Dems want Rush on the air.

I don't usually listen to Rush. Talk radio isn't my thing. Those guys (the successful ones) are usually loud and abrasive when it comes to their opinions. That's just the nature of the job and doesn't really stand in the way of their views, however. IMO, Rush is as conservative as they come. Now, when he says off-the-wall things in a vulgar tone, that does not mean it's the "conservative" in him talking. I think that's a distinction that not many make. Whenever Rush says something that can vilify him, the liberals all say, "Well, that's a conservative for ya," and some conservatives say, "Well, Rush doesn't represent us." Both sides are wrong here. Rush Limbaugh is a conservative; a conservative is not Rush Limbaugh. Anyone to argue that fact is doing so simply to argue. But... there's also no need to disassociate yourself from someone you don't entirely agree with or may be unpopular. There's no basis for it. It's not like either of the two parties can be summed up by one person's views. You don't have to agree with every single thing Rush says to be a conservative. Moreover, you don't have to disagree with everything he says to be a liberal. This division is pure insanity. After Rush's speech, I watched news coverage for 16 straight hours! 16! I watched FOX, MSNBC, CNN, and HN (which I believe is a subsidiary or something of CNN). On 3 of 4 of those networks (i'll let you guess which lmao), Rush was vilified and called names and picked apart and taken out of context and said to be the "voice of the conservatives." On 1 network, he was picked apart and had his words examined, but that's as far as went. The only logical conclusion I can possibly draw here is that an extremely large part of progressive liberal democrats' philosophy is to sell a bill of goods (or sign one into law) to the public and hope they never question things for themselves. Whereas it seems to be the conservative republicans urging people to simply seek the truth; ask the hard questions and decide for yourself whether or not you agree with the direction we're heading. Rush being used by liberals as the "devil you know" is great for conservatives, in my opinion. It's a plan that will blow up in their faces. Rush is different from most conservative media or politicians in that he'll tell the bold truth - as he sees it - instead of simply calling the public to question policy. By promoting him as the "must listen" source in America, a lot of people are going to stop putting the TV on mute just to cuss at him, and they're going to start realizing that through the loud tone and the condescending remarks, he's actually telling the truth. The combination of a still-failing economy and an unrestrained Rush Limbaugh will convert many a'liberal. My prediction. :-) As far as who I would like to see represent republicans... I still have no problem with Palin. To choose someone who the other side might approve of or who all conservatives can simply agree with at all times is hugely false and will see the continued demise of the party. ... End of super long rant! :D

"OK guys lets find a truly crazy, criminal, outlandish liberal out there we can make their poster boy." Um..that's something that Rush Limbaugh and his ilk have always done. Anyway, if Rush is such a fringe element not representative of mainstream Republicans, why was he a key speaker at the CPAC? Why did the leader of the Republican party have to apologize for calling Rush an "entertainer?" Rush may not be representative of all people who identify as conservative, but the Republican leaders are all following his lead right now.

I must admit if I were a part of the Democratic leadership I'd sure be flattered thast you'd given "us" so much credit for this power struggle between Rush Limbaugh and the GOP. The only problem with the Democrats having been responsible for Rush being portrayed as the "poster boy" for the GOP is that the Democrats aren't the ones who gave Rush the most important speaking slot at the recent CPAC, the Democrats aren't the ones who are so torn between not wanting to seem to their constituents back home as going along with Limbaugh's desire that President Obama (or his policies) fail and being scared sh1tless of crossing the talk show host that if they say anything even remotely derogatory towards him they run off, usually in less than an hour, to apologize and beg his forgiveness. I know Rush doesn't represent all Republicans or even most of them but the leadership of the party, at least those who get the most airtime and those from their base on the farthest right seem more than happy to have him speak for them more often than not. Here's an article about the recent war of words between GOP Chairman Michael Steele and Limbaugh: http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2009/03/03/gop-chairman-michael-steele-and-pundit-rush-limbaugh-in-war-of-words.html Now to the end of your post; "OK guys lets find a truely crazy, criminal, outlandish liberal out there we can make their poster boy." Are there some "crazy, criminal, outlandish liberals" I could name? Sure, more than a few to be honest. There are even some who have had more influence over some in the Democratic leadership than some of us would have liked and there are some I'd like to see denounced for some of the "crazy, criminal, outlandish" things they've said and done, but I can't think of a single one who is given the type of forum or who is treated as some kind of a god in the way Rush Limbaugh is by the GOP. Annie

You're absolutely right and I was telling my wife the exact same thing the other day. That's why you only hear democrats saying Rush is the leader of the republican party. Republicans don't say it because it simply isn't true. Half his listeners are democrats who want to "spy on the enemy". They probably would have picked Ann Coulter to tell people was head of the republican party, but then they want to pretend that republicans are anti-women so that might not have worked as well. Picking the overweight, middle-aged, white man was the democrats best bet since democrats pretend to be the party that represents women and minorities while republicans are supposedly against both. We don't really have to find a poster boy for the democrats. The most extreme, pro-abortion left wing person in their party is already running the show. No, not Obama, Nanci Pelosi. She's already throwing her weight around and bullying Obama. He's proven he doesn't have the guts to stand up to her. I guess he's just lucky that he already agrees with most of her extreme left-wing agenda. We can all see how much she's done for California already.

Well, everyone is looking for someone to hate. Off the top of my head, I'd say Al Sharpton or Micheal Moore, as they are the most annoying people in my opinion, that are part of the democrat party or maintain a liberal philosophy.

How about William Ayres? A terrorist for a poster boy?