All the media wanted to talk about this past week is Rush Limbaugh calling the new Democrat Sex Mascot, Sandra Fluke, a slut on his radio program. Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection noted that one of Rush’s sponsors, Carbonite, has pulled its ads:
Carbonite, a company I never heard of except through its advertising on Rush Limbaugh’s show, has dropped Rush nothwithstanding Rush’s apology.
Here is the statement released earlier tonight:
A Statement from David Friend, CEO of Carbonite as of 6:45pm ET, March 3:
“No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse.”
Rush did apologize for the language used but in his favor, he kept faith with the point:
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.
Apparently now even more advertisers are falling in line to try to make Rush the next Don “Nappy Headed Ho” Imus:
Update: There are five other companies which have dropped Rush, according to Think Progress, which is giddy: Quicken Loans, SleepNumber, the Sleep Train, Legal Zoom, and Citrix Systems. Ms. Magazine is mounting a drive against Clear Channel to force Rush off the air.
All this, even as Fluke was exposed as a 30 year old professional student and Democratic plant by Just A Grunt at Jammie Wearing Fools:
For me the interesting part of the story is the ever-evolving “coed”. I put that in quotes because in the beginning she was described as a Georgetown law student. It was then revealed that prior to attending Georgetown she was an active women’s right advocate. In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown’s insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn’t cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.
In other words, folks, you are being played. She has been an activist all along and the Dems were just waiting for the appropriate time to play her.
While she is described as a “third year law student” they always fail to mention that she is also the past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.
Does your campus’s LSRJ chapter face opposition in regard to facilitating a comprehensive conversation about reproductive justice? Well mine definitely does! While my campus has a mix of people with different backgrounds, and a rich liberal arts community, the Midwest doesn’t exactly scream bleeding liberal. Some LSRJ chapters at conservative campuses face opposition in the form of other, more conservative, student run organizations; some face it from their administrations, and others from their peers, or the community in general. Whatever the opposition is, it can be incredibly frustrating and disheartening.
The question is, how do we combat this conservative opposition and oppression, in order to facilitate a discussion and educate others about the RJ movement? I am obviously not alone in facing these problems, as Sandra Fluke of Georgetown lead a packed room in a discussion on this question at the first Issue Caucus that I attended at the Leadership Institute, LSRJ’s national conference at Berkeley.
While no solution was definitively reached, and I personally don’t begin to have the “right” answer, I was really charged by the discussion and feel many great ideas were presented. Some campus chapters decided to take an adversarial approach, feeling it important to use those “scary” words the opposition fears.
Further background research on Ms Fluke reveals that she got her start in government in New York in 2009.
Sandra Fluke’s professional background in domestic violence and human trafficking began with Sanctuary for Families in New York City. There, she launched the agency’s pilot Program Evaluation Initiative. While at Sanctuary, she co-founded the New York Statewide Coalition for Fair Access to Family Court, which after a twenty-year stalemate, successfully advocated for legislation granting access to civil orders of protection for unmarried victims of domestic violence, including LGBTQ victims and teens. Sandra was also a member of the Manhattan Borough President’s Taskforce on Domestic Violence and numerous other New York City and New York State coalitions that successfully advocated for policy improvements impacting victims of domestic violence.
As the 2010 recipient of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles Fran Kandel Public Interest Grant, she researched, wrote, and produced an instructional film on how to apply for a domestic violence restraining order in pro per. She has also interned with the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking; Polaris Project; Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County; Break the Cycle; the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project; NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund; Crime Victim and Sexual Assault Services; and the Human Services Coalition of Tompkins County.
Through Georgetown’s clinic programs, Sandra has proposed legislation based on fact-finding in Kenya regarding child trafficking for domestic work, and has represented victims of domestic violence in protection order cases. Sandra is the Development Editor of the Journal of Gender and the Law, and served as the President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, and the Vice President of the Women’s Legal Alliance. In her first year, she also co-founded a campus committee addressing human trafficking. Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.
My only question is, how does someone go from being a champion of domestic violence issues to an expert of women’s reproductive health issues?
Seen any of that info in the news lately?
Me, neither…and I also don’t remember the press up in arms when Bill Mahr called Sarah Palin a “c*nt” or when Ed Shultz of MSNBC called Laura Ingraham a “slut”.
Ed did get “suspended” but he is still prattling on at that little watched Media Matters driven, DNC propaganda arm of NBC.
How about when a loser liberal radio talker said this of Rebecca Kleefisch, the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Wisconsin – that she “performed fellatio on all the talk show hosts in Milwaukee” and “pulled a train” (slang for gang sex).
Michelle Malkin has been chronicling the hate directed at conservative women for years – it seems invisible to the media.
It is all a show, folks. Faux outrage designed to distract from Obama and the Democrat’s lack of performance and to protect the prosecution of their Marxist agenda, an agenda that the mainstream media agrees with.
Now let’s get back to getting Fluke and her supporters to understand the meaning of these words which they so wilfully ignore:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….”
Walter Duranty died in 1957 but his spirit lives on in the American liberal “news” outlets.
Duranty was the infamous New York Times reporter and shill for the Stalin regime in Russia. Duranty is a perfect example of people who Lenin called “useful idiots”, so much so that one of Duranty’s biographies is titled “Stalin’s Apologist : Walter Duranty, the New York Times Man in Moscow“.
Mark Herring, reviewing the biography written by S.J. Taylor, describes Duranty thusly:
Duranty was a chain-smoking, Scotch drinking vulgar sort of man who made no apologies for his admiration of Stalin. He was held in awe by other journalists, especially young female journalists. He did not fail to use the awe to his advantage, or rather their disadvantage. As Fascism rose in Europe, and Japanese jingoism emerged in the East, Duranty wrote glowing accounts of Stalin’s Five-Year Plan. Almost single-handedly did Duranty aid and abet one of the world’s most prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true. He had swallowed the ends-justifies-the-means-argument hook, line and sinker. Duranty loved to repeat, when Stalin’s atrocities were brought to light, “you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” Those “eggs” were the heads of men, women and children, and those “few” were merely tens of millions.
As Stalin exiled untold numbers of Soviet citizens to die in Gulags, the Soviet propaganda machine glossed this over, never expecting to get a reasonable hearing, but prepared to deny everything. Duranty’s acceptacnce of the official line exceeded even Stalin’s wildest expectations. Taylor’s book is a tour de force on the vile, brutish, and nasty life that was Duranty’s. His fall in this book is as if from a skyscraper. That his own paper, the New York Times, refuses to acknowledge his perfidy only makes the read all the more savory. Readers now know that the “paper of record” knows that we know. When this story is added to yet another media icon crash, H.L. Mencken and his anti-semitic, booboisie racism, the liberal downfall is complete. Not only are we able to see liberalism’s clay fee; we are now treated to the certifying papers of its alleged dementia.
What an oddity of life — or is it rather God’s inexhaustible sense of humor? — that Duranty would come from an affluent middle class family with a Harrow-Eton education. His nuclear family was Presbyterian to its core. Though the rumor of a “public school” education dogged Duranty as part of the myth of the rugged reporter, Duranty’s facility for reading Latin, Greek, French and, later, Russian belied any such nonsense. For all his posturing, Duranty was perhaps the best-educated reporter in all Europe.
Duranty also has a Pulitzer. Seems to me that we have a lot of little Duranty wanna-be “journalists” running loose today. They are just as much useful idiots and fellow travelers to Obama as Duranty was to Stalin.
UPDATE: Stacy McCain has more on the Democrat’s New Inflatable Sex Toy.
UPDATE II: Allapundit at Hot Air adds this compilation of quotes.