Our Long National Nightmare Is Over: Rush Apologizes Over Slut Comment

Whew!

(Rush Limbaugh) 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.

His choice of words was poor, but, hey, that’s what can happen when a person is speaking off the cuff, and, come on, let’s face it, I’m sure most people, including Liberals/progressives, though “my goodness, how much sex does she have a day? Does she ever study?” And then Rush doubled down on the comment. But, I’m sure those on the left will graciously accept Rush’s apology….no? They’re still going after him at places like the DU, The Politico, Think Progress, Washington Post, and so many other, saying apology no accepted, it wasn’t a real apology (some suggest Obama instruct Rush on how to apologize, cause Obama is really good at it), that Rush should be forced off the air, that he die, etc and so forth.

Why did Rush apologize? As many have suggested, I’m sure part if it has to do with losing advertisers. He lost a big one in Carbonite. Also, I’m confident that Rush realizes that this issue distracts from the real issue, namely, government intrusion into religious issues, violation of the 1st Amendment, government mandating coverage, as well as other issues, like Obama’s incompetence, rising gas prices, Iran, unemployment, the economy as a whole, etc. Whether or not the contraception mandate was intentionally intended to distract from the real issues, that’s what happened (which is why I have ignored the kerfuffle over Rush’s comments).

I’m also confident that the apology from Rush was sincere. We’ve all said things in the heat of the moment, and, rather than backing down and realizing that we went over the line, we double down, before eventually realizing we were wrong. I triple dog dare anyone to tell me that’s never happened to them.

But, now that Rush has apologized, will we finally hear

  • Harry Reid apologize to Bush43 for calling him a loser and calling our troops jack booted thugs?
  • John Kerry apologize to our troops for calling them morons and that they terrorize kids in the dead of night?
  • Bill Maher apologize to Sarah Palin for calling her a c*nt?
  • Nancy Pelosi apologize to Tea Party members for insinuating that they are Nazis?
  • Liberals apologize to Michelle Malkin, Sister Toldjah, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and virtually every conservative woman for their hateful, misogynistic, and death wishing treatment of those women?
  • Liberals apologize to Andrew Breitbart’s family for being gleeful over his death?
  • Barack Obama apologize to, well, all American’s for calling them soft and lazy? Saying they don’t think clearly? The Dalia Lama? The Queen of England? England? Poland? For calling Netanyahu a liar? Gordon Brown?

That said, don’t expect liberals to give up on the Rush narrative: it serves to distract from the 99% ineptitude Obama displays as president (yes, he has done a few good things.)

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

11 Responses to “Our Long National Nightmare Is Over: Rush Apologizes Over Slut Comment”

  1. mahabarbara says:

    “I’m sure most people, including Liberals/progressives, though “my goodness, how much sex does she have a day? Does she ever study?””

    Most liberals/progressives are not thinking that at all, because most of us actually understand what Fluke said, which has nothing to do with her own sexuality. She could be celibate for all we know. Her testimony was about the uses of birth control pills for medical conditions such as ovarian cysts.

    Since you obviously have no idea what Fluke actually said, you might want to read the transcript before you continue to make a fool of yourself. See also John Cole.

    And might I add that many of us have been amused by the Right’s seeming lack of understanding of how birth control pills and IUDs work. Expense has nothing to do with frequency of sexual activity, since a birth control pill prescription or an IUD costs the same whether one has sex three times a day or once every ten years. Rush may have to take a pill every time he has sex, but for women it doesn’t work that way. See also “Contraception: That’s Not How It Works, Guys.”

  2. Yet, regardless, it is a violation of the 1st Amendment on religion to mandate that religious organizations provide contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients that go against their religious beliefs. That’s what this is about.

    Nor should others be forced to pay for contraception for sex.

    I read the transcript, and, no matter how you spin it, she was overstating the cost of contraception. Even birth control pills for actual medical issues wouldn’t cost that much. This is simply Kabuki theater designed to create an issue that deflects from the piss poor record of Obama’s. And, Rush fell for it.

    (PS: just in case you’re thinking I banned you, nope, your comment ended up in spam cue. Akismet/Bad Behavior can be a pain)

  3. Gary from Kansas says:

    I read it, and I listened to her..The whole thing was Pelosi theater..

    If you want me to pay for your birth control, then come and ask me personally..If you want your college to pay for it, then go talk to them..if you think insurance companies should cover it, then start your own insurance company and knock yourself out..Show us all how it’s done..

    Don’t go to congress and speak for women you don’t know, and waste time on ridiculous side shows when we are spending our future away..And feign outrage at an off the cuff remark by a guy who does 15 hours a week live..who has no power to run (or ruin) your life..

  4. mahabarbara says:

    Yet, regardless, it is a violation of the 1st Amendment on religion to mandate that religious organizations provide contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients that go against their religious beliefs. That’s what this is about.

    But the Obama Administration already agreed they don’t have to pay for those things. And before you argue otherwise, please read why contraception coverage actually is revenue neutral and possibly saves money. That’s why contraception coverage is being mandated, because it lowers overall health care cost. Logically, policies without it ought to cost more.

    Here’s why y’all are being politically stupid, though. Right after the concession by the White House, all kinds of headlines came out saying “Obama Caved.” Look it up. A lot of leftie bloggers also were slamming Obama for caving in to the bishops. If you all had just declared victory and moved on to something else, it would have hurt Obama politically, especially among women. But now you’ve turned him into a hero, courageously standing up to the neanderthal bullies who are trying to shame women for using contraception. Thanks!

  5. mahabarbara says:

    “If you want me to pay for your birth control, then come and ask me personally.”

    First, we’re not talking about taxes, we’re talking about health insurance coverage offered by private companies. Birth control is health care. Women have to go to a doctor to get it, and for most women between the ages of 20 and 50, fertility is their biggest health care issue. Pregnancy or lack thereof is a rather significant factor in one’s health. Plus, unwanted pregnancies eat up health care dollars that might have been used elsewhere.

    So if we apply your logic, we could say “If you want me to pay for your prostate exam, or your chemotherapy, or to have your broken bone set, then come and ask me personally.” It makes no sense. Whenever any of your health care is paid for by insurance, basically other people are paying for it, yes? Do you hate the health insurance industry?

    The issue here is the smarmy, knee-jerk attitude that anything having to do with women’s sexuality is dirty and somehow not part of “normal” health care coverage. Do attempt to join the rest of us in the 21st century some day.

  6. gitarcarver says:

    But the Obama Administration already agreed they don’t have to pay for those things.

    No, they haven’t. The Obama administration has said that if the institution does not want to pay for such things due to protected First Amendment rights, their insurance companies can pay for them. Clearly that is simply a shifting of the payment burden, a fact that even your opinion piece in Time does not refute.

    It is also irrefutable that many large religious institutions have insurance companies manage their insurance plans. The institution establishes levels of coverage, rates etc while another company manages the money end of it. In cases such as that, the institution is still paying directly for the contraception. In all other cases, they are paying indirectly which is the same thing in their eyes as either killing a person or paying someone to kill a person.

    Look it up.

    We did and what we found was the exact opposite. The left wing bloggers bought into the idea this was a “concession,” when in fact it was nothing of the sort. It was a PR move and as usual, the left lapped it up.

    First, we’re not talking about taxes, we’re talking about health insurance coverage offered by private companies.

    ObamaCare covers contraception. ObamaCare is paid for by taxes.

    Birth control is health care.

    No, it isn’t. Birth control is a consequence of a choice. People do not choose to get prostate cancer. They do not choose to have a heart attack. Those are health care issues. Getting pregnant is a choice. There are actions – avoidable actions – leading up to a pregnancy.

    The issue here is the smarmy, knee-jerk attitude that anything having to do with women’s sexuality is dirty and somehow not part of “normal” health care coverage. Do attempt to join the rest of us in the 21st century some day.

    The issue, my condescending, ill informed friend, is whether the government can force a person to act against their moral and religious objections in spite of the First Amendment and in spite of the organic documents which laid the foundation for this country.

    This issue is whether others should be held accountable for the choices a person makes. This is not about women’s sexuality. That is simply a canard thrown out by people when the facts are against them.

    If men and women want to have sex, fine. That is their choice. When people demand that others be held responsible for the choices of people, that is not moral or correct.

    Please do try and join the rest of us in the 21st century who know that women and men are strong enough, capable enough and responsible enough to make choices for themselves without demanding others pay for those choices. Your position actually damages the idea of strong, independent women as you are arguing women cannot have control over their own bodies without someone else paying for it.

    As you said, come into the 21st century.

  7. John Gray says:

    How is having insurance companies pay for contraception a violation of the 1st Amendment?What of Ms. Fluke’s religious freedom?If Georgetown can’t force her to attend Catholic worship services they can’t force her to abide by and provide for (through her tuition)any attempt to spread Catholic doctrine among the students.Doing that violates her freedom from religion.

  8. John Gray says:

    Actually birth control pills are health care.They are used to treat a variety of medical problems,such as ovarian cysts,as Ms. Fluke pointed out.Sorry to let facts get in the way of a good lie,but…

  9. John Gray says:

    Actually “Obamacare” isn’t paid for by taxes.It’s paid for by the premiums that people will paying to for profit health insurance corporations.Again I hate to let a small thing called facts burst your bubble,but the facts are against you on that one.
    If a an organization run by Christian Scientists objected to any of its employees using a doctor for any purpose there would be no outrage that the government was forcing them to provide health care,but if it’s the Catholic Church and contraception then somehow it’s violating the First Amendment.
    Absolute b.s. we are not forcing the Catholic Church to abandon its teachings on birth control,we are merely requiring that they not force others who don’t share the beliefs of the Church to go along with them and be denied medical care because the Church objects.

  10. gitarcarver says:

    How is having insurance companies pay for contraception a violation of the 1st Amendment?

    As previously stated, religious institutions either pay for the premiums that would fund actions that are against their religious and moral conscience, or as the institutions ARE the insurance companies, they would be paying directly for actions that are against their religious and moral convictions.

    Please explain under what Constitution authority you believe you have the right to make a person or group act against their religious convictions?

    What of Ms. Fluke’s religious freedom?

    What of it? As you said, no one is forcing Ms Fluke to act against her religious principles. It is Ms Fluke and others such as yourself who are demanding institutions act against their moral and religious principles.

    You and Ms Fluke are free to practice your religious beliefs without interference.

    Why are you demanding the church not have the same rights as you do?

    ….as Ms. Fluke pointed out.Sorry to let facts get in the way of a good lie,but…

    There are cases when certain birth control pills are prescribed by a doctor for medical reasons. In that case, insurance does cover the costs. If you actually listened to Fluke’s statement, her reference to “friends” and “what someone told her” was lacking any specifics as to actual people, companies, institutions, etc. Fluke also said the insurance of her friend covered the medication, but had denied the payment. You and others have made the jump that is must be because the institution does not cover birth control. Yet Fluke’s own testimony refutes that. Fluke is recounted (or fabricating) a story that sounds more like a dispute over a payment rather than actual coverage.

    It is sad when facts get in the way.

    Actually “Obamacare” isn’t paid for by taxes.It’s paid for by the premiums that people will paying to for profit health insurance corporations.Again I hate to let a small thing called facts burst your bubble,but the facts are against you on that one.

    I hate to burst your bubble, but the Obama administration has argued in court the program is paid for by taxes. This is the only way they can get the thing through because the Constitution allows Congress the power to tax.

    Absolute b.s. we are not forcing the Catholic Church to abandon its teachings on birth control,we are merely requiring that they not force others who don’t share the beliefs of the Church to go along with them and be denied medical care because the Church objects.

    No, you are demanding the church act against its teachings. No one is saying that Fluke or people like you have to hold the beliefs of the Catholic Church. Yet you have no compunction demanding the Church and its institutions believe as you do. You want to force the church to act against its teachings and beliefs.

    No matter how you try and couch it, that is a violation of the First Amendment.

  11. Lanny says:

    Its been read. The point your missing is it would require the insurance to provide it…which would require the employer to STILL violate his moral and religious convictions in paying into a compoany that provides it. The other point? The US Constitution provides no authority for the government to mandate contraceptives. For these people, its seen as blaspheme by proxy. For you, its seen as women’s healthcare.

    Their is a compromise though: a religious exception. The employer does not have to cover the cost (as the bill is written now, they wold as part of the insurance package) and instead the cost is shifted to the employee who can buy into it if they want by having a little extra removed from their pay every pay period. This way contraceptive is still provided by insurance, but no one is forced into violating their convictions. WHich brings us to the last point. The white house could of thought about this, probably did, and chose not to.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6222 access attempts in the last 7 days.