The "Rush" To Judgement

(Disclosures: I loathe the Catholic Church. I loathe Rush Limbaugh. I don't especially like Obama and leftist policies. And I HATE the right-wing. In short, nothing new.)

Normally, I write about things of either personal importance, or what I like to think of as national importance. This one is and isn’t about national importance. It's a single incident in the course of a national “debate” which exemplifies all that is wrong with the right-wing extremists who seem hell-bent on turning this country into a dictatorial theocracy.

The debate:

President Obama has decided that all insurance companies should be mandated to, as part of their benefit packages, supply free coverage for oral contraceptives. Employers pay for insurance for their employees as part of the benefits of working for that employer. Often times, employees have to pay a co-pay or other addition to get the benefit. Basically, it's mandating coverage of a particular kind of drug. I don't approve that it should necessarily be “free”, but I believe that it should be part of the coverage provided as a routine for prescription drugs. If an insurance company doesn't cover ANY prescription drugs, so be it.

Another aspect of this debate is the Roman Catholic Church. Through many public agencies they run, such as hospitals, care centers and other such public services, they employ people of all religions. A recent decision by the Catholics was to not provide contraceptive coverage from insurance for their employees because it violates their moral code against birth control.

Several important things have been lost on people in this debate:

1. Contraceptives do more than prevent pregnancy. There are a myriad of reproductive system disorders in women which contraceptives treat that are vital to their health and well being. Eliminating that benefit puts a financial strain on them simply due to their employer's religious mandates, not because of the employee's religion.

2. The right-wing isn't attacking the “free” part as much as they're attacking the mandated part.

3. Religion is a personal choice, not one imposed from on high upon everyone. A “good” Catholic will not take contraceptives because it's against their religion regardless of whether it's free to them or not.

4. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right, which also means no other religion can impose its tenants upon one who is unwilling to be part of that religion.

The Controversy:

The final part of this little trip down Relevance Lane is that there was a congressional hearing lead by (who else?) the right-wing to review relevant information about this debate. Democrats wanted to have a female law student at Georgetown University - a Jesuit run center of education - named Sandra Fluke testify before this committee as to the impact the Catholic policy would have on her and people she knows. The right-wing, led by Darrel Issa (R-Calif - San Diego County, 49th Congressional District and a long-standing, major league, first class prick) refused to let her testify. Apparently, having women testify before the official Congressional inquiry into the impact of a religious organization with a tiny minority of followers in the United States imposing it's idea of faith on women not of that faith was too much relevant information for them. The Democrats pointed this out (by walking out), and scheduled an INFORMAL hearing, inviting this law student to testify so that at least it would be on record somewhere.

On February 26th, Ms. Fluke testified before this informal Democratic congressional committee.

The shit proceeded to hit the fan on the right-wing side.

On February 27th, the first of the personal attacks begins from the right-wing blogsphere when Craig Brannister published this on CNCSNews.com: Sex-Crazed Co-Eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control, Student Tells Pelosi Hearing Touting Freebie Mandate By Craig Bannister

On February 28th, HotAir posted this: Georgetown co-ed: Please pay for us to have sex … We’re going broke buying birth control by Tina Korbe.

Neither of these people called her names, even if they "quoted" things she didn't actually ever say or even imply. Both of them showed remarkably narrow-minded attitudes (I was reminded of 17th century puritans, myself, and wondered why obviously frightened-by-the-concept, highly religious virgins were so against sex, but I digress..), but don't necessarily attack her personally.

But on February 29th, the biggest HotAirBag in the world, Rush Limbaugh, attacked Fluke personally, calling her both a "slut" and a "prostitute".

"What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex -- what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."

He then said, "ok, so she's not a slut. She's round-heeled."

"Round-heeled", by the way, is an old-fashioned term for someone who is promiscuous. You know, today they're called “sluts”.

So he actually did it twice.

Now, aside from the fact that no tax money is involved in this at all, that taxpayers aren't paying shit for this (it's the employers who have to pay for the insurance, and usually all employees have to pay for that, too, but in this case it was student insurance offered through the university to paying students - so in all cases, SOMEONE HAS ALREADY PAID FOR THE BENEFIT), and that he didn't walk back the slander of calling her a prostitute, Limbaugh went several steps further than the previous micro-brained, sexually frustrated, dogmatic morons in what Limbaugh said and did the next day.

"So Ms. Fluke and the rest of you femi-Nazis, here's the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and, thus, pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. And I'll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."

So apparently, Limbaugh is a sex fiend and a 'john', too, wanting to get something for his “tax dollars” which to him is to pay someone for sex - and in this case a video of it - and wants to do this for every woman opposed to his policies. Can you say “voyeur”? How about “pervert”? Misogynist? Take your pick. All of them fit.

To this egregious personal attack on a nobody by a nationally recognized political pundit, the right-wing yawned and seemed to be underwhelmed by the magnitude of the attack.

Speaker of the House John Boehner: Limbaugh's comments were “inappropriate”. Ya THINK???

Rick Santorum brushed it off as the words of an entertainer in a manner that's barely coherent:

“Well, he's taking - you know, he's being absurd. But that's, you know, an entertainer can be absurd. And - and he's taking the absurd, you know, the asurd - absurd, you know, sort of, you know, point of view here as to how - how far do you go?

And, look, I'm - he's - he's in a very different business than I am.

I'm - I'm - I'm concerned about the public policy of this president imposing his values on the people - on - on - on - on people of faith who morally object to - to the government telling them they have to do something which they believe is a grave moral wrong. And government should not be in the business of telling - you know, when you talk about the separation of church and state, you hear it all the time.”

(...and this moron wants to be our PRESIDENT???)

Mitt Romney said, “I'll just say this, which is, it's not the language I would have used." Apparently, to Mr. Romney, it's the thought that counts, with which he apparently agrees.

Newt Gingrich took a completely hands-off approach to the comments: “I am astonished at the desperation of the elite media to avoid rising gas prices, to avoid the President’s apology to religious fanatics in Afghanistan, to avoid a trillion dollar deficit, to avoid the longest period of unemployment since the Great Depression, and to suddenly decide that Rush Limbaugh is the great national crisis of this week.” Mr. Gingrich, where in that is a condemnation of Mr. Limbaugh's personal, public attack on an American citizen for voicing their political concerns? Way to take a stand there, dude. Spoken like a true slimeball.

While Paul also seems less than offended by the remarks: “I had said he used very crude language, and I think he gets over the top at times. But it’s in his best interest. That’s why he did it. I don’t think he’s very apologetic. He’s doing it because some people were taking advertisements off his program. It was the bottom line that he was concerned about.” Wow... Casper Milquetoast couldn't have undersaid it better...

Anyone notice that each and every one of these people are wealthy, white males over 50?

Let me be clear about something: Sandra Fluke was pretty much a nobody. She had been invited by the Democrats to speak on a relevant topic before Congress at an official Congressional hearing. She was in a unique position to provide a counterpoint to some other comments (like Santorum's sugar daddy suggesting that women use an aspirin as contraception - by holding it between their knees).

She was not on the national radar before then. She merely accepted an invitation, was not allowed to testify by the right-wing majority (which caused the Democrat minority on the hearing panel to walk out in protest) and testified before an informal Democrat-led panel a week later.

Before then, she was just another student on a university campus. No “people”, no “handlers”, no political agenda that could shape the future of our country. No legions of mindless drones who hung on her every word. Her biggest worry was probably the upcoming midterms. Like every American who cares about their country, she has a voice in the shaping of it - by voting in our democratic process and communicating with her elected representatives.

She was Jane Q. Public, anonymous, tending to her own business. But she was going to a religiously influenced university whose insurance for students (who, as I pointed out PAY to go to the university in the first place and who are also not necessarily of the same religion) does not include the same coverage as other public university in that contraceptives are not even offered as a covered drug.

Every other drug, apparently, is.

She was merely informally testifying as to the impact that omission of an often vital drug as part of a benefit package for which she does, in fact pay has on her and other women.

If she were Nancy Pelosi testifying, one wonders if Limbaugh would have called Pelosi a slut and a prostitute. Pelosi is a powerful political figure, a female, opposed to the new Catholic policy and supports Obama's mandate that contraceptives be offered for free as part of all insurance benefits regardless of who the employer is. In short, Pelosi is a power equal (if not superior) to Limbaugh. Fluke was a nobody.

And Limbaugh publicly and proudly attacked her, slandered her and insulted her - after which the right-wing basically yawned and acted basically as if someone had justifiably uttered a dirty word under their breath.

I'll add one more word to the list of pervert, voyeur, and sex fiend to describe Limbaugh's character: Bully.

But it's not JUST Limbaugh's character on trial in this little diatribe of mine. It's the character of the entire right-wing.

Limbaugh started to lose sponsors once the outcry began against him. His words assaulted EVERY woman who takes contraception for any reason, and for some strange reason - call it decency, call it moral outrage, call it looking out for the bottom line - sponsors of his show started bailing out on him.

He mocked them by making his listeners feel bad: “…I’m sorry to see them go. They have profited handsomely from you. These advertisers who have split the scene have done very well due to their access to you, my audience, from this program. … Now they’ve chosen to deny themselves that access, and that’s a business decision and it’s theirs alone to make. They’ve decided they don’t want you or their business anymore.”

It seems to me that if anyone has profited handsomly from his listeners, it's Limbaugh himself. (It's just a guess, but based on past information it's probably pretty close to the truth.)

Then he lost more sponsors - nine of them before he issued an “apology”. Here it is in its entirety:

“For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

Wow... A multi-sentenced diatribe against the left and middle that preambles a brief three sentence apology that doesn't really apologize for being a bully and an ass.

Premiere Networks, a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications which runs pretty much all of the country's radio stations, stood by Mr. Limbaugh, in saying it was, “committed to providing its listeners with access to a broad range of opinion and commentary without condoning or agreeing with the opinions."

Very high-minded of them. To me, that's like a city letting a bus driver of theirs mow down pedestrians because the driver didn't like the way they sat on the bus.

Fortunately, almost no one (with three functioning, independently thinking brain cells) believes that Mr. Limbaugh was sincere in apologizing to Ms. Fluke. He was obviously pandering to his listeners while trying to stop the exodus of advertisers from his show.

It didn't work. The public furor didn't (and still hasn't) died down.

So Rush issued another “apology” to explain the first “apology”. This time, it was on-air.

“I don’t expect, and I know you don’t either, morality, intellectual honesty from the left. They’ve demonstrated, over and over, a willingness to say or do anything to advance their agenda; it’s what they do. It’s what we fight against here every day. But this is the mistake I made: in fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them.”

“That was my error, I became like them. And I feel very badly about that.”

What the FUCK does he mean “I became like them”??? HE MADE THE MOLD FOR IT! He's been calling people on the left bad names for 20 years!

And this, as you may (or may not) expect, did nothing to mollify his sponsors whose trickle for the door became a flood. The current total of sponsors which have fled - most of which merely had service agreements with Premier Networks and weren't specific sponsors of Mr. Limbaugh's show - is now up to 34, and rising almost hourly.

In speaking with my father about this, he pointed out that the sponsors are only doing this to protect themselves until the controversy dies down, then they'll be back. This is likely true, however there is now talk that Mr. Limbaugh's show may not be able to survive the controversy. After all, former long-time radio host and DJ Don Imus, who famously called the Women's Rutgers Basketball team “Nappy-headed hoes”, was forced out of his position by CBS, who apparently unlike Premier Networks, thinks it's better to fire someone for being a bully and an ass. (Imus himself decried Limbaugh's “apology” as “lame”). If the radio stations lose sponsors, they lose money and kicking Limbaugh out may be the only way to resume their revenue stream.

But the possibility that the sponsors might quietly slip in the back door, should be guarded against, so here is a list of who were sponsors of the radio network. Keep in mind that many of them only had blanket contracts to have their ads aired by the station (as opposed to those which supported the show) and many had no control over which shows aired them.

AccuQuote,
AOL
Bethesda Sedation Dentistry
Bonobos
Capitol One
Carbonite
Cascades Dental
Citrix
Downeast Energy
Geico,
Goodwill Industries
Hadeed Carpet
Heart & Body Extract
JCPenney
John Deere
LegalZoom
Matrix Direct
Netflix
Philadelphia Orchestra
Polycom,
ProFlowers
Sears
Service Magic
St. Vincent's Medical Center
Stamps.com

Please note, this is just a partial list. For a complete list of sponsors - current and former - (including contact information), both nationally and by state, along with the radio stations which still carry his show, you can get them here. Another list that is a touch easier to read is here. A petition is being circulated to these sponsors requesting them to pull their advertising.

Now, being “fair minded” and because Limbaugh's supporters are calling this a “witch hunt”, I have to admit that this is the first time Limbaugh has been put under this kind of public pressure compared to some of his other over-the-top bullshit. Apparently, they've never heard of the term “the straw that broke the camel's back”. But while the other comments were certainly egregious, they were generalized. A person can have a viewpoint about something and generalize about a group of anonymous faces without instigating an atmosphere suitable for a lynching. But in this case, the person has a face, it was public, it was personal, it was bullying and in today's world, with today's communications and social networking, it was fundamentally STUPID.

And is it a double-standard for me to call someone what I've called political figures and rail against them doing the same? it depends. I do it here, on a blog. I don't do it on national television. I don't do it on national radio. I don't do it to nobodies. I do it to the bullies, liars, hypocrites and the evil people who take the national stage not because they want to help, but because they want the power and wealth that often accompanies it. The bottom line is that it is most definitely not a double standard.

It's called holding those in power accountable for their abuses of power.

Rush Limbaugh is just a stupid man, whose radio program should be removed from the air. He has lived on the edge for so long, he has finally crossed the line the public will not tolerate being crossed. Don Imus publicly called a specific group of young women “nappy headed hoes” in jest. He issued an apology to them both publicly and face to face and was still fired.

Rush Limbaugh publicly called a single individual a slut (TWICE!) and a prostitute, has never apologized face to face, his apologies always included an attack on her ideals or those she espoused, he has repeatedly proven himself to be about the worst possible example of an American as anyone still in the public eye, is an embarrassment to our nation, our people, our constitution and our way of life.

So, yeah, lynch the bastard - figuratively speaking of course. Banish his extremist, hate-filled, American-bashing voice from the airwaves. Let him spew his vomit on the Internet like the hell-spawned drug-addicted demon he is in obscurity (kind of like me here, minus the hell-spawned, drug-addicted part. I'm sure I'm a demon in someone's eyes.).

Silencing his show over what he said would be a fitting public end to a man who has spread so many lies, so much hatred and so much divisiveness in our country. He deserves obscurity as a pathetic and shameful footnote in American history. Starting now.

America is becoming more and more intolerant of these extremists, and, maybe, with any luck, will start to FINALLY do something about kicking them out of mainstream politics for good.