So, I’m reading articles about the present “feud” between The AnointedOne Barack Hussein Obama, and Rush Limbaugh.
Something stuck me as profound about this little tempest in a teapot. He just telegraphed to the whole world how weak and unsure he is about his presidency.
Here’s a portion of the article from the New York Post that got me to thinking:
President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.
“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.
Limbaugh Responds, Slams Obama
One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts.
“There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats,” the official said. “We shouldn’t let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done.”
That wasn’t Obama’s only jab at Republicans today.
In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: “I won,” according to aides briefed on the meeting.
“I will trump you on that.”
Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.
First, understand this: Obama and the Democrats have control of both houses of Congress, are only 2 votes away from a filibuster-proof Senate vote, and also hold the Executive Branch. In the past, it’s been an EASY thing to get at least a couple of weak-kneed Republicans to screw their party (read: McCain, Snowe, Chafee, Graham) and jump to the Democrat side of the aisle. If Democrats remain in lock-step as they pretty much have in the past, they’ll get their agenda passed without breaking much of a sweat.
So, why does Obama have his panties in a bunch over a guy like Rush Limbaugh?
In addition to that, why isn’t he making an issue over that outright insane whack-job Keith Olbermann on MSNBC? That piece of walking excrement is just as devisive, if not more so, than Limbaugh. I’m sure that some of it is because Olbermann doesn’t have the audience that Limbaugh does. But I’m sure the other part of this is that Olbermann will be so busy licking the shoes of his imperious leader (Obama) that he won’t be much of an issue for Obama. Plus, Olbermann is as much of a delusional socialist as Obama has shown to be, so birds of a feather…
But the point is here is that Limbaugh is basically a non-factor as to what comes out of Washington DC. He may have twenty- or thirty-million listeners (something like 10% of the US public), but he has NO control on the levers of power in Washington DC. And it’s REAL clear that Republicans don’t listen to Limbaugh, given the person they ran against Obama in 2008.
Limbaugh has been mocking McCain for years now. Limbaugh is by no means a McCain supporter.
So the “partisan politics” is essentially a non-factor.
I’ll tell you why Obama has his panties in a twist about Republicans and Limbaugh. First, someone in the Obama Administration has figured out that maybe, just maybe, Limbaugh’s criticism of Republican moderates is starting to sink in. Republicans, in the last couple of elections, have been putting their “non-partisan” moderates in the forefront, highlighting their “big tent” party, catering to illegal immigrants (translation: Hispanics), and so on. The result? RESOUNDING defeats. Obviously, rock-bottom is within Republican reach. In Michigan, they ran DeVos against incumbent governor Granholm, with nary a difference between the two. The result? An utterly FAILED governor handily defeated a successful businessman. The same was true of the match-up between Obama and McCain. Obama – an inexperienced socialist with ties to radicals and terrorists – pounded the crap out of McCain. However, when you look at their platforms, and McCain’s past voting history, there wasn’t much of a difference between the two.
So, Limbaugh’s analysis might find some pretty fertile ground in a devastated Republican party.
But I think the real reason isn’t because of Limbaugh himself, or Limbaugh’s message. I think the real reason why Rush Limbaugh is now a target of Obama is because Obama is essentially weak. He is uncertain. He doesn’t like criticism, like most socialists out there. Limbaugh is a media organ that can be VERY successful if there is no turnaround in the economy in the next six months. So, to check this, Limbaugh needs to be silenced.
This is the first obvious sign of a weak leader with a weak or uncertain plan. Confident people are sure in their actions, and confident of the outcomes of their plan. It’s the reason why one of the first things a dictator or tyrant does is silence ALL criticism, so as to ensure total control of governed. One need only look at famous dictators in the past – Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Castro, Mao (all socialists, by the way) – to see this played out over and over again.
The present major media outlets are, as Bernard Goldberg notes, slobbering all over Barack Obama. They won’t run any stories that make him look bad, or outright criticize him. However, Obama isn’t content to have a couple of weeds in what would be a perfect lawn. No, he has to rip them all out. That’s because a perfect lawn to someone like Obama, is far more important than the fact the he owns a house with a leaky roof, and a crumbling foundation. The exterior appearance is what matters.
Thus, the attack on Limbaugh.
Now that the “historic” nature of Obama’s election is beginning to fade, he needs to start actually showing results. Otherwise, that Democrat majority in Congress could rapidly change. I recall the same thing happened with Clinton.
Again, it shows weakness. And it is a stupid mistake.
Secondly, having to convince Republicans to gladly go along for the ride only reinforces the notion of Obama’s weakness. He doesn’t have to. In fact, he should be wanting to OWN the issue. He should be willing to want to stand or fall based on his principles, and the turn-around of the economy. Instead, he has to negotiate with people who haven’t much of a say in how the country gets run over the next two years. And let’s face it: with the current hostility directed at Republicans by major media outlets, and the public at large, no one is going to give a flying crap what Republicans have to say about Obama, his plan, the recession, or Democrats. Their criticism will get muted, ignored, or turned against them. Most likely, the Obama people know this in advance.
Then, there is a slight problem with conservative Blue Dog Democrats maybe not going all too quietly into that “good night” along with the rest of the socialists in the party. So, if Dear Leader can intimidate a few spineless Republicans into sharing the blame (I GUARANTEE you, they will NEVER share credit if things go well), it only strengthens his hand.
I think it means Obama desperately looking for cover. One more show of weakness. I think it displays his total non-confidence with any of his “stimulus” package actually working. In fact, I think he’s fully aware that it’s not going to work, based on the fact that similar tactics have been employed in Michigan, and the result has been a near-decade-long recession. I also think he’s a little concerned about the spectre of Jimmy Carter hanging over his shoulder. So, if he can get a good number of Republicans to go along with his “plan”, he can successfully hide behind the “bipartisan” agreement on his stimulus, thus using incompetent and spineless Republicans as a shield to avoid responsibility, much in the same way Jennifer Granholm used George Bush as an excuse for her ineptitude in turning around the Michigan economy (in fact, she was blaming Bush for Michigan’s woes when the rest of the country was enjoying an economic boom).
His actions telegraph weakness.
Dumb. Dumb and telling. The only think that would be more stupid is for Republicans to go along with this idiocy. Something I wouldn’t put past them given their recent track record.
I often write posts well in advance of releasing them on the blog, and in several instances new information comes to light. This is an update to information that is relevant to the post in question.
So, I’m stuck in snow-bound traffic, listening to WJR (the Frank Beckmann Show). On comes Mike Rogers, US Representative from the Brighton, Michigan area. He was in the meeting with Obama when he held court with Republicans just the other day.
According to Rep. Rogers, Obama asked if the present stimulus bill was negotiated between Democrats and Republicans; he was informed it wasn’t. In short, Democrats cut Republicans out of ANY input they might have with the bill. This, of course, is not unusual for Democrats. They’ve done this time-and-time again in the past when they were the ones in control of Congress.
Once more, according to Rep. Rogers, he claimed that Obama was “surprised” by this revelation. As if he either assumed that Republicans were given a voice in the process, or had been told otherwise (or what just acting). To paraphrase Rep. Rogers, “I may have read him wrong, but his reaction seemed to be to be one of genuine surprise.” he also seemed a little concerned that the stimulus bill included provisions for things like family planning.
So much for everyone “coming together” to fix the “problems” of this country – Obama included.
So the man obviously has no clue as to the activities or plans of the other leaders in the Democrat party.