Rush Limbaugh and the Mobilization of White Male Anger in the Health Care Debate

Rush Limbaugh's critics have long noted the factual errors and tortured logic that are regular features of his radio program. Not surprisingly, little has changed over the past few months as he has put his stamp on the health care debate. But Limbaugh does not only distort arguments about complex issues like health care through deliberate falsehoods and bad reasoning. His persuasive power lies mostly in his emotional connection with his audience.

Any serious attempt to understand how Limbaugh has made himself into the nation's most influential conservative, and why he has been so effective in shaping the debate about health care, must account for this part of his appeal - especially to those in his primary demographic: middle-aged and older white men.

One of Rush Limbaugh's greatest strengths as a rhetorical alchemist is the way he turns fear into anger - especially men's fear. Limbaugh regularly takes (white) men's sadness, disappointment and apprehension - about a range of political and personal subjects -- and interprets it for them as anger. This is effective, in part, because for so many men, anger is much less treacherous emotional terrain than other emotions - and much more socially acceptable.

In fact, countless men deal with their vulnerability by transferring vulnerable feelings to feelings of anger. The anger then serves to "prove" that they are not, in fact, vulnerable, which would imply they are not man enough to take the pressure. This process affects millions of men in our society, but is especially pronounced in the lives of social conservatives, who are heavily invested in maintaining the tenets and practices of Father Knows Best masculinity.

Throughout his career, Limbaugh has honed an impressive ability to manipulate his callers emotionally. A good example is how he handled an obviously upset man on one of his shows last month. Limbaugh introduced the caller by telling his audience that "Tom," from Wichita, Kansas, "has been waiting on hold for two hours and twenty minutes." Thus the stage was set for a familiar script to unfold, where Rush patiently plays the role of sounding board for a person who is struggling, then explains to them -- and the audience -- how their troubles are caused not by the cold-hearted logic of the capitalist marketplace, the social policies of the Republican party, or their own choices, but by "big government" liberals and power-hungry "socialists" like Obama. Those of us who listen to Limbaugh have heard variations of this script for years.

Tom did indeed tell a tale of woe: He was an army veteran who lost his job early this year. For months he had been looking for work, sending out hundreds of resumes. He had gotten a few interviews, but no job offers. What will happen when his unemployment insurance runs out? "...We're into the red zone. We're cutting essentials: food...laundry, clothing, shoes..." He was clearly worried; in fact he openly admitted that he was "scared to death." Despite his pleas, he repeatedly told Rush that he was not "a whiner."

Tom wanted to know: What was President Obama doing to turn the economy around? Why was the president spending all of this time on health care when people are out of jobs? And what had the stimulus plan done to create jobs for people like him, with a family to support? Luckily for him and his kids, his wife had a job that provided health care for the family. But if something didn't change soon, he was going to have to re-enlist. He said softly, and haltingly, that he had lost his father in Vietnam when he was a young boy, and now at 43 years old he might be going off to war, potentially leaving his own kids fatherless.

The savvy talker saw his opportunity and seized it. "I didn't hear you as whining," Limbaugh reassured him, building to one of his characteristic conversational pivots. "I hear you as mad." It didn't matter whether anyone else heard anger in Tom's voice. I didn't, and it would have taken a considerable amount of auditory acrobatics to do so. What I heard was an anxious, needy man, reaching out for help. Limbaugh let him continue, because although Tom got a chance to speak much more than the typical caller, the master narrative was securely back in Rush's hands. He could twist the distraught caller's plight and emotional vulnerability into an attack on Obama.

Limbaugh is successful because he not only knows how millions of white men think - he knows what pushes their emotional buttons. Better yet, he knows how to steer those men toward conservative political positions that appear to address those concerns, even if the "solutions" they provide are at best woefully inadequate or even counterproductive.

Consider the conversation with Tom. In one clever rhetorical turn, Limbaugh was able to validate the caller's manhood ("you're not a whiner."), and reinterpret the man's "soft" feelings of loss and fear into "hard" feelings of anger and resentment. And he offered the caller scapegoats for his problems: the Democrats! The public employee labor unions! All of Obama's friends who benefited from the hated "porkulus" bill!

A central feature of Limbaugh's appeal is his over-the-top performance of white masculine certitude. The ditto-heads believe that Rush embodies old-fashioned white male authority, the loss of which, many conservatives believe, lies close to the heart of our cultural decline. To many of his critics, Limbaugh is a cartoonish vaudevillian showman. To conservative true believers, he is an authentic "man's man," a cigar-smoking, NFL-watching, red-meat right-winger who's offended by the "feminization" of American society.

His pretense toward patriarchal authority might be compromised by revelations of his drug dependency, his three failed marriages, his use of Viagra, his avoidance of military service during the Vietnam era due to an anal cyst, and the fact that he does not have children. Nonetheless, he talks a great game. He is, after all, the King of Talk Radio. Millions of people tune into his show on a daily basis because, as he constantly reminds his audience, Rush Knows Best.

Tom from Wichita seemed well aware who he was talking to, which explains why he kept insisting that he was not a whiner. Real men don't cry on Rush Limbaugh's lap. But then again, Tom was not a typical dittohead. He was either naïve enough -- or brave enough -- to say "...my self-esteem is right now at its lowest that I've ever had it....I'm getting choked up."

"I know," Limbaugh replied in a well-timed display of empathy, the kind he reserves for callers whose heartfelt testimonies put flesh on his ideological pronouncements. "I've been there."

Since Rush often mentions that he, too, was unemployed much earlier in his career, he had the standing to say that he felt Tom's pain. But what he didn't say is as revealing as what he said. He affirmed Tom's frustration that the stimulus bill hadn't provided enough "shovel-ready" jobs. But he never mentioned that he was ideologically opposed to the stimulus bill in the first place. He attacked it daily for weeks. Limbaugh's answer to the plight of unemployed working people such as Tom? Stimulate the economy with yet further tax cuts for the wealthy.

Limbaugh's conservatism has nothing to offer working and middle-class people, especially those whose jobs have been downsized and outsourced as capital flees in search of cheaper labor markets. Limbaugh's empathy is solely rhetorical: for twenty years he has consistently opposed progressive efforts to use government to improve people's lives through public policies such as increased spending on public higher education, job retraining, and health insurance reform. Let the market do it!

Throughout the entire call, Limbaugh studiously avoided offering any information or analyses that might disrupt his tidy little narrative, such as the fact that the very unemployment insurance that had been Tom's life-blood for months had come about during FDR's New Deal, and was passed by a Democratic congress with strong pressure from organized labor over the objection of pro-business Republicans and conservatives of both parties. If Limbaugh's predecessors had had their way, Tom would never even have received any unemployment insurance to help him through these tough times.

Of course Limbaugh also never brought up Obama's contention, which is shared by the vast majority of Democrats and the dwindling cadre of fiscally responsible Republicans, that health insurance reform is part and parcel of economic recovery, because one of the reasons for huge job losses in the U.S. over the past couple of decades, especially in the manufacturing sector, is that American companies can't compete with foreign corporations whose countries provide free health care as a right of citizenship.

The only way an elitist multimillionaire like Rush Limbaugh can appear empathetic with self-described "average Americans" like Tom is to avoid talking about any of this. Instead, in the health care debate "el Rushbo" has chosen once again to use his formidable rhetorical skills to serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful as a master propagandist, one who can channel the emotions of vulnerable, out-of-work family men (and women) away from the source of their anguish - rapacious health insurance companies and their conservative mouthpieces in Congress - and turn them against the one U.S. president who's gotten the closest to providing quality health care for all Americans.

Comments

[raechel]

Wow. Great analysis. It certainly hasn't escaped my attention that the "loonies" and "crazies" we're seeing at town halls, etc. are nearly all white male. There's obviously something going on, although I, like many women, hesitate to say much because -- well, angry men are dangerous to the rest of us. Now I have a context, and I'm going to think about how we can defuse this problem. It's not OK to strap on a gun because you don't have a job! And it's certainly not ok to manipulate vulnerable men to your own purposes, and to their disadvantage.

[old lady]

Bring it on, Rush - we femmi-nazi's have been waiting years for a shot at you. You and your impotent ditzohead followers can't keep up - we women will outlive you and the minority populations you're so neurotic about are fast becoming the majority. Preparations are underway for the "Adios Senor Rush" celebration - I hear it will be a national holiday.

[jsgaetano]

Only Goopers and their hate radio can appeal to the rage of the enfranchised.

[Subversive]

While Mr. Katz analysis of Limbaugh is essentially correct, it is doesn't make any difference because Limbaugh is a demagogue of the first order. Contrary arguments and logical reasoning are not only wholly lost on right-wing talk radio, they are irrelevant. But back in the Thirties and Forties at least the fearmongers could be beaten back one at a time. America has always had demagogues on both sides, but never in history have they had nationwide programs from which to spew their vitriol with a reach that Father Coughlin, Billy Sunday, and Amy Semple McPherson could only dream about. So long as Limbaugh and his ilk are allowed to say whatever they want with no regard for fact, logic, and basic common sense, fear and demagoguery will rule and the people will suffer.

[abelenkpe]

How do we change things so that people like Rush are not allowed to say whatever the want with no regard to fact, logic or basic common sense?

I'd love to live in that world.

[raechel]

Rather than controlling speech we don't like (welcome to authoritarianism), let's put some thought to what we can say to undermine the message of hate that spews from Limbaugh. How can we turn people away?

[Bronxdude]

Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is running for Governor of Texas, recently said that she would like for public education to return to the same type of system she enjoyed growing-up in Galveston, Texas. Really? Born in 1943, Senator Hutchison attended segregated schools from kindergarten through college. Under Court order, Texas schools were forced to desegregate in 1971, 18 years after desegregation became federal law. The republican mantra of restoring America’s “traditional values,” which is code for resurrecting Jim Crow era policies, continues to be the war cry for conservatives. Change invariably generates baseless fear, which was the case in 1964 when President Johnson pushed the Civil Rights Act through Congress. Comfortable with the status quo, white southerners ginned up fear by proclaiming from the pulpit that granting blacks equal protection under the Constitution would transform America into a banana republic; thus, based on orders from degenerate Christian segregationists, across the nation, black men, women and children were systematically raped, murdered and brutalized. Fast forward to 2009, spurred on by the repulsion of a black president, and desperate to stop the hemorrhaging of their political power, the Republican Party has evolved into a regional, rudderless mob of bigots and malcontents hell-bent on maintaining control through civil war. Republicans and their Neanderthal-base are petrified that the racial make-up of America is changing, which is why they are directing their hatred towards delegitimizing, dehumanizing and disrespecting President Obama.

[Bronxdude]

John Ensign (adulterer), David Vitter (adulterer), Mark Foley (soliciting boys for sex), Larry Craig (soliciting men for sex), Dick Cheney (querulans paranoia), Rush Limbaugh (drug induced ego neurosis), Ann Coulter (confabulation psychosis), Chuck Grassley (imbecility), Glenn Beck (desanimania), Sarah Palin (narcissistic pathoneurosis), Newt Gingrich (adulterer…while wife was hospitalized and dying of cancer, Newt abandoned her for his secretary) and Mark Sanford (adulterer): The meltdown of the racist, misogynistic, homophobic and xenophobic GOP brain trust charged with restoring America’s “traditional values,” which is code for resurrecting Jim Crow, continues unabated. While touting their morally superior Christian values, and simultaneously promoting themselves as the self-appointed messianic saviors of America, these holier than thou, self-absorbed, self-righteous buffoons underscore the toxic hypocrisy and caustic ignorance that underlies the conservative movement—the party of debauchery, Birthers, liars, Tinfoil Hatters and double standards. It would seem that in order to be a republican, you must be willing to abandon independent thought and have someone else think for you. Republicans are not concerned with what is best for working-class Americans; thus, not matter what concessions democrats make, republicans will never support healthcare reform because they are in bed with big business. Using fear tactics taken straight from McCarthyism, republicans will label as socialism any initiative that benefits the working-class. Historically, republicans have opposed social security, Medicare, Medicaid, public health, school lunch programs and public housing. Enough…public option now!

[Bronxdude]

In their quest to concoct reality, spread paranoia, encourage dissension, and kowtow to their shrinking birther base, the republicans are inciting people to violence in the name of democracy. Spurred on by vitriolic racist like Limbaugh and Beck, republicans validate hate and are hell-bent on igniting a race war, pitting American against American (unlike the 50s, however, the ensuing violence will be reciprocal). Using code words and phrases, republicans spew inflammatory rhetoric designed to agitate racists, fanatics, segregationists and conservative malcontents and then claim no complicity when these lunatics commit violent and heinous acts aimed at restoring America’s “traditional values,” which is code for resurrecting Jim Crow, misogyny, xenophobia, and other shameful policies associated with pre-1960s America. The republican party has evolved into a mob hell-bent on dividing and conquering our great nation. Southern republican Neanderthals are petrified that the ethic and social fabric and racial make-up of America is changing, and they can’t stop it. Diversity now, diversity forever!

[pfc1369]

I listened to Limbaugh years ago when he was on locally in Sacramento, California.

In those early days it was amazing to hear someone on the radio build an audience by constantly excoriating the very weakest segments of society, the homeless, the poor and especially advocates for rights of any kind, including animal protection and environmentalists.

These are the groups he so bravely attacked with lies, sarcasm, insane exaggeration, and of course endless bombast.

Women were alway a target.

He obviously struck gold with these inanities, and went on to poison the public well beyond his wildest dreams.

[eyelashviper]

Good post. Rush is a fine example of sociopathy in its most virulent form, and his words and toxic diatribes are as lethal as any weapon.

[c2morow]

THANK YOU!!! Rush IS the very definition of socipathic behaviour. You are my first ever "fanned".

[cobraxus]

I live in upstate NY and you cannot go anywhere without hearing Rush Limbaugh or one of his ditto-clones.Unless you've lived amongst this element of humanity you have no idea how bad it is.What you hear being spouted on AM Talk Radio is what I grew up having to listen to from my teachers who used the classroom as a podium for their reactionary views.
Ditto-Logic goes something like this:as white American men were once like gods upon this earth.nobody was better than us or could tell us what to do.then the liberals and feminists and affirmative action and gays and illegal immigrants came along and took it all away from us.now they have all the power and we're their slaves!I call it the protracted whine of white male entitlement.

[lesterbud]

You summed up not just why Rush's gig works so well, but why he is the way he is:

He fears women - turned that into hate of the feminists that ruined his three marriages and why he has to resort to pills to get aroused.

He fears Blacks - turned that into hate of the "Socialist President" that is ruining "Our" country and any other Black leaders that stand up against "The Natural Order".

He Fears Change - turned that into hate of all progressive movements. If he had been around at the time, he would have been vitriolic against revolution from England, emancipation of slaves, women's vote, any form of immigration (Irish?), WWI and WWII, and the Civil Rights Act.

He Fears Being Poor - turned into hatred of all threats to unfettered power of the rich and privileged. He is for anything that keep poor folks poor and makes rich folks richer - he will tell poor folks, with all the fake sincerity he can muster, why being against this premise is to be un-American, unpatriotic - socialist!.

His personal life is a mess - he should be the last person to comment on marriage and family issues. Given his addictions, alcoholism and drug dependencies - should be the last to comment on personal morality/r­esponsibil­ity. Given his dodging of military service - should be the last to comment on foreign policy and war on terror.

But comment he does - and his mindless minions ignore the hypocrisy

[KYlawyer]

Well said fanned and faved.

[gloriousbeing]

Consider yourself fanned!

[postman66]

Rush's entire career has been built on white male angst.

[68-lukeburlington]

Obama is hardly the liberal decried by Boss Limbaugh! http://www.suburbanempire.com Thinks Obama would best help his country by tapping into his inner "Andrew Shepherd"... we can only hope!

Left wing sass served up fresh daily by folks in Vermont......so you know it's liberal!

[mediaman]

The controlling emotions are not fear converted to anger. They are fear coupled with hate. Burdick addressed the application of hate and fear to politics in his novel, "The Ninth Wave." If you can locate a copy it makes interesting but frightening reading..

[unite4change]

How can you explain the lack of anger toward the white men who been running the country forever?

[jazabelz]

Fear! And the hope that they can become the same if they just tow the line!

[skullman]

I think the word "uneducated" needs to be added to "white male".

[PoliticalJunkie65]

I know many cases of guys who love Limbaugh who are educated.

Perhaps background would be more appropriate? Older, who come from small towns/rural areas, who appreciate the way "it was"?

Would I be off on this assessment?