my god i'm giddy.
So where were we? Oh yeah. limbaugh. Read this and see if this isn't surprising to you as well. Its from David Frum.
Quote:
|
On the one side, the president of the United States: soft-spoken and conciliatory, never angry, always invoking the recession and its victims. This president invokes the language of "responsibility," and in his own life seems to epitomize that ideal: He is physically honed and disciplined, his worst vice an occasional cigarette. He is at the same time an apparently devoted husband and father. Unsurprisingly, women voters trust and admire him. And for the leader of the Republicans? A man who is aggressive and bombastic, cutting and sarcastic, who dismisses the concerned citizens in network news focus groups as "losers." With his private plane and his cigars, his history of drug dependency and his personal bulk, not to mention his tangled marital history, Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence—exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we're cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush's every rancorous word—we'll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time.
|
http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279?from=rss
Not surprising that its from David Frum. It makes perfect sense. Its surprising that people would buy into this "life long republican facing reality" shit. Rush is not a walking stereotype of self-indulgence. As above described he's a walking stereotype of corporate republicans. One of whom David Frum personally helped groom and foster. So we're expected to feel all nostalgic for the party of "buckley" after his own kid gets booted off the national review for endorsing obama? This from a bush speech writer, coiner of the phrase axis of bad guys, and wants "evil" removed from the world: ie non republicans. looks like a natural progression from frum to rush, and it smacks of cynicism to posture oneself as above it, let alone plead innocent of it.
Honestly Ron paul summed up the situation best: "sad."