Connect with us

Limbaugh: Apologies, Excuses and Sluts



As advertisers flee, Rush Limbaugh, in the worst attempt at spin control ever uttered by anyone facing a widespread public backlash, offered a half-hearted explanation for his unconscionable attack on a Georgetown University law student, Sandra Fluke.

Limbaugh, who triple-downed calling Sandra Fluke a slut and a prostitute over the course of three days, revealed, once again, a deep-rooted, ugly, cringe-worthy misogynist mind set and embarrassing ignorance of how birth control actually works, and basic English terminology.

While “slut” is generally used as a derogatory term for women considered sexually promiscuous (whereas sexual promiscuity in men is considered a back-slapping demonstration of masculine prowess), a prostitute is a sex worker—a person who is paid to provide sexual intercourse or other sex acts, usually as a means of livelihood when other options are limited. Slut and prostitute are no more interchangeable than ignorant and obese.

“She’s having so much sex, she’s going broke buying contraceptives and wants us to buy them. I said, ‘Well, what would you call someone who wants us to pay for her to have sex? What would you call that woman? You’d call ’em a slut, a prostitute or whatever,” Limbaugh exploded in his sweaty tirade.

He later feigned remorse, stating “OK, she’s not a slut, she’s round-heeled.” The hypocrisy is standard fare for Limbaugh, as is the deliberate attack on women. And despite Limbaugh’s misinformation, in his attempt to stir outrage, he implies that he, and other taxpayers, are paying for contraception. Which is not the case. We don’t have universal healthcare in the United States. And insurance companies are happy to provide contraception as opposed to the multitude of serious health issues that birth control mitigates, unwanted pregnancy being just one.

On the other hand, illegally obtaining prescription drugs like oxycodone and hydrocodone which Limbaugh did to feed his addictions, violating Florida’s doctor shopping laws, which Limbaugh did to feed his addictions, and forcing the expenditure of resources by drug enforcement agents, which Limbaugh did when caught smuggling Viagra from the Dominican Republic using a prescription that wasn’t in his name, does in fact, impact insurance companies, the costs of which are passed on to Limbaugh’s deluded listeners (and everyone else).

Then there’s the weight. A 270-pound body (yo-yoing up and down based on both gluttony and narcotics) is as unhealthy as it is expensive for everyone else. “When I want a steak or a huge slab of prime rib, which is frequently, I go to Ben Benson’s Steak House on West 52nd,” Limbaugh once told Cigar Aficionado. “I think cigars are just a tremendous addition to the enjoyment of life,” he stated in the same interview. If there’s one clear image that emerges, it’s that Rush Limbaugh will eat, smoke and fuck whatever his hedonistic mind tells him, consequences, costs or pseudo-morality be damned.

Limbaugh’s pathetic excuse to try and stem the hemorrhaging resulting from his Sandra Fluke comments is indicative of his cowardice and insincerity.

Pointing to a Romneyesque grueling three-hours-a-day work schedule, Limbaugh continues to believe he and the taxpayer are footing the bill for contraception. Oblivious to the costs of his gluttonous, hedonistic lifestyle choices. Or the costs to the state in providing pre and post natal resources for unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. Or the well being of children born to inadequate, unprepared mothers – or “sluts” as he would call them.

Or does Limbaugh reserve that term for women who use contraception only?

“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.”

His words, not their meaning. In his excuse, Limbaugh claims he didn’t expect his ugly tirade to rise to a Presidential level after the President called Sandra Fluke on Friday to commend her for her courage in testifying before congressional forum convened by Minority leader Nancy Pelosi (after a Republican-led House committee on women’s health issues, refused to hear her testimony, deferring to an all-male panel instead).

Yet Limbaugh ignores the fact that his show itself plays a political role – one that reaches into the heart of the Presidential primary.

Perhaps Mitt Romney’s shameful, tepid “not language I would have used” response demonstrates that the candidate still shares the sentiment. Perhaps he would have used a nicer word for “slut”.

Maybe Romney doesn’t want to offend Limbaugh, petrified, as all Republicans are, to dare cross him. Or could it be that their fortunes are inextricably linked. After all, Limbaugh’s fortune comes from his radio show on Clear Channel. And Clear Channel is owned by Bain Capital.

This kind of media/politician fraternization inter-fucking is about to destroy Rupert Murdoch once and for all, as the cozy relationship between David Cameron and Rebecca Brooks was exposed in sensational headlines in Britain last week, along with the unceremonious demotion of James Murdoch from News International.

The silent lack of condemnation from Republican leaders is as deafening as it is predictable. This cowardice is nothing new. And nor is their unbridled disrespect and condescension toward women.

Limbaugh’s derisive, condescending excuse as apology is not aimed at Sandra Fluke.

It’s to stop the backlash and the scrutiny a continued spotlight threatens to expose and the financial damage that could result.

And when someone compromises their moral certitude for the sole purpose of financial gain, we see all too clearly what a real whore looks like.

Image By Belltown Messenger

Clinton Fein is an internationally acclaimed author, artist, and First Amendment activist, best-​known for his 1997 First Amendment Supreme Court victory against United States Attorney General Janet Reno. Fein has also gained international recognition for his Annoy​.com site, and for his work as a political artist. Fein is on the Board of Directors of the First Amendment Project, “a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to protecting and promoting freedom of information, expression, and petition.” Fein’s political and privacy activism have been widely covered around the world. His work also led him to be nominated for a 2001 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Debt Ceiling: McCarthy Faces ‘Lingering Anger’ and a Possible Revolt as Far-Right House Members Start Issuing Threats



As House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) continues to negotiate a deal to avoid a debt crisis, members of the far-right Freedom Caucus are growing furious with him over broken promises he made to them.

