When Rush Limbaugh was just a local talk show host in Sacramento (on AM station KFBK from 1984-’88), he wasn’t all that sure about a lot of things. His politics were conservative, but they were unrefined enough that he regularly engaged with a U.C. Davis political science professor (Larry Berman) who would take him to task for his ignorance of U.S. history and its implications in the then-current political environment.
After many of these on-air conversations, Limbaugh would say something like, “Hey, what do I know? I just want to be a rich Republican.”
That he wasn’t all that up on the details (either as to history or current events) shouldn’t have been any great surprise. His formal education ended after one year of college when he dropped out of Southeast Missouri State University, which he had reportedly only agreed to attend at all because his parents had insisted he give college a try.
Prior to his Sacramento talk show, Limbaugh had been a disc jockey for a couple of years on two Pittsburgh stations (the GM of the second fired him and told him he should work in sales), and just prior to the Sacramento gig he had been the promotions director for the Kansas City Royals baseball team.
He was hired by KFBK to replace the late Morton Downey, Jr., who was a fiery conservative who had a history of getting himself in trouble for making outlandish and unsupported statements about political figures and issues. Limbaugh’s early period on the station was far less vitriolic. He would state conservative positions, but we’re talking about the days when being conservative meant saving social security by increasing taxes. In other words, he was, in terms of the politics of 2012, a flaming liberal.
I recall, in particular, one series of shows Limbaugh aired from Washington, DC, where he spent a week trying to build ratings. (The station made a big deal of the shows, proclaiming in promotional ads that Limbaugh would be talking to the country’s “real policy makers.”) He did get a few interviews with Senators and the like, but most of what he asked was of the human interest variety, like “what’s life like when you’re a Senator?”
It was the typical small-town hick sounding star-struck while trying to act like a seasoned vet.
But Limbaugh figured out the game quickly enough, and by 1988, having built, during his four years at KFBK, a sizeable following, and having honed a more definitive (if simplistic) enunciation of his conservatism, he was hired by a major broadcaster to take his show nation-wide. By 1991, his show was being carried on 650 stations across the country.
And the last two decades have been all Rush, as he has dominated the talk radio format and been the model that others on the right have cloned themselves after.
But Limbaugh’s dominance isn’t confined to the hard-right “infotainment” that he provides. He has become the leading voice for the Republican Party’s rank and file (the base of the party that is in the process of picking a presidential nominee). And, as such, he often appears to be dictating, rather than mouthing, the party’s talking points.
All of which makes the current imbroglio that Mr. Limbaugh has brought upon himself that much more intriguing. In defaming a young female law student (Georgetown’s Sandra Fluke) in the grossest of terms and with the most repulsive forms of “humor” (solely because she testified to a gathering of Democratic members of Congress), this man from humble beginnings and of meager intellectual credentials has created a firestorm of opposition to his views on contraception and to his party’s apparent hostility to women.
That Limbaugh chose to engage at all on this issue is strange enough. He obviously doesn’t know what he’s talking about (not that he’s ever felt constrained by his own ignorance in the past), since he equates contraceptives (the “pill”) with sexual promiscuity. In fact, his comments suggest that he believes the pill works for women the way Viagra works for men, a “take only when you are going to have sex” medication that only sexual libertines and profligates use.
Limbaugh may well be a sicko (define that word however you like) as some have suggested. Be that as it may, he would almost certainly now be off the air (either on a long-term suspension or just plain fired) were it not for his massive following (estimates of his weekly radio audience are as high as 20 million listeners).
Still, in the aftermath of the deluge of his offensive and despicable attacks on Ms. Fluke last week (delivered on three successive days), two developments bear watching.
The first is the status of his program’s sponsorship. By the end of last weekend, even with his less than abject “apology” (“I used the wrong words in my analogy of the situation”), he had temporarily lost nine sponsors for his show. Should that trend continue, or become permanent, Limbaugh will quickly find himself an unemployed “rich Republican.”
But the more interesting and potentially significant development has been the reaction of Republican Party leaders to his intemperate remarks. House Speaker John Boehner, the nominal, if not actual, leader of the national party, called Limbaugh’s comments “inappropriate,” to which conservative pundit George Will, expressing obvious disgust, replied, “Using the salad fork for the entrée at dinner is inappropriate.”
Mitt Romney echoed Boehner’s tepid response, as did Rick Santorum. What are these would-be-presidents and party leaders afraid of? Is Limbaugh really too big to take on or at least scold?
The sad answer is that he is, at least if you are trying to avoid the opprobrium of the “ditto-head nation” that swears allegiance to Limbaugh. Viewed sympathetically, that would be the kinder and gentler explanation.
The less charitable one would be that, as in all matters of substance and policy in the world of conservatism these days, Rush Limbaugh really does say what most Republicans (both those serving in public office and those electing them) actually believe.
That he wasn’t all that up on the details (either as to history or current events) shouldn’t have been any great surprise. His formal education ended after one year of college when he dropped out of Southeast Missouri State University, which he had reportedly only agreed to attend at all because his parents had insisted he give college a try.
Good article, but is the above to sugest that to be knowledgable you must be a college graduate? Elitism?
When my friend, the late Morton Downey, Jr. had a show on KBFK, he got in trouble for calling a Chinese American station Board member a “stupid chink” He refused to apologize and was fired.
The job was filled by Rush Limbaugh after his 4th firing, at $25K/year. He built that to $250,000/show for he and his investors. He uses a Sacramento fact-check organization to be sure what he says is true – 98%+ over 18 years.
