Sex, lies, and videotape

The Fonz does his best “both sides do it” routine, e.g. Chris Matthews called Hillary Clinton “Nurse Ratched,” and “Madame Defarge”, so that proves liberals (we all know how awesomely liberal Chris Matthews is of course) are just as sexist blah blah blah.

Here’s the thing: Rush’s “slut” comments were over the line but it was the “sex tape” comment that really creeped people out. I think it creeps people (or at least me) out so much that they don’t want to refer to it at all. It’s like that bad episode of Law & Order SVU that you had to turn off 20 minutes in.

The right can spew all the false equivalences they want, but Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a “twat” (while reprehensible) just doesn’t compare with Rush Limbaugh’s sick sex tape fantasies.

123 replies
  1. 1

    Speaking of Glibertarians, Julian Sanchez should just pack it in and Go Galt. To wit:

    http://coreyrobin.com/2012/03/.....o-to-work/

  2. 2
    Svensker says:

    This argument has broken out all over my FB, like a bad rash. Bill Maher said something nasty about Laura Ingraham, apparently, plus he gave $1M to an Obama PAC, so therefore it’s the same thing as Rush speculating on this private woman’s sex life (and lying, to boot) for 3 days.
    Why am I not boycotting his sponsors? The arguers are absolutely convinced of the equivalence. Driving me bonkers.

  3. 3
    PeakVT says:

    Someone should point out to that dipshit that Blimpbaugh called Ms. Fluke some variation on slut or prostitute at least 53 times. Fifty-three.

  4. 4
    The Dangerman says:

    @Svensker:

    The arguers are absolutely convinced of the equivalence.

    These people will have to be deprogrammed; it’s basically cultish to draw these equivalencies.

  5. 5
    redshirt says:

    I saw some misogyny on this blog once; ergo, both sides do it.

  6. 6
    New Yorker says:

    Here is a piece from David Frum (a sane right-winger) that I posted a few days ago that says all that needs to be said about the false equivalence between Limbaugh and Maher, no matter how much the wingnuts cry about it.

  7. 7
    MikeJ says:

    @Svensker:

    Why am I not boycotting his sponsors? T

    Yeah, HBO just loads that show up with commercials, don’t they?

  8. 8
    General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero) says:

    Here’s the thing: Rush’s “slut” comments were over the line but it was the “sex tape” comment that really creeped people out.

    Limbaugh seems to me the type of projecting shit head, that if you videotaped his bedroom, the horrors would make Caligula Teevee seem PG rated. Especially his bungalow get away jaunts down in the Dominican Republica.

  9. 9
    JGabriel says:

    DougJ @ Top:

    The Fonz does his best “both sides do it” routine, e.g. Chris Matthews called Hillary Clinton “Nurse Ratched,” and “Madame Defarge”, so that proves liberals (we all know how awesomely liberal Chris Matthews is of course) are just as sexist …

    So Gillespie’s point is that both sides punch hippie women? And The Fonz thinks this helps his argument?

    .

  10. 10
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Sandra Fluke was not a celebrity or public figure. There’s an entirely different standard in place.

    I can’t think of a conservative private citizen ever being targeted in a similar way for popping up in the news. We had some fun with Joe the Plumber, but it wasn’t shaming and demeaning like this.

  11. 11
    Moonbatting Average says:

    So now HBO = AM radio? Riiiight

  12. 12
    elmo says:

    Yeah. The specific names he called her are just a distraction, at this point. It isn’t about the names. It’s about the creepy, voyeuristic imagination that went into “so much sex it’s amazing she can walk,” and the demand for videotapes, coupled with the fact that (a)she’s a private citizen, not a public figure, and (b)she’s less than half his age.

    Men his age have daughters her age. Decent men his age don’t fantasize, in public , at great length and in specific detail, about the sex lives of their daughters’ contemporaries.

  13. 13
    Marcellus Shale, Public Dick says:

    rush limbaugh’s comments were scoped and aimed at destroying the credibility of someone who happened to testify before congress. he also sustained this targeted attack. there was no other purpose to them, than to avoid the content of the testimony.

    context matters.

  14. 14
    Mattminus says:

    There’s a lot of differences. The main one, IMHO, just comes down to duration. If he had made the joke (or what he thought was a joke) once and moved on , I don’t think it would have been a big deal. It was 4 days of screaming “Slut!” at a private individual that really freaked people out.

    Now I’ve gotten flamed here before for defending the use of gendered insults, but there’s a world of difference between what Maher is saying and what Rush is saying. When Maher calls Palin a “twat” there’s no way that anyone is taking that literally. You’re saying the same thing as “she’s an asshole”, and if it was Todd he would probably have used “prick”. When you call someone a slut, and call them that because they take birth control, you’re making a factual claim, and one that comes with a lot of retrograde political baggage.

  15. 15
    JGabriel says:

    @Svensker:

    Bill Maher said something nasty about Laura Ingraham …
    __
    Why am I not boycotting his sponsors?

    I’m gonna get right on that and start boycotting everyone who advertises on Maher’s HBO show, stat.

    .

  16. 16
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    There were a number of reasons:

    The video part was creepy
    The fact that he said she had to have condoms bought at 12 was creepy
    She’s in the age range of still being a child for a number of parents
    She’s not a public figure
    Rush went on for three days

    All of these people are justifying Rush’s actions, where the people you named get called on it by the left. Ask Ed. See how many times Maher gets called out on DK.

    It’s obvious none of these people can think “What if it was my daughter?”

  17. 17
    eric says:

    Here is the thing: when you watch and listen to the various comments being bandied about, you can tell the difference. I saw Rush’s comments for the first time yesterday and there was a meanness and hatefulness that was apparent. Plus, Ingraham, Coulter, Palin, et al have all dished out as bad as they got.

    to my mind it was not the sexism that was as offensive (it was), but the tone and spirit of the remarks. I cant articulate it precisely, but I was physically taken aback when I saw Rush’s remarks. it is the unspoken subtext of his remarks that makes it so reprehensible. You could hear that he wanted to destroy Fluke’s life permanently. Add the creepy comments about posting videos and I think he showed himself as beyond satire, beyond entertainment, and into sadism.

  18. 18
    artem1s says:

    and as I was pointing out to a friend this morning. It was not a lone incident (53 times for Ms. Fluke alone). He has been spewing his hatred for years, decades now even. If you count up all of the marginally offensive things that ‘the other side’ has said in public and stuck them on a scale with ONLY Limbaugh’s comments about Ms Fluke you might get some parity. But add on his comments about Pelosi, Hillary, Chelsea, Anita Hill, and every other woman in the universe who had the audacity to have an opinion… (Please, for your own sake don’t go there. It’s not worth wasting Google Fu reiterating all that spittle.) He didn’t just step over that line once, he stepped over once too often. The universe just decided enough was enough.

    the worst thing now and into the future is that Ms Fluke will have her name irreparably linked to that gas bag. No matter how accomplished she is or becomes, the first line of her story is always going to be about that hateful bastard.

  19. 19
    JoyfulA says:

    And Bill Maher is a not a liberal, by any stretch of the imagination. He’s a self-identifying glibertarian, just like the Fonz.

  20. 20
    Liz says:

    @PeakVT:

    I posted the transcript from that on another site I frequent. Just reviewing it briefly made my stomach turn.

    He’s really one fucked up individual.

  21. 21
    Yutsano says:

    @JGabriel: Apparently you’re supposed to cancel HBO. Or something. That’s really the only way to boycott them.

  22. 22
    scav says:

    In the Pot-Kettle OT mind-hurting vein, Sarko, Beh-oui, Sarko son of Hungarian Sarko, thinks there are too many foreigners in France. Sarko, espèce de sachet du thé, va t-en. iz zat ze odor of uh, fear I am zenz-ing? a leetle kees to la petite le Pen? I’m with Jon, there may very well be simply too many elections being held all at once for this to be a safe planet.

