Cantor Tries To Reject And Denounce The Limbaugh Doctrine

This morning on This Week, George had this exchange with Eric Cantor:

STEPHANOPOULOS: So the Rush Limbaugh approach of hoping the president fails is not the Eric Cantor House Republican approach?

CANTOR: George, absolutely not and I don't think anyone wants anything to fail right now, we have such challenges.

Silly whip. Here's Limbaugh at CPAC yesterday:

"This notion that I want the president to fail, this shows you the problem we've got. This is nothing more than common sense and to not be able to say it? Why in the world would I want what we just described: rampant government growth, welfare that is not being created yet is being spent? What is in this, what is possibly in this that any of us want to succeed?

Very interesting that Cantor is rejecting and denouncing the Limbaugh doctrine of failure, which got such a rousing response from the crazies at CPAC yesterday. Could it be that Cantor and company suddenly see Limbaugh's rhetoric and the notion that Limbaugh is the party's putative leader as a liability?

Smarter than I thought. Of course it's a liability, which is why on Face The Nation this morning Rahm Emanuel made sure everyone understands who exactly is speaking for the Republican Party:

SCHIEFFER: Who do you think now speaks for the Republican Party?

EMANUEL: You just named him: it is Rush Limbaugh. He has laid out his vision, in my view. And he said it clearly. I compliment him for that. He's been very up front and I compliment him for that. He's not hiding. He's asked for President Obama and called for President Obama to fail. That's his view. And that's what he has enunciated. And whenever a Republican criticizes him, they have to run back and apologize to him and say they were misunderstood. He is the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party. He has been up front about what he views and hasn't stepped back from that, which is he hopes for failure. He said it and I compliment him for his honesty. But that's their philosophy that is enunciated by Rush Limbaugh and I think that's the wrong philosophy for America.

Some believe the administration's addressing Limbaugh by name is a counter-productive strategy because it simply elevates him but elevating him's the whole point. This guy who may be a unifying and rallying force among the base is an alienating figure among the far larger and more important bloc of voters in the middle, many of whom still call themselves Republicans. Perhaps not for long.

Cantor has apparently come to realize this is a problem and has decided it's time to assert his own leadership role in the party. The question is, how long before he has to crawl back to Rush and apologize.

Update [2009-3-1 16:0:9 by Todd Beeton]:Ryeland has the beginnings of the rightwing backlash against Cantor.

Tags: Eric Cantor, rahm emanuel, Rush Limbaugh (all tags)



Re: Cantor is manipulating you

I disagree with about what Cantor is doing.

Cantor's statement is not new leadership. Cantor's statement means that the GOP would rather people not know their agenda in such overt terms.  Their strategy requires it remain hidden. Even if it's an open secret, there is always that element of "Well we can't be sure if it's principles or obstruction that drives them?" Limbaugh it very clear that it's obstruction.

It does not mean Cantor will not continue the same line of obstruction as before. He simply doesn't want it to be so openly stated as such by the likes of Limbaugh. In other words, this is PR, not changed strategy. He doesn't have to go back to Limbaugh, because his actions will do that for him.

Rahm in this instance is right to thank Limbaugh for his honesty. I also prefer the honesty about what the GOP is up to here because this honesty serves Limbaugh's crudeness serves our i interest more than Cantor's lies. That's what they are- lies. They appeal to our nature as liberals. But we should not be fooled by them.

Cantor is just lying so that we can hope they will come to the table in good faith. Don't be fooled. Limbaugh is the real messenger. Let's use that.

by bruh3 2009-03-01 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

I do not think it is productive to call every Republican a liar or worse simply because they are Republicans. I agree with you that Rush Limbaugh is the true messenger of the party, but that does not mean there are not dissenting opinions or that Eric Cantor's might not be one of them. I will admit that the Stimulus Bill was not a good sign of their willingness to negotiate in good faith, but we should also recall that a.) we do not need their votes to pass anything in the house and b.) that was bungled in some ways by our side as well.

by JDF 2009-03-01 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

Exhibit A for why Cantor said what he said. Until you get that you are manipulated by your own desires you won't get why he said what he said.

by bruh3 2009-03-01 09:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

Your reply makes no sense re: what I said.