Ihe ESPN reporter the left demanded be fired wasn’t the first, however his innocent use of the term “chink” describing a Knick’s game loss with its highly touted Chinese player. “Chink in the Armor” is a term that goes back to the Middle Ages when knights wore chain mail as part of their armor. It could “chink.”
It reminds me of the poor bureaucrat in DC who accused a Congressional committee of being “niggardly” in funding a project he was interested in. Forget the dictionary meaning – “cheap” – and insist it was a racial remark. Only “progressives” can come up with such failed attempts at judgment and cost people their careers.
BTW, Downey, who had a gay brother Tony got beat up by his drunken father defending Tony. He also served on JFK’s transition committee but became a Republican when the feckless Jimmy Carter refused to take a stand against abortion.
Ed, I don’t recall you complaining about all the foul stuff thrown at Sarah Palin, her children and any other conservative woman the foul-brained left always comes up with… never to apologize as Limbaugh did. Rush admitted he sank to the level of his detractors. LOL
Where were you when Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz and Bill Mahr were and are throwing their childish name calling and death wishes around?
Rush gives millions to charitable causes – especially to military families -(anathema to “progressives” who believe “charity” is the Government’s job – at 4x the cost to taxpayers as direct giving.)
I’m sure you know Cong. Issa wouldn’t agree to the Dems on the Governmental Oversight Committee replacing the (addled) Barry Lynn with Sandra Fluke. Issa already knew what Lynn promotes, but he was vetted (as we should have done with our President) and Sandra was not.
So the minority staged and taped a “hearing” for Sandra to address and voila, a sucker punch that was actually designed to draw attention away for BHO’s idiotic attack on the Catholic Church – opening a new front, nicely finessed to Fluke’s “nobody will pay for my rubber john testimony” against her poor apostate “Catholic” Law School at Georgetown.
Some vetting of Fluke shows she is both pretty old for a college student, having spent a lot of time advocating birth control – aka demise of the white race. Whoops Margaret Sanger, you goofed – even though you said in 1922 – “… I think you must agree … that the campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics … Birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the eugenic educator.”
Eugenics? “Progressives” have bought in so much that their childless, suicidal numbers are dying out!
toddyo,
Can you provide the source for this bit of information.
” [Rush Limbaugh] uses a Sacramento fact-check organization to be sure what he says is true – 98%+ over 18 years.”
Thanks for asking Eddie. Rush makes reference to the firm – The Sullivan Group – run by Thomas L. Sullivan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M._Sullivan
The difference between Rush (and Glenn Beck for that matter), and the likes of Bill Mahr, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, et al, is when a misstatement is made, it is immediately corrected and apologies issued -on air, loud and clear, not on page 78 in the recipes section. The arrogant Mahr wouldn’t even go there.
BTW, if anyone took my missive as attacking Ed, I apologize for that. Ed is the one man from the far left who will put his views out for wild hairs like me to take pot shots at. I’ve learned a lot from him. I hope some of my “brilliance” has sunken into his quite open mind. http://www.webcommentary.com is where you can find my posts.
toddyo
Thank you for following up. Don’t want to be a nitpicker but the wiki site you shared says Mr. Sullivan’s past history involves contributing to Rush’s broadcast as a substitute host and having his own show on FOX t.v.. This could give a moderate or liberal a reason for pause. Imagine Bill Mahr having his facts checked by MoveOn.org or Rachel Maddow.
Thanks Eddie. You may be ruining me – my second mistake – one time I thought I was wrong, but I was actually right. However…
I can’t find anything that tells me it is other than the Sullivan Group. There aren’t many outfits that can make a living doing fact check. Even Snopes slips up on occasion and I don’t think they are getting rich. One thing for sure, a financial advisory group like Sullivan ought to have considerable talent on staff to check facts, so as a long-standing side business, I’m sure Rush is happy to keep them on retainer. At least he reports on his score regularly and admits his mistakes. Bill Mahr still insists Sarah Palin is a c***!
Oh, that our friends at Daily KOS would get in this game as they admittedly are in cahoots with MoveOn.org and Media Matters in true “Sorosian” style (aka Useful Idiots for a crook who made $10 bil off the American public last year).
I ran across a U/Rochester Economics prof who defends Limbaugh quite eloquently. He seems to have an open mind and a sense of humor – he wrote a book, “More Sex is Safer Sex”… approached from the viewpoint of a fairly practical economics professor.
http://www.thebigquestions.com/the-author/
Sure stirred up a lot of dust, but bottom line is still a blatant attack on religious freedom and the Catholic Church and its institutions in particular.
On June 6th 2013 the Bilderberg group (the worlds Global elite decision makers) will meet at The Grove Hotel, Watford, Hertfordshire for a 4 day conference to decide upon: Destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities within three years, Prolonging the war on Syria by arming anti-Assad elements, The threat of a global pandemic, Internet control, Diffusing austerity induced social protests, Preventing Britain from leaving the EU, Propping up the Euro to keep the Eurozone intact, Minimal 2013 economic growth, Increasing central bank power, tansferring more wealth from ordinary people to corporations and super-rich elites and Preventing a growing credit bubble from popping. You can guarantee none of the decisions made at this meeting will be in your best interest. Join the gathering army of peaceful protestors near the Hotel to have your say. http://bilderberg2013.co.uk/