Rush Limbaugh out on a Limb?

Yesterday, a friend who is seldom ruffled by things I consider outrageous, cocked his head and asked with incredulity, "Did you hear what Rush Limbaugh said about Michael J. Fox?" I mentioned I had seen a clip on ABC news where Limbaugh proclaimed that Fox was doing nothing more than "acting" in the ads done to spur stem cell research. Later, according to the report, Limbaugh apologized, though we didn't get to hear what or how he did this.

My friend went on to tell me that Limbaugh also accused Fox of deliberately going off his medication in order to make his physical gyrations more pronounced. In fact, according to the consultation he had done with physicians, he learned that Parkinson's victims who are taking their medication are much more likely to sway. Off their medication, they slide toward rock-like immobility.

"What possibly is Limbaugh's appeal?" my friend asked me. I said I believed Limbaugh's appeal is centered in how he talks. He is haughty, arrogant, and, most especially, disdainful. His tone of voice often is intensely scornful and loathing. The people and behavior he attacks are the focus of scathing, shaming comments. Only the lowest of the low would ever be caught being and doing what he so cavalierly slams. Anybody who doesn't agree with him is, by implication, a fool or worse.

Conversely, those who agree with him clearly are nobody's fool (at least not one of Limbaugh's fools). While the subject of his rants tends to be understood as conservative, the content actually is secondary to the source of his power, which is his use of intense disdain. There are many who believe there is more than a grain of truth in his positions, but few who go to such an extreme degree to make the disbelievers out to be such obvious idiots.

Psychologically speaking, his extreme approach taps into two powerful streams, safety and the narcissism-shame continuum. The psychoanalytic concept of identification with the aggressor is used to explain any number of things such as why people are friends with a bully or why some who are abused as children end up being abusers themselves. If you have a choice between being a victim, feeling helpless and powerless to protect oneself, and being a bully, it is safer to be the latter than the former. "Hey, don't hit me, Mr. Bully, I am on your side. In fact, I'll do some of your dirty work for you just to prove it." When Mr. Limbaugh is beating up on people verbally, some of his fans - "ditto-heads" - will cluster around him, seeking safety by identifying with him and absolutely not identifying with the targets of his attacks.

The other strong appeal, definitely related, is found in what I see as the narcissism-shame continuum. Narcissism is a highly inflated sense of self worth as reflected in the eyes of others and intense shame is a highly deflated sense of self worth as reflected in the eyes of others. If someone has more than a bit of insecurity or lack of sense of self-worth (and who doesn't, being the finite human creatures we are), then one of the easiest ways to feel better about oneself is to feel superior to someone else. Mr. Limbaugh specializes in this. He does all the work and his listeners can reap all the benefits. A hit of Limbaugh will at least temporarily overcome even the slightest sense of feeling down, stupid, unworthy, or incompetent.

As mentioned above, the content is secondary to the form of expression. I have encountered more than one liberal who was extremely self-righteous and dismissive of contrary points of view. One man, a highly-educated minister, was particularly harsh with any and all who might disagree with his views on war and the environment. But I find that there seems to be more public support for conservatives who fill this awful niche and I think it has something to do with George Lakoff's thesis of the strict father vs. the nurturing parent models. The issues and methodology of the conservative, strict father position morph rather easily to disdainful shaming whereas the spirit of the nurturing parent position would more naturally seek to overcome this tendency.

Yes, I would like Rush Limbaugh to go off the air, at least until he finds and starts living out of the kinder and more compassionate side to his soul. His form of emotional poison does all of us damage because it does not lead to understanding. Any element of truth in his positions won't be heard by those he opposes and clearly he is not interested in respectfully seeking out the elements of truth in other positions. He models intolerance, not respect. If one does but a quick glance around the world, it is easy to see that we do not need more streams of intolerance flowing into our global network. On the other hand, we do need much more respect being expressed. We also need to cultivate a deep hunger for compassionate understanding of those who differ from us.

Do I want him forcefully removed? No, for I do firmly believe in free speech. The only way he will go off the air is when many more people in our society mature to the point that they simply stop tuning into and therefore enabling Mr. Limbaugh' s unhealthy behavior. When he loses his appeal, and when someone else with the same mean-spirited style does not take his place, I will be hopeful that God's grace is indeed more present in our collective hearts.

-David E. Roy

Copyright 2006 by David E. Roy, All Rights Reserved.

Return to Home