And yes, everyone is manipulated by their own desires but since you have no clue what mine are you have no clue how I responded to what Cantor said.

by JDF 2009-03-01 02:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

No- everyone is not manipulated. You are specifically being manipulated here by your hopes of what you would like to think of people by saying "not all republicans are like the really bad ones." And what's worse is you admit to it by pointing out that in fact you have no basis for this conclusion regarding the Congressional republicans based on their own actions. That's what makes you manipulated here. You require nothing of them other than what they say they are. I am saying look at what they are doing and have done. ignore the verbiage.

by bruh3 2009-03-01 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

to complete my point: their actions are what Limbaugh advocates. Their strategists, if you listen to their commentary and writings (including men like Ed Rollins), are advocating what Limbaugh advocates. The only dissonance is that Cantor tried to strike a different tone in his messaging. That messaging is not the reality. Their action and strategies are.

by bruh3 2009-03-01 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Cantor is manipulating you

One example does not, by itself, indicate a strategy or a pattern. I will wait to see what happens with the next major peice of legislation before passting judgement on Cantor.

I would however argue that many members of the Republican Caucus are going to be concerned with re-election and not want to appear as simply obstuctionist when they could, instead, be doing things to help their district.

by JDF 2009-03-02 11:04AM | 0 recs
Now THIS is Ju-Jitsu

He has laid out his vision, in my view. And he said it clearly. I compliment him for that. He's been very up front and I compliment him for that. He's not hiding. He's asked for President Obama and called for President Obama to fail. That's his view. And that's what he has enunciated. And whenever a Republican criticizes him, they have to run back and apologize to him and say they were misunderstood.

Talk about turning an opponent's strength against them, Oy.

Oh, and it looks like Rush is pummeling Newt. Wow,

by Neef 2009-03-01 09:29AM | 0 recs
Yeah, throw Newt overboard...

That's right, get rid of ANYONE in your group that actually can come up with a plan, a theme, a policy...

Besides hysterics about us becoming Sweden!

Crucify the last guy that actually had a winning strategy for your side!

As you said, Wow...just wow!

All we need is Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber bleating about Socialism. and praying to iconic images of Ronnie Reagan and we can absolutely increase the new SouthWest/Idustrial Midwest Strategy, and continue to turn the Republicans into the Old White Peoples Party of Alabama, Kentucky, Utah and Wyoming.

Yes, the party that wants to build a bridge to the 1980s.

by WashStateBlue 2009-03-01 09:39AM | 0 recs
They have almost no one left

The ideological purge of the GOP has left them with only the loons.  Dangerous to be sure, but loons nonetheless.

Oh, and to answer your question, I give it til Tuesday before he goes crawling back to lick the boots of Limbaugh.

by scytherius 2009-03-01 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: They have almost no one left

If THAT long. according to this diary, free republic and redstate are already winding up the anti-Cantor rhetoric.

by Neef 2009-03-01 10:06AM | 0 recs
Full Speech

Personally I side with Rush over Cantor on this.  The republican party will be forced to the more classical liberal view, another party will emerge or we will have a one party system.  Rush wrapped himself in the Constitution for this speech it isn't that much of a jump to make an attack on Rush and attack on our founding documents, then everything the "wingnuts" have been saying for the last year will have been proven true.

For anyone interested in forming their own opinion here is the entire speech.  I would love to hear your opinion.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10


by Classical Liberal 2009-03-01 10:06AM | 0 recs
CL, I give you full props

You sit here in the lion's den, and make your case intelligibly.

No particular comment on the Rush video yet.

by Neef 2009-03-01 10:15AM | 0 recs
Re: CL, I give you full props

I really don't think I am in the lions den.  I know there is overlap between protecting the people from the government and protecting the little guy.  Thanks for the input.

PS: I could be a complete baffoon, but I still think this debate over the size of government is the real debate and people should be asking questions.  No one truly knows what the ramifications of the President's plan are because there has been no open debate. I mean on this issue the McCain looked like a hypocrite(he was).

I am interested in your review. :)  Have a good one.

by Classical Liberal 2009-03-01 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: CL, I give you full props

Well considering very few of us here are in favor of "small government," it is a bit of a lions den, but I view it more as friendly disagreement than bitter rivals.

by JDF 2009-03-02 11:07AM | 0 recs
Cantor Tries To Denounce Limbaugh Doctrine

In the past CPAC was largely ignored by the media. They mentioned it, showing some highlights and moved on. As a result most americans never heard got a full blast of their wacky positions. For some reason, this year the media decided to give CPAC extensive coverage included Rushs Limbaugh's complete speech un-interupted. Wow! I'm sure most moderate Repuglicans were horrified. It's bad enough for them that the "Party of NO" label is taking hold. They now have to deal with their NOT so Grand Old Party   is being led by an arrogant, radical political blowhard. It is only logical that the Dems led by Emmanual will take full advantage of this opening to religate "The party of NO" to the status of a extremist fringe group.

by eddieb 2009-03-01 10:37AM | 0 recs
Karl Rove pummeled

Elsewhere in George Stephanopoulos's This Week program, the roundtable discussion featured a clueless Karl Rove being barraged by great arguments and sharp accusaions from Katrina vanden Heuvel and Stan Greenberg.


Guys, if you haven't seen it, I suggest you go look for it on YouTube or somewhere.  It should be available, and MADE available.

I love it so much that I'll watch it again.  And again.  And again.

by Sieglinde 2009-03-01 10:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Karl Rove pummeled

Yea! Rover boy isn't used to REAL criticism. After all he's spent most of his self deluded life in Bush World and then jumping ship to immerge in the Never Fair and Balanced Fox World. It was like watching a spectacled, balding Rat caught in the Headlights of an oncoming liberal Train.

by eddieb 2009-03-01 10:50AM | 0 recs
vanden Heuvel was amazing

George Will (theoretically on the conservative "side") basically abdicated the argument to "gee, I guess we'll see who's right!"

I do wish they had pushed back a little more on the "twice as many jobs for half the price" thing. But otherwise, a very solid performance.

by Neef 2009-03-01 11:04AM | 0 recs
my favorite part

was when Rove was forced to admit that Obama is giving a tax cut to 95% of working Americans...then snarled that some of the cuts are going to people that don't pay income tax -- an argument Katrina quickly eviscerated.

by ryeland 2009-03-01 12:47PM | 0 recs
None of Them Have it Right

What do we define as success?  More jobs outsourced and millions more hitting the unemployment lines?

None of the political pundits have offered any solutions to the economic problems this country faces.  Then, like a light bulb turning on, it was apparent that the USA has been in a trade war for years.  And the politicians are so blind they do not even acknowledge this trade war exists.

What we are seeing is the permanent transfer of wealth from the USA to the new manufacturing powerhouses of the world.  This will not change unless trade agreements are modified to equalize trade between countries.

The middle class has long been the group of taxpayers that paid for most of government.  Now that these middle class jobs are nearly all gone, there is nothing left to do but drive up deficits or tax the rich.  The poor have nothing to give and many in the middle class are sucking up some form of government assistance (welfare or unemployment).

The solution to the economic crisis is to admit that the USA has lost its economic might and that it is time to live within our means.

by BillW 2009-03-01 11:34AM | 0 recs
Implying you don't want these policies to succeed

means you expect them to and that completely blows conservative policies out the window.

If you truly believed in YOUR policies and beliefs, you'd oppose Obama's plans because you don't THINK they will succeed, though you'd wish they would.

Rush Limbaugh is saying "Obama may succeed and we don't want that" proving that he doesn't really have faith in the policies he claims to believe in...he just hates people.

by DTOzone 2009-03-01 01:52PM | 0 recs
So true

If you jump out the window because you think you can fly, I'm going to wish you luck. =) I'm certainly not going to say "I hope you die, because people can't fly".

by Neef 2009-03-01 02:01PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads