Foreign Policy: U.S. Must Take Strong Action Against Putin’s Aggression
Ed Morrissey has a thoughtful analysis on the topic of Steele here, which leads me more and more to thinking that Steele isn’t ready for showtime at all. He’s gone from GOP rising star to one of the most despised in the GOP in the timespan of about a week, and as Ed details in his post, a lot of it has to do not just with Steele’s mocking of Rush Limbaugh’s speech from this past weekend in which Rush made the case for a government that runs based on conservative principles – which are good not just for conservatives but for everyone, but also his failure to repudiate D.L. Hughley when he compared the GOP convention to “Nazis.”
I’m interested in your thoughts as to whether or not you think Steele must go, or if you think he should stick it out and try to make his way through the storm of controversy he has generated within the party.
Related to all this, The Politico this morning writes in depth about the Democrats and their continued attempts at painting Rush Limbaugh as the face of the GOP, which The Fix noted yesterday has been aided by the WH via Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.
Quite frankly I find it both disgusting and disturbing that the WH at its highest levels are resorting to use it for campaign purposes. Make no mistake about it; that’s what’s happening here. Barack Obama pledged last year to not use the WH as his campaign HQ so as not to politicize it, but I guess we can just chalk that up to another one of his many promises that have apparently expired.
The goal here is to demonize Rush Limbaugh (as “more toxic” than Rev. Wright!) and characterize anyone who would agree with him in any way as “out of touch” and “mean-spirited” and “partisan” – that way virtually no legitimate criticisms of the Obama administration and the Democrats running wild in Congress will be taken seriously. As I’ve noted before, Obama set this tone very early on in his administration. Of course none of this takes into account that both parties have prominent people within it who espouse views that most of them agree with on a general level – the Democrats have them with the Daily Kos and HuffPo crowds, who they’ve gotten quite cozy with over the years, and the GOP has them with Rush Limbaugh’s listeners. People are naturally going to gravitate to public figures they can relate with and to, and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, the Obama administration would have the American people thinking that this is a dangerous thing simply because Rush puts to the airwaves the feelings, thoughts, and ideas so many conservatives across this country have.
Obama claims he’s someone who will “reach across the aisle” but that’s really a bunch of BS – as I’ve pointed out before. He’s quietly laid the foundation for making any conservative idea look petty and unworthy of serious consideration (and let’s not forget how the MSM aids him in this), while he puts on a public face of “bipartisanship.” It’s classic bait and switch, and “conservatives” like David Brooks fell for it hook line and sinker and in the process helped get one of the most deceptive politicos in modern history elected.
I’m starting to understand Bill Clinton’s frustration with Obama last year more and more. Some of it, of course, had to do with the fact that the press clearly adored Obama and not Hillary Clinton, but I suspect another part of it had to do with the fact that Obama clearly can tell a slick lie even better than Bubba himself as he did when he promised the American people he would “change” Washington’s (DC’s) old ways. He hasn’t, won’t, and never intended to. “Washington’s old ways” are working out for him just fine. But what it means for the state of legitimate disagreements and debates in this country is another – very serious – matter altogether.