Countering "The Limbaugh Victory"

The New York Times declined to print my letter to the editor in response to Zev Chafets' opinion piece, "The Limbaugh Victory" so I am posting it here: 

In the "The Limbaugh Victory" Zev Chafets suggests that Rush Limbaugh is single-handedly responsible for 2010 Republican successes. While Chafets rightly points to Limbaugh's influence dating back to 1994, he ignores the radio host's steadfastness between 1994 and 2010. What is unique about Limbaugh and other far rightwing politicians, pundits, and activists - and what is sorely missing from the left - is their unwavering positions, even in years when those positions are unpopular or inexpedient. Rather than compromising, Limbaugh and those like him instead insist that everyone tow the line. It is this consistency and preparation that allows movements such as the Tea Party to emerge quickly at opportune moments. Rather than portraying Limbaugh as a powerful individual in 2010, Chafets would do well to present this more complex, longitudinal strategy so that we who oppose the movements that Limbaugh stands for can better understand how to fight them.