This City Councilman Turned a $50K Deal Into a Personal Payday. Now He's...
Meet the Conservative Outsider Who Wants to Bring Common Sense Back to His...
How This Small-Town Police Force Became a 'Criminal Organization'
Iranian Regime's Latest Move Shows How Desperate It Has Become
CBS News Tried to Recalibrate Detention Stats — DHS Was Having None of...
If 'The Only Thing More Powerful Than Hate Is Love' Democrats Missed the...
Elites Did Their Part to Fight Global Warming by Flying Dozens of Private...
Historic: U.S. Marks Ninth Month With Zero Releases at the Border
Man Who Pushed Propaganda About a Young Gazan Boy Slaughtered By The IDF...
Harry Sisson Refuses to House Illegals in His Home, And Claims ICE Agent...
Critics Blast Katie Porter's Pre Super Bowl X Post As She Tries to...
Immigration Win: Federal Court Sides With Trump Admin on TPS Terminations for Multiple...
Federal Judge Blocks California Effort to Demask ICE Agents
Jasmine Crockett Might Be Running the Most Incompetent Campaign in History
WaPo Claims That Bad Bunny's Profane Performance Represented 'Wholesome Family Values'
Tipsheet

The Party of Lincoln and the Party of Limbaugh?

Apparently, there is a strategy afoot on the Democrat side to try to gain support by arguing that the party of Lincoln has become the "party of Limbaugh".
Advertisement


The strategy is one coined by Bill Clinton in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombings (and relies on the MSM to push a distorted portrait of Rush aimed at those who have never taken the time actually to listen to his show).  For me, however, it's always seemed profoundly unseemly for the putative head of the free world -- or his supporters -- to attack a private citizen who dares to disagree with him, albeit an incredibly influential one.

Can anyone visualize President Bush calling out Oprah Winfrey (on the entertainment/influence side) or Keith Olbermann (on the hard-core partisan/pundit side) -- as President Obama did Rush?  Of course not.  It's unpresidential, and -- at least for the left, it's hypocritical, insofar as it relies on the kind of attack rhetoric that President Obama supposedly deplores.

Certainly, it's difficult to articulate policies and ideas effectively, without resorting to easy demonization of the opposition.  But that's the way politics ought to be conducted -- and if the personal likability of President Obama forces the GOP to have to move in that direction, it's all to the good.

It's cheap politics to do what the left did for the past eight years -- that is, simply attack the president, over and over, in vicious personal terms.  Their new strategy -- "let's just find a new demon" -- is cheap and unworthy of Obama's rhetoric about "unity," not to mention being totally unsuitable for the serious times in which we find ourselves. 
Advertisement


But perhaps it's the only playbook the left now has.  "It's a little like the old lawyers' saying: If you don't have the law on your side, argue the facts.  If you don't have the facts, pound the table."  Substitute "popularity" for law and "policies" for facts.  Could it be that demonization -- the political equivalent of table-pounding -- is the only way the that Democrats know how to practice politics these days?

And isn't it frightening (and hypocritical) that the party that spent years celebrating the virtue of "dissent" is now so ready to attack those opponents who practice it?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement