Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The GOP debacle: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh
http://bidinotto.journalspace.com/?cmd=displaycomments&dcid=468&entryid=468 ^

Posted on 11/13/2006 7:13:48 AM PST by truthfinder9

Now that Republican senatorial candidate George Allen has conceded defeat in Virginia, the U.S. Senate, like the House before it, has been delivered to the Democrats. Pundits are poking through the entrails of the exit polls in search of reasons for the GOP debacle, and many are obvious: the fact of the seemingly intractable Iraq war; the fact that, for the past decade, Republican congressmen have allowed themselves to be seduced by the Dark Side of politics, and have thus abandoned their principles for perks and pork; the fact that, even with total control of all three branches of the federal government for years, the Republicans have failed utterly to accomplish much of anything -- except to balloon the size and power of the state to proportions not seen in Karl Marx's wildest wet dreams; etc.

But did the congressional Republicans have to lose everything to the Democrats (not a single one of whose incumbents was unseated)? For instance, did they have to lose the U.S. Senate -- and therefore, vitally important control over the appointment of federal judges? The Dems now run that body by virtue of a single vote, 51-49. This means that had the GOP held onto only one seat in any of several very close senatorial races -- e.g., Virginia, Montana, Missouri -- the balance would have tipped the other way.

There is plenty of blame to go around for this sorry mess. But let me single out a previously uncited person to blame for the loss of the Senate: Rush Limbaugh.

Yes. Rush Limbaugh.

Let me explain.

By now, just about everyone knows of Limbaugh's self-indulgent, mocking tirades against actor Michael J. Fox on the issue of federally-funded embryonic stem cell research. Fox suffers from advanced Parkinson's disease, and exhibits obvious tremors and shaking that have ended his acting career. For Fox and people like him, a cure is possible only through medical research; embryonic stem cell research is one promising area that scientists are probing for a medical breakthrough. However, many conservative Republicans (including Limbaugh) took a stand of blanket opposition to all embryonic stem cell research as such, on religious grounds that the embryo is a person.
 
This viewpoint, also reflected in general conservative "right-to-life" opposition to abortion, is justifiably rejected by most Americans. For example, in South Dakota, a ballot measure this November that would have banned all abortions except to save the life of the mother went down to defeat by a comfortable 56-44 percent margin. This vote is consistent with national polls on the subject. Most Americans believe (sensibly) that we should not sacrifice actual human lives to potential human lives. For that same reason, they tend to support embryonic stem cell research.

In any case, the issue prompted Fox to hit the campaign trail on behalf of government-funded research and candidates who support it. A pivotal state in this regard was Missouri, where Democrat senatorial candidate Claire McCaskill endorsed a state ballot measure promoting such research, while GOP candidate Jim Talent did not.  The actor, shaking uncontrollably, appeared in TV ads on behalf of McCaskill and the ballot measure.

Enter Limbaugh, who draws a bigger audience than any radio talk show host in America. On his national radio show -- portions of which are also available online as video downloads from his website -- Limbaugh decided to attack not Fox's views, but his sincerity. "He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh claimed concerning Fox's tremors in TV ads. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act." Not only did Limbaugh claim that the hugely popular and tragically afflicted actor was faking his tremors, he actually stooped to lampooning and imitating Fox's uncontrollable spasms.

This caused a justifiable national uproar against Limbaugh -- and, in my humble estimation, a measurable political backlash against Republicans. The Missouri ballot measure favoring stem cell research won by a narrow margin. Even some Catholic voters supported the measure, tipping the vote toward its margin of victory:

In Missouri, anti-abortion groups, evangelical Christian clergy and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis campaigned hard against the stem cell measure, contending it would condone life-destroying embryonic research.

Debbie Forck, a Catholic from Jefferson City, Mo., was among those giving the measure a narrow victory.

"I've had several family members that have had debilitating illnesses," said Forck, 50. "It goes against my church, but to eliminate pain in my life, I thought it was worth it."

Much more significantly, however, Democrat Claire McCaskill beat Republican Jim Talent, who had publicly opposed embryonic research, by a very narrow 49-47 percent margin.

That single, razor-thin victory gave control of the U.S. Senate to the Democrats.

Would anyone care to dispute the likelihood that Talent's defeat -- and the consequent GOP loss of the Senate -- hinged on a one-percent swing of voters toward the Democrats because of Rush Limbaugh's highly publicized and grossly offensive personal attack on Michael J. Fox?

Not only was Limbaugh's mockery of a sick man disgusting, it was incredibly stupid. Rather than focus the debate on the narrower question of whether such research should be government-funded, he and other conservative Republicans chose instead to mock Fox, and to hinge their case on faith-based "right to life" premises that every poll shows that most voters reject. As columnist Ilana Mercer points out today in a scathing column:

Limbaugh needed only to remind Fox (and his own soon-to-be-dethroned party) of a thing called the Constitution. He needed to berate Fox not for his spasticity, but for using his celebrity to petition Congress for money not his. Limbaugh ought to have suggested Fox refrain from pickpocketing the taxpayer, and raise money for private research among his stinking rich pals. Instead—and in character—Limbaugh beat up on a cripple.

There is an irony here, one that I hope conveys a lesson for "conservatives."

Rush Limbaugh's influence was widely credited with inspiring the "Republican Revolution" of 1994, leading to the GOP takeover of Congress. But at that time his message -- and that of the GOP conservative candidates -- had focused on limiting government intervention into our lives.

By abandoning its core principles of individualism and limited government in the decade since, the Republicans in Congress have been fired by American voters. Likewise, by focusing stupidly on the alleged "rights" of embryos rather than the actual rights of living citizens -- and by substituting cruel personal attacks for principled arguments -- Rush Limbaugh has now helped engineer his party's crushing defeat.

My further thoughts about the philosophical collapse of the Republicans can be found here.

UPDATE -- While we're spreading around blame, we can equally blame the Libertarian Party for throwing the U.S. Senate to the Dems by siphoning off enough votes to defeat the GOP candidate in Montana. Hope you idiots enjoy the next few years under the Socialist Party.

UPDATE #2 -- One of my favorite pundits, Charles Krauthammer, carefully studies the cloud formations after the election and finds several silver linings. I feel better. Well, for the moment....



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dontconfusemewfacts; gop; ibelonginblogs; imawhiner; libertarianblamegame; limbaugh; michaeljfox; stemcells; toosmartbyhalf
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-203 next last
To: truthfinder9
Would anyone care to dispute the likelihood that Talent's defeat -- and the consequent GOP loss of the Senate -- hinged on a one-percent swing of voters toward the Democrats because of Rush Limbaugh's highly publicized and grossly offensive personal attack on Michael J. Fox?

have at it.
81 posted on 11/13/2006 7:42:18 AM PST by stylin19a ("Klaatu Barada Nikto")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

This guy is an idiot who did not even listen to Limbaugh. In fact, if not for Limbaugh, pubs probably would not have won control of Congress in the first place.


82 posted on 11/13/2006 7:42:18 AM PST by Tennessean4Bush (I would never belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe
Well, in that case, let the destruction of human life begin!</sarcasm>
83 posted on 11/13/2006 7:42:32 AM PST by BufordP ("Every morning I start my day with juice, toast, and a big bowl of Baby Crunch!" -- Michael J. Fox)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: All

Bookmark to read later.


84 posted on 11/13/2006 7:43:15 AM PST by freeper_peeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: T.Smith
He had me until that. I don't suspect I'll be any more miserable under Socialist Democrats than I was under Socialist Republicans.

Oh...I think you'd be suprised.

85 posted on 11/13/2006 7:43:31 AM PST by TNdandelion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree

That's because we seem to be too busy pointing fingers at one another when we should be firing the Captain and Officers and hiring new ones.


86 posted on 11/13/2006 7:43:51 AM PST by Leatherneck_MT (In a world where Carpenters come back from the dead, ALL things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Personally I think Limbaugh's affect would be minimal. I don't know if there's any way to gage that. You are right--death by a thousand cuts. I would include immigration and the open border, McCain's backstabbing, the constant MSM negativity toward the GOP, Libertarian siphoning of votes, "macaca", 6th yearitis, corruption scandals (real and imagined), and President Bush's communication problems to your list. I'm not trying to sound like an eternal optimist because I AM very disappointed over the election, but all and all, it's surprising that we didn't lose by a bigger margin than we did. To me it shows that the GOP has a pretty good base of support. If we can correct the problems (at least some of them) that lead up to this loss and start attracting more people to our side then we would be in really good shape. Overriding the MSM is going to be the really big hurdle.
87 posted on 11/13/2006 7:43:54 AM PST by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

Clinical progression is: Idiot, Imbecile, Moron...the writer of this article is a moron


88 posted on 11/13/2006 7:43:59 AM PST by joe fonebone (Israel, taking out the world's trash since 1948.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy
..What all these Aholes do not realize is that Rush explained to his DITOcam watchers WHAT HE SAW ON THE FOX ADD. He was SHOWING them how Fox was acting in the add. The MSM and liberals moved the film faster to...

Which brings us to FOX NEWS....Be careful people... they simply found they could make money pandering to the right... but they could turn against us in a sec.. Be careful!

Just look at the owner... and you'll see he is not conservative champion!... but, he knows how to make money!... which is cool... but let's not delude ourselves.

89 posted on 11/13/2006 7:44:09 AM PST by ElPatriota (Let's not forget, we are all still friends despite our differences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

This author does not know of what he is writing.

