A Rush and a Push and the Land is Ours – The Smiths
There’s been a lot of discussion about the role of Rush Limbaugh in the modern Republican party. Obama took a lot of flak with the press for daring to point out the obvious: that Republicans these days reflect the values and interests of Limbaugh more than anything else.
Bringing him up only legitimates him! It makes you look weak! they cried. Here’s a representative example from professional I-told-you-so columnist, Kathleen Parker:
Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’ve been baited by none other than the Master Fisherman. Limbaugh tossed you a lure and you chomped.
Rules:
Never start a land war with Asia. Never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel (or who owns the patent on the microchip). Never let rabble-rousers get under your skin — especially those whose popularity in some circles compares favorably with your own and whose earnings make bailed-out bank presidents envious.
Clever, no?
There’s only one problem with that version of events: it’s total bollocks.
Bringing up Limbaugh doesn’t make Obama look weak or petty. It makes him look like a guy who is willing to tell relatively obvious truths, one that force his political adversaries into difficult (potentially irresolvable) situations.
That has become incredibly clear in the past couple weeks, as the administration has kept up the effort to paint Republicans as fundamentally beholden to Limbaugh. It’s not “partisan” to do this, and the public has keenly managed to figure that out. Speaking about how Republican DO behave has nothing at all to do with how you might WANT them to behave. Put another way: calling them the party of Limbaugh only works as long as the Republicans continue to act like Limbaugh clones.
But here’s the thing. That seems to be precisely how they want to play things. From Jindal’s wackaloon speech, to the three (count them: one, two, three) total GOP votes for the stimulus bill to preemptive threats to filibuster judicial appointments and so on…the Republicans appear to have decided to double-down on their economic plans (step 1: tax cuts for the rich! step 2: invisible hands. step 3: profit!) and their extremely conservative philosophies.
Bringing up Limbaugh is useful precisely because it calls attention to this fact. In fact, his continued significance to modern GOP politics is made clear by one simple fact. As Rahm Emanuel pointed out a few days ago: “whenever a Republican criticize him, they have to run back and apologize to him, and say they were misunderstood.”
So it was significant when Michael Steele (who mostly hasn’t taken his foot out of his mouth since he took over as the chairman of the Republican Party) struck out at Rush this weekend. Here was a market, a clear statement of intent by the establishment wing of the party. Steele went so far as to say: “So let’s put it into context here. Let’s put it into context here. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh, his whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it’s incendiary. Yes, it’s ugly.” All true, by the way. And blindingly obvious, too. Of course Limbaugh is saying this stuff for ratings. Of course it shouldn’t represent real elected Republicans. Duh.
All of that should go without saying.
But that’s what makes this so hilarious. Less than 48 hours after those comments, Steele came out begging for forgiveness and…wait for it…claiming his was misinterpreted.
The Democratic response virtually writes itself. Limbaugh is rooting for Obama and our country to fail. And every time a mainstream Republican dares to point this out, they immediately walk it back. What does that tell us about the Republican Party right now?
The point is NOT that Democrats feel upset when Rush says mean things. It’s that Republicans of every stripe don’t seem to be interested in disagreeing with him. It’s not a question of bruised feelings; it’s a question of how we’re supposed to fix our problems if the minority party doesn’t want to. And that’s a pretty easy line to sell to the public.