Appreciating Rush Limbaugh

By Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R.

Patterico’s Pontifications kicked up a bit of discussion early this month when the eponymous blogger/crimefighter wrote a post saying he hoped Rush Limbaugh would fail in his bid to become the de facto head of the conservative movement.

While I differed with Patterico on his point, I’m glad he made the post. Because having to research what Limbaugh said, and the context in which he said it, made me decide to become a regular listener.  Limbaugh is a welcome counterpoint to the spin we get from the Obama administration as relayed by a sympathetic mainstream media.

Limbaugh isn’t always accurate, a point he often makes ironically by claiming to be error-free. But he provides a valuable service by challenging the media narrative with a much different interpretation of events. And while I am a Libertarian, not a conservative, most of what El Rushbo says could have been taken from the texts of quasi-libertarian Ayn Rand.

A little background. Patterico, himself a conservative, is mainly a fan of Limbaugh’s. But he says Limbaugh chose the wrong way to frame the conservative opposition to President Obama:

I know: when he says he hopes Obama fails, he doesn’t mean he wants to see Americans suffer. He just doesn’t want liberal policies enacted because he thinks they’re bad for the country. I get it. I agree with that.

But, you know, that’s nuance.

The problem is, Americans have short attention spans and don’t always do nuance well. Just by writing the title of this post the way I did, I’ll get an angry reaction from some — even though, if you read the post, I haven’t said anything particularly negative about Limbaugh.

To see for myself if Patterico was right, I went to Limbaugh’s site, read his words and downloaded his broadcasts. And I found Limbaugh to be well-reasoned. If you like a free market, if you don’t want a vast intrusion of government into the economy, you pretty much have to hope Obama fails.

Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed?  This is affirmative action, if we do that.  We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he’s doing simply because of the color of his skin?  Sorry.  I got past the historical nature of this months ago.  He is the president of the United States, he’s my president, he’s a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn’t have to being down with the struggle, all of that’s irrelevant to me.  We’re talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids.  Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism?  Why would I want to do that?  So I can answer it, four words, “I hope he fails.”

El Rushbo has fun. He mocks Obama’s sudden tongue-tiedness, revealed when he’s without benefit of a teleprompter, in hysterically funny performances, even doing a pretend interview with TOTUS, the Teleprompter Of The United States.

But more importantly, Limbaugh has been relentlessly covering the power grabs by Obama, and the frightening demonization of companies like AIG by Obama and the Democratic leaders in Congress, for their political benefit.  Mob rule, John Adams would have called it.

And the media has not been eager to say what it is. One of the most sickening examples to me was how the media covered protests at the home of AIG executives, demanding they return the bonuses contractually given to them.

The Associated Press carried a story that uncritically covered the protests as a struggle by ordinary folks against greedy executives:

“We think $165 million could be used in a more appropriate way to keep people in their homes, create more jobs and health care,” said Emeline Bravo-Blackport, a gardener.

She marveled at AIG executive James Haas’ colonial house, which has stunning views of a golf course and the Long Island Sound. The Fairfield house is “another part of the world” from her life in nearby Bridgeport, which flirted with bankruptcy in the 1990s and still struggles with foreclosures and unemployment.”

“Lord, I wonder what it’s like to live in a house that size,” she said.

What the Associated Press didn’t tell you is that Emeline Bravo-Blackport is the local community organizer for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

On his March 25 show, Limbaugh talked with the wife of one of the AIG executives, who said her husband was so stressed at the attacks that he was taken to the hospital with heart pains. And he’s also worried about the impact on their three children that the company their father works for is being vilified.

Limbaugh said:

It is not presidential for the president of the United States to stand up and to denounce a single company like this for the express purpose of creating mob behavior and a mob mentality.  This is his life.  What do you think a community organizer does?  A community organizer, for ACORN or anybody else, goes to the downtrodden in any community and says, “You are here, and you are where you are because they have given you the shaft, they have taken what is rightfully yours, they are the people we need to protest and punish to get back what is rightfully yours.”  He’s just taking it now beyond the stages of Chicago to the stages of America.  That’s who Barack Obama is.  He is behaving as any community organizer does, who is an acolyte of Saul Alinsky, whose objective is chaos and the destruction of American capitalism, or capitalism anywhere.  So you can sit there and act outraged at the media but the media are just slaves to Obama, and they’re going to follow his lead.  So your anger here needs to be taken to the top.  Eva, I’m glad you called.  Thanks very much.  I appreciate it, and I really feel bad for you.

Strong stuff indeed, and I don’t necessarily buy all of it. Never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence. But I’m sure glad Patterico wrote that blog post. It prompted me to find out just what Limbaugh is actually saying, as opposed to what his critics say. Now my daily routine includes downloading Limbaugh broadcasts, so I can listen to them on my way home.

I don’t take Limbaugh’s word as The Truth. The point leftists miss is that Limbaugh doesn’t expect you to. He expects you to listen and think critically, and read on your own.  Compared to the groupthink that pervades the MSM, Limbaugh’s approach is much more open-minded, one might almost say, liberal.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Obligatory disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are those of the author, Bradley J. Fikes, and do not necessarily reflect the views of his employer, the North County Times.

9 Responses to “Appreciating Rush Limbaugh”

  1. serr8d says:

    I’m glad someone from Patrick Frey’s camp decided to review The Four Words with some independence of thought. Of course Rush Limbaugh knew he was creating a firestorm; of course he knew that by saying Obama’s policies should fail his words would be contextually deprived and used against him (and against Republicans in general, since Rham Emanuel decided that Rush was the best target for the White House to pursue; a masterful stroke right out of the Alinsky narrative).

    Losing the Congress and the White House was a natural event I think; Republicans simply ran out of pendulum: this swing Left was due, just as a return swing Right will happen, unless our country capsizes during this economic ‘perfect storm’.

    Having listened to Rush for 20+ years, his remarks brought a grin to my otherwise stone face. Rush is not a politician; he is as forceful in his convictions as Thomas Paine was, and nearly as effective. The Left loathes him. Moderate Republicans, such as Patterico, wince and begrudge his tactics, then spend an inordinate amount of time apologizing and glancing around for the quick exits. I won’t do that, sorry. What he said needed to be said, and needs to happen: Obama’s policies need to fail or this ‘perfect storm’ will be the end of the USS Constitution as we knew her.

  2. Hi serr8d,
    From the beginning of this controversy, I have maintained that Limbaugh said nothing outrageous, in fact, it was courageous. (And I wrote so on PP at the time). I was very impressed with Limbaugh’s explanation.

    Today, Limbaugh said his opposition helped stiffen the spine of Republicans to stand up to Obama and the Dems. I think that’s absolutely true. I very much admire Limbaugh for tackling the demagoguery against AIG — fueled by an administration and Dem leadership that knew those bonuses were there, who even enacted a protection into law.

    It’s okay now to criticize The Messiah, and Limbaugh, by his willingness to say what needed to be said, helped make it possible.

  3. […] the trees wait to be taken added an interesting post today on Appreciating Rush LimbaughHere’s a small reading…president of the United States to stand up and to denounce a single company like this for the express purpose of creating mob behavior and a… […]

  4. BJF,

    I always thought the dust up was a big to do about a whole lot of nothing.

    The left is terrified of Limbaugh and makes ridiculous claims about Rush’s power over his listeners. That dust up was a case of the left creating and carrying the narrative that we non-leftists willingly took up and kept carrying. The left did the same thing with W’s intelligence and Palin’s too.

    Rush is fun to listen to every now and then. Right now I’m listening to Fred Thompson’s radio show.

  5. Dana says:

    Good post, BJF. As always, if Rush weren’t a threat at some level, the MSM would ignore him. But they know as well as we do that Rush is fearless, will tread where those depending on voters, won’t, and isn’t at all afraid to offend. Whether the provocateur or not, he’s not afraid to be uncompromising. You gotta respect that.

  6. Anon says:

    The best part is that the Obama Administration handed Rush Limbaugh and conservatives a ratings bonanza:

    http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2009/03/rush-limbaugh-talk-radio-experience.html

    Not everyone who listens will be persuaded but some will, and others will be more willing to question the Administration/MSM talking points.

  7. LYT says:

    Y’all are aware that the left is actually trying to make Rush more prominent, right?

    It’s like when certain voice on the right worked to make it seem like Michael Moore was the face of the left. As much as I am entertained by Moore, that notion is silly, but to the extent that it worked, it turned off some regular folks who aren’t real keen on sweaty fat dudes being snarky. Bowling for Columbine won an Oscar…but Bush beat Kerry.

    We on the left are quite happy, and not bothered in the least, that Rush is a dominant voice right now. We’re spreading that notion as best we can! He appeals to the true believers — and those like Bradley who aren’t partisan Republicans but dislike Obama — but isn’t as user-friendly in the middle. And it’s hilarious to see so many politicians try to look “independent” by disagreeing with him, then falling all over themselves to apologize when he calls them on it.

    (by contrast, John Kerry pretended he hadn’t seen Fahrenheit 9/11 and couldn’t comment when asked, even though it was a matter of record that he had).

    As for me, I’ve never liked Rush…but I do respect his ability to remain relevant for about two decades now, even as more telegenic folks have tried to usurp his throne.

  8. The attempt to make Limbaugh the face of the party is a mistake, I think. If you ever listened to him, he makes a lot of sense between outrageous humor and bluster. Most of his listeners are “Wal Mart Republicans” and those are people we need.

    I do think the GOP needs some new and smart people. Gingrich is not one. Maybe Cantor and Paul Ryan although he blew it a bit when he voted for the 90% tax bill. I look for Shadegg to replace McCain one day. Arizona has had its fling with lefties with Napolitano and I think she left town one jump ahead of trouble. The Republicans did quite well in Arizona in 2008 in spite of some negative stuff by people like David Frum.

    That’s why I am planning to move there. I’ve lived in California for 53 years and it breaks my heart to see what has happened. In 1962, Pat Brown a traditional Democrat, beat Nixon and went on to build infrastructure and the university system. The modern Democrats have wrecked the state and will soon drive away the rest of the middle income tax payers. The rich left will stay as their money is elsewhere. They will live in their gated communities until the outside is unlivable. Then they will jet away to Switzerland, leaving behind the dregs they elected, like Villaraigosa.

  9. Anon says:

    Mike,

    I sympathize because I’d hate to leave my State, but I agree California faces some difficult times.