Exploring the Polyvocal Leadership Problem in the Pro-Life Movement: the Case of Rush Limbaugh and Sandra Fluke
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EXPLORING THE POLYVOCAL LEADERSHIP PROBLEM IN THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT: THE CASE OF RUSH LIMBAUGH AND SANDRA FLUKE BY LEAH AMELIA MOCZULSKI A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTERS OF ARTS Communication May 2014 Winston-Salem North Carolina Approved By: Alessandra Von Burg, Ph.D., Advisor Mary Dalton, Ph.D., Chair Margaret Zulick, Ph.D. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my amazing advisor, Dr. Alessandra Beasley-Von Burg for all of her advice throughout this process. Her input was invaluable and she made me a better writer, student, and rhetorical critic. Without Alessandra, this would have been impossible. I would also like to thank Dr. Margret Zulick and Dr. Mary Dalton for providing valuable input as I worked on this project. I am honored to have worked with these three amazing women. I would like to thank my awesome parents for supporting me in my decision to attend graduate school. I would especially like to “shout out” the entirety of the Wake Forest Debate team. I would have never considered a degree in Communication if it were not for them. They have been awesome to work with and have taught me so much about how to be a debate coach and a scholar. They have made this experience an amazing journey. Thank you to Alexis Kostun for taking on an immense amount of proofreading. Finally, I would like to thank Jim. He is brilliant and incredibly patient and I appreciate his willingness to act as a sounding board for my ideas while I was writing this thesis. ii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 Theoretical Contexts ....................................................................................................... 5 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................. 10 Chapter 2: The Polyvocal Leadership Problem and the Evolution of Social Movements 19 Exploring Rhetorical Leadership in the Digital Age .................................................... 20 Synecdoche and the Pro-Woman Frame: A Strategy for Unity .................................... 25 Rush Limbaugh as a Pro-Life Leader ........................................................................... 31 Chapter 3: Fluke’s Testimony, Vilification, and Incivility ............................................... 35 Rushing to Judgment: A Closer Look at Fluke’s Testimony ........................................ 35 Argument by Association – Identification and Distancing ........................................... 39 Vilification Rhetoric and Limbaugh’s Attacks ............................................................. 46 Limbaugh and the Polyvocal Leadership Problem ....................................................... 52 The Implications of the Polyvocal Leadership Problem ............................................... 53 Chapter 4: Conclusion....................................................................................................... 58 Political Punditry and Political Relevance .................................................................... 59 Final Thoughts .............................................................................................................. 63 References ......................................................................................................................... 66 Curriculum Vitae .............................................................................................................. 73 iii Abstract This thesis focuses on examining the statements that Rush Limbaugh’s made regarding Sandra Fluke following her Congressional testimony on the Conscience Clause in February of 2012. In particular, I investigate the way that Rush Limbaugh’s statements, and their subsequent circulation, made him a leader within the pro-life movement. Particularly, I problematize what I call the “polyvocal leadership problem” that occurs in social movements that lack a centralized leadership. I apply Kenneth Burke’s work on identification and vilification in order to examine the ways that Limbaugh ruptures the “pro-woman” frame forwarded by other members of the pro-life movement. I begin by discussing the “polyvocal leadership problem” as it relates to social movements in the digital age. I next examine the way that Limbaugh’s deployment of vilification rhetoric demonstrates the problem of polyvocality in social movements. I conclude with a discussion about the relevance of political punditry in public policy. iv Chapter 1: Introduction For a moniker as straightforward as “pro-life,” the structure of the pro-life movement is far from streamline. The equivocation within the pro-life movement stems from fundamental differences in policy goals and strategies that exist within the different factions of the movement. In decades past, scholars have analyzed the rhetoric of the pro- life movement and have identified and woven together the recurring argumentative themes used in order to achieve policy or social outcomes. In these investigations, patterns emerge regarding the rhetoric and tactics that the pro-life movement uses to forward arguments about abortion and restrictions on contraceptive care (Condit, 1994; Vanderford, 1989). Rhetorical analyses of the pro-life movement seem to focus extensively on what was said in pro-life messages rather than who was saying it. This lacuna in the literature seems to stem from the absence of centralized leadership in the pro-life movement. There are multiplicities of churches, businesses, and non-profits that would self identify as part of the “pro-life movement,” each of them has internal leadership and policy goals that differ within each organization. This heterogeneity is often beneficial for the pro-life movement because it can allow for argumentative flexibility when responding to new policies related to abortion and contraceptive care. Every church, business, and non-profit reaches a different audience. Each subset of the pro-life movement can localize their arguments to tailor to the specific group that they represent. Despite some of the benefits of decentralization, substantial problems can arise within movement that has no central leadership. Lack of a central leader could contribute to mixed messages about the fundamentals of the movement. If all of the varying branches project a message differently, lack of commonality between those messages could cause fragmentation. Lack of a centralized leader could also make it easier for extreme outliers that tarnish the reputation of the group as a whole by making extreme statements. Many of these setbacks caused by the lack of centralized leadership manifest themselves within the pro-life movement. In order to explore these problems further, this thesis focuses on one particular episode of the constantly unfolding debate about reproductive rights for women: The Conscience Clause of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Particularly, Rush Limbaugh’s role in this controversy as a leader for the pro-life movement. Rush Limbaugh’s emergence as an unanticipated voice in the debate about the Conscience Clause highlighted the way that lack of central leadership in a movement allows anyone to step forward and speak for the movement as a whole. On February 23 rd 2012, Sandra Fluke was invited by the democratic half of the House of Representatives to speak on behalf of women who were in support of repealing part of the Affordable Care and Protection Act of 2010 called the Conscience Clause. The “Conscience Clause” is a component of the legislation that allows faith-based organizations an exemption from certain health care mandates that could potentially conflict with their ideological beliefs (Feder, 2005). Speaking on behalf of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice, Fluke presented arguments as to why Georgetown University, a religious institution, should be responsible for providing contraceptive coverage for women as part of their school sponsored healthcare benefits (Moorhead, 2012). It did not take long for her testimony to draw fire from prominent conservatives opposed to reproductive rights for women. On February 29 2012, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh (2012) aired a scathing criticism of Fluke’s testimony: 2 What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps. Rush Limbaugh’s attacks on Sandra Fluke directed the debate about contraceptive care toward a discussion about the morality of the women who support state-mandated coverage. Limbaugh’s established media presence, due to his nationally syndicated radio show, meant that his