Posted on 03/09/2009 12:01:50 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
He once described feminism as something invented to allow ugly women access to the mainstream.
According to the media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, he once advised a black caller to his radio show, "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back."
He once made fun of the body tremors of a man struggling with a degenerative and incurable disease of the nervous system.
Yet, when Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele described Rush Limbaugh's radio program during a recent CNN interview as "ugly" and "incendiary," it was Steele who was required to tender a prompt apology.
People keep asking, in the wake of two consecutive shellackings at the voting booth, what is wrong with the GOP. They have wrung their hands and hung their heads over Steele's goofy attempts ("off the hook") to bring street cred to the party of big business and social conservatism, over the way Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal seemed to channel Howdy Doody in delivering the GOP response to President Obama's speech before a joint session of Congress.
But if you want to know what ails the elephant, you need look no further than the sight of its putative leader groveling before the throne of a radio talk-show host and declaring his "enormous respect" for this "ugly" and "incendiary" fellow.
It must be crowded at the base of the throne. Steele is only the latest GOP official (Georgia Rep. Phil Gingrey and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford preceded him) to find himself offering clarifications and apologies for making the mistake of speaking honestly about the party's bloviator in chief. It's a sign that, for all the talk about rebranding and reinventing, the party remains too reluctant and regressive to match its words with actions. And that bodes ill for both it and the nation.
You will not believe it, but I have been rooting for the GOP. As well deserved as its recent drubbings have been, the fact is, single party governance is invariably a recipe for overreaching; the Bush years proved that inarguably. So for the sake of the checks and balances that make our system work, I would like to see the party get off the mat.
But it is hard to imagine this is how the party will do it.
As many pundits and even party officials have noted, given the dramatic cultural and demographic changes under way in this country, the GOP faces a real possibility of being reduced to a regional party of limited national relevance unless it broadens its appeal beyond angry white men living primarily in the states of the old Confederacy. That being the case, why are its members kissing the ring of the angry white man who broadcasts from West Palm Beach, Fla.?
Why are they not in South L.A. talking about entrepreneurship? Or in the Ninth Ward bearing proposals to encourage marriage and strengthen families? Or in Liberty City offering ideas to stem the violence? Why are they not competing for the votes they say they want?
To judge from the eagerness with which they prostrate themselves before Limbaugh, the answer is troublingly simple: They fear losing the votes they have. They are unable to disenthrall themselves from that culturally intolerant, intellectually incoherent, perpetually outraged and willfully ignorant cohort of the American demographic they call their base, i.e., extreme social conservatives.
Through the years, the GOP has reliably been able to woo them by demonizing gays, people of color, Muslims, feminists and anyone else who did not fit their white picket fence fantasies.
But the changes afoot in our country suggest that won't work quite as well in the future as it has up until now. So it's all well and good if the party faithful feel a need to apologize.
But they're facing the wrong way.
Not so. The party which booned the economy, the party which supported and fought for a successful war (two wars) is a long ways from "over".
She was a bunny for a while in Atlanta.
Rush may not have 20 million listeners every day
I may be wrong, but I think the average is 30 million. Lately it has been almost double.
No, it wasn’t. Fox was on his meds.
Explains why health care has to be fixed?
Excuse me?!?!?
Explains why health care has to be fixed?Huh? I was just pointing out that Rush was not, in fact, "exactly right" about Fox not being on medication.
If I recall correctly, Rush even preemptively apologized if he was wrong and then restated his criticism of the Fox ad so as not to be so insulting to Fox and other Parkinson's sufferers. Naturally, that is left out by Rush's critics, but the fact is that Rush was wrong in his original statement.
Pitts is one of the most biased, racist columnists I’ve ever seen. This moron could find racism in white toilet paper.
don’t forget fox was on record as intentionally manipulating his drugs to effect a sympathetic image.
that part is left out too.
don’t forget fox was on record as intentionally manipulating his drugs to effect a sympathetic image.Where is a link to this record? I believe that these claims were debunked.
Thanks. You could be right. I thought I had read 14 to 20 million recently, but I may have missed other reports.
Fine. If the author wants to be open and honest, it was the DEMOCRATIC party instituted 'Rush is the leader of the GOP' ploy. Too bad none of the Gross Old Party can find their spine long enough to say something about it.
Calling Rush a bloviator in chief is just a cheap shot by a truly clueless person.
The next good idea Pitts has will be his first.
“You will not believe it, but I have been rooting for the GOP.
You’re right, I don’t.”
Pitts has, in this article, validly raised the issue of single party rule. Moreover, he states that single party rule failed under Bush and holds little hope that Obama can perfect single party rule.
While mostly a Liberalism impaired writer, Pitts occasionally rises to sheer excellence. His article “Tripping Through The Haagen Daz” is a case in point.
Personally, I will feel better about the future of the Republic when the voters are aware of their nation’s history, of the basics of economics, and such issues.
To depend on one party or another is a path to tyranny.
Public officials are servants. Servants steal - Lorenzo De Medici recognized that, and said that when theft went beyond 10%, steps had to be taken.
Note: He had available to him certain disincentives to theft not available to the voter.
On the other hand, we can simply vote the thieves out of office.
Pitts, for all of his being a black, Liberalism impaired writer, is aware of things like this.
Give the devil his due.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.