  23. 23
    SteveM says:

    “Sex tape” definitely takes the creepiness to another level, but just calling her a “prostitute” made it toxic as well. That’s not one of the “dirty words,” which we all know are used figuratively most of the time. (“Fuck you,” for instance, isn’t a wish that “you” will engage in intercourse.) When he said “prostitute,” he was leveling a literal, specific allegation.

    And then the endless repeat of “so much sex!” creeped me out, as the ranting of a perverted voyeur with anger issues specifically related to women. But most people have no idea he said “so much sex!” over and over and over. I really wish the Kos compilation video posted by John would become Exhibit A in this matter, but it hasn’t — which is why Limbaugh is in the process of getting away with apologizing for “two words.”

  24. 24
    Quincy says:

    To make those comparisons one needs to focus, disingenuously, on the specific, isolated words used and ignore entirely the surrounding context. Maher, Schultz, etc. using a derogatory term to express their dislike of someone should of course be condemned. But they didn’t use sexist terms while advocating for sexist public policy, they didn’t use the words “slut” or “prostitute” within an unwarranted discussion of the individual’s sex life. Their remarks expressed contempt for a specific, targeted individual and ignorance of correct social protocol. Rush’s remarks expressed contempt for any woman who voices an opinion he disagrees with, any woman who uses birth control, and essentially any woman who disputes the subservient role he assigns them within society. People who miss all of that either ignore the context deliberately to advance their arguments/feel better about themselves, or simply haven’t developed the cognitive skills necessary to accurately comprehend information as it is received.

  25. 25
    Jewish Steel says:

    Law & Order SVU

    An apt analogy.

    For leering + scolding prurience, SVU has no peer. If we can only leave one artifact in the time capsule to explain America to the aliens, this is a good candidate.

  26. 26
    SteveM says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): And Befalon is right:

    The fact that he said she had to have condoms bought at 12 was creepy.

  27. 27
    JGabriel says:

    @Phil Perspective:

    Speaking of Glibertarians, Julian Sanchez should just pack it in and Go Galt.

    Libertarian think tank is shocked, shocked I tell you, that people who pay their bills want them to support Republicans!

    .

  28. 28
    PTirebiter says:

    Ms. Fluke was at the time a completely private citizen. Chelsea Clinton was a child. The natural laws of decency are no longer afforded to those who disagree or somehow threaten the right wing world view. These people really are the enemy and they need to be marginalized.

  29. 29
    colby says:

    You know another difference? As soon as the contraception thing started, everyone knew this was only a matter of time. I saw it on this very blog, people saying you could set a stopwatch until the first time a Republican called someone a slut for wanting BC. With Maher or Schultz, it wasn’t as expected. I’m not saying that those guys are what feminists look like, but they’re not raging misogynists, either. It was unexpected, and we knew that at some level, while they fucked up, what they said was not representative of their thoughts on women.

    With Limbaugh, though, we don’t have that same assurance. Indeed, if anything, what he said about Fluke confirms what we’ve always long suspected about him.

  30. 30
    Cluttered Mind says:

    @artem1s: I’m glad you brought up Anita Hill. This is not the first time that a woman has been subjected to this kind of treatment by unhinged wingnuts, not by a long shot. I think it speaks to progress in our society that this time enough people got outraged about it to cause actual backlash. Probably helps that Sandra Fluke is white and attending a Catholic college, too. I wish such things didn’t matter, but they do.

  31. 31
    wvng says:

    @The Dangerman: I don’t care so much about the cult. They will say and believe whatever they want. But because they are so loud and relentless about it, the damned MSM will echo what they are saying, refuse to prove any relevant context, and the general public that doesn’t listen to Rush or go to right wing blogs will have no way to judge the calls for President Obama to shame Mahrer and return his million that will soon hit Fox.

  32. 32
    WaterGirl says:

    @SteveM: The whole thing is creepy, but every time I read about the “so much sex that it’s surprising use can still walk” comment I can feel my face changing, involuntarily, to its “i just smelled something vile and disgusting” configuration. Ditto for condoms at 12. The man is vile.

