When did the stimulus debate become about Rush Limbaugh? Seriously? This is a failure on everyone's part.

Rush was just doing what he normally does, spitting venom to rile up his easily riled audience, and then suddenly people thought it was outrageous that he said some outrageous things about how he dislikes our black Democratic president. And then Obama mentioned his name, dismissively, and then suddenly Rush is demanding a meeting with the President, christ.

Obama already made his unnecessary tax-cutting concessions to the right-wing fringe, and yet here is Rush, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, opining on matters economic, because he's an expert. His op-ed calls for tax cuts to stimulate the economy, though it does note that tax cuts are a form of government spending, which is a step forward, we suppose.

Now the never-annoying liberals at MoveOn are just encouraging Rush, with another of their always-effective advertisements, and suddenly the AP has one of their wonderful analysis pieces—by the TV writer!—about how Rush Limbaugh destroyed post-partisanship and "the new politics" that Obama was supposed to usher in.

Well yes if you pay attention to Rush, who is doing what he has always done, and make his doing what he's always done news, than it will be news that Rush is doing what he's always done, which is be a dick. And then you can write your little thinkpiece on how the bugaboos of divisive partisanship just won't go away!

And guess what? We just had a wonderful campaign season where nothing Rush did or said mattered! He hated John McCain and desperately needed Hillary Clinton to stick around and it turned out that he and his audience didn't matter! Just like House Republicans don't matter! And yet there they are, on the cable news, all the time. Sigh. The old politics can't be over: they're the only kind of politics the newsmedia knows how to cover.