"El Rushbo" Called Out: By A Republican!
John Feehery, who worked for the House Republican leadership from 1989
to 2005, is either a very brave man, or has a political death wish - he
has dared to call out the sacred cow (cow can be interpreted in many
ways) of the Republican party, "El Rushbo," (Feehery's words, my
emphasis), in Politico, A letter to Rush Limbaugh:
Here's the call out:
Feehery isn't shy in challenging, Fearless Leader:
Feehery is polite to a fault:
Hopefully, Mr Feehery has an unlisted phone and e-mail cause there are 20 million "ditto-heads" out there putting on war paint.
On behalf of the other 280 million of us, thank you.
Dear Rush,
Congratulations! You have been selected by the Obama administration, the mainstream media and 20 million of your most passionate followers to be the new head of the Republican Party.
As such, you are given all the rights and responsibilities that come with being a true political leader.
Your mission is simple: Restore the Republican Party to its former greatness by single-handedly helping Republicans to regain control of Congress and to offer a reasonable and viable alternative to President Barack Obama.
Here's the call out:
You should be honored that the Obama administration has selected you, El Rushbo, to lead the Republicans in such a quest. Obviously, they find you to be a formidable foe -- politically adept and a proven vote-getter.
Feehery isn't shy in challenging, Fearless Leader:
We would like to see your plan to attract more women's votes. While we always get creamed by single women in elections, even married women turned against us this time. Not sure if calling female leaders "feminazis" really works in this atmosphere, but we are willing to hear you out on that. We got killed by America's fastest-growing voting population, Hispanics, in the last election. What is your plan to attract these voters? I know that you despise any kind of nuanced position on immigration reform, but we would love to see any of your ideas for getting some of these voters in the next election.
Feehery is polite to a fault:
Anyway, congratulations on this big promotion. We are proud of you, and, of course, we are all "ditto-heads." Please get us your plans as soon as possible, because we have a lot of work to do.
Sincerely,
The Republican Party
Hopefully, Mr Feehery has an unlisted phone and e-mail cause there are 20 million "ditto-heads" out there putting on war paint.
On behalf of the other 280 million of us, thank you.
Advertisement
Great Post!
February 9, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant!
February 9, 2009 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent. Proves that are rational, intelligent and interesting Repubs who care and aren't just a cog in the broken wheel of the GOP machinery.
Thanks for posting. Rec'd.
February 9, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems I heard this idea around TPM before, but I am not sure where it come from. :O)
February 10, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
.
Well . . .
(I'm going to try this one more time. I tried posting it twice yesterday -- damn TPM gremlins)
As Mr Feehery pointed out:
So ... when it comes to getting along? Maybe. That is when I observe a consistent long term attempt at more relevancy to subject matter and less pigeon-holing, more competent thought on how people are referred to without resorting to political labels, and more practicality in posting about the specific nuts and bolts of actual meaningful issues in lieu of personal observations of other cafe member's motives and agendas.
I'll think about . . .
~OGD~
February 12, 2009 4:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Relevancy is in the eye of the beholder. If that is the bar, I am not sure I will ever clear it as we are obviously coming from vastly different places on how we see many issues, though we probably agree on most long-term strategic goals for reshaping American policy.
I have a long and consistent history of blogging and commenting with the quote you offered as my guidepost. Some of my opinions are more fleshed out than others, but I have never been accused of inconsistency by any but a few people around here of which you are certainly included.
The only time I use labels in a derogatory fashion is when they are used first, but when offering commentary on how to move away from a reliance on political labels, it is going to be necessary to define the debate in those terms.
You use labels all the time rather than simply offering questions or critiques of a given position, so this admonition sounds like more "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" quacking. Even when I offer the flag of truce as a way to move the conversation forward, I get a Video Professor lecture in return.
Sorry, I'm not buying your product.
February 12, 2009 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I, for one, hope lush keeps up on that feminazi thing. Goodbye republicans.
February 9, 2009 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Wow . . .
The red lights are flashing and the klaxon bell is ringing loud and clear at the USS Free Republic submarine . . .
Hahahahahahahaha. . . .
~OGD~
February 9, 2009 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gorgeous!!!
February 9, 2009 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, now we just need a few more Republicans like Feehery to help push Humpty Rushty off that wall.
February 9, 2009 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was REALLY good! The cracks are starting!
February 10, 2009 2:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who the hell is this Feehrey? What was that? A letter to the editor from some aide? Or clerk? What happened to his 16 year career? He get fired or something?
February 10, 2009 7:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Spoken like a true Limbot.
February 10, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sensible Republicans will have no choice but to split from fatheads like Rush and his Congressional lapdogs, thereby splintering their Party beyond recognition for the foreseeable future.
Boo-hoo.
February 10, 2009 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is one option, but hardly likely. Eventually they will find their way toward a more 21st Century definition for their side, just as democrats have finally started that conversion themselves under Obama.
It was always going to take at least a couple election cycles for the current crop of republicans to shoot their feet off as voters send new representative to Washington, thus alerting the incumbents that remain as to what the new paradigm is.
The more successful Barack is, the quicker the GOP will change into something worthwhile.
February 10, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
So true Jason. That is why the big business republicans are trying so hard to shape the "Obama is a failure" meme.
February 10, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally agree. The Michael Steele pick only backs that notion up. I love the republican governors getting behind him though. That really kills the RNC strategy when it comes to moderates.
February 10, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS: I meant the republican governors supporting Barack's efforts helps with moderates. Steele will only make the RNC's current problems much worse.
February 10, 2009 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watch out now. If someone in the leadership were to call him out the Republicans might start getting somewhere. Fortunately, Steele-Boehner-McConnell aren't going to do anything like that in the next two years.
February 10, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The republican "leaders" will follow whichever way the wind is blowing. Limbaugh is about to blow up in their face as the guy is clearly off the reservation and turns off more moderates as he tries to spin up the ideological right.
February 10, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
missing the point.
rush never has anything to lose for the fact that he DOESNT speak for anyone but himself.
if people listen thats their fault.
the dems dropped the ball as usual here because they should have had a vote on a resolution in congress condeming his talk of hoping Obama fails.
that would have forced the party to distance themselves from him and if not there would be a record of who agreed that Obama fails.
that was the way to handle this.
February 10, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I for one say that is a dumb idea because it allows the GOP to don the mantle of free speech and rally around the victim flagpole. Using the Congress to condemn Rush is an sbuse of federal power.
February 10, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just like when Senate slapped MoveOn's peepee over the "General Betrayus" ad. All of it is protected speech under the First Amendment, no matter how much we are disgusted by or agree with what is said.
February 10, 2009 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please, please please!!! Let's keep Rush around as long as we can. He is the most useful tool in the Republican realm as it fades into obscurity. Will they come back? Probably, but not anytime soon, not until the 400# walrus has his coronary. In the meantime, he is great for us.
One of the most assinine declarations of Rush was that regulations are useless. The government has no right to interfere, and when they do they hurt business. His proposition was that business would never do anything to hurt their market. People were going ah-ha all over the place in agreement. It made so much sense! Well, somehow everyone forgot about the incendiary Ford pick-ups.
In the Bush years and currently we are seeing, besides the obvious failure in the financial sector to properly evaluate investments, that the mines do collapse as owners take short cuts, the milk will get tainted if it could make a few bucks, and not even peanut butter is safe. Can we stop with the greed is good aleady? Greed does not trickle down.
All of these tragedies are not some mid-manager making a bad decision. They are people at the top having their eyes on the prize, profits. Government is not about profit. It's about people, we the people, and we need it looking over the shoulder of every business to ensure people come before profits. Because it is a lie, business has fouled their market time and again. Rush does not learn. Republicans seldom learn, although JEM would have us believe they can. We the people must learn. The Republicans will not revive unless people leave it. Those people will not come back, but there will be a new generation of fools to replace them. There will be No Child Left behind.
February 10, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
At least 36% of the republican party who supports Obama and thinks he is doing a good job can learn something new, though I would agree that the 17% who disapprove are a lost cause. Leaves 47% of the republican party somewhere in between. Seems a pretty well-defined trend that falls well outside any supposed fantasy on my part.
February 10, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Significant statistics, but they analyze the ones who are left.
February 10, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ones who are left can't be so easily classified or shoved into standard demographic sets. Assuming that a good portion of that 47% can be convinced that a new, more progressive path makes sense for the country doesn't lose me anything but high blood pressure and Karmic debt.
February 10, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good luck with that. Just remember the definition of insantiy, repeating the same behavcior and expecting a different result. I do hope you remain healthy and active in the debate.
February 10, 2009 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is why I advocate a different response by progressives than the same old partisan warfare in the hopes of changing the debate in our favor. Only by redefining the "center" can we begin to solve some of these problems that I think most Americans agree need to be solved.
February 10, 2009 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all in favor of the destruction of the Right. That should move the Center quite a bit. I am hopeful more people will abandon Rush, who is a very high priced whore. That also goes for Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, and Lou Dobbs. I do not agree that they have a valid point of view because there is no substance to support it other then what they contrive. These people are liard and it is an embarassment that people support them, or watch them, nothing less then shameful, IMHumbleO.
February 10, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with that the coming destruction of the far right idiots you cite will indeed move the Center quite a bit, but that hardly means the entire country is going to join the democratic party or start identifying themselves as liberal.
The final make-up of the electorate isn't going to change much, though the public face of the republican will certainly change dramatically over the coming years as will the relative influence the far right loonies have in its policies.
February 10, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the question which time will answer is whether, like the economy, things have gone too far to recover. Can Republicans keep their name and change the party, or do these people need to begin some place else anew? Libertarians are an example of where the exodus is headed. But I think their ideology is too extreme and I resent their insisting we cannot help each other, which is what government is, we the people helping each other. It is those who consider government the place to help themselves that government does not work, i.e. no bid contracts in Iraq, no price negotiations for drugs, etc.
As someone with pro-Democratic tendencies, I would see nothing wrong with everyone being Democratic, but will agree it is unlikely. However, I think that describing the party as liberal is how so many people are repulsed by that thought. The Reich has done a great disservice to the country by making "liberal" something to be despised. Having a liberal consideration does not taint any effort to right the ship that is this country. To me, it is all about hybrids, where we can tap into the better angels of both ideals. It is makng them work together that will bring us the most success.
February 10, 2009 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
No argument and many great points in that comment.
Personally, what I think we are witnessing is the beginning of a total renunciation of the last 40-years of trench warfare between "liberals" and "conservatives" in favor of something a little more nuanced and effective. It is hard to define just what that will look like without a few more years and a couple of election cycles to clear out the deadwood.
Can we come together quick enough for it to matter? I am certainly optimistic enough to think so, though my optimism is strained at times for a variety of reasons.
February 10, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we do not come together we will certainly fall apart.
BTW - I see the McCain and W stickers on some cars still, but where did all those United We Stand stickers go?!?
February 10, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reminds me of the Franklin quote: "We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
February 10, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
GZ, there seems to be a mixup in what the two of you are talking about. According to the latest CBS poll, Republicans are evenly split between approval and disapproval of BHO at 36%. 28% are unsure.
The Pew Poll did not include a party breakdown. The total there was 64% approval, 17% disapproval and 19% are unsure.
Well defined trends should be well defined, don't you think? :-)
February 10, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was taking JEM's numbers and going with an argument from there. If one looked at the Senate vote on the stimulus plan, those numbers are irrelevant anyway, 3 in favor with the balance opposed.
It does not appear the Senators referenced their constituents, only their party colleagues. Voinivich (R-OH) could not see voting for it when Ohio is in dire straits. Judd Gregg (R-NH) ignored the shut out the Dems pitched in the northeast this past election. Voters denied every Republican candidate the chance to go to Washington, DC, incumbent or not. All who ran failed.
More immediately one might even say the Republican Senators did not reference the governors of the states from whence they came! Martinez (R-FL) did not vote in favor while Obama stumped in Florida with Gov. Crist (R). Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also voted against while Gov. Palin was in favor. I thought that was kind of amusing after the whole bridge to nowhere fiasco. But I believe she is clueless to her own hypocrisy.
February 10, 2009 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not so sure Rush really has an audience of 20 million, I think it's actually 10 million extremely large people.
February 10, 2009 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup yup!
*wink*
Also.
February 10, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Or . . .
... more like 4 million listeners with 5 separate radios in each room of their houses... Oh, and one radio out in the outhouse out behind the Kudzu where the wife's car is parked.
~OGD~
February 10, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
In case you're interested, here's what Feehery had to say about the responses to his letter: http://pundits.thehill.com/2009/02/10/rush-response/
February 10, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the link, Melissa. Good bookend. Republicans aren't tone deaf, they're hard of hearing. Hold on, isn't El Rushbo...
February 10, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Great find . . . Melissa
The heart of Feehery's message:
That's pretty much where I would like to see the whole country go.
~OGD~
February 10, 2009 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sometimes post over at The Hill, and I was a bit surprised to hear this all coming from Feehery. Maybe there's hope for him after all...
February 10, 2009 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does this mean we can be friends again?
This is a great summary of where I would love to see both parties go, each approaching the problem from two different direction thus doubling our effectiveness as a nation.
Great quote.
February 10, 2009 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Well . . .
As Mr Feehery pointed out:
I don’t think we should be more moderate. Nor do I think we should be more conservative. I do think we should be more relevant, more competent, and more practical.So ... when it comes to getting along? Maybe. That is when I observe a consistent long term attempt at more relevancy to subject matter and less pigeon-holing, more competent thought on how people are referred to without resorting to political labels, and more practicality in posting about the specific nuts and bolts of actual meaningful issues in lieu of personal observations of other's motives and agendas.
I'll think about . . .
~OGD~
February 11, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Well . . .
As Mr Feehery pointed out:
I don’t think we should be more moderate. Nor do I think we should be more conservative. I do think we should be more relevant, more competent, and more practical.So ... when it comes to getting along? Maybe. That is when I observe a consistent long term attempt at more relevancy to subject matter and less pigeon-holing, more competent thought on how people are referred to without resorting to political labels, and more practicality in posting about the specific nuts and bolts of actual meaningful issues in lieu of personal observations of other's motives and agendas.
I'll think about . . .
~OGD~
February 11, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Sheesh . .
This site has gone totally off the rails...
~OGD~
February 12, 2009 4:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can buy into what he is saying too, except I am always suspicious of people who want to fix things, because we can fix horse races too. If we are attending to what really needs fixing, like above-board contracts, I am totally in favor of that!
February 10, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't mention it. :)
February 10, 2009 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink