GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

That Darn Troublesome Limbaugh!

by

Remember, how, during the eight horrible, no good, very bad years of the George W. Bush Administration, Democrats (and their allies in the MSM) regularly demonized that good man, calling him as a divisive force in American politics.

Well, I’m wondering if during those eight years, that Republican president ever called his critics “troublesome” as the Democratic president called his Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck in an interview with CBS’s “The Early Show” co-anchor Harry Smith:

Asked by Smith whether he’s “aware of the level of enmity that crosses the airwaves and that people have made part of their daily conversation” about him, Mr. Obama replied, “Well — I mean, I think that — when you’ve listened to Rush Limbaugh or Glen (sic) Beck it’s …”

“It’s beyond that,” Smith interjected.

“It’s pretty – apparent,” the president continued, “and — it’s troublesome. . . . “

And I’m wondering if, an interview with then-President Bush, any “reporter” or anchor asked that Republican about the level of enmity that crossed the airwaves and that people had made part of their daily conversation?

Fascinating yet again how the media only discovers “uncivil” political discourse when Democrats are targeted.  Seems Mr. Smith has learned his Democratic talking points well.  Note above Smith’s interjection which helps push that narrative along.

If Obama were indeed the kind of man he portrayed himself to be on the campaign trail, instead of calling Limbaugh troublesome, he’d have responded by saying that we always get this kind of discourse in politics and he’s not going to let it get to him, “My predecessor experienced it as did his.  And I’m not going to let it get to me.  I’m doing my job and have confidence in the American people’s ability to see the decency and good will of my Administration and see for themselves the effectiveness of our policies.”  Or some such.

It’s telling that Obama must regularly attack his critics.  Can’t remember W ever doing that.

Comments

  2. I’m wondering if during those eight years, that Republican president ever called his critics “troublesome” as the Democratic president called his Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck

    He didn’t, or at least not on-the-record. I vaguely recall one time when he referred to some unknown New York Times reporter as a dick or a-hole or some such, strictly off the record.

    Put it this way: if Bush had followed Obama’s example with (say) some Air America host, the Democrats in Hollywood would have made nine movies about it already. And would keep making them for the next 50 years.

  6. “Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest talk show host!”

    And the Democrats are the ones who say the Republicians are the only ones who would never stoop to inciting violence.

    otpu

  7. I remember Bush saying you’re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists, and I remember him saying he had earned political capital in his reelection. And I remember when he said Mission Accomplished re. toppling the Saddam Hussein regime. That’s about as contentious as GWB ever got in public.

  8. I remember Bush saying that lefties could sniff his rear portal that he was going to go to war no matter what. I remember Bush saying he was going to spy on all Americans and if you didn’t like it he would send you to Gitmo and torture you. I remember Bush tearing up the Constitution and shoveling money out of the treasury into Halliburton trucks. I remember Bush ordering 9/11. I remember Bush saying he was going to blame 9/11 directly on Saddam Hussein. I remember Bush plotting out oil prices with OPEC. I remember Bush lied and people died. I remember Bush telling Old Europe to suck lemon drops and get out of the way.

    I remember Bush smirking and saying “I won.” I remember Bush saying that if you bring a knife, he will bring a gun. I remember Bush telling his crew to “get up in their faces.” I remember Bush ramming things through with no attempt at working with the Democrats. I remember Bush…….

    Now I am getting confused. Some of it I read about Bush and some of it might not have been Bush, but that other guy …..

    I think I better think it out again.

  9. If Obama were indeed the kind of man he portrayed himself to be on the campaign trail, instead of calling Limbaugh troublesome, he’d have responded by saying that we always get this kind of discourse in politics and he’s not going to let it get to him, “My predecessor experienced it as did his. And I’m not going to let it get to me. I’m doing my job and have confidence in the American people’s ability to see the decency and good will of my Administration and see for themselves the effectiveness of our policies.” Or some such.

    These posts where you offer these prescriptions for people to take who you’re never going to like anyway are one of my favorite things about your crazy, delusional blogging. All these little ideas you have for how the Democrats should behave. Rush Limbaugh gets to rail against the Obama administration for 15 hours a week, he’s just one of many such conservative personalities who do so, but when Obama says a word about it, that’s somehow inappropriate, it’s over-reaching, it’s untoward, it’s un-presidential, blah blah blah, whine whine whine, boo-f*cking-hoo.

    The issue here is that Rush and his ilk try very hard to cultivate this fantasy about Obama, Democrats, and liberals, and his efforts work best when he’s doing it in a vacuum where no one is responding. It’s easier to demonize people and make things up about them when you’re not looking them in the face. As an American that follows politics, I don’t understand how it is possible to not get excited at the possibility of these two people having an argument in public, and I especially don’t understand the conservative tendency to get all defensive of Rush and pretend like Obama is singling out private citizens.

    And it works exactly the other way with Bush. I would have loved to have seen Bush get interview by Rachel Maddow, but Bush’s team had him avoiding all things confrontational and it’s pretty easy to understand why. He was a terrible President with a terrible record and he was stupid to boot – he could barely make it through speeches towards the end and he did terribly with even the most softball questions. Just head over to YouTube and watch Bush’s last press conference. It’s a terrible performance by any measure, and that’s probably the truest Bush we ever got.

    The bottom line is that conservatives are afraid of confrontation, but it’s not so much confrontation between two politic figures that you’re worried about, it’s the confrontation of your myth-making with reality. Rush Limbaugh is a storyteller and Obama is in the real world, and Rush gets paid to peddle his wares – not deal with the real world.

    It’s telling that Obama must regularly attack his critics. Can’t remember W ever doing that.

    The Republican Party under Bush attacked its critics more viciously than anything I’ve ever seen, and while George Bush wasn’t the primary motivator of those efforts (that would have been Karl Rove) he did his part, too. Hell, I’m still being called a terrorist-loving, troops-hating traitor, and I’ve been right all along about the Iraq war.

  10. and I’ve been right all along about the Iraq war.

    Based on what? What the KOSholes tell you is true? Damn shame you don’t live in the real world. Not ONLY does this “president” attack his critics, he attacks, insults and provokes the American people. It’s a damn shame you approve of that.

  11. Based on what? What the KOSholes tell you is true? Damn shame you don’t live in the real world.

    Based on the fact that it is a terrible waste of time and resources that has only made us look stupid and incompetent because we’re totally unable to justify any of the reasons we gave for invading.

    It’s one of the dumbest things that has ever happened and congratulations, you’re partly responsible for it.

    Not ONLY does this “president” attack his critics, he attacks, insults and provokes the American people. It’s a damn shame you approve of that.

    How did he attack his critics? Because he called Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh ‘troublesome?’ Honestly now, is that a bridge too far in political discourse at the moment? When Glenn Beck is a calling him a racist with a ‘deep-seeded hatred for white people,’ you’re going to complain about Obama saying that Glenn Beck is troublesome? How is anyone supposed to take that seriously?

    And how does he attack and insult the American people? Like… what?

    That third one is very interesting, he ‘provokes’ us, does he? Provokes us to what? Please explain, I would love to hear what he is provoking us to do.

  12. Um, Levi, it’s one thing for a left-wing partisan to slam Limbaugh, but the president is supposed to show some grace, some class. This is a post about Obama, Levi, not Limbaugh.

    Defend your man, don’t attack us and our sometime ally.

    I am flattered, honored really, by all the time you devote to our blog, writing such lengthy commentary. We offer you challenges, you ofer us empty rants. Please provide examples of W attacking his media critics as Obama does his.

    Telling that you use the space we provide you to attack us rather than defend your beloved Obama.

  13. Um, Levi, it’s one thing for a left-wing partisan to slam Limbaugh, but the president is supposed to show some grace, some class. This is a post about Obama, Levi, not Limbaugh.

    Defend your man, don’t attack us and our sometime ally.

    Who says so? The President isn’t the pope, he still gets all those ‘freedom of speech’ perks that the rest of us get, and if he wants to have an argument with whatever critic he chooses, he should be able to. How does responding to a critic show that you don’t have class and grace? Is Rush Limbaugh showing nothing but class and grace during his 15 hours of broadcasting each week?

    I mean come on now, all the guy said was that they were ‘troublesome.’ That’s somehow beyond presidential etiquette? Please.

    I am flattered, honored really, by all the time you devote to our blog, writing such lengthy commentary. We offer you challenges, you ofer us empty rants. Please provide examples of W attacking his media critics as Obama does his.

    Telling that you use the space we provide you to attack us rather than defend your beloved Obama.

    For people on my side of the political debates in 2003, 2004, and 2005, everything we said about the Iraq war was labeled as an unserious, weak, and traitorous response by people in the Bush administration from top to bottom. As I said earlier, it was much more than just Bush, it was the entire GOP, from the politicians to the base. And those campaigns were far more broad than Obama’s comments about individual commentators, they would routinely cast all liberals as naive wusses that wanted to coddle terrorists. Bush and Cheney and Co. were talking about the resolve of regular people like me, not multibillionaires that make a living spouting propaganda.

    Which is more beneath the station of President? Saying that a talk radio host is ‘troublesome,’ or pretending that half of the citizenry is a bunch of lily-livered traitors?

