Issues & Insights

Rush’s Absence Can Make The Right Grow Stronger

I&I Editorial

Rush Limbaugh, who passed away on Wednesday, entered the national political landscape at a time, three decades ago, when his singular talents were sorely needed in America – after the exit of Ronald Reagan, and as liberals were gleefully proclaiming that the end of the Cold War had left conservatives high, dry and irrelevant. Spending the massive “Peace Dividend” was the new challenge, as Washington contemplated the “End of History.”

But Rush may now have just departed at the perfect time too – after the exit of Donald Trump, when the left is defining the Republican Party as lost and gradually disintegrating, its leaders and its voters irreparably split between Trumpers and Never Trumpers.

The truth is that both El Rushbo and The Donald were, like Reagan, great communicators. And what all three communicated were roughly the same set of principles.

Only on Monday, the Wall Street Journal’s Bill McGurn put it succinctly: “If we stick with the policies that made Donald Trump successful – deregulation, cutting taxes, moving the [U.S.] embassy [to Jerusalem] – those are standard conservative principles. He sold them in a unique way, but if the party stays with that it’s not a break with Trump and it’s not a break with its past.”

Economic freedom, getting government out of the way of investors and entrepreneurs, an America that asserts itself effectively in the world, supporting its allies and not losing wars, traditional moral values, judges who judge instead of legislate social revolution – in these general areas there is little difference between Reagan, Trump, and Rush. But what the death of Rush does – and it will dominate Fox News and other conservative media for days – is focus on the fact that these principles go beyond Trump, and were garnering majorities and working well in action pre-Trump.

They are ideas that succeed – but only when articulated effectively. Mitt Romney claiming to the attendees of the 2012 Conservative Political Action Conference that he was “severely conservative” revealed not only that he wasn’t one of them, but that he didn’t understand them, plus that he was willing to hand them a line of baloney. No surprise this fake conservative lost as Republican nominee.

Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, understood everything about conservatism. As he often said, his 20 million listeners tuned in to hear their views validated; sometimes people who don’t live, eat and breath politics can’t always explain themselves eloquently. Rush could, and always did.

Socialism is easy to explain; there’s a problem, there’s a government, so the latter should step in and solve the former. The real world and real remedies require nuance in description. “’Trust me’ government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what’s best for us,” candidate Reagan said in 1980. “Well my view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties … in the people.”

Candidate Trump in 2016 said, “America is one of the highest-taxed nations in the world. Reducing taxes will cause new companies and new jobs to come roaring back into our country. Then we are going to deal with the issue of regulation, one of the greatest job-killers of them all. Excessive regulation is costing our country as much as $2 trillion a year, and we will end it. We are going to lift the restrictions on the production of American energy. This will produce more than $20 trillion in job-creating economic activity over the next four decades.”

More than Reagan’s avuncular folksiness or Trump’s colorful toughness it was the meat of their agenda that got them votes. And Rush Limbaugh spent three hours every weekday diving deep into all the policies that worked – as well as the mischief of the misguided opponents of those ideas, including “feminazis” and “environmentalist wackos.” And he always made it fun – like a David Letterman of politics.

As Americans spend the next days appreciating how Rush did this, they will see that it can and must be done again – not by Rush or Reagan, obviously, and probably not by Donald or any other Trump, but by the great communicators of today and of the future. Knowing this will make the right grow stronger as it gets cracking to find those leaders of tomorrow.

— Written by Thomas McArdle

Will You Help Us In The Fight For Free Speech?

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.

Share

I & I Editorial Board

The Issues and Insights Editorial Board has decades of experience in journalism, commentary and public policy.

Subscribe to Issues & Insights via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to I&I and you can receive notifications of new articles in your email. It’s simple, and free.

Join 5,464 other subscribers

We Could Use Your Help

Will you help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left? Issues & Insights is published by a team of volunteers who believe in free speech and in quality journalism. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on the Tip Jar above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

%d bloggers like this: