Posted on 11/25/2015 11:34:24 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
In the summer of 1992, Rush Limbaugh saved me from myself. I was an 18-year-old high school graduate about to begin college, too impatient to wait for adulthood to come to me. So instead, I went in search of it the only way I knew how: by engulfing myself in presidential politics and the fascinating campaigns that summer between Bill Clinton, George Bush and Ross Perot.
Like many idealistic teens, I was at first drawn to the youthful Clinton campaign and Fleetwood Mac's cheerful command to "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow." But then I started listening to Limbaugh and it changed everything. I was working as a delivery driver, so I'd plan my trips at six minutes after the hour so as to not miss a minute of his show — a habit I keep even today. The way he described his belief in conservatism reached out and grabbed me and I've been a loyal listener ever since.
So it is not from a place of hatred or misunderstanding that I write this. I'm not a plant from Media Matters. But when it comes to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Limbaugh is a mind-numbing, frustrating hypocrite (with all due respect, of course).
His tacit endorsement of Trump, now occurring daily during his show, is almost impossible to understand. Listening to him gleefully discussing Trump is painful for those of us who have followed his advice for decades. Why? Let's break it down.
Look at the polls
For years, Limbaugh has lambasted the "drive-by media" for their insistence on using polling data to make headlines and drive the story of the day. Trump's appearances and speeches, for the most part, are Trump droning on about how well he's doing in the polls. It's often the only story.
Words mean something
One of Limbaugh's biggest criticisms of President Obama has always been the vagueness in Obama's message; in his way of speaking until he can think of something to say; in the blank canvas that he offers us to project our hopes and dreams upon. And that, when he goes off-message, he often misspeaks. Explaining what Obama meant to say has become a cottage industry for websites like Vox and full-time gigs for a variety of nationally known journalists.
When has Trump ever offered anything of substance? His speeches are meandering streams of consciousness, and although he claims each to be unique, they are often the same litanies of vague promises. Trump will negotiate hard with China and Mexico. Trump will make the military so strong it will make your head spin. You'll get bored with winning so much. Chinese bankers live in his building, which proves he can bring jobs back from China. Trump thinks reporters are sleazy. Trump will hit you so hard. And, oh, by the way, have you seen the polls?
Big government
Limbaugh has been the voice for those who believe in smaller government for as long as he's been on the air. So it would stand to reason that challenging Trump on even his vague promises to vastly enlarge an already bloated government should give Limbaugh pause. Apparently, it doesn't. How many new government agencies will be necessary to round up 11 million illegal immigrants, send them back to Mexico and then let them back in? How many billions of dollars will it cost to make the military so great your head will spin? How many government workers will be required to build the Trump wall, complete with a beautiful Trump door?
The Kardashianification of American politics
Limbaugh has long lamented "low-information voters," who, he claims, are responsible for the rise of Obama. It's not his policies that win the day; it's the fact that he's cool and hip. His celebrity overcomes all other weaknesses.
Trump took the money that his father left him and built a series of failed casinos. What else does he have to offer, other than gaudy celebrity?
The Limbaugh Theorem
Simply put, the Limbaugh Theorem is Limbaugh's explanation as to why Obama remains popular when so many of his policies lack public support. It posits that Obama is always campaigning against the bad guys or bad situations, even when those situations are of his own making. It's a disassociation in the public perception of him between cause and effect.
Just peruse Trump's Twitter feed to see the Limbaugh Theorem on full display. He's always campaigning; always ready to right to wrongs in the world. The problem, though, is that many of those wrongs will be borne from a Trump presidency. He'll be there on Twitter or on another stop in his perpetual campaign, making obscenely vague promises that only he can fix what is wrong.
I'm still listening, Rush. But I hope you are, too. We don't need another blank canvas in the Oval Office, gilded or otherwise.
Hale is a freelance writer who lives in San Antonio with his wife and three children.
The writer of the article doesn’t get Rush. You apparantly don’t get him either. Rush has never endorsed any candidate. I’ve been listening to him since 1987 and I don’t understand why the writer is claiming hypocracy.
Trump may be the liberal you claim but all I’ve ever heard Rush say about Trump is how he doesn’t let the media frighten him nor does he seem to worry about PC. I’ve not heard Rush endorse Trump at all. There’s things he admires about Trump, but I don’t necessarily consider that an endorsement. Rush has mentioned the well known fact that Trump has violated all the political wisdom of the establishment GOP and the political pundits - yet is still leading the other candidates. That is not an “endorsement” either.
As to Trump being “vague” when it comes to specifically HOW he will fix certain problems, well, all of the candidates are pretty vague when it comes to that- but, I don’t see that with Trump when it comes to immigration. He’s pretty clear about what he wants to do. The Hill article says Trump will always be in “campaign” mode and never get to specifics. Well, Trump IS in a presidential campaign and has never been president before, so I think it is unfair to presume that he will remain in campaign mode after he’s elected (assuming he wins). That criticism doesn’t even make sense at this point.
Rush has pointed out how Obama always acts like he’s never been in office the past 7 years in his perpetual campaigning against problems that he has contributed to or ignored. How can the writer criticize Trump about that when he’s not even president yet?
Anyway. The writer, for all his claims of being a Rush listener for several years, sounds like he really has never listened to Rush during a presidential campaign season.