  33. 33
    hitchhiker says:

    @elmo:

    It’s about the creepy, voyeuristic imagination that went into “so much sex it’s amazing she can walk,”

    This. For some reason the “guys lined up around the block” thing is what really incensed me . . . the weird junior high flavor of it, combined with the video of an angry fat man spitting it into his microphone.

    I wasn’t aware of how bitter and hostile he sounds until I saw these clips; I thought he was more of a jolly type of bully.

  34. 34

    I agree that what Rush said was just so nasty and disgusting (going even beyond the videotape comment; remember his inquiry about where Fluke got condoms in junior high), that the examples from Maher and Schultz just don’t compare.

    But you know what? I don’t think there’s any point in defending Schultz and Maher anyway. They’re both nincompoops. If both those guys disappeared from the media tomorrow, I could really care less. Are they on my “side”? I guess so. But they suck at what they do, and if they were hounded away, I wouldn’t care.

  35. 35
    Water balloon says:

    It was more the sustained, repeated attacks that bothered me. One off comments are bad enough, but Rush really went after that woman for days on end.

  36. 36
    Sargent Pepper's Spray says:

    Also. Too. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin are at least public figures. The level of criticism aimed at them shouldn’t be vulgar by any means, but they are well armed within DC circles having powerful lobbies, news outlets at their disposal and political spokespeople. A woman like Ms. Fluke is simply an ordinary citizen, and when the great rightwing wurlitzer kicks in into full poutrage gear there’s really not much she can do to fight back. Luckily, on this particular occasion, Left blogostan came through and actually had her back.

  37. 37
    eric says:

    @SteveM: But here is the thing, had he said something like “the natural extension of the numbers Fluke gave is that girls have been buying buckets of condoms since putting on a training bra,” the comments would have been offensive (and wrong), but not cruelly personalized. It is the abject meanness directed at this nice young woman in his remarks that gets people’s dander up.

  38. 38
    pat says:

    I haven’t listened to Ms. Fluke’s testimony, but isn’t Rush totally misrepresenting what she actually said??? And what he says is what is being barfed up in comments on all the right wing sites.

    No one seems to be addressing this, the fact that the obnoxious windbag is LYING.

  39. 39
    beltane says:

    What do you expect from conservatives? These are the same people who think that universal healthcare is worse than the Holocaust. It should not surprise anyone that this crowd of deviants, freaks, and weirdos would not see anything wrong with the behavior of their Pervert-in-Chief.

  40. 40
    Steve says:

    Misogyny is all over the place and it does bug me that too many liberals are too comfortable with it. But you are not going to find any equivalents to Rush’s three-day tirade, no matter how hard you look.

    If someone wants to have a real conversation about misogyny on the left, right, and center, I think that would be a great idea. But the people making excuses for Rush don’t have a problem with misogyny, other than as an accusation to lodge against their partisan enemies, so there’s no real point in debating it.

  41. 41
    victory says:

    Just to throw out a sports metaphor….this “both sides do it” equivalency is like saying Jerry Rice and Santonio Holmes are equal talents because they both catch Touchdowns.

  42. 42
    catclub says:

    Conservatives kick down. Attack someone smaller and weaker.

    Rush is the classic example, since before it all happened, Sandra Fluke was not even a public figure.

    Maher and Laura Ingraham — note that Ingraham is definitely a public figure.

    Also why GOP pols apologize to Rush, but there is no comedian that Democrats have ever had to apologize to.

  43. 43
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @pat: John covered the lying in two righteous posts the other day, though they could probably stand to be relinked to.

  44. 44
    Baron Jrod of Keeblershire says:

    The other big difference between Maher and Limbaugh is that Maher’s insult applied only to Ingraham. The ire was focused directly on her and no one else.

    Limbaugh’s string of insults could apply to every single woman who’s ever taken birth control. Which is pretty much all of them. His whole point was that taking birth control makes you a slut, and if it was paid for by insurance you’re a literal prostitute.

