What Was Rush Thinking?
What was Rush Limbaugh thinking when he called a law student a slut?
Rush Limbaugh can be inflammatory and incendiary, but that’s talk radio. He is the most successful shock jock on the radio. He is conservative, very conservative, but liberal talk radio has generally failed. He draws an audience, and that’s what counts in broadcasting. Liberals fear, and often loathe him.
Rush Limbaugh makes a living broadcasting on the political edge, but even for him there is a line that should not be crossed.
What was he thinking though when he called Sandra Fluke a slut?
Certain words are unacceptable today; slut is one of them. A predecessor, nymphomaniac, went out of the lexicon decades ago. Don Imus and his crew paid a steep price for calling African-American basketball players at Rutgers “Hos.” John and Ken in LA were suspended for labeling the deceased Whitney Houston a whore. John and Ken may label some politicians “political whores” without facing a backlash, but don’t falsely call individual women variations of being a prostitute.
There may be a few more offensive slurs for a woman than” slut,” but not many.
Did Rush forget the double standard in the media? Bill Maher went unscathed in
calling Sarah Palin a “c..t” and “dumb tw.t.” He’s a liberal “comedian” so it’s probably OK. Ed Schultz on MSNBC called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.” Sandra Fluke appeared on Schultz’s show last Thursday after Rush Limbaugh’s remarks.
How upset is Sandra Fluke?
The offensive word is even more objectionable when used against one it does not fit. The Georgetown Law Student stated that one of her classmates was spending $1,000 per year, or $3,000 over three years for contraceptives. The President’ proposal for mandatory, free coverage of contraceptives would be very beneficial to her friend.
Rush referred to Fluke as a slut and prostitute.
Rush Limbaugh brags he is always 99% right. This is one of the 1%, and it’s a big one.
What was Rush thinking?
He rails against the mainstream media. They hate him. Why give them the means to strike back? The New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, et al, dumped on him.
Some advertisers pulled their ads from him. Boycotts were threatened against advertisers and those wrongly believed to be advertisers, as occurred previously with Glenn Beck on Fox. The left does not believe in freedom of speech for conservative commentators.
He could care less what the media thinks. Indeed, he probably revels in their attacks.
What was Rush thinking?
He knows, indeed, propounds that President Obama is using the contraception issue to divert attention from the economy. Why help the President by providing ammunition to Democrats attacking the Republican “War on Women?
He should have known better than to provide the Democrats and the mainstream media an issue to divert the American people from the economy and rising gas prices.
Fluke entered the political arena before a rump session by House Democrats. Chair Issa of the House Committee devoted the Committee hearing only to the religious issues involved in the President’s proposals. Former Speaker Pelosi called a rump meeting for women to speak out on the contraception issue. Sandra was speaking on behalf of fellow students. She was not speaking of her own sex life.
She became a highly visible public figure in a newsworthy public debate, a debate over religious freedom. She could expect criticism, and under the First Amendment, it could be caustic, inflammatory, hyperbolic, vitriolic, and bombastic. Political debates in Washington are often uncivil.
Any number of criticisms can be raised of her.
He could have criticized the attempt at creating a new entitlement program – for female contraception to be paid for not by the government, but by private insurers.
Sandra Fluke had a dual major at Cornell. One of which was feminist, gender & sexuality studies. She worked five years for a domestic violence Center in New York City. She is co-President of the Georgetown Law School Chapter Law Students for Reproductive Justice. Thus, Rush Limbaugh could have simply hurled “Femi-Nazi,” one of his favorite epithets, at her, and be done.
But not the S word.
Was Rush really attacking the mores of our society?
Perhaps, but the reality is that The Pill and Playboy Magazine liberated women 45 years ago. I remember when the Jesuits at the University of San Francisco in the mid-1960’s expelled a student because he had sneaked his girlfriend into his dorm room over a weekend. Even Catholic educators recognized decades ago that their students were not going to remain chaste. They may not distribute condoms on their campuses, but they certainly recognize what’s happening. Booze, drugs, and sex are prevalent, not universal, but prevalent in our colleges. Law schools and religious institutions are no exception.
He could have called her a liberal activist who’s poor at math.
He could simply have said all that, but he crossed the line. Had the Democrats sat him up for a fall, he fell into the trap.
What was Rush thinking when he initially apologized?
He was thinking how to apologize by not fully apologizing.
He’s upset. It’s not always easy to recognize a mistake, especially when your record is so good.
His original statements did not reflect the theatre of the absurd.
He “Manned Up” Monday morning on his show and publicly admitted a mistake. Rush should personally call Ms. Fluke, as did the President, and apologize to her. He will be bigger for it. She probably will be unreceptive to his call, but he will be bigger for it.
Did Rush Limbaugh realize he guaranteed Sandra Fluke lifetime employment as a feminist spokesperson and activist?
Why did it take Rush Limbaugh so long to make a full, proper apology