You liar. You answered nothing. You’ve dodged that question every single time it’s been posed to you.
It’s well past time for you to answer it.
BTW, where’s your proof you’re for Cruz ? Let’s see all your posts.
I think she is still upset about Perry.
And marriages is another game that they share in common.
I’m on to posting tactics used to change the subject to me.
You lose.
I don’t doubt it.
Answer the question, troll.
You're entitled to your opinion, I haven't heard an endorsement.
Rush has scores to settle.
He still speaks well of the Bush family and keeps his lights off so the turtles won't get lost.
Or are you referring to something or someone(s) in particular?
Rush wants access.
Rush can have someone call Home Depot and have doors delivered while he's on the air, he gets Apple things delivered all the time and talks about waiting for them!
Rush's temperament is similar to Trump's.
You're making a generality... similar, how? Are you saying that Trump is a harmless lovable fuzzball?
Rush can deny-deny-deny all he wants, but no one can honestly say that he isn't campaigning for Trump.
What is Rush deny, deny, denying?
I think that I can honestly say that he isn't campaigning for Trump... in fact, I just did.
Check again...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3365020/posts
And Rush never ever endorses so the article itself is off base and biased.
Good job.
If it weren’t for Trump we’d all be discussing how we can get Jeb! to change his mind about bringing millions of illegal aliens into the U.S.
If it weren’t for Trump we’d be cringing at the latest Jeb! screw-up as he falls for the latest media trap, apologizing for his violation of some petty rule of political correctness. And he wouldn’t fight back, of course, because his brother W didn’t fight back, and he was not raised that way, and because deep down inside he’s not a fighter. And he’d make an endless series of promises, that of course all ultimately add up to bigger government. Just like his brother.
We are SICK of candidates like McCain and Romney, that don’t fight back, and therefore give into the Democrats on EVERY issue, despite mandates and majorities from our side. We REFUSE to fall into the same pattern of the last two elections. Trump’s message is a basic one, but it’s loud and clear — and we are tired of weak-knee’d neurotic policy wonks, we want a VISIONARY, a LEADER.
This is NOT the year of the establishment politician. We are ANGRY at the establishment. We are willing to take a CHANCE with Trump rather than go with a sure-thing business-as-usual GOPe reactionary pantywaist like Jeb! or Kasich, and lose the election again to a Democrat that does little more than promise more ‘free’ stuff to low-information voters.
Look at the ones whose superpacs are attacking Trump right now — they’re the ones hurting the future of the Republican party. THEY are the ones we need to get rid of, because without them their superpacs (that they don’t control) would be existentially moot.
Trump has changed the game AND the tactics for every Republican candidate smart enough to listen — and that includes the best candidate in the lineup — the anti-establishment Tea Party favorite Ted Cruz. But if Trump is the nominee he gets my nod.
Rush has not endorsed Trump, he has praised the way Trump handles the media. Rush points out the obvious to people engaged in a mindset that prevents them from seeing the truth. The conventional wisdom is what has HURT our chances in the last two presidential elections.
I really wish McCain and his liberal ilk would find their last shred of honor and switch to the Democrat party. They're the biggest fakes walking.
At least with leftist radicals like Obama, you know exactly where they stand. Not so much with phonies like McCain, Graham, Romney, Boehner, Ryan, etc., who pretend to be on your team, but spend their whole lives betraying their constituents.
Shhh ! Doesn’t fit with the CW troll’s narrative.
Rush hasn’t endorsed anyone. He has specifically said that this week.
I don’t think you listen to him at all, otherwise you would know that.
You should stop pushing bullshit, you are incredibly annoying.
‘preciate it!
McQueeg passed on doing so in 2004. He was more than willing to be Jean-Francois’s VP running mate that year (though I think he was told privately the Dem base wouldn’t be receptive to it, despite his anti-Conservative weaselry. He more than made up for it in 2008).
She is NOT a Cruz supporter.
So now you are mis-representing Limbaugh. Hate to tell you, Rush adjusts his air time topically, and it just happens right now that Trump is getting an more than line share of the headlines and buzz. If you were truly a listener, you would have heard that he understands that Trump strikes a chord with conservative agenda, and has the guts to fight the PC malice and madness infiltrating our society. Also have you read his opinion of Cruz? Maybe less air time, but more glowing.
With that, I am and always be a 100% Cruz supporter until he withdraws or until the gavel falls. Otherwise, I am starting to agree with the other posters who think you have an unhealthy hate of Trump, and really wonder about you intent and agenda.
BTW, you aren't making points here trashing conservative icons. Who next week???? Reagan???? Buckley?????
Thank you for comment on the article.
I too have been a Rush listener (since 1990) so I do “get” Rush.
Trump needs to be judged by his past associations and his stated policy positions. When you assess that, it’s undeniable that he’s a liberal.
You can believe what you will, from what Trump says now, but where is your proof that that man who has contributed to the Democratic Party Leadership (Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Clinton, etc), who said Hillary was a wonderful Sec. of State (along with praise for her husband), that that Trump is your leader in shining armor?
I hardly think that Trump supporters turn on Rush to hear about the media being flummoxed by Trump, but rather to hear Rush’s non-stop campaign for him.
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.