I kind of like how attention has been focused on Rush Limbaugh. You know who else likes it? Rush Limbaugh. By making him the focus of discussions on "who's really running the GOP", an attention-sucking vortex of need, last seen actually resembling a black hole at CPAC, gets all the attention he craves. And if anyone tries to take it from him--he fights back!
Attention must be paid, and if you diss him, as Michael Steele sort of kind of did (he called him an "entertainer!" and implied Limbaugh might not be really the head of the GOP! can you imagine?), you need to apologize.
Obviously, it's a spectacle. Serious people know it's a spectacle. But how do you solve a problem like Rush Limbaugh's ego? How do you handle his impressive army of 5 million listeners a day? (Who are, like the same people tuning in every day, and like a half-million or so actually hate him, they just like train wrecks.) Cooler, wise grey heads must prevail. So enter Newt Gingrich:
Now, I've been seeing Newt on the talk shows more often lately, anyone else notice that? You know, when celebrities go on talk shows, it's usually because they have a book or a movie or a show they want to promote. So, I expect, when I see him, he's angling. Why? Because he wants back in. He took a lot of credit for 1994. I'm thinking he's nostalgic. A new Democratic president. A dispirited Republican party needs leadership. And then there's Newt.
I know, that's a long article I just linked to--this is the bit I find relevant:
When most of the nonpolitical world last paid attention to Newt Gingrich, about a decade ago, he was stepping away from public life shrouded in the kind of ignominy that seemed to shadow all the sordid politics of his era. Having delivered House Republicans from decades of suffering in the minority, and having reigned for a brief time as one of the most powerful House speakers since the early part of the 20th century, Gingrich followed the same steep trajectory back down to near irrelevance. Politically, he was badly outflanked by a masterful and more pragmatic Bill Clinton; on a personal level, he was undone by petulance and hypocrisy, whining about his status on Air Force One after a state funeral and carrying on an extramarital affair while impeaching the president for lying about sexual transgressions. He became, in the public mind, a mop-haired caricature, the man depicted on the front page of The Daily News as a crying infant.(Emphasis mine.)
I don't really know why Sunday chat shows love him, but then again, they put Tom Delay on, too. It's a funny old world.
Naturally, Rush Limbaugh can't let that go. Message discipline and all that, I guess, him being the leader and all. Here's a snippet from his show:
....Here's my attitude on this. I am at the top of the mountain of what I do. Everybody underneath it wants what I've got. That's great. That's human nature. As such, they'll do what they can to take me down or to criticize me or what have you. It is beneath my dignity to be critical of those beneath me. It's just a waste of time. All this is such human nature. I know that Newt would give his whatever to have what I've got. So would any of these other critics of mine.
They'd love to have it, and they've taken their best shot. But for me to get... This is what's silly about Obama talking about me. You know, he's the president of the United States! The fact that he's got time to dispatch his people out to do this means something. It means we're effective. It means we pose a problem. If we weren't effective on this program doing what we're doing, none of this would be happening. No assaults, no attacks, no attempts to discredit, 'cause we would be irrelevant. So the question you have to ask yourself then Mr. Snerdley is, "Okay, why am I relevant. Why are we relevant here?" 'Cause this guy was hoping for a highway with no cars coming the other way, and he's got a caravan of cars heading the other way trying to stop it from going from where we he's going, led by me.
This guy can't speak off of a teleprompter. They can't send him out on ad-lib missions. They can't send him out. He can debate other Democrats because they don't disagree about anything, but you can't go and debate others in public off the prompter. He just can't do it. So you have to ask, "Is he really the leader of the Democrat Party?" They're talking about who's the leader of the Republican Party. Is it me? No. There isn't a leader of the Republican Party, as it should be. What's going on right now is a bunch of people trying to become the leader setting themselves up to either be anointed or to self-anoint themselves in that position.
You can read more here at Rush's site. Or don't. (What am I gonna do--make *him* famous?) Oh yeah, emphasis mine again.
Mostly, I just shudder at the visual of people beneath him. But the thing Rush points out about guys like Gingrich is they can and will say anything they need to:
RUSH: It's just part of the territory. I mean, next week Newt could come out and profess his total admiration and love for me --
I think that's the radio-personality version of Babe Ruth pointing to a spot in the stands. He's already calling the apology. I think that's what that is. I think someone should tell Newt Gingrich. Why, I--you know, as a person who follows politics? I would love to know what his response will be.
In other words, what fun.
No comments:
Post a Comment