If there is one good thing I can say about Republicans, it's that they really know how to stay on message and create an ongoing narrative. For the past thirty years, they have managed to turn "liberal", "socialist", "wealth re-distribution", and "government spending" into four-letter words to a lot of independents and moderates. We are at a particular point in history, however, where progressives can utilize this same method to all but bury the GOP in 2010.
There is no question in anyone's mind that Rush Limbaugh has, in fact emerged as the de facto leader of the Republican party. I have no doubt that a good portion of the GOP is in heavy denial over this, but we have already witnessed what happens when it is publicly challenged. Georgia congressman Phil Gingrey certainly learned what the price is of publicly decrying Limbaugh. The reaction from the base was swift and fierce, and a day later, Gingrey had no choice but to grovel at Limbaugh's throne and beg for his forgiveness.
This presents a tremendous opportunity to drive a permanent wedge into the Republican party and create one of two potential scenarios: One in which the GOP unites behind Limbaugh and permanently alienates the party from moderates, or one in which the GOP publicly seperates itself from Limbaugh and ignites a destructive civil war within the party itself.
According to a recent Gallup poll, Limbaugh remains popular among Republicans, but has an unfavorable rating among 45% of independents and 63% of Democrats. Essentially, all you have to do is utter his name to invoke a negative reaction among nearly half of all independents, and this creates a golden opportunity for progressives to create a narrative that could very well enter into the mainstream media.
How is it done? We introduce new terms into the vernacular. From now on, no longer use the term "Republican Party". Instead, replace it with "Rush Limbaugh Party". End usage of the term "GOP" and replace it with "RLP". Use it every time you post a diary or comment, or create a blog entry, or write a letter to the editor, or to your representatives. Use it in everyday conversation; it may confuse some at first, but give them a moment or two and they'll understand what you mean.
Using these new terms is powerful because every time you say it, it puts a member of the Rush Limbaugh Party in a defensive position. If they try to correct you, it's a simple matter of immediately challenging them on whether or not Limbaugh is, in fact, the head of the party. With that, they are immediately backed into a corner that they can't get out of. Feel free to cross your arms and look smug at this point.
Now I'm sure some people are thinking, "Why give Limbaugh more exposure? Wouldn't it be better to ignore him?" In my humble opinion, the answer is no. Limbaugh makes a living by selling a product, and that product is inflammatory rhetoric. If he does not utter divisive statements, then he loses his audience. And that's why it's so important that we keep him out there and exposed to as many people as possible. Every time he utters a statement as bad as or worse than "I hope he fails", we can go after members of the Rush Limbaugh Party and ask them what their leader means.
The goal of this proposal is simple: Take a personality who generates a negative reaction in most voters, then chain it to the feet of members of the RLP. It will put them in an untenable position in the 2010 campaign, and will turn off moderate and independent voters in key districts. If they choose to publicly deny that Limbaugh is in fact their leader, then the ditto heads within the party will revolt.
At first glance it may seem silly, but I am pretty confident that it could have widespread success. If these two terms can be successfully introduced into the vernacular, then it will create a narrative that members of the Rush Limbaugh Party cannot escape, and they will be buried in the 2010 mid-terms.
Let me know what you think.