Moderate Republican Ridge Criticizes “Shrill…Divisive” Rush Limbaugh

Former Pennyslvania Gov. Tom Ridge, who also served as George Bush’s Homeland Security chief, has weighed in on the debate about conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh’s exclusionary and partisan-red meat rhetoric and he has a message: respect others, tone it down and remember that past Republican presidents have treated the party as if it was trying to be a bigger tent..

That’s the gist of his comments today to CNN’s John King in the wake of Limbaugh and Vice President Dick Cheney basically suggesting that moderate Republican Powell — and by implication other moderate Republicans who don’t agree with Cheney and Limbaugh — ought to take a hike from the party since they’re not real Republicans.

Here’s the key quote from Ridge:

“Rush Limbaugh has an audience of 20 million people. A lot of people listen daily to him and live by every word. But words mean things and how you use words is very important,” Ridge, the former Homeland Security Secretary under President Bush, said during an interview airing Sunday on CNN’s State of The Union.

“It does get the base all fired up and he’s got a strong following,” Ridge continued. “But personally, if he would listen to me and I doubt if he would, the notion is express yourself but let’s respect others opinions and let’s not be divisive.”

And here’s the video:

Ridge is not a favorite of conservatives and is closely identified with being part of the more moderate wing of the GOP. When his name has been floated on various occasions — to run as Vice President, even to run against now-Democrat Arlen Specter — it has raised conservative hackles.

Will he join the long line of GOPers who criticize Limbaugh and wind up apologizing to him after facing the wrath of Limbaugh and his loyal listeners?

In this case…most likely not. There are two reasons:

(1)Ridge isn’t running for anything and isn’t in office so he can’t be pressured to fall in line and remain silent. (2)The battle lines are now drawn in the GOP over whether the party is going to be one that is a big tent where those inside can talk freely and help shape a future course, a smaller tent where there are fewer people, or an ostensibly larger tent where some of those inside will be told to sit quietly and shut up because they’re tolerated, invited guests versus real participants in shaping what goes on inside — and outside — the tent.