RUSH: The New York Times today by Jackie Calmes: "Obama Must Walk Fine Line as Congress Takes Up Agenda." Why? What in the world's Obama got to worry about? Obama's not up for reelection. No, no. Seriously, now. Why in the world is there a fine line for Obama? What? Why? He's the president of the United States and he's got an agenda, and his agenda is "long-range deficit reduction." Ha! Is that what it says here? (laughing) Long-range deficit reduction!
"Gun safety." Right, gun safety. Do you know what "gun safety" is? It's you don't have yours anymore. "Changes to immigration law." What's that? Amnesty. So you know what the "fine line" is? The fine line is having everybody not realize what Obama's agenda is. That's the fine line. Long-range deficit reduction? Don't insult us here! That's the way the thing begins: "The days ahead could be decisive ones for the main pieces of President Obama's second-term agenda: long-range deficit reduction, gun safety and changes to immigration law."
The fine line. There are two things about the fine line: First, is avoiding blame. That's the Limbaugh Theorem. Right here it is: Avoiding blame, and making sure nobody really knows what the agenda is. Obama's agenda? "Long-range deficit reduction" equals massive tax increases. That's what that means. "Gun safety" means gun control. "Changes to immigration law" means amnesty. So let me read this as it should be written by Jackie Calmes of the New York Times. Ahem.
"The days ahead could be decisive ones for the main pieces of President Obama's second-term agenda. Major tax increases, gun control, and amnesty." But no! That's not what they write. They write: "long-range deficit reduction, gun safety and changes to immigration law. ... Members of both parties say Mr. Obama faces a conundrum with his legislative approach to a deeply polarized Congress.
"In the past, when he has stayed aloof from legislative action, Republicans and others have accused him of a lack of leadership; when he has gotten involved, they have complained that they could not support any bill so closely identified with Mr. Obama without risking the contempt of conservative voters." This is all such smoke and mirrors. There really isn't much to the piece, here.
What it does is bring up a talking point that is being parroted in other Drive-By articles, and that is that the next couple of weeks are going to be extremely vital to Obama's second term and his legacy. So in other words, he'd better play his cards right if he wants to win control of the House in 2014, because he's gotta move this agenda forward without him being attached to it.
That's the key to it. The Limbaugh Theorem. He's gotta move gun control forward. He's gotta move tax increases and amnesty forward. He's gotta move all that forward without being tied to it. Nobody wants any of those things. I mean, a majority of people don't want any of those things. But that's what he's aiming for. So, once again the Limbaugh Theorem.