Connect with us

How Rush Limbaugh’s “Apology” Destroys Any Credibility He Had Left On The Right

Published

on

Rush Limbaugh, after four days of putting the nation through a cultural, gender, sexist, and misogynistic war, has “apologized” and within his apology he has revealed the roots of his madness. Limbaugh, who spent half this week calling a college student a “slut” and a “prostitute,” then demanding she post online videos of her having sex, released a short statement (in full, below,) in which he reveals that every moment of his 35 years on the air have merely been “absurdity,” and that his comments and positions are not meant to be taken seriously. In other words, Limbaugh retreated to his supporters’ (faulty) default position that the conservative radio talk show shock jock is merely an “entertainer.”

READ: Limbaugh Brand Poison As List Of Advertisers Quitting Jumps Yet Again

To be clear, he is not merely an “entertainer.” And to be clear, were he merely an “entertainer,” he would still be held to the same standard as every other human being in this nation.

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

Shorter Limbaugh: “Officer, I didn’t know the gun was loaded.” Or, slightly longer, shorter Limbaugh: “I’m sorry, I thought I could get away with murder like I always do.”

But the gun is loaded, Rush, and you yourself, every day, go to Walmart, buy the gun, buy the ammunition, load the bullets, and shoot. Every day. “Three hours a day, five days a week.”

Limbaugh in this case reminds me so much of RedState founder and CNN contributor Erick Erickson, who immediately upon being hired at CNN was forced to issue an apology for his comments. His excuse? Essentially, “I was just talking like I do with my friends and neighbors.”

The lack of self-awareness of both Erickson and Limbaugh is astonishing. Were they both 18, perhaps we could understand — although not excuse — their daily atrocities, their daily assaults on this county. Alas, they are not.

But what is perhaps even more frightening is that is would seem Limbaugh is taking his marching orders — or at least his words — from Erickson.

“For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week,” Limbaugh’s statement said today.

“So of course Rush Limbaugh was being insulting,” wrote Erickson Friday morning. “He was using it as a tool to highlight just how absurd the Democrats’ position is on this.”

If that don’t beat all.

Rush Limbaugh is a 61 year old multi-multi millionaire who heads — albeit, unofficially — the Republican Party. And he has now headed it into shame, disrepute, misogynistic attacks, and we are left on the sidelines, watching the implosion.

Limbaugh has lost many corporate advertisers, and many companies lost by those advertisers, and possibly for the first time in his life he has been forced to apologize for his actions.

But his apology is not enough, not satisfying, not fulfilling. It is empty, shallow, the excuse-ridden day-late homework assignment of a fifth grader who copied it while looking over his shoulder at someone else’s work.

In short, he’s cheated again.

For locked within his non-apology apology is the fact that he still just doesn’t get it. He still has no idea what the issue is really all about.

“I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation,” Limbaugh says.

You think?

 

Limbaugh apologized because he finally realized that even he could go to far, and his comments all week had not only weakened the nation, not only weakened the Party, not only weakened his bank account, but had weakened his brand.

 

 

But, in fact, he didn’t choose the wrong words. He chose the wrong analogy. And he chose the wrong analogy because he doesn’t understand the situation to begin with.

Limbaugh’s ignorant comments — aside from the ad hominem attack on Sandra Fluke — reveal, as Rachel Maddow discovered, that Limbaugh thinks that women have to take a birth control pill every time they have sex. Limbaugh’s comments reveal that he thinks contraception is merely something women use to ensure they don’t get pregnant. And Limbaugh’s comments reveal his belief that the proper and default condition for women is to be pregnant.

“I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress,” Limbaugh’s apology continues. If that were true, Limbaugh would have annihilated not Sandra Fluke, but Darrell Issa, who convened a U.S. House of Representatives hearing in which five men representing various religions were caught “discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress.”

After claiming, “I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke,” which — clearly — he did, Limbaugh says, “I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.” That’s how Limbaugh’s “apology” ends. Note, it doesn’t say, for “my” insulting word choices. It doesn’t say “I apologize for using her as a target.” It doesn’t say, “I apologize for attacking all women.” It doesn’t say, “I apologize for my ignorance, I will explore the issue more in depth and consult with women in order to gain a better understanding of this issue that literally affects every person in America, directly or indirectly.”

No.

“I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation.”

“I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

Too little, too late Rush.

Finally, let’s be especially clear: Rush Limbaugh did not apologize out of sincerity. Limbaugh did not apologize after wrestling with his inner demons, or after soul-searching, or after consulting with his better angels. Limbaugh apologized after losing a half-dozen advertisers — and after knowing more were about to jump ship. In short, Limbaugh apologized because he finally realized that even he could go too far, and his comments all week had not only weakened the nation, not only weakened the Party, not only weakened his bank account, but had weakened his brand. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the only reason Rush Limbaugh offered his three-paragraph apology.

Rush Limbaugh’s apology, full complete text:

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.

Actually, one last thing. What did Limbaugh write on his website one day before his apology was posted? It was called, “I’m a Danger to the Women of America?,” and included this:

So Pelosi arranges her own press conference for the woman, and the woman makes it clear (her name is Sandra Fluke) that she’s having so much sex, she can’t pay for it — and we should.  She’s having so much sex, she can’t afford it.

She gives the numbers: $3,000 worth of birth control pills worth of sex.  She’s paying anywhere from $35,000 to $50,000 a year to go to Georgetown, $20,000 room and board, and can’t afford the $1,800 to $3,000 a year for birth control pills and wants us to pay for it.  I said, “What does that make her?”  She wants taxpayers, the Democrats want taxpayers, to pay for it. They want to create a welfare entitlement program where we provide birth control pills, because pregnancy’s an illness. Pregnancy is a “women’s health issue.”  So the woman comes forth with this, frankly hilarious claim that she’s having so much sex (and her buddies with her) that she can’t afford it.

And not one person says, “Well, did you ever think about maybe backing off the amount of sex that you have?  Do you ever think maybe it’s your responsibility for your own birth control, not everybody else’s?”  Nobody raises those questions.  Amazingly, when there is the slightest bit of opposition to this new welfare entitlement being created, then all of a sudden we hate women! We want ’em barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, all of these other things.  So that’s where we are.  And now, at the end of this week, I am the person that the women of America are to fear the most.

No, Rush, no one fears you anymore. Now, we merely pity and despise you. And that’s the way apologies work. No one is forced to accept them. You have to hope you have enough good will stored in your bank of gratitude to pay for it. And yours, Rush, has been overdrawn for decades.

When history has had its say on you, trust me, Rush, it will not have chosen the wrong words.

Related:

Limbaugh Brand Poison As List Of Advertisers Quitting Jumps Yet Again

Breaking: Fifth Advertiser Quits Rush Limbaugh After “Slut” Comments

Santorum On “Slut” Slur: Limbaugh An “Entertainer” Who Was “Being Absurd”

Limbaugh “Should Apologize” Says Scott Brown, First GOPer To Denounce

Third Limbaugh Advertiser Quits After Rush Calls 30 Year Old A ‘Slut’

Limbaugh Advertiser Exits Stage Left After Rush’s “Slut” Comments

Limbaugh: Law Student GOP Wouldn’t Let Testify Must Post Sex Tapes Online

Limbaugh Calls Law Student GOP Wouldn’t Let Testify “Prostitute” And “Slut”

Image: Rush Limbaugh by DonkeyHotey

Related Topics:
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.

OPINION

Trump Threatens to Violate Gag Order and Go to Jail: ‘I’ll Do That Sacrifice Any Day’

Published

15 hours ago

on

May 6, 2024

By

Just hours after a New York State Supreme Court Justice held Donald Trump in criminal contempt of court for violating his gag order and threatened him with jail time, the ex-president attacked several of the judges overseeing his cases, and suggested he may violate the gag order for the good of the U.S. Constitution.

“Because this judge has given me a gag order and says you’ll go to jail if you violate it. And frankly, you know what, our Constitution is much more important than jail. It’s not even close. I’ll do that sacrifice any day,” Trump claimed.

Trump is on trial for 34 criminal felonies for falsification of business records, which experts describe as election interference after he paid “hush money” to an adult film actress in an effort to keep his alleged affair away from the public eye just before the 2016 presidential election.

The ex-president, who announced his 2024 run for the White House, insiders say, to escape prosecution for a wide variety of alleged crimes, began his Monday post-trial news conference with reporters by criticizing the prosecution’s announcement it expects to wrap up its portion of the trial in about two weeks.