    Maher attacked one person. Limbaugh attacked an entire gender, at a time when sensitivity to attacks on women are at the highest point since… shit, my entire life I think. So at a time when pushback against public misogyny is practically guaranteed, Limbaugh decided to call every woman in America a filthy slut whore. Maybe he’s not the super-genius he’d have us believe he is, eh?

  45. 45
    Seebach says:

    Someone brought this up before, so there’s less of a sting, but it would be interesting what happened if Fluke was less attractive. I’m sure the “ugly bitch gets laid how?” spew would have been much more vile.

  46. 46
    wvng says:

    @pat: Many people have addressed the fact that he is lying, that the entire assault is predicated on a lie. John Cole did one of the best breakdowns of the fabrications a couple of days ago.

  47. 47
    Joey Maloney says:

    Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a “twat” (while reprehensible)

    Wasn’t it a commenter on this selfsame blog who said that Bible Spice had “neither the warmth nor the depth” to deserve that honorific?

  48. 48
    JGabriel says:

    @Yutsano:

    Apparently you’re supposed to cancel HBO. Or something.

    Oh.

    Well, I don’t have cable. I just watch Maher clips on the intertoobz. So I’m already on that too.

    .

  49. 49
    Joel says:

    The sexism, while vile, was beside the point. There is plenty of misogyny in Limbaugh’s past. What set these comments apart was their sheer, unhinged cruelty. We are talking about a private citizen, here. And a pretty relentless assault on that citizen.

  50. 50
    Brian S says:

    I love how none of these false-equivalenciers (is that a word?) mention that Tweety and Maher and Olbermann and Schultz have indeed taken holy hell from liberals over their misogynist comments in the past. Few, if any liberals, we’re willing to defend Schultz when he insulted Ingraham, and both Tweety and Maher are basically applauded for when they don’t say something stupid–which is rare enough as it is.

  51. 51
    Martin says:

    Just an aside. I thought Clinton would be a good SecState. But she might be the best damn SecState we’ve ever had. It’s the one thing I’m least looking forward to in this election – that she’s indicated she’s not going to stay on for a 2nd term. I think she would have made a much better President than I gave her credit for at the time.

  52. 52
    beltane says:

    @Water balloon: Limbaugh came across as an abusive stalker. Any woman who has had to deal with men like this first-hand (most of us have) will recognize the behavior instantly, thus the reaction we are seeing now. I once saw a poll that said the most reliably conservative demographic in this country was white, middle-aged, divorced men. Perhaps Rush’s quivering, man-boobed style of misogyny is the perfect reflection of the impotent rage that has consumes the souls of these rejected, undesirable men.

  53. 53
    redshirt says:

    @Martin: What did she do recently to earn this praise? I’ve not been paying attention.

  54. 54
    Satanicpanic says:

    All these people who are saying “he’s an entertainer”- I would love for them to explain how these creepy fantasies are entertaining.

  55. 55
    lacp says:

    So Fonz has time to tut-tut about the equivalence of mean liberals with Rush’s (no libertarian he) oral droppings, but has nothing to say about the possibility of the Cato Institute taking some hard Koch?

  56. 56
    catclub says:

    @Martin: Agreed, although George Marshall might give her a run for her money.

    Marshall plan and all that.

  57. 57
    BDeevDad says:

    I’ll join the chorus of “She’s not a public figure” It’s Conservative SOP. Michelle Malkin did the same thing with some family’s kitchen counters. They have no shame and don’t know the difference or don’t want to know the difference between a private citizen and a public figure.

  58. 58
    JGabriel says:

    @pat:

    No one seems to be addressing this, the fact that the obnoxious windbag is LYING.

    I think that’s being downplayed because to point it out justifies the slurs.

    It’s difficult to call Limbaugh a liar without subtly implying that his rhetoric would be okay if he were telling the truth. In other words, even if Fluke is sexually active, and had testified about it in detail (which she did not), that still would not give Limbaugh the right to call her a slut or prostitute or demand sex tapes from her (c.f. John Cole).

    So most commentators are focusing on Limbaugh’s offensive language. To point out that he’s both a liar and that his language would be offensive even if his characterization of her testimony was true (which it is not), is apparently a little too complicated and subtle for TV and radio sound bites.

  59. 59
    slag says:

    If I promise to not compare them to Limbaugh’s disgusting behavior, can I still wish liberals would refrain completely from making sexist/racist comments to and about people we disagree with? Really…it’s a distraction that only takes away from whatever valid point is being made. That said, there’s very little in liberal discourse that can remotely compare with what is borderline typical in conservative discourse. Conservatives are savants in the art of reaching new lows.

  60. 60
    Fanshawe says:

    The illegal Obama administration still has failed to release their extensive collection of Whitey Tapes! Until they do, calling for a tape of anything is fair game, ipso facto. Suck it libs.

  61. 61
    scav says:

    @redshirt: I think it was a sort of general position achievement award, not one for any specific recent movie. I think I’m with Martin, not too many wheels have fallen off in a very wobbly global environment and I’ve enjoyed the combo of cool/smooth and steely/calm they can get going. Understated with the vague hint of blade she brings to it. Could be a lot worse. (He’s got blade too, but hers might be a touch scarier, all in all.)

  62. 62
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    @catclub:

    Conservatives kick down. Attack someone smaller and weaker.

    Yes. Rush’s comments were a near perfect storm of cowardly bullying in which a powerful and prominent public figure was picking on a semi-private person, the larger context of his obvious hatred of women spanning many years and numerous despicable comments, the policy context in which his remarks were not simply an ad-hominum insult but were part and parcel of the policy argument the Right is making, and then as if all that wasn’t enough the sheer ick! ewww! gross! factor of an older man publically fantasizing about the sex life of a woman young enough to be his daughter (going all the way back to her pre-teen years), and then having the sheer gall to ask for tapes.

    If Rush survives this debacle as a figure of public influence it says more about us as a society than it does about him.

  63. 63
    Svensker says:

    @JGabriel:

    Apparently you’re supposed to cancel HBO. Or something.
    Oh Well, I don’t have cable. I just watch Maher clips on the intertoobz. So I’m already on that too.

    I have to admit to never having watched anything on HBO. Maybe part of a show once in a hotel room. I didn’t know they don’t run ads. Yes, I’m old and relatively uninterested in popular culture.

  64. 64
    Bill ORLY says:

    @Svensker: It appears to be the latest FB virus. I had one “friend” attack my post about Brent Bozell believing that this has to do with infringement of the 1st amendment. It rapidly drifted into this “look how bad the left is,” including how all liberals use government power to control those that they disagree with.

  65. 65
    Jewish Steel says:

    @Svensker:

    Yes, I’m old and relatively uninterested in popular culture.

    Dude. I ain’t old (yet) but I’m right there with you.

  66. 66
    Tonybrown74 says:

    @beltane:

    Limbaugh came across as an abusive stalker.

    This.

    The first time I really heard about controversy, was when someone quoted that he said she was having some much sex she could barely walk. That stopped me cold, because it was disturbing in that she-better-watch-her-back/spy-cameras-in-her-hotel-room way.

    And then he mentioned that she should make a video …

    And everyone ended up being grossed out by him. He came off as a predator.

  67. 67

    This is pretty typical for the false equivalency narratives. You can, if you look hard, find someone on the liberal side who has done once what is institutionalized on the GOP side.

  68. 68
    Soonergrunt says:

    @DougJ, top-

    Here’s the thing: Rush’s “slut” comments were over the line but it was the “sex tape” comment that really creeped people out.

    For me, it was Limbaugh’s demand to know who was buying her condoms in the sixth grade. When she would have been 11 or 12 years old.

  69. 69
    Jennifer says:

    Ms. Fluke herself did a good takedown of the “both sides do it” in her appearance on the View.

    I’m not familiar with Maher ever saying anything about Ingraham. That was Ed Schultz and as others have noted, he said it once, he apologized sincerely (not a “I’m sorry if I offended anyone” but “I apologize to Ms. Ingraham) and got a 2-week suspension from MSNBC.

    I’m also not familiar with Maher having called Palin a “twat”. There was a flap a while back about him having called her a “cunt” during one of his stand-up appearances, not during a broadcast. He shouldn’t have done it and he never apologized but again it was a one-time occurence and it wasn’t broadcast.

    The thing that’s really beyond the pale here is the premeditation. Limbaugh set out to sexually slander this woman, and the only way he could get to the point where it was defensible even by his low standards or those of his audience was to build an entire scaffold of lies. That started out with the blatant lie that anyone was asking Limbaugh or his listeners to pay for their contraception and continued through the pretense that cost of contraception is dependent upon how much sex you’re having.

    There’s simply no way to watch Sandra Fluke’s testimony and come away with the idea that 1)she was testifying about her own sexual habits or 2)that she was asking anyone else to pay for contraception for her.

    But an accurate reflection of the testimony would not have afforded Limbaugh even the flimsiest excuse to call Ms. Fluke a slut, so he just lied about it, knowing full well that none of his audience would ever bother to check it out for themselves.

    That’s what’s really bad here, though the demand for video and the cracks about condom use in 6th grade are just creepy as hell too. The biggest deal is that he wanted from the beginning to make misogynistic slurs against Ms. Fluke, and concocted whatever story he needed as an excuse to do it. I’ve wondered if maybe Ms. Fluke doesn’t look like a woman whose rejection Limbaugh found particularly galling and the projection default built into every rightwinger caused him to conflate her with the bitch that ripped out his heart some 40 years ago, and now it was time for payback. That sounds almost twisted enough to explain it.

  70. 70
    EriktheRed says:

    It’s like that bad episode of Law & Order SVU that you had to turn off 20 minutes in.

    I’m a fan of that show, myself. Which episode was this??

  71. 71
    Martin says:

    @redshirt: Really, just everything. We’re now going into talks with both North Korea and Iran. I can’t recall a time when the US was juggling so many diplomatic balls – and so many different kinds of issues – from the government changes all across the Middle East and Myanmar and now possibly Somalia and other parts of Africa, to the economic impact out of Europe, changes in Cuba, still have Iraq and Afghanistan and so on. Events like the Japanese tsunami add quite a lot of work to that agency as well.

    And with all of that going on, I don’t see many situations where you’d say “Whoops, we fucked that up” or “we missed that”. Yeah, Bahrain went a bit sideways because we have a critical naval base there, and there are a number of other cases like that, but nothing where our standing is falling, nothing where we seem to be making things worse.

  72. 72
    Bob2 says:

    Doug,

    http://andrewsullivan.thedaily.....k-ctd.html

    I think it’s time for another mocking.

  73. 73
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Tonybrown74:

    The first time I really heard about controversy, was when someone quoted that he said she was having some much sex she could barely walk.

    I tend to mute it when they play his clips, so I’m learning about all this in dribs and drabs. What I always say about Tweety and women– pinching Hillary Clinton’s cheek, virtually molesting Erin Burnett– goes for Limbaugh in spades: Does no one love him enough to point out that he’s making an ass, in this case a pig, of himself? How about his IIRC well-educated, thirty-something fourth wife? Of course, as so many others have pointed out, this instance is only remarkable in that he kept it up for three days. His racism and sexism is the core of his being, the heart of his appeal.

  74. 74
    Culture of Truth says:

    She’s an orginary student who dares offer some testimony (rejected, BTW) and this twisted bastard spews 3 days of sick sex fantasies. It’s wrong, and everyone knows it’s wrong, and it has nothing to do names thrown around at politicians by comedians, any more than snuff films are like Thomas Nast.

  75. 75
    Jay C says:

    @hitchhiker:

    the weird junior high flavor of it

    FTW!

    For all that the Organized Right (Big Conservatism?) and its affiliated Party used to make such a big deal out being the “adults in the room” bloc (vs. those naive, head-in-the-clouds liberal hippies), it really is amazing how quickly their level of discourse drops to the nasty-adolescent mean-girl level whenever called out on virtually anything.