Pointless Elitist drivel.

What we have now is the country club of the belway trying to force out the main stream citizens in favor of insiders.


(for example Sandra Day Occonor has no business on the Iraq Study Group)


90 posted on 11/13/2006 7:44:35 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maineman
Rush took credit in 1994...I guess he can take blame for 2006.



How so?
Rush made Mark Foley chase after boys(complete with pervy IM's), and cleverly released that info in drips just before the elections, and then made the MSM hammer Republicans over that matter for 3 straight weeks at 24/7 in the run up to the elections?
91 posted on 11/13/2006 7:45:19 AM PST by ShawTaylor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: LC HOGHEAD
Rush did not attack Fox, in fact Fox admitted in his book about altering his meds to fit the occasion.

Yes, and not only that, but Fox stated in an interview the same week as Rush's comments that the shakiness in the ad was due to overmedication.

92 posted on 11/13/2006 7:45:27 AM PST by SunStar (Democrats piss me off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
embryonic stem cell research is one promising area

Well, this statement is an outright falsehood. To date, there have been absolutely NO indications that embryonic stem cells offer any promise.

That said, Limbaugh definitely made a mistake in attacking Fox's possible "acting" or "exaggerating" his symptoms. Limbaugh should have stuck to attacking Fox's position on the issue on the basis of it's lack of support by the facts.

The statement in the article is wrong, but the overall premise that Limbaugh likely impacted Talent's re-election bid negatively is fair enough. On the other hand, its sort of like blaming the field goal kicker for missing a last-second field goal to win a football game: the team is to blame for letting the game come down to the need for such last minute heroics. Likewise, the Republicans blew the game long before Limbaugh came in and possibly "shanked" the winning field goal kick.

93 posted on 11/13/2006 7:45:50 AM PST by Sicon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
Paleeease.

This is a hack of all hacks. Rush said said something that was.....ah......TRUE!

J Fox DID go off his meds to ENHANCE his symptoms before. HE ADMITTED TO DOING SO YOU BONEHEAD!

Rush simply pointed it out and people are so uneducated or bias that they can't or won't see the truth.

If it wasn't for Rush, the GOP wouldn't have been in the majority in the first place. He's been pounding the Dems since the 80's. Show some appreciation you hack.

94 posted on 11/13/2006 7:46:25 AM PST by Bassfan (No cheese please)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Victor
If the author of this has ever listened to Rush, he clearly missed the 15 hours or so that Rush spent discussing this on his program.

That's the way it is...the national media didn't cover his discussion. They ran with the "ugly conservative" image he provided.

95 posted on 11/13/2006 7:46:27 AM PST by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rhombus

This is small fish conservatives who are trying to make a name for themselves.

It does not matter how correct Rush did everything, this small fish would criticise in order to build up his own image.


96 posted on 11/13/2006 7:46:39 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

I am a fan of Rush, and I don't think he was trying to mock Fox and belittle him. But he did step in it, the story became about him attacking 'Marty McFly' and not that there are different kinds of stem cell research or that the admendment in MO was about cloning. Rush's biggest problem is his ego, and he spent more than a week talking about the Fox ad and its fallout. Worse was the fact that other non-news, non-political outlets covered the story in a bias fashion like Entertainment Tonight and played into the hateful Rush attacking poor Michael Fox. This played perfect for the part-time voters who can't named the VP or a single SOCTUS justice. Rush should have dropped the story after day one, but he wouldn't and helped keep the story alive.


97 posted on 11/13/2006 7:47:47 AM PST by jbwbubba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
IMO the election was more about the "HATE BUSH" meter being proven to take roughly 60 months for to fill to the top.

Sure we have some issues to work on, but in an offyear election when turnout is down naturally (compounded by some shortsighted conservatives) the dems ran purely on "hate bush" for the 3rd election cycle still stemming from people who think "they got robbed" in 2000.

I know there is a tendency, especially around here, for people to try to sound smart and pinpoint what lost it for us, but for THEM, but it was as simple as "hate bush" for the 3rd time in a row that eventually worked... and no 'better immigration policy' or 'tighter spending' would have effected that specific aspect at all.
98 posted on 11/13/2006 7:47:53 AM PST by FreedomNeocon (Success is not final; Failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

I'm tired of the whining and finger pointing.


99 posted on 11/13/2006 7:48:31 AM PST by Eagle Eye (There ought to be a law against excess legislation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: beaversmom

6 yearitis is a huge factor. When a party controls all three branches for so long, anytime something goes wrong, deserved or not, that party gets the blame for it. Over time the list of things builds and builds, until inevitably it just becomes too much, and there is a sense of, let's give the other guys a chance.

Another fact is that most Americans are just not comfortable with one party controlling the executive and legislative branches, regardless of party.


100 posted on 11/13/2006 7:49:27 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-203 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson