Rush Limbaugh, honorary Republican Congressman
January 28, 2009 12:22 pm ET by Jamison Foser
Some observers seem to think that Barack Obama has "elevated" Rush Limbaugh to a position of leadership in the Republican Party. Nonsense. Republicans did that long ago.
It was the House Republicans who made Limbaugh an honorary member of their caucus and gave him credit for the GOP takeover of Congress in 1994.
It was the leaders of the conservative movement who embraced Limbaugh's far-right agenda, marginalizing themselves with ill-considered and unpopular - though Rush-approved - stances on nearly every significant issue that has come up over the past two decades.
It was Dick Cheney and other prominent Republicans who chose to enhance Limbaugh's stature by appearing regularly on his radio program.
Limbaugh's place at the center of the conservative movement - though not of the population at large -- is so well-established, even Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz describes him as a "mainstream conservative."
Barack Obama didn't elevate Rush Limbaugh to a position of leadership of the GOP and the conservative movement. Limbaugh has held that position for nearly two decades - and he has done so because his fellow conservative leaders share his far-right views and his rabid distaste for fact and reason. Their embrace of Limbaugh and his failed ideology has had disastrous consequences first for the nation and then for the conservative movement. Some of those conservatives may now have the good sense to be embarrassed by their association with Limbaugh, but until they actually change their policy positions and their approach to politics, he will remain an icon of their failures and excesses.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
We should copy and paste this every time a Rush apologist tries to tell us that he's "just an entertainer".
An oldy but a goody:
In the heat of the '04 presidential campaign a report came out that shook the Bush administration to it's core. The report was that huge Iraqi weapon caches had been or were being left unguarded and unknown persons (this was before the word "Insurgent" became a part of the American lexicon) were pilfering those armaments for unknown but suspicious purposes (this was before the acronym IED was as common as SUV).
I was watching, I think it was CNN and listening to Rush on the Radio. I know it's odd but I did listen to Rush regularly and this is well before I had ever even heard of Media Matters. But anyway, I'm watching TV, and Donald Rumsfeld starts a press briefing. Now, Rush cuts to the briefing and is basically simulcasting the briefing. In the briefing they bring out an EOD (explosive ordinance disposal) Master Chief. Man did he look like a deeer in the headlights. Master Chief was describing how they were securing certain Iraqi weapon sites...And that is when Rush cut from the briefing "Cut it there, that's all I need to hear folks", I will never forget those words.
Well, I still had the TV on and the Master Chief went on to describe how there were other sites within his view that they could not secure and yes those were being pilfered. But he explained he was not responsible for those and while he did contact his CO there was simply nothing he could do about it.
I wanted to jump out of my skin. Rush purposefully cut from the briefing when it was conveneint and unless you were watching the briefing live like I was, you would have thought here goes the "drive by media" again.
Now we know who Rush Limbaugh was "carrying water" for. And as I sit here writng this I am reminded of how Rush Limbaugh claims that HE, HE, HE supports the troops more than anyone else. Well folks dont you beileve it, Rush supports Rush and his house in Baco Raton. The rest of us are along for the ride. I can not type anymore, this really hurts.
The Democrats have won the war of ideas in 06 and 08, but the Right is still in control of language. If a Republican disagrees with a spending plan, it's pork. If a Republican disagrees with a major program, it's socialism or communism. All tax cuts are good, so why not have zero taxes? Add this to the "death tax" (Norquist) and the DemoCRAT party (many sources) and the GOP still sets the tone. The genius of Jay Sekulow was to turn every establishment violation into a proactive free speech issue on someone's behalf. The Left has not countered well, in spite of Pres. Obama's win.
I would argue that the Republicans have also been blatantly dishonest, and that is the dilemma for me, and probably a lot of other Liberals. Can we counter dishonesty without indulging in it ourselves? One would hope so, but in the real world, it could be a handicap.
No, that would be George Bush, who sank that one POW's chances for the Presidency. After the Republicans' defeat in November, the Republican Party has been split, segregated, and separated.
That's not to say BHO doesn't deserve any credit - he does - but it isn't all him either. The majority goes to Dubya, some goes to Obama's campaign manager (Emanuel?), some goes to Obama, and a tiny bit of it goes to Rush.