Taking the Klavan Challenge, Part II: "But What About ME, Politico? What About MEEEEEEEE?"

[Pamela Troy]

So on April 1st, the second day of my taking the Klavan Challenge, I emerged with not so much a single quote from Limbaugh as a group of quotes. They logically cancel each other out but still, if you just kind of half listen without remembering what Rush said just a few minutes before, they do maintain the rough integrity of Rush’s premise – which is “Democrats BAD! Republicans GOOD! !”

The subject is the current, very close, NY House race between Democrat Scott Murphy and Republican Jim Tedisco, which Rush describes as “a slam-dunk loss for the Democrats and Obama":

This Democrat candidate Scott Murphy ran fliers, he emailed flyers that had pictures, of me, pictures of Sarah Palin, pictures of George W.Bush. The Democrat candidate in this race ran against me.

(Forget the pictures of Palin and the last president. For most of the next few hundred word, Rush certainly does.)

… They thought it was a slamdunk puttin’ me in all the campaign literature. They believed that putting me out there would rally the Democrat base cause there’s such hatred of me and the Democrat base would be so eager to show up and vote that they would need to be restrained. It turns out that the turnout in this race was average if a little bit below.

Okay, let’s pause for a moment and consider what Rush is saying here. The Democrats, Rush claims, have not just lost in the election between Tedisco and Murphy. It’s been a slamdunk loss because, you see, the Democrats thought it would be a slamdunk win.

And why did they think this? Because they put Rush Limbaugh in their campaign literature! And assuming that’s true, those same “Democrat” strategists are now flabbergasted because the turnout was just “average if a little bit low.” That, you see, is how it’s been a slamdunk loss for them.

Makes sense, doesn’t it? Well? Doesn’t it? Of course it does. It just stands to reason.

…And the Democrats are ahead by 59 votes,

Whaaaa? I thought…but you said…

they should have won this in a slamdunk, and they did not and they may very well lose it!

Okaaaaay. I suppose maybe, assuming what Rush said earlier about Democratic confidence in a win is true, and assuming that the Democrats actually started out with a significant lead, that might be reasonably argued…

No time to think! Rush is moving forward on the subject of just how wrong, how corrupted by liberalism is the mainstream press, specifically the website Politico.com:

Now here is the Politico:

“There’s no winner yet in the upstate New York special election, and it might be mid-April before the race is settled. But a few things are clearer after Tuesday’s contest, none of it welcome news to the Republican Party.

The first election to take place during the Obama administration was a push, with neither side winning big or losing big. But that in itself ranks as a defeat of sorts for the GOP, which invested heavily in the…”

But here Limbaugh breaks off because he is shocked! Absolutely shocked!

So did the Democrats! How in the world…you people at Politico ran all of the stories on how I was the Great Satan! I was the magic elixre for the Democrats. Put my name out there, put it on a billboard, put it in emails, and you’re gonna win in a landslide because I am so hated, I am the leader of the Republican party. You people at Politico are dishonest and you oughta be ashamed of yourself….

So, apparently, the way Rush Limbaugh knows that the Democrats were betting everything on invoking Himself in this race is that Politico (which, the listener must assume is the official house organ of Democratic strategists) was saying so, calling Rush the Great Satan, the magic elixre, etc, urging the Democrats to put him on billboards, etc….

And now that it’s not the “slamdunk” win they, Politico, predicted, now that the strategy they pushed invoking Rush Limbaugh, the strategy they swore would result in a landslide for the Democrats, didn’t result in a landslide at all -- they’re not mentioning Rush!

Can you believe it? Politico is acting as if they’d never pushed Rush Limbaugh as the key to the Democrats winning!

Wow. I can see why Rush would be kind of angry about this. Especially given that he’d behaved so modestly during the special election:

I didn’t even go up there and campaign! I didn’t mention this race, Friday or Monday. I purposely stayed out of it. I didn’t mention it Tuesday. I coulda hyped it. I coulda swallowed the bait. I could have tried to make this about me! But that’s not my ego.

Of course it’s not, Rush. You’re just not like that!

I’ll tell you what’s really sad, to me, about this? … this outcome shows me Tedisco could have won this big-time. He did have a double-digit lead. And what pared down the double-digit lead was all the Democrats spending. They say the Republicans were heavily invested in this… But that’s the spin, the drive-bys are going to spin for the Democrats.

Run that by me again? The Republicans began with a double-digit lead, it dribbled away to the point where they are now 59 votes behind the Democrats –

and it’s a slamdunk loss for the Democrats?

The illogic of all this practically defies summary. As near as I can figure out, Rush is complaining because he feels he’s been unfairly denied credit by Politico for dwindling the Republicans’ two-digit lead to the point where they’re now behind the Democrats by 59 votes –something he defines as a “slam dunk loss” for the Democrats.

I searched in vain through Politico.com’s coverage of the Tedisco/Murphy election for any mention of Limbaugh whatsoever. He just doesn’t come up. Politico.com covered the results of the NY special election as if they’d never pushed invoking Rush as a decisive factor because, in fact, they never pushed invoking Rush as a decisive factor.

So his completely senseless complaint is based on something that's completely untrue.

Which brings us to the question:

Why did Rush Say they had? Why make an issue of an affront that never took place?

Well, it’s possible that Rush actually believes he’s been insulted by Politico. He may be offended by the fact that Politico didn't bother to mention at length Rush's presence in the flyers, and so he has "exaggerated" it to the story he told on April Fools Day. On some level Rush may believe his own story.

But even if he doesn't, there's a method to this madness. Sure, Rush comes across here as an incurable narcissist, but in doing so, he indirectly flatters his own audience. "No," he's telling them, "You're not wasting your time by listening to me for three hours a day! You are among those wise Americans who recognize my significance!

No need for you to read those websites or newspapers. I'll tell you what they say, and what to make of it."

[zeemike]

1. Yep I think you nailed it Pamela.

It was all about him and his magnificence.

[ColbertWatcher]

2. A kic and rec and another request to put all of these together! Well done! n/t

[nxylas]

3. 5th rec

To the greatest page with you for exposing Rush as the huge narcissist he really is. One minor correction, though: it's spelt "elixir".