Late late week, President Barack Obama told Republican Congressmen that they would have to “ignore Rush Limbaugh” if they wanted to get things done in the coming four years. Limbaugh’s approach to politics is, Obama argued, too polarizing; Republicans will need to ignore Limbaugh and similar individuals and work with Obama instead.

Although certainly no fan of Limbaugh – the man is extremely polarizing, he doesn’t understand American conservatism on an intellectual basis (it’s all intuitive for him) – Obama’s words signal a change in his approach to politics: he talked the bipartisan talk when running for president, now that he has been inaugurated, however, he’s trying to isolate ideological conservatives and strong-arm Republicans into cooperation.

Limbaugh responded to Obama’s words, telling National Review’s Byron York: ’There are two things going on here. One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me.’

He continued:

[H]ere is a combo quote from the meeting:

“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective.  Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts.  It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward.  It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing “eternal” power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.’

There’s a lot of truth to Limbaugh’s words. Obama et al. want to isolate ‘conservative’ leaders so they can get Republican politicians to play along with plans these conservative opinion leaders oppose. Obama and others believe these plans to be in the long term interest of the United States, but they also believe passing them to be in the interest of themselves and their party. Every single politician in the world cares about one thing first and foremost; his own career. Everything else comes second.

Marginalizing Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc. is a strategy for Obama to accomplish his goals and to guarantee reelection. Reelection will be made easy if he doesn’t have to deal with a strong and passionate opposition; he will just explain to Americans for years from now that Republicans and Democrats supported what he did, so why vote for someone else?

On the other hand, there is Limbaugh for whom bad attention means attention nonetheless. He too doesn’t care as much about the fate of the country as he cares about his own career. He opposes  Obama’s plans simply because a Democrat proposed them, not necessarily because they hurt (weaken) the country.

Ironically, Obama is right when he says that Republicans should stop listening to Limbaugh. It’s just that they should stop listening to him for a different reason. They should go back to ideological and reasonable conservatism. Limbaugh’s conservatism is a collection of fancy slogans and nothing more. It’s not meant to govern the country, nor to function as a sound foundation for ‘loyal opposition.’

Obama is wrong, however, when it comes to what kind of opposition Republicans should advocate; they should work with Obama only when and if Obama is willing to let conservative principles influence his policies, but they should not work with Obama just so they can call themselves ‘bipartisan.’ Bipartisanship is a means, not a goal. There will be many times when Republicans have to oppose Obama’s plans, and they will have to do so passionately and clearly. But they should do so because those plans will be counterproductive or useless, not because it’s Obama who proposes them.

If Republicans follow through on the above they will make a comeback in 2010. If not, they will be marginalized.