RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Rush Limbaugh going the Imus route?

It looks like his attack on a female college student isn't playing out to well for him.

Attack? Really?

Attack? Really?

Attack? Really?

The chicks a straight up whore and he called it like it is. Get the fuck over it.

He did give her to much credit. At least prostitutes get paid. She just got her ass slammed as a hobby.

I don't even know what he said. All I know is every pansy liberal on the planet is defending her. That always means that she is wrong.

Rush did shoot himself in the foot. Not only sponsors are dropping him, some stations are leaving now too. The big campaign now is to get him removed from the networks that make up armed forces radio.

Rex, he called a law student at Georgetown a "slut" and "prostitute" and said she wanted taxpayers to pay for her birth control because she can't afford it due to how much sex she is having.

IMO. the comments were stupid and sounded terribly uninformed. But, the worst part was his doubling down on them in the days following. He then offered a non-apology apology that only furthered the outrage.

What's wrong with that?

If it's true? Nothing. Otherwise, it is defamation. A lot of people aren't seeing any truth in it and, apparently, a lot of his advertisers agree with them (Sleep Number, The Sleep Train, Quicken Loans, Legal Zoom, Citrix, Carbonite, ProFlowers, Tax Resolution, AOL, Bonobos, Sears, Allstate Insurance, Sensa, Bare Escentuals, Vitacost, Hadeed Carpet, Thompson Creek Windows, PolyCom, Service Magic, AccuQuote Life Insurance, Geico, John Deere, Stamps.com, and St. Vincent’s Medical Center so far).

So a bunch of angry hippies pressured those sponsors to drop their ads? Its still doesn't make him wrong.

The bitch shouldn't be running to the government (her school) to fix her problems. Sex isn't a right. She should have to live with the consequences to her actions and not be a cunt about it.

They're saving face. They'll be back.

I'll grant that Rush Limbaugh's comment was dumb. That it diverted focus from the real issue, that Obama's power grab that forces Catholic institutions (such as Catholic schools and hospitals) to provide birth contol to its employees infringes on religious freedom, forcing people of Catholic faith to provide birth control services that are in opposition to their stated beliefs.

It is one thing for some (perhaps most) Catholic individuals to elect birth control services outside of their church, that are provided at very small or no expense by Planned Parenthood and other private women's health service providers. I read that Walmart, with no insurance, provides birth control pills for as little as 9 dollars a month.

By going after Sandra Fluke in such an inflammatory and personal way, Limbaugh gave Obama and the Democrats exactly the emotionally charged diversion from the true facts they were hoping for.

But I do notice a double standard.

When Bill Maher, Ed Schultz, Alec Baldwin, or David Letterman, or many other liberals make misogynist remarks calling women like Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, or even political bystanders like Bristol Palin, calling them "bitch" or "whore" or "cunt" or worse... where is the liberal media to demand their being taken off the air, or intimidation of their advertising backers, or even demand for an apology.

If and when the Left ever does hold liberal media uncivility to the same standard as they do conservative remarks, I might begin to take their whining about Limbaugh's or Imus' poorly chosen remark seriously.

Remarks I don't condone, but still free speech, just like liberals' far more prevalent --and unchallenged-- vileness.

A salute to Kirsten Powers for being the only liberal I've seen who has held her fellow liberals to the same standard.

You and all the idiot polititards need to stop doing this right now. Once you victimize yourself, you lose all credibility. This is why I hate the occutards. This is why I hate tim tebow fans. This is why I hate you. Get over yourself and grow the fuck up.

There are many books that document the liberal media double-standard, in examples of the hard numbers of stories done (such as the number of stories done of rising feul prices when Bush was president in 2008 vs. now under Obama, or the fully proven Anthony Weiner scandal vs. the never proven Herman Cain allegations. Both gave more than double the stories when it damaged Republicans, even devoid of evidence)

Even polls of reporters, of how they vote, and how they view the issues (as compared to the majority of Americans) reveals from their own mouths the blatant and unquestionable liberal bias in reporting.

As has been cited in articles and quotes in multiple topics here on RKMB, for years. Beyond the multiple books available on the subject, documenting the same.

Stop hiding behind your hate books and read what others have to say.

Even if it weren't true, because she willingly injected herself into a public debate and appeared on national television to talk about her sex life, she would probably not be able to claim defamation under the "public figure" doctrine:

• Public figures, such as government officials, celebrities, well-known individuals, and people involved in specific public controversies, are required to prove actual malice, a legal term which means the defendant knew his statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth or falsity of his statement. In most jurisdictions, private individuals must show only that the defendant was negligent: that he failed to act with due care in the situation.
  
  A defamation claim -- at least one based upon statements about issues that are matters of public interest -- will likely fail if any of these elements are not met.
  
  While on many of these issues the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, the primary defenses to a defamation claim are that the statements are true, are not statements of fact, or are privileged. Some defamatory statements may be protected by privilege, meaning that in certain circumstances the interest in communicating a statement outweighs the interest in protecting reputation. For example, most, if not all, jurisdictions recognize a privilege for fair reports of what is said, done, or published out of government and judicial proceedings, and for reports of misconduct to the proper authorities or to those who share a common interest (such as within a family or an association). Privileges do vary somewhat from state to state in their scope and requirements. They generally apply to non-media defendants to the same degree as to media defendants.

It's also a case of not just liberals making a fuss because Rush said something dumb again. That's usually a plus for him with his viewers. I think he actually managed to offend a portion of those who generally support him.

Like who?

As such. He called it right.

Someone who wants to have sex so badly that she needs someone to pay for her to do it is a prostitute--even moreso that she consciously became Pelosi's chump to go in a public forum and appeal for it.

The only problem here is Rush overplayed his hand. He mistook himself for having the same kind of cult of personality status as Maher or Stewart and went the whole nine yards by actually telling it how it is.

What he should have done was said, "Now what exactly do we call someone who wants to be paid to have sex--as this individual is asking? I'm not gonna cross the threshold and say it myself. I'm just gonna let the meaning hover in the air."

That would have been perfect. But he got excited.

You're honestly going to claim that being subject to the pressure from social groups makes him wrong?

Did I? Read it again carefully. That said, I don't think the loss of sponsors has been totally the work of pressure groups. The CEO of Carbonite's statement seemed pretty damn sincere and--no doubt--influenced the decision of other companies. That said, Carbonite stock has dropped 12 points since the opening bell on Monday. So, reactions spawn reactions.

My bottom line is that it is talk fucking radio. Feel free to read into that whatever you want.

Isn't Rush just a big slutty whore for saying he's sorry just because sponsors and radio stations are dropping him?

Yeah, that's definitely a "nature of the beast" whore thing to do. It isn't apologizing because you're contrite. It is apologizing because you want the money. However, I can acknowledge Pariah's point as being somewhat true. Had he left is to vague insinuation then we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. But, he let words slip. Then, rather than apologizing quickly and moving on, he decided to double down with the "post the videos on the internet" stuff. He could've gotten ahead of this and done damage control by Thursday morning. But, he let hubris get the best of him.

All this to say that we take our media pundits just a little too seriously in this country.

And that's different from David Letterman's half-hearted apology for joking about Sarah Palin's 14 year old daughter getting knocked up by A-rod... how?

Or Ed Schultz on MSNBC, who called Laura Ingraham a "slut", who never was threatened with campaigns to take away his advertising sponsors?
An even more identical situation that underscores the one-sided outrage over a virtually identical comment as Limbaugh's.



Any number of politicians and pundits have apologized for over-the-top remarks.
One in particular that pissed me off during the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, regarding 6 guards abusing Iraqi prisoners, Senator Dick Durbin compared our troops as a whole to "Nazi storm troopers, Soviet gulags, and the Pol Pot regime". For which he a week later apologized for, and then when asked about it later, acted as if he never said it and was being misrepresented.

This is pretty much spot on.

To be fair, Schultz got suspended without pay for a week. All this happened the very next day. MSNBC and CBS Radio came in and did damage control quickly. Rush or Clear Channel (whose Premier subsidiary syndicates the show) should've done the same. Instead, he kept pushing it and daring people to do something about it for the next couple of days. Well, they did something.

There is more than a small difference between Schultz (and Maher) and Limbaugh. While I think Limbaughs words were ill chosen and he should have apologized sooner, he was clearly engaging in a "logic game," to illustrate why the activist's premise was unsound. He wasn't just (ala Schultz or Maher) insulting someone because they happened to be a woman with whom he he disagreed.

Rush wasn't using logic that made any sense though.

He was, though. Again, Rush likes to be over-the-top because it gets him in other media. He just went too far, and it backfired on him. The point he made still stands, though. Sexual intercourse is a personal choice. Why should taxpayers fund a person's choice to have sex? Should the government give me money to put gas in my car because I choose to drive? It's her choice. It's her responsibility. Comparing her to a prostitute was where he stepped over the line in an attempt to seem witty and to cast it in a morally negative light.

Actually it's cheaper for taxpayers having the contraception provided this way than for the unplanned pregnencies according to some studies. Plus taxpayers already pay for people to have sex when it results in a baby.

So its ok for people to continue being a drain on society because its already happening. That makes complete sense.

Actually I don't want to pay for either. Nor should I have to. Nor should I be obligated to. You let someone's sperm infect your uterus, you raise it. can't afford it? DO NOT BE A FUCKING GOD DAMN FUCKING SLUT!

NO ABORTIONS.

DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR ACTIONS!

WORK 2 JOBS TO PAY FOR DAY CARE! NOT MY PROBLEM! NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY!

I'll gladly have my taxes assist orphans and the child of (proven by adequate evidence) rape victims but "inconvenience" should not be an answer.

I'm not saying this is your intent, however...

This kind of thinking (cheaper for the government to prevent or end life) is the beginning of the slippery slope into China-style infanticide family planning.

Rush Limbaugh: Just another Rightwing Extremist voicebox for the Crazy Conservatives trying to play GAWD, like normal. Is anyone ever surprised when that fat hypocritical bag of shit says anything remotely offensive? And, is anyone surprised when the Rightwing Nutbags try and defend him in this forum? Bunch of bottom-feeders. Good luck in irrelevance, guys. Congrats. Your morality is no longer suspect. We now KNOW you have none...

I think it's crazy how much power and influence we give to entertainers considering how much this has exploded.

Quite frankly, we shouldn't be. I have no problems with unemployment benefits as they are temporary and are only supposed to be a bridge from one job to the next. We shouldn't be supporting whole families just because some unwed mother won't pay for her own birth control or just won't use it. Our government shouldn't be in the business of shielding people from their own mistakes.

It should also be noted that after enactment of Welfare Reform, which included increased emphasis on abstinence eduction programs over free birth control, growth of out-of-wedlock childbearing came to a near standstill.