Radio is an unlikely springboard to widespread political influence in modern America. As our favorite source of banter, fast-spoken traffic and weather reports, and advice for our love lives, radio is not often a shaper of the political landscape. Most of the political activity in our country takes place on television, in writing, or in person. The influence of radio hosts is almost always local and minor. Thus, one would expect to find an ambitious man of ideas like Rush Limbaugh debating on CNN Crossfire, writing editorials, or lecturing at a university. Rush, however, has defied the limitations of radio and has risen to prominence with his political commentary on “The Rush Limbaugh Show.” He now broadcasts to over 20 million listeners weekly and has become a household name nationwide. The success of Rush hinges on his effective use of the radio to deliver conservative ideology.
Rush’s story illustrates the barely-tapped potential of the radio as a source of political influence. It also illustrates the incredible skill required to harness this potential. How many other political figures could fill a three hour show with elaboration on their political ideology? How many could do it every weekday? For eight years? Rush is a seemingly bottomless well of creativity and political ingenuity. In terms of ideas publicly expressed, Rush is arguably one of the most prolific political theorists in American history. Every show sets an additional building block of his ideology which has, over his eight-year career, become a conservative fortress. Although not (yet) a real term, Rushism is a very coherent collection of ideas on all strains of social, economic, and political issues. The beauty of Rushism is that unlike most political philosophies, it reacts daily to the changing national and international environment. “The Rush Limbaugh Show” is essentially a dynamic political manifesto.
The success of Rushism stems largely from the manner in which it is presented. A radio show allows Rush to communicate directly with millions of people. Near-universal access to radio coupled with its mobile nature make it a very democratic means of communication and facilitate the reception of Rushism by ordinary Americans at work or in their cars. Conveniently, it does not require listeners to “give up” their time to him but still puts them in his sphere of influence. Listeners can, however, call up the show and become active participants in the discussion. Anyone with something to say can deliver their message too over the air. This marvelous display of First Amendment expression removes national politics from the realm of the elite. The direct line of communication between his supporters and him substantially increases his appeal as a leader. Rush’s celebrity status attests to the effectiveness of this populist strategy.
Rush’s unabashed ultra-conservative bias is central to his image. Rush “fires at will” at all of the problems he identifies in society. His criticism, whether it be of abortion, taxation, or global, is always memorable and poignant. Whether or not his inflammatory rhetoric is more accurate, it is certainly more interesting than the emotionless speeches of other political figures. It is the unique nature of his work and personality that allow him to exercise his first amendment rights with little fear of professional or social repercussions. With no constituency to please and no demands of congressional civility to satisfy, Rush does not tailor or mitigate his arguments. He speaks freely on any subject, with concern for the truth, not the propriety, of his argument.
His patriotic zeal and his heartfelt support of American interest makes most other political figures appear lukewarm. No one shows a larger devotion to America or a greater willingness to express this devotion. With his ardent, enthusiastic tone, Rush gives us the lowdown on current events: “I'm going to tell you, what's good for al-Qaeda is good for the Democratic Party in this country today. That's how you boil this down. And it doesn't have to be al-Qaeda. What's good for terrorists is good for John Kerry. All you got to do is check the way they react.” This no-nonsense, direct manner of expression is an essential component of his genius.
Following the Republican loss of Congress in the midterm elections, many conservatives may be pulled towards the center. Rush, however, is never discouraged by the throes of defeat, and remains a pillar of the far-right. The conservative movement needs his undying enthusiasm now, more than ever, to guide it through the upcoming days in the minority.
Comments