H
Harry Hope
Guest
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/1995/05/ivins.html
Lyin' Bully
Commentary:
Instead of picking on someone his own size, Rush consistently targets
dead people, little girls, and the homeless--none of whom can fight
back.
By Molly Ivins
May/June 1995 Issue
One of the things that concerns a lot of Americans lately is the
increase in plain old nastiness in our political discussion.
It comes from a number of sources, but Rush Limbaugh is a major
carrier.
I should explain that I am not without bias in this matter.
I have been attacked by Rush Limbaugh on the air, an experience
somewhat akin to being gummed by a newt.
It doesn't actually hurt, but it leaves you with slimy stuff on your
ankle.
I have a correspondent named Irwin Wingo in Weatherford, Texas.
Irwin and some of the leading men of the town are in the habit of
meeting about 10 every morning at the Chat'n'Chew Cafe to drink coffee
and discuss the state of the world.
One of their number is a dittohead, a Limbaugh listener.
He came in one day, plopped himself down, and said, "I think Rush is
right: Racism in this country is dead. I don't know what the ******s
will find to gripe about now."
I wouldn't say that dittoheads, as a group, lack the ability to
reason.
It's just that whenever I run across one, he seems to be at a low ebb
in reasoning skills.
Poor ol' Bill Sarpalius, one of our dimmer Panhandle congressmen, was
once trying to explain to a town hall meeting of his constituents that
Limbaugh was wrong when he convinced his listeners that Bill Clinton's
tax package contained a tax increase on the middle class.
(It increased taxes only on the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.)
A dittohead in the crowd rose to protest:
"We don't send you to Washington to make responsible decisions. We
send you there to represent us."
The kind of humor Limbaugh uses troubles me deeply, because I have
spent much of my professional life making fun of politicians.
I believe it is a great American tradition and should be encouraged.
We should all laugh more at our elected officials--it's good for us
and good for them.
So what right do I have to object because Limbaugh makes fun of
different pols than I do?
I object because he consistently targets dead people, little girls,
and the homeless--none of whom are in a particularly good position to
answer back.
Satire is a weapon, and it can be quite cruel.
It has historically been the weapon of powerless people aimed at the
powerful.
When you use satire against powerless people, as Limbaugh does, it is
not only cruel, it's profoundly vulgar.
It is like kicking a cripple.
On his TV show, early in the Clinton administration, Limbaugh put up a
picture of Socks, the White House cat, and asked, "Did you know
there's a White House dog?"
Then he put up a picture of Chelsea Clinton, who was 13 years old at
the time and as far as I know had never done any harm to anyone.
When viewers objected, he claimed, in typical Limbaugh fashion, that
the gag was an accident and that without his permission some
technician had put up the picture of Chelsea--which I found as
disgusting as his original attempt at humor.
On another occasion, Limbaugh put up a picture of Labor Secretary
Robert Reich that showed him from the forehead up, as though that were
all the camera could get.
Reich is indeed a very short man as a result of a bone disease he had
as a child.
Somehow the effect of bone disease in children has never struck me as
an appropriate topic for humor.
The reason I take Rush Limbaugh seriously is not because he's
offensive or right-wing, but because he is one of the few people
addressing a large group of disaffected people in this country.
And despite his frequent denials, Limbaugh does indeed have a somewhat
cultlike effect on his dittoheads.
They can listen to him for three and a half hours a day, five days a
week, on radio and television.
I can assure you that David Koresh did not harangue the Branch
Davidians so long nor so often.
But that is precisely what most cult leaders do--talk to their
followers hour after hour after hour.
A large segment of Limbaugh's audience consists of white males, 18 to
34 years old, without college education.
Basically, a guy I know and grew up with named Bubba.
Bubba listens to Limbaugh because Limbaugh gives him someone to blame
for the fact that Bubba is getting screwed.
He's working harder, getting paid less in constant dollars and falling
further and further behind.
Not only is Bubba never gonna be able to buy a house, he can barely
afford a trailer.
Hell, he can barely afford the payments on the pickup.
And because Bubba understands he's being shafted, even if he doesn't
know why or how or by whom, he listens to Limbaugh.
Limbaugh offers him scapegoats.
It's the "feminazis."
It's the minorities.
It's the limousine liberals.
It's all these people with all these wacky social programs to help
some silly, self-proclaimed bunch of victims.
Bubba feels like a victim himself--and he is--but he never got any
sympathy from liberals.
Psychologists often tell us there is a great deal of displaced anger
in our emotional lives--your dad wallops you, but he's too big to hit
back, so you go clobber your little brother.
Displaced anger is also common in our political life.
We see it in this generation of young white men without much education
and very little future.
This economy no longer has a place for them.
The corporations have moved their jobs to Singapore.
Unfortunately, it is Limbaugh and the Republicans who are addressing
the resentments of these folks, and aiming their anger in the wrong
direction.
In my state, I have not seen so much hatred in politics since the
heyday of the John Birch Society in the early 1960s.
Used to be you couldn't talk politics with a conservative without his
getting all red in the face, arteries standing out in his neck,
wattles aquiver with indignation--just like a pissed-off turkey
gobbler.
And now we're seeing the same kind of anger again.
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting, the organization that provided the
absurd Limbaughisms that you see to the right, has a sweet, gentle
faith that truth will triumph in the end, and thinks it is sufficient
to point out that Limbaugh is wrong.
I say it's important to point out that he's not just wrong but that
he's ridiculous, one of the silliest people in America.
Sure, it takes your breath away when he spreads some false and vicious
rumor, such as the story that Vincent Foster's body was actually
discovered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton.
Or when he destroys an important lobby-control bill by falsely
claiming that it would make the average citizen subject to lobbying
laws.
Yes, that's sick and perverse.
But it's important to show people that there is much more wrong with
Limbaugh's thinking than just his facts.
Limbaugh specializes in ad hominem arguments, which are themselves
ridiculously easy to expose.
Ted Kennedy says, "America needs health care reform."
Limbaugh replies, "Ted Kennedy is fat."
Rush Limbaugh's pathetic abuse of logic, his absurd pomposity, his
relentless self-promotion, his ridiculous ego--now those, friends, are
appropriate targets for satire.
_________________________________________________
Thanks, Molly, we'll miss you.
Harry
Lyin' Bully
Commentary:
Instead of picking on someone his own size, Rush consistently targets
dead people, little girls, and the homeless--none of whom can fight
back.
By Molly Ivins
May/June 1995 Issue
One of the things that concerns a lot of Americans lately is the
increase in plain old nastiness in our political discussion.
It comes from a number of sources, but Rush Limbaugh is a major
carrier.
I should explain that I am not without bias in this matter.
I have been attacked by Rush Limbaugh on the air, an experience
somewhat akin to being gummed by a newt.
It doesn't actually hurt, but it leaves you with slimy stuff on your
ankle.
I have a correspondent named Irwin Wingo in Weatherford, Texas.
Irwin and some of the leading men of the town are in the habit of
meeting about 10 every morning at the Chat'n'Chew Cafe to drink coffee
and discuss the state of the world.
One of their number is a dittohead, a Limbaugh listener.
He came in one day, plopped himself down, and said, "I think Rush is
right: Racism in this country is dead. I don't know what the ******s
will find to gripe about now."
I wouldn't say that dittoheads, as a group, lack the ability to
reason.
It's just that whenever I run across one, he seems to be at a low ebb
in reasoning skills.
Poor ol' Bill Sarpalius, one of our dimmer Panhandle congressmen, was
once trying to explain to a town hall meeting of his constituents that
Limbaugh was wrong when he convinced his listeners that Bill Clinton's
tax package contained a tax increase on the middle class.
(It increased taxes only on the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.)
A dittohead in the crowd rose to protest:
"We don't send you to Washington to make responsible decisions. We
send you there to represent us."
The kind of humor Limbaugh uses troubles me deeply, because I have
spent much of my professional life making fun of politicians.
I believe it is a great American tradition and should be encouraged.
We should all laugh more at our elected officials--it's good for us
and good for them.
So what right do I have to object because Limbaugh makes fun of
different pols than I do?
I object because he consistently targets dead people, little girls,
and the homeless--none of whom are in a particularly good position to
answer back.
Satire is a weapon, and it can be quite cruel.
It has historically been the weapon of powerless people aimed at the
powerful.
When you use satire against powerless people, as Limbaugh does, it is
not only cruel, it's profoundly vulgar.
It is like kicking a cripple.
On his TV show, early in the Clinton administration, Limbaugh put up a
picture of Socks, the White House cat, and asked, "Did you know
there's a White House dog?"
Then he put up a picture of Chelsea Clinton, who was 13 years old at
the time and as far as I know had never done any harm to anyone.
When viewers objected, he claimed, in typical Limbaugh fashion, that
the gag was an accident and that without his permission some
technician had put up the picture of Chelsea--which I found as
disgusting as his original attempt at humor.
On another occasion, Limbaugh put up a picture of Labor Secretary
Robert Reich that showed him from the forehead up, as though that were
all the camera could get.
Reich is indeed a very short man as a result of a bone disease he had
as a child.
Somehow the effect of bone disease in children has never struck me as
an appropriate topic for humor.
The reason I take Rush Limbaugh seriously is not because he's
offensive or right-wing, but because he is one of the few people
addressing a large group of disaffected people in this country.
And despite his frequent denials, Limbaugh does indeed have a somewhat
cultlike effect on his dittoheads.
They can listen to him for three and a half hours a day, five days a
week, on radio and television.
I can assure you that David Koresh did not harangue the Branch
Davidians so long nor so often.
But that is precisely what most cult leaders do--talk to their
followers hour after hour after hour.
A large segment of Limbaugh's audience consists of white males, 18 to
34 years old, without college education.
Basically, a guy I know and grew up with named Bubba.
Bubba listens to Limbaugh because Limbaugh gives him someone to blame
for the fact that Bubba is getting screwed.
He's working harder, getting paid less in constant dollars and falling
further and further behind.
Not only is Bubba never gonna be able to buy a house, he can barely
afford a trailer.
Hell, he can barely afford the payments on the pickup.
And because Bubba understands he's being shafted, even if he doesn't
know why or how or by whom, he listens to Limbaugh.
Limbaugh offers him scapegoats.
It's the "feminazis."
It's the minorities.
It's the limousine liberals.
It's all these people with all these wacky social programs to help
some silly, self-proclaimed bunch of victims.
Bubba feels like a victim himself--and he is--but he never got any
sympathy from liberals.
Psychologists often tell us there is a great deal of displaced anger
in our emotional lives--your dad wallops you, but he's too big to hit
back, so you go clobber your little brother.
Displaced anger is also common in our political life.
We see it in this generation of young white men without much education
and very little future.
This economy no longer has a place for them.
The corporations have moved their jobs to Singapore.
Unfortunately, it is Limbaugh and the Republicans who are addressing
the resentments of these folks, and aiming their anger in the wrong
direction.
In my state, I have not seen so much hatred in politics since the
heyday of the John Birch Society in the early 1960s.
Used to be you couldn't talk politics with a conservative without his
getting all red in the face, arteries standing out in his neck,
wattles aquiver with indignation--just like a pissed-off turkey
gobbler.
And now we're seeing the same kind of anger again.
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting, the organization that provided the
absurd Limbaughisms that you see to the right, has a sweet, gentle
faith that truth will triumph in the end, and thinks it is sufficient
to point out that Limbaugh is wrong.
I say it's important to point out that he's not just wrong but that
he's ridiculous, one of the silliest people in America.
Sure, it takes your breath away when he spreads some false and vicious
rumor, such as the story that Vincent Foster's body was actually
discovered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton.
Or when he destroys an important lobby-control bill by falsely
claiming that it would make the average citizen subject to lobbying
laws.
Yes, that's sick and perverse.
But it's important to show people that there is much more wrong with
Limbaugh's thinking than just his facts.
Limbaugh specializes in ad hominem arguments, which are themselves
ridiculously easy to expose.
Ted Kennedy says, "America needs health care reform."
Limbaugh replies, "Ted Kennedy is fat."
Rush Limbaugh's pathetic abuse of logic, his absurd pomposity, his
relentless self-promotion, his ridiculous ego--now those, friends, are
appropriate targets for satire.
_________________________________________________
Thanks, Molly, we'll miss you.
Harry