Posted on 03/03/2009 9:41:56 AM PST by goldstategop
Kathryn, in all the Rush-bashing, I was more disturbed by Michael Steele's wretched performance. His initial reaction — that Rush's show is "incendiary" and "ugly" — revealed:
a) that he never listens to it;
b) that he takes his cues from the mainstream media, for whom Rush is invariably "angry". They don't listen either. Rush is a lot of things, but "angry" isn't one of them. If you catch him for 20 minutes, you know he's full of fun, laughing it up, having a grand old time. There are a lot of angry talkshow hosts out there bellowing at the world for three hours a day, but Rush isn't one of them. (Full disclosure: I guesthost for Rush once in a while, and regard it as a signal honor for a sinister foreigner such as myself.)
This first reaction is disturbing for two reasons: first, given the size of Rush's audience, it's something an RNC chairman should not be so obviously foreign to; second, it's not encouraging when the de facto face of the party accepts so unthinkingly the liberal/media framing of the issue.
Then we come to Mr. Steele's second response - his reaction to the reaction to his original reaction: By apologizing for his first remarks, he opened the door for his DNC opposite number to make sport of the way he was kowtowing to the "ugly" Limbaugh. So a man who apparently shares the elite's disdain for Rush and his audience nevertheless feeds the impression that the Republican leadership is prostrate at his feet: the worst of both worlds.
In two brief soundbites, Mr. Steele has managed to suggest to his own party base that he has a lazy disposition that reflexively shares the liberal biases, and to allow the wider world to portray him as a craven squish. This is not encouraging. At the very minimum, he does not appear ready for primetime.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Rush is definately not angry sort of person
Savage Nation, I consider angry
Mr. Steele definitely stepped on something that he shouldn’t have.
“Savage Nation, I consider angry”
Don’t forget Mark Levin.
The RNC is worthless, and Rush is hilarious, good natured, and erudite.
Of course the Left has to smear him.
They sure as hell can't argue with him.
Steele needs to go. Now.
“a craven squish”
A perfect and well turned description of Michael Steele.
I am disappointed, but I’d have to agree that he is not. I’d love to see JC Watts take a more prominent stage in politics.
‘A craven squish’. Pwha-ha-ha!
Hey, these days we’re all angry!
....craven squish.
in a few words.
"Mr. Steele:
"Your job as RNC Chair is to articulate the GOP message. It should be your goal to gladly accept insightful help whenever, and from wherever, it is proffered.
"Your intemperate remarks about Rush Limbaugh display your apparent misunderstanding of this. I supported your election to the RNC chair over the other contenders because you seemed ready to articulate conservative principles. Yet this past week you disparaged the one most articulate spokesman conservatism has. Shame on you, and shame on anyone who also falls for Democrat tactics to split the conservative voice. I now regret my support.
"Rush Limbaugh is right. The GOP should not be wishing Obama well. The GOP should be countering his every move, his every thought, his every desire. Obama is wrong for America and is leading this country (as well as the World) into the greatest depression yet. Wishing him success is effectively turning against America and what has made this country great. Government bailouts, pork barrel spending and tax increases are not the solution.
"America deserves better than this, and America deserves better than what the GOP, and you, are providing. If you are incapable of doing the job then you should step aside. Let someone who understands the issues, and America's needs at this critical time, attain the position of head of the GOP. There is no time for on-the-job training.
"I understand that last evening you made public what I consider a lukewarm apology to Rush Limbaugh. I expect he will graciously accept it, although it did come across as being more concerned over appearances, than any true and sincere recanting of your words. Whatever. Your job now is to show daily you understand the wedge you have created within the GOP by your falling for Democrat prodding, and hereafter articulating conservative principles, and standing firmly behind anyone and everyone who articulates them. Are you the man to do this?
"Get a clue, or get out.
"Sincerely,
"bcsco
This is the mail system at host mx2.smartechcorp.net.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message.
The mail system
: permission denied. Command output: Mail quota exceeded.
Hmmm. Perhaps there's a lot of anger out there?
Now....perhaps some of you know how the Ron Paulites feel. Steele has consistently treated them like dirt.
Very good!
“Hey, these days we’re all angry!”
But that’s why Rush is the best. Dennis Prager is #2 in my book. Both of those guys know how to be thought provoking without ranting and raving.
Levin and Savage are just ranting 90% of the time.
Glenn Beck has been lost to gloom and doom. Seems like he does end of the world stuff all the time.
Medved and Bennet are pretty good. But, both are a bit too low key, and both seem to avoid real hot topics.
And then there’s Hannity. No one can appreicate Hannity like Hannity does.
Uh. I like JC Watts, but I think it's time for a white guy again. Normally I wouldn't care about someone's color, but we appear to be pandering to the blacks. Appearing to pander is bad.
ML/NJ
Check out post ##13...
Ow! Coffee through nose!!!!!
I hardly ever listen to Rush but I have read a couple of his books. In the 1990’s I bet a democrat friend a hundred dollars that if he read one of them he would agree with Rush at least 80%. He refused to even touch the book. Like he was afraid he would catch something. What Rush preaches is nothing more than common sense. Which is to a liberal like light to a cockroach.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.