Give It A Rest, Wanda...

I'm trying for a second time to post my thoughts about the jokes told at the White House Correspondent's Dinner over the weekend. I tried writing this for more than an hour yesterday, but stopped when I just couldn't make my my writing convey what my brain was thinking. My grouchy friend, Jen, encouraged me to give it another shot, so here I am.

For the most part, I really enjoyed President Obama's monologue. He had some wickedly funny lines - my favorite being that Rahm Emanuel was struggling with using the word "day" after the word "Mother" because he's so used to using a more vulgar suffix. Very funny stuff. The President also made light of the fact that the media continues to idolize him, and he did it in a friendly "I-get-the-joke" kind of way.

My review of Wanda Sykes is not so kind. I will not pretend to be outraged or offended by what she said, but I did find the whole routine to be a bit tiresome.

The reaction of Democrats after the November election was completely understandable. They were celebrating a determined victory after eight years of a Republican administration that they clearly could not stand. They took a commanding lead in both the House and Senate, and essentially ensured their party's dominance on the American political landscape for at least the next eight years (short of some unforseen disaster). They gleefully picked apart the bones of what was left of the GOP, and danced on the graves of their opponents. And God bless them. To the victors, go the spoils.

But here's my beef. The election was seven months ago. The Democrats won. Do we really still need this kind of partisan venom-spewing? President Obama campaigned on a promise of change in America. A lot of moderates swung his way on the hope that this kind of partisan divisiveness would, if not go away, at least be removed from the spotlight. Wanda Sykes' performance at the Correspondents Dinner just served as a reminder to me that nothing much has changed.

One of Sykes' biggest targets was Rush Limbaugh. Again - I won't speak to the appropriateness of her jokes directed at Rush. Frankly, I could care less about the content. My frustration lies in the fact that even as the Democrats try to demonize Limbaugh, they are empowering him. He's like one of those creatures in Star Trek that feed on phaser power, and only grow more powerful as they are attacked. The more attention Rush Limbaugh gets in the national media, the higher his ratings will become, and chasm that divides the nation will only continue to grow wider.

Rush Limbaugh exists to divide America. I do not hold him to blame for this. It's what he does. It's how he makes his living. It's what ALL political-opinion radio talk hosts do - from left and right. And no - it does not serve my personal idealistic higher goal of getting Americans to stop hating each other, but it does serve my even greater jones for the First Amendment.

The Democrats have created this "Rush Limbaugh is the face of the Republican party" lie. It is no more true than to say Janeane Garafalo is the voice of the Democrats. Most Dems have never heard Garafalo speak, and 90 percent of Republicans do NOT listen to Rush on a regular basis - or want him running the country, for that matter.

President Obama is enjoying incredibly impressive popularity ratings in the polls these days, and with Congress behind him, he is possibly the most powerful President we've seen since FDR. He has it within his power to quell the kind of divisive humor that Wanda Sykes spewed out this past weekend. All he would have to do is tactfully drop a mention that he would like to see some of the venom to die down - and I think it would to a great extent. If Mr. Obama is going to meaningfully lead the nation, he would go a long way to help heal the nation first.

Democrats also need to be mindful that politics go in cycles in America. Just as surely as the Obama era replaced the Bush era, the Bush era supplanted the Clintons. What goes around come around. The GOP will live to fight another day, and as the saying goes, "an elephant never forgets". The mud you fling today will most certainly come back to soil your faces soon enough, so maybe it's best to treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.

But perhaps I'm being too idealistic. There are a lot of people keeping score out there - people who want their pound of flesh for enduring the Bush administration, and politicians who don't know how to govern or legislate without first busting a gut to knock down their political opponents first.

Still - imagine how much energy we could all save if we didn't spend the majority of our time hating on each other!

Kumbayah, y'all!

Hey Republicans - He IS An Entertainer!

Say what you will about Barack Obama - you can love him or hate him, but he and his team are brilliant at the political game, and kicking their opponents when they are down.

Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has managed to successfully paint Rush Limbaugh as the head of the Republican party, and in the course of doing so, he's been able to sit back and let Limbaugh and RNC Chairman Michael Steele attack each other, further dividing an already-weakened GOP.

Steele, quite rightly so, tried to make the point that Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Limbaugh is not an elected official. It is not his job to consider the views of constituents. It is not his job to legislate, or to work with the opposing party to find middle ground on the issues of the day. It is Limbaugh's job to rouse the anger of his audience, and to grow that audience any way he can. Having a working, functional government is an inherent conflict of interest to Limbaugh. This is not a criticism... It is merely a fact. And if the people who get their political guidance from him don't realize that, then we're all in trouble.

