I agree on this. The Obama administration are far too sensitive about this and there is no time for that. The Clinton administration was the same way.

There have been recent references to Fox news and a childish and irritable response to Rick Santelli's "tea party".

Limbaugh's comments in themselves are partisan sniping. But highlighting any opposition to Obama's economic plan is not a good idea. Do the Democrats really want scrutiny? The numbers definitely do not hold up.

This obnoxious nonsense about all Republicans is the great pitfall in all of this for the Democrats. The assumption that all conservatives think exactly alike and follow Rush Limbaugh is insulting rubbish with no basis in reality.

There is a snooty contempt coming from the Democrats regarding conservatives which is self-destructive and absurd. If they want to hold on to ther victories they need to learn how to speak with respect to people who are different than they are.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

If this was just YOUR daughter's L/D department that wouldn't be saying much. But this scenario plays out over and over an over again in EVERY L/D department in the US. Many of those women have kids by several different males (I refuse to call them men)...who are in an out of prison.

__________________

No, I'm sure that OSB has it right; this is pure political calculation on the part of the Democrats. Rush Limbaugh's fan club, I think, have very little understanding of just how odious he is to anyone who isn't a resident of the far right -- although the more intellectual and responsible sort of conservatives surely share that opinion. And when I say "anyone who isn't a resident of the far right," I mean that literally; I don't just mean the Democratic base. Limbaugh is a caricature of a right-winger, actually.

So if the Democrats can succeed in making him "Mr. Republican," and associating him in the public mind with the GOP, they've got it made. And this is the reason for the attacks.

As for it "backfiring," if the goal were to drive him into obscurity and deny him radio listeners, probably it would backfire, but that's not the idea. The Democrats don't want him to disappear. He's too useful as a foil. If he didn't exist, they'd want to invent him.

You are so kind in your evaluation. Next you will be as cynical as I, saying 'the left hand feeds the right, and the right hand feeds the left." Better be careful there!

__________________

I agree that many are admitting that they blew credibility on performance and platform integrity, and that is a good start. But some other things needs to be in order too, and your own personal example is part of it given you decided 'enough is enough' on a local town board and sought and got the seat to make such changes.

First, I think the GOP needs to recalibrate its own ideological positions. One example is the idea that 'less is more' when it comes to government. Obama studied everyone from the left and right and came to what I think is a good conclusion: less or more government isn't the issue but effective government, and that may mean more or less depending on the situation and whatever it is, it must be effective. I think the GOP should consider that wise counsel, but decide for itself what exactly are those areas where more or less is required, and also focus on effectiveness. That all fell flat during the Bush years where there was more of the wrong stuff, less of the right stuff, and most things managed ineffectively.

Second, fresh faces. On that you are exactly right. IMO, it's going to be really hard to hear the mea culpas from guys who have done exactly what they said they oppose and/or performed ineffectively. They had their chances and blew it. Credibility is key, and fresh faces of people who mean what they say and say what they mean and prove it--and do so showing their judgements have proven and/or promise to be effective--are the ones who can retake seats and promote themselves with public approval.

Third, the party needs to offer genuine ideas with plans. Right now, there are too many questioned, debunked by actual observation, discredited by lack of honest application, and outdated by time and space platitudes. There are also too much gratutious naysayings and guffawings of whatever the Dems say. Monkeys can do that. That's a big reason why Jindal's speech fell so flat the other day. What is missing that voters don't miss? Actual plans and solutions with a credible promise or evidence.

Fourth, the party needs to get on a set page of platforms. Right now, the bases are way out of whack and incompatible. For example, just looking at this thread...is socially liberal Steve and a Religious Right person compatible? Or the libertarians with the RR? How about the mega-wealthy with the poor social conservative? How about the plain old centrist voters? It seems those kinds are totally excluded. The end result is that there is so much discord that there has been massive flight to the Dems as a result.

Fifth, demographics must be considered for all four of the above. If demographic trends are considered, the GOP is going to continually be in huge trouble in the future unless this gets resolved favourably to address those demographics.

For example, Obama got 44% of the vote in TX...TX. Why? Large Hispanic and northerner migrations into TX over the past few decades plus other outlook changes in TX amongst the populace. Cities like Houston are majority Hispanic, Austin and several cities might as well be in California, etc. FL has the same Hispanic and northern migrations. Even states like VA are becoming fastly Democratic again given the expansion of the megalopolis from down North. The GOP losing a state like VA can consistently win the POTUS election for the Dems given it can overcome the losses of states like OH, which are again also trending Dem. Obama won all three of those states...and more given further demographic changes (the slide is now in NC, etc).



And in those remaining red states, Obama made it very close in some. And it's not just about Obama gaining there--the Dems in Congressional seats, voter registrations and ID, etc...are all generally gaining, except in some very thinly populated areas with unusually homogenous conservative demographics (Mormon states, etc).

The disasterous performances of the GOP under Bush and the Bush Congress also created a huge youth affiliation with the Dems, much like Reagan did for the youth generation in his time 30 years ago.

