"Let me tell you who we conservatives are: we love people. When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups. We don't see victims"
About this Quote
Limbaugh wraps a hard-edged political worldview in the language of warmth, and that’s the trick. “We love people” is doing defensive work first: it preemptively counters the charge that conservative politics can be indifferent to inequality by starting on the moral high ground. Once that credential is asserted, the rest of the passage quietly redefines what “love” requires: not repair, not redistribution, not even acknowledgment of patterned disadvantage, but a refusal to name those patterns at all.
The repetition of “we see” functions like a pledge of allegiance to a particular kind of national belonging. It’s also a filter. “Americans. Human beings” sounds inclusive, yet the phrase “We don’t see groups” is less a kumbaya gesture than a rebuke to anyone who talks about race, gender, class, or historical harm as political realities. The subtext is that group-based claims are suspect by nature: at best a mindset of grievance, at worst a con. That’s why “victims” lands as the emotional pivot word, turning structural critique into a personality flaw.
Context matters: Limbaugh built a career translating conservative ideology into entertainment, and this is classic talk-radio populism. It takes a complex debate about identity and power and reframes it as a contest between decent regular people and elites who “divide” the country. The intent isn’t merely to argue policy; it’s to police the vocabulary. If you can brand “groups” as illegitimate and “victims” as contemptible, you don’t have to dispute the data - you discredit the lens.
The repetition of “we see” functions like a pledge of allegiance to a particular kind of national belonging. It’s also a filter. “Americans. Human beings” sounds inclusive, yet the phrase “We don’t see groups” is less a kumbaya gesture than a rebuke to anyone who talks about race, gender, class, or historical harm as political realities. The subtext is that group-based claims are suspect by nature: at best a mindset of grievance, at worst a con. That’s why “victims” lands as the emotional pivot word, turning structural critique into a personality flaw.
Context matters: Limbaugh built a career translating conservative ideology into entertainment, and this is classic talk-radio populism. It takes a complex debate about identity and power and reframes it as a contest between decent regular people and elites who “divide” the country. The intent isn’t merely to argue policy; it’s to police the vocabulary. If you can brand “groups” as illegitimate and “victims” as contemptible, you don’t have to dispute the data - you discredit the lens.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Rush
Add to List






