Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth
I'm not sure its always that easy though Ace, Rush has a large audience and has for a long time. Those that don't like him do ignore him but his core audience is big enough that it will always keep his views in the mainstream discourse about politics. I do agree that his opponents however give him far to much credit and if they didn't loose their shit every time he said something controversial it would certainly lessen the impact he does have.
|
I don't know if Rush was the first to use the term czar when describing some of Obama's appointees, but it is something Rush would do. The reason he would do something like this and most of us know it, is to play to the socialism/communism/facsim barbs he throws at Obama and to get under the skin of overly sensitive liberals. Everyone who follow politics knows these folks are not czars, we know every President make these appointments, etc., but Obama's team got offended to the point where they did this on the Official WH website:
Quote:
The Truth About "Czars"
Posted by Anita Dunn on September 16, 2009 at 03:21 PM EDT
Reality CheckLast week, when the President addressed the Joint Session of Congress in a speech on health reform, he referred to some of the untruths – okay, lies – that have been spread about the plan and sent a clear message to those who seek to undermine his agenda and his presidency with these tactics: "We will call you out." So consider this one of those calls.
Over the past several weeks, we've seen with increasing frequency and volume issues raised around the use of "czars" by this Administration. Although some Members have asked serious questions around the makeup of the White House staff, the bulk of the noise you hear began first with partisan commentators, suggesting that this is somehow a new and sinister development that threatens our democracy. This is, of course, ridiculous. Just to be clear, the job title "czar" doesn’t exist in the Obama Administration. Many of the officials cited by conservative commentators have been confirmed by the Senate. Many hold policy jobs that have existed in previous Administrations. And some hold jobs that involved coordinating the work of agencies on President Obama’s key policy priorities: health insurance reform, energy and green jobs, and building a new foundation for long-lasting economic growth
But of course, it’s really the hypocrisy here that is noteworthy. Just earlier today, Darrell Issa, a Republican from California and one of the leaders in calling for an investigation into the Obama Administration’s use of "czars", had to admit to Fox News that he had never raised any objections to the Bush Administration’s use of "czars". Many of these members who now decry the practice have called on Presidents in the past to appoint "czars" to coordinate activities within the government to address immediate challenges. What is clear is that all of this energy going into these attacks could be used to have a constructive conversation about bringing this country together to address our challenges moving forward – and it doesn’t take a "czar" to bring that about! Just some folks willing to act in good faith.
Take a look at the facts below – the truth about "czars":
|
The Truth About "Czars" | The White House
The traction is gained from the over-reaction.
Or when Rush says "the Obama regime", and then the term is used by Howard Dean in an interview inadvertently, giving Rush hours of material and an immeasurable amount of credibility - it is the fault of Obama and his team. They should ignore Rush.