Rush Limbaugh vs. Michael Steele

Original Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2009/mar/03/republicans-usa

By Daniel Nasaw

Limbaugh prevailed this round, winning control of the Republican line on Obama's economic policy. The message? Obama's ambitious economic agenda should fail so that Republican 2010 and 2012 electoral prospects may improve.

The Republican party's search for a media front man has so far yielded little. House minority whip Eric Cantor won early plaudits for persuading House Republicans to vote unanimously against Obama's fiscal stimulus package -- but the bill passed anyway. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal's response to Obama's state of the union was mocked as a condescending, sing-song reiteration of the anti-tax, anti-government policies that Americans have turned on.

Party chairmen are typically behind-the-scenes fundraisers and operations men, not media stars. But when Michael Steele was elected chairman of the Republican party in a contentious fight in January, he pledged to revamp the Republican party's message -- though not its policies -- to win over minority, urban and coastal voters who have abandoned the party in droves in the last two election cycles.

Since then, Rush Limbaugh has reemerged as the preeminent spokesman for conservative America, and over the weekend, he beat out Steele for control over the GOP bullhorn.

The latest tiff for control of the party message began Saturday evening, when Limbaugh gave a rambling, disjointed, red-meatspeech at the conservative political action conference, an influential rally of conservative activists. He made an ethnic crack at the Republican star of the week Bobby Jindal, denounced the "drive-by media" and the "race industry", mocked the poor and denounced Obama's effort to restore equity to US economic and fiscal policy.

The speech is long on anger and resentment and short on policy prescriptions or political advice. (See if you can find any substantive suggestions the Republicans can use to win an election). A major theme of the speech is Limbaugh's defence of his widely criticised recent comments that he wants Obama to "fail".

What is so strange about being honest to say that 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 foundation? Why would I want that to succeed?

The White House leapt at the chance to elevate the polarising, hard-right talk-show host's stature. Rush has a massive following -- an estimated 20m listeners -- but is unlikely ever to run for office, has no substantive policy ideas, and turns off the centrist voters the Obama needs in his corner during the ongoing stimulus and budget fights in Washington.

On a CBS Sunday morning news programme, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel described Limbaugh as "the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party. And he has been up front about what he views, and hasn't stepped back from that, which is, he hopes for failure."

Meanwhile, Limbaugh picked another fight -- with Steele -- and seems to have come out victorious.

Saturday night on CNN Steele, who in January defeated two old-line southern White conservatives for the party chairman's post, asserted himself over Limbaugh. "I'm the de facto leader of the Republican Party," he said, then called Limbaugh an "entertainer" whose rhetoric is "incendiary" and "ugly".

Thrilled to debate the titular head of the Republican national committee, Limbaugh pounced yesterday, saying, in essence, I'll do my job and you do yours.

It's time, Mr. Steele, for you to go behind the scenes and start doing the work that you were elected to do instead of trying to be some talking head media star, which you're having a tough time pulling off.

...

I would be embarrassed to say that I'm in charge of the Republican Party in the sad-sack state that it's in. If I were chairman of the Republican Party, given the state that it's in, I would quit. I might get out the hari-kari knife because I would have presided over a failure that is embarrassing to the Republicans and conservatives who have supported it and invested in it all these years. I certainly couldn't say I am proud of the Republican Party, as I am leading the Republican Party. Right now the Republican Party needs to be led, and it will be. The next Republican president is going to be the head of the party. Last time I checked, I don't think Mr. Steele is running.

Limbaugh then accuses Steele and Washington Republicans of wanting "President Obama and Speaker Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid to succeed with their massive spending and taxing and nationalization plans" -- that is, White House and congressional efforts to right the US economy.

Steele subsequently apologised to Rush. In an interview with Politico, Steele said:

My intent was not to go after Rush – I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh.

I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. … There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership. I went back at that tape and I realized words that I said weren't what I was thinking. It was one of those things where I thinking I was saying one thing, and it came out differently. What I was trying to say was a lot of people … want to make Rush the scapegoat, the bogeyman, and he's not.

The skirmish is over and it appears Steele has ceded control, for now, of the Republican line on Obama's early administration. The message Steele has endorsed? That Obama's ambitious economic agenda should fail so that Republican's 2010 and 2012 electoral prospects may improve.