Rush Limbaugh Apologizes For His "Slut" Remarks.

FredHayek wrote:

Soulshiner wrote: Strange how this is bring focused on two words when he ranted for 3 days about her in a deviant sexual way. To me, it's not the two words he said, it's his attitude and opinion that is the problem. Ranting about getting something for his money isn't even correct as the situation didn't cost him a dime. Comparing his 3 day rant to single statements which were admitted to as wrong and truly apologized for is a deflection. All of the statements were wrong, it's just that Rush didn't make a statement, he opened his mouth for three days and then offered a I'm sorry if you were offended by my wrong choice of words, not a my point was wrong apology. He deserves to suffer until he truly understands that his position on this is wrong.

You should boycott him! Oh wait, you don't listen anyway. Would you support the goverment taking him off the air, like Putin does to broadcasters he doesn't like?

No, I support Clear Channel taking him off the air. The government has nothing to do with it. This being a democracy and all, I'm free to boycott his advertisers. I'm also free to let his advertisers KNOW that I am boycotting them--and why. I'm also free to let the advertisers that pulled their support know that I applaud their decision--and why. That's called "free market."

I'm listening to Rush right now... the advertisers are falling right and left. There was one ad that stopped right in the middle. It's a stampede. Rush should be off the air by the end of the week.

Indeed you are, and they are free to ignore your misplaced anger and continue to advertise on and broadcast the program. If you were truly interested in doing something other than silencing one with whom you disagreed, you would not hold advertisers and sponsors accountable for what was said on the program. You would instead hold only the speaker accountable for their own actions and not listen to the person who was doing the speaking. That denies to the advertisers the ability to reach you as a potential customer and denies to the stations the ability to charge more for the advertising based upon the number of those listening to the program - all without calling for the silencing of one with whom you have a disagreement. However, the purpose of the collectivists throughout history has always been the silencing of those who disagree with them - which is why collectivists seek to use the power of the corporations, which they otherwise despise the corporations having, to silence their opposition for them.

PrintSmith wrote: Indeed you are, and they are free to ignore your misplaced anger and continue to advertise on and broadcast the program. If you were truly interested in doing something other than silencing one with whom you disagreed, you would not hold advertisers and sponsors accountable for what was said on the program. You would instead hold only the speaker accountable for their own actions and not listen to the person who was doing the speaking. That denies to the advertisers the ability to reach you as a potential customer and denies to the stations the ability to charge more for the advertising based upon the number of those listening to the program - all without calling for the silencing of one with whom you have a disagreement. However, the purpose of the collectivists throughout history has always been the silencing of those who disagree with them - which is why collectivists seek to use the power of the corporations, which they otherwise despise the corporations having, to silence their opposition for them.

That is the most amazingly twisted logic I have ever seen you post. Are you feeling okay?

I believe I have the right to tell any company what I think about their advertising and make a decision not to buy from that company based on those thoughts. If they choose to spend their dollars advertising on Rush's show, I have the right not to spend my dollars with them when a portion of those dollars support such hate speech. The company can make their own decision about the loss of sales revenue and what it means to them.

Maybe he will p/u Cialis, Viagra and Extenze as new advertisers.

I think the lady is a slut. Who here would testify in front of congress about her sex life- and the fact that she's having so much sex that the government must pay for her birth control. The details are coming out now about this person's leftist political activism. She has been quite active for leftist causes- in addition to screwing guy's every night. To use Rush's words- this "tramp" is a feminazi.

Come to think of it- not only is she a slut- but she is a scum sucking leach as well. She wants me as a taxpayer to pay for her birth control. What ever happened to the good ol days when sluts paid for their own birth control pills- and the studs that we're drilling these sluts paid for the condoms! I would ask her to get all the men she is screwing to pay for the condoms, because we are 17 trillion in debt.

Attention all Lefties; You're birth control expenses are not a right- these are products that you need to pay for yourself. No wonder why insurance rates are skyrocketing with every one having this "entitlement" attitude.

Where is all my free stuff!!

Talk about an entitled society- we expect the government to pick up the tab for our sex lives now too. This crap has got to come to an end.

Now don't get me wrong- usually I like sluts for their general sluttyness- but these sluts expect the taxpayer to subsidize their sluttyness. That makes them socialist sluts. And I don't like socialist sluts- no matter how good they suck C***.

In a few days- Rush will be back on his game- and many of those sponsers will be damn sorry they pulled out of his program because it is the single most popular talk show in America.

I'm also very sorry to see Rush cave into them with an apology- He should never let the commies control his speech- this is America- it is shameful to see the left so involved with this issue - trying to censor free speech. Especially the free speech of a talk show host- who's trade is free speech. Rush makes 50 million a year doing what he does- and not much of that money comes from Socialists.

I bet none of those people who are complaining have ever bought any of the products that those sponsers sell. Those companies ignore this fact at their own peril. Listen to these deadbeat lefties and the business will suffer. If I had any stock in those companies- I would be selling it now because I predict their earnings to tumble very soon.

And I'd be buying Rush's new sponsers- I think those companies will do very well this year. Rush can not be fired as some on the left are suggesting- he owns the company he is broadcasting from. Now clear channel can choose not to put him on their stations air waves- but that would be an epic mistake- because the competition will gain the most popular talk show host in America- and lots of good new sponsers!

Sandra Fluke is about to graduate from Georgetown University.
The average STARTING SALARY for a Georgetown graduate straight out of school is 160 thousand dollars.
AND SHE EXPECTS ME TO PAY FOR HER BIRTH CONTROL PILLS????
I am concerned about people with an entitlement mentality, multiplying... so.. if she wants me to pay for her sexual escapades, I would be prefer my money to be used for sterilization.
Jan Morgan

Martin Ent Inc wrote: Sandra Fluke is about to graduate from Georgetown University.
The average STARTING SALARY for a Georgetown graduate straight out of school is 160 thousand dollars.
AND SHE EXPECTS ME TO PAY FOR HER BIRTH CONTROL PILLS????
I am concerned about people with an entitlement mentality, multiplying... so.. if she wants me to pay for her sexual escapades, I would be prefer my money to be used for sterilization.
Jan Morgan

Uninformed and sick! Worthless tripe from another uniformed fool.Not worth a serious response. Awful is awful. Go live with yourself. fool!

Guess that is what others think, just found it on another site.
Thought it was more entertaining than anything Maher says