Public figures are bound to offend from time to time. Occasionally they’ll stick their foot so far in their mouth they’ll develop athlete’s tongue. Enter Rush Limbaugh, who might need to brush his teeth with fast-acting Tinactin. If you missed it, Rush called Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke some unflattering names after she practically begged congressional Democrats to force Georgetown to meet her contraceptive demands.

The villain is, predictably, anyone who criticizes Sandra Fluke. But keep in mind that Fluke is no innocent bystander; she’s a feminine activist. She knew full well that Georgetown didn’t include contraceptives in student insurance plans before she enrolled. Sandra’s an operative who used her private life to affect public policy, thus inviting criticism. Frankly, Ms. Fluke is symptomatic of the entitlement attitude that has infected our nation. She demands a benefit at someone else’s expense and is willing to grovel at government’s feet to get it. A freedom fighter she’s not.

However, we don’t really know Ms. Fluke’s personal affairs, and not all women who use contraception work at the corner brothel. Rush should’ve chosen his words with more care. He since apologized, leaving everyone to decide for themselves whether he did so sincerely or to stem the advertising exodus from the EIB network. But if anyone thinks this is the end of the line for the Rush Limbaugh Show, they’re jumping the gun.

Conservatives support Rush because he publicly articulates their views on culture and government. As the fallout continues and they see advertisers, and a few radio stations, withdraw from the king of daytime radio a sense of panic on their part is normal. Despite Rush’s apology the firestorm hasn’t relented, prompting grave concern about Limbaugh’s survival among his supporters.

Liberals, conversely, have indulged more fantasies about Limbaugh’s demise than have teenage boys about Sports Illustrated swimsuit models. He’s arrogant and uninformed, a colossal blowhard who must be silenced at all cost. In wake of his Fluke rebuke, leftwing forums and message boards are joyously singing funeral dirges to the despised Rush Limbaugh.

Whichever side of that fence you’re on, you’re reacting prematurely. Controversy isn’t new to Rush Limbaugh. He has faced it before and emerged stronger each time. Remember Donovan McNabb, and the phony soldiers? It turned out Rush was right on both topics. He survived drug addiction, hearing loss, the great Viagra airport bust, and failed marriages. Each was said to be his undoing. But he’s still there, coast to coast, weekdays from noon to three Eastern Time.

Leftwing personalities have uttered far worse slurs toward conservatives than what Limbaugh said about Sandra Fluke. Bill Maher hosted two loons who fantasized about raping Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman. Oh, what a laugh that was. Michael Moore produces nefarious propaganda on par with Leni Riefenstahl and wins an Oscar for his documentary. Al Franken became a Senator!

So, love him or hate him, get used to him. Limbaugh isn’t going away.

Comments

  • Gururussell

    I discovered Rush back in the late 80’s (maybe it was 1990?) when I had to travel between schools around lunch time.  Always enjoy listening when I can (mainly summers). 
    Glad he apologized.  It is a case of needing to be a bigger/better man than the Mahers of the world. 

    No way that this takes him down.  That’s just a pipe dream of the libs.  What it does, with the extreme overreaching by the libs, is make him a symphathetic figure as people are reminded of the hypocrisy of the media in past similar/worse situations of the past.

  • Gururussell

    I discovered Rush back in the late 80’s (maybe it was 1990?) when I had to travel between schools around lunch time.  Always enjoy listening when I can (mainly summers). 
    Glad he apologized.  It is a case of needing to be a bigger/better man than the Mahers of the world. 

    No way that this takes him down.  That’s just a pipe dream of the libs.  What it does, with the extreme overreaching by the libs, is make him a symphathetic figure as people are reminded of the hypocrisy of the media in past similar/worse situations of the past.

  • Whodat

    I have been a ditto-head since the first day I heard Rush’s irreverence toward the cowards, cheats and doo-fusses who find their way into our government.  He gets carried away sometimes, but so do I.  He ain’t going away.  No way. No how.

  • Whodat

    I have been a ditto-head since the first day I heard Rush’s irreverence toward the cowards, cheats and doo-fusses who find their way into our government.  He gets carried away sometimes, but so do I.  He ain’t going away.  No way. No how.

  • Rick Dancliff

    Rush Limbaugh is an egomaniac and self-important entertainer. He doesn’t care about causes, he cares about ratings. I don’t blame him for building an impressive following and making millions, but he’s no spokesperson for the right and no one I look up to. He’s a showman. Good for him. He has an act and does it well. But I have no respect for him beyond that of a savvy capitalist.

    • Rick Danclif

      All that makes it surprising to me that he would so lightly take these sponsor losses. More than 40 have left and more are likely to follow. He deserves the money he’s made and now he deserves to lose whatever the market dictates.

  • Rick Dancliff

    Rush Limbaugh is an egomaniac and self-important entertainer. He doesn’t care about causes, he cares about ratings. I don’t blame him for building an impressive following and making millions, but he’s no spokesperson for the right and no one I look up to. He’s a showman. Good for him. He has an act and does it well. But I have no respect for him beyond that of a savvy capitalist.

    • Rick Danclif

      All that makes it surprising to me that he would so lightly take these sponsor losses. More than 40 have left and more are likely to follow. He deserves the money he’s made and now he deserves to lose whatever the market dictates.

  • Steve M.

    Anthony, while I agree with you that people on both sides of the spectrum have said much worse (of course you ignore that people on the right have) and while I agree that Rush will most likely survive and continue to thrive going forward (though the Imus debacle certainly proved that’s not a certainty); the entire first half of your article is absurd.