Unfortunately, Steele has caved, and now apologized to Rush, which is absolutely the worst thing he could have done, because it only validates the notion that Limbaugh IS, in fact, the head of the Republican party.

Whether Limbaugh is taking the spotlight and running with it (which I strongly suspect is the case), or whether his fame has gotten to his head and he thinks he actually has an active role in shaping the direction of the Republican party, this is NOT good for either the GOP or the country.

I know the Democrats are giddy over watching the GOP implode, but the timing of this could not be worse. President Obama is making decisions right now that will shape the direction of the nation for the next half-century... and increasingly, he's doing it without credible checks and balances from the opposition party. We NEED opposition opinions, regardless of which party is in power.

If this GOP slide continues, it won't be good for anyone - except, perhaps... Rush Limbaugh. It's time for his to go back to being the "harmlsss little fuzzball" that he's always claimed to be.

And So It Begins...

I really don't want my blog to become a political wasteland, but the news of the day dictates that I respond to President Obama's lashing out against Rush Limbaugh. From the New York Post:

President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

One White House official confirmed the comment but said he was simply trying to make a larger point about bipartisan efforts.

"There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats," the official said. "We shouldn't let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done."

President Obama is correct in his sentiments, but I hope he did not just make a giant political blunder. When I was a kid getting picked on on the school playground, the best advice I ever received from my parents and teachers was to ignore my enemies - because they only thing they were interested in was getting me to react to their taunts. Well, now that Obama has reacted to Rush, he's given Limbaugh enough material to last until April Fools Day!

Instead of encouraging bipartisan spirit, I fear the President may have inadverently damaged it. Remember - Rush Limbaugh (and other talk hosts, including liberals) has no interest in playing nice with the President and Congress. Divisiveness is the coin of the realm in talk radio. Here's the take from radio industry analyst Tom Taylor in his column at radio-info.com:

Barack Obama’s already challenging Rush Limbaugh by name.

A tricky game – and one that Rush probably can’t lose at. He’s getting that “made you look!” kind of attention that he and his base dearly love. While new President Obama will have to do this very delicately, to make it clear to most Americans that he’s talking about Limbaugh’s old-style partisanship and its receding relevance. Otherwise – Obama could get mired in the same-old “vast right-wing conspiracy” riff that made Hillary Clinton an object of hilarity among movement conservatives. But Obama’s clearly thought about it and on his third full day in office he advised Republicans that they “can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done” with the new administration. Of course Rush doesn’t want to “get along” – he wants to throw rocks at the White House.

Of course, I discussed all of this last week, before the President made his remarks... Hey, somebody ought hire that guy!

...And One More Thing!

Following up on my previous post in which I chided the Democrats who mocked President Bush as he took his seat at the Inauguration...

It was no less disgraceful that Rush Limbaugh mocked the incoming President as he made sarcastic comments while speaking over the inauguration ceremony yesterday, an action that was, in itself, an insult. I think Limbaugh has been an important part of the American political landscape, but I also firmly believe that this nation has come to a point where we need collegiality, not divisiveness, to move forward.

It would be difficult (and counter-productive) to point the finger of blame at any one group or industry for bringing the talk radio/TV business to where it is today, but I am really starting to think it is harming us as a nation. Corporations are making a lot of money by asking Americans to essentially choose sides - to ask the question "Are you for us, or against us?" at a time when we really all need to be in this mess together.

You can blame Rush, but he's not alone, and conservatives are not alone to blame. Chris Matthews and Bill Press and Al Franken and Keith Olbermann are just as divisive as Sean Hannity and Michael Savage and any other conservative talker you can name.

As I write this, we are less than 24 hours into a new administration, and I have already seen and heard more than enough gloating and griping to last for the next four years!

This is no doubt the most idealistic thing that this cynic will ever write, but for once, I wish we could all choose to follow the lead of our friends in Howard County, Maryland, who are becoming well known for posting this sticker on their bumpers:

... And Joy Behar Is A Know-Nothing Bitch!

In this clip from "The View", co-host Joy Behar calls radio host Rush Limbaugh a terrorist:



Now, before I go any further, I must say that I am not a regular listener of Rush Limbaugh's, although I know plenty about him, having spent 19 years with him hosting the midday show on WMAL. I am not a fan, per se, but I do admire him as one of radio's greatest legends of all time. You can hate the man's politics, you can find him to be obnoxious, or snide, or pompous. But you cannot deny his impact on the talk radio industry. Rush Limbaugh is - in total fact - the most-listened-to man in America.


A couple of things really bother me about this institutional hatred of Rush. First of all, I strongly suspect that most of his critics have never spent more than 5 minutes listening to him on the radio, and therefore, their criticisms of him are simply ill-formed and invalid. People hate his politics, they personalize that hatred, and turn Limbaugh, in their minds, into some sort of Hitleresque monster.

The fact is, Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer - and a brilliant one at that! He knows exactly how to massage his audience to attain maximum results. I'm quite sure that , ideologically, Rush believes what he says, but you must know there are two Rush Limbaughs... The one for public consumption, and the private Rush who spent years crafting the Limbaugh persona. The difference between private Rush and the Great and Powerful Oz is that Rush is way too smart to ever let you see the man behind the curtain! But trust me when I tell you that while Limbaugh's shtick is not an act, it's also true that he ramps it WAY up for his audience.

Limbaugh is unique... and when I say unique, I mean it in the literal sense. There are many pretenders to his throne, but none who can hold a candle to his talent on the air.

The great irony I find in Joy Behar's comments is that she and he are basically doing the exact same job, albeit on opposite ends of the political spectrum. "The View" and Rush Limbaugh have different audiences, but both shows exist for the same reason - to present a point of VIEW that will help listeners/viewers shape their own opinions.

So Joy - aren't you just the pot calling the kettle black, you li'l terrorist?

Brian Williams Is THE MAN!

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams gave a commencement speech at the Ohio State University over the weekend, and told graduates that it's up the them to "fix this country". Conservative media critics, always on the lookout to attack "liberal media bias", were quick to pounce on this. Williams gave them plenty to rant about. He even encouraged the young people to get out and be active campaigners during this fall's election! If THAT's not liberal bias, then what is? After all - ALL 20-somethings will obviously support Barack Obama, won't they?

I have never met Brian Williams, but I did see him speak once at a Radio-TV News Directors Association function, and he was one of the most natural "regular guy" speakers I have ever seen. He's a college dropout from New Jersey - a plain speaker and one of the funniest people I've ever seen at a microphone. My good friend, Scott Wykoff, actually met Williams, and said he was very enthusiastic and eager to support local radio guys like us.

Brian Williams knows DC well, by the way... He attended both GW and Catholic Universities, and he replaced Maury Povich on "Panorama" on Channel 5 back in the day...

Anyway - back to the point of my blog entry... To me, there are a couple of reasons that members of the media get pinned with the "liberal bias" tag...

1. - Because Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity say it's so. If you listen to them, and other conservative talk hosts, blaming the media is about 80 percent of their shtick. They tell their audiences the media is not only biased, but that there is a liberal media conspiracy. These hosts conveniently fail to mention that they are also members of the media, that they do, in fact, conspire to attack liberals. It never failed to amaze me when I was at WMAL how often we would get complaints from our own listeners attacking our news coverage as liberal - especially since our news was pretty much tailored to a conservative audience. We were attacked because our own hosts were telling their listeners to do so.

2. - Because some people don't think news anchors can have opinions. When news people do share opinions, whether they betray a political bent in one direction or not, it sets off critics who automatically pounce... even if it's something as innocuous as a commencement speech. Brian Williams says the country is broken. Can you find one political candidate who would not agree with that sentiment? It sounds more that a little defensive to get upset about the country being broken - as though it specifically targets the White House. The last I checked, Congress was just as unpopular as the GOP President - and IT's controlled by the Democrats! - A pox for everyone's house!

3 - Because it's kinda true. Sorry folks - most of the news that's fit to print - and broadcast - in this country is produced in New York and Washington, DC - by journalists who were largely educated at northeast liberal arts universities. And aside from any inbred bias, keep in mind that journalists are trained from day one to not take sides. The general public finds this concept hard to grasp sometimes. For the most part, people watch and read the news to reaffirm their own particular points of view... And when the news does not do that, it prompts consumers to take a "if you're not with me, you're against me" stance. Hence the dreaded "liberal media" problem.

Anyway - decide for yourself... Here's the entire Brian Williams commencement speech at Ohio State - It runs more than 13 minutes, but I think you'll discover after just a couple of minutes that Brian Williams speaks the truth with humor and grace...

Or maybe I'm just biased.