Rush Limbaugh Apologizes For His "Slut" Remarks.

Apparently words DO have consequences.....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/04/1070800/-I-ve-spent-the-past-2-days-trying-to-convince-my-16-y-o-she-is-not-a-slut-?via=siderec
and the followup:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/05/1071265/-An-Update-Our-FIRST-meeting-with-the-school-is-done-?via=siderec

One would think, by now, that these types of incidents would be occurring in our nation's schools at fewer and fewer intervals. Perhaps they are - I have no empirical data at my disposal that suggests otherwise. But, given the vitriol spouted by Rush Limbaugh (and, yes, there are also others on the right AND the left who engage in almost the same type of vitriolic rhetoric), we as a society would actually avail ourselves of the "Random Acts of Kindness" mentality being called for, especially here in Colorado. Just sayin'.

And the delicious irony to that Z is that it is a corporation engaging in political speech in a manner of which you approve this time around - which makes it all fine and good in your opinion. When they engage in political speech of which you disapprove, however, you want to enact a constitutional amendment to silence them. On the one hand you object to the exercise of corporate power to advocate for a candidate or party and on the other you celebrate the exercise of corporate power when advertising dollars are pulled or awarded based upon the message that the corporation wishes to be associated with. It's all corporate speech Z; and all of that speech is via the spending of money based upon the perceived best interests of the corporation.

FredHayek wrote: Imus must actually be pissed that Rush wasn't fired.

And I don't hear ads for any of those AOL companies on Rush's show either. (Could just be ineffective ads..)

Back to the ratings today, Rush's supporters are probably trying to support the remaining advertizers and the liberals monitoring the broadcast are lining up more companies to boycott.

Heard some of the show today, the apology was ok but limited, he definitely needed to apologize and it was wrong to be so crude toward that student. He rarely gets that nasty even towards public officials.

Surprising thing was his disregard for the advertisers, he said let them go, doesn't care. Doesn't seem concerned about it. Could be an act, but he didn't apologize at all to the advertisers. Time will tell. Like I said before, the show has gone downhill since 5 years ago or so IMO. The nastiness has gone up, and the funny entertaining value is mostly gone.

PrintSmith wrote: And the delicious irony to that Z is that it is a corporation engaging in political speech in a manner of which you approve this time around - which makes it all fine and good in your opinion. When they engage in political speech of which you disapprove, however, you want to enact a constitutional amendment to silence them. On the one hand you object to the exercise of corporate power to advocate for a candidate or party and on the other you celebrate the exercise of corporate power when advertising dollars are pulled or awarded based upon the message that the corporation wishes to be associated with. It's all corporate speech Z; and all of that speech is via the spending of money based upon the perceived best interests of the corporation.

Soooo,,,, let me get this straight. You apparently condone what Rush Limbaugh, and others of his ilk, say, regardless of how derogatory and lacking in good old fashioned common sense it might be? This is so totally off the wall, I'm having trouble even coming close to connecting your convoluted dots. If that's a "delicious irony" for you, I'd advise you to keep on chewing it for awhile. Like gum, the taste eventually goes flat. The two issues you posit are two totally different and unrelated issues. Nice try.

Female Veterans Call For Military Radio Channel To Drop Rush Limbaugh After 'Slut' Remark

Already facing the loss of numerous advertisers over his derogatory remarks about Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh may soon see his show dropped from the radio stations of the U.S. military.

A group of female military veterans issued a statement on Monday calling for Limbaugh's show to be pulled from the airwaves of the American Forces Network. AFN is a government-run media service that provides television and radio programming to American service members overseas.

"When many of our female troops use birth control, for Limbaugh to say they are 'sluts' and 'prostitutes' is beyond the pale," the women wrote. "It isn't just disrespectful to our women serving our country, but it's language that goes against everything that makes our military work."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... f=politics

Double-down, Schmuck... Do it some more..please...

ZHawke wrote:

FredHayek wrote:

ZHawke wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And I don't hear ads for any of those AOL companies on Rush's show either. (Could just be ineffective ads..)

Does that mean just because you haven't heard any, they don't exist? FYI: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-rot-continues-aol-just-boycotted-rush-limbaugh-2012-3

I said it right above, the ads may be un-memorable to me, for instance, the tax ads. The ones I remember most are the ones where Rush does a personal endorsement.

Think this will lose Rush listeners? Personally I think Rush's ratings will continue to rise, but mainly because the Presidential election tends to increase ratings.

Now Santorum and Romney can buy more ads on Limbaugh's show.

Well, then, can you say "selective hearing"? You must really think a lot of this guy if you listen mostly to those ads he personally endorses.

Doesn't really matter one way or the other if you've heard any of the AOL and/or subsidiary company ads or not. Fact is, his sponsors are abandoning him. That's what matters. Personally, I hope his ratings do go in the toilet, and that he gets fired (like Imus did).

But you aren't exactly impartial right, probably thought Ell Rushbo deserved to be fired before this latest incident.

And I actually hardly ever listen to a complete show, more like 40 minutes and then I switch to music or sports talk.

LadyJazzer wrote:

Female Veterans Call For Military Radio Channel To Drop Rush Limbaugh After 'Slut' Remark

Already facing the loss of numerous advertisers over his derogatory remarks about Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh may soon see his show dropped from the radio stations of the U.S. military.

A group of female military veterans issued a statement on Monday calling for Limbaugh's show to be pulled from the airwaves of the American Forces Network. AFN is a government-run media service that provides television and radio programming to American service members overseas.

"When many of our female troops use birth control, for Limbaugh to say they are 'sluts' and 'prostitutes' is beyond the pale," the women wrote. "It isn't just disrespectful to our women serving our country, but it's language that goes against everything that makes our military work."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... f=politics

Double-down, Schmuck... Do it some more..please...

Thanks, LJ. Also on the Daily Kos where an email can actually be sent to Armed Forces Network requesting that Rush be withdrawn from their airwaves: http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=84 If AFN is, in fact, funded by you and me (taxpayers), I believe this would be a legitimate way to have our voices heard.

FredHayek wrote: But you aren't exactly impartial right, probably thought Ell Rushbo deserved to be fired before this latest incident.

And I actually hardly ever listen to a complete show, more like 40 minutes and then I switch to music or sports talk.

So what? I never make it a point to listen to this airhead's broadcast. Doesn't matter whether or not I thought "Ell Rushbo" deserves to be fired or not. His corporate sponsors will ultimately be responsible for that decision, one way or the other. Also, doesn't matter HOW much you listen to - you apparently think a lot of this guy from your posted comments. You're entitled, but so am I.

So now Allstate, Sears, Kmart & Bonobus have pulled their ads from Rushbo. Also, it looks like radio stations are starting to drop his show as well.

PrintSmith wrote: And the delicious irony to that Z is that it is a corporation engaging in political speech in a manner of which you approve this time around - which makes it all fine and good in your opinion. When they engage in political speech of which you disapprove, however, you want to enact a constitutional amendment to silence them. On the one hand you object to the exercise of corporate power to advocate for a candidate or party and on the other you celebrate the exercise of corporate power when advertising dollars are pulled or awarded based upon the message that the corporation wishes to be associated with. It's all corporate speech Z; and all of that speech is via the spending of money based upon the perceived best interests of the corporation.

I am glad that you are finding Rush's comments delicious, but you appear to be confusing (or intentionally trying to deflect) the recent decision regarding a corporation's right of political free speech under the 1st amendment with the corporations right of marketplace decisions. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.