Democratic Fatuities in Attacks on Michael Steele and Rush Limbaugh
--Richard E. Vatz
Matt Lauer asked Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, the umpteenth variation of the question liberal Democrats and liberal Democratic supporters have been asking all week: do you support Rush Limbaugh when he says he “wants the policies of Barack Obama to fail?”
Usually when an elementary logical mistake is made in political discourse, one expects it to be corrected by major media, or at least by a large number of the fragmented internet sources.
Lacking that happenstance, let me just say what is probably obvious to many, if not most, political observers: to want President Barack Obama to fail in his efforts to radically redistribute wealth in this country and fail in his efforts to mortgage the country beyond the ability of future generations to pay for it does not mean that one wants him to fail in improving America’s economy. If the United States had used nuclear weapons in Vietnam, and people objected to their use, it would not mean that they opposed the defeat of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese.
Let’s go on to unmask the charade that passes for fair national political dialogue. The President’s Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel has been the major source of the effort to convince Americans that Rush Limbaugh is the face of the Republican Party. This would be funny if it were an update of “Alice in Wonderland.” Is Rahm “Republicans can go f--- themselves” Emanuel the face of the Democrats? Is Keith “You’re a fascist, Mr. Bush” Olbermann the face of the Democratic Party?
When asked to reconcile his and Republican views with Mr. Limbaugh’s, the good Mr. Steele – and he is a good man – should simply bring up the foregoing examples or simply say, “Mr. Limbaugh is part of the conservative commentariat, and I have no interest in interfering with his freedom of speech. He brings good intensity to Republican efforts, and beyond that if you have questions about his opinions, just ask him.
Wonder how President Obama reconciles his views with those of the elected Rep. Dennis Kucinich?
Richard E. Vatz is professor of political communication at Towson University
6 comments:
Professor - Did it occur to you that Michael Steele actually wants to keep his squabble with Rush Limbaugh afloat?
His dustup with Rush Limbaugh diverts attention from the unraveling campaign spending scandal sucking not just Mr. Steele, but also former Gov. Ehrlich, into the vortex of their own creation:
http://www.wbaltv.com/news/18805463/detail.html
Both gentlemen would have been better served had Mr. Steele not sought and won the RNC chairmanship.
- Steve Lebowitz
Don't dis Limbaugh. He rules and now, given his apology, Steele knows it, too.
Oh Steve, perhaps the WH and their enablers ALSO want to keep on Limbaugh to keep us from thinking about our losses in our 401k's. Or to keep it on Rush to keep us from talking about the economy.
I find it quite cowardly of the WH to discuss this when the US is crumbling around them.
Sure, deflect from Steele's troubles by blaming the White House.
Limbaugh rules and Steele knows it.
Steve - You're running out of places to put your worn out anti Ehrlich dribble.
Rush represents the conservative movement which may be independent of the Republican party.
Emanuel is just one of the many Soros hatchet men. Sorry, I meant Obama hatchet men.
Mr Steele is an honorable and ethical person but does not have the chutzpah to be RNC chairman.
Gee, the President and/or his spokesman and his chief strategists go after Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Santelli. Yep, that certainly is presidential. The whole operation in this White House is so much worse than what we saw with both Mr. Carter and Mr. Clinton; tax cheats openly serving in the government and unbelievable deficit spending. Such spending was not necessary during the worse 1981-2 recession. This unfortunately makes the Republican Congress and President Bush look good in hindsight.
Post a Comment