in the WSJ?

I say thumbs down on that idea.

Nope. Ignore it. I think Obama has already given Rush too much attention. Any attention for Rush gives him even more respect among Republicans.

Totally ignore it.

President Obama took the high ground when he called out Rush as somebody we shouldn't be listening to. From there, it's OVER.

If Obama were to respond now, with Rush initiating the topic, he then would undo the "somebody we shouldn't be listening to" bit.

Also, Rush loaded that OpEd, trying to pin Obama on some media ownership and regulatory matters. It's a much better position for Obama, if he waits that out, then takes the iniative on the topic at some later date.

The beauty of it is that Rush totally opened the door and it's difficult to close after so many years doing what he does. Had he taken more defensible positions, or was clear about entertainment, vs facts, Rush would actually have some authority now, and could move to force Obama's hand.

For now, that's off the table though. Nice move from Obama.

I agree. Besides, as mentioned previously, Obama already put Rush in his place.


Perhaps after years of this BS from Rush, perhaps its time to tell Rush to run for office himself. Put up or shut up.

should respond only on the E.I.B. Network!!!get a 2 way dialog going!!!

When the revolution begins, Rush Limbaugh should be the very first person to be publicly drawn and quartered as a fundraiser for National Public Radio. First local fundraiser will be Lars Larson. Pioneer Square, on a Saturday, at noon.

I think Obama should just answer his question;

No.

Limbaugh is nothing more than a glorified carnival barker. Let him bark.

What the Obama White House needs to do is better communicate its goals rather than letting Rush and company do it for them. That's the mistake Clinton made during the first part of his first term. The lack of discipline in the early Clinton White House coupled with missteps on health care, Somalia and other domestic issues put Limbaugh and Gingrich in the catbird seat.

If the White House stays focused, communicates its message clearly with without missteps and reminds the country how the GOP isn’t interested in serving as the loyal opposition but rather the "pity" party without a plan for anything except tax cuts for the rich, the Democrats will be fine.

"Limbaugh is nothing more than a glorified (drug addicted) carnival barker.

Never miss an opportunity to point that out.

When you listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram, you realize just how old and tired their message seems. It's ancient history. We’re in a crisis but the best they can do is the same old routine from the Clinton years. It’s as if the WSJ under the tutelage of Rupert Murdock and his WSJ editorial chief John Fund (who is also Rush Limbaugh’s ghost writer) are trying to repackage their old friends from the Clinton days.

62kgw>> "should respond only on the E.I.B. Network!!!get a 2 way dialog going!!!

Why would President Obama want to have a dialog with the drugster?

Why would President Obama want to have a dialog with the drugster?

Yeah, it's not OK to talk to Rush, but it's OK to appoint, how many is it, tax cheats to his cabinet.

With Geitner, at least he admitted the mistake and paid his taxes. Rush on the other hand would routinely CASTIGATE those with drug problems but when it came to his own problem, the chicken shit didn’t even have the balls to go out and buy his own drugs. He hid behind his housekeeper and tried to paint her as the bad guy. Talk about a pansy and worthless piece of shit. Rush is all about taking responsibility -- when it comes to other people.

Rush has about as much credibility as Eliot Spitzer.

You know I've been wondering about that communication bit.

Obama does a weekly address. It's pretty clear what is going on. Sure, there is this and that that's muddy, but overall, we know the current focus.

Why expand that to include things that are not yet decided? If Obama entertains that, then they can just start pushing an agenda and framing.

Better to just ignore it. No time expectations, no nothing. If you want to know what's going on, check up on the address and follow the public dealings in Congress. As things get resolved, we know more, until the expectations on things are mostly set.

Advancing that is just pressure to make a bad decision, or a means to frame whatever decision is made. Simply not addressing things until the core decisions have been made keeps most of that off the table.



I do think CJ has a point. A simple "No" has both the impact of letting people know it's not going to happen. That's a positive because it makes framing it not happening as something sinister is harder.

On the other hand, once they've got the "No.", they then get the signal that it's not going to happen, and can cry baby about that more than they are right now.

Not sure what's better. I think just flat out ignoring it is best, but who knows?

You have to have a pro-active agenda, and it needs to be a nearly daily undertaking. During the Reagan years, it meant focusing on a theme of the week. They'd roll something out Monday and try to keep it the focus of the news cycle during the week. But because of 24 hour news and the Internet, things have changed. Keeping the agenda focused on a daily basis is imperative. But you’ve got to be able to sell it and have segregates that sell your message in a meaningful way. You can’t put people on television selling your ideas that don’t relate well to the audience (or even in print). President Obama is the best salesman the White House has. But he can’t do it alone. Overexposure can be a problem too. You have to make certain these people are polished and communicate in a way that touch your audience in a positive manner. It really is about how to best spin the message and be credible.

Skybill>> "Yeah, it's not OK to talk to Rush, but it's OK to appoint, how many is it, tax cheats to his cabinet."

Rather than trying to change the subject, why don't you answer my question, Skybill?

President Obama has nothing at all to gain by having a dialog with the drugster and much to lose.

Well, that's not even enough precision.

It's perfectly OK to talk to Rush. No crime in that. Doing so is a bad idea, given what Rush will do with the conversation.

@Tal I think Obama is doing pretty well now. Kind of a rough start, and it's popular with the 23 percenters to play all this crap up.

Less is more right now. It might not seem as potent this way, but it is a whole lot less risky. Obama keeps the high ground and they get to make a lot of noise.

The more it happens, and the more Obama gets done, the stronger his position will get. As those things get done, more and more people will tune in to his messaging, and that will be enough to carry it through.

Some of the people best served by the noise are never, ever going to change up and deal. It's a waste of time to even try. That job is for the various progressive advocacy groups.

I think we are going to see more of that effort ramped up too. Take the noise and the positive results and run brutal AD's all 4 years long.

@Skybill I don't think anybody is perfectly happy with the economic cabinet. Given how serious of a mess the Republicans left us, there is a case for not having too disjointed of a team.

Have you guys seen the news coming out of Europe? Good god, they are hosed big! I think Germany and France are the strong economies, and the rest are just failing badly. The UK is where we are and worse.

Ireland is gonna just flat out default. (again)

Many of the smaller nations are in trouble.

The Swiss are in big trouble too. Bad loans are threatening to marginalize the Franc. They are considering joining the EU, and with that goes the secrecy they have valued over the years.

That's not an insignificant change!

(and it's gonna flush out a few tax dollar dodgers from the US too. About damn time.)

I think it's perfectly safe to say we don't have a good handle on the damage done. Derivatives are way over valued. Nobody knows what a lot of stuff is worth, and the scope of the problem is bigger than most nations can afford to even consider paying down.

Obama is going to give these guys a bit of slack, but not much. In about a month, I expect the hammer to come down. Unlike the previous President, Obama is in charge.

His team is one that is accountable to him, not just blindly trusted to make the calls. He reserves a lot of authority for himself. And the problems are complex.

Perhaps better people could have been picked. No question. However, the picks he did make are defensible all things considered.

We will just have to see how that plays out.

30 years of supply side economic theory really has done it's work.

It's also safe to say unbridled capitalism has been discredited. Greed isn't good for us, unless checked. That much is absolutely clear.

Going forward, there must be a balance where government defines how the markets work and how accountable they must be. From there, greed works within each one, coupled with competition to give us good value and regular innovation.

This is going to be totally resisted from the investor class. They don't want to admit they've lost huge and will do everything they can to socialize their losses, while preserving their entitlements at our expense.

To be completely honest, I'm a bit worried that Obama will entertain that. I'm also aware we are one month in to sorting out a huge mess too.

You see, the thing with Rush is we don't hear a holistic opinion from him. We don't hear solutions and commentary that takes the events happening under consideration.

What we do hear is him playing right to that easy cheezy 23 percenter audience. Those people will let the world burn, if it means furthering their agenda item, whatever it is.

This means Rush isn't your friend! He doesn't care about you, or me, or the nation! What he cares about is HIS dollars, and HIS power.

That's it. That's what this whole mess is about.

Given that, NOBODY should be giving him any serious credence at all. He's an entertainer, a buffoon, carnival barker (GOD I LOVE THAT ONE!), and a drug addict who ruined his own ears with the stuff.

He's not even in the same class as Obama in both the character and public works accomplishment arenas. And his power base consists almost entirely of the 23 percenters, who have core issues, and powerful people interested in checking the left and preserving their class gains realized over the last 30 years.

That makes him flat out toxic to most ordinary Americans and this administration.

Rush is his own toxic cause too. All his deal. He chose that path because it would make him a lot of money. That's all he really cares about. If it were otherwise, he wouldn't have gone down the road he did!

Nobody that actually cares about the state of things would!

Why should the President of the United States engage in a conversation with a drug addict?

What's unique about today is that President Obama is dealing with several very different and complex issues. The economy, the foreclosure crisis, banking stability, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war on terror, two budgets to pass (remember, Congress and President Bush agreed to disagree and would save the 2009 budget for later). It’s a huge plate to balance – much more than most of Obama’s contemporaries.

I personally get worried that if you provide the Rush Limbaugh’s of the world with a sufficient opening, they'll drive a wedge right through the whole agenda. And they have zero interest in working across the aisle. They hate all things Democratic. Plus look at their rhetoric. It’s bombastic to say the least. They put ideologues in the driver seat and let them take the controls. They haven’t found that wedge issue yet – that issue that will make independent and conservative Democrats think twice about voting Democratic (even if it is a non-issue). But given the times in which we are living, perhaps it won’t happen anytime soon. But you have to be ready for it and respond in kind.

I realize things are much different than 1993, but these conservatives are crafty folks. For over a decade, they let the ideologues run the ship and now, they HATE being in the minority. They seem to believe they are entitled to power and when they don’t have it, they make every effort to usurp the party in power.

they make every effort to usurp the party in power.

And the liberals didn't when the conservatives were in office?

Payback's a bitch!

Skybill: And the liberals didn't when the conservatives were in office?

You think Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are competent enough to usurp anything? Give me a break.

I'll give you that!

Pelosi and Reid couldn't find their butts with both hands if there was a neon arrow pointing at it!!!

Obama campaigned on being transparent and open and change and important stuff. I don't think Limbaugh should be treated as a pariah because he knows how to articulate dissent. I'm not saying it would be easy to hold a regular conversation with Rush. But Obama should try and figure out a compromise. Why not engage him? If Rush is just a blowhard, then I think people will see him for what he is. If he has valid points or concerns, then go ahead and see what he has to say.

I know it's easy for me to say and it should be handled with a bit of care. But the irony is thick with Rush requesting an audience with The President. I mean, this is the guy who tried to get everyone freaked out about the possibility of Obama sitting down with leaders with no pre-conditions. Isn't that kind of what Rush wants here?

Yes, there has to be a line drawn somewhere. I'm just not convinced that it needs to be with Rush. Who knows? Maybe Obama will turn him to a fervent supporter?

Next; Bill O Reilly. Talk to them all for a little bit.

But then Rush and Bill have to have lunch with me too. That seems only fair.

Who the hell is Rush Limbaugh? What has he ever been elected to? Why should Obama feel the slightest obligation to talk to him about anything?

Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are media personalities out to make money by attracting viewers and listeners to their shows. They are not elected officials who need to be listened to at all. And their agenda is THEMSELVES not any greater good. Obama was elected to govern, so his actions as president are focused on getting things done, not promoting his show or himself.

And the liberals didn't when the conservatives were in office?

The GOP Congressional leadership and George W. Bush did it for them. The level of incompetence by the GOP Congressional leadership and George W. Bush was so bad that it made the Democrats job of winning control of both bodies of Congress very doable -- with or without Pelosi and Reid. You couldn't ask for a more derelict group of incompetents in once place as we saw in the GOP Congressional leadership of Hastert, Delay, Blunt, Boehner (and the White House).

What's ironic is listening to the GOP complain bitterly about a lack of bi-partisanship yet when they were in control of Congress, they treated the minority like shit. Civility ended in large measure when Newt Gingrich came to power. You don't see Tom Foley berating the GOP on MSNBC or CNN like Gingrich continues to do the Democrats on Faux News. President Obama has went out of his way on numerous occasions to court the GOP yet they make it make it seem like they didn't get any face time with the President during the stimulus debate. What’s also ironic is you have GOP members of Congress who voted against the stimulus crowing about items in the stimulus bill that their districts will support. They want it both ways.

As for Pelosi and Reid, I'm not a huge fan of either. But I'll take them over Boehner and McConnell any day of the week.

Andrew, I admit that my example of sitting down with leaders was a poor one. I take that back. Your point is right.

That was an uninformed opinion on my part. I'll think about it some more before I spout off next time.

Invite one talk-host to each cabinet meeting!!!

Skybill wrote:
Pelosi and Reid couldn't find their butts with both hands if there was a neon arrow pointing at it!!!

Yeah, not half as good as Hastert was at hiding things, such as congressmen IMing teenagers.

Wait. Does Rush still want Obama to fail?

Absolutely he does.

Haven't heard him come out and say, "sorry!". He's not contributing ideas that could help him succeed. Etc...

Skybill: Absolutely liberals went for the power. They stepped right up and competed for it, just as conservatives failed to do.

In this country, power is something we can compete for. It's ok to do that. It's adversarial.

Whoever gets it has the burden of being a good Shepard of that power. When that does not happen, there is payback, and it is totally a bitch.

That is why the Republicans are where they are now.

That's my beef with Rush and many Republicans right now.

They are fighting for the power, because they want power, not so they are working to be the better shepards of it!

It's obvious!

Look at the framing. Basically they take the shitty position. Simple contrarian.

We post up a stimulus. They take the position they are not happy. They want tax cuts.

So, they are given tax cuts, and the burden of contributing ideas that are new, might work, and reinforce the idea that we need stimulus.

They ignore all but the tax cuts, and play politics with the rest of it.

Result: We've a diluted bill, and they have set up the framing so they can be opportunistic about whatever happens!

Stimulus goes well: THANK GOD WE WERE THERE TO MAKE SURE IT WENT WELL.

Stimulus goes ok, maybe just breaks even: SEE? IF YOU HAD LISTENED TO US, WE WOULD SEE SUCCESS RIGHT NOW.

Simulus fails: FUCKING DEMOCRATS! YOU GET WHO YOU VOTE FOR.

Higher tax cuts: WE NEED MORE TAX CUTS. LOOK AT ALL THAT PORK LEFT!

No tax cuts: WE NEED TAX CUTS.

Some tax cuts: NOT ENOUGH TAX CUTS.

Sort all that out and you've got shitty framing that adds NO value at all.

We know tax cuts are a failure.

Given that, where is the Republican position that says, "here is what we do" so that "peoples lives are improved!".

Nothing!

Back when this was asked of Democrats, we unloaded with ideas. More ideas than I can remember.

Republicans just fall back on being shitty, hoping for a fall, so they can grab power.

When they've got it, do they consider things? No. It's MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS, OR WE WILL GET SHITTY.

That's exactly what they did.

Now, when called on it, they squeal like stuck pigs! Why? Because they are out of power, and will just be shitty about it, until they are back in power, where they are just free to be shitty anyway!

Show me the value add, and I'll take it back and say Republicans are working for me. I don't see it.

I see them working for big business, the wealthy and anybody else that can pony up for 5K a plate. I don't see it for most Americans. All I've really seen is: BEST WATCH IT AND DO EVERY SINGLE THING RIGHT, SHIT CASH FOR THE BIG BOYS, HOPE THEY DROOL A BIT BACK DOWN, OR WE WILL JUST GET SHITTY.

It's cool to get out there, post up some ideas, build a movement and go and get stuff done. That's how it works.

That movement can't just be for the sake of having it though, and until we see value from Republicans, that's all it is.