READ MORE: ‘Israel Aid, Ukraine Aid, Kitchenaid’: Dem Mocks GOP’s ‘Hands Off Our Appliances’ Week

“The government just said that they want two to three more weeks,” Trump complained. “That means they want to get me off the [campaign] trail for two to three more weeks. Now, anybody in there would realize that there’s no case, they don’t have a case. Every legal scholar says they don’t have a case. This is just a political witch. It’s election interference. And this is really truly election interference, and it’s a disgrace. It’s a disgrace, and in every poll I’m leading by a lot.”

Those statements are false.

The New York Post reports, “Prosecutor Josh Steinglass estimated that the DA’s office would wrap up its case around May 21, two weeks from tomorrow. But he cautioned that’s a ‘rough estimate.'”

Concluding the District Attorney’s Office did have a case, a Manhattan grand jury indicted Trump on 34 felony counts.

A great many legal scholars say there is a case.

There is no evidence of a “political witch-hunt.”

Trump is not leading in all the polls, nor, in all the ones he is leading in, is he leading by “a lot.” Nor do political candidates get exempt from prosecution because they may be leading in a particular poll.

The ex-president went on to claim prosecutors “figure maybe they can do something here, maybe they can do, this case should be over, this case should have never been brought.”

“And then Alvin Bragg brought the case, as soon as, when I’m running and leading, that’s when they decided, let’s go bring a case. So it’s a disgrace. But we just heard two to three more weeks. I thought that we’re finished today and they are finished today. We look at what’s happening. I thought they were going to be finished today and then 2 to 3 more weeks,” he again complained, again saying prosecutors “all want to keep me off the campaign trail. That’s all this is about. This about election interference. How do we stop it? And it’s a disgrace.”

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

Trump then brought up the gag order.

“Where I can basically, I have to watch every word I tell you people, you asked me a question, a simple question I’d like to give it but I can’t talk about it,” he claimed, falsely.

“Because this judge has given me a gag order and say you’ll go to jail if you violate it. And frankly, you know what, our Constitution is much more important than jail. It’s not even close. I’ll do that sacrifice any day.”

Trump attacked three of judges overseeing his case, excluding U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon.

“But what’s happening here is a disgrace and the appellate courts ought to get involved. New York looks so bad, system of so called justice was so bad between this judge and [Judge Arthur] Engoron and [Judge Lewis] Kaplan the triple teamed with the corrupt judges is a disgrace to our nation. So I should be out there campaigning.”

Watch Trump’s remarks below or at this link.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

 

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Israel Aid, Ukraine Aid, Kitchenaid’: Dem Mocks GOP’s ‘Hands Off Our Appliances’ Week

Published

18 hours ago

on

May 6, 2024

By

Last year in January, in the wake of a study that found 650,000 children have developed asthma because of gas stoves, Bloomberg News reported: “US Safety Agency to Consider Ban on Gas Stoves Amid Health Fears.”

There was no ban in the works or on the way, and the chair of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) was forced to issue a statement promising, “I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so.”

Republicans however, went on the attack, with some, like U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), a physician, shouting on social media, “I’ll NEVER give up my gas stove. If the maniacs in the White House come for my stove, they can pry it from my cold dead hands. COME AND TAKE IT!!”

Congressman Jackson soon doubled-down, appearing on Newsmax.

One month later, West Virginia Democratic U.S. Senator Joe Manchin teamed up with several Republicans to protect Americans’ “right” to non-electric cooking.

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

“Gas stoves have been in the news lately and I’ve come out strongly against the Consumer Product Safety Commission pursuing any ban of gas stoves,” Manchin declared, despite there being no possibility of that. “In fact, I’m introducing legislation today with Senator [Ted] Cruz that would ensure that they don’t and separately sending a letter to the commission with Senator [James] Lankford.”

For decades the scientific community has known about the health dangers of gas stoves, but Americans love them and there are no plans to have any federal government agency coming to take them away.

The Biden administration would like to help Americans buy new, energy-saving home appliances, but Republicans oppose those efforts as well.

Nearly sixteen months later, Republicans are still working to protect Americans from what some have suggested will be the federal government knocking on the doors of U.S. citizens to take away their gas stoves.

Last month, Republican Speaker Mike Johnson was all set to revive the House’s focus on ensuring Americans can continue to grill baby grill – indoors – childhood asthma-be-damned, and nearly put HR 6192, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act, and several others on the floor for votes, including:

The “Liberty in Laundry Act” (HR 7673), the “Clothes Dryers Reliability Act (HR 7645), the “Refrigerator Freedom Act” (HR 7637), the “Affordable Air Conditioning Act” (HR 7626), and the “Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act” (HR 7700).

But at the last minute he changed the schedule after aid to Ukraine and Israel became the national focus.

READ MORE: Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

MSNBC’s Steve Benen reports Monday, “the ‘Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act’ … will likely reach the floor this week, possibly as early as tomorrow.”

One year ago this month, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) delivered amusing remarks during a House hearing.

“I want to apologize on behalf of the Democratic Party that we have decided to put kids’ safety, in their neighborhoods from getting gunned down, in movie theaters, or grocery stores, or school churches, or synagogues – we as Democrats have clearly lost our way that we are not focused on appliances,” Moskowitz said sarcastically in a viral video.

Now he’s back, along with the House Republicans’ renewed focus on the false fear-mongering the federal government is coming for your home appliances, or is going to ban them.

In response to Axios’ Andrew Solender reporting, “Appliance Week is BACK in the House!” Congressman Moskowitz replied, “Israel aid, Ukraine aid, Humanitarian aid, Kitchenaid.”

He then grew even more sarcastically excited:

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

 

Continue Reading

News

‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

Published

20 hours ago

on

May 6, 2024

By

Republican South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem continues to make media appearances promoting her new book, which has received massive attention for the story about her shooting to death her 14-month old dog, Cricket, and a goat, and her reportedly false claim she met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.

But in discussing that apparent lie that appears in her book, Noem appeared to tell a few more – and seemed to suggest she may have actually met with Kim Jong Un but should not have put that meeting in her memoir. Experts have said it’s unlikely she did meet with him.

“The book is called, ‘No Going Back,’ but it sounds like the publisher, Center Street, is going back on a couple of the details in the book,” CBS Mornings told Noem.

“Well, I don’t believe so,” Noem replied.

After hearing the apparently false details of her alleged meeting with Kim Jong Un being read on-air straight from her book, Noem explained, “when I became aware of that we changed the content, and the future editions will be adjusted.”

READ MORE: Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

Noem also said she’s “met with many, many world leaders, I’ve traveled around the world. I should not have put that anecdote in the book, and at my request they have removed it.”

She was then asked, “That specifically didn’t happen?” but Noem appeared to brush off the question.

“What I’m saying is I’m not talking about that meeting, I’m not talking about my meetings with world leaders, there are some that are in the book and there’s some that are not in the book.”

Asked, “Did you tell your ghost writer to write that?” Noem refused to answer the question.

“I specifically have worked on policy for over 30 years, and over that time I have traveled around the world and met with leaders around the world. And that anecdote, I’ve asked them to change the content, and it will be removed.”

“It’s a simple question, did you or did you not meet with Kim Jong Un?”

“That’s the answer that I have for you,” Noem replied.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

She also did not tell CBS why she chose to put it in the book at all, if she knew it was false.

Noem does not mention that she recorded the audio book version for “No Going Back,” and would have read those words about meeting with the North Korean dictator aloud, yet apparently did not ask her publisher to remove it until a local newspaper, The Dakota Scout, published a report starting her account of the event was “in doubt.”

On Sunday, Noem first began to suggest the meeting might have taken place. Speaking with CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Axios reported, “Noem declined to talk about specific meetings she had with various world leaders, and never outright said she didn’t meet with Kim during the interview.”

A CBS News transcript of that interview shows “Face the Nation” moderator Margaret Brennan saying, “you released video of your recording of the audio book. you didn’t catch these errors when you were recording it?”

“Well, Margaret, as soon as it was brought to my attention, I took action to make sure that it was reflected,” Noem responded, before leaping into an attack on the media.

Also on Sunday, The Independent reported, “North Korea experts say it’s highly unlikely Ms Noem ever met the North Korean leader.”

“From 2011 to 2018, Mr Kim did not leave North Korea, according to University of Notre Dame professor and North Korea expert George Lopez.” The Independent added, “Benjamin Young, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University and an expert on North Korea, told The Dakota Scout that Ms Noem’s account of meeting Kim was ‘dubious.'”

“I cover North Korea very closely, and I have never heard of Kim Jong Un meeting congressmen or congresswomen,” Young said.

Watch Noem’s full CBS interview from Monday below or at this link.

READ MORE: RFK Jr., Embracing Far-Right, Spoke at Fundraiser for Anti-Government Group With J6 Ties

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.