According to MSNBC political analyst Steve Benen, with a slim GOP majority in the House, McCarthy is walking a tightrope to get a budget deal passed and may need help from House Democrats if members of his caucus refuse to go along with him.

As Benen points out, in order to win the speakership McCarthy agreed to an easier path for a motion to “vacate the chair” which could end his tenure as Speaker. That could come into play if the Freedom Caucus stages a revolt.

“… as the negotiations approach an apparent finish line, the House Republicans’ most radical faction is learning that it isn’t likely to get everything its members demanded — and for the Freedom Caucus, that’s not going to work,” he wrote in his MSNBC column.

ALSO IN THE NEWS: Trump in danger of heightened espionage charges after bombshell report: legal expert

Citing a Washington Times report that stated, “[Freedom Caucus members] want everything from the debt limit bill passed by the House last month plus several new concessions from the White House,” Benen suggested far-right House Republicans are now issuing veiled threats.

In an interview, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) stated, “I am going to have to go have some blunt conversations with my colleagues and the leadership team. I don’t like the direction they are headed.”

With Politico reporting, “The [House Freedom Caucus] was already unlikely to support a final bipartisan deal, but lingering anger with Kevin McCarthy could have lasting implications on his speakership,” Benen added, “If this is simply a matter of lingering ill-will from members who come to believe that GOP leaders ‘caved,’ the practical consequences might be limited. But let’s also not forget that McCarthy, while begging his own members for their support during his protracted fight for the speaker’s gavel, agreed to tweak the motion-to-vacate-the-chair rules, which at least in theory, would make it easier for angry House Republicans to try to oust McCarthy from his leadership position.”

Adding the caveat that he is not predicting an imminent McCarthy ouster he added, “But if the scope of the Freedom Caucus’ discontent reaches a fever pitch, a hypothetical deal clears thanks to significant Democratic support, don’t be surprised if we all start hearing the phrase ‘vacate the chair” a lot more frequently.”

Continue Reading


Prosecutors Tell Trump They Have a Recording of Him and a Witness: Report



Prosecutors in Donald Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial have notified the ex-president’s attorneys they have a recording of him and a witness. The notification comes in the form of an automatic discovery form, CBS News reports, which “describes the nature of the charges against a defendant and a broad overview of the evidence that prosecutors will present at Trump’s preliminary hearing or at trial.”

CBS reports prosecutors have handed the recording over to Trump’s legal team.

It’s not known who the witness is, nor are any details known publicly about what the conversation entails, or even if it is just audio or if it includes video.

READ MORE: ‘Likely to Be Indicted Soon’: Trump Might Face Seven Different Felonies, Government Watchdog Says

According to the article’s author, CBS News’ Graham Kates, via Twitter, prosecutors say they also have recordings between two witnesses, a recording between a witness and a third party, and various recordings saved on a witness’s cell phones.

Trump is facing 34 felony counts in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case related to his allegedly unlawful attempt to hide hush money payoffs to a well-known porn star by falsifying business records to protect his 2016 presidential campaign.

See the discovery form above or at this link.

Image via Shutterstock


Continue Reading


‘Likely to Be Indicted Soon’: Trump Might Face Seven Different Felonies, Government Watchdog Says



It’s no secret the U.S. Dept. of Justice is investigating Donald Trump for his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and for his likely unlawful removal, retention, and refusal to return hundreds of documents with classified and top secret markings.

Earlier this week Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal reported, “Special counsel Jack Smith has all but finished obtaining testimony and other evidence in his criminal investigation into whether former President Donald Trump mishandled classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort.”

And while it’s unknown if or when Trump will be indicted, a government watchdog says the ex-president who is once again staging a White House run is “likely to be indicted soon.” The organization is offering details on what it claims could be seven felony charges he might face.

“The next criminal charges former President Donald Trump may face could well come from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s possession of nearly 300 classified documents — including some marked as top secret — at his Mar-a-Lago residence and business in the year and a half after he left office,” Betsy Schick and Debra Perlin of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) state in a lengthy report published Friday.

READ MORE: DeSantis Slammed by Former High-Level FBI Official After Declaring How He Would Treat Bureau’s Independence

“While Fani Willis’ Fulton County, Georgia investigation into election interference continues, as does a federal investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and Alvin Bragg has already indicted Trump in New York for his role in false statements connected to hush money payments to Karen McDougal and Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) during the 2016 presidential campaign, an indictment by Smith in the Mar-a-Lago investigation would yield the first federal charges against the former president,” CREW notes.

“Trump may face charges ranging from obstruction of justice and criminal contempt to conversion of government property and unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material.”

Here is a list of “possible crimes” Trump might be charged with, according to CREW:

Obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1519)

Criminal contempt (18 U.S.C. § 402)

False statements to federal authorities (18 U.S.C. § 1001)

Conversion of government property (18 U.S.C. § 641)

Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material (18 U.S.C. § 1924)

Removing and concealing government records (18 U.S.C. § 2071)

Gathering national defense information (18 U.S.C. § 793(e))

READ MORE: Republican Complaining It’s ‘Almost Impossible’ for Straight ‘White Guys’ to Get Appointed by Biden Has History of Bigotry

CREW also offers that Trump’s attorneys may try to argue several different defenses, including:

No “knowing” removal

Deference to the intelligence community

Challenging the constitutionality of the Special Counsel regulations

Additionally, several reports this week also appear to suggest an indictment might be coming, and soon.

Citing a Washington Post report published Thursday, several top legal experts are predicting DOJ will charge Donald Trump, and those charges will include obstruction and violations of the Espionage Act.

Earlier this week NYU School of Law professor of law Ryan Goodman said Dept. of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith had struck “gold” after obtaining the contemporaneous notes of a Trump attorney who counseled the ex-president on his possibly unlawful handling of classified documents.


Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.