Rush Limbaugh

Last Thursday, I wrote:

And so, in the interest of "fair and balanced" reporting, we get to listen to bed-wetting cries that homosexuals are more dangerous than terrorists, feminists are the the cause of hurricanes, and liberal bloggers working for liberal candidates are scions of anarchy. In other words: hate and fear your fellow Americans.

FDR, one of America's greatest liberals in history, famously said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." The radical right preaches, "There's nothing to fear but not being afraid enough."

Thus the hysterics we see on Fox News and other voiceboxes of wingnuttia. Be afraid. Boogie boogie boogie! Boogie boogie boogie!

Also picking up on this sentiment (I won't assume "echoing" as I doubt he has read this blog, at least lately), Austin Cline at [correction - mg] Jesus' General wrote on Sunday:

This week I'd like to write about the same topic I was going to address last week — it was more timely last week, perhaps, but it never goes out of style: the conservative, Republican use of fear as a political weapon against internal enemies, dissenters, and political opponents. On January 31st, Amanda Marcotte wrote about how conservative pundit Mike Gallagher actually admitted that terrorism would be a good thing for Republican political ambitions:

There is a strangeness in Washington as we return to the two-party system. Like Moses leading his people in the wilderness, the Democrats are slowly returning to power. Was it any different in 1994 when the tables were turned?

The conservatives say, at least in some circles, that the Republican defeat was not all that bad and in two years the people will come to their senses and re-elect a Republican government like we've had since 2000. Perhaps. But, that's not the interesting story.

For two years, we will have a different voice in Congress and this will be a chance for the Democrats to re-frame the issues.

I think of when Rush Limbaugh could be a foil against a Democrat Congress, or at least against President Clinton, and though he had his own personal problems, I think what really killed it for him was that the Republicans got into power. His rage really had no place to go, except kicking the people who weren't in power.

Now the strangeness comes back. The two-party system might have a chance, and two of the first losers are Steven Colbert of the "Colbert Report," and to some extent Kos of "The Daily Kos." "Does their schtick still work?" asked a friend. The Daily Show is not as invested as Kos and Colbert in the brand of anger in the case of Kos and humor in the case of Colbert.

I don't go to Kos any more, but I have peeked in on and off, more on than off, on Colbert, and suddenly his feigned right-wing stance falls flat. Nothing against Steve. It's just that in a matter of a week, the entire humor base has shifted along with the power base. In the case of Colbert, his humor worked when the Republicans were the only party in real power and his feigned support was great counterpoint. Now the Republicans are a minority in Congress (slim though it may be) and the President is a lame duck. Not as funny to be a feigned zealot.

Colbert and Kos suffer the fall out. Their base has a place to go for real power, just as Rush found out.

We'll see where Washington goes in the next several months, but the new balance of power has unexpected consequences in the strangest of ways.

Since Rush Limbaugh's spazz-out mockery of Michael J. Fox and attacks on Fox's integrity and honesty, making armchair medical diagnoses that would make even Republican Bill "Terri Schiavo will recover" Frist blush, the right-wing reactionary reaction has been remarkable only in its vehemence.

On BlogHer, new Contributing Editor Dana Tuszke offers a socially conservative perspective:

Michael J. Fox and Ben Cardin are misleading the public by playing on the hopes and fears of millions of Americans who are suffering from debilitating diseases like Multiple Sclerosis, Alzheimers and Dimentia, as well as Parkinson’s Disease. The ad campaign is repulsive because it’s dishonest in promising cures to these diseases, cures that are uncertain and yet to be discovered.

Instead of arguing the facts and admitting the truth behind Limbaugh’s statements, Democrats attack the radio host calling him cruel and hateful and continue to distort his words and statements he makes on his radio show.

The Passion of the Christ star Jim Caviezal, along with actress Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves Raymond) and Cardinal’s pitcher Jeff Suppan, have appeared in advertisements countering the claims of Michael J. Fox. In the ad Caviezal, Heaton and Suppan tell Missouri voters the facts about embryonic stem cell research and then state “Don’t be tricked”, “Don’t be deceived”, and “Don’t be fooled.”

Michael J. Fox came into my living room through my television a few nights ago. He showed me how badly his Parkinson’s disease causes him to tremor, so that maybe I’d feel sorry for him and vote Democrat, or maybe I’d feel guilty if I responded to his exploitation of his condition.

She claims that there is no hope for any results from stem-cell research, and says everyone who says otherwise is trying to "trick the intelligence of their voters." And this is the soft-spoken attack on Fox, though in the comments she gets more strident and plain-spoken. There's quite a discussion thread there worth reading.

In case you missed it, Michael J. Fox fired back at the attacks:

It's funny because, what I'm talking about is about hope. It's about promise. It's about moving forward. It's a forward-looking attitude about what this country is capable of and what we can accomplish for our citizens.

And so if we get sidetracked into a dialogue about whether sick people have a right to display their symptoms in public, you know, that reaction. I think it was more disappointing, from the point of view of— The campaigns, like the [Republican Senate candidate Michael] Steele campaign, their spokesman said, "It was in poor taste," which really— I mean, I'm out here and I expect that. Being in the lead, I'll take some hits. And that's fine. I'm a big boy. Well, not height-wise.

BlogHer Contributing Editor Melinda Casino offers a run-down of other reactions.

For a little background and insight, another BlogHer Contributing Editor Marianne Richmond writes:

Surprising because Dana sees it as exploitation and I see it as someone who cares about stem cell research for the most personal of reasons; and that his appearance with his symtoms painfully obvious puts us as close as we can get to experiencing what this disease looks and feels like.

The way that the issue of stem cell research has been painted to be about other various moral hot buttons, cloning, right to life, is exploitive.

My son told me that some of the St. Louis Cardinals were in ads advocating "Vote No" on the stem cell amendenment. The New York Times coverage of this called it "Pitching and Politics."
This I see as an example of celebrities contributing to the exploitation of an issue.

Also interesting is the BlogHer forum thread, "Does GOD really care about stem cell research?"

Sometimes this guy out-does even himself:

To Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Michael J. Fox looked like a faker. The actor, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, has done a series of political ads supporting candidates who favor stem cell research, including Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who is running against Republican Michael Steele for the Senate seat being vacated by Paul Sarbanes.

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

So says Doctor Limbaugh, whose "expertise" in medicine gave him above-the-law license to illegally medicate himself. (Why isn't he in prison anyway? Didn't he preach "no tolerance" for drug addicts?)

"Now people are telling me they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial," Limbaugh said, according to a transcript on his Web site. "All right then, I stand corrected. . . . So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act."

Then Limbaugh pivoted to a different critique: "Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited and in the process is shilling for a Democratic politician."

More like Limbaugh is taking Michael J. Fox's political views as an indication that he's somehow not entitled to any sort of humane treatment or consideration or decency. Such is the hate-filled heart of your wingnut media luminaries.