It just occurred to me after reading this (and this, about RON PAUL!) that there's a valid practical reason to not take marching orders from Rush Limbaugh: if Republicans ever regain power, there will always be a day's lag time before they take action on anything. The "president" won't be speaking before Rush's opinion is known, right? Otherwise he'd risk wasting valuable press conference time apologizing to Rush. Until that 9-12 broadcast of official talking points you're better off keeping your thoughts to yourself. And after, you're still better off.
And God forbid Rush doesn't cover a topic you need to speak about - you either wait a day, or guess correctly and it's all fine, or you misread Rush and then your career is over.
Look, it's not all downside. Rush is, after all, never wrong. I just hope Jindal and Palin can keep their egos in check.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
A Practical Consideration
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I find it amusing that you conspiracy minded lefties think Rush is ever listened to by the GOP. Rush has NEVER been listened to by the GOP. Rush controls no one, he has nothing to do with planning, and he is not part of the power structure. Never was, never will be.
But, you conspiracy theorists can keep prattling on. It's pretty funny, really.
Hey I could be wrong. After all, Jeb Bush hasn't been made to apologize about HIS Rush remarks. On the other hand, his career is already ruined.
Ruinned?
He was a highly successful governor and was recently sought after to run for Senate! Personally, I think he's bored with politics.
The irony here of course, is that the more the White House and the MSM talk about Obama v. Rush, the more people will tune in to hear what the fuss is all about.
Rush increases his audience, and has 3 hours to reach those all-important "swing voters" with the message of Conservatism.
Reminds me of back in the day with Howard Stern. I had never heard him, just bits and pieces repeated in the media ("Did you hear what Stern said?"). When I diled him in to hear what the big deal was, I learned that not only was he being misrepresented, but that I liked his show.
I'll wager the same thing will happen with some folks when they tune in to hear Rush.
I used to listen to Rush in the early nineties. He's a mighty good broadcaster - great voice, nimble, funny, and it took me about six months to realize that I never agreed with him on anything.
I only stopped when I realized that he kept repeating debunked lies and making up statistics, and that wasn't good for me. Plus I got a day job.
Publius: Yeah, that must be it.
Post a Comment