« | »

Behind Dems’ Rush Limbaugh Strategy

From an elated Politico:

Rush Job: Inside Dems’ Limbaugh plan


Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House.

The strategy took shape after Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans, especially younger voters. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.

Soon it clicked: Democrats realized they could roll out a new GOP bogeyman for the post-Bush era by turning to an old one in Limbaugh, a polarizing figure since he rose to prominence in the 1990s

If Limbaugh himself were to coin a phrase for it, he might call it Operation Rushbo — an idea that started out simply enough but quickly proved to be deeply resonant by a rapid succession of events, say Democrats inside and outside the West Wing.

The seeds were planted in October after Democracy Corps, the Democratic polling company run by Carville and Greenberg, included Limbaugh’s name in a survey and found that many Americans just don’t like him.

“His positives for voters under 40 was 11 percent,” Carville recalled with a degree of amazement, alluding to a question about whether voters had a positive or negative view of the talk show host.

Paul Begala, a close friend of Carville, Greenberg and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, said they found Limbaugh’s overall ratings were even lower than the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s controversial former pastor, and William Ayers, the domestic terrorist and Chicago resident who Republicans sought to tie to Obama during the campaign.

Then came what Begala called “the tripwire.”

But liberals quickly realized that trying to drive a wedge between congressional Republicans and Limbaugh was unlikely to work, and their better move was to paint the GOP as beholden to the talk show host

By February, Carville and Begala were pounding on Limbaugh frequently in their appearances on CNN.

Neither Democrat would say so, but a third source said the two also began pushing the idea of targeting Limbaugh in their daily phone conversations with Emanuel.

Conversations and email exchanges began taking place in and out of the White House not only between the old pals from the Clinton era but also including White House senior adviser David Axelrod, Deputy Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and Woodhouse.

The White House needed no more convincing after Limbaugh’s hour-plus performance Saturday, celebrated on the right and mocked on the left, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where he re-stated his hope Obama fails.

“He kicked this into full-gear at CPAC by reiterating it,” said a senior White House official of Limbaugh.

By Sunday morning, Emanuel elevated the strategy by bringing up the conservative talker, unprompted, on CBS’s “Face the Nation” and calling him the “the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party.” …

David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager last year and a member of his inner circle still, will publish an op-ed in Wednesday’s Washington Post chiding Republicans for being “paralyzed with fear of crossing their leader.”

A senior White House aide has been tasked with helping to guide the Limbaugh strategy.

Outside, Americans United for Choice, a liberal group, and the Democratic National Committee are driving the message, in close consultation with the White House

Media Matters, the left-leaning media watchdog and advocacy group, began a “Limbaugh Wire” web-site Tuesday to track him. “For a long time Americans haven’t really been aware that he’s so influential,” said Eric Burns, the group’s president.

Democrats are now working hard to ensure that changes.

“He’s driving the Republican reluctance to deal with Obama, which Americans want,” said Greenberg. “He’s the policeman [keeping them in line].”

They’ll all get a fresh hook for the story after Wednesday, when a Democratic polling firm goes into the field to test, among other things, Limbaugh’s standing with the public…

Even the Nixon enemies list was not run by his chief of staff. (In fact, Nixon may not have even known about it.)

No, it was run by Chuck Colson and the now Democrat saint, John Dean.

In fact, here is a memo from Dean to Lawrence Higby, dated August 16, 1971, where Dean explained the purpose of the list:

“This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration; stated a bit more bluntly—how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.”

But this current strategy is being run by the very most inside of insiders, and they are a very incestuous clique.

Lest we forget, among other things, Mr. Emanuel lived rent-free with the pollster Greenberg for years, as was noted by Dick Morris in the New York Post:



February 17, 2009

… Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.

During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee – which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg’s firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel’s own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)…

Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality – for five years?

Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000…

Moreover, Messrs Carville and Begala are longtime business partners, who are only too eager to be hired out.

Mr. Dean (and Goebbels) can only look on in envy at the current White House.

(Thanks to Curvyred for the heads up.)

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, March 4th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

31 Responses to “Behind Dems’ Rush Limbaugh Strategy”

  1. U NO HOO says:

    Rush has challenged Obama to a radio debate.

    Anyone betting Obama will accept?

    Not a chance.

    Obama is just a cowardly BMOC.

    Obama is smart enough to know he is wrong and cannot win a debate with any conversant conservative.

    Rush just nailed it, “Obama you won!” The Presidency and Congress

    • jobeth says:

      Rush isn’t Bush for sure!

      Rush can think on his feet and knows the subject better than nearly anyone! The “I won” wouldn’t stand a chance with Rush.

      But boy, what I wouldn’t give to see THAT debate! LOL

  2. proreason says:

    Bring it on.

    My money’s on Rush.

  3. dulcimergrl says:

    Hey, there’s only one letter’s difference between “Rush” and “Bush”. They won’t have to edit their “get Bush” stuff much at all to make it “get Rush”.

  4. Colonel1961 says:

    These libtards suffer from arrested development. Can’t they just run the country with picking playground fights? Fights they can’t win? Weren’t they going to change the tone in Washington? What a bunch of punks…

  5. ThreeBus says:

    You are doing a great job Rush. Keep it up.

    You got em right were you want em.

  6. Consilience says:

    Didn’t hear Rush today—with a client—-but I read the transcript and laughed out loud where he offered to fly the thug to the Southern Command on EIB One—he pointed out that he paid for his jet…
    Put your money on Rush.

  7. 1laidbackRN says:

    The liberals fear Rush (and other conservative radio/tv personalities), because they know that probably at least 50% of their voting base has no clue what the true liberal platform or agenda is about. They think they are saving trees and dolphins and helping the disabled, but soon enough they find out that this is not so. It usually happens soon after college when they get their first paycheck or work with the public and realize “hey, I’m working here and these people aren’t”. The liberals cannot stand the idea of these young voters being exposed to the truth.

    • Dangerous says:

      The liberals can’t stand the idea of anyone being exposed to truth. If their ideas really were superior, they wouldn’t have anything to fear from open debates or challenging people like Ann and Rush on a factual basis. Most liberals know this, at least deep down, but the few that don’t can make for some entertainment. Assuming you can stomach their pristine ignorance. (“People have a right to a house,” anyone?)

  8. VMAN says:

    This is just typical liberalism. Rush is being effective so they say he’s not. Conservatives say up libs say down and so on and so on. That’s how bipartisanship works in a liberal world. The O hole will have his put up town hall meetings filled with a bunch of poverty queens playing the system but forget about having an honest discussion with a legitimate national figure like Rush.

  9. Lipstick on a PIAPS says:

    Don’t the liberals know all they are doing is making Rush more visible? ROFLMAO That’s why Cargil told Clinton don’t get involved, he will take your head off and you will be giving him a bigger platform. This is GOLDEN!!!

  10. Reality Bytes says:

    How long before some drive by photo shops out Rush’s index finger in that photo?

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      Yeah .. kinda like in the primaries when o-blah-blah scratched his face with his middle finger while yacking about Hillary .. and again towards the end of the campaign after talking about McCain???

      Course no photo shopping was needed there. It was the real deal. The no class Chicago pimp.

  11. Reality Bytes says:

    Dreamed last night there was a military coup with David Petraeus named commander in chief. Instead of Al Qaeda, there were remnants of moveon.org, media matters, planned parenthood & the DNC setting off IED’s. Their new leader, Rahm Emanual was hiding out in a cave – I think it was actually his parent’s condo in Boca – not really sure.

    Funny thing too, the next day, the stock market went up a 1000 pts. Petraeus contracted Halliburton to build TWO border fences & the ban on off shore & interior drilling was lifted. I also remember community action leaders, we call them colonels who arrested the corrupted local politicians, made the streets way safe & created tax inner city free enterprise zones as well as in suburbia.

    All in all, people were pretty happy. What do you think this means?

  12. joeblough says:

    … Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party …


  13. I felt pretty bad after getting in an argument with my dad today. He is buying the Rush is “fringe” argument being promoted by the agents of the left. It was one of those writing inspirations. Sigh..


    The particular message I want people to take from it (especially those who believe in conservatism – but don’t care for Rush’s style) is “inimicus inimici mei amicus meus est” or rather “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    • joeblough says:

      Well, I’ll just assume that your dad is a rational guy, and consequently will come around after a while.

      What you have to remember is that the enemies of freedom have had most of human history to convince people not to be too self-confident — they don’t want too many independent thinkers running around, don’t you know.

      Why do I say that? Because that’s the thing the other side tends to hate the worst about Rush, his self-confidence, which derives from seeing his ideas (both absorbed from outside and original) bear good fruit in the real world.

      And they hate the enthusiastic ebullient sense of humor that goes along with that.

      It’s hard for your average good man to take back his sense of being on the high moral ground and the self assurance that’s appropriate to that position.

    • proreason says:

      A lie repeated a thousand times becomes the truth to most of the world.

      It’s a key lynchpin of the radical left’s successful strategy.

      That’s why they spent 20 years infiltrating the architects of education and the media.

  14. TwilightZoned says:

    It’s the same ‘ol same ‘ol with the dems. If you throw enough sh** hard enough on a wall eventually something will stick.

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      .. and we just cannot forget how superbly polished these libs have gotten in their craft of deception .. lies! They are accomplished EXPERTS at it! .. and as proreason pointed out, they been at it a lonnng time.

  15. GL0120 says:

    I truly hope that Rush, Sean, and Ann have bodyguards; it isn’t too much of a stretch for TCO to make an “offhand” remark that he wished he were rid of them and his devoted followers set out to do his will.

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      .. and don’t forget our good friend, Mark Levin. The libs would love to see him ‘unplugged’, too.

      God Bless that foursome! They’re truly Great Americans!

  16. Liberals Demise says:

    O Hole without a prompter is nothing more than an O Hole.
    I’ll be Rushs’ guard any day of the week.
    “No R.O.E.”

  17. BigOil says:

    Barry and his “handlers” are smart enough to know liberal ideology can not hold up to any level of real scrutiny. After all, The Won did not give a press conference for the last 6 months of his campaign. When he finally decided to answer questions, his first press conference as President was scripted like a B-movie.

    A debate with Rush would provide the ideological contrast McCain could never muster – which is why we will never see it happen.

  18. brad says:

    Yep, as I wrote before, the Democrats take turns targeting one person at a time, assassinate their character, and run them into the ground. It may take time, but the drum beat against Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, assorted A.G.s, Palin, and others actually works. Conservative back down, change people to appease liberals.

    Meanwhile: Kennedy, Byrd, Spitzer, McGreevy, Jackson, Shapton, Pelosi et. al, simply brush off conservative complaints as “partisan politics” and they get away with it.

    It goes to show, that even though liberals are much worse, they have much thicker skin.

  19. GL0120 says:

    I can just imagine TCO trying to debate Rush; no teleprompters, no aids whispering in his ear, just him and Rush.
    I get a tingly feeling just thinking about it!

« Front Page | To Top
« | »