    Do you honestly believe that anyone who argues for a change in public policy that affects personal life must welcome and expect unfair personal insult without complaint? The villian is not “predictably, anyone who criticizes Sandra Fluke” — the victim is someone who uses out-of-hand insults in an ad hominem attack on someone they’ve never met. The villian is someone who jumps to outrageous conclusions about a person’s personal sexual life because of a position that person advocates.

    Please explain to me how this position makes Ms. Fluke “symptomatic of the entitlement attitude.” She is arguing for a change (a government mandated change) in a health insurance plan that she pays for. She’s not demanding anything at anyone else’s expense — she’s advocating for an additional benefit to a health plan that she already pays for (a benefit, by the way, that Health Insurance companies have already stated actually reduces the premiums of a health plan). 

    If Rush had said, Sandra Fluke is arguing for a personal benefit at the expense of religious liberty, he would be right; he would have a more effective argument and very few people would be criticizing him (though some would certainly disagree). But of course, he would also have far fewer listeners with that kind of rational, level-headed diction.

    • http://www.therightslant.com/ Anthony Hager

      I stand by the argument Steve. You’ll note that I’m not defending Rush’s comments; there were much better ways to make the point than sinking to mudslinging. However, Sandra Fluke is not a mere student. She is an activist who chose Georgetown knowing full-well they didn’t provide what she apparently desired. She can shop for plans that cover birth control if she wants to. But rather than do that she calls on Congress to exercise unconstitutional authority and force G’town to meet her demands. That is an attitude of entitlement. You might disagree with the conclusion. But your disagreement doesn’t invalidate the point.

  • Steve M.

    Anthony, while I agree with you that people on both sides of the spectrum have said much worse (of course you ignore that people on the right have) and while I agree that Rush will most likely survive and continue to thrive going forward (though the Imus debacle certainly proved that’s not a certainty); the entire first half of your article is absurd.

    Do you honestly believe that anyone who argues for a change in public policy that affects personal life must welcome and expect unfair personal insult without complaint? The villian is not “predictably, anyone who criticizes Sandra Fluke” — the victim is someone who uses out-of-hand insults in an ad hominem attack on someone they’ve never met. The villian is someone who jumps to outrageous conclusions about a person’s personal sexual life because of a position that person advocates.

    Please explain to me how this position makes Ms. Fluke “symptomatic of the entitlement attitude.” She is arguing for a change (a government mandated change) in a health insurance plan that she pays for. She’s not demanding anything at anyone else’s expense — she’s advocating for an additional benefit to a health plan that she already pays for (a benefit, by the way, that Health Insurance companies have already stated actually reduces the premiums of a health plan). 

    If Rush had said, Sandra Fluke is arguing for a personal benefit at the expense of religious liberty, he would be right; he would have a more effective argument and very few people would be criticizing him (though some would certainly disagree). But of course, he would also have far fewer listeners with that kind of rational, level-headed diction.

    • http://www.therightslant.com/ Anthony Hager

      I stand by the argument Steve. You’ll note that I’m not defending Rush’s comments; there were much better ways to make the point than sinking to mudslinging. However, Sandra Fluke is not a mere student. She is an activist who chose Georgetown knowing full-well they didn’t provide what she apparently desired. She can shop for plans that cover birth control if she wants to. But rather than do that she calls on Congress to exercise unconstitutional authority and force G’town to meet her demands. That is an attitude of entitlement. You might disagree with the conclusion. But your disagreement doesn’t invalidate the point.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jarret-Herrmann/100000948333321 Jarret Herrmann

    Comparing Michael Moore to the Nazis? Way to keep it classy. You might say that with his blaming of religious minorities for all of a country’s woes, and his constant zeal to invade new territories, and the false and misleading propaganda that allowed him to do so, a certain American leader of the past might more accurately fit that description. But no, it’s Michael Moore, the guy who tried to call attention to those misdoings and other abuses by the radical right wing agenda..

    • Anonymous

      Your college professor would be proud.

    • Gururussell

      Jarret is right.

      Anthony owes a full apology … to Leni Riefenstahl.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jarret-Herrmann/100000948333321 Jarret Herrmann

    Comparing Michael Moore to the Nazis? Way to keep it classy. You might say that with his blaming of religious minorities for all of a country’s woes, and his constant zeal to invade new territories, and the false and misleading propaganda that allowed him to do so, a certain American leader of the past might more accurately fit that description. But no, it’s Michael Moore, the guy who tried to call attention to those misdoings and other abuses by the radical right wing agenda..

    • Anonymous

      Your college professor would be proud.

    • Gururussell

      Jarret is right.

      Anthony owes a full apology … to Leni Riefenstahl.

  • Anonymous

    It is not the end of the line for the Maha but it is a sign that he is damaged goods. Rush was once an intellectual voice in the conservative movement. Now he is becoming nothing but a shock joc. His intellectual point was valid but of course his rhetorical style clouded his point.

  • Anonymous

    It is not the end of the line for the Maha but it is a sign that he is damaged goods. Rush was once an intellectual voice in the conservative movement. Now he is becoming nothing but a shock joc. His intellectual point was valid but of course his rhetorical style clouded his point.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is going to be just fine.  If they think something like this is going to take him down when the drug addiction didn’t, they are in for a shock.

  • Anonymous

    Rush is going to be just fine.  If they think something like this is going to take him down when the drug addiction didn’t, they are in for a shock.