The Rush Limbaugh-Barack Obama Matchup


As someone who has listened, off and on, to Rush Limbaugh's radio show for some 20+ years, I must be something unique since I can not say I qualify as one of his "ditto-heads," ie, people who totally subscribe To everything the Rush-man preaches.

I also can not say that I share what looks to be the true reverence for the guy that many of his other 20,000,000 listeners profess. To be frank, Rush Limbaugh is a pompous blowhard as well as being frequently obnoxious, often egotistical, and possibly hypocritical and insensitive, all of which would suggest I do not like or respect the man which would be an incorrect assumption.

Point is, despite his negatives his positives far outweigh them. He may be all of the above but Rush Limbaugh is our pompous, obnoxious, egotistical, hypocritical, insensitive blowhard and easily the most valuable asset the American Conservative movement has in its arsenal.

Rush Hudson Limbaugh, 58, a thrice married, thrice divorced advocate of family values, an admitted former addict to illicitly-acquired oxycontin who preaches against illegal drugs, and a cigar aficionado, is essentially a good man.

He has his quirks as we all do and he also happens to be a very rich man thanks to his extended success as a political commentator and a 2002, 8-year contract from Clear Channel Communications reputedly worth $ 31.25 million a year which he signed knowing he Was going deaf.

Deafness is a significant drawback for a radio guy, although Rush successfully had a successful cochlear implant which effectively returned the gift of hearing to him. Still, he signed that huge contract under false pretenses, which is one issue I have with him even if things worked out for both him and Clear Channel. Clear Channel was evidently satisfied since it signed an 8-year contract extension with Limbaugh last year for a reported astronomical $ 400 million.

Like him or hate him, barely tolerate him or hardly know him, "The Rush Limbaugh Show" and his Excellence in Broadcasting (EIB) network, an imaginary Limbaugh construct, will be on the air until near the end of Obama's second term. The president may or may not get that term but Rush already has his contract.

Rush contends he has been proven right on his prognostications, critical observations, and opinions some 99% + of the time, as certified by an objective, outside source. I'm not sure that's statistically verifiable but that's irrelevant. I agree with him about 90-95% of the time, and vice versa, and that's fine by me.

There's no need to reclaim all Rush Limbaugh's accomplishments, awards, recognitions since he does a fine job regularly referencing them himself. Suffice to say that he has received more auspicious awards than any other personality in radio history.

Beyond that, for anyone out there who has never heard him expound on where he stands on the issues and policies of the day, who has never tuned into a few hours of his fifteen hours a week air time, rather than detailing them I would refer The curious to his website, As with many other successful website entrepreneurs, he has a basic and a pay-to-watch, "Rush 24/7" additional feature which, considering his millions, strikes me as a tad tacky and rapacious.

The brouhaha referred to in this article title reflect to what's currently going on with Rush and the new president. In a word, it's shameful. The shame does not extend to Limbaugh since he neither provoked nor encouraged it.

Rush did say that he hoped Obama would fail, to which the administration reacted as if he had said he hoped the country would fail. In fact, Rush has explained, he hoped Obama would fail in such efforts as spending us into oblivion, socializing medical care in America, expanding abortion rights and overruling state sanctions against killing babies, and crippling freedom of speech by muzzling talk radio. I agree, but those policies are not the only causes for Obama's shame.

As Sean Hannity, another conservative talk show host, did during and since the last campaign, Rush has extended an invitation to President Obama to debt him on his show, all 3 hours of his show, if Obama wishes. The format for the debate would have no holds barred, with no shortcomings such as Rahm Emanuel as substitutes or advisers, no modulators to tailor softball questions, and will certainly be devoid of any teleprompters, a prospect which if nothing else should give Obama a serious Case of the hershey squirts.

Why, though, would a sitting president deign to accept such an invite from a man the Obama administration has already described as merely "an entertainer," a put-down clearly implying inconsequential? For better or worse, Obama is now America's commander-in-chief, America's chief executive, the ostensible leader of the Free World. Why would a radio talk show host, an entertainer with 20 million listeners, have the temerity, the audacity, the gonads to ask the president of the United States of America to be a guest on his program and to debate him?

The answer goes directly to the shame of it all, and to the amateur, bumbling nature of this president and his administration: They picked a fight with that radio talk show host by designating him the leader, the spokesman for the party of the loyal opposition , The Republican Party.

I guess you can not expect much different from a nascent administration that invites the co-founder of Twitter to come to the White House to help counsel the president on the economy. As that co-founder, Ev Williams commented, on his Twitter, this "must mean they're really * out of ideas."

Well, they had an idea a week ago, not a very good idea but an idea, after Rush's rousing speech at the CPAC conference, the transcript and videos of which could be seen on his website, without charge

See here for a slew of articles on detailing the genesis of how the White House got itself into this absurd slapdown with Limbaugh:

Do not look for any whys since there is no rational why to explain the White House actions on the brouhaha in which it bypassed elected Republican leaders such as Rep. John Boehner, Sen. Mitch McConnell, and RNC head, Michael Steele.

Essentially, Rush was elevated to the position of leader of the Republican Party by the Democratic Party. The only decent and polite thing to do was for the leader of the Reps to challenge the leader of the Dems to a contest, no?

How the debate question and the potential debate itself all plays out is anyone's guess. Rush will no doubt follow through if the invite is accepted. With Obama? Who can tell? What is definite is that this president has already tarnished the office with his buffoonery so he might as well accept. What could he lose?

Personally, I'd prefer to watch Obama and Rush engage in a sumo / mud-wrestling exhibition with the winner to run the country.

I'd be betting on Limbaugh.