Total Pageviews

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Rush Limbaugh: Who's afraid of him?


Rush Limbaugh speaks at an event. | AP Photo

The last time a prominent Republican dismissed Rush Limbaugh as a mere “entertainer,” as then-Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele did in 2009, he found himself offering an apology within a day.
But when Rick Santorum used the same word on Friday, brushing aside the comments about a Georgetown law student that have now cost Limbaugh dozens advertisers as “absurd,” there were crickets.
The firestorm ignited by Limbaugh’s choice of that and other sexually demeaning words to attack Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke for her position on insurance coverage of birth control continued to draw oxygen Tuesday, despite Limbaugh’s Saturday apology, as the president declared during a press conference that “the remarks that were made don’t have any place in the public discourse” and more advertisers headed for the door.
This is hardly Limbaugh’s first turn through the media wringer. He’s likely to survive the advertiser exodus and continue delighting dittoheads with his successful brand of political provocation. But some conservatives believe he will no longer command the same kind of fealty from Republicans in Washington that prompted Steele’s groveling two years ago.
“It will now be much more permitted on the conservative side to dissent from Rush,” said Michael Medved, a conservative talk radio host who subbed for Limbaugh in the 1990s.
David Frum, the conservative pundit who has been critical of the party’s embrace of Limbaugh in the past, agrees this might weaken it.
“Republican politicians are going to want to keep more of a distance from Limbaugh after his incident,” he said. “If you are a Republican politician, you spend a lot of time with people who are huge Rush fans, and it’s easy to lose sight of the negative reaction to him among women and younger people. This incident drives home that there are many more voters out there who regard an association with Limbaugh as a negative, not a positive.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73699.html#ixzz1oQWD74mg

No comments: