Is That All There Is?

Comedian Rush Limbaugh – who is, it seems these days, the virtual leader of the increasingly deranged Republican Party – did the Democrats a huge favour the other day with his offensive remarks directed at “college co-ed” (i.e., third-year law student) Susan Fluke.

Whether deliberate or not, Limbaugh’s deeply misogynistic tirade analogizing the issue as being akin to prostitution, calling Ms. Fluke a “slut” and then derisively suggesting that taxpayers be recompensed with pornographic videos of her sexual activities, effectively steered the surreal “debate” about state-mandated provision of contraceptive medications by private employers directly off a cliff.

It’s supposed the Republicans had initially wanted the discussion (if one can call it that) to be about “religious freedom” – an arguably legitimate issue of perpetual controversy near and dear to the heart of the party’s social conservative base – but then a number of truly bizarre proposals by various Republican-controlled state legislatures (demanding the insertion of invasive trans-vaginal ultrasound probes prior to abortion, for example), together with perplexing comments on the subject made by various sex-obsessed, theocratic right-wingnuts quickly revealed the true nature of their objection to the rulemaking healthcare proposals of the Obama administration…

Some liberal pundits and politicians have deemed the Republicans’ efforts in this regard as a “War on Women” – an expression that is certainly overstated, but perhaps not by much. If one looks at the legislative priorities of the Republicans since their resurgence in 2010, when not blindly demanding that taxes and regulations be cut as a magic elixir for economic growth, their primary focus appears to be almost madly fixated on controlling, limiting, and repealing the hard-fought reproductive rights of women. Why is that?

As an outside observer on the American political scene, it’s truly amazing that these kind of irrelevant (some might even say, completely bogus) distractions are the stuff and substance of current political debate given there are so many other imperative things that need to be addressed which are all vastly more meaningful and significant to the lives of ordinary people.

17 Comments

Filed under Right-Wing Haters, US Politics, Wingnuts

17 responses to “Is That All There Is?

  1. Nomennovum

    Misogyny! “War on Women!” LOL.

    http://www.quickmeme.com/Sandy-Needs/?upcoming

  2. I just feel embarrassed for the people that support or listen to this man. He seems to be held in high regard among conservatives. It is baffling.

    His comments re: Susan Fluke were just factually wrong and somewhat confusing. I mean, he was married (four times).. right? With no kids… and he still doesn’t understand birth control.

  3. It’s hard to believe that this degenerate freak has the temerity to lecture other people about morality.

  4. Im curious to know if Romney or Santorum came out strong against RLs comments. I guess the far right would be upset, but it could go a long way to getting reasonable thinking voters and a long way to changing discourse in this country.

  5. The ringing continues:

    “This 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, did you ever think about maybe backing off the amount of sex that you have?”

    RLs comments from today… He seems to have found some purpose to all this. Im not sure what it is? Hes popular I guess? We all cant wait to see what he does next? Its one thing for Lindsay Lohan to be a complete train wreck, but she doesnt have a voting block.

  6. As far as I’m aware Romney hasn’t said anything about it and Santorum just dismissed Rush’s “inappropriate language” as nothing more than a joke. You know those wacky conservatives… they’re all such jovial, fun-filled kidders with absolutely terrific senses of humor. That’s why so many of them are comedians! Like… um, um..you know… that guy…. Oh, what’s his name?

  7. Red Tory:

    Dennis Miller? That’s the only name that I can come up with for a well known (arguably, since at best he is C list if not with Kathy Griffin on the D list) conservative comic/comedian, and I never found him all that funny even at the peak of his game.

  8. Rotterdam

    @parklife
    Why does any politician have to respont to any comedian or talk show host?
    Is Obama supposed to respond to every one of Bill Maher’s misogynistic comments. Is he supposed to return his million dollar pac donation?

    Is George Bush supposed to phone Sarah Palin up to see how she was doing after Maher called her a cunt?

    This is all faux outrage.

  9. Rotterdam

    Update:
    Ed Schultz called Laura Ingram a slut.
    She never got a call from the President, if she was OK.
    Barbara Walters laughed.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/06/Ingraham%20Walters%20Laugh%20Slut

  10. Nomennovum

    “As an outside observer on the American political scene, it’s truly amazing that these kind of irrelevant (some might even say, completely bogus) distractions are the stuff and substance of current political debate given there are so many other imperative things that need to be addressed which are all vastly more meaningful and significant to the lives of ordinary people.”

    Whoever wrote these words is pretty damn perceptive. At what website did I land?

    Damn perceptive.

  11. Rotterdam: False moral equivalency doesn’t become you. Pack up that desperate talking point from the loony wingnut sites you visit and toss it in the garbage.

  12. Newname: I’ll take your comment as an oblique compliment.

    It does astound me that the political discussion isn’t focused more seriously on important issues… and that even when it does touch on the economy, the discourse is fantastically stupid (e.g., the whole bullshit “debate” about gas prices).

  13. Rotterdam

    I love looney sites, that is why I am here.🙂. It is hilarious to see the double standard, even funnier to see you in denial.

  14. In “denial” over what, exactly? That the apology by Ed Schultz about an offhand insult to conservative radio host Laura Ingraham was different on all kinds of levels from the quasi-non-apology provided by Rush Limbaugh to a law student from Georgetown University after demeaning and slandering her for three solid days on his program?

    If you can see those two things as being equivalent, then it’s YOU that are the one in denial.

  15. Rotterdam

    http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/media-migraine/2012/mar/8/bill-maher-defends-rush-limbaugh-against-fluke-fat/
    At least one leftist, unlike most others, realize they need to be consistent. He has no choice.

  16. Ah, the good ol’ Moonie Times… why am I not surprised you draw on that as a “news” source?

    Maher is wrong insofar as deeming what Rush said as being an “apology” — it was nothing of the sort.

    Oh, and like “consistency” is such an outstanding characteristic of “rightists” (or should I say “fascists” because that’s basically the equivalent opposite of “leftists” in political terms, isn’t it?).

  17. The compliment wasn’t meant to be oblique.

    In this case.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s