It’s Okay to Disagree with Rush Limbaugh. Really.

Those who dictate policy must be in a position to not only dictate, but also govern, and subsequently receive possible criticism for their governance. In other words, those who dictate policy must be liable, or held accountable in some way, because it is the people who ultimately approve or disapprove of the policy put into place. When radio talk show hosts dictate policy to a political body, it is bad not only for that political party, but also for those who allow themselves to be governed by that party. If I were a Republican, I’d be mighty upset at the path my party is taking.

Over the weekend, Rush Limbaugh used his clout and conservative stardom to stand on the soapbox for an hour longer that his allotted time at the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference). He brought the crowd to its feet several times, he used strong conservative overtones to challenge liberal ideals, and he even threw in a joke here or there. But then he did something odd. He used his time (or overage thereof) to actually defend a statement that had drawn him so much heat over the past month. Rush Limbaugh defended his statement that he wants Barack Obama to fail as president. And, when RNC chairman Michael Steele called Rush an “entertainer” and his remarks “incendiary” and “ugly”, well, good ol’ Rush fired right back. He said he was “stunned that the chairman of the Republican National Committee endorses such an agenda.” Rush used his talk show to call out Republicans, challenging them to call in and tell him why they would disagree with his statement.

Apparently, he got his message across just fine to some. Even Michael Steele, who later backed off his earlier statements and had a personal chat with Rush that has yet to be disclosed. So what does this all mean? Well, let me lay it out in very simple terms: Rush Limbaugh is the behind-the-scenes leader of the Republican Party. He’s the puppet-master, and right now, he’s pulling all the strings, not just some of them. So far, those who have disagreed with his statement are few and far between, which means that by in large—especially when your chairman backs off condemning remarks—your party does not want to offend a talk show host.

Again, if you are in a position to dictate policy, you’d also better be in a position to receive the criticism of your governing body. Talk show hosts are in no such position. Rush Limbaugh doesn’t debate. Rush Limbaugh doesn’t answer to the people of America, be it in a state, county or district. So why is he being allowed to speak for a party who has the responsibility of governing so many in the United States? Why are his comments being allowed to gestate amongst the conservatives? Think about what he is saying. If Barack Obama fails, this country fails. Right now, our nation does not need failure on any level, yet Rush Limbaugh is rooting for it on the grandest stage.

There is a fundamental difference between wanting an ideology to fail and a president to fail. I would understand, as most everyone would, if Rush came out and said that he wanted liberalism to fail. Of course he does. But that’s not what he said. He said he wanted Barack Obama to fail. And the unfortunate thing about that remark is that currently, Barack Obama holds the highest office in the nation during the most troubling economic times in modern history. Failure would mean a virtual collapse of our infrastructure, the loss of millions of jobs, widespread poverty and probable global panic. This is the scenario that Rush Limbaugh hopes for.

If there were a conservative president in the White House, and a liberal talk show host made the same remark, he would be absolutely drubbed by conservatives nationwide, and labeled a traitor, terrorist or worse. Make no mistake, Rush Limbaugh has every right to say what he wants. But if you are a Republican, you need to ask yourself the question, ‘Do I want Obama to fail, or do I want liberalism to fail?’ Because those are two very different things, and although Rush may say he realizes the difference, I suspect he does not. No one who cares for this country—Republican, Democrat, conservative or liberal—would ever put their political party above the well-being of the nation. That is what Rush Limbaugh has done. He’s put his own agenda and ego above the common welfare of every American, whether you agree with him and listen to his talk show, or not.

Think about that, and then ask yourself if you support or condemn Rush Limbaugh’s remarks. And before you do, realize that it’s okay to condemn the remarks of someone you usually agree with. It’s okay to disagree with someone in your party. Believe it or not, that’s what this nation was founded upon. And, believe it or not, no talk show host has ever dictated policy in America’s 230 plus years of existence. Maybe someone should remind Michael Steele of that, and ask him what he’s so afraid of.