Who Runs Gov

The Plum LineGreg Sargent's blog

Happy Hour Roundup

* Is Rush Limbaugh the new face of the GOP? Some Dems sure hope so, reports WaPo’s Chris Cillizza.

* Who says all the unions are waiting for Barack Obama to give them the go-ahead before they attack Republicans for blocking the confirmation of Hilda Solis as Labor Sec, as I noted below? The United Food and Commercial Workers Union sends over a statement accusing GOP Senators of trying to “thwart” Solis, and demanding that “Republican Senators should stop obstructing her confirmation.”

* Turns out Bank of America — which is under pressure from SEIU to fire its CEO — hosted a conference call against Employee Free Choice, just a few days after getting a huge chunk of bailout change, according to this real barn-burner by Sam Stein.

* Will Karl Rove continue to be able to shield himself from John Conyers‘ subpoena? Looks like that may be up to the Obama administration to decide.

* Michael Calderone has more on that story about the McCain campaign’s aborted plot to kick New York Times reporters off the campaign plane.

* That reporter who interviewed Obama for al-Arabiya television says that Obama showed a shift in tone towards Palestinian suffering, though he doesn’t see a shift in “substance” yet.

* Ben Smith makes the point that I tried to make below, only better: Obama’s gestures towards Republicans aren’t so much about winning GOPers over to his stim package as they are about laying the groundwork in advance for casting the Republicans as the partisan ones.

Consider this an open thread…

Posted by Greg Sargent | 01/27/2009, 05:45 PM EST | Categories: Employee Free Choice Act, Probes of Bush administration, bipartisanship, labor, political media

12 Responses

  1. Tena | January 27th, 2009 at 05:50 pm

    Hey – happy weekend, Greg. You are doing a great job here. Love the open threads.

    :)

  2. Greg Sargent | January 27th, 2009 at 05:52 pm

    thanks, but the weekend is four days away … :)

  3. Farinata X | January 27th, 2009 at 05:57 pm

    Limbaugh has been the face of the GOP for years. Bush called him “a national treassure,” remember? The Village media keeps this obscured, but it’s the case nevertheless. No one on our side has been willing to take him on directly until now. Bravo.

  4. Greg Sargent | January 27th, 2009 at 05:59 pm

    FX — I particularly liked the implication in that piece that Gibbs was trying to keep the fight going

  5. Tena | January 27th, 2009 at 06:14 pm

    Thank god someone is taking on Rush Limbaugh – he is the godfather of hateful rightwing rhetoric.

    And Greg – I lost my head because of the open thread. And because I don’t pay much attention to what day it is and because my short term memory is full of…breathing space. LOL

  6. CT Voter | January 27th, 2009 at 06:24 pm

    Sorry. Ben Smith couldn’t make any point better than you. I think the search for “bipartisanship” is done for two reasons. One, it might work. Maybe now, maybe even eventually. Who knows? No one would have predicted three years ago that we’d be talking about President Obama, so I’m willing to suspend my disbelief. Second reason? If it doesn’t, Obama has been out there on the cable news, demonstrating how willing he is to reach out. That’s the image that’s out there. And it’s going to be hard to counter. Republicans have, I think, backed themselves into a corner at this point.

  7. Bernie Latham | January 27th, 2009 at 07:18 pm

    Greg
    Re Ben Smith/Cilliza/yourself…I think you guys are probably getting the Obama strategy right. This is a very smart team. And it is rather convenient that Powell earlier voiced something nearly identical to Obama’s advice to Republicans.

    We’ll note as well that Limbaugh has not only “clarified” his politically imprudent statements (I want Obama to fail) but is also now trying to associate/brand himself with notions of “bipartisanship”.

    Likewise, Republicans in the House and Senate are trying to collar this demanded-by-the-public critter and claim it as their very favoritist thing in the world.

    But Obama owns it and people like Limbaugh and Boehner, who have built their careers on division and dfference and discord and exclusion, have put themselves in a presently inconvenient corner as a consequence of their own self-branding.

    I’d add, too, that I believe Obama and team are strategizing in this manner not merely to position themselves (in terms of appearances) up the road but because they understand that the uber-partisanship and misinformation of the Gingrich/Rove/Limbaugh past is crippling and destructive to the polity.

  8. Bluesplashy | January 27th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

    Good link on the limbaugh bit, Greg. I’ll bet George Will is proud. I think before our economy gets back on more solid ground (a couple of years maybe) the Gingrich/Rove/Limbaugh triology will be over. Gingrich will mellow out, Rove in jail (ALL my fingers are crossed), and Limbaugh, well… a too little drugged out. But then again, I forgot about our dear lady of the frozen brain – oops, I mean frozen North – she may breath a little life into at least Limpy in 2012. Hopefully we’ll be able to just breeze right on by that wreck (rest assured, I will gawk as I pass!)

    By the way, came over from TPM just to see you and you have met and surpassed my expectations Greg – just great.

  9. Mike Stark | January 27th, 2009 at 10:57 pm

    Rush Limbaugh has been the face of the Republican Party for many years now. Elected democrats have just been too obtuse to exploit that fact.

    I mean, c’mon. The guy played “Barack the Magic Negro” on his show. He went off on a lengthy monologue about Barack Obama being handy with a “spade” – get it? funny, funny, right? – and his “ho(e)” – whew!!! I’m keeling over now, tears streaming… how ’bout you?

    Same guy that sells Gitmo gear in the midst of 3-4 soldiers dying every day in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    He had – repeatedly – George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfield and other administration principals on his show. Rush Limbaugh is absolutely the personification of the Republican Party. With his dishonesty, distaste for science, mean-spiritedness and rabid pursuit of right-wing dogma, he could stand in for almost any Republican that remains in the House or Senate. Obviously, there are exceptions – Collins, Snowe, Lieberman ;-) , Specter… But in the main, the point is unassailable.

  10. Daddy-O | January 28th, 2009 at 12:03 am

    I’m wondering…out loud…so to speak…if the geniuses working the White House Counsel office are up all night trying to figure out an appropriate response to the Karl Rove executive privilege conundrum.

    I trust Obama. And I’m sure he has no real problem with transparency, unlike Bush. But this policy will be in place for at least his term, if not two, and I’m sure they want to get it right the first time.

    There must be a way for Obama to hang Rove out to dry while still preserving a modicum of legal framework that doesn’t completely desert the principle of executive privilege without abusing it, Bush-style.

    I can’t wait until Rove is pleading the Fifth to Conyers, et al.

    Tena…did you used to hang out at Eschaton, in comments? Did you have the keys and help Atrios/Duncan out at times? Just wondering if you’re the same person. I like this place, Greg. See you soon.

  11. Greg Sargent | January 28th, 2009 at 06:21 am

    Hey Bluesplashy, thx much, appreciate that. hope you’ll hang here. and hey Mike, how goes it — been awhile. you making any mischief?

  12. SGEW | January 28th, 2009 at 08:25 am

    btw: I get a real thrill out of the blog software automatically censoring Richard Cheney’s first name.

    Heh heh. Dick.

Leave a Reply


Please email us at profiles@whorunsgov.com to bring to our attention any content or conduct that you believe violates our Discussion and Submission Policy.