ANALYSIS: Obama and Democrats are being smart by attacking Rush Limbaugh now!


Hello Everyone:

I definitely believe that Barack Obama and Democrats are doing the politically correct and smart thing to be publicly attacking Rush Limbaugh right now over his outrageous comments and by making elected Republican office holders take a public stand on him:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01232009/news/politics/prez_zings_gop_foe_in_a_timulating_talk_151572.htm

PREZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A $TIMULATING TALK

Comments: 2842
Read Comments
Leave a Comment

By CHARLES HURT, BUREAU CHIEF

Last updated: 4:16 pm
January 24, 2009
Posted: 8:13 pm
January 23, 2009

WASHINGTON -- "President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts..."

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17258

Please sign this DCCC petition against Rush Limbaugh and forward it on!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 28, 2009 - 11:55pm.

This fight with Rush Limbaugh in my opinion is very long overdue and it cannot be avoided if Obama wants to accomplish his goals of serious change in Washington and real bipartisanship!

Let me make it very clear that Rush Limbaugh is NOT "just a radio talk show host" as many people say that he is. Rush Limbaugh is "just a radio talk show host" in about the same way how that the Pope is "just a Roman Catholic." The truth is that the Pope is the leader of the Roman Catholic Church (with some dissenters of course) in about the same way how Rush Limbaugh is the loudest voice in the Republican Party right now (with some dissenters of course) who even many elected Republican office holders fear!

Ed Schultz got it exactly right in my opinion when he said about Rush Limbaugh "this is not just some ordinary talk show host:"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21114452/

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for Oct. 2
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show

Updated: 10:39 a.m. CT Oct 3, 2007

Guests Sen. Jim Webb, Frank Gaffney, Robert Greenwald, Heidi Harris, Ed Schultz, Julie Mason, Bob Herbert, Matt Continetti

ED SCHULTZ, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: "And what you say, this is not just some ordinary talk show host. This is a guy who has almost unfettered access to the president, one-hour personal time. They go to him every time they need to do some P.R. mop-up, like Cheney or any of them, when it comes to communicating with the American people.

He has been the White House lap dog for a long time..."

Here is the Hardball video link to watch this dialogue with Ed Schultz:

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&brand=msnbc&tab=m5&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/&fg=&from=00&vid=47759d58-9c32-44bf-a146-a862a00888ff&playlist=videoByTag:mk:us:vs:0:tag:Source_Hardball:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A (8:20)

Who’s right in the Limbaugh fight?
Oct. 2, 2007: Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid picked a fight with Rush Limbaugh calling the radio talk show host’s comments about "phony” soldiers "hateful" and "unpatriotic.” But now Limbaugh is hitting back. A “Hardball” panel, Ed Schultz and Heidi Harris, debates: Who is right in the fight?

Both Paul Begala and James Carville in my opinion got it exactly right when they described just how much power and influence that Rush Limbaugh has in the Republican Party on CNN last Friday:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/30/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

"Disaster" for the Middle Class; "Bad Bank" for Toxic Assets; Economy on a Tightrope; GOP Picks First Black Leader

Aired January 30, 2009 - 17:00 ET

PAUL BEGALA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: "But I think Candy's piece is instructive. The real leader of the Republican Party in America today is a corpulent drug addict with a AM radio talk show, Rush Limbaugh. He's the real power in the Republican Party. And so Michael Steele is going to need to stand up to Limbaugh if he wants to actually lead the party of Lincoln..."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/30/sitroom.03.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

White House vs. Rush Limbaugh; FDA Launches Criminal Probe Into Peanut Plant

Aired January 30, 2009 - 18:00 ET

JAMES CARVILLE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: "And the fact that zero Republicans voted -- I've got to tell you, as a Democrat, as an American, it probably wasn't a good thing. But I think as a Democrat, the Republican Party sent out a message loud and clear that Rush Limbaugh is running this party, he's in charge and we're not going to go along with anything...

CARVILLE: I mean the House Republicans sent a pretty clear signal, I thought. And I think they're quite satisfied with themselves and Rush is very pleased with them. And so they're happy...

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "All right, James, why would President Obama even talk about Rush Limbaugh in that -- in that closed door meeting?

CARVILLE: Because he is the most powerful leader of the opposition party. The president has an opposition party in a democracy. He has to deal with it as it is. Rush Limbaugh is the de facto head of the Republican Party right now. You see these congressmen just groveling.

And he and Rush himself has admitted that he's more powerful, than, say, Mitch McConnell or John Boehner.

And so we don't -- it's not the Democrats or the president that are elevating Rush Limbaugh. It is the Republican officeholders who have deemed him his daddy. He is the daddy of this Republican Congress right now...

CARVILLE: Yes. It is not -- it is the Republican who have elevated Rush Limbaugh. We're just -- this guy Gingrey, some congressman from Georgia, the man is peeling him off the wall, he was apologizing so profusely to Rush.

He is the person that they have elevated. Rush acknowledges his position as the most influential Republican..."

James Carville is right about this claim from Rush Limbaugh. Here is what Limbaugh said last Friday:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_013009/content/01125104.guest.html

Stack of Stuff Quick Hits Page

January 30, 2009

Story #2: Is the Senate Gang of 14 Poised to Strike Again?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/29/senates-gang-poised-strike-stimulus/

RUSH: "Okay. Try this. Fox News. The headline: "The Senate's Gang of 14 may be poised to strike again over the stimulus bill. The Gang of 14 compromise in 2006 displeased many conservatives. Now with Democrats in power, a similar compromise may be brewing for Obama's [Porkulus] economic bill." This is all about Ben Nelson, Democrat, Nebraska, "who gathered Republicans and Democrats and the Gang of 14 to avert the nuclear option over judges." My friends, I don't want to appear overly confident here. I just want to tell you: Don't worry about this. They may try for their Gang of 14, but I have a gang of 20 million, and our gang of 20 million will overwhelm their Gang of 14..."

James Carville is also right about Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) calling into Rush Limbaugh's radio program begging for forgiveness after being critical of him when so many of his dittoheads contacted his office:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17258#comment-340494

Limbaugh's followers made GOP Rep. Phil Gingrey apologize to him

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 29, 2009 - 2:09pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17258#comment-340495

Rep. Gingrey's call to Limbaugh where he begged to be forgiven

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 29, 2009 - 2:21pm.

I completely agree with Bob Herbert's comment about Rep. Phil Gingrey's apology to Rush Limbaugh when he said on Hardball last Wednesday, January 28 "You have Republican members of Congress who feel free to openly criticize President Obama. But if they criticize Rush, then they have to genuflect and kiss his ring. I find that fascinating:"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28937025/

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for January 28, 2009
Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

Guest: Rep. Darrell Issa, Dick Armey, Joan Walsh, Bob Herbert, Michelle Bernard

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: "Anyway, here‘s Congressman Phil Gingrey of Georgia basically groveling before the alter of Rush Limbaugh today. This is really—I don‘t know what staffer got him into this position. Listen to this thing.

We‘re digging for it. Basically, he said something here earlier in the week about how Limbaugh was really easy to be rich and make all kinds of comments as a talk show host. But it‘s different when you‘re elected to be a leader in the Congress. You have to take different, more nuanced positions.

Then he came back, no it‘s OK to be a well-paid talk show host and say what you feel like. That speaks for me. Here he is adjusting his position for Rush.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PHIL GINGREY ®, GEORGIA: We‘ve got to have your support. And, of course, I know you reach millions of people across the country. I tell you, I‘ve heard from quite a few of them since my foot and mouth disease yesterday.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Then Rush grandly, grandiosely allows the supplicant to rise. Bob Herbert, it‘s unbelievable...

BOB HERBERT, “THE NEW YORK TIMES”: What I think is interesting is apparently the Ditto Heads are in Congress as well. You have Republican members of Congress who feel free to openly criticize President Obama. But if they criticize Rush, then they have to genuflect and kiss his ring. I find that fascinating..."

I have been saying and I have credibly documented for the longest time what Paul Begala, James Carville, and Bob Herbert said about Rush Limbaugh so I was really glad to hear them bluntly say what they did:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13578

ANALYSIS: Why Rush Limbaugh is so powerful & what many media pundits do not get!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 10, 2007 - 1:47am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12971

Bush met with 10 Neocon talk radio hosts and in private with Rush Limbaugh!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 9, 2007 - 3:28am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7735

ANALYSIS & DOCUMENTATION: PEW stats on Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly & the Media!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 1, 2006 - 3:29am.

Jonathan Alter is not one of my favorite political pundits but in my opinion he did an excellent job of explaining how powerful that Rush Limbaugh is and what Obama has to gain by publicly attacking him:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28899468/

'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for Monday, January 26
Read the transcript to the Monday show

Guest: Jonathan Turley, Jonathan Alter, Matthew Alexander

JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: "But, look—Rush Limbaugh is now in the process of moving from the center of our politics for the last 15 years, you and I might not have liked it but that‘s where he was. He was extraordinarily important in American politics, to the fringes of our politics, which is where he belongs. That doesn‘t mean he loses his ratings. He‘ll still have his fortune, but he‘s no longer central to the debate.

And when you have somebody like Bill Bennett saying that he was out of line, Rush Limbaugh that is, in hoping that Barack Obama fails, that gives you some indication of how he can be marginalized.

So, what the president did was give that a little bit of a push, try to push Limbaugh out of the picture. And even though he gives him some more publicity in the short run, he does, as you say, separate him from the herd..."

Here is the Countdown video link to watch this dialogue:

Making peace with the pundits
Jan. 27: Jonathan Alter interview about Rush Limbaugh and conservative pundits.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/28864490#28864490 (05:43)

Jonathan Alter is exactly right in my opinion and he answers one of the most common objections that I hear about attacking Rush Limbaugh which is "Attacking him will only give him more attention."

The answer to this objection is that Rush Limbaugh already has that attention and power. You cannot deny to Limbaugh what he already has by just burying your head in the sand and refusing to deal with it!

Rush Limbaugh in my opinion is vulnerable right now because his Neocon ideologues lost power in the 2006 and 2008 elections and because he has definitely opened himself up to being legitimately attacked!

Rush Limbaugh recently said "I Hope Obama Fails" which is out of the mainstream with middle America, he previously made an inappropriate racial comment about Colin Powell back on October 19, he made a racist comment about Barack Obama back on August 20, he made a highly offensive sexual comment about Elizabeth Edwards back on August 12, he insulted Gen. Clark by calling him "a total ignoramus and moron" back in October of 2007, "he called our troops who disagree with him about Iraq "phony soldiers" back in September of 2007, and he has said many other stupid things which I have credibly documented:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_011609/content/01125113.guest.html

Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails

January 16, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: "If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z-OgbrCu_I&eurl=http://www.dccc.org/page/s/rush&feature=player_embedded

Rush Limbaugh Hopes President Obama Fails (0:19)

DCCCLive
January 26, 2009

"Sign our petition at http://www.dccc.org/rush and we'll send him your comments..."

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012209/content/01125117.guest.html

I Want Obama's Policies to Fail

January 22, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: "This morning, CNN, they have a beat reporter on me. Her name is Carol Costello. I'm her beat. Coanchor Kiran Chetry, introduction to... Wait a minute. This is not about Green Bay. This is about the Last Man Standing. This is about I want Obama to fail. I don't want Obama to fail; I want the country to succeed! I want Obama's policies to fail. But Obama's failure to implement his policies is good news, the best news possible for this country. That's all I'm saying..."

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16851

Rush Limbaugh's comment about Colin Powell and race can be nationalized by Dems!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 28, 2008 - 12:07pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16333#comment-323157

Rush Limbaugh called Obama "the little black man-child"

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 22, 2008 - 11:44am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16333

VIDEO: Dan Abrams showed how Rush Limbaugh can be a liability to GOP candidates!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on August 18, 2008 - 4:15am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13599

Is Limbaugh saying "Wesley Clark is a total ignoramus and moron" the last words?

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 12, 2007 - 9:44am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13497

ANALYSIS: Why Rush Limbaugh is especially vulnerable to attack right now!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 2, 2007 - 9:44am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11762

Keith Olbermann asks good questions about Imus leading to the Fairness Doctrine!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 13, 2007 - 4:35pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/9373

How Democrats (especially Jim Webb) can use Rush Limbaugh to their advantage!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 1, 2006 - 9:12am.

It is good to see mainstream Republicans like Chuck Hagel and Colin Powell attacking Rush Limbaugh:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17024

Senator Chuck Hagel sent a good message by strongly attacking Rush Limbaugh!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 25, 2008 - 10:01pm.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/18/hagel-takes-aim-at-limbaugh-senate-colleagues/

November 18, 2008

Hagel takes aim at Limbaugh, Senate colleagues

Posted: 03:13 PM ET

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/11/powell-gop-polarization-backfired-in-election/

December 11, 2008

Powell: GOP 'polarization' backfired in election

Posted: 07:01 PM ET

"Powell, who says he still considers himself a Republican, said his party should also stop listening to conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

"Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh?" Powell asked. "Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?"

Rush Limbaugh does NOT believe in any kind of compromise with people who disagree with him and that even includes moderate Republicans:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7018083

Building Bipartisanship? Not Limbaugh's Problem

by David Folkenflik, January 25, 2007

"Limbaugh talks tough and takes unyielding conservative stands. Some critics blame him and a crop of imitators for splitting Americans further apart, making it more difficult for people of goodwill to forge a consensus on tricky issues.

Limbaugh says that's not his problem. He has absolutely no interest in crossing the divide and forging compromise — and good reasons not to do so.

"I always say my real purpose is to attract the largest audience I can, and hold it for as long as I can, so I can charge confiscatory advertising rates," the talk show host says.

And that formula has made him a very rich man. But Limbaugh says he is able to make such profits by pursuing his passions, such as politics.

"Getting along is not the objective. When it comes to the war on terror, when it comes to tax policy, to me, defeating, politically, people I disagree with is the order of the day, and I don't think I defeat them by compromising with them," he says..."

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17024#comment-336612

Why GOP moderates should join with Dems to get rid of Limbaugh:

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 26, 2008 - 1:19am.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102408/content/01125111.guest.html

Good Riddance, GOP Moderates

October 24, 2008

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11920

ANALYSIS: Exactly how Extreme and Arrogant that the Neocon GOP Activist Base is!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 27, 2007 - 4:02pm.

This means that nothing Obama does will ever satisfy Rush Limbaugh and Limbaugh in my opinion is clearly Obama's biggest obstacle who is getting in the way of policy by intimidating elected Republicans!

Rush Limbaugh is definitely NOT "right wing" or "Conservative" in any mainstream sense of those words but rather he and ideologues like him are what I call "Extreme right wing" and "Neoconservative:"

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12716

ANALYSIS: Extreme right wing vs. right wing/Neoconservative vs. Conservative!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on July 19, 2007 - 9:07am.

As long as elected Republicans in Congress like Phil Gingrey and Eric Cantor keep on kissing Rush Limbaugh's ring because they fear him or because they fear a primary challenge from the far right by upsetting Limbaugh's activist base, then it will be very difficult for Obama to change Washington and restore bipartisanship!

This is why Obama and Democrats are being very smart by attacking Rush Limbaugh right now and by forcing GOP officials to make a clear choice between Limbaugh's fringe base or mainstream America!

The idea of attacking Rush Limbaugh is NOT really to try and convert his activist base. There would be about as much of a chance of converting one of Limbaugh's "dittoheads" as there would be of a devoted follower of Gen. Clark being converted to Limbaugh which I think is zero!

The main idea of attacking Rush Limbaugh is rather to expose his extreme ideology, to expose how powerful that he is along with how much influence that he has with a lot of elected Republicans in Congress, to show how much that he is out of the mainstream with middle America, and then to make elected Republicans in Congress take a public stand on him.

This should help to contain Limbaugh's influence mainly to his activist base which should help Obama be able to get more Republican votes on important legislation when Republicans in Congress have to make a public choice between voting to kiss Rush Limbaugh's ring or voting against Rush Limbaugh in the best interest of middle America!

It would be really great if Obama and Democrats in Congress could bring back the Fairness Doctrine:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16851#comment-333782

Bringing back The Fairness Doctrine would help to restore...

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 28, 2008 - 1:04pm.

I have to give Obama a lot of credit for his doing what many high profile Democrats would not do before him when it comes to trying to seriously deal with Rush Limbaugh and fighting back against his bullying!

Mitch Dworkin

http://www.securingamerica.com/

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16039
RESOURCES: Speeches, Articles, and Career Highlights to help define Gen. Clark!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on July 7, 2008 - 2:51pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.

http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 1, 2009 - 4:11am.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_013009/content/01125107.guest.html

Obama Owes America an Apology for His Lies About the US Economy

January 30, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: President Obama should apologize.  This is getting out of hand. Remember yesterday I was talking about I guess all week long, the immorality of this so-called stimulus bill, the Porkulus bill; the fact that so many elements of this -- from the contents of the bill to the way it's being sold to the way it's not being reported by the media -- is just morally wrong. You know, I watched again today. An MSNBC infobabe interviewed Tony Blankley. She had no clue what he was trying to say, no clue what he was talking about. She was a total Obama apologist, total anti-Bush. She doesn't have any idea what is in this debacle!  She doesn't care.  

Other Drive-Bys are trying to make it seem as though they do know what's in it.  Let's take a look at the GDP number that came out today.  The GDP number shows that the fourth quarter was down 3.8%, right?  Now, for the longest time, we've been hearing that we're in "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression."  The Great Depression was 1930s.  So that's 70 years ago.  Now all of a sudden, Obama said this morning that the economy in the fourth quarter GDP number was as bad as it's been in three decades.  Now, he said that to confuse his own voters.  He shoulda said 30 years.  Wait a minute! Thirty years and 70 years is a big difference.  

Do you know what the GDP, you know what happened to it in 1982?  That was Ronald Reagan's second year in office.  The GDP for 1982 was minus six-point-something percent, almost twice what the fourth quarter was in 2008.  Not only is this economy right now nowhere near as bad as the Great Depression, it's nowhere near as bad as the recession of 1982 when we were coming out of Obama One, also known as Jimmy Carter.  I'll tell you what our gross domestic predict is going to be minus 6.8 or seven or whatever, and I'll tell you when the misery index is going to get back up to 21% -- and that's two years after Obama is out of office in 2012.  

You give him four years with nobody to stop him, and we're going to end up like 1982.  We are not there now, and this is a lie that is being perpetrated. It is a myth that is being sold.  It happened on CNN last night on Campbell Brown's show: No Bias, No Bull.  Campbell Brown had as a guest a CNN business correspondent by the name of Ali Velshi.  Campbell Brown said:  "This quote from, Rush Limbaugh today that's getting a lot of attention, The Wall Street Journal: 'Tax cuts are the surest and quickest way to create permanent jobs. We know that when tax rates are cut in a recession, it brings an economy back.'"  Now, listen to the business correspondent of CNN in full-fledged ignorance mode.

VELSHI:  This is not the economy that Ronald Reagan ever saw!  We have not seen anything like this in our lifetime.  Anybody who tells you this is how it works, is lying.  We don't know how it works.  We have never seen anything like this before.

RUSH:  Mr. Velshi, you are incompetent.  You are a disservice to your business, except you fit right in at CNN.  Disinformation, character assaults.  This economy is nowhere near as bad as it was in 1982.  In fact, Mr. Velshi, the entire economy, the GDP rose 1.3% for all of 2008!  It was down 3.8% in the fourth quarter, but it grew 1.8% the whole year.  Now, Mr. Velshi, after calling me a liar -- and I'm not even a business reporter, but you pretend to be -- in 1986, GDP was down over 6%.  We were in a recession.  What was the centerpiece of Mr. Reagan's economic recovery plan, Mr. Velshi?  Let me spell it for you: T-A-X [space] C-U-T-S.  In fact, Mr. Velshi, you may not have seen anything like this before, but I have.  I've seen worse.  I lived through worse! 

When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, the top marginal tax rate, Mr. Velshi, was 70%.  When Ronald Reagan left office in 1989, the top marginal tax rate was 28%.  The only way you can say the tax cuts didn't lift us out of a recession is if you want to lie like Bill Clinton did and claim that the eighties were the worst economy in the last 50 years, but you go back and you look at the prosperity that was created by these tax cuts throughout this country, look at the prosperity that was created through the nineties that Bill Clinton got to claim the credit for. But aside from all that, to go on a cable news network and call me a liar while you are as factually incorrect as you could possibly be?

If somebody was trying to get Ali Velshi fired at CNN, this is the kind of script that they would write for him to say.  The problem is that nobody at CNN knows that he doesn't know what he's talking about.  I wonder what Mr. Velshi thought when he got up today and saw the story. He probably didn't see it.  He probably didn't see the story that the whole economy was up 1.8% in 2008, and he probably didn't see the news that 1982 GDP was minus 6.8%.  We've never seen anything like this, not even the Great Depression?  Never seen anything like this?  Make a mistake, Mr. Velshi, feel free.  Don't call me a liar.  Here's Obama at the White House this morning.  Big Labor audience is announcing Joe Biden as the middle class czar, or some such thing. (interruption) What?  What are you saying to me?  You're not saying anything to me.  My staff is livid.  They're in there mouthing their disgust, and I think they're talking to me.  Here is Barack Obama speaking to a group of union leaders about his new White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families.

OBAMA:  I'm pleased that the House has acted with the urgency necessary in passing this plan.  I hope we can strengthen it further in the Senate.  What we can't do is drag our feet or delay much longer.  The American people expect us to act, and that's exactly what I intend to do as president of the United States.

RUSH:  Mr. Obama --

OBAMA:  But passing my plan is not the end.

RUSH:  Wait, wait, wait. Hold it! Hold it!

OBAMA:  It's just the beginning of what we have to do.    

RUSH:  Oh, he stopped.  I thought it was the end of the bite.  I'm sorry.  My mistake.  I was too eager to put this in context.  As Peggy Noonan wrote today: There's no sense of euphoria in this country after this thing was passed by the House, is there?  In fact, the Democrats are mad. The Democrats are mad they couldn't get any Republicans to go along. Why do they care?  Some Democrats are suggesting, "Well, just cut the Republicans loose. Just cut 'em loose."  Exactly right! You don't need the Republicans to get any of this shambles done.  Cut 'em loose.  Why do you care that no Republicans are on board?  I'm just fascinated to read all these Democrats and all these media people worried about the future of the Republican Party, 'cause they don't get it and they're not on board.  The future of the Republican Party is in resisting this destructive debacle, this Porkulus bill.  That's the strength of the Republican Party.  Now, let's see, let's see, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.  We have more from Obama.  I forgot the main point I was going to make when I interrupted him when I thought the bite was over.  Oh, "Passing my plan is not the end. It's just the beginning of what we have to do."  Exactly right!  I told you yesterday, they didn't think FDR spent enough in the early years of the Great Depression.  Here's more Obama from the same setting.

OBAMA:  We have to reverse many of the policies towards organized labor that we've seen these last eight years, policies with which I've sharply disagreed.  I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem.  To me, it's part of the solution.  We need -- (applause) We need to level the playing field for workers and the unions that represents their interests, because we know that you cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement.

RUSH:  All right.  Let me address this before we go to the break here, because this is more just flat-out BS.  "Over the last 100 years, ladies and gentlemen, the middle class..." This is what Obama said today.  "Over the last 100 years, the middle class was..." Actually, this is Biden too. They're going back and forth, but they're on the same message, but this quote actually comes from Biden:  "Over the last 100 years the middle class was built on the back of organized labor.  Without their weight, heft, and their insistence starting in the early 1900s we wouldn't have the middle class we have now, in my view."  This is Biden on CNBC yesterday.  

Does anybody know what's factually wrong with that?  Union membership is 12% and plummeting, until this election.  The middle class is not Big Labor! The middle class is not organized labor.  Their numbers are dwindling, membership numbers.  Then Biden went on to say, "So I think labor getting a fair share of the pie is part of it."  So the stimulus plan's going to go to labor?  It is, and it's going to do it in punitive ways.  Now, since organized labor represents a small fraction of the workforce in this nation and much of it is in government jobs... Do you know how many organized labor jobs there are in government?  How can it be said that they represent the middle class?  They may be part of it, but they are not the middle class.  

What's happening here is more Obama dumbing down the English language, dumbing down what it means to be in the middle class -- and people like Ali Velshi at CNN fall for this kind of stuff hook, line, and sinker.  What Obama is talking about with his organized labor, "Middle Class Task Force," is nothing more than his constituent groups: Big Labor, wacko environmentalists, the poor, the slackers, the demanding, the people who aren't accomplishing anything the people who don't have any "skin in the game" who are demanding benefits galore, health care and all of that.  There's no middle-class tax cut in his bill, after promising 95% of Americans a tax cut.  

There is no middle-class tax cut in his bill.  He can say there is but there's not, 'cause he doesn't cut the personal income tax rate! He's giving welfare checks, but he's not cutting the personal income tax rate.  Meanwhile, small businesses not only are ignored. Small businesses once again are portrayed as the enemy, and they are going to be the fertile hunting grounds for further unionization when Obama keeps going.  This is all smoke and mirrors trying to redefine the middle class.  The middle class today is nothing more than the constituency groups: the ACORNs, the community organizers, the Code Pinks. The unhappy, miserable rabble-rousers that make up the core constituency groups -- angry women, the feminazis -- that's what middle class is now: traditional Democrat voters.  

And that is what the White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families is all about: buying votes continually from this group of people while claiming that we care about the middle class and the people that are being so left out of all of this, because these evil Wall Street titans and their bonuses and their jets and their redecorated bathrooms!  Then he's got his army of dumbed-down, ignorant reporters and so-called experts all over the Drive-By Media reporting every lie, every bit of misinformation he can --and then when people point out the truth in the lies of what Obama is saying, then these people then go out and attack those of us who are the agents of truth. 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here is President Obama today lying about the United States economy.  This is this morning in the White House and his new White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families.

OBAMA:  Today we've learned that our economy shrank in the last three months of 2008 by 3.8%.  Uh, that's the worst contraction in close to three decades.  This isn't just an economic concept; this is a continuing disaster for America's working families.  The recession is deepening, and the urgency of our economic crisis is growing.

RUSH:  Now, three decades is 30 years, is 1978.  "The 3.8% annualized drop in the fourth quarter of 2008 marked the weakest quarterly showing since a 6.4% annualized plunge in the first quarter of 1982 when the country was suffering through a severe recession."  GDP shrinkage worse than since 1982.  They've been telling us we have the worst economy in the last 50 years, the worst economy since the Great Depression.  It was worse in 1982!  And it was precisely a program of tax cuts -- and you know what else that was demonstrated?  We were able to cut taxes, reduce the deficit starting a couple years after the tax cuts went into play, about 1985 when the deficit started -- and, in addition to that, we did this without inflation, which stunned all the Keynesians, by the way.

John Maynard Keynes and Keynesian is simply: Just spend as much federal money as you can print if you've got a problem, on roads and bridges and whatever.  Supply side is Reaganism.  So Obama is out there with 3.8%, and he's now saying it's -- the exact quote -- "the worst contraction in close to three decades."  Regardless, ladies and gentlemen, the president of the United States is trash-talking the United States economy, for his own benefit, for the benefit of his party.  As I wrote my Wall Street Journal op-ed yesterday: We don't have to trash talk the economy. We don't have to depress the hopes and the dreams of the American people. We don't have to get up and tell 'em, "My God, it's going to be worse than we even knew," even though the only upside is I predicted this all during the campaign and all during the last couple months of the year. "You watch," I said. "They're going to get in power, and they're going to discover, 'Why, it's worse than we even knew!  Look what was held back from us. Look what we didn't know,' blah, blah, blah, blah, blah." So there you have it -- and there is no sense of euphoria.  The American people are not buying this, are they?  You have any sense that they're all revved up about the Porkulus bill?

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Anyway, I want to revisit this economic news because it's crucial.  The president is lying to the American people about the status of our economy.  He is trash-talking it.  It is a disservice to the American people, to depress them.  He was elected on "hope."  He's depressing their hopes.  I'm going to repeat this for those of you who need it.  For 2008, the economy was up 1.3%.  Economic growth was 1.3% throughout 2008.  The figure today everybody is harping on is the fourth quarter GDP, which was down 3.8%.  But they've been telling us that this economy is the worst since the Great Depression.  However, in 1982 the first quarter, the first three months of 1982 the GDP was minus 6.8% -- much worse than it is today.  

And here's another little interesting tidbit.  In 2001, the year George Bush took office, the economy expanded at less than 1%, 0.8%, total economic growth, 2001.  Last year, 2008, the economy grew 1.3%.  You could say, looking at the whole year, that last year, 2008 was better economically than 2001.  That's not 30 years.  It's not Great Depression.  Stop trash-talking the economy, Obama!  Stop using people's emotions to further your political ambitions.  This administration is telling you that you are -- we are all -- worse off than we are, for their own personal political gain.

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...

Wall Street Journal: My Bipartisan Stimulus- Rush Limbaugh

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318906638926749.html

AP: Obama Touts Middle-Class Task Force Lead by Biden

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jEtOI8ay_-XoZrKX9qFZBXsDQb7wD961IODO0

AP: Q4 GDP Down 3.8 Percent, Biggest Drop Since 1982

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Q4-GDP-down-38-percent-rb-14206356.html

NewsMax: Public Support for Stimulus Plan Falls, Poll Finds

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/stimulus_support_falls/2009/01/29/176437.html

Heritage.org: Stimulus Plan: Non-Existent Unemployed Climate Modelers Get $140 Million

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/01/26/stimulus-plan-non-existent-unemployed-climate-modelers-get-140-million/

WS: Trojan Horse. Threats to American Health Care Lurk Within the Stimulus Package

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/074nsbzs.asp

American Spectator: Thirty Years Ago - Ben Stein

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/30/thirty-years-ago

CNSNews: Stimulus Bill Spends Only Two-Thirds of Funds Through Fiscal 2010

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=42758

NewsMax: The Stimulus Shopping List: $1.17 Trillion in Pork Goodies

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/stimulus_pork_spending/2009/01/29/176503.html

HotAir: Popularity of Stimulus Package Dropping

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/30/popularity-of-stimulus-package-dropping/

Wall Street Journal: Look at the Time - Peggy Noonan

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123326587231330357.html

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 1, 2009 - 4:21am.

Ali Velshi in my opinion is an expert who has more accurate knowledge about the economy in his little toe than ten Rush Limbaugh's would have all put together: 

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/01/30/tsr.limbaugh.vs.velshi.cnn  (2:26)


CNN's Velshi answers Limbaugh 2:26
CNN's Ali Velshi responds to Rush Limbaugh's argument that tax cuts are simplest way to stimulate economy.

The Situation Room
Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull

Source: CNN
Added On January 30, 2009

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/01/30/tsr.limbaugh.vs.velshi.cnn  (2:26)

Here is the CNN transcript of this video:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/30/sitroom.03.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

White House vs. Rush Limbaugh; FDA Launches Criminal Probe Into Peanut Plant

Aired January 30, 2009 - 18:00   ET

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "Meanwhile, a very public difference of opinion is brewing between CNN's chief business correspondent, Ali Velshi, and the popular radio talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.

At issue, just how effective are tax cuts?

Here's what Ali said last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: When companies take tax cuts, the idea is they use the savings to reinvest, build factories and pay people and get going.

CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Right.

VELSHI: You know what happens in a recession?

Any cash that they get, any savings that they get, many companies will just hold. Many individuals -- that's why they won't spend the money.

BROWN: Right.

VELSHI: They'll hold it to prepare for the worst. You know that on the other side of the recession, business is good. But you may not spend it until then. So anybody who tells you this is how it works is lying. We don't know how it works. We have never seen anything like this before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Rush Limbaugh immediately took issue with Ali's comments, even calling him on it by name.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW, COURTESY PREMIERE RADIO NETWORKS)

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: In fact, Mr. Velshi, the entire economy -- the GDP rose 1.3 percent for all of 2008. It was down 3.8 percent in the fourth quarter, but it grew 1.8 percent the whole year. Now, Mr. Velshi, after calling me a liar -- and I'm not even a business reporter, but you pretend to be. 1986, GDP down over 6 percent. We were in a recession.

What was the centerpiece of Mr. Reagan's economic recovery plan, Mr. Velshi?

Let me spell it for you -- T-A-X space C-U-T-S.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right, let's go to Ali right now -- Ali, what do you make of all of this?

VELSHI: Well, it's a common argument. It's growing less common -- people who think that tax cuts are the only solution. Now, I've never come out against the idea of tax cuts, Wolf. I'd like to pay less taxes myself.

The issue is this. Unlike 1986 or 1982 or -- or any other time, we have never had a near complete freeze of credit.

What that means is that companies cannot raise money easily. That's why interest rates are so low, because nobody actually wants to borrow and nobody wants to lend.

So this is an environment where people are not necessarily taking their money.

I don't think, on a long-term basis, tax cuts are a bad idea. I don't know that they are the answer.

But I was just making the point that it is not a widely held opinion that that is the only solution in a recession. This is very different. There are many, many measures by which this recession and this economic crisis we're in are very different from prior recessions.

So, you know, it's a thing that people can disagree on. But that's the point I was making. And, clearly, Rush Limbaugh doesn't agree with that -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Clearly. And Ali is going to have a lot more on this in an hour on Campbell Brown's "NO BIAS, NO BULL." That's coming up at 8:00 p.m. Eastern..."

Here is part of the video that Wolf Blitzer is referring to:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/01/30/cttb.campbell.brown.limbaugh.cnn  (1:23)


Campbell on Limbaugh 1:23
CNN's Campbell Brown weighs in on Rush Limbaugh's comments in reference to CNN's Ali Velshi.

Show Pages - Campbell Brown - CNN.com

Source: CNN
Added On January 30, 2009

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/01/30/cttb.campbell.brown.limbaugh.cnn  (1:23)

Here is the full transcript of Ali Velshi answering Rush Limbaugh's points:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/30/ec.01.html

CAMPBELL BROWN: NO BIAS, NO BULL

Tom Daschle Under Fire; Michael Steele to Lead Republican National Committee

Aired January 30, 2009 - 20:00   ET

CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: "But, first, we are "Cutting Through The Bull."

And, last night, on this program, we spent some time talking about Rush Limbaugh and a piece he had in "The Wall Street Journal" arguing there should be more emphasis right now on tax cuts to help the economy.

Our chief business correspondent, Ali Velshi, came on and took issue with some of what Limbaugh said.

Rush then responded with this today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW")

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Mr. Velshi, you are incompetent. You are a disservice to your business, except you fit right in at CNN, disinformation, character assaults. This economy is nowhere near as bad as it was in 1982.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So, let's stop there.

Now, Mr. Limbaugh, you may well have a legitimate case to make about tax cuts and what they can do for the economy, but the histrionics and the name-calling, they undermine anything constructive you might have to say.

Rush, I would love for you to come on, on this show and debate Ali on the issues. Make a case for your ideas. Our country is in desperate straits right now, and we need ideas. But what we don't need is nasty rhetoric and useless noise. This doesn't help anyone get a job or keep a job or feed their family.

If there were ever a time to put the meanness behind us and focus on real dialogue and real solutions, this is the time.

And, on that note, we invited Ali to respond, not to the name- calling, but to the substance of this debate.

We're putting ourselves to our NO BIAS, NO BULL test tonight.

And, Ali, let's see, you know what you are. You're incompetent.

No, seriously. I mean, let's deal with the substance of the issues and forget the other stuff he said.

ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Right. Right.

BROWN: And, with that in mind, let me play a little bit more of what -- of the case he made on his radio program.

VELSHI: Sure.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW")

LIMBAUGH: Now, Mr. Velshi, after calling me a liar -- and I'm not even a business reporter, but you pretend to be -- 1986, GDP down over 6 percent. We were in a recession.

What was the centerpiece of Mr. Reagan's economic recovery plan, Mr. Velshi? Let me spell it for you, T-A-X C-U-T-S.

In fact, Mr. Velshi, you may not have seen anything like this before, but I have. I have seen worse. I lived through worse.

When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, the top marginal tax rate, Mr. Velshi, was 70 percent. When Ronald Reagan left office in 1989, the top marginal tax rate was 28 percent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right. So, he argues the economy much worse in the early '80s than it is right now.

Does he have a point?

VELSHI: Yes, I mean, I don't want to get into a "My recession is worse than your recession" argument.

But, ultimately, I am going to have to interject with a few facts that he might have to think about. We have -- unemployment was higher back then than it is today. It was 10.8 percent. It's 7.2 percent right now.

But 2008, we saw the price of a median single family home drop 15 percent. Never before have we seen that on record. Industrial production, which is the measure of how much we actually make in this country, has never been lower than it is right now.

Personal income, adjusted for inflation, was higher then than it is today. Personal savings -- right after Reagan got elected, people were socking away 12 percent of what they made, today, virtually nothing, which means we don't have anything to get us through a recession.

But put all of the economic talk aside for a second. Ultimately -- we have talked about this many times -- this is an economy that is based on people's willingness to spend money, more than any other economy in the world. People are not willing to spend money.

And just to give you the one indication of this that we always talk about, and it's consumer confidence. Inconveniently, for Mr. Limbaugh, the standard for consumer confidence was set in 1985. So, 1985, whatever consumer confidence was back then is considered 100. Today, it is at 38. It is the lowest it has ever been.

Until consumers start buying, businesses will not start investing. You can give them all the tax cuts you want; they can't.

Now, he is right about something. Reagan cut taxes from 70 percent to 26 percent. They're 35 percent right now, the top marginal tax rate. So, we don't -- we can't halve them.

Back then, when you took them from that rate over a course of years, down to 26 percent, even if you didn't believe in tax cuts, you would really believe that that would be stimulative.

So, ultimately, there are two schools of thought, cut taxes or stimulate the economy another way. Virtually nobody falls into one entirely camp or the other. I, too, would like to pay lower taxes.

But, ultimately, the facts are the facts. But maybe it was worse for a lot of people. Every recession is hard on -- on some people. But we are in a very dire situation right now.

BROWN: All right, Ali Velshi with that perspective tonight.

Certainly, I will reiterate my request for Rush Limbaugh to come on.

VELSHI: Absolutely.

BROWN: And we could actually have this as a debate.

But, Ali, appreciate it tonight. Thanks, as always.

And for much more on your money and on President Obama's massive stimulus package, don't forget later right here tonight, we will have the premiere of the "CNN Money Summit." Again, that will be later tonight. Ali and the best money team on television look at how we can really fix the economy. It premieres at 11:00 p.m. Eastern time..."

Good for Campbell Brown for calling on Rush Limbaugh to debate the issues.  I think that many more serious debate challenges need to be publicly issued to Rush Limbaugh! 

Rush Limbaugh in my opinion would not last for 10 minutes in a serious economic debate with Ali Velshi if it could ever be arranged.  Limbaugh would be all style and no substance just like how Sarah Palin was in her VP debate against Joe Biden!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 1, 2009 - 4:24am.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012209/content/01125117.guest.html

I Want Obama's Policies to Fail

January 22, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:   This morning, CNN, they have a beat reporter on me. Her name is Carol Costello.  I'm her beat.  Coanchor Kiran Chetry, introduction to... Wait a minute.  This is not about Green Bay.  This is about the Last Man Standing.  This is about I want Obama to fail.  I don't want Obama to fail; I want the country to succeed!  I want Obama's policies to fail.  But Obama's failure to implement his policies is good news, the best news possible for this country.  That's all I'm saying.  Okay, you want to hear one of the CNN bites? Okay, here's Kiran Chetry introducing the correspondent Carol Costello, the Limbaugh beat reporter, the pool reporter at CNN, on me.

CHETRY:  Barack Obama has inspired millions to "hope," including Rush Limbaugh, only Rush Limbaugh hopes something very different.  Let's listen.

RUSH ARCHIVE:  Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care.  I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work.  So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: 'I hope he fails.'"

CHETRY:  All right, so is the Obama honeymoon already over for some die-hard Republicans?

COSTELLO: (snickering) Well, if you listen to Rush Limbaugh (haughty laugh), it certainly is!  Let me ask you a question, though, Kiran.  How long did your honeymoon period last after you got married? (cackling)

ROBERTS:  It's still going, right?  How many years has it been?

CHETRY:  It's been eight, eight and still, you know, every day --

COSTELLO:  Yeah, but that's not the honeymoon period.  Some -- some people say their honeymoon period lasted as long as it took to walk down the aisle.  Barack Obama, of course, is asking for a lot longer than that from Americans.  The question is: Will he get it?

RUSH:  Now, the question here is... By the way, this report was then used by another CNN reporter, Rick Sanchez who I even know and who I thought was professional. But Rick Sanchez obviously is not a professional journalist.  I just explained in that bite everything I mean about why I want him to fail.  There's no way to misunderstand this, but they get to those four words, "I hope he fails," and they ignore everything else I said in front of it. They actually put this in context.  It is impossible for anybody at CNN to not understand what I was saying, yet they purposely took it out of context, and then Rick Sanchez, who... I wouldn't trust anything you see this guy do, if you even watch CNN, because he knows full well what was said and what was meant.  He might have been assigned this by some editor, I don't know, but they don't care obviously at CNN to get it right.  And it's all of course redounded to my benefit. 

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...

FOXNews: Rush Limbaugh's Shocking Words for President Obama

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481484,00.html

The Hill: The Obama Presidency: Here Comes Socialism - Dick Morris

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/the-obama-presidency--here-comes-socialism-2009-01-20.html

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 1, 2009 - 4:31am.

"repeatedly to join me on this program and describe his position for himself. But he hasn't returned our calls:"

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/26/cnr.07.html

CNN NEWSROOM

Barack Obama vs. Rush Limbaugh; Portland Mayor Under Fire

Aired January 26, 2009 - 15:00 ET

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: "This is Rach. Rach is watching our newscast. She's interested. And she has this to say: "Rush -- referring to Rush Limbaugh -- "don't mess with our Rick."

Hey, that's kind of nice -- like I need defenders.

All right. This is what we're talking about. Something else to take note of right now. It is about Rush Limbaugh -- who I happen to know, by the way. But as a journalist, that can't possibly stop me from reporting on him, right? So last week when he told his listeners that he wants Obama to fail, I told you about it and carefully put it in context by letting you hear his position twice.

Apparently, it wasn't enough for Rush. He's not happy. This is what he said about me on his show.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM RUSHLIMBAUGH.COM)

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Rick Sanchez -- who I know and who I thought was professional -- but Rick Sanchez obviously is not a professional journalist.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: There you go. He then goes on to lambaste not just me -- now, I want to be fair -- the whole rest of the media who reported on him. Limbaugh points out -- this is his main point, this is his conjecture, that when he said: "I want him to fail," what he meant was that he wanted liberalism to fail, not that he wants Obama and the country to fail. He wants his context explained -- which is exactly what I did, by the way, on the air the first time I talked about it here.

Watch it for yourself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: I want to be fair, so here's the context, all right?

He asks himself: "What is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here."

And then he goes on to say this. This is a quote: "I would be honored if the drive-by media headlined me all day long. Limbaugh, 'I hope Obama fails.' Somebody's got to say it."

There you go. That's as it was reported that day.

Now we've asked Mr. Limbaugh repeatedly to join me on this program and describe his position for himself. But he hasn't returned our calls.

So Rush, let me get this straight. I know you're going to hear this. So you asked the media to play your quote saying: "I hope Obama fails" and that's what I did. You asked for context, which I provided -- twice. And I asked my staff to reach out to you and invite you to be on this show and you didn't respond.

And you're upset, because when the audience -- when Americans hear you say I want Obama to fail, they really think you want Obama to fail?

If that's not what you meant, then why did you not say what you meant? Those are, after all, your words and their reaction.

Enough said.

By the way, if you agree with Rush or me or otherwise, you can hit us on my Web site.

It's at CNN.com/ricksanchez..."

Rick Sanchez in my opinion did an excellent job of refuting Rush Limabugh and he set the right example how to do it!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 1, 2009 - 4:39am.

and I completely agree with his reasons:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/28940801#28940801  (05:42)


Rush Limbaugh: GOP spokesman?
Jan. 30: The Washington Post's E.J. Dionne talks about Rush Limbaugh's stimulus plan and whether it's just a gimmick for an attack ad.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/28940801#28940801  (05:42)

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 2, 2009 - 6:45am.

he "is the most influential and important Republican in the country right now," he "has ascended to political power that's unseen, unheard of in American politics," and "Republicans in Congress, they're scared of him and they follow him." The evidence in this post in my opinion definitely confirms that Carville's claims about Rush Limbaugh are correct:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0902/01/sotu.03.html

STATE OF THE UNION WITH JOHN KING

Economic Numbers; Wall Street Bonuses

Aired February 1, 2009 - 11:00 ET

JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: "Another person after this bill is Rush Limbaugh on talk radio. And he said this in a "Wall Street Journal" editorial. He's not only on the radio, he writes editorials. And he said this, "As a way to bring the country together, and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions under the Obama/Limbaugh stimulus plan of 2009, 54 percent of the $900 billion -- that would be $486 billion -- will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats. Forty-six percent, $414 billion, will be directed towards tax cuts as determined by me."

James Carville, Rush Limbaugh obviously sees a business opportunity, conservatives are looking for a voice and he's on talk radio. But does he make a valid point in criticizing the bill?

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, first of all, he is the most influential and important Republican in the country right now. And Ii think it would be wise to acknowledge that. He is the daddy, as I say, the daddy of the Republican Party. They're all scared to death of it. I was a little taken aback when he said it should be 54-46 because that was the election returns. I sure remember Rush Limbaugh saying the Democrats ought to get more in 2000 because they actually won the election.

No, he is a talk radio show host and he has ascended to political power that's unseen, unheard of in American politics, and I mean, if you listen to these Republicans in Congress, they're scared of him and they follow him. And he has been very, very, very influential in the Republican Party here..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 2, 2009 - 7:13am.

from him and for his willingness to work with Obama.  In my opinion, it is a very good idea to ask elected Republican officials like Tom Coburn to take a stand on Rush Limbaugh's stupid comments when they do public interviews because Limbaugh loses more credibility among people in middle America with each well known Republican office holder who distances themself from him:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012009/content/01125113.guest.html

Come On, Senator Coburn!

January 20, 2009

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This afternoon, CBS TV, after the inauguration of Obama, Jeff Greenfield spoke to Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.  Coburn says, "I think everybody, no matter what your political persuasion, wants Obama to be highly successful in what he's attempting to do."

GREENFIELD:  That's interesting because Rush Limbaugh, probably the most prominent conservative commentator in America, said just a few days ago, "I know what he wants to do, and I don't want him to succeed."  Are there, among some conservatives, feelings that if he succeeds, that's bad for our movement?

COBURN:  I don't think so.  You know, I would differ.  First of all, I'm not sure he knows what he wants to do, Rush doesn't.  What he wants to do is to get us back stable economically, he wants us to advance in education, which we haven't.  We need to.

RUSH:  Good Lord!

COBURN:  -- are pretty open.  You know, we label people, we label him a progressive, we label him as the most liberal US Senator.  But I found every time I worked with him he had tremendous common sense and he didn't abandon his principles to embrace mine.

RUSH:  Exactly!  He didn't abandon his principles to embrace yours, and I love Tom Coburn.  Tom Coburn makes more sense on responsible government spending than anybody in the United States Senate.  He and Jeff Sessions and Cornyn and McConnell are my favorites up there.  I love Coburn, but this doesn't make any sense.  And that's not exactly what I said.  What I have been saying is, precisely, I don't know what he's going to do, but I'm pretty sure, based on what his voting record is and what he says he wants to do.  His plan is socialism.  Spend, spend, spend, government responsible for people's jobs and so forth.  This is not what made the country great.  I have asked, "Why should I set aside my principles for this guy to succeed?"  And, by the way, Greenfield, there's a slight premise in his question that's incorrect when he says, "Are there, among some conservatives, feelings that if he succeeds, that's bad for our movement?"

I don't care about the movement right now.  I care about the country.  I don't think that's that hard to understand.  I care about the country.  I care about what it was that made this country great, and I fear that there are people who want to redefine various aspects of the way this government and country function.  I think they want to implement New Deal 2.  It scares me.  But I'm not opposed to Obama succeeding if he embraces certain ideas I agree with.  But this just depresses me.  What he wants to do is get us back stable economically?  This is not how you do it.  What we're doing with bailouts and never ending deficits is not how you get a stable economy.  He wants us to advance in education, which we haven't.  Good Lord, everybody knows this, every president before him has wanted to improve education.  As though nobody else has?  We're spending more on education than we ever have and too many graduates of high school can't even read their own diplomas.  

Now, spending on education is not the answer.  The answer to education is deemphasizing power of the teachers unions.  And I'm sorry, there are going to be empowered even more than they are now.  The whole purpose of the public school system, as far as the left is concerned, is to use it to indoctrinate young skulls full of mush.  Oh, this is Tom Coburn.  I love this guy.  But in his own words.  "We label him as the most liberal US Senator, but I found every time I worked with him, he had tremendous common sense, and he didn't abandon his principles to embrace mine."  Well, they're a whole different set of principles, Senator Coburn.  Has Coburn not been listening to Obama?  Is this the same Coburn who backed McCain as a conservative?  We don't know what Obama wants to do?  What's incorrect here is Coburn, sadly to say, and not me.  

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  I am still in the state of shock, a state of stunned disbelief and dismay over Tom Coburn's reaction to Greenfield's question.  My comments are not the ones that have to be studied in order to be understood.  I don't know how much clearer about this I can be.  I do not want a collectivist, New Deal president taking hold of this economy under the auspices of fixing it.  That's not success to me.  I do not want somebody who is going to have the federal government absorb more and more of the private sector on the premise that the private sector has failed here when it's the government that has failed!  Why do I want blanket success? It's just because this guy's father was black?  Is that why we're supposed to all hope for his success? He wants to "fix" education?  I think it's a mutual admiration society, and these people are just into thanking each other and they're working together. "My good friend, Senator Obama. He never compromised his principles in dealing with me, which is why Barack Obama always smoked me every time we got into arguments about legislation!" (sigh)

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...

Washington Post: Obama Sworn in as 44th President of U.S.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/20/AR2009012001146_pf.html

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 3, 2009 - 5:33am.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_110608/content/01125108.guest.html

Get Off the Ledge, Conservatives! We Have Two Battles on Our Hands

November 6, 2008

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Joanne in Merritt, North Carolina, great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.  Hello.

CALLER:  Hi, Rush.  I love you.  You get me off the ledge on a daily basis.

RUSH:  Thank you, madam, I appreciate that.

CALLER:  Here's my point.

RUSH:  But I'll tell you something.  Don't go to the ledge anymore because I myself don't like going out there.

CALLER:  Yeah, I know, I know, it's a scary place, but at least I have your voice to talk me in off there.  This is what I'm thinking, and I want to know what you think.

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER:  The last eight years have mobilized the liberals like nothing I've ever seen, and I'm just wondering if you think that the next four years of The Messiah will get us organized, get us excited, get us back to our conservative roots and excite the conservatives.

RUSH:  Yeah, I've looked at the exit poll data.  I looked at McCain, 20% of conservatives voted for Obama.  The vast majority --

CALLER:  I don't believe that.

RUSH:  I'll explain why here in just a second.  You said you don't believe it.  I do.

CALLER:  Yeah?

RUSH:  I do.  We have exit poll data I shared with you yesterday, 41% of voters in exit polls identified themselves as conservatives and something like maybe 31% identified themselves as liberals.  The rest wishy-washy moderates and independents or said they didn't know what they were, but I could probably show you enough e-mails the past six months from people to me that constitute the 20% of conservatives that didn't vote for McCain.  These are people said, "I can't vote for the guy.  I cannot vote for the guy, and I'm not going to vote against somebody.  I can't vote for this guy, and the Republicans need to be taught a lesson," and so there was a lot of that sentiment out there.  And I firmly believe it.

CALLER:  Well, do you believe that it will mobilize us?  Do you think that people are going to get back to the real serious grassroots --

RUSH:  Yes.  Yes.  But it's going to depend on something crucial.  

CALLER:  It is up to you, it is entirely up to you, I leave this entirely on your shoulders.

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER:  Okay?

RUSH:  Well, yes, that's exactly right.  I don't dispute that, you're entirely true and accurate about that.  But beyond me --

CALLER:  There's me.  I'll do my part.

RUSH:  No, no -- (laughing)

CALLER:  (laughing)  I promise you.

RUSH:  All right. Look, this is the battle.  We're going to be taking on two things here the next four years, Obama and our own party establishment.

CALLER:  Yeah.

RUSH:  If our party nominates another McCain type --

CALLER:  I don't think they -- who?  Who's left?  I don't think they can.  I just don't see anybody coming and fighting that fight.  Do you?  Rush, please tell me no, even if it's not true.

RUSH:  Sadly, there are more of them than I'd like to admit.

CALLER:  Yeah.

RUSH:  But even if we nominate, say, a Bobby Jindal --

CALLER:  I love him!

RUSH:  I do, too.

CALLER:  I love him.

RUSH:  Not in a biblical sense, but I do too.

CALLER:  Oh, no.  Right.  Well, I'm a married woman.

RUSH:  The thing is the moderate establishment GOP is going to be out to destroy Bobby Jindal, too.

CALLER:  You really think so?  Because I'm starting to get a little miffed at that.

RUSH:  What are they trying to do to Sarah Palin?  They're scared to death that Sarah Palin will also run in 2012.  That's what this is all about.  They're trying to destroy her within the Republican Party.  She was more popular than McCain.  These people are not learning.  Anyway, I gotta run here, Joanne.  Get off the ledge.  I don't want to go back out there myself.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Back to the phones to Huntington, Indiana.  This is Duane, and you're up, sir.  Nice to have you with us.

CALLER:  Thank you, Rush.  You and Bo and the staff are doing God's work, thank you.  My remark is addressed to Senator McCain and any of the staff that might be listening.  I have one final suggestion for you, senator, from a 59-year conservative activist in the party.  Reach out, take a step, reach out across the aisle one more time, grope for a comfortable seat, sit down and remain there.  We have no more room for Democrat-light.

RUSH:  Duane.  I just want to make sure that I understand your command to Senator McCain.

CALLER:  Yes.

RUSH:  You're saying that when he walks across the aisle again, to stay there?

CALLER:  Right.

RUSH:  You want him to officially become a Democrat?

CALLER:  Yes.  And perhaps the people of Arizona next time can find a Republican.

RUSH:  Well, let me see.

CALLER:  I have one more footnote, if you have time.

RUSH:  Well, I'm still pondering this.  He could at least become an independent since his party rejected him.

CALLER:  I think it's high time that we told these moderates who are nothing more than Democrat-light that they go over where they're more comfortable.  They can perhaps help The Messiah with his program of marginalizing the Americans.

RUSH:  I could not agree with you more.  I myself said as much on previous occasions on this program.  What are you guys messing around trying to screw up our party for?  Just join the people that you have all this love for.  Do you like literary people, do you like writers, do you like people you think can communicate very well, doesn't matter what they say, doesn't matter, they could be socialist, doesn't matter, you think they could be extreme leftists, you like 'em, go join 'em.  Make it official.  Leave us alone.  Don't try to reform our party.  You already have a party that you like or that you admire, go join them.  This is going to be an epic battle I fear 'cause it's going to come down to what it always comes down to.  It's going to come down to people that think they're the smart people, the elites, versus the people they think are not smart people and hicks, and that would be all of us, including you and me, and try to say we're the reason all these elections are being lost.  They are the reason.  It's going to be a big, big, big, big battle. 

END TRANSCRIPT

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 3, 2009 - 7:17am.

Democratic politics which even GOP strategist John Feehery agreed with when he correctly said "It puts republicans in a very difficult position, they either have to defend Rush Limbaugh, which puts them out of the main stream with a lot of swing voters, or they risk his wrath by not defending him. So it's very clever by the Obama campaign:"

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2009/01/31/crowley.obama.vs.rush.cnn  (2:36)


Dems paint Rush as GOP voice 2:36
CNN's Candy Crowley reports on GOP efforts to steady the party and Democrats' attempts to frame GOP as Party of Rush.

Source: CNN
Added On January 31, 2009

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2009/01/31/crowley.obama.vs.rush.cnn  (2:36)

Here is the CNN transcript of this video:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/31/cnr.08.html

CNN NEWSROOM

Severe Weather Blasts Kentucky; Seeking Stimulus Support

Aired January 31, 2009 - 11:00   ET

BETTY NGUYEN, CNN ANCHOR: "It's no surprise that he is directing his cutting wit at President Obama's stimulus plan. He openly said that he hopes Barack Obama fails, but he's also placing the GOP in a tight spot. Here's our Candy Crowley.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAEL STEELE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: This is awesome.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Michael Steele is the first African-American elected to run the republican national committee. A new face who may have to deal with this established voice.

RUSH LIMBAUGH: Ladies and gentlemen, the president of the United States is trash talking the United States economy, for his own benefit. For the benefit of his party.

CROWLEY: Three hours a day, five days a week coast to coast, Rush Limbaugh holds court.

LIMBAUGH: The president of the United States once again did not tell the truth about the status of the United States' economy.

CROWLEY: A persistent critic of the stimulus plan the combative conservative Limbaugh is easily the most listened to republican in the country. And for democrats, a perfect poster boy as they dream of majority power for decades ahead.

OBAMA: Hello, everybody.

CROWLEY: Inside his charm offensive, now including a super bowl party, President Barack Obama threw a sharp elbow recently, telling a meeting of republicans you can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done. An outside liberal group cozy with democratic lawmakers joined in with radio ads. Pressuring selected senate Republicans to vote for the president's stimulus plan.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Will our senator John Ensign side with Rush Limbaugh too?

CROWLEY: Democrats see one of two outcomes republican votes for the 2009 stimulus plan or vulnerable republicans in 2010. The Obama versus Limbaugh story line comes at a not so great time for a humpty dumpty political party trying to put itself together again. Limbaugh has a rock solid conservative fan base. The moderate and swing voters republicans need to rebuild the party, not so much. It is brilliant democratic politics.

JOHN FEEHERY, GOP STRATEGIST: It puts republicans in a very difficult position, they either have to defend Rush Limbaugh, which puts them out of the main stream with a lot of swing voters, or they risk his wrath by not defending him. So it's very clever by the Obama campaign.

CROWLEY: The election of Michael Steele is the beginning sign of a party looking to expand its base, but still hold on to its core voters.

MICHAEL STEELE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Rush Limbaugh is a conservative voice in this country that clearly people must pay attention to and clearly the Obama administration and others in the administration must be paying attention too. So Rush will say what Rush has to say, we will do what we have to do as a party.

CROWLEY: It's a balancing act and republicans are on the high wire. Candy Crowley, CNN, Washington.

(END OF VIDEOTAPE)..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2009 - 8:28am.

I completely agree with James Carville because the evidence in this post in my opinion very clearly suggests that he is correct:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0902/04/ec.01.html

CAMPBELL BROWN: NO BIAS, NO BULL

Bailout Pay Cuts; Madoff Warnings Ignored?

Aired February 4, 2009 - 20:00 ET

CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: "Rush Limbaugh has been awfully busy lately. He's pitching his own economic stimulus plan on the pages of the "Wall Street Journal." On his radio show, he's picking fights with everybody from our own chief business correspondent Ali Velshi to the president of the United States. Limbaugh says he's got the president running scared. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOICE OF RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: He's obviously more frightened of me than he is Mitch McConnell. He is more frightened of me than he is of, say, John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So we ask again, is Rush Limbaugh really the face of the Republican Party right now? And my next guest has no doubts about it.

Democratic strategist James Carville has started returning fire. Republican Tony Blankley joining us once again from Washington.

James, let me start with you here. You have called Rush Limbaugh the moral, intellectual leader and most influential person in the Republican Party. And there are hundreds of Republican politicians out there. A new party chairman now, Michael Steele.

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Right.

BROWN: So what makes you say that Limbaugh is really speaking for the GOP?

CARVILLE: Well, first of all if you watched the groveling that goes on in the GOP, you think any of these Republican congressmen essentially care what Michael Steele says. Of course not. They sit there. They bring out this guy, Phillip Gangrey (ph) or whatever his name is. You have Senator McCain talking about how he's the most prominent Republican.

The truth of the matter is, he is the intellectual center of the Republican Party. That's not a debatable proposition and acknowledge that.

Look, Rush is very -- he's very popular and very influential among these congressional and senatorial Republicans. That's just a fact. I'm pointing out a fact.

I'm a weatherman. No sense in getting mad at me if it rains. I'm just telling you what the weather is.

BROWN: But here, I mean, in a way I guess what's wrong with that. I mean, every party has its provocateur and there are people who would say that even you had been that for the Democrats from time to time.

CARVILLE: Well, I've never been -- I've never been as near. I've been 100 (ph) as influential as Rush is. No Democratic congressman would quake at what I say.

I mean, I'm not saying that -- it's just a fact that the Republicans in Washington have ceded leadership and Rush is the person that they follow. He said he wanted the president's thing to fail. They're all ganging up against the president's stimulus proposal. That's just a fact.

And I mean, I'm not really so much attacking him as just reporting that the modern Republican Party has as its most influential member, Rush Limbaugh. I think President Obama was saying the same thing when he urged the Republican congressmen essentially (ph) not to follow Rush Limbaugh.

He was acknowledging the fact as anybody does in a democracy who the leader of the opposition was. Unfortunately, they didn't listen to the president. They followed Rush Limbaugh. That's their choice as Republicans. I don't -- he's not my leader or anything like that but then again, I'm not a Republican.

BROWN: So Tony, do you agree with James?

TONY BLANKLEY, EXECUTIVE VP OF GLOBAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS, EDELMAN: Look, the rule in politics is if you're attacked by your political opponents with vigor, you must be doing something right. So when everybody from President Obama to my friend, James, is coming at Rush, he must be doing something right.

Look, clearly, Rush is one of the major voices in American politics. He has 20 million people a day listening to him, and he is a tremendous polemicist. He's also a tremendous entertainer.

He's not the only voice. He's more conservative than he is a Republican. But, of course, he's an important voice and he's, in fact, very smart. And people who wrestle with him usually lose.

So I'm delighted. Look, when I was working with Newt and we were taking on the Democrats and taking back the House and the Senate in 1994, I don't think we would have won without the efforts of Rush. And I think he's a tremendous asset for American values and conservative values and I'm delighted he's on our side.

BROWN: But Tony, let me -- you know there are a lot of Republicans who disagree with you, who do believe that he represents one side of the Republican Party, a more extreme side. And given what happened in the last election --

BLANKLEY: He's not extreme. He is emphatic and he's -- I would call pretty much a Reagan conservative on his policies. So no, he doesn't represent the entire spectrum of the party. He represents, I would say about 70 percent of it. That is, by the way, the spectrum that has been electing presidents and congresses for the last 30 years and may well do it again.

BROWN: And James, let me jump in because you said it, you weren't -- you didn't intend this, in your words, as an attack on Limbaugh, frankly.

CARVILLE: I don't attack. I'm just acknowledging. And Tony, I don't know of any Republican that's attacking Rush Limbaugh. Everyone that I know falls in line behind him.

If you like Rush Limbaugh, if you think that his ideas are what America needs, then you should be a Republican. He is your leader. I'm -- all I'm -- I'm not really attacking him, I'm acknowledging the fact and I think Tony is, too, that he is the moral, intellectual leader and most powerful Republican in the United States today.

BLANKLEY: One of the people --

CARVILLE: I'm not attacking him at all.

BLANKLEY: One of the people who attacked him, of course, was President Obama, who said Republicans shouldn't listen to him, which sounds a little bit like an attack.

CARVILLE: No, that's not attacking him.

BLANKLEY: Well --

CARVILLE: That's not -- if you say --

(CROSSTALK)

BLANKLEY: I think there's a little bit of a quibble --

CARVILLE: American public is (INAUDIBLE) Americans of an attack --

BLANKLEY: I mean, my sense, you and I both have been in politics an awful long time.

CARVILLE: Right (ph).

BLANKLEY: And my sense is that a lot of Democrats are coming at him pretty hard because he's a pretty effective force on our side.

BROWN: Or they're enjoying that he is a very effective force on your side and encouraging that. Well, I don't know. It depends on how cynical you are, but I got to end it there, guys. We're out of time.

BLANKLEY: Thank you.

BROWN: Tony Blankley, James Carville, thanks, guys.

CARVILLE: Thank you.

BROWN: Appreciate it.

CARVILLE: Appreciate it..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2009 - 8:35am.

Again, I completely agree with James Carville because the evidence in this post in my opinion very clearly suggests that he is correct. Democrats in my very strong opinion would be committing political malpractice to not take the threat of Rush Limbaugh seriously:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/02/03/am.roberts.carville.interview.cnn  (4:01)


Limbaugh running GOP? 4:01
CNN's John Roberts speaks to Democratic strategist James Carville about Rush Limbaugh's power in the GOP.

Source: CNN
Added On February 3, 2009

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/02/03/am.roberts.carville.interview.cnn  (4:01)

Here is the CNN transcript of this video:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0902/03/ltm.03.html

AMERICAN MORNING

Chavez: Obama Doesn't Know Energy; CEO Bonus Outrage; Liz Claiborne to Lay Off 725 Positions; Desperate for Work

Aired February 3, 2009 - 08:00   ET

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: "The White House versus Rush Limbaugh. Are Democrats and Republicans, for that matter, helping the conservative radio host build his power base? Democratic strategist James Carville has some strong opinions on the subject. We'll talk with him just ahead...

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL STEELE, RNC CHAIRMAN: Rush Limbaugh is a conservative voice in this country that, clearly, people must pay attention to and, clearly, the Obama administration and others in the administration must be paying attention to. So, Rush will say what Rush has to say. We will do what we have to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTS: That is the newly minted chairman of the Republican National Committee, trying to downplay Rush Limbaugh's power within the GOP. But at least one Democratic insider is not buying it -- James Carville has gone so far as to say that Rush Limbaugh is running the Republican Party. James is also a CNN contributor. He joins us now this morning from New Orleans.

Good morning to you, James.

JAMES CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Good morning.

ROBERTS: You wrote a column recently in which you rebutted something that Rush Limbaugh said, in which he believed that ideas for the financial stimulus package should be allocated according to the percentages in the November 4th election, which would mean that Democrats would have 54 percent of the ideas, Republicans would have 46 percent of the ideas. What do you have to say about that?

CARVILLE: Well, I just thought that it has risen to the level of hypocrisy that had to be dealt with none other than humor. As you know, Rush Limbaugh on a "Wall Street Journal" editorial page wrote that 100 percent in favor for overturning the popular will in the 2000 election. So, I just want to point that out.

He is the most exalted Republican. He is the leader of their party. They have submitted to him in the Congress. They quake at mighty Rush. And he's the one that's setting the Republican agenda. They don't care what Michael Steele says. He can go do anything he wants. And we just have to acknowledge that kind of awesome political power within the Republican Party where it exists. And I was acknowledging power and hypocrisy which is, you know, two things that are in abundance in Washington.

(CROSSTALK)

ROBERTS: Just to remind people, you said in your column that Rush Limbaugh was, quote, "the moral and intellectual leader and most influential person in the Republican Party." Do you really believe that he is more powerful than the GOP leadership -- McConnell, Boehner and Cantor?

CARVILLE: Of course, he is. I mean, if you look at this guy Phil Gingrey, this Republican congressman, who is just groveling to him. He has said on his show that he has more power than these people. You cannot -- no one in the Republican Party is scared of John Boehner. No one in the Republican Party is scared of Mitch McConnell.

I heard Senator McCain, who, as we know, is one of the really brave people in politics, his voice was almost quaking. He didn't want to do anything to offend Rush Limbaugh. These Republicans are scared to death of Rush Limbaugh because he is the most powerful person in that party.

ROBERTS: And this is...

CARVILLE: Which is kind of odd that a political party has a radio talk show host as its intellectual power house, but that's today's Republican Party, and we Democrats have to acknowledge that.

ROBERTS: And this isn't you just stirring the pot, James?

CARVILLE: Well, why would I? I mean, I'm not stirring the pot. Yes, I'm stirring the pot on the hypocrisy of him saying it should be a 54/46 allocation, but it's the Republicans who have put Rush in this position, and I'm just acknowledging the opposition leader of the party opposite mine.

ROBERTS: Let me switch gears here..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2009 - 9:05am.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Senator: Talk Radio Hearings Could Be On The Way...

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1155201977/bctid10237007001  (3:02)

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Sen_Stabenow_wants_hearings_on_radio_accountability_talks_fairness_doctrine.html?showall

February 05, 2009
Categories: Talk Radio

Sen. Stabenow wants hearings on radio 'accountability'; talks fairness doctrine

This morning, radio host Bill Press brought up the recent closing of liberal station Obama 1260 when speaking with Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, and talked about whether there needs to be a balance to right-wing talk on the radio dial.

http://www.billpress.com/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/DC_loses_liberal_radio_station_.html

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1155201977/bctid10237007001  (3:02)


BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean, look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.

BILL PRESS: Can we count on you to push for some hearings in the United States Senate this year, to bring these owners in and hold them accountable?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.

Although Obama has been publicly opposed to reinstating the fairness doctrine, conservative radio has talked nonstop about the fear of it returning (or perhaps something like it with another name) while there's a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in Congress.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/114322-Obama_Does_Not_Support_Return_of_Fairness_Doctrine.php

UPDATE: A commenter points out that Stabenow is married toTom Athans, a liberal talk radio executive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Athans

AUDIO LINK:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1155201977/bctid10237007001  (3:02)

(Courtesy of The Bill Press Show)

This is what the extreme right wing fringe of the Republican Party greatly fears:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16851#comment-333782

Bringing back The Fairness Doctrine would help to restore...

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 28, 2008 - 1:04pm.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2009 - 4:07pm.

Subj: Three states 
Date: 2/6/2009 9:45:28 AM Central Standard Time
From: info@dscc.org
To: Mitch Dworkin
Sent from the Internet (Details)



Dear Mitch,

I know it's only the beginning of February, so much is happening in Washington and in Senate races around the country that I wanted to make sure you saw it all.  Here are the latest updates...

Rush Limbaugh Calling the Shots

More proof that this is, in fact, your grandfather's Republican Party comes from Rush Limbaugh's recent rise back to the top of right-wing leadership.

Last month, Limbaugh actually said on his radio show that he "hopes [Obama] fails."  That's right - we're facing the worst economic crisis in a generation and wars on two fronts, and Rush Limbaugh is rooting against the President's success.

It's infuriating, especially after all those lectures about patriotism from the other side.

But to Republicans, Limbaugh's words aren't outrageous - they're marching orders.  How else do you explain that every single House Republican voted against President Obama's economic stimulus package to provide urgently needed jobs and get the economy moving again? 

Limbaugh railed against the plan on the radio, and House Republicans toed the line.  Limbaugh and his listeners even chastised one Republican Congressman into apologizing for having the nerve to claim that Rush did little more than "throw bricks," instead of trying to get something done.

The American people have overwhelmingly voted for change.  This country is facing massive challenges.  And Rush Limbaugh is the leader Republicans are turning to for guidance.

No wonder they keep losing.

Join the Conversation

We know how much our grassroots like to get together and talk about the pressing challenges facing the country - and about the latest right-wing outrage, so we'd like to invite you to come over to From the Roots, the DSCC blog to discuss the topics of this message or whatever else is on your mind.

The grassroots are an enormous part of our success and we hope that we can foster an even tighter sense of community among all of our top supporters.  I hope to see you on the blog.

We're discussing today's email on the DSCC blog.  Click here to join in.

http://www.dscc.org/blog?blog_entry_KEY=507

Sincerely,

J.B. Poersch

 

The DSCC is committed to protecting our majority in the Senate. We can't do it without your help. Please click here to make a donation.


The DSCC knows how to win Senate races for Democrats. If you liked this message after receiving it from a friend, click this button to join our cause.

 

Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, http://dscc.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 7, 2009 - 8:46am.

Morning Joe video - At about 09:27 into this video, Paul Krugman asked how there can be bipartisanship with 36 out of 41 Republican Senators who take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh which I think is an excellent point:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/29051511#29051511  (13:25)


Krugman on economy, stimulus fight
Feb. 6: The New York Times' Paul Krugman — winner of the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences — joins the Morning Joe gang to discuss the economic downturn and President Barack Obama's legislation. 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/29051511#29051511  (13:25)

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 1, 2009 - 2:38am.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0902/27/sitroom.02.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

Iraq War End Date: August 31, 2010; A Transformational Budget; Interview with John McCain; President Obama's High-Stakes Week

Aired February 27, 2009 - 17:00 ET

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: "United by -- Rush Limbaugh was able to galvanize congressional opposition because he's the person that these congressional republicans look to. He couldn't galvanize Charlie Crist. He couldn't galvanize Schwarzenegger or people like that. I think that's the interesting dynamic that's happening within the Republican Party and I do think he is the most influential republican...

CARVILLE: He is the most influential republican and we should acknowledge that..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 2, 2009 - 2:22am.

that he needed about what the differences are between the role of a political commentator and the role of a reporter. Howard Kurtz and John King have more credibility in their little toes than Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh would have put together in my very strong opinion!

It is great to see serious and credible journalists who I respect like Howard Kurtz and John King fighting back and not taking any of Hannity's bullying:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/01/sotu.02.html

STATE OF THE UNION WITH JOHN KING

State of the Union: Reliable Sources

Aired March 1, 2009 - 10:00 ET

HOWARD KURTZ: "I'm sure you remember that on-air rant by CNBC's Rick Santelli challenging the Obama mortgage bailout with his pals at the Chicago Board of Trade. Well, John King and I are getting a little bit of flak for our skeptical reaction last week.

Here's the instant replay.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Now, he has every right to take on Santelli after that diatribe. Santelli may or may not have a populist point. But isn't he supposed to be a reporter? I guess ranting on television is one way to get attention.

KING: I think you just hit the nail on the head there, Howie. A way to get attention. And I think there's probably a little bit too much.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: That, it seems, was enough to set off Fox's Sean Hannity.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: Now it seems CNN talking heads Howard Kurtz and John King were brutally (ph) offended by CNBC's Rick Santelli's emotional reaction to President Obama's socialist housing policies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Let's bring back my partner in crime, John King.

John, I said Santelli may or may not have had a point. I don't recall supporting the president or embracing -- what did Hannity call it -- socialism. How about you?

JOHN KING, HOST: No, I don't think we embraced or rejected anything, Howie, because we were trying to be reporters. My point and your point is that Mr. Santelli's job is to go find that outrage if it exists, if is a factual portrayal.

My opinion -- and maybe we're dinosaurs, Howie -- is that we cover the news, we don't try to make the news. That's, I think, what our job is.

KURTZ: Right. And I love when right-wingers or left-wingers beat up on journalists. I mean, Hannity doesn't have Alan Colmes any more to balance him. His guests this week included Ann Coulter, Karl Rove, Republican Congressman Eric Cantor, and Mitt Romney.

So, again, we were not really taking any side. This wasn't a debate about the substance of the proposal, it was debate about how far should journalists go -- and you get a lot of attention when you crank up the volume, John -- how far should they go in talking about the president's plans?

KING: It's a great point you make. And again, we should make the distinction, what Sean Hannity does -- and I respect him, he's a good guy -- he does something very different from what John King and Howie Kurtz do.

He is a political commentator. We are reporters. There's room in the business for both, but he has more license to do things that you and I simply aren't comfortable with. And like I said, I might be a dinosaur, but I'll stick in my mud pit.

KURTZ: He's got plenty of license as a commentator.

All right, John. We'll turn it back over to you. Thanks very much..."

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 3, 2009 - 7:04am.

Michael Steele's very obvious fear of Limbaugh.  Michael Steele apologizing to Rush Limbaugh out of fear is in the same pot of stew with Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) who did the exact same thing when Limbaugh put the pressure on him:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17258#comment-340494

Limbaugh's followers made GOP Rep. Phil Gingrey apologize to him

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 29, 2009 - 2:09pm.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/17258#comment-340495

Rep. Gingrey's call to Limbaugh where he begged to be forgiven

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 29, 2009 - 2:21pm.

http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/prnewswire/press_releases/national/District_of_Columbia/2009/03/02/DC77822

Kaine Statement: Steele Apology to Rush Limbaugh Proves the Point: Limbaugh is Leading Force behind Republican Party

WASHINGTON, March 2 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- On the same day GOP Chairman Michael Steele apologized to conservative talk radio show host Rush Limbaugh for courageously challenging Limbaugh's role as leader of the Republican Party calling his show "incendiary" and "ugly," Governor Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, issued the following statement calling on Republicans in Washington to stop following Rush Limbaugh's lead:

"I was briefly encouraged by the courageous comments made my counterpart in the Republican Party over the weekend challenging Rush Limbaugh as the leader of the Republican Party and referring to his show as 'incendiary' and 'ugly.' However, Chairman Steele's reversal this evening and his apology to Limbaugh proves the unfortunate point that Limbaugh is the leading force behind the Republican Party, its politics and its obstruction of President Obama's agenda in Washington. Just this weekend, Rush Limbaugh repeated his claim that he is rooting for the President to fail. The last time Rush Limbaugh said he wanted the President to fail, virtually every single Republican in Congress followed his lead and voted against the President's plan to create or save 3.5 million jobs.

"As Congress works to pass the President's budget, Republicans need to stop following divisive figures like Rush Limbaugh, stop apologizing to him and put aside the failed politics of the past so we can put our economy back on track, reform our health care system, break our dependence on foreign oil, improve our schools, and lay the foundation for long-term growth in the 21st Century."

SOURCE Democratic National Committee

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 4, 2009 - 11:47am.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/26/rush-sanford-idiot/

By Ryan Powers on Feb 26th, 2009 at 2:35 pm

Limbaugh Responds To Sanford: The ‘Hell We Don’t’ Want Obama To Fail! Just Need ‘The Guts’ To Say So

Yesterday, ThinkProgress noted that in an interview with the Real Clear Politics, Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) was asked about the “view that perhaps Republicans are rooting for President Obama to fail. “Anybody who wants him to fail is an idiot,” Sanford responded. The question was a clear reference to Rush Limbaugh declaring on Inauguration Day, “I hope Obama fails.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/02/q_a_with_governor_mark_sanford.html

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/25/sanford-limbaugh-idiot/

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/20/limbaugh-obama-fail/

Today on his radio show, Limbaugh responded to Sanford’s comments. Limbaugh suggested that while Sanford in spirit agrees with him, the governor “had” to denounce his comments for political reasons. Limbaugh then reiterated his hope that Obama will fail:

LIMBAUGH: I am told South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford called me an idiot, not by name. But he said, “Anyone who wants Obama to fail is an idiot.” I don’t anybody else who said it. So, I guess he’s talking about– … Politicians have different audiences than I do and they’ve got to say things in different ways. So, after he said, “Anyone who wants Obama to fail is an idiot,” then went on in his own way to say, “Gosh, I hope this doesn’t work.” … He just had to say, “We don’t want the president to fail.”

Hell we don’t! We want something to blow up here politically. We want something to not go right. … We’re talking about freedom that is under assault!

Later, Limbaugh suggested that Sanford simply didn’t have “the guts to talk about” Obama the way he does on his radio show. “Everybody wants to talk about [Obama failing] within the confines of policy,” Limbaugh lamented. Watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-ZtUBIWFsg&eurl=http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/26/rush-sanford-idiot/

Rush Responds To Sanford Calling Him An Idiot  (3:07)

thinkprogress
February 26, 2009

Asked to comment on Limbaugh’s statement, Joel Sawyer, Sanford’s Communications Director, said that “the governor was not referring to anyone” in particular when he said that anyone hoping for Obama to fail is an “idiot.” Rather, Sawyer said, Sanford was speaking “generically” and did not know that Limbaugh had previously said he hopes that Obama will fail.

Comments 180

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on June 10, 2009 - 7:13am.

with Cheney in second place.  This is why I definitely believe that Democrats (and even moderate Republicans) need to try and take out Limbaugh right now while they more than likely still have the chance to (preferably with some version of The Fairness Doctrine which Limbaugh truly fears) because ideologues like Limbaugh, Cheney, and Gingrich (as opposed to the reasonable moderates like Colin Powell and Tom Ridge who are in the vast minority of GOP activists) will probably take over the GOP if they ever get back in power.  If that happens, then we will go right back to the extreme ideology of the Bush-Cheney years if ideologues like Limbaugh and Cheney still have majority control of the GOP:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120806/Limbaugh-Gingrich-Cheney-Seen-Speaking-GOP.aspx

June 10, 2009

Limbaugh, Gingrich, Cheney Seen as Speaking for GOP

Obama overwhelmingly seen as main person who speaks for Democrats

by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- Asked to name the "main person who speaks for the Republican Party today," Republicans across the country are most likely to name three men: Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney. Democrats are most likely to say Limbaugh speaks for the GOP, followed by Cheney. Both Republicans and Democrats overwhelmingly say Barack Obama is the main person who speaks for the Democratic Party, although Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats to mention Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.


These results are based on an open-ended question included in a May 29-31 USA Today/Gallup poll. It comes as the Republican Party is attempting to regroup after losing last November's presidential election, and is looking for ways to reorganize and strengthen in time for the 2010 midterm elections.

The responses to the Republican leadership question provide hard evidence that there is in fact a significant leadership vacuum confronting the GOP today. Forty-seven percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents could not come up with a single name in response to the party spokesperson question. In contrast, a much lower 17% of Democrats could not name an individual as the person who speaks for their party.

Additionally, no one person dominates even among Republicans who are able to name someone who speaks for their party. Radio talk-show host Limbaugh, former Speaker Gingrich, and former Vice President Cheney -- although at the top of the list -- are all mentioned by only 9% or 10% of Republicans. The only other individuals named by more than 1% of Republicans are Sen. John McCain at 6%, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele at 2%, and former Massachusetts Gov. and presidential candidate Mitt Romney, also at 2%. Of notable interest is the fact that less than 1% of Republicans name George W. Bush in response to the question. This reflects at least in part that Cheney has been highly visible and outspoken since leaving office, while Bush has largely remained silent, publicly.

Democrats are most likely to name Limbaugh as the person who speaks for the Republican Party (18%). Since Limbaugh is not a popular person with Democrats, the frequency with which Democrats name him is no doubt a negative characterization of the GOP from those who identify with the rival party. The talk-show host is followed on Democrats' list by Cheney at 12%, then McCain and Bush at 5% each. Gingrich is apparently not on the Democrats' radar as much as he is on Republicans'; the former speaker receives 4% mentions from Democrats, compared to the 10% mentions he receives from those who identify with his own party. (This past Monday, Republicans gathered for a House and Senate campaign committee fund-raiser in Washington, and Gingrich gave the keynote address.)

Democrats have little difficulty in naming the individual who is the main person who speaks for their party -- Obama, mentioned by 67% of Democrats. Six percent of Democrats name Pelosi, and 3% Hillary Clinton.

Republicans are also most likely to name Obama as the main spokesperson for the Democrats. But 20% of Republicans name Nancy Pelosi. Recent Gallup polling shows that Pelosi is highly unpopular with Republicans, suggesting that, just as a number of Democrats are happy to characterize the GOP (presumably in a negative way) as being led by Limbaugh, a number of Republicans are just as happy to characterize the Democrats as being led by Pelosi.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120761/Cheney-Pelosi-Poor-Ratings-Common.aspx

Discussion

While being associated with the party of the sitting president gives the Democrats a natural advantage over the Republicans in having a well-defined person representing them, these data clearly underscore the leadership vacuum that confronts the Republican Party today. Almost half of those who identify with or lean toward the GOP cannot think of a single political or other figure when asked to name the main person who speaks for their party. And none of the three individuals whom Republicans name -- Limbaugh, Cheney, and Gingrich -- would likely be characterized as new visionaries or individuals bringing a fresh or new face to the Republican political scene. None of the three hold elective office at this time, all are older white males (the youngest of the three is Limbaugh, who is 58), and only one has a realistic chance of running for the presidency in the future (Gingrich).

Perhaps most importantly, none of these is mentioned by more than 10% of Republicans, a telling indication that rank-and-file Republicans today simply have no single consensus leader around whom they can gather their forces.

Most pundits and political observers already have a list of possible candidates who could end up battling for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination -- including (in addition to Gingrich) Sarah Palin, Romney, Mike Huckabee, Charlie Crist, and Jeb Bush. Gingrich is the only one on this list who is mentioned by more than 2% of Republicans as the person who -- at this point in time -- speaks for their party.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,015 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted May 29-31, 2009. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

Click below for more on these topics:

USA
Democrats
Government and Politics
Political Parties
Republicans
Americas
Northern America

Home | Gallup Poll | Consulting | University | Press | Contact Us

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.