First and foremost, were it not for Rush Limbaugh, there would have been no Republican Majority elected in 1994. There would have been no balanced budget in 1995 and 1996. There would have been no welfare reform. There would be no Fox News. Things would be very different now; I’m not sure if different is a good or a bad thing.
Rush revolutionized how conservatives communicate. He created a figurehead in media that could spread the right’s good message of freedom, revolutionized talk radio, and opened up conservatives to breaking into the media aspect of politics, over which Democrats usually have such fierce control. Because of Rush, the conservatives have someone to say everything they can’t and take the hit.
Now we’ve started to hit him, and it’s not cool.
Liberal GOP Leader Michael Steele recently said some of Rush’s comments about wanting the President to fail were “incindiary and ugly,” calling him simply an “entertainer.” Alec Baldwin is an entertainer. Sean Penn is an entertainer. Al Franken is an entertainer. Rush is rather different than most of them, primarily because a lot of people give a damn about what he has to say.
Conservatives Republicans are now joining Steele in their disapproval of the man with the Golden Mic. They will often say he is filled with hate, that he is a drug addict and a racist. Silly things. They are buying into the BS that, as Rush would say, the drive-bys are feeding them.
When people claim that we don’t need El Rushbo to be a “de facto” leader of the Republican Party, I get confused. He is NOT even close to the leader. Remember his hesitation to support John McCain (but operation chaos was a pretty sweet deal)? Rush is a figurehead, not a leader, of CONSERVATIVES, thus comparing Rush to today’s Republicans is like comparing JFK to today’s Democrats. The similarities are purely arbitrary.
I have been known to say “I don’t have to eat dogshit to know it tastes bad,” so my stating the obvious fact that the Republican’s that hate Rush obviously don’t listen to him is purely hypocritical. But it’s true. As a regular listener for goin on 6 years, I have never heard the man from EIB say anything “too” over the top, whatever that means.
I want Barack Obama to fail.
I think Donovan McNabb is only a mediocre QB but the NFL and the media want him to be so much more, primarily for his race.
Black voters ARE only 12% of the population. Pandering because of race is irrational.
When America fails, Democrats secretly rejoice, because that means they can add more government programs (SEE OBAMA AND UHC)
Moderate IS simply a made up word to account for liberal Republicans
I’m not saying that the GOP needs to rally around Rush as their leader. The GOP is supposed to be anti-establishment. But they don’t need to abandon Rush as if he’s the Plague.
Remember the last time the GOP dropped an important leader for PR purposes?
Tags: GOP, Michael Steele, rush limbaugh
March 26, 2009 at 11:17 am |
Great article. I don’t like Rush but at one time he was all there was a long time ago. Ic hose to listen to Christian broadcast about what was going on instead. Now I feel that almost all the conservative talk show hosts are narcassit beasts and I can only take doses of them. I need to listen more but why can’t they quit screaming? You’re right (of course). Rush did lead the way and I will try and listen more to him. I’m from Maryland and Michelle Steele really is more of a liberal Rublican than you see him as. Nice guy but liberal policies. Great and thoughtful article.
April 6, 2009 at 8:58 pm |
Nice to see someone take up the defense of Rush. I have argued that he is not the leader of the Republican party defacto or otherwise. He is a strong voice for conservatism and it is no wonder that there are Republicans that hate him. They are the same repulicans that most conservatives have labled as RINO’s. Good riddance. We need a strong conservative voice and until our representatives take up the mantle Rush will do just fine.