The hundred-dollar phrase of the week is “de facto” – as in “Is Rush Limbaugh now the ‘de facto’ leader of the Republican Party?”
True, the word had been caroming around main-stream media news sets for a few weeks – particularly since Rush’s now notorious “I hope Obama fails” sound morsel hit the news cycle – but it had quite a revival over the weekend, following his landark speech at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) on Saturday. In fact, for most of the weekend, the news channels were devoting almost all of their non-Messianic time allotment to Rush. Anchors, analysts and others of the blathering class have since been falling over themselves trying to figure out who will lead the Republican Party from the ruins of their Obamacratic trouncing. (After all, it was a mandate, wasn’t it?)
De facto this, de facto that… (It is the “nuance” or “hubris” of 2009).
To liberals, Limbaugh is already the de facto embodiment of Hitler and the de facto personification of racism. Being the de facto leader of the Republicans is almost pedestrian in comparison.
Still, it has been incredibly fun to watch.
Following Limbaugh’s talk on Saturday afternoon, the first words from CNN’s equitable political analyst Bill Schneider’s mouth were:
“Well, it was an angry tone. He was the hero of 1994. Fifteen years ago when Republicans won a big victory in Congress. And that was the year of the angry white men.”
I have no doubt that Mr. Schneider, along with almost everyone else who comprises what Limbaugh famously calls the “drive-by media,” genuinely heard it that way.
For liberals, any impassioned oratories delivered by conservatives must be filtered and processed as “angry right-wing rhetoric” because to try and substantively deal with the contents of a speech such as Limbaugh’s would reveal the weakness and indefensibility of leftist ideology. Thus, when Leftocrats hear conservatives speak of individualism, liberty and achievement, they hear indignation and acrimony. When conservatives talk about American exceptionalism, liberals hear animosity and exasperation.
By contrast, when liberals hear themselves go on about government as the people’s problem-solver, and the need to level the American playing field by punishing the most successful among us, they see the greatness of America.
CNN’s Schneider went on to foam:
“Well, this was a very angry speech. By the way, they’re not all white and they’re not all men but they are angry conservative voters. They didn’t do so well last year but they’re still angry. The tone of this speech was mocking, bullying, it was full of contempt, and I thought it was a very harsh speech.”
Translated from my brand-new 2009 edition of the ‘Drive-By Media/English” dictionary, Schneider is affirming and validating the Bos-Wash news media mindset – that anything critical of liberalism, i.e. Barack Obama, uttered by any conservative can only be rooted in antagonism – maybe even racism. After all, what the mainstream media does so well – aside from nothing – is portray conservatives as angry and bigoted. The playbook says so.
And conservatives aren’t just wrong, mind you, they’re bad – replete with ulterior motives and underhanded intentions, looking to crush the working man, the struggling mother and the “trying-to-make-ends-meat” family in favor of their white corporate overlords.
Ask anyone who doesn’t think … or calls themselves an independent voter. They’ll tell you so.
All of this right-wing antipathy, of course, came through manifestly through Limbaugh’s speech.
Sample some of the mockery and contempt from Rush’s lips:
“When we (conservatives) look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don’t see groups. We don’t see victims. We don’t see people we want to exploit. What we see — what we see is potential.”
Bitter, scathing, offensive, wasn’t it? Watching someone drop kick a baby duck would have been less ghastly.
“We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be.”
The scoundrel. Does he also favor open-hand slapping the elderly?
“… I want everyone in this room and every one of you around the country to succeed. I want anyone who believes in life, liberty, pursuit of happiness to succeed. And I want any force, any person, any element of an overarching Big Government that would stop your success, I want that organization, that element or that person to fail. I want you to succeed.”
Hang him from the highest tree, take him down, and string him up again.
And not even a mention of food stamps.
While the likes of the always-vainglorious Keith Olbermann and the never-interesting Janeane Garofalo carry on about Limbaugh with all the charm of two old men in a nursing home comparing their bowel obstructions, what the American Leftocracy simply doesn’t comprehend is that Limbuagh in not the de facto leader of the Republican Party – nor does he wish to be. He is, however, one of America’s most eloquent and compelling spokesmen for conservatism … and it is conservatism, through world class communicators such as Rush, that must – and will -reclaim its place as the core of the Republican Party.
- – – – -
And since Rush’s “I hope Obama fails” remark is getting so much play and is so remarkably misunderstood, I am going to once again stand by him and his courageous – and completely correct – position on the matter.
I am REPOSTING RIGHT HERE, something I posted back on January 27, 2009 – an article that prompted more hate-mail and personal attacks than I have gotten since starting this blog – but something I firmly stand by. It is the Obama Manifesto – 25 Reasons To Support Failure:
1. If President Barack Obama is resolute on reversing Bush administration measures that have served to keep this country safe from attack for over seven years, I want him to fail.
2. If the President believes that enemy combatants captured on the field of battle are due the same Constitutional rights as American citizens, I want him to fail.
3. If the President believes that “direct diplomacy” with despotic leaders of murderous regimes is the best way to keep America strong, I want him to fail.
4. If the President is willing to trod upon one of the fundamental rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence – namely, the right to life – with his illimitable support of abortion, I want him to fail.
5. If the President believes that taxpayer dollars should be used to fund abortions, I want him to fail.
6. If the President wishes to use taxpayer dollars to fund embryonic stem cell research, I want him to fail.
7. If the President wishes to appoint judges to the Supreme Court who view the Constitution as a document that breathes and bends with time, I want him to fail.
8. If the President wants to infringe on my Constitutional right as a law abiding American to own a firearm, I want him to fail.
9. If the President believes that government is better equipped to solve the problems of Americans than Americans themselves, I want him to fail.
10. If the President attempts to follow through on his campaign promise to fundamentally transform the United States of America, I want him to fail.
11. If the President wishes to send me a check that I didn’t earn, paid for with other people’s hard-earned tax money, and call it a tax cut, I want him to fail.
12. If the President wishes to send a so-called stimulus check to those who did not pay federal income taxes, I want him to fail.
13. If the President believes that government bailouts of private sector businesses are the way to tend to an ailing economy, I want him to fail.
14. If the President believes that the government should set pay limits on executives of companies who receive bailout money, I want him to fail.
15. If the President believes that government spending of unprecedented amounts of taxpayer money is the way to deliver the economy from recession, I want him to fail.
16. If the President believes that the planet is in danger of catostrophic ruin due to man-made global warming, and is willing to implement so-called “green” policies that will damage this country’s economy, I want him to fail.
17. If the President wishes to undertake an unparalleled “domestic infrastructure” plan that puts untrained non-professionals on the government’s payroll with the belief that this will stimulate the economy, I want him to fail.
18. If the President believes that people who fall into the highest tax brackets in this country need to pay more taxes, I want him to fail.
19. If the President believes that the military of the United States is a venue for social engineering – such as lifting the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy – I want him to fail.
20. If the President believes that healthcare is not only a right but a moral obligation of government, I want him to fail.
21. If the President believes that it is a good idea to attack those who listen to conservative talk radio as a means of fostering unity, I want him to fail.
22. If the President supports a reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, effectively ending talk radio as we know it, I want him to fail.
23. If the President is unwilling to boldly deal with illegal immigration into the United States, and chooses to try and come up with something “comprehensive” to solve the problem, I want him to fail.
24. If the President is unwilling to take a serious look at nuclear energy as a viable and safe alternative source of energy, while wasting time focusing on wind turbines and solar paneling, I want him to fail.
25. If the President decides that he will continue his class-warfare style assault on big corporations – such as oil and pharmaceutical companies – as he did during his campaign by punishing them with higher tax rates, I want him to fail.