Limbaugh’s apology—once more, with feeling
Rush Limbaugh apologized again to Sandra Fluke yesterday, and this time he sounded sincere, although he managed to get in a well-deserved (see this, for example) dig at the left in the process:
“I descended to [the left’s] level when I used those two words to describe Sandra Fluke,” Limbaugh said. “I’ve always tried to maintain a very high degree of integrity and independence on this program. Nevertheless, those two words were inappropriate. They were uncalled for. They distracted from the point that I was actually trying to make, and I again sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for using those two words to describe her. I do not think she is either of those two words. I did not think last week that she is either of those two words.”
He added: “It was way beneath me, and way beneath you. I was wrong. I genuinely apologize.”
Limbaugh claimed he was not forced into issuing an apology to Fluke, despite calls from prominent conservatives””including House Speaker John Boehner and GOP candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum””to do so, as advertisers of his show fled in droves.
“The apology was sincere and heartfelt … pure, simple, heartfelt,” he said. “All the theories, all the experts are wrong.”
I thought the original two words Limbaugh’s referring to (prostitute, slut) were inappropriate, too. Not because they’re un-PC, but because they didn’t even make sense as a joke. As I wrote here, in my previous one-and-only post on the subject (and the present post will probably be my last):
But when last I checked, prostitutes were paid by their clients to have sex, not by the general public to use contraception. What’s more, birth control pills have no connection with frequency of sex, because they must be taken regularly and are not act-dependent, whereas act-dependent condoms and diaphragms/cream cost the same whether the sexual acts are with one partner many times or different partners many times (the latter being the definition of “slut”).
So, what do you think? Is Limbaugh honestly sincere [*see note] on this? Or was his hand forced by either his lawyers or his advertisers, or both?
The whole incident has made me reflect on the Limbaugh phenomenon, something I usually ignore. I freely admit I’m not a listener, which makes me not an expert on what it is that makes him so appealing to so many. In the past, when I’ve tuned in now and then, I’ve usually tuned out in just a few minutes, partly because I’m not an auditory learner (I much prefer to read), and partly because I find his style doesn’t suit me and the content doesn’t say much to me. I don’t find him funny, and the few times I have listened to him at any length I’ve quite regularly found some of his comments offensive (unfortunately I can’t quote which ones, because I never thought to take notes and I haven’t heard his show in ages).
But that’s just me. I’m well aware that others—many many many others—may and do differ. My impression is that they find him both hugely entertaining and tremendously informative, which so far has been a winning combination for him and a tremendous threat to the supremacy of the MSM and its prevailing message. For that, members of the latter institution have probably long been aching to take him out in some way, and now they almost certainly see their golden opportunity.
I think that’s the deepest source of Rush’s apology, and the genesis of his sincerity: he recognizes that he may have given his enemies the rope with which to hang him, because his remarks were just stupid and over-the-top enough to give their attacks credibility. He’s kicking himself for that.
*NOTE: Honestly Sincere—
You don’t need someone to articulate your thoughts, neo. You’re independent and non-tribal.
Most of his listeners seek a foundation and justification for their anger and concern. He is not an educator, per se, but an explainer, mocker, moralizer, demagogue, entertainer, and he helps many people get through their day.
Say you had a job working in a plywood mill or a chicken factory where you hated your job, but every day, for three hours, you could listen to someone who always wins every argument, your argument.
Or say, you’re retired and fairly lonely and his broadcast every day is your highlight. That’s his audience and first and foremost, Rush’es message is more than political, it’s survival. Rush’es listeners love him not for what he teaches them but for that fact that he is an anchor in an otherwise leftist disintegrating society. His audience, in my view, are good people, working people, working laborers and business people, working mothers, stay at home working mothers, mostly white people who have seen their country infiltrated and populated by a new breed of it’s-right-to-hate-America-and-demand-at-the-same-time-it-feed-and-support-us people.
If the Left was any wiser, they would realize that if it wasn’t Rush, it would be another person.
And you are right on about the source of Rush’es apology.
Stretching the topic here, but how about an apology to Sarah Palin. And is McCain turning into Ed Harris:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/05/mccain-finally-assails-game-change
http://tinyurl.com/8a78fwz
Rush is best seen as a vaccine: He’s inoculated tens of millions of Americans against the MSM propaganda virus that plagues us.
And these good folks aren’t all clueless citizens from Rush’s fictional town, “Rio Linda”. For example, UW law professor and blogger Ann Althouse – – who voted for Obama in ’08 but who may well be yet another political changer in the making- – seems to be a subscriber to Rush’s rather expensive 24/7 premium service, and she blogs about him regularly.
If he wasn’t a real threat he wouldn’t get as much MSM coverage as he gets. They fear him and fight him because he pulls back the curtain on them for all to see.
I’ll stipulate that for many folks he’s an acquired taste. No question that he can be corny-sounding and often comes across as pompous (his idea of comedy). And he’s definitely not “cool” like the cast of SNL and all the cable TV politco-comedians. But he’s every bit as courageous as Andrew Breitbart was and in my experience is worth listening to.
“Rush’es listeners love him not for what he teaches them but for that fact that he is an anchor in an otherwise leftist disintegrating society.”
Curtis there are surveys that say differently. Limbaugh’s listeners and conservative talk radio in general are usually as good, if not better informed than followers of the New York Times or NPR in awareness of current events.
http://www.livescience.com/2957-americans-flunk-simple-3-question-political-survey.html
I think neo that his sudden drop off in advertisers took him aback. It forced him to reconsider but that, ultimately, the apology he gave was sincere. He rarely waste words on his program with platitudes.
Absolutely agree, Hong. You can’t but help and get education when listening to Rush as well as his guest hosts and resources made available. Rush is good information; my assertion is that Rush provides something more fulfilling and necessary than information. In a sense, he provides home.
I don’t care for Rush’s humor, nor his parodies. I think both things do drag him down a level or two. What I love, and what I listen for, is the way he rejects the liberal premise, and exposes liberals for what they are. His media montages are truly brilliant at showing how the leftist media works in lock step with the Democratic machine. He cuts through the propaganda and shows us what’s really going on.
Today for example, he put together items from several different sources showing that progressives are now asking government to get involved with our food distribution system. They call it “food justice.” There are suddenly books, newspaper stories, etc. about how only the rich can afford the best food, and IT’S JUST NOT FAIR!
Ruch scares me to death, but he’s usually right.
I thought Rush’s usage of the term slut crass and ill advised. Was anyone here taught as a child to call other people nasty names? This is kindergarten 101. Rush has the ability to motivate people and he definitely scares the pants off of ‘liberals’ but it was foolish to provide them with ammo to shoot back at him.
C’mon people ! Win dirty or lose fair.
Rush makes sense to millions of folks who are ALL on our side. He is derisive, of course, but his targets universally deserve it. I actually think he has little for which to apologize. The Fluke thing was a neat little stunt, the object of which was to take down Catholic opposition to an assault on the Church.
I heard some of Rush’s remarks as he made them, and have read the transcript in full. I have no quarrel with any word he spoke. Fluke’s personal history and her pseudo-testimony make it entirely clear that she is a whore in the moral, not sexual, sense. The look on the faces of female Georgetown Law students who can’t afford contraception, indeed! This was intended to titillate the ignorant, and the Pelosi crowd succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, which augurs most ill for us all.
Don C,
The term liar would’ve been more accurate than slut.
Carl in Atlanta,
Rio Linda is no fictional town 🙂 It’s just north of Sacramento.
An appropriate response to an absurd proposition:
Fnaggle. Fnoy. Fnaggle.
Apologizing to the Left is never going to work out. In their tribal world of cannibalistic glee, apologies are a way to get out of the limelight, so they will hunt you down even harder to prove you can’t. And if you sincerely apologized, it also shows fear, which the Left can always smell, taste, and also addicted to, to boot. Addicted to causing in their enemies.
Rush, like most of us all, are under the stress of Leftist totalitarian greed, policy, and power. Tends to stress people out, one way or another. He just lost it for a second or two. That’s all it takes. Rush was probably thinking about the hypocrisy with which the Left attacked Sarah Palin, her daughter, Trig, and even Hillary Clinton for being “bad women”. These kinds of things get to humans. That’s why you shouldn’t fight the Left or argue with them.
Destroy them utterly and finish the job, because the longer you fight them, the more you will be forced to become them simply to survive. ONe way or another.
The 7 advertisers were intimidated or in league with Leftist forces, which used interesting tactics to take them out of the picture, a form of economic warfare.
Carbonite, if you read the Legal INsurrection posts or others of the same kind, is headed by a MoveOn backer and Soros ally.
In any case, that blathering woman really needs to take some time to go Fluke herself.
The better question regarding sincerity is Obama’s profession of Christianity. If he’s such a Christian, then why is he so much more interested in protecting Muslims who kill Christians?
http://www.meforum.org/3179/obama-islam
Or how about the sincerity of his transparency?
Be Breitbart!
I don’t think we should ever apologize to the left. Under any circumstances.
It’s clear by now that Fluke was a Democrat plant, substituted at the last minute, and a feminist activist to boot, not a mere “student”.
Attack, attack, attack. Nobody ever won by playing defense.
what they want to do is silence him. I’m a liberal black female and I think it’s wrong. This reminds me of the Cultural Revolution in China — if you did not fit in with what Mao wanted the Red Guards would demean you to the point of suicide. Do we really want that?
Why is everyone getting worked up over a fat AM dj’s opinion of a chick whose job occupation will have her called worse names over time? Because the O-bots want to destroy anyone who can challenge him.
O does not care about Americans much less women. He stakes on their fear of loss of control of their bodies —women do not have jobs, drive cars or pay mortgages…nope we’re just so darned scared of losing our BC.
If he really cared about us, he would open up the Keystone pipeline, allow more drilling permits and stop being hostile to business. People can’t be liberal if their bellies aren’t full. Instead Obama uses fear because he can’t use anything else.
even if he never said the s-word, those pseudo libs would still find a reason to hunt him down, or anyone who threatens Obama’s Next Four Years. They only care about victory, not if the person in office is doing a good job.
If it was not BC it would have been something else. Remember the movie Inventing the Abbotts,: ” if the Abbotts didn’t exist, someone would invent them”
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/06/investors-flee-carbonite-after-limbaugh-announcement/
People have been telling me to check ‘this Rush guy’ out since he went on the air. Never got into him although I don’t dislike him either. Wrong about too many facts (once I notice someone is wrong more than 1 out 10 facts; I tune them out), show is too slow paced (not enough info for the time it takes), and he does the fool or knave thing on lefties that we don’t like when Bush bashers do it… re: he will assign conflicting motives to [the same individual] lefties to always see their actions in a bad light. They’re wrong so much we don’t need to play that game!
I do think he is funny sometimes. I do enjoy his bombast. Oh; and the left inflates how often he is wrong to ‘about everything’. Most of his facts are correct… He isn’t a michael moore..
Parker @6:44pm:
Sluts are non-discriminating!
rickl Says:
“Attack, attack, attack. Nobody ever won by playing defense.”
If you are loosing it can help the loss to be bigger. Some of my best take downs against lefties were when they thought their message was more popular and they just kept restating it in different ways… which allowed me to build a case and then point to their own words as arguments that my narrative of them was right…
If there was principle involved, then I would care one way or the other. But since this was an entirely manufactured excuse to criticize Rush (those criticizing were deploying entirely “situational” ethics) I don’t care. The whole thing was a lefty game, and I don’t think anyone should participate in those. Ignore the manipulation and talk about Obama’s economic failures. That’s what’s important.
“I don’t think we should ever apologize to the left. Under any circumstances.”
In a perfect world I would say yes, Rush was over the top, too crude and should apologize. But the world is anything but perfect. These guys (the left) fight a hell of a lot dirtier than making a random offensive remark – they are out for blood, almost literally.
I wonder if Fluke is going to get a “bounty”.
Rush pointed out a profundity yesterday in remarks to progressives bitching about food availability problems for people in Detroit. Who the hell has been running Detroit or 50 years?
The man does get to the point.
What he should apologize for is walking into a well-set trap. We should have caught on when during one of the debates–#239 wasn’t it?– Stephanopolis asked out of the blue a question about contraception. Obama can’t win on his record but he might if he could change the subject: Convince enough people that GOP = War on women. This was the plan with or without Rush, but he mightily helped.
Really, we are like rubes at the carnival compared to this guy. Too bad he’s such a lousy president.
The really odd thing about Rush critics is that, almost to a man, they aver never (or hardly ever) to have listened to him.
thomass @11:41pm is a bit conflicted. He says Rush gets too many facts wrong, so he doesn’t listen. And in closing, says “Most of his (Rush’s) facts are correct.”
Don Carlos,
Right. Those that do listen to him on a regular basis would quickly tell you that there’s one thing he says quite a bit — he “illustrates absurdity by being absurd.” That and he’s first and foremost an entertainer.
This is just a case of people who don’t like/agree with someone wanting that person silenced.
I have a better proposal — if you don’t like someone, just don’t listen to them. Unfortunately the people who dislike Rush know that the only potential way to silence him is to hold advertisers at gunpoint and threaten them until they heed their demands.
Ryan:
Thanks for that info about Rio Linda being real I looked up Rush’s explanation, which can be found here:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2007/11/30/rio_linda_explained_for_those_in_rio_linda
As usual, the truth is stranger than fiction….
Don Carlos,
I sympathize (agree?) with your “win dirty or lose fair” remark, but I don’t think Rush goes that far. Rush is, by far, the Right’s strongest asset; and if he’s allowed to fail, we lose. Unlike far, far too many on our side, he fights and he knows how to fight. He was the only one standing after the 2008 election, and we all owe him for that. He realized that he went over the line in his remarks about Fluke, but — as Curtis notes (and Rachel, tangentially) — think about what was said about Palin. I’m not suprised that Boehner and Romney caved, but I hoped for more from Santorum. These are all very grim developments.