In another twist in the phony, shape-shifting "Operation Chaos," Rush Limbaugh proclaimed victory for his alleged part in manipulating Tuesday's elections.
As you know, Big Pants has been urging his listeners to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary Clinton to prolong the Democratic primary fight, and help nominate her -- the conventional wisdom for months was that Clinton was the weaker candidate.
That's one version. More recently he claimed, “Operation Chaos was born primarily for the purpose assuming Obama was going to be the nominee at the get-go of this. He needs to be bloodied up politically since McCain is not going to do it. Since the Republican Party is not going to be on the field in this way, somebody's gotta bloody up Obama. The only person that can do it is Hillary, and she can't do it if she's not in the race -- and so the purpose was Operation Chaos was to keep her in the race and to have her bloody up Obama in the process of staying in the race.”
It was also a convenient fall-back for the Obama campaign to blame any success Clinton might have had on the Evil Rush.
But Barack kicked ass, Tuesday. He went beyond expectations, and apparently overcame some very bad weeks. Clinton with all her alleged support from Chaos voters lost in double digits in North Carolina, and barely squeaked a win in Indiana where she was supposed to prosper.
The "Limbaugh effect?" Negligible. But that didn't stop Rush from claiming total victory.
Although the goals of Operation Chaos were never clear, they're even foggier now. Now he claims he wanted Obama to win all along.
Wednesday, Big Pants told listeners to vote for Obama, because he's the "weakest candidate since McGovern." Superdelegates, he says, know in their heart of hearts, "...[Obama] cannot put together the necessary coalition of Democrats to win this thing."
"Operation Chaos" was hugely successful as self-promotion, and for the boosting of sales of gear -- the coffee mugs, the caps, the jerseys; the autographed, fully-illustrated New Testaments.
Limbaugh's phony-baloney stealth campaign got his name batted around in the cavernous 24-hour newshole by reporters who should know better. His name was on everyone's lips -- a glorious place for any entertainer's name to be.
Rush Limbaugh-a legend in his own mind.
Posted by: rozskat | May 08, 2008 at 05:42 AM
...but definite 'reality' in his bank account; so it's all in how you measure success. And definitely a 'legend' in the annals of talk radio history.
He, like Dori Monson is an 'entertainer'...nothing more, nothing less.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 05:51 AM
Rush Limbaugh is a broadcasting genius. He uses politics as a comedic device to generate massive ratings and put hundreds of millions of dollars into his personal bank account. Limbaugh has met and surpassed both objectives.
Posted by: abob | May 08, 2008 at 06:40 AM
Someone tell that fat fuck to shut the fuck up.
Can you imagine in the left was trying the same tactics? We would never stop hearing about how unpatriotic it is. What a fucking joke.
Posted by: Herbalizer | May 08, 2008 at 06:56 AM
Notice how our Republican friends above are all about money? Banks accounts and hundreds of millions of dollars...
Whatever happened to umm patriotism boys?
Spin and more spin. Actually, seems like Rush still has that 20-30 percent who still like Bush and money and lapel pins made in China.
Randi has a theory that Rush really does want Hillary to win it all. Few conservatives like McCain and her roots are in the conservative camp. Who knows.
Posted by: joanie hussein for obama | May 08, 2008 at 07:57 AM
My statement stands and is irrefutable based on how 'our society' measures success. In my book joanie - you and sparks are making a greater contribution to society than Rush Limbaugh...but unfortunately that doesn't get the recognition it deserves and blowhards like him get the fame and the bucks!
Lo siento mucho....indeed.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 08:11 AM
It's all so confusing...I read this blog to assist my political choices, but posters are so divided. I am grateful to Rush for making clear decisions, and I wouldn't consider having an opinion without accessing his wisdom first! As-Salāmu Alaykum!
Posted by: Fremont Redux | May 08, 2008 at 08:29 AM
Herbyizer
"Can you imagine in (if) the left was trying the same tactics?"
Can you say "Ellen Craswell"?
STFU, it is a full contact sport. We kick your asses at every opportunity and you return the favor at every opportunity. It is the American way.
Posted by: chucks | May 08, 2008 at 09:28 AM
Rush Limbaugh does not give a rat's ass who becomes President. His radio show grew rich and successful during both the Clinton and Bush administrations. Limbaugh's success does not depend on who sits in the White House. His $300 million radio contract was earned because of his talent as a broadcaster.
Posted by: abob | May 08, 2008 at 09:30 AM
Medved, when not being an annoying smarypants with an even more effeminate voice than Dori, which is a tough go, occaisionally has moments of elucidation and perspicacity. His theory on the superdelegates was one of the most arcane heard yet, but intrigueing nonetheless. He says that they know that choosing either candidate will result in a large % of the other candidates voters refusing to vote for the nominee, but they will vote for Obama since they know that Hillary's unhappy voters will at least show up to vote for the statewide and local Dem candidates, whereas those black disgruntled voters will simply "stay home" thus jeopardizing the superdelgates' reelection campaigns. All they care about, according to Litterman, is maintaining and increasing their Congressional majorities.
Posted by: Tommy008 | May 08, 2008 at 09:49 AM
Rush Limbaugh is as crazy as a shithouse rat. He hasn't voted for a president in years. His radio show has lost listeners while his drug habit has grown. Limbaugh's drug habit does not depend who is in the White House. His $300 million radio contract does not generate the ad revenue, nor does it keep up with his pusher who keeps him supplied.
Posted by: Baba Booey | May 08, 2008 at 09:54 AM
Ah yes, but the Clintons' can play rougher than Limbaugh; check out this Follow-the-money power-play that apparently went (and is probably still going) on.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Weinstein, Limbaugh, yadda-yadda-yap-yap. It's all dust in the wind now - Give it up already).
Here's why - Follow (again) on the Delegate Calculator:
A.) Put Michigan & Florida in play (big if), and give them both Clinton's margins of victory - 55% in Michigan, and 49% (call it 50)in Florida.
B.) Now slide the remaining states toward her side until she ties/passes Obama. I have 15% to 85%.
In other words, she must win by 85% of the remaining states to just pull-even with Obama - EVEN with Florida and Michigan included. And Michigan would be a GIANT "if" - 40% went for 'uncommitted'... who knows how many Obama would have taken had he been on the ballot.
SO if you have different math, bring it. Otherwise, throw in the towel.
Posted by: mercifurious | May 08, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Wont through in the towel 'till me lady does. Your numbers are great...unless/until the super-delates (for WHATever reason) can be persuaded that she would be a more formidable candidate. May be that will happen....may be it won't!
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 12:42 PM
...oops, meant 'throw'; sorry sparks.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 12:46 PM
By the way..those "scientists" who say that there is no such thing as climate change and global warming:
There are a couple of updates on the Heartland Institute's "500 Scientist List" smackdown. Not only has it turned out that many of the scientists on the list are not climate change deniers, and never consented to be on the list, but some of them are even dead. Also:
The Heartland Institute has withdrawn its claim of having identified "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts about Global Warming Scares," but is refusing the demands by dozens of those scientists to be removed from the Heartland's original offending document.
And, five New Zealand scientists have actually sent out a press release saying although the Heartland Institute put them on the list, they also never consented to be put on the list.
Posted by: sparky | May 08, 2008 at 01:08 PM
merci: I will say that I DON'T agree with letting it get This Messy
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 01:10 PM
There is no denying 'climate change'! Principal cause is 'unsettled'.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 01:13 PM
How is that "messy"? The only way she can possibly win is by ripping the party apart. One of these days Dunceman, you'll have to just let go of the flat-earth, UN-tax, Hillary Clinton victory fantasy scenarios.
Check this out
Even by the math above, Clinton would STILL have to grab 81% of the remaining SDs.
It's time to put the party 1st and her ego 2nd. Your's too.
And duncy, we've been over your Geocentric Global Warming bit ad nauseum. We thoroughly handed you your ass ad nauseum. When we did, you ran away like a frightened rabbit ad nauseum. Unless you're into S&M, don't make us hyperlink you into oblivion (again).
Posted by: mercifurious | May 08, 2008 at 01:26 PM
I don't know if I'll vote for Obama in the general election, I resent how Obama supportes insist his %51 edge is a clean and clear victory and think the 49% of Dems who prefer Hillary should bow to the razor thin majority. It's no different than Bush's voter "mandate" after his wimpy 2004 victory.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | May 08, 2008 at 01:35 PM
Those who have 'illusions' of having handed others 'their ass'(as you put it)on 'various topics' might find it wise to 'look in the mirror'[& in the archives]. (Soooooo many links....sooooo little time.)
Now, go to work on that blog of yours smegma-breath, and try to make yourself useful. [Are we still updated to 03/04/2008???] LOL!
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 01:36 PM
Might be a good time to exercise one's right not to vote.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 01:40 PM
I am enjoying this more than I had ever thought possible. Just watching the party faithful shitting on Hillary is more than funny. That the democrats would throw out the loyal, hardworking queen for a complete unknown is great.
Of coarse they are both big ol' turds. Whichever one you flush is gonna leave the crapper backed up.
Maybe I will plan a Denver vacation this year. Could be fun.
Posted by: chucks | May 08, 2008 at 01:42 PM
I have to agree with you Chucks.
I am so surprised to turn on Error America and hear the hosts there trashing Hillary like she was George W himself. What would ol' ED Schultz do if Hillary ended up getting the nod for the nomination? I guess he would have to become a McCain supporter, I don't see how he could retract all of the venom he's been spewing for the last 3 months.
It's very strange how the Junior Senator from Illinois with little practical experience and none whatsoever working across the aisle is getting such rabid support from the talking heads and the Dem party's most visible.
Posted by: Brian | May 08, 2008 at 02:59 PM
Put away the "math" charts-Hillary isn't naive enough to think she'll win the regular delegate count anyway. She's hoping for either A. an Obama meltdown before the convention B. a victory through superdelegates support. Plan B is more unlikely only because Obama has introduced the emotionally carged race card and carries a big stick in the form of a near 100% block of black voters who will sit on their hands if Obama is not nominated and maybe leave the party. If it was any other white or Hispanic candidate with the same fatally flawed electability/electoral numbers as Obama, superdelegates would easily do their duty and vote in the muc stronger Hillary, since we're basically in a tie. I love the way the Obamanites love to quote the party rules and procedures when they are to their advantage, but when it comes to the superddelegates exercising their purpose and role (a counterweight to party activists, to prevent the nomination of another McGoven), that should be thrown in the garbage in favor of the divine destiny and birthright of their sainted Obama. In the case of Obama he is the candidate who is "more equal than others" and the superdelegates should just forget about critically evaluating his chances to win in Nov., which aren't much. Of course they have a pro-Obama anus and dunce of a party chairman in Howard Dean, cheering them on.
Posted by: Tommy008 | May 08, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Now, go to work on that blog of yours smegma-breath
A.) Apparently BW's official attention whore has found a big new ad hominem. Congrats - sure beats thinking & reasoning (& math!)
B.) Not that I've ever given 2 shits about your opinion, but I have big doings up-to and including August 22nd - putting all blog-else on hiatus.
C.) How's the grand-opening of your "I Heart Hillary" blog coming along?
Chucks: Wasn't ever a fan of Hillary, but as I've mentioned many times: I vote via platform - not via American Idol contest (or Dunceman's criteria: "I just like her"). If (Astronomically huge "if") she pulls it off, I'll rally behind that platform and the person that represents it.
But it's not going to happen - Even Hillary-loving Erica Barnett says Clinton is finished & should just give up.
Posted by: mercifurious | May 08, 2008 at 03:28 PM
PS, Chucks:
How could ANYONE vote for a candidate (Clinton or McCain) who supports such an idiotic & economically unsound idea as a "gas tax holiday"?
(well, you know who)
We've had 8 years of "The best person for Joe Sixpack to have Beer/BBQ with" in charge. A gas tax holiday is just more of the same. Time to turn the corner.
Posted by: mercifurious | May 08, 2008 at 03:40 PM
We just need Geo Bush, Slimy Harry and the airhead of the south, Pelosi to announce that we are going to start drilling in Anwar, off the coast of Florida plus build two or three new refineries in the next thirty days and oil prices will drop like bricks. Does not even need to be the truth. It is the same child psychology they use on the working stiffs to get them to vote "correctly".
The gas tax holiday is a joke. Just not a funny joke.
Posted by: chucks | May 08, 2008 at 03:51 PM
You guys should all get jobs on Wall Street and let the world benefit from all you "know."
Posted by: sparky | May 08, 2008 at 04:00 PM
wow, reading you guys is an education in bad language, poor manners, elitism, jealousy, etcetera, ad infinitum ... you can't really be this stupid and insipid at the same time, can you ... but for idiots like you, rush might be nothing ... what a bunch of LOSERS !!!
Posted by: bill | May 08, 2008 at 04:08 PM
We just need Geo Bush, Slimy Harry and the airhead of the south, Pelosi to announce that we are going to start drilling in Anwar, off the coast of Florida plus build two or three new refineries in the next thirty days and oil prices will drop like bricks.
Big steaming pile of BS. We could do all that & invade Saudi Arabia & the Emerites, and the price would still stay the same (or go up).
Here's why:
A.) Flat world demand for oil is a thing of the past. A parabolic curve is the future. This is a parabolic demand curve that no new-found supply can catch up with.
B.) Even if more supply would alter the equation, the Big Oil co.'s hold all the cards, and know our addiction/demand and control supplies accordingly (ie, mysterious refinery fires every summer). We continue sucking nozzle, the pimps continue raking $$$
This is not to say there won't be a tipping point, but it hasn't happened yet.
Simple economics chucks.
Posted by: mercifurious | May 08, 2008 at 04:22 PM
Gee Mr Bill
Stupid, insipid, bad language, poor manners, elitism etc. Yep, you are probably right. I still go back to my post expressing joy in the mayhem generated by this election. Being the product of both Seattle and Los Angeles School districts will not lesson the joy I get from the carnage the pergressives are inflicting on them selves. Six months ago, I could not see any fun in this election. You guys fixed that, thank you very much. You still may retake the White House, but not without blood. Yours...
Posted by: chucks | May 08, 2008 at 05:26 PM
By the way, Nate, what you say is mostly true. But I believe that it is OPEC that is holding the cards.
The oil company's are just playing the cards they were dealt.
Posted by: chucks | May 08, 2008 at 05:32 PM
So merci (Nate) what's your response to Tommy008's post? Notice you never addressed that...as you never do.
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 07:08 PM
Duff
What was it that Tommy 008 posted?
Merci
More supply will help meet increasing demand.
More suppliers will help to make it harder for small cliques to control all of the oil supply.
I am assuming that you are in favor of clean nuclear energy, right?
Posted by: PugetSound | May 08, 2008 at 07:20 PM
Puts: its' on the previous page at 03:16 pm. [I've never once seen ol merci respond to a post of T008's]
Posted by: Duffman | May 08, 2008 at 07:24 PM
What is a 'small clique' in the oil world?
Posted by: J.Hova | May 08, 2008 at 08:42 PM
C'mon J Hova, pull it out of your hole man.
You can't be that dense, can you?
Maybe you can, you do follow Joanie's line.
Hey good catch on the Alfred Alford plea deal.
I was going by memory, not by Wiki.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 08, 2008 at 08:49 PM
it is a full contact sport
Right, chucks. The libs are the white hats and the conservatives are the black hats. We will defeat your greedy <30%. Take that to the bank and ...
His $300 million radio contract was earned because of his talent as a broadcaster.
Yep. There's a sucker born every minute and a conservative to take advantage of each and every one.
When are you one-note johnies going to give up on the trashing of everything principled? I hope you do go to Denver, chucks. You might actually learn something. With sales down, I doubt you'll be able to afford the gas bill. Huh?
Oh well, I'm sure you and tommy the hater could share the ride and the bill. You'd have fun sharing trash talk at the same time. See which one can sink lowest. Then report back and let us know. I'm sure we're all interested in the answer.
Duhffman, you're getting tiresome again. Why don't you talk about the weather for a while.
Posted by: joanie hussein for obama | May 08, 2008 at 09:02 PM
If you can't explain it Putz, which we figured, then I guess you're the Dizzy Dean of Blatherwatch
Posted by: J.Hova | May 08, 2008 at 09:08 PM
joanie
you really shouldn't take shots at T008 like that. he's capable of making you look even sillier than usual.
he's a lot quicker than you are.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 08, 2008 at 09:09 PM
there you go again with the 'we' crap.
you got a mouse in that pocket, jackass?
Posted by: PugetSound | May 08, 2008 at 09:10 PM
I was going by memory, not by Wiki.
That's probably true, J'hova. He posts everything that everybody else has already said from memory. There's not an original neuron or synapse in his entire head.
BTW, we get most of our oil from Canada and Mexico. So, how come mideast oil is raising the cost so much? Are Canada and Mexico supplying the world or North America? Seems like the middle east would be supplying mostly Eurasia.
Also, I guess profits amounting to "billions and billions" (that's Carl Sagan in case you've forgotten putsie) has nothing to do with oil prices?
BTW, hardly anybody responds to tommy's hate posts. He's sick.
Posted by: joanie hussein elitist | May 08, 2008 at 09:18 PM
Which means Putz wants cheap oil and dosen't believe in the free market anymore, hence the 'small cliques'
Posted by: J.Hova | May 08, 2008 at 09:28 PM
He really doesn't make much sense, J'hova.
BTW, he thinks he's finally got some currency on this blog so he's passing on the disrespect. Sort of like a gang initiation. Puerile, I know. But, that's our putsie.
You already make a hundred times more sense than he does.
Posted by: joanie hussein elitist for obama | May 08, 2008 at 10:04 PM
I gave him 3 chances to explain it all. I think it's funny when a cheap ass who wraps themselves up in letting the free market decide has finally had enough when other countries do the same thing. hahah
Posted by: J.Hova I love Citgo | May 08, 2008 at 10:17 PM
J Hova
Gee, I didn't realize you had addressed anything to me. Let me break it down, big fellow.
Perhaps the price of Oil should be at $30 or $90 a barrel. But we don't really know that because of a thing called OPEC which interferes with the free market by rationing output. There are other factors but when you start off with rationing output you already impact prices artificially upward. The more that we interfere with the free market the more skewed the prices. Adam Smith, Milton Freidman, would be a couple people you should acquaint yourself with.
In regards to Joanie and this 'currency' I've sent her off to skedaddle many a time off this blog when the Randi Talking Points have failed her. All she can do now is a 'rant an go' pattern usually at 2 am. No heft or substance to it. Kind of sad if you had seen her a few years ago before she lost a step. (I figure it's the booze)
Joanie's stuff now is no more than the the Blog version of graffiti. Some may call it 'art' but when you come down to it all you have is someone scribbling half formed ideas with a can of spray paint. So rant on Joanie you just prove our point.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 09, 2008 at 06:37 AM
I love it when putsie gets defensive.
Keep on explaining yourself, putsie. At some point you might get interesting.
Posted by: joanie hussein elitist for obama | May 09, 2008 at 07:45 AM
I could not agree with Duffman more. This is the most fun I have had regarding politics in many many years. The holier-than-thou Dems are wetting their beds because Rush is using their tactics (how do you think the R's got stuck with McCain?). Priceless.
And someone tell me how a man can broadcast his plan over the airwaves day after day and the author of this post refers to it as "stealth". Priceless.
Rush is a genious. Chances are much of the $300 million he makes comes out of the cry baby D's pockets via products he endorses. Priceless.
Posted by: jamrev | May 09, 2008 at 09:10 AM
Oops. I meant Chucks and abob not Duffman.
Posted by: jamrev | May 09, 2008 at 09:18 AM