Rush Limbaugh Owes Democracy an Apology

Rush Limbaugh Owes Democracy an Apology

Rush Limbaugh Owes Democracy an Apology

Of course, the radio personality was wrong to attack Georgetown student Sandra Fluke. But this goes beyond what has been said about a woman who dared to speak up. Limbaugh is attacking basic premises of representative democracy.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Syndicated talk radio host Rush Limbaugh got so upset over the able articulation of an opposing view by Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University Law School student who testified before members of Congress in order to highlight concerns about limits on access to contraception, that he attacked her as a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

This was no slip of the conservative commentator’s tongue. This was an elite media personality with a national media platform seeking to silence a citizen.

When concerns were raised about his vile language, Limbaugh doubled down and restated his attacks on Fluke.

The attacks were so over the top that Georgetown students, national groups and President Obama rallied to Fluke’s defense.

Fluke has ably defended herself in interviews on national news programs. She’s a strong young woman who has proven herself more than equal to the task of responding to a shocking assault on her as an individual—and on her right to speak as an American citizen.

It is the second assault that should concern everyone—no matter what their partisanship, no matter what their ideological bent.

While Limbaugh certainly owes Fluke an apology, the fact is that the radio host owes a broader apology.

Limbaugh attacked fluke for speaking up before Congress on an issue of national concern.

Fluke stepped into the limelight not as an entertainer or a political player. She did not seek fame or fortune. She spoke up as a citizen.

And that’s what is so unsettling about Limbaugh’s crude language and cruder stance as this controversial incident has exploded.

Prominent political players and media personalities can get pretty rough with one another. No one is objecting to the give and take that characterizes electioneering and governing. This is not about constraining the discourse, nor even about promoting civility.

What is at stake here is something that does far deeper, and matters far more.

When political and media figures with national prominence use their positions to attack individual citizens who dare to speak up about controversial concerns, they do not just attack the citizens.

They attack the basic premises of a representative democracy in which citizens do not just have a right to freedom of speech. If the American experiment is to work, citizens have a responsibility to speak truth to power. It is not easy to do that. But it is necessary if we are to keep alive the founding principle, as articulated by Thomas Jefferson: “Whenever our affairs go obviously wrong, the good sense of the people will interpose and set them to rights.”

At a point when political players, most of them men, were going obviously wrong with regard to policies affecting women, Sandra Fluke spoke up.

She performed a necessary duty of citizenship.

Citizens need to challenge their political leaders—and the media echo chamber that amplifies the self-serving messages of those leaders. We have enough of a problem in this country with the media’s casual dismissal of the voices of the poor, of working people, of people of color, of trade unionists, of rural Americans and of the young. When the dismissals turn aggressive and unforgiving, as was the case with Limbaugh’s attack of Fluke, the promise of citizenship is assaulted.

And when elitists so powerful as Rush Limbaugh seeks to silence citizens so sincere and appropriately engaged as Sandra Fluke, with personal attacks, crude language and constant criticism, those elitists attack democracy itself.

John Nichols’s new book on protests and politics, Uprising: How Wisconsin Renewed the Politics of Protest, from Madison to Wall Street, has just been publshed by Nation Books. Follow John Nichols on Twitter @NicholsUprising.

Can we count on you?

In the coming election, the fate of our democracy and fundamental civil rights are on the ballot. The conservative architects of Project 2025 are scheming to institutionalize Donald Trump’s authoritarian vision across all levels of government if he should win.

We’ve already seen events that fill us with both dread and cautious optimism—throughout it all, The Nation has been a bulwark against misinformation and an advocate for bold, principled perspectives. Our dedicated writers have sat down with Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders for interviews, unpacked the shallow right-wing populist appeals of J.D. Vance, and debated the pathway for a Democratic victory in November.

Stories like these and the one you just read are vital at this critical juncture in our country’s history. Now more than ever, we need clear-eyed and deeply reported independent journalism to make sense of the headlines and sort fact from fiction. Donate today and join our 160-year legacy of speaking truth to power and uplifting the voices of grassroots advocates.

Throughout 2024 and what is likely the defining election of our lifetimes, we need your support to continue publishing the insightful journalism you rely on.

Thank you,
The Editors of The Nation

Ad Policy
x