No joy in Dittoville tonight. I don’t get it.

Talk-radio fans and political junkies buzzed in anticipation about what Mr. Limbaugh might say on his national, three-hour radio show.

Instead of retaliating against Ms. Sykes, Mr. Limbaugh spent much of the show praising former Vice President Dick Cheney, who on Sunday was much kinder.

Politico caught this bit near the end of the show and assumed he was referring to Gibbs’s statement:

During his show Monday — his first since Saturday night’s dinner — Limbaugh alluded to the dinner just once, calling it “showbiz for ugly people, that’s what politics is.”

There was, however, a mysterious moment during the show’s final minutes, when Limbaugh interrupted a dialogue on fiscal policy and, in a statement seemingly directed at his prodding producer, said, “How can they be running a response, when I didn’t respond? Well, there isn’t going to be a response!”

Why doesn’t he want to respond? Sykes is small potatoes, admittedly, but it’s not Sykes who’s the problem actor here. It’s Obama, for laughing stupidly at material that obnoxious and then having his own press secretary lie to the press corps about how The One supposedly believes it’s no laughing matter. This is as golden an example as you’ll ever have of shameless leftist hypocrisy over demonizing one’s opponents, and all the more so given Obama’s crap about “changing the tone in Washington” during the campaign. And Limbaugh’s going to punt on it? Any insight into what’s going on here, Rush fans? You know his thinking better than I ever will.

Update (Ed): I didn’t ask Rush about this during our interview because, well, he was interviewing me.  Besides, if he wanted to talk about it, he had three hours in which to do it today.  My guess: it’s small potatoes, as I wrote yesterday.  Why add fuel to the fire and give Wanda Sykes credibility and a platform?  As for Obama laughing at the joke, well … res ipsa loquitur.