Ed Morrissey: “Obama fiddled with Rush Limbaugh while Wall Street burned”

Loading

My favorite line today comes from Ed Morrissey with this one:

Obama fiddled with Rush Limbaugh while Wall Street burned.

This is after Ed learned the White House attacks on Rush are a deliberate strategy to get everyones minds off of the real issue’s of the day:

So far, Obama’s attack machine — and there’s no other term for it — has mostly succeeded. While the markets have lost 18% of their value in the six weeks of his leadership, all Democrats can talk about is Rush. Newspapers and media have followed suit, and so have the blogs. Usually excellent sites like The Moderate Voice and Political Machine have turned themselves into almost nothing but anti-Limbaugh sites, where Jazz Shaw’s light satire of the trend gets completely subsumed in the overwhelming focus on someone who has no direct power on policy or enforcement. Instead of focusing attention on the real policy leaders in Washington — all Democrats — whose every move has received a resounding vote of no confidence from investors, they have allowed themselves to get distracted by a deliberate strategy of misdirection originating in the highest levels of the White House.

It’s reminiscent of Nixon’s enemies list, and it comes from the supposed messiah of Hope and Change.

And Rush is telling the White House to bring it on:

RUSH: It is on the record — thanks to Politico.com — since last fall, the White House, led by Rahm Emanuel, the chief of staff to Barack Obama, has been targeting me, your host, your harmless, lovable little fuzzball. Their standard operating procedure: they need a demon to distract and divert from what their agenda is. They need a demon about whom they can lie so as to persuade average Americans that they’re the good guys, the benevolent good guys, and the mean SOBs are their enemies trying to stop this great young little president from doing miraculous and wonderful things.

Here is a new ad that this union bunch is running in Washington, DC, ladies and gentlemen. And, of course, it’s been picked up all over the Web.

~~~

RUSH: That’s the union bunch. Can you just see…? (laughing) “Call the Republican leadership and say no to Limbaugh.” (laughing) Now, ladies and gentlemen, the Politico story today. I got an e-mail last night from the writer of the story, Jonathan Martin, who did not tell me the full details of what the story they were working on was. He did not tell me that they have discovered that there is a team inside the White House targeting me and that they’ve been doing this since last fall, when they went out and did some polling data and found out I’ve got very high negatives among certain groups. So they thought, “Well, this is the guy to demonize! Since Bush is leaving, we need somebody,” and so this is being led from the White House. There is an orchestrated attack, daily drumbeat on me from the White House. The participants here are James Carville, Paul Begala and Rahm Emanuel.

But make no mistake about it. Emanuel is the leader of all of this. Carville and Begala are just trying to ride my fame into their fortune and become relevant again. Begala and Carville, don’t confuse them with the power brokers that are managing this. It all Emanuel. Begala and Carville are second-rate talking heads on CNN. CNN has no audience. Rahm Emanuel is the power behind the throne — and don’t let his effeminate nature and his ballerina past mislead you on this. He may look effeminate (he was a ballerina at one time) but he has the feral instincts of a female rat defending its young. Well, take a look. When Emanuel and Carville and Begala are together (and I’ve seen pictures) it looks like a reunion of the Village People. (singing) Y! M! C! A! They are really the official greeters in Roswell, New Mexico, in Area 51 where Carville was born.

My point here is that these are really odious, empty, nasty people who are feasting on their own arrogance. They are power hungry. But, you know what? They’ve never had a serious debate over ideas. Their goal is to destroy opponents, which is what they’re trying to do now. They don’t want to engage opponents. Their idea of victory is the destruction of the opponent. They’re not for a level playing field. They want to clear the playing field so that their ideas do not have to undergo any scrutiny. So what do they do? They leak stories to The Politico intended to create impressions about their own importance and their brilliance, when in fact they aren’t even bit players on the nation’s stage. This is Emanuel, and this is Obama.

But I have an idea. If these guys are so impressed with themselves, and if they are so sure of their correctness, why doesn’t President Obama come on my show? We will do a one-on-one debate of ideas and policies.

