It’s almost funny to watch how hard it is for Republicans to criticize Rush Limbaugh. Instead of calling him a misogynist and a bully, they say he is being “absurd” and chose the wrong words. Rush’s sponsors, on the other hand, are getting a little skittish. He’s lost at least six advertisers in the last couple of days, including: Citrix Systems, LegalZoom, Quicken Loans, Sleep Number, and The Sleep Train.
I just find it amusing that Limbaugh thinks the Pill costs more if you have more sex. I guess his wives have been telling him that to extort more shopping money from him. I guess they’ve convinced him that their pills work just like the Viagra pills he used down in the Dominican Republic while he was shopping in the sex slave market.
This is a man who committed prescription fraud in order get enough Oxy-Contin to make himself deaf. Four wives and no children. Could Limbaugh be sterile?
And now Bill ‘Falafel’ O’Reilly is saying that this dispute is all about subsidizing a promiscuous lifestyle, too. How much did he pay out in his sexual harassment settlement?
I just find it amusing that Limbaugh thinks the Pill costs more if you have more sex.
It is constantly astonishing to me just how loudly Redoublechins are willing to shout out their ignorance.
There’s no downside for people like Rush shouting out their ignorance. Their fan base mostly consists of people who either don’t know the facts themselves or don’t care if something is factually incorrect as long as their side “wins”.
It will be interesting to see how quickly Scott Brown, the only elected republican who has actually said anything harsh about Limbaugh’s words, walks it back. He needs the dittohead voters in Mass is he is to have any chance of winning.
Brown may need the dittohead vote, but he also needs as many independents as he can get and he needs to not motivate the Dems who didn’t bother voting for Coakley.
Hmmm. It occurs to me that Brown isn’t looking forward to Romney (presumably) being the presidential candidate. Brown and Romney are a bit too similar, and Romney is not fondly remembered here.
…but if she were a woman of color and had made those comments, they’d be up in her business, big time.
These people are out of their minds.
“O’Reilly likely paid Mackris millions of dollars, but the terms of the agreement are confidential.[71]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O'Reilly_(political_commentator)#Sexual_harassment_lawsuit
“Plus there was that whole sexual harassment thing – the lawsuit he settled for an estimated $10 million. Not the kind of guy you normally think of when it comes time to pass out honors.”
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/05/boston-tv-host-fired-for-criticizing.html
“He’ll settle. Maybe not for the full sixty million dollars Mackris wants, but perhaps for six million”
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20041028_spilbor.html
“Sources told the Daily News that O’Reilly will have to pay Andrea Mackris at least $2 million – and possibly as much as $10 million.”
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2004-10-29/news/18269465_1_andrea-mackris-o-reilly-factor-o-reilly-l
awyer-ronald-green
However, the REAL killer is it took only 16 days to get the settlement completed.
When Obama was elected, I thought the republican party would begin fighting from within and rip itself to pieces. I grossly underestimated the power of a common enemy. But it’s starting to manifest now. Not saying it’s going to unfold in one election cycle. Could play out over years. But a party playing on the fears of old white people is walking down a dead end.
We’re seeing the opening shots in what in time will become a pitched battle. The first voices who wanted to take their party back from the crazies were just run out of town on a rail. Here I’m thinking of David Frum.
Last week, we saw Bobo begin to cross over. As more moderates turned enablers begin to speak up, the dynamic will shift and this will be hastened by electoral disaster, if we can hold the White House and the Senate while taking the House. Then the Overton window will begin to shift left, as it should have in 2008.
Arrogant ignorance can only grease Rush’s wheels for so long. And there are so many ways to use his screed to point out he leads a whole Party in America who follow his celebration of ignorance.
Mitt would have been better served by simply saying he would have chosen a better informed comment.
But seriously,this is a moment where Rush’s advertisers are listening. And if the people can impress on them that his kind of talk is unacceptable it will go farther than just cutting off his supply of drugs it will message the ‘you lie’ Joes as well.
This is a perfectly example of how Santorum is a better politician than Romney. Santorum’s response is a sort of mind-jujitsu where Rush’s comment have absolutely no bearing on the discussion he is championing because he’s a comedian, presumably a comedian at least the peer of Stewart or Colbert to get away with naked slander. And Speaker Boehner’s office at least threw in that gruel-thin “both-sides-do-it” whine about dem-fundraising on the slut slurring:
By contrast, Romney’s comment is
At least Santorum and Boehner found a diversionary topic. Romney’s got nothing at all. And really Mitt, you wouldn’t use that language when you needed to scurrilously and sexistly attack a private citizen offering important testimony before a congressional committee? What would you call her Mitt, hmm?
A harlot and a trollop perhaps?
you damn straight..
THIS IS WHO THEY ARE.
this is who they’ve always been.
no shock in the least.
W-T-F does Willard mean when he says ‘ he wouldn’t have used that language’?
THEN WHAT WORD WOULD YOU HAVE USED, WILLARD?
Strumpet, probably, or floozy. He’s much more refined.
Rush is losing sponsors. This is the most effective way to reply to him. If people don’t get paid, there’s no show.
The is was serious breech of what should be on the public airwaves. I want to see him taken off the air.
Mitt did this one wrong. He should have condemned Rush and did not.