So, it's not going to be done without some heavy lifting in courtships, as well as message reconsiderations, recalibrating, etc. It can be done, but the legwork must be done plus a willingness to adapt.

__________________

I spoke quite specifically of C-PAC, who certainly are not "all Republicans." But I warn that all Republicans may suffer the consequences if Limbaugh continues to be paraded about as a " representative Republican." If you tell people that frequently enough, some of them will believe you.

And if they succeed in making him "Mr Republican" they will have created unnecessary problems for themselves by insulting millions of people who don't appreciate being stereotyped and mocked. The conservatives who love Limbaugh will be energized. Those who don't love him will be offended and disgusted.

Either way the Democrats lose - and they will be entirely to blame.

This inability to understand how conservatives think is absolutely unacceptable. If the Obama admiinistration go out of their way to ridicule and mock conservatives by trying to make them (us) into cartoons, they will cause needless offense.

The sheer stupidity and arrogance of politicians really is unbelievable.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

__________________

And that is the purest fantasy world nonsense - just patronizing rubbish.

That is the problem with the failure of the Dems to understand how conservatives think.

All conservatives know who Limbaugh is. All Americans do. I do not appreciate the attitude of the Obama administration towards conservatives that I see developing. There is no chance that I will start thinking Limbaugh represents me or anyone besides his followers.

Contempt is the great Achilles heel of the Democrats, just as aggression is the Republicans' chief flaw. That attitude of patronizing condescension is what drove the left from power beginning in 1968. Now it is returning.

The Dems had better learn how to address those who disagree or they will start losing power in 2010.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)

I am glad you agree on that point, let's be honest at the same time. This comes from the left (on being "politically correct"). Giving money to someone for doing nothing--& or being irresponsible only creates more irresponsiblity.

To fix the problem--one has to have the guts to stand up to the politically correct in this country & say NO MORE!

I am fully aware that this goes on all over the country--I just wanted you to hear just one single story at one ordinary average sized hospital in this country to make a point.

It's the mindset of these women--who think they can be drug addicts & mothers at the same time, that really bother me.

In fact, they should make a law that if you come to give birth to a baby & that baby has drugs in it's system, the mother is sterilized--& that baby is taken away forever.

Right now, these women get a pat on the hand--& social services hands the baby over to them.

Why are you angry at Obama, but not angry at C-PAC. It appears that C-PAC has been much more effective in presenting Rush Limbaugh as representative of all Republicans. If this is a false image, as you say, why not criticize those who perpetuated the falsehood?

For the DNC to be throwing money--in an off-election year--at a talk show host--shows they're scared to death of him. The more they attack Limbaugh, the more curiosity Limbaugh is going to receive from the American public. Add to that you have millions of Americans very upset with this stimulus bill that is loaded with ear-marks & pork barrel spending that has nothing to do with economic stimulus. I imagine there will be 3 million more listeners tuning into Rush Limbaugh--because the DNC is actually promoting him.

I don't think so...it's what has been making more people switch parties or swing vote.

You are a good example of that. You are well educated, well thought, well employed, productive, a family man, etc. You also are a 'measured conservative' and reasonable. You think about your vote. You voted for Bush the first time, didn't like the directions you saw, voted for Kerry, and felt McCain was rightly tempered enough to earn your vote. What put you off about the Bush years? Too much of the 'dittohead' control and other hard right characters IIRC. That is not the kind of GOP you want to see.

Whilst some GOPers who could be courted might be offended by the Dems typcasting the GOP as the 'party of Limbaugh' etc, just as many if not more of the centrist ones switch parties or switch vote because they are more offended by the Limbaugh types, hardcore RR types, etc, and others getting too much control and influence. Such types don't want to be associated with that, and insofar as the Dems saying that, they'll just see it as stating the truth.

And the GOP is making it 'the truth.' Why for example is this buffoon speaking at CPAC saying this kind of stuff?

YouTube - Cliff Kincaid Says President Obama Not Born in US

Obama's a commie, he wasn't born here, etc...whackery and buffoonery. Why is the party giving the microphone to Limbaugh, Coulter, guys like him, etc? And of course there is a large applause also being noted from the crowd. That's a problem. It drives people away.

The GOP will never lose a meaningful number of the hard right vote and they won't vote Dem. Palin got them motivated. But, a tepid vote counts as much as an enthusiatic vote. The hard core base like the Limbaugh crowd didn't like McCain but they voted for him anyway just because "whoever it is on the GOP side it must automatically be better than the Democrat." They therefore are irrelevant to the analysis. But, the electoral map showed who else got motivated looking at her...for Obama, that is.

__________________

Because Obama and the Democrats are in power and that is my concern right now.

Obama and the Dems came into power by appealing to the center. They have veered very far left. I don't appreciate that - both because it is very bad for the economy and because I don't like it when people (including politicians) say one thing to get elected and then do another in office.

Silly attempts to brainwash people into thinking "all conservatives love Limbaugh" is just childish propaganda. I don't have time for it. None of us do.

__________________
My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure.

"Sir Galahad," by Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1834)