Monday, March 02, 2009


When Rush speaks it really shows how much the party itself lacks a voice. He can be up there for an hour without a teleprompter because he knows what he believes and he isn't afraid to say it.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, who last month blasted CNBC host Rick Santelli from the podium in the briefing room, challenged reporters on Monday to ask Republicans if they agree with Limbaugh's desire.

"Do they want to see the president's economic agenda fail? You know, I bet there are a number of guests on television throughout the day and maybe into tomorrow who could let America know whether they agree with what Rush Limbaugh said this weekend."

The Answer: It doesn't matter what I want. Any president who thinks he can solve the economy by spending a Trillions dollars we don't have will fail with or without my desire. I would rather see Obama succeed by cutting capital gains and corporate taxes.

I wouldn't have posted this article at all without this next quote:
After Gibbs launched into Santelli in late February, challenging that the CNBC host had not actually read the stimulus bill he was criticizing, a number of Democrats and Republicans expressed surprise in e-mails to The Hill that Gibbs would elevate such a critic by battling with him from the White House podium.

When asked Monday why he would "elevate" Limbaugh by addressing his criticisms from the podium, Gibbs said Limbaugh "elevated himself."

"He's got, I understand, a fairly popular radio show," Gibbs said.

These reporters are hilarious. Obama had not read the bill nor had any congressman who voted for it. If the Obama team had wanted time to read the bill they could have stuck to their promise to have a 48 hour window before the vote. To accuse Santelli of not reading it is priceless. The reporter here doesn't even point out the fact.

Gibbs has a lot of leeway right now because Obama's approval rating is high and they hope to cripple the Republicans entirely by separating elected officials from grassroots conservatism. The problem is that you should never make any one critic of your administration the focus of your work. Can you imagine Bush going after Keith Olbermann or George Clooney or Michael Moore? A leader leads and ignores the critics or otherwise a leader gets into a habit of looking to others to make decisions. The New Left and by that I mean the Post Vietnam Left seems just as interested in whether they are popular. Remember how Obama would raise our standing with those Europeans we went to college with? Obama's path eventually makes him look weak. Obama has already shown scant leadership as the stock market has fallen more than 2000 points since the election. How strong will he look once the honeymoon is over.


E said...

One of my lib colleagues asked me today whether I want Obama to fail. I told him I "expect" Obama to fail because his policies are stupid. "But do you WANT him to fail?" You have to answer their gotcha question. "I can't WANT him to fail because that will be bad for everyone. But I can't see him succeeding if he implements the policies he has been promoting, because the policies are stupid." No interest from my colleague on discussing the policies.

Sir Saunders said...

that's a good way of framing the answer E. I know that Rush has articulated that he wants Obama's policies to fail. But you don't have to want it, they are failing. Just look at the DOW reaction and he could care less. This isn't really about improving the economy though, it's about a dramatic reorganization of the economy and society around socialist standards. The more "middle class" investors pull out of the stock market and depend on Gov. for their salvation, the happier they are.

Post a Comment