~~~

Just come on this program. Let’s have a little debate. You tell me how wrong I am and you can convince the rest of the Americans that don’t agree with you how wrong we all are. You’re a smart guy, Mr. President. You don’t need these hacks to front for you. You’ve debated the best! You’ve debated Hillary Clinton. You’ve debated John Edwards. You’ve debated Joe Biden. You’ve debated Dennis Kucinich. You’ve debated the best out there. You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity. Don’t send lightweights like Begala and Carville to do your bidding — and forget about the ballerina, Emanuel. He’s got things to do in his office. These people, compared to you, Mr. President, are rhetorical chum.

~~~

But I’ll cover the cost. I will cover the cost, Mr. President, so that the taxpayers do not have to pay for it, as they did your Super Bowl party, and as they do your Wednesday afternoon cocktail party. So you have no excuses. Your flunkies are demanding this debate. Your flunkies are targeting a private citizen with an enemies list that so far has three or four names on it: Mine; Rick Santelli; Jim Cramer at CNBC; and let’s not forget Joe the Plumber, who your allies in Ohio also tried to destroy. The difference is that Joe the Plumber does not have his own microphone every day. They’re shutting Santelli up at CNBC. They’re going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he’ll go down with a fight. That isn’t going to happen here, to me.

I’m calling. I’m ready. I’ll do everything I can to facilitate it. You’re a very courageous man, Mr. President. I am, after all, just The Last Man Standing. If you take me out, if you can wipe me out in a debate and prove to the rest of America that what I say is senseless and wrong, do you realize you will own the United States of America? You will have no opposition. You have America’s media in your back pocket. It’s amazing. In 1972, Richard Nixon had an enemies list, and the media was outraged by this. They were outraged. At the same time, those who weren’t on it were a little jealous. But they were outraged that a president would engage in this kind of behavior toward the media. Now they go after a private citizen.

Rahm Emanuel is leading the team going after a private citizen, and the Drive-By Media applaud, get on board and help further the mission. We live in different times. So if you can wipe me out — and, by the way, Mr. President, and Mr. Emanuel: Don’t make the mistake of assuming I’m wiping myself out here in the process. I want to thank you guys for elevating me beyond the stature I already earned and achieved, because now more and more Americans have the opportunity to learn who you really are, what your ideas will really accomplish, and what damage and harm I think your policies will bring for a very, very long time to them and to this country. So I want to thank you for the opportunity. Obviously, it’s a threat targeting me. I’ve extended the invitation. I’m looking forward to hearing back from whoever in your cabal one way or the other on accepting my offer.

Obama is doing a bang up job of changing the tone in Washington eh?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Obama has a breathtakingly bold agenda. If he succeeds, he’ll have his picture on American currency later on in the 21st century. I have been writing on this blog since shortly after the election that it is his strategy to push the GOP far to the right and co-opt the center. If he does that, he can pass any legislation he wants. As much as you guys think he’s a socialist, he’s only increasing the government sector of the economy by 2% and there isn’t a single true “socialist” initiative in anything he’s presented to date. 2/3 of the country is seeing it exactly his way. He’ll have his own version of the New Deal passed and signed into law before the GOP decides what its own position should be regarding Rush Limbaugh.

I know that no one here will ever take my word for it: here it’s explained very well on a very good conservative blog:

http://lonestartimes.com/2009/03/04/the-war-on-rush-aka-how-the-left-is-winning-the-middle/

Here’s a quote, illustrating the crux of the problem:

>>Limbaugh and other right-wing talkers are popular with a third of the country. Fairly or not, they turn off moderates and self-described independents (and, for the left, conservative talk radio is the font of all evil). Most politicians would prefer to have 70 percent of the public on their side at the cost of losing 30 percent, even if that requires being less than fair to the 30 percent.<<

While you guys are hiding out in your echo chamber, preaching to the choir, Obama is indeed winning the middle. You need to spend more time communicating to the middle, as opposed to spending all of your time and effort reinforcing the conservative base, if you want to have any hope of derailing Obama’s agenda.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

“While you guys are hiding out in your echo chamber, preaching to the choir, Obama is indeed winning the middle.”

That’s funny you say that. Obama seems to be losing even David Brooks and Maureen Dowd at the NYT.

David Brooks:
“Those of us who consider ourselves moderates … are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Maureen Dowd:
“. .Team Obama sounds hollow, chanting that ‘the status quo is not acceptable,’ even while conceding that the president is accepting the status quo by signing a budget festooned with pork.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04dowd.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Larry said. While you guys are hiding out in your echo chamber, preaching to the choir, Obama is indeed winning the middle.

It doesn’t bother you that a president of the United States has stooped so low as to pick at talk show hosts? That the People’s House is being used to plot against public citizens in attempt to ruin them?

I’m going to count on that “middle” having a bit more class and dignity and these immature antics will discust them.

