Rush Limbaugh isn't happy with Michael Steele, who insisted that Rush isn't the leader of the Republican Party, but is just an "entertainer" whose work is "incendiary" and "ugly."
Greg Sargent reports
that Limbaugh positively lambasted Steele on his radio show today, even seeming to suggest that the new RNC chairman should resign in shame: "I'm not in charge of the Republican Party, and I don't want to be. I would be embarrassed to say that I'm in charge of the Republican Party in a sad-sack state that it's in. If I were chairman of the Republican Party, given the state that it's in, I would quit."
Limbaugh also responded to criticism of his very active desire for President Obama to fail, bringing back the GOP's with-us/against-us dichotomy -- only in this case it's you're with Obama
or against him. "So send those fundraising requests out," Rush said mockingly. "Make sure you say, 'We want Obama to succeed.' So people understand your compassion."
So the question now is who better speaks for the Republican base voters and activists: The official party leadership, who say they want the president to succeed even as they don't think his policies can work -- or Rush Limbaugh, who actively wants the stimulus and other policies to fail so that the country can survive
? Five'll get you ten...