« "socialism" as an attack word - what's up with that? | eds's Blog | "Obama DOJ Defies Federal Judge" »
RNC uses strawman 'distract' to distract
"Rahm Emanuel and the Democrats know they lose an argument with the Republican Party on substance so they are building straw men to attack and distract," said RNC spokesman Alex Conant.I'd agree with the second part if not exactly as it was probably meant -- the Republicans are a sideshow these days and they continue to sideline themselves as the "party of No"..
"The feud between radio host Rush Limbaugh and Rahm Emanuel makes great political theater, but it is a sideshow to the important work going on in Washington.["] -- Politico
But let me qualify my agreement. CPAC *is* an American sideshow, and it's about the only Republican show in town these days which isn't mere "theater" or fake "entertainment". Limbaugh addressed CPAC for about an hour. So pointing out his leadership role at CPAC is hardly a distraction and while he may be made of straw politically (does he truly believe his radio show position?), he's not being used as a mere strawman in this case.
Advertisement
OH! I get it!
The Republicans had a strawman address the CPAC Convention? Their representative apologized to a strawman for making an unkind characterization! They have not challenged Limbaugh's claim that he is the Leader of the GOP because he is a strawman!
Rahm Emanuel versus Limbaugh is the politcal theater this country has been needing for the past 30 years. Finally, we are taking notice of his ranting and asking questions he can not now, or ever answer in a way that suggests there is any truth in his declarations.
March 2, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
There were those who cautioned that Rahm was elevating Rush by attacking him. Well, maybe he did, maybe Rush needed the handicap to reach a level playing field. So far Rahm is way ahead on points, on my scorecard.
March 2, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er, isn't it Politico who is using teh strawman gambit to distract? As far as I tell, there is no feud between Rahm Emanuel and Rush Limbaugh.
Rahm was asked to comment on Rush, and he did. He didn't call him out, or threaten to beat him up after school.
So isn't Politico creating a strawman rather than take on what little substance occurred at CPAC.
March 2, 2009 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a missing " mark in the blog post blockquote, both items are attributed to Conant. Conant is an RNC guy. Those are given as his words, including "feud", so Politico isn't making that up. (see the linked article)
It is true ALSO that Politico is making hay out of it, but they are hardly the only ones noting Rahm vs. Rush. The Rahm comment caught on right away, and is now reaping its harvest, wheat and chaff together.
March 2, 2009 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink