Rush Limbaugh and the Grandmother Test

NewsMax ^ | Oct. 14, 2003 | Jim Quinn

[nathanbedford]

In 1992 a great portion of the electorate thought Bill Clinton to be an alpha male, possessed of extraordinary gifts because he was possessed of a square jaw. They simultaneously believed George H.W. Bush to be a wimp because he had a wimpy voice. Bush in real life was a genuine war hero and a very brave man. Clinton was... well we all know what he is.

It is a common human trait to confuse the message with the messenger and so infuse the messenger with the virtue or lack of it, which they perceive to be in the message. Hence, John Wayne was believed to be courageous because of his movie characters. Trial lawyers are perceived to be wicked because of the perceived guilt of their clients, even though the attorney himself might have acquitted himself quite honorably.

On the other hand the message is often highly valued because the messenger is revered. Mao and the Cultural Revolution come to mind.

Is the Gospel of Christ less real if brought to you by Elmer Gantry? Or more valid if you hear it from Mother Theresa?

So, Rush is what he is, a great entertainer, a broadcasting phenomenon who revolutionized the medium, a brilliant satirist, and a popularizer of the conservative cause who reshaped the political landscape. But he is not a moral icon, a man of letters, a great athlete, a success in his personal life, or a role model.

To believe that the validity of the conservative message depends on his moral rectitude is about as smart as buying a Buick because Tiger Woods endorses it, or buying a three wood because he can hit it. Nor should one believe that Rush is necessarily a noble person because he articulates a conservative philosophy. Some people might do well to concede the possibility that in private Al Franken, politics aside, might be far more charming than Rush Limbaugh.

Franken has been quoted as saying that a 12 step program will require Limbaugh to be rigorously honest and this means, if he is to recover from his addiction, that he cannot maintain his political views. This betrays Franken's myopia and illustrates how a little knowledge can be dangerous. I know of nothing of Limbaugh's opinions or of his broadcasting modus operandi which suggests that Limbaugh is dishonest. Indeed, the contrary is true because he operates from the record and exposes with satire the absurdity of the liberal posture. He has operates out of conviction while on the air.

I wish Rush well and want his voice back on the radio advancing my cause but I do not believe he can get me to heaven.

[Diddley]

[21]

A well-crafted and reasoned passage. You have said it well.

Diddley

[NutCrackerBoy]

From the moment a recreational drug user puts the first straw to his nose, the first joint to his lips or the first needle in his arm he KNOWS that what he is doing is illegal.

For whatever reason, he has made a moral choice that his "normal" state is insufficient and needs to be augmented – so much so that he is willing to assume the risk of arrest and/or incarceration. And his resulting addiction should come as no surprise. He knowingly operates outside the law from the get-go. This is vastly different from Limbaugh's scenario.-Jim Quinn

Rush and most people have taken a drink or two. It is a simple fact that drinking alcohol risks addiction. Yes, marijuana use is illegal by comparison and it is a sound moral course to abide by the law. But smoking a joint or two is also something that vast numbers of people do. And they risk addiction by doing it.

We should all appreciate the nuances and know that addicts are broken people at great risk.

At the same time, appreciating the nuances does not require us to stop condemning poor moral practices OR to stop fighting intrusive government.

[marron]

Very well said.

[jammer]

Well said. I can't find one word to disagree with you about. Your last sentence is really clear, well-stated, and is my position exactly:

At the same time, appreciating the nuances does not require us to stop condemning poor moral practices OR to stop fighting intrusive government.

[jammer]

Actually, I can quibble about one word, just for the record--the use of the term "addiction" with respect to marijuana. robertpaulsen and I had a lengthy debate/discussion about that this weekend. I don't want to reopen it here. But, I do have to go on the record.

[Diddley]

[25]
I agree wholeheartedly.

Diddley

[jammer]

Yeah, why in the heck is this thing so polarized? It is possible to hold BOTH positions, but that isn't recognized much on FR. We can despise and decry drug use and STILL be skeptical of federal laws against it. Those aren't mutually exclusive. I guess that's discussion for another thread.

[Grenada]

And if you can't catch Quinn in the morning, you can normaly go the archives and catch the show after 9:00pm. He really is great. I wish Rush would use him at least once this month.

[jammer]

Exceptional post. You should post it as a vanity. It deserves a thread of its own. (But, I'm still buying that 3-wood. Hey, it can't hurt.)

[dixiechick2000]

Just getting my tagline in support of Rush on this thread.

BTTT!

[NutCrackerBoy]

Franken has been quoted as saying that a 12 step program will require Limbaugh to be rigorously honest and this means, if he is to recover from his addiction, that he cannot maintain his political views.

Just shows what a dolt he is. Those like Franken who do not understand and therefore hate conservatism are being marginalized.

[Diddley]

[28]
We can despise and decry drug use and STILL be skeptical of federal laws against it. Those aren't mutually exclusive.

Yup. Of course, there should be laws concerning selling to kids.

Diddley

[cartoonistx]

...a 12 step program will require Limbaugh to be rigorously honest and this means, if he is to recover from his addiction, that he cannot maintain his political views...

Having gone through such a program myself, I know of the spiritual nature of Dr. Bill's 12 steps. If anything, Rush will come out with a renewed philosophical foundation for his conservative positions.

[Diddley]

[31]
(One of the greatest talkers of our age is getting sober. And you ain't heard nothing yet.---L. Henry)

Great tag line.
Can you sing? :-)

[jammer]

Oh, sure. And there should be state laws against selling them to ANYONE in those states that want to. Those states that don't want the laws (I'm thinking California here), should be free to not have them.

The Founders knew that one size does not fit all, hence the 10th Amendment. Many today can't or won't see that. (or, to be fair, see it and disagree in this case)

[Diddley]

[34]
I really believe that Rush will come out stronger that ever, still hittin' the Libs hard.

Diddley

[Diddley]

[36]
Yup.

Diddley

[ravinson]

Limbaugh took a dim view of recreational drug use. He preached against the importers and the dealers and the users.

I have listened to Rush fairly often and have never heard him distinguish "recreational drug use" (whatever that is) from any other kind of illegal drug use. Rush's position has consistently been that the government can rightfully tell people what to do with their bodies even within the confines of their own home, and that illegal usage is illegal usage regardless of the drug or the cirsumstances, and illegal users should be incarcerated.

Thus, while I do not condemn Rush for his drug abuse, it is apparent that he is a first class hypocrite who has hired a high-priced lawyer, ratted on his suppliers, and checked himself into a rehab center in order to avoid taking the bitter medicine he has prescribed for others.

[Grenada]

You have been saying the same things for days. STFU or put up.