BTW, your WSJ poll. Respondents polled were 51% Dem/leaning dem and 30 % Rep/leaning rep. Real exciting.

I believe the more correct phrase is that – Rush fiddled while wall street burned. He and some of the fringe seem to be hung up on name calling ( i.e. Socialist, Marxist, Dictator etc.) rather than createing a solid alternative plan for helping the mess both we and the world are in right now. Doing nothing will result in exactly that – nothing! I would suggest you spend more time on offering solutions rather than railing against those who trying! I also think Bush in the last few months was trying to help find some solutions but this economic mess is deep, complex and difficult and by the way, Obama has been President for about 6 weeks not 6 years.

@Don Schuster:

If you were a regular listener, or an irregular listener, or a person with even a wisp of an interest in knowing the facts you would have already found out that Rush has been offering alternate plans every single day on his radio program, but you didn’t feel compelled to try and research that for yourself did you?

As to hurry up and do something, I’ll go with Thomas Jefferson’s advice on the matter: “Delay is preferable to error.”

On most occasions, doing nothing is preferable to doing the wrong thing. This current debacle is a prime example. We have shoveled tens and hundreds of billions of dollars down a rat hole never to be seen again, yet the markets continue to tank.

Why is that?

Could it possibly be that the markets have lost their confidence in “The Won”?

Could it be that those who have skin in the game saw the danger of BO a long way out?

Image Source,Photobucket Uploader Firefox Extension

Image Source,Photobucket Uploader Firefox Extension

Furthermore, if you weren’t suffering from a deficit of intellectual acuity you would know that Rush has nothing to do with the performance of Wall Street, one way or the other.

Zip. Zero. Zilch.

Nada.

BO, on the other hand, has a lot of influence on the stock market.

@George: You said it George and I liked it so much I am going to repeat it.

“While you guys are hiding out in your echo chamber, preaching to the choir, Obama is indeed winning the middle.”

That’s funny you say that. Obama seems to be losing even David Brooks and Maureen Dowd at the NYT.

David Brooks:
“Those of us who consider ourselves moderates … are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Maureen Dowd:
“. .Team Obama sounds hollow, chanting that ‘the status quo is not acceptable,’ even while conceding that the president is accepting the status quo by signing a budget festooned with pork.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04dowd.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

I would just add to that the disclosure this week that Chris Buckley, son of William F. Buckley Jr. has also had an Obama change of heart:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/02/christopher-buckley-surprised-to-find-the-guy-he-voted-for-is-in-fact-a-statist-liberal/

More and more intelligent thinking people are waking up from the hope and change hangover.

Is it too early to say WE TOLD YOU SO?
Larry? Your move!

Aye, can you tell me what alternative plans Rush has – here is your chance, go for it. Please don’t tell me to listen to Rush I want you to tell me.

@Don Schuster:

While I appreciate the opportunity Don, it simply is not my responsibility to do your research for you.

The Internet is a great research tool and if you’re truly interested in the answers to your question then go find the answer.

@Aye

Good to see that you printed the slump before Obama took office. Just shows how much was lost under Bush. Much steeper than has been lost so far under Obama. Usually we only see the chart after he took office.

Of course trying to pin the blame on him is laughable. Usually I’ve heard lame excuses like before Obama took over it wasn’t Bush’s fault – it was the Credit Crunch yadda yadda but when Obama gets in- it’s Obama’s direct fault and not continued fallout from the slump.

Now it look’s like conservative revisionism is trying to make out it was indeed Obama’s fault for even running as President. lol

When did that slump begin? Keeping in mind that for the last two years of the Bush presidency the Democrats controlled the purse. Here’s the timeline and numbers:

Deficit Spending
Democrat Opposition? Not Quite

Feb. 13, 2008 – The first “stimulus” bill, H.R. 5140, became law, putting checks in the mail.
215 House Democrats (93%) voted to add $124.4 billion to the deficit (CBO). Senator Obama did not show up to vote.

July 30, 2008 – H.R. 3221 became law, allowing the government to insure $300 billion in mortgage loans.
227 House Democrats (96%) voted to add $24.9 billion to the deficit (CBO). Senator Obama expressed support but did not show up to vote.

Oct. 3, 2008 – H.R. 1424 became law, authorizing $700 billion for TARP.
172 House Democrats (73%) and Senator Obama voted to bailout Wall Street with $700 billion (CBO).

Dec. 10, 2008 – The House passed H.R. 7321 to bail out automakers. When it did not pass the Senate, the Treasury provided a bailout with very similar terms.
205 House Democrats (87%) voted to spend $16.168 billion (CBO) with President-elect Obama’s full support.

Feb. 17, 2009 – The non-stimulus bill, H.R. 1, became law, spending $787 billion on long-time Democrat priorities and pseudo tax relief for non-taxpayers.
246 House Democrats (96%) voted to add $787 billion to the deficit (CBO) with President Obama’s full support.

Feb. 25, 2009 – H.R. 1105 passed the House of Representatives, spending $410 billion on a pork-laden omnibus bill that gave big increases to existing government programs.
229 House Democrats (91%) voted to spend $410 billion with President Obama’s full support.

On to the 2010 budget, healthcare, environment, card check, etc. and a deeper slump.

Stuck in spam. P&T

You missed out the % Republicans who voted. And what support did Bush give?