The Limbaugh Mythology

Rush Limbaugh is the undisputed hero of the willfully ignorant. By willfully ignorant I don't mean moronic. There are many willfully ignorant who are very smart. The willfully ignorant are those who ignore facts they do not like. These form the basis of Limbaugh's appeal because he consistently gives his fans facts (or fiction) they like and agree with.

There is a kind of mythology surrounding Limbaugh in that somehow he is the de facto leader of the GOP, that his opinion counts and more importantly, he is in a position to make or break Presidential candidates. There are multiple examples of his ineptness but suffice it to mention a few. He was powerless to prevent John McCain to be the GOP candidate for President, powerless to prevent Mitt Romney to be the same, and of course, powerless to prevent Barack Obama from winning the presidency. Twice.

Besides, Limbaugh is not about being effective or consequential. He is all about money. His shtick makes him millions because there are millions of willfully ignorant in radio-land and he gives them their daily fix of their special brand of narcotic.

This is why it was astonishing to find out that there are professional pundits who credit Limbaugh for Scott Walker's exit from the presidential race. They preposterously posit that Walker was doomed the instant he "lost" Limbaugh. When the great wizard Rush veered his support to his fellow blowhard Trump, Walker dropped like a lead balloon.

Scott Walker

The truth is more likely the opposite. When the ever opportunistic Limbaugh found out that Mexican bashing was evidently more popular than union bashing, he switched to Trump as Walker was sinking. You can never go wrong with unabashed racism flavored with xenophobia. There are people who are indeed angry with the status quo. Angry with the black man in the White House, angry with the Democrats who support him, and especially angry at the Republicans who can't seem to do anything about it.

Where is the promised impeachment?

Why wasn't Obamacare repealed?

Why do we have an agreement with the dastardly Iranians?

Why does Obama keep winning?

So there is nothing like a convenient scapegoat to vent their anger at. Unions won't do so well because they teach our kids, protect us from criminals and put out our fires when needed. But Mexicans, those guys are fair game, and the Donald knows it and plays it for all it's worth.

That is why Limbaugh is on board with Trump. Not because he has any personal animus towards Mexicans, but his fans do, and it's always about pandering, it's always about posturing, and most importantly, it's always about the money.

Santorum Revisited

On the eve of the second GOP debate it might be instructive to review the actions of Rick Santorum on the occasion of the shootings in South Carolina. Time may have passed but we do not forget. His actions at the time were reprehensible at best and he has a lot to answer for. He has put all that behind him and blended into the woodwork but those of us who were shocked at the time remain aghast that he is still a viable – barely so – candidate  for the Presidency of the the United States.

The reaction from Presidential candidate Rick Santorum to the tragic events in Charleston, South Carolina was to call the murders part of a broader attack on "religious liberty." He went further on to say "It’s obviously a crime of hate. Again, we don’t know the rationale, but what other rationale could there be?"

Really?

Rick Santorum

Dylann Roof said he was hoping to start a "race war." He told the survivor of his massacre:“I have to do it. You’re raping our women and taking over the country. You have to go.” Last time I checked, Christians don't typically advocate rape.

How obtuse is Rick Santorum? I suspect this graduate of Dickinson Law School at Penn State University is not as naive as he pretends to be. It doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes mind to divine that this is a man who is either a racist or is deliberately catering to bigots.

Dylann Roof

How does a bigot like Santorum even being seriously considered as a Presidential candidate? Have we as a nation have no scruples? Have we no backbone? Santorum when asked the straightforward question on whether they should take down the Confederate flag at the South Carolina statehouse he waffled and said since he was not a South Carolinian how could he take a position on this issue? Jeb Bush when he was governor of Florida rid his state of the Confederate flag and I'm sure it was not a popular move among certain elements in that state.

Rick Santorum has disqualified himself from the Presidential race and the sooner he leaves the better. Americans of all races and of all political persuasion need to call out the racists without equivocation. We need to fulfill the promise Thomas Jefferson made in the Declaration of Independence. that "All men are created equal." 

Huckabee and the Power of Hate

There is a new star in the right-wing Christian universe. Kim Davis, who refuses to issue marriage licences to gay couples because that's what the Lord wants her to do. Forget that the Supreme Court struck down all the laws prohibiting same sex marriage, declaring these laws unconstitutional. The folks who rave about following the Constitution see fit to ignore the Constitution when it contradicts their prejudices. Lets be clear about Kim Davis and her supporters - they hate gays. That's pretty much it.

Because there are many instances where marriage laws conflict with Biblical teaching. Granting licenses to adulterers, or marrying divorced people to name just two. But these good Christian folk have no problems with granting marriage licences to these sinners. Just gays.

A few years back it was interracial couples. Same arguments. It was an abomination. It was against God, etc. etc. Today, interracial marriage is OK, and clerks all over the land grant licenses, possibly begrudgingly by some, but they still do it. Was there any question that bans against interracial marriage were motivated by hate, and not love of God? So too is the resistance to gay marriage. It's hate all over again.

That ordinary citizens lower themselves to hating others is bad enough, but for Presidential candidates to join the lynch mobs is inexcusable. Is there any doubt that the rise of Trump in the GOP primary race is primarily due to hate of Mexicans? Because it ain't about his tax policies or his great health care plan. So since Trump has the hate Mexicans market pretty well cornered, Reverend Mike has to content himself with the hate gays crowd.

Mike Huckabee and Kim Davis

And he played it to the hilt. Presenting Davis as a triumphant warrior for God it was as if they had won something. Even Ted Cruz tried to glom in on the Huckabee show but the Huckabee thugs were out in full force, literally preventing the hapless Cruz from being on stage. As far as a display of thuggery, Huckabee taught Cruz a valuable lesson. It's a dog eat dog world out there and even among the smiling Christian crowd, the candidate with the better goons gets the limelight. It was a bit gratifying to see the bully Cruz get manhandled and shown how old school politics works, however.

Huckabee, although playing to the Kentucky crowd was actually working the Iowa ultra crowd. Iowa has a sizable block of evangelical right-wingers that participate in the caucuses and the only way for Huckabee to come close to Trump and his Mexican hating crowd is to bring in a solid gay hating crowd.

This spectacle is obviously self defeating. It is indeed possible to round up a large number of haters in Iowa in order to score a few delegates at the GOP convention, but in a general election when the whole country is engaged, these hate tactics won't be very helpful, because as a whole, the American people are not a hating people.

Bigotry, under the guise of religion will only take you so far.

Reagan and Trump

Donald Trump likes to compare himself to Ronald Reagan. And why not? Reagan is still the patron saint of the GOP, the model of successful conservative policies and above all, winning elections.

The problem with this analysis is that it is wrong on so many levels. Trump likes to point out that he, like Reagan "evolved" from a Democrat to a Republican. That Reagan was an outsider in the GOP establishment much the same way he is. That there are millions of disaffected voters out there who worship both Reagan and Trump. All this may be true, but that's where the similarity ends.

As with everything Trump, these similarities are superficial and basically meaningless. Cocktail party talk as is most of Trump's campaign so far.

The differences are most telling, however.

First, unlike Trump, Reagan had real governing experience. After all, he was governor of California, no mean feat in one of the bluest of blue states.

Second, he had been knocking about the GOP leadership for quite a while. He delivered a barn-burning speech on behalf of Barry Goldwater in 1964 just before the election that introduced him to the nation much like the speech given by Barack Obama at the Democratic National Convention introduced the young Senator. He also challenged Gerald Ford for the Presidency in 1976, and was very narrowly defeated. Reagan, therefore, was no newcomer to politics at the highest level.

Third, and most importantly, was Reagan's personality. That was his weapon for winning elections. He had a sunny disposition and hardly ever uttered a word in anger. Even his famous line, "Mr, Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" was more advice than admonition. And then there was the long forgotten Reagan 11th commandment which was: "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican." Modern day Reagan supporters who berate Jeb Bush for trying to bring civility to political discourse conveniently forget that it was Ronald Reagan himself who ushered civility into our politics. Reagan was just a likable guy. The irony being that whereas most Americans did not agree with his policies (contrary to what the far right in this country would have you believe) they loved the man. He stood tall, oozed of self-confidence and made many Americans proud to be American whether they supported his politics or not.

In sharp contrast, Trump has a losing personality. He expresses contempt for anyone who contradicts him or even questions him. He is devoid of warmth or compassion, choosing to mock Jeb's "act of love" comments about illegal immigrants. And there are some Americans who are so worked up about illegals that they fall for his obvious mean streak. Even his efforts to redeem himself by repeating, "I love Mexicans," "I love China," ring hollow. This is a man who his fans are convinced is sincere. He indeed has been able to delude lots of people, but there are many more he has not been able to delude. Sooner or later, his personality, his contempt for humanity, will come through.

Americans are basically tolerant people. They have proven it again and again. The election of a black man and his subsequent re-election is ample proof of that. Obama has a winning personality as did Reagan. It is fair to compare Reagan and Obama even though their politics were as far apart as can be. Trump is indeed a small man, trying to convince himself and the rest of us that he is big. No, huge. Americans, even pissed off Americans, will see through his act eventually.

Trump can rightly point out his business success, but he is no Ronald Reagan.