got news for him - he’s now the President and his enemies are political STATES like North Korea and Iran that want to take us down. NOT radio talk show hosts. He needs to protect the country - not the jobs in dem PR firms.
Yes, we are agreed. And I think when you put it that way most FReepers would agree.
Now, how do we break out of that box?
It needs to happen right now!
Rush says, “This is my fight, not the GOP’s.”
Steele says, “My duly acquired authority over the GOP will be neither usurped by nor consigned to any other person. You want a piece of me? Here I am.”
Then have both of them attack on separate fronts and we'll see this thing turn around.
That is the dumbest take I've seen on this. Rush is NOT part of the RNC or the GOP. He's a private citizen who is also the most articulate speaker for conservative principles. No one is allowing him authority over anything, nor responsibility within the RNC/GOP. No one! Nor is he aspiring to such authority/responsibility.
This is a blatant attempt at denying Rush his voice. And it is something you are apparently in favor of. Brilliant on your part and also disgusting. The fact that the RINOs are complacent enough to go along with this is disgusting enough, but for a so-called FReeper and conservative to do the same is revolting.
Get a clue and get a life. If you can't fight for conservative values, and defend those who articulate them, then get lost.
I see that you're retired. Hopefully you're retired from running the campaigns of GOP candidates. But your insight, and understanding of political strategy leads me to believe you're probably either Ken Mehlman or Ed Gillespie.
You fight back by attacking their strength, Obama’s public image, specifically his sincerity.
Both Rush and the GOP need to explain what Obama is trying to do and call out the administration for playing cynical political games in a time a crisis.
Take that message and hammer it repeatedly. Ignore any media attempts to stir up drama.
Darn right!
Gloves are off! You want war, Mr Emmanual, you chump, bring. it. on.
Is that all you have to come back with? Sheesh!
In fact, you being a Newbie and all, if you can’t get your head around conservatives defending conservatives, then you need to return to the DU, KOS, or wherever you came from.
Do you honestly think either Mehlman or Gillespie have two good words for Rush?
They both flee conservatism, especially social conservatism, like a plague.
The problem with this little attempt at branding is that it is effective only so long as the negative numbers on which it is based remain constant, and those numbers are the most evanescent thing in politics. In this case those numbers are strongest among people who have never listened to the program, the 18-25 demographic, and the campaign is based on the hope that they do not change their minds. Given we're only one month in, I think that's a bad bet.
It might be a very effective strategem were we actually in a campaign environment, this buildup of a third party as a puppet master. But contrary to the current Democratic approach that all of politics is a constant campaign, we aren't in that mode and it is beginning to be painfully obvious that Obama is a far better campaigner than he is an executive. Were the constant-campaign theory correct that wouldn't be a problem. It is a problem.
Palin isn't necessarily the next standard-bearer but she's the frontrunner at the moment. The difficulty with the focus on Rush is that smears pointed her direction are no longer as effective. We've already seen Andrew Sullivan left holding the bag on the Palin pregnancy issue, becoming a laughingstock for his trouble. People may have cared six months ago but they don't care now. With Rush as a lightning rod they'll continue not to. He is, in effect, running interference for the next Republican standard-bearer as long as the emphasis is kept upon him.
There is an additional risk from the Democrat point of view, and that's that it formalizes the change in emphasis that is a natural consequence of their majority in Congress and possession of the White House. It is that Rush is not accountable to anyone for what he says but Obama is entirely accountable for what he does. This is the reverse of the comfortable position the Dems enjoyed under Bush and most of them still haven't realized that Bush-sniping isn't going to work anymore. And that's a game that Rush plays better than anyone in the country.
I might note with some amusement that Carville, recently quoted as characterizing Rush as a "mean, awful man," was also the best man at Rush's wedding. He is a consummate professional at what he does, meaning that not a single word coming out of his mouth that is directed at a microphone is uncalculated. Carville is a terrific smear artist who has somehow managed to keep most of his listeners convinced that he's sincere. When you can fake sincerity, you've got it made.
I have no idea what if anything Mehlman and Gillespie think of Limbagh. What I do know, is both characters have tin ears when it comes to designing and implementing a political strategy.
What has gone on with the GOP and this Rush Limbaugh fiasco hearkens back to the same stupidity that governed GOP political strategy in 1992, 1996, 2000, 2006 and 2008.
For the last 47 or so months, the DNC attacks and the GOP reacts. And it's more of the same.
Putting GOP politicians in a position where they have to defend and embrace or deny and repel Rush Limbaugh is a winning strategy for the DNC and a losing strategy for GOP.
As I've said. If the GOP Politician denounces Limbaugh, they alienate themselves from their base and good chunk of their financial support. If they embrace Limbaugh (not Limbaugh's message, mind you, but the man), that becomes a 2010 DNC campaign commercial linking the GOP Pol with a WILDLY unpopular man as viewed by over 75% of the electorate.
Limbaugh is less popular in this country than Jeremiah Wright. What part of that is so confusing to so many?
People on this board are viewing this as some type of ideological war between RINOS and DEMS and "real" conservatives. It isn't. It's MASTERFUL political gamesmanship once again on part of the DNC and not the GOP.
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.