The New Yorker: Rush Is A Fussy Baby

By: David Hancock
Topics: Republicans

(The New Yorker)

In one of its less subtler moments, this week's New Yorker depicts conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh as a fussy baby. And not just one screaming, tantrum-throwing infant, but eight of them.

Hmm. What's the message?

Limbaugh, as readers here surely know, has emerged as the chief voice of opposition during the first weeks of Barack Obama's presidency. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs picked up on a statement made by Limbaugh days before the inauguration when Limbaugh said hoped Mr. Obama failed because he didn't believe in the incoming president's policies.

Limbaugh later clarified that position to say "I want the country to succeed and the stated policies of the administration will not achieve that objective … I support the president but I opposed his policies, just as the left claimed to support the troops but opposed their mission of victory. I thus am confident that all conservatives want the country to succeed."

He was in the headlines for weeks after that, at one point challenging Mr. Obama to a debate.

Meanwhile, the designated head of the GOP, Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele has had a bumpy few months since being named to the job in January. His latest misstep involved an interview with GQ in which Steele suggested abortion should be "an individual choice." This prompted a lot of angry reaction from the conservative base and ended with some "I'm pro-life" backpedaling from Steele.

Limbaugh marked his 20th year in syndication this year and signed a contract last year reportedly paying him $38 million a year through 2016.

Now that's something to scream about.

10 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by brianblogger March 21, 2009 8:43 PM EDT: The New Yorker is simply preaching to the choir. Listeners of Rush and conservatives will dismiss this as the tripe it is, it won't change any minds. The Left hates Rush, he doesn't bow down to their leftist toxic agenda as gutless Republicans do, and he has more listeners than newspapers have subscribers and liberal TV shows have viewers. Previewing some of the comments on this thread attacking Rush, it's just standard operating procedure. LIberals can't debate the facts so they have to attack Rush personally.; Reply to this comment


by Republicantillidie March 21, 2009 8:24 PM EDT: I have listened to Rush for almost 20 years now. He is a sane voice of reason ,who I respect greatly. He is a gentleman and an extremely intelligent. I wish HE had run for president. I have a feeling he is far to intelligent to even consider that.One hassle that he didn't need. He also has a great sense of humor and will most definitely get a laugh out of this cover!; Reply to this comment


by yaelleno March 21, 2009 8:09 PM EDT: I know cartoonists try to merge news stories for ironic visuals. I get that Limbaugh is supposed to be the octuplets. But the reason the octuplets are news is because the mother deliberately had them after 6 other young kids, and no income, so they will all be thrown upon the taxpayers to support (and folks feared for the babies' safe care).

Rush Limbaugh is quite self-supporting. He's not doing anything different than ever. If the point is that he's a baby crying, he's been doing it for 20 years. He's not really news. Democrats didn't want Bush to succeed; it's only common sense. It's just that the Obama administration wanted to put a face on their opposition, so they put up Rush's to mock him. Mocking is not actually a political argument but it gathers support just like the bully back in middle school did.; Reply to this comment


by K8EEE March 18, 2009 9:33 PM EDT: Hilarious! RushBo always did remind me of the old Baby Hughie cartoon.

He and Beck both are such characters that it's almost hard to parody them - they do such a good job of it themselves! Funny how a lot of RW "heroes" are like that. Ever see any video of McCarthy? Raving lunatic.; Reply to this comment


by chipsmydog March 17, 2009 1:47 PM EDT: Liberal socialist hypocrites wouldn't tolerate Limbaugh because he opposes socialism and fascism. The liberal hypocrites are also envious of his success. They live as large as they can on the back of free market capitalism while assuaging their fear of persecution by attacking it. Liberals are litigating legislative tyrants who destroy freedom. Prosecute the criminals who abuse freedom. Do not destroy freedom because there are criminals who need to be prosecuted.

By the way, if you want to help the poor, give aggressively to charities, we do. Stop government intrusion into the private sector. Stop trying to fix every problem you perceive on the planet, Big Brother. Stop forcing me to work for the government more and more through the year due to taxes.; Reply to this comment


by zontar1300 March 17, 2009 1:30 PM EDT: You'd be a whining washed-up crybaby reactionary has-been if you were suddenly obsolete too.......; Reply to this comment


by Gzillasam March 17, 2009 11:04 AM EDT: METVS EST PLENA TYRANNIS. Rush ,as with all too many, NEED TO GROW UP. Name calling , finger pointing , incessant nagging , snide , rude and generally disagreeable seems to describe RUSH too well.; Reply to this comment


by cbsblogger March 17, 2009 10:53 AM EDT: Who are the commercial sponsors of Rush Limbaugh? If they make enough profits to fritter away $38M a year on him they are pillaging the system, and I want to be sure I don't support them.; Reply to this comment


by VTchemist March 17, 2009 10:46 AM EDT: In response to wtcmedic, it's just the hypocrisy of the righteous right that I have the hardest time with (as a liberal).; Reply to this comment


by wtcmedic911 March 17, 2009 10:34 AM EDT: liberals love freedom of speech as long as its what they agree with. when you have a different view degrading comments, editorials, covers as this one work to nullify the opposing view and degrade it.; Reply to this comment