Rush Limbaugh is Becoming Irrelevant

Image from Salon

It's been a very long trip from fringe to mainstream back to fringe. And I'm not confident enough to say that the age of the Glenn Becks and Rush Limbaughs is entirely over. Goodness knows, today's crop of GOP presidential candidates is squarely in formerly fringe territory, politically. Limbaugh and Co. did their job of driving the right to the very cliff. But it would seem that Limbaugh himself is going over the edge, and like Wile E. Coyote, he's kind of suspended in midair, maybe not yet realizing that he needs to throw up a "Yipes!" sign, and start grabbing for branches to break his fall.

I bought The Way Things Ought to Be and See? I Told You So, Limbaugh's first two big books for my grandmother, who was a fan, way back in the early 90s. I was a viewer of Limbaugh's ill-fated TV show, though never (ever) a fan. I still marvel that he was able to muster such an audience, because over the last 20+ years, I have listened periodically. He has literally never won me over to his side on any argument. Not ever. I've always been able to spot his manipulation tricks, his spin on a subject, his steering of his audience, the red meat nuggets he's lobbing, and mostly the lies he's telling. My B.S. detectors (honed by my skepticism toward religion, and other factors, including my coming to terms with being gay in a world that was not okay with it) are tripped by Limbaugh every single time, and very, very quickly. He might as well be a Jehovah's Witness or Mormon elder at my door on an early weekend morning: nothing he says sounds convincing, and I'm irritated by his effort.

So, I think I have a more honest appraisal of Limbaugh (and his ilk, many others I've also more than just sampled) than do conservative critics of the left. I'd wager that most people who make the false equivalence of MSNBC to FOX "News," for example, have watched very, very little MSNBC. People who believe there is such a thing as a "far left" in this country would have a very difficult time finding an analogue to Limbaugh on the left. Or pointing factually to the areas where such an analogue has dragged mainstream liberal Democrats to the fringe. Or finding a liberal version of the Tea Party with any real influence on politicians.

This is where Rush has done his job well. He's drummed into his audience (and it's seeped into "conventional wisdom") that there is a lockstep liberal media, that President Obama is a radical leftist, that conservative Republican white Christian males are under attack. That absolutely everything contrary to fringe conservative thought is anti-American, anti-Christian and a sinister conspiracy. Everything is an outrage, everything is orchestrated, and somehow liberals (or gays, naturally) are a united front with hidden diabolical motives. Because of Rush and his compatriots, conservatives will declare with conviction that President Obama hates America, and that destroying it is his number one priority. They'll declare that gay people do not seek equality, don't really want to get married, they want to destroy the family, destroy America, destroy Christianity.

I've long thought that permanent rage can't last forever. It's got to burn out. Or at least evolve. I've truly never understood why Rush managed to have such a stranglehold on his audience, given his four marriages, drug scandals, odd forays into island countries with Viagra, and other unsavory behavior. Like Sean Hannity, Limbaugh has no particular foundation in political science, no background education, he's just a guy on the radio. How "Rush is right!" became such a thing, and stayed a thing for so long is as baffling to me as the fact that Dr. Phil is a thing. Why? But Rush's shtick seems to finally be bringing about his undoing. [Story continues below, after my favorite anti-Rush video]



In today's age of social media and instant memes, when you say something egregious, it can zing around the world in a few minutes. So, after Limbaugh decided to go after feminist activist Sandra Fluke (with, let me point out, a rant that wasn't just appallingly sexist, but devoid of any grounding in reality whatsoever), he blew out some load-bearing supports below his career (not intended to be a fat joke, but hey, there you go). An advertiser boycott was launched. And it has been sustained. Rush has been shedding advertisers ever since, and finally, he's also shedding his biggest radio stations.

Unfortunately, it's had the effect of damaging the already hanging-by-its-fingernails liberal side of talk radio, given the same advertiser base. Which is the potential downside of a lot of boycotts, unintended consequences. While that hurts, I can't help but have a measure of glee at the slow plunge of Wile E. Limbaugh off the cliff. And I'll be happy to wait, neck craned and ear cupped for the soft "whump!" and cloud of dust when he finally hits bottom.

[Excerpt]

Rush Limbaugh is cooked: The stunning fall of the right’s angriest bloviator

The bad news just keeps coming for conservative talker Rush Limbaugh. Which bulletin was worse, though? The news in April that he was being dropped by WIBC in Indianapolis, a booming talk powerhouse that played home to Limbaugh’s radio show for more than two decades, or the news this week that the talker’s new address on the Indianapolis dial is going to be WNDE, a ratings doormat AM sports station that has so few listeners it trails the commercial-free classical music outlet in town? . . .

Read more at: Salon

Lisa Murkowski Defeats Joe Miller in Alaska Senate Race

Image from source, Huffington Post

So is a Nelson Muntz "Ha ha!" moment or a Lisa Simpson "Meh?"  More meh, I guess, since the party that would win the Alaska Senate seat was never in dispute. What was unusual was that Lisa Murkowski lost her Republican primary, and still managed to win on a write-in vote. That almost never happens. But the ha ha comes in when you consider that Joe Miller was almost as big a nut as Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell. All Sarah Palin endorsements, and all losers. Okay, so that's a BIG ha ha moment.

[Excerpt]

Lisa Murkowski Defeats Joe Miller In 2010 Alaska Senate Race



History, the GOP, the tea party, Sarah Palin and her own mouthful of a name worked against her. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski conquered them all Wednesday, becoming the first Senate candidate in more than 50 years to win a write-in campaign. . .
 
Read more at: Huffington Post

The Young Turks: Why the Right-wingers Hate President Obama

Cenk Uygur is probably one of those people that right-wingers deem extreme left.  Truly, I don't know who qualifies for that label in reality. I just know I'm on the same page with Cenk 95% of the time, and don't consider myself extreme.

Shocking Poll of GOP Beliefs; More Shocking Response

Image from Memewatch

OK, "shocking" might be a little strong. It is actually not so surprising given the prevalence of FOX "News" and right-wing talk radio. What it shows is that the extreme right-wing is now firmly entrenched in the conservative mainstream. What remains to be seen is whether or not what was the fringe is able to drag centrists and independents to the extreme edge with them.

[Excerpt]

Poll: What Republicans believe

A new Research 2000 poll of more than 2,000 Republicans, conducted for the liberal blog Daily Kos, has some eyebrow-raising findings:
-- 63% of them believe President Obama is a socialist
-- 53% believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Obama is
-- 39% believe he should be impeached
-- 36% believe he wasn't born in the United States
-- 31% believe the president hates white people-- 24% believe the president wants the terrorists to win
-- 23% believe their state should secede from the union

Source: MSNBC

That last one is to me, proof positive that the "America first" mantra of the right is pure hokum. How can you say you're a patriotic American if you think your state should secede from the union? It's actually worse than it looks on the surface, when you factor in all of the "unsure" votes in the poll. Hmmm, should my state secede? I just don't know!!!

Go a little deeper into the far-right's favorite internet outpost, FreeRepublic.com, and the picture gets even weirder. They're almost uniformly on board with this poll, by my read. There is very little there that tries to belie any of it. And yet they'll complain that this poll was conducted with the Daily Kos (left-wing blog) name attached. Which is it, folks? The poll is bogus because it is lefty-inspired, or it's totally accurate? Based on the comments excerpted below, I'm going with the latter.

[Excerpts]

"The numbers seem a little low, but I’m confident they will all increase as 2010 moves along."

"'63% of them believe President Obama is a socialist' No way are you going to convince me that 37% of Republicans are that stupid!"

"Personally, I don’t think he is a Socialist. I think he is a Fascist."

"63% of them believe President Obama is a socialist: He is.
53% believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Obama is: She is.
39% believe he should be impeached: He should be.
36% believe he wasn't born in the United States: We don't know where he was born, because he won't tell us for sure.
31% believe the president hates white people: He certainly doesn't like them very much.
24% believe the president wants the terrorists to win: He wouldn't lose any sleep if they brought us down a notch or two. Nothing he's not trying to do himself.
23% believe their state should secede from the union: Any state interested in freedom would -- tomorrow.
63% of them believe President Obama is a socialist: He is."

Read more of this stunning brilliance at: FreeRepublic.com

What the Hell is the Far Left Wing?

So I'm watching Meet the Press and FOX "News" Sunday on the DVR today, and I've heard that President Obama should "move to the middle" or "move to the right" in order to more effectively govern. It's counter-intuitive, since doing this is what his own party thinks he's already done too much of. Despite the ridiculous right-wing image of socialist/Marxist/Communist, the President has made countless gestures to "reach across the aisle" in the health care program, in fiscal policy and elsewhere. The President's descending approval ratings have as much to do with the left's disappointment in his timidity as they do with the right's over the top attacks.

So, I'm digesting this really annoying "conventional wisdom" talking point, and then I hear another one. Senator Evan Bayh--in trying to discount the move-to-the-middle point--said that "far left blogs" were upset with concessions already made to the right. Huh? Who is he talking about there? The biggest left-wing blogs I can think of are Daily Kos, Huffington Post, FireDog Lake, and Democratic Underground. I wouldn't classify any of those as "far left." I'd be willing to bet that Bayh (and every FReeper) would call this blog far left, even though I am a former Republican with a few conservative opinions.

Do some far leftist readers comment at blogs like these (and mine)? Probably. Is there occasionally a post that would be out of the mainstream, even for a solid Democrat? Probably. But by and large, all of those blogs represent merely the left, not the far left. None of them is as staunchly extremist as say FreeRepublic.com, the far right internet outpost. The weird part is, with the mainstreaming of people like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck--extremist far right-wingers by any definition--anything left-of-center is now seen as "far left." It isn't. And I didn't like seeing a prominent Democrat furthering that misperception.

Funny or Sad? "No Rules for Radicals"

If you can make it all the way through this video, you have a much stronger stomach than I do. Have the Glenn Becks and Rush Limbaughs of the world convinced right-wingers that the Democrats are radicals? Because I don't know how they would have come up with that conclusion on their own.

They seem to think that the approval ratings for President Obama and the Democrats are down because America has rejected their "radicalism." But they really don't get it. The right has been firmly in the "against" column since before Obama was even sworn in. The left by contrast is not in a snit because of any radical moves. They're upset because the Democrats haven't been radical enough. The Democrats have tacked right at nearly every turn in a misguided attempt to gain some bipartisan votes (hint: they're not coming). Everyone is saying that Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid need to move to the center. Wrong move. The right will still say "no," but then so will the left. And still, swill like that contained in this video is churned out, with the bizarre notion that the Democrats are "far left." Far from it.

Glenn Beck: A Clown Who Wants to Make Money

Image from source, Raw Story

The headline isn't very surprising from a liberal blogger like myself, but it is sort of strange to come from the man himself. The problem with this honest self assessment, is that the clown in question is riling up a potentially dangerous crowd, that is hanging on his every word.

It's becoming increasingly obvious that the former fringe of the Republican Party is now front-and-center. People like Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity used to represent a very far-right segment of the political spectrum. These days, they're the standard bearers. And the followers of people like this used to be pandered to by Republicans to ensure their votes. Now, they are setting the agenda. It's a bizarre metamorphosis, and it just keeps getting worse. I wonder if Glenn Beck feels any responsibility for pushing an already nutty crowd ever closer to the edge?

[Excerpt]

Glenn Beck's soliloquy: 'I am a clown' who 'wants to make money'

There's nothing worse than a clown looking for pity instead of laughs.

Last night, Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck delivered the following soliloquy, "You know, I'd really like to share with you a personal story from today, but I can't, because it puts my family in danger. Do you think I want to get on the air every night and tell you this stuff? Do you know who I am? The media will say 'aw, he's just a clown.' Well you know what, I am a clown. I am a guy who just... I just want to have laughs and fun, I'm a capitalist, I want to make money, all that stuff. I want to live my life with my family. . .

Read more (with video) at: Raw Story

Frum Continues to Hit Limbaugh, This Time in Newsweek

Image from source, Yahoo!News

Conservatives and the Republican Party have been hijacked by the far-right wing, as evidenced by the high profile of personalities like Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and most especially, Rush Limbaugh. Some time during the Clinton Administration, these types of fringe voices began getting more mainstream coverage, and an 24/7 outlet in already-established talk radio, and the birth of FOX "News."

Nowdays, it would be hard to find a "far-right" personality that is not regularly portrayed in the mainstream as a legitimate conservative/Republican voice. The lunatics are running the asylum. And the more level-headed (which isn't saying much in comparison) conservatives have had enough. Conservative writer David Frum has begun to fight back, and to his credit has not knuckled under after being vilified for stepping out of line. No, he stepped up his argument, with a cover story in Newsweek that is guaranteed to turn Frum into a target.

I don't use that word lightly. I've been concerned for some time now about the rhetoric coming from the far right. They are energized and angry, but with vague and fuzzy underpinnings to their rage. "Socialism," "Marxism," "communism," "fascism." All of these words are being bandied about by conservatives, but they're used as carelessly and cluelessly as "freedom," "liberty" and "democracy" were in the past eight years. It's never good to rile a mob, but even less so to rile them with scary, ill-defined words. Mobs are already nearly mindless. This one is utterly brain dead.

[Excerpt]

NEWSWEEK Cover: Enough! A Conservative's Case Against Limbaugh

David Frum on the GOP and Impact of Rush Limbaugh: 'From a political point of view, Limbaugh is kryptonite, weakening the GOP nationally'

'We are accepting the leadership of a man with an ego-driven agenda of his own, who looms largest when his causes fare worst. . .'

Read more at: Yahoo!News

David Frum Dares to Go After Limbaugh

I once again made a poor decision as it pertains to my radio listening. On the way home, I listened to a short portion of The Mark Levin Show. You may not have heard of him, but his show has been catching on of late. If sources like Randi Rhodes and Stephanie Miller (with cohorts Jim Ward and Chris LaVoie) are to be believed--and I think they are--Levin is sort of "Sean Hannity's Brain." Which would mean he's responsible for inflicting The Manatee on us, and in return has garnered some fame of his own.

Anyway, Levin is a particularly nasty brand of talk radio host, with a horrible, whiny voice. He's Rush Limbaugh without the charm, if that makes any sense. And tonight he was blasting conservative pundit David Frum. He'd apparently been on the tirade for a while, and by the time I tuned in, Frum himself was on the phone with Levin. To say Levin was rude to Frum would be an understatement. It was at once unpleasant and fascinating.

I'm no fan of Frum's, but the short article that caused all the furor was basically trying to separate mainstream conservatism from the radical, right-wing brand that Rush personifies. Unfortunately for Frum, it's the radicals that rule the roost right now. You're with Rush, or you're against him. So that leaves ordinary conservatives without a party.

There are a couple of ironies here. First, is that I agree with Frum. He's right, if mainstream conservatives don't extricate themselves from the radicals, the Republican Party is not going to regain its footing. "The base" is great for helping to win elections, but they can't win it alone. See, though I agree with Frum, I'm not anxious to see this all sorted out. From my perspective, the longer conservatives are out of power, the better.

With the trashing Levin gave Frum, and the beating he's taking elsewhere, it's not likely his message is going to be allowed to catch on anyway. So the second irony--one that Levin and his listeners are blind to--is that they are shutting out actual answers that might help revive their party. The elevation of people like Limbaugh (and Levin) to mainstream status is dooming their party, unless they manage to convert more middle-of-the-road conservatives to their radical status. Good luck with that.

[Excerpt]

LIMBAUGH AT CPAC

. . .And for the leader of the Republicans? A man who is aggressive and bombastic, cutting and sarcastic, who dismisses the concerned citizens in network news focus groups as “losers.” With his private plane and his cigars, his history of drug dependency and his personal bulk, not to mention his tangled marital history, Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence – exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we’re cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush’s every rancorous word – we’ll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time. . .

Read more at: NewMajority

Rush Limbaugh: It's Not Over Until the Fat Man Rants

CPAC, the Conservative Pathetic A-hole Collective (I think that's what it's called) is over, but the stories out of there will feed political punditry, comedy routines and this blog for some time to come.

They saved the big cheese for the last day. Rush Limbaugh. Politicians try to distance themselves from the formerly fringe, now front-and-center de facto leader of the Republican Party, only to beg forgiveness later. Right-wingers have been yukking it up, saying we liberals consider Barack Obama to be "The Messiah" (when only they use that term for him). Well, 'pubbies. Who's your messiah now?

[Excerpt]




Limbaugh at CPAC: It’s Not Over Until the Fat Man Rants.

It’s Not Over Until the Fat Man Rants.

That’s what you can conclude from Limbaugh’s virtually drug-addled, Messianic, Hallucinogenic "speech" to a Saturday CPAC audience that seemed right out of Nathaniel West’s monstrous crowd scene in "Day of the Locust."

Limbaugh was dressed in black, as if he were the Pillsbury Doughboy trying to imitate Steven Seagal. . .

Read more at: BuzzFlash

GOP's 14-Year-Old "Wunderkind" Jonathan Krohn

Just a couple of days ago, I ran a post called Today's GOP: A Cast of Cartoon Characters, where I pointed out what an assortment of oddballs currently lead the Republican Party. Sometimes these folks disown the title "Republican," and opt for "conservative," but they're pretty much interchangeable these days.

Anyway, one of the current crop I left out was 14-year-old Jonathan Krohn. He's deemed a "Wunderkind," and is treated with as much awe as are many of the others in the CPAC bunch. Now, Jon may be a nice enough kid--politics aside--but c'mon. He's 14. He's the age most of us are when we're trying to figure out the best time to sneak away and lock ourselves in the bathroom for goodness' sake. But there he is on (surprise, surprise) FOX "News," opining away.

Michael Steele Disses then Apologies to Rush Limbaugh

Image from source, Amazon.com

Back in 1993, I bought my grandmother--a died in the wool, if not logically grounded Republican--Rush Limbaugh's book, The Way Things Ought to Be. Grandma loved the guy. Me, I found him to be a curiosity. I often watched his television program, not as a fan, but for the sheer audacity of it. It was right up there with The Morton Downey Junior Show, or even The 700 Club for its loony, fringe theories and pronouncements.

Limbaugh was successful with his book, and (of course) his radio program, but his TV show tanked. Maybe it was that "TV adds 20 pounds" thing, I dunno. But the point is, Limbaugh was not a mainstream personality. His political ideas were far, far right-wing, and he was basically only taken seriously by like-minded individuals. Like my Grandma.

Since 1993, with the ascendancy of Newt Gingrich, the "Republican Revolution" of 1994, and the two term purgatory of the George W. Bush presidency, Limbaugh (and a host of other far-right ideologues) have ascended into the mainstream. I'm not convinced that his views are mainstream, as the lock-step conservatives seem to constitute a fairly constant 25% of the populace, but Limbaugh is now front-and-center the guy in charge of the Republican Party.

I liken it to a cult. Cults are typically kooky religious sects with charismatic leaders, and are derided by most religious (and non-religious) people. But when cults get big enough, and are around long enough, they become religions. And their leaders go from whack-jobs to "Reverend." Well Reverend Limbaugh and his disciples are now the public face of the Republican Party. And even the official Republicans now have to bend and kiss his ring. Or ass. Take your pick.

[Excerpt]

Limbaugh blasts Steele, the GOP


On the same night he was offering the keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference, Rush Limbaugh drew criticism from an unlikely source: Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele.

In a little-noticed interview Saturday night, Steele dismissed Limbaugh as an “entertainer” whose show is “incendiary” and “ugly.”

Read more at: Politico

And then. . .

Steele to Rush: I'm sorry

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele says he has reached out to Rush Limbaugh to tell him he meant no offense when he referred to the popular conservative radio host as an “entertainer” whose show can be “incendiary.”

“My intent was not to go after Rush – I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh,” Steele said in a telephone interview. “I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. … There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership. . .”

Read more at: Politico

Today's GOP: The Party of "No!"

Have you been paying attention to the remarks and actions of the Republican Party since the November elections? Mostly, they've insisted that they have a say in things, even though when the positions were reversed (and they were in power) they barely acknowledged the existence of the opposition party. In fact, the GOP actively squashed any input by Democrats for most of the Bush Era. They even talked about "the nuclear option (nuke-yoo-ler, if you prefer)" for eliminating the filibuster, which would have left Democrats absolutely powerless.

But the positions are reversed these days, and Democrats--particularly President Obama--have made a very public show of trying to include Republicans. Even though they don't have to. And Republicans for their part are threatening a filibuster to everything, making every move by the Senate require a super-majority. Why on earth Harry Reid doesn't threaten his own nuclear option, or at least force Senate Republicans to act on their filibuster threats, is beyond me.

One thing is clear: The GOP of today is the party of "no." While they accused past Democratic minorities as "obstructionist," they are taking that label to a Whole. 'Nother. Level. It's really not surprising, when you consider that "no" is pretty much what "conservatives" of today are all about. Consider what they are against:

- Abortion, always, no matter the circumstance.

- Entitlements for ordinary people, even if they have been paid into for years by recipients.

- Gay rights in any form, particularly marriage rights.

- Taxing or restricting religion in any way, even if they are meddling in politics.

- Sex education. So what if abstinence doesn't work?

- Regulation of anything. No restriction on companies that pollute, or on predatory lending.

- Science. Global warming, evolution, stem-cell research; name the science, they're against it.

- Restrictions on guns of any kind. Let us take our guns to church! The airport!

- Government intervention, unless it's money for big business, or meddling in our private lives.

- The Constitution, unless it pertains to guns. Warrantless wiretaps? Unreasonable search and seizure? Religion mixed into politics? It's all good (as long as a Republican is in charge).

So what are they for? Take the above list and flip it. God, guns and (no) gays. That's pretty much it, except for the "fiscal responsibility" mantra, which they completely ignored for the last eight years. Right now, the GOP is truly a party in exile. They've been whittled down to a far right extremist party.

Unfortunately, the far-right has had a spotlight shone on it for quite some time now. Ann Coulter. Rush Limbaugh. Sean Hannity. Mark Levin. These types of people, and their message used to be the "far-right fringe." They were not mainstream. But with their omnipresence on TV, radio and bookstores, the public thinks they are mainstream conservatives. And they think that the message they spout is credible. Most people don't dig below the surface to find out if what is being said is true. Hey, they're on TV, on a news channel. What they say must be true, right? Wrong.

Fortunately, many Americans have figured out that much of the far-right message is bull pucky. Reality has a way of slapping you in the face like that. So, I'm hopeful that this far-right group being painted as mainstream kind of dies away. But I actually heard Ann Coulter call Rush Limbaugh "right down the center" recently. Really, Ann? Then exactly who would she consider to be "far right?"

Sarah Palin, You Know, Starts a PAC Too, Also

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

Source: Think Progress