Republicans: Back to the Future?

Boy, that didn't take long. Republican leadership, newly installed and hopeful of turning around the devastation wrought by the leadership of the last eight years, took about one month to take a giant step backward. The Politico tells us today: "In a little-noticed interview Saturday night, [Republican RNC Chairman Michael] Steele dismissed Limbaugh as an 'entertainer' whose show is 'incendiary' and 'ugly.' " What is Mr. Steele thinking about? Did he watch the CPAC speech by Limbaugh? Has he listened to his show? What about Rush Limbaugh is "incendiary" and "ugly?" His remarks on Saturday and every other time I have listened to him are upbeat, optimistic, insightful, and honest. He does pointedly criticize the Liberals and liberal culture, frequently with humor and irony, but most often with devastating analysis. He definitely frustrates Democrats, especially when they try to marginalize him, but I hardly think that constitutes him as "incendiary" much less "ugly," at least not in any society that pretends to a devotion to free speech. Unfortunately, I am afraid this misstep by Mr. Steele shows that he will be played by Democrats and the Liberal Media just like his predecessors. And that is because he, like them, just can't follow what the Liberals are trying to do. When he is asked about Rush Limbaugh, they are not trying to engage in a political debate about the Republican party and the ideas it represents. They are trying to trivialize and marginalize any voices which oppose them. So, they state that Rush is a wacky neanderthal right winger, and Mr. Steele thinks that he's got to distance the Party from being labeled extreme and disses Rush Limbaugh. But the correct answer is very simple: Rush Limbaugh is not the leader of the Republican party, and does not pretend to be. He is a powerful voice for conservatism, and he speaks for many, many people, and as such, Mr. Steele respects and welcomes his help in the national debates, and also in the Republican Party discussions of the issues. If the media has any specific problems with things Rush says, then Mr. Steele should direct them to voice their concerns with Rush. But as for the Republican Party, it is glad to have him. Period. That's it. That's the response. Why would the Republican Party throw a powerful media voice like Rush under the bus? Rush does not claim to be the head of the Republican Party. That is Mr. Steele's job, and if he is to be more effective than the leadership preceding him he is going to have to man-up and meet these media goons with a forthright defense of the Party. And that includes a refusal to allow the media to dictate who is and is not an "acceptable" member of the Party. via email.