    And as I have done in the past, I would like to thank you for being cool enough to not ban the liberals that come to your blog. It’s a very rare quality in my experience and it demonstrates that you do have an admirable level of bravery and curiosity.

  15. Levi, you’re not addressing the point. I’ve offered your a challenge. Provide me an example of W dressing down one of his critics in the media in the same manner his successor has done.

    I’m waiting.

    You know, I’m just so sorry that I don’t feel like chasing down some video clip from three years ago on a Saturday because somebody has a problem with the current President calling a couple of bomb-throwers ‘troublesome.’ What you’re complaining about isn’t a problem. Obama isn’t trying to shut anyone down, he’s not trying to intimidate Rush Limbaugh into going off the radio, it’s nothing.

    The Bush administration (and Republicans for years) dedicated enormous amounts of its energy and resources into convincing their base that liberals are bad people that want America to fail and the terrorists to succeed. The things that were said by the administration were amplified by the conservative movement, and if you didn’t have a problem when it was going on back then, you’re not going to have a problem with it now, so I’ll save myself the trouble. And to compare a group of war-loving maniacs’ propaganda campaign to sell a war and to turn one half of the citizenry against the other to calling a snake oil salesman ‘troublesome’ is the height of dishonesty.

  17. Hell, I’m still being called a terrorist-loving, troops-hating traitor, and I’ve been right all along about the Iraq war.

    Actually, that’s because liberals like you aid and abet terrorists and pass resolutions calling our troops to be “uninvited and unwelcome intruders” and encouraging people to attack them.

    This is what you and liberalism support. The facts are right there. You have no facts to counter, only whines about how you’re too lazy to work on a Saturday.

  18. The President isn’t the pope, he still gets all those ‘freedom of speech’ perks that the rest of us get, and if he wants to have an argument with whatever critic he chooses, he should be able to. How does responding to a critic show that you don’t have class and grace?

    Because you said it didn’t.

    The Bush administration (and Republicans for years) dedicated enormous amounts of its energy and resources into convincing their base that liberals are bad people that want America to fail and the terrorists to succeed.

    So again, what we have here is Levi attacking a white person for allegedly doing something that he supports and endorses a black person doing.

    Racist.

  19. This from Dan at the end of his posting:

    It’s telling that Obama must regularly attack his critics. Can’t remember W ever doing that.

    And this from Levi:

    Which is more beneath the station of President? Saying that a talk radio host is ‘troublesome,’ or pretending that half of the citizenry is a bunch of lily-livered traitors?

    I understand, Levi, that you can not find a shred of evidence that GW Bush ever so much as hinted that in his mind “half of the citizenry is a bunch of lily-livered traitors.” I realize that you are projecting and that you are deeply depressed that your Iraq rant has never gained any traction. You should learn to take your lumps and move on. There are a lot of leftists who wanted Obambi to do war trials and lock up Bush and Cheney and Rove and the neo-con Jews and fire Halliburton and pull out of Iraq and tear down Gitmo and banish anything a school girl might call torture and trash can the Patriot Act. Why Obama even stopped talking about the war on terror and called it some goofy disturbance unrelated to religion by people who have misunderstandings about us and reform of social justice on an intergalactic level.

    Bad news. 1.) Gitmo is here to stay. Obama has backed off it. 2.) Obama has totally adopted the Bush strategy in Iraq. 3.) Obama has kept and increased the provisions of the Patriot Act. 4.) Obama has done a 180 on chit-chat diplomacy with the dictators. 5.) The coalition Bush put together is shredding and Canada and Germany are going to go home. So much for the Obama smart diplomacy of wooing our allies into Afghanistan. 6.) Durbin, Reid, Pelosi, et. all have deserted you. MIA. They are funding the war and they make no, zero, nada talk about troop reduction or with drawing. 7.) Biden has even begun to talk about the “Obama miracle” in Iraq. Why is that Levi?

    You were skunked, sonny boy. Your Messiah cooed in your ear and you went for the whole enchilada. But Obama has to deal with reality now, and North Korea and Israel and Iran and the Somali pirates and Chavez and China and Castro and Limbaugh and Beck and Hannity and the TEA party have taken Obama’s measure and he has a whole lot of chump showing. And now he pouts. Just like you.

    What will you do if Obama veers toward the center in a desperate fake to try to save his Messiah anterior portions? He would sell you out in a New York minute. That is the way power lust and ice water in the veins work.

  20. Once again, our resident fascist proves he can’t back up his words with facts.

    Facts are like Mr. Limbaugh. Troublesome, hard to refute, and accurate.

  21. President Bush was stupid?

    Obama claimed to have been to 57 states with two more to go. If Bush had said something that stupid, we’d still be hearing about it.