Notwithstanding the enthusiastic reception he received last night at CPAC, at least one prominent Republican Congressional leader doesn’t agree with Rush Limbaugh’s view of the world:
During our exclusive interview on “This Week,” Republican Whip Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., rejected comments made by Rush Limbaugh at the CPAC conference.
Defending his attacks against President Barack Obama’s economic plans, Limbaugh said Saturday to the conservative conference, “What is so strange about being honest and saying I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundations?”
Cantor today rejected Limbaugh’s rhetoric.
“So the Rush Limbaugh approach of hoping the president fails is not the Eric Cantor, House Republican approach?” I asked.
“Absolutely not,” Cantor said. “And I don’t — I don’t think anyone wants anything to fail right now. We have such challenges. What we need to do is we need to put forth solutions to the problems that real families are facing today.”
Cantor had more to say that makes me think he might just be one of those Republicans who gets it:
“There is no question the Republican Party has to return to be one of inclusion, not exclusion,” Cantor said when I asked him if he was willing to move the party to the middle on issues like the environment and gay rights.
“We are a party with many ideas. And we have in that a commitment to make sure that we have positive alternatives, if we don’t agree with this administration,” Cantor said.
This seems to be an example of the new Republican rhetoric that I wrote about earlier this week.
Here’s the full Cantor interview, which is worth watching:
Update: Steven Taylor makes this excellent point about Limbaugh and his influence in the Republican Party:
Limbaugh is primarily an entertainer who wants as much attention as he can possibly get, because attention means listeners, listeners means ratings and ratings means increased advertising revenues. One can point out all one likes that Limbaugh is being hypocritical by calling for a president to fail during a time of war, but the bottom like is that he is, to strain a phrase, hypocritical like a fox. He is getting as much attention as he has in some time, if ever, through he positioning himself as a major voice of opposition at the moment.
It is this later point that is, however, a problem for the Republican Party, as they need real leadership, not simply a talk radio host who is free to say whatever he likes without actually having to do the heavy lifting like winning elections and governing. Rush will appeal to a specific segment of the GOP base, who will applaud what he says, but he does not represent a serious solution to the problems facing the Republican Party at this point in time. Indeed, he is going to come across as simply an angry blow-hard to all but the faithful and the degree to which the GOP is seen as the party of Limbaugh (and Joe the Plumber, for that matter), the more difficult it will be for the party to rebuild itself.
In other words, Limbaugh is, as I’ve always said, an entertainer whose job it is to maximize ratings for his network and it’s advertisers. To the extent he does that by making controversial political statements that cause people to tune in to hear what he’s going to say next, he succeeds. He’s the political equivalent of Howard Stern, a shock-jock who says what he says for ratings, and does it very, very well.
What he is not, though, is any guide for what the Republicans need to do to get back on track.
I doubt the cheering masses at CPAC realized the truth of either of those points last night.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 am
You are exactly right. Rush is an ENTERTAINER. Cantor is right. We need to be the party of inclusion and come up with solutions. And THAT is the PARTY’S job. Not Rush.Rush is the cheerleader and, sometimes, asst. coach. He is pointing out the dangers of becoming the Democrat-lite party that he saw forming. Why shouldn’t he want Obama’s policies to fail if he feels that those policies are worse. Of course, for Obama’s policies to fail, he feels that conservative policies should replace them. I want the economy to improve. I just don’t feel that Obama’s policies will help and did not want them to pass. That is Rush’s position. Should Conservatives jump on the band wagon? Cantor, of course, has to work in the circus. And Obama is the ringmaster. He has to work with his fellow politicians. Rush doesn’t and will use that freedom to point out problems that he sees. If the GOP doesn’t stand up for its closely held principles, the GOP should fail, too. As it has. Why does a party, or anyone, have to give up their principles to “get things done?” Why shouldn’t the Left abandon, I”m sorry, compromise, some of THEIR principles? I thought that this was the post partisan age. Instead we get Republicans locked out of committees, Bills passed blindly, and told that thing are going to be Obama’s way or the highway, because “he won.”
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:48 pm
[...] Eric Cantor isn’t the only Republican distancing himself from Rush Limbaugh these days: On the same night he was offering the keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference, Rush Limbaugh drew criticism from an unlikely source: Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. [...]