Limbaugh's latest attacker: RNC's Steele

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By JONATHAN MARTIN

On the same night he was offering the keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference, Rush Limbaugh drew criticism from an unlikely source: Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele.

In a little-noticed interview Saturday night, Steele dismissed Limbaugh as an “entertainer” whose show is “incendiary” and “ugly.”

Steele’s criticism makes him the highest-ranking Republican to pick a fight with the popular and polarizing conservative talk show host.

But the new RNC chairman’s extraordinary comments won’t sit well with the millions of conservative listeners Limbaugh draws each week, and Steele aides scrambled to limit the damage Monday morning by trying to change the subject.

....

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19498.html

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't think this is helpful. If the left would give over giving any credence whatsoever to these journo hacks then the only storms they would create would be in some very warped teacups. Steele should have left this alone too - he will be given a lot of flak for being sensible which will polarize things more.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think this is helpful. If the left would give over giving any credence whatsoever to these journo hacks then the only storms they would create would be in some very warped teacups. Steele should have left this alone too - he will be given a lot of flak for being sensible which will polarize things more.

I disagree. It was significant for the leader of the RNC to criticize Limbaugh. It sends a clear message to Rush that he's an entertainer and nothing else. Whatever political clout he was granted before by the GOP, he's lost it.

[alienlovechild 75]

I don't think this is helpful. If the left would give over giving any credence whatsoever to these journo hacks then the only storms they would create would be in some very warped teacups. Steele should have left this alone too - he will be given a lot of flak for being sensible which will polarize things more.

I disagree. It was significant for the leader of the RNC to criticize Limbaugh. It sends a clear message to Rush that he's an entertainer and nothing else. Whatever political clout he was granted before by the GOP, he's lost it.

Who lost political clout Limbaugh or Steele?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't think this is helpful. If the left would give over giving any credence whatsoever to these journo hacks then the only storms they would create would be in some very warped teacups. Steele should have left this alone too - he will be given a lot of flak for being sensible which will polarize things more.

Seriously. Why does Limbaugh (and Ann Coulter for that matter) merit so much attention?

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't know but I think this is a new and silly trend to include entertainers in serious political discussion. They cry out for attention and guess what? This is the attention that makes them grow. Sorry Mr FP but I totally disagree with you on this one. They are meritless as political commentators and deserve to be ignored in the political arena.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think this is helpful. If the left would give over giving any credence whatsoever to these journo hacks then the only storms they would create would be in some very warped teacups. Steele should have left this alone too - he will be given a lot of flak for being sensible which will polarize things more.

I disagree. It was significant for the leader of the RNC to criticize Limbaugh. It sends a clear message to Rush that he's an entertainer and nothing else. Whatever political clout he was granted before by the GOP, he's lost it.

Who lost political clout Limbaugh or Steele?

I suppose it depends on which Republicans you ask. What has been more evident since this past election up to now - is how fractured the GOP is. Rove masterfully kept the party poised as being united and unanimous for a long time, but the cracks began to show over issues like immigration back when Bush was still president. I think it's actually good for the party. They need to stop acting like that all have to be on the same page over every issue. What they need to do find out what issues they will unite behind while allowing dissent among its members. It would behoove them to adopt the Dems motto of, "Strength through diversity."

[Otto 83]

Seriously. Why does Limbaugh (and Ann Coulter for that matter) merit so much attention?

Question of the day...

[HAL 9000 96]

Seriously. Why does Limbaugh (and Ann Coulter for that matter) merit so much attention?

Question of the day...

Perhaps analogous to onlooker delays on a highway. People slow down to look at the car crash, slowing everyone down behind them.

[alienlovechild 75]

It would behoove them to adopt the Dems motto of, "Strength through diversity."

Who told you that? Turn in your party card now and you're banished to Utah. That's not the Democratic Party motto.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't know but I think this is a new and silly trend to include entertainers in serious political discussion. They cry out for attention and guess what? This is the attention that makes them grow. Sorry Mr FP but I totally disagree with you on this one. They are meritless as political commentators and deserve to be ignored in the political arena.

I can't think of any similar people in the UK who are given the sort of prominence that these commentators enjoy in this country. We have more than our fair share of mad bastards - like Robert Kilroy-Silk, but people like that are rightly banished to the fringes and their newspaper columns and TV appearances make occasional headlines, but not to anything like the extent that Limbaugh et al are.

Of course if Limbaugh had the balls to stand behind his convictions he'd stand for election himself - or he would perhaps if he were not motivated by money rather than his vaunted ideology.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It would behoove them to adopt the Dems motto of, "Strength through diversity."

Who told you that? Turn in your party card now and you're banished to Utah. That's not the Democratic Party motto.

Sure it is. It is a party of inclusion - which the Republicans had criticized for a long time as the Dems' weakness - can't get enough of them to agree on anything. While that may have been partially true, what the Democratic Party has succeeded during this last election, was to come together on certain issues - the very issues that the majority of Americans wanted - healthcare, bringing our troops home, addressing climate change, etc. That's why Obama is a populist president - the Dem Party is on the side of the majority of Americans - at least on those keys issues and this time around. But I would concede - Americans are a fickle bunch and they'll change their views when they see that certain ideas aren't working or failing. So far, the Republican has been failing miserably to reconnect with what matters most to Americans right now, and instead clench their fists around their failed ideologies.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Rush=WWF

end of story

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]