    Rush Limbaugh goes off on a misogynistic tirade on a private citizen – for days – and only after he gets shit-tons of well-deserved flak for it, some rightie farts out “Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a twat!” and — what? This automatically makes Rush right> And Sandra Fluke an actual slut?

  76. 76
    Culture of Truth says:

    The Onion has a running gag of Joe Biden with his shirt off. Mark Halperin called Obama a “dick.” They can deal with it. It’s not the same at all.

  77. 77
    Culture of Truth says:

    Limbaugh rants weren’t just offensive, it was disturbing. Fluke doens’t need an apology, she needs a restraining order.

  78. 78
    Tonybrown74 says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Does no one love him enough to point out that he’s making an ass, in this case a pig, of himself? How about his IIRC well-educated, thirty-something fourth wife?

    Have you ever truly tried to deal with a stubborn asshole. They don’t want to hear any of it. And then they raise their voice and start to shout just to drown you out. Then they start being really abusive to you.

    So to some, they just won’t bother.

    However, in Limbaugh’s case, he let his freak flag fly for three days. I felt as if we got to look into the mind of a sick, twisted predator. You really look at him now and have to think twice about letting ANY woman (or even girls) near him.

    And I doubt any straight man would even want to be near him to have any guilt by association.

  79. 79
    Librarian says:

    I hope Rush is grateful to Sully and Michael Kinsley for their efforts to keep him on the air. Maybe he’ll even thank them on his show, because they certainly deserve it.

  80. 80
    Jay C says:

    @redshirt:

    It isn’t just “recently” – it’s 3+ years of restoring America’s diplomatic credentials on the international level: creds that don’t – as in the previous Administration – come dressed in camo and carrying a gun.

    The war-happy neocons and their Republican enablers have been fixated – and still are: just glance at the “foreign policy” bits of any recent GOP debate – on pushing the concept of “American leadership” as defined almost exclusively as bullying other countries into doing things our way by the threat of military force. Under Obama and Clinton, we’ve gone back to that “radical” notion that “jaw-jaw” actually IS better than “war-war”: and gotten a lot further with it than the Bushies’ “with us or against us” drivel.

  81. 81
    JGabriel says:

    At the end of the Corey Robin piece that Phil Perspective mentions, Corey updates with link to James Grimmelman, who nails the irony of Cato’s fight with the Kochs:

    The irony here is that the nation’s preeminent libertarians—who ought to be exquisitely attentive to freedom of contract, institutional design, and observing the letter of the law—couldn’t get their rights right. They built this Streeling of libertarian thought, with its $20+ million annual budget and world-wide reputation, on a shareholding structure that is either actually or nearly under the control of people who do not share many of their values and have not for decades. The entire enterprise may well have been for years only one death away from Koch domination. If so many libertarians are now so worried about a Koch takeover, one has to ask, why have they spent so many years building a brand with an unshielded thermal exhaust port?
    __
    […]
    __
    I could not tell you how many times I’ve encountered libertarian arguments about law that assume that individuals can and ought to use contracts to protect themselves against just this sort of contingency. Don’t worry about users clicking “I agree” to overreaching terms of service; if they truly cared about the terms, they’d negotiate for better ones. Don’t worry about people who refuse to buy health insurance; they’re making a rational choice for themselves. Don’t worry about minority shareholders, don’t worry about franchisees, don’t worry about all the other groups that find themselves on the wrong end of a bargain that always seems to tip against them in the long run—if they wanted better protections, they could and should have negotiated for them up front.
    __
    Except they don’t. They never do. And really. If the uber-libertarians of the Cato institute can’t watch out for themselves, what hope is there for the rest of us?

    .

  82. 82
    clone12 says:

    For me, the biggest difference is that When Bill Mahler took a potshot at Sarah Palin or when Ed Schultz went with the “slut” slur at Laura Ingraham, they were going after people of roughly the same stature and power as they are. Palin and Ingraham are big girls who have allies and giant megaphones and they can take care of themselves. Forget the gender angle for a second, Bill Mahler and Ed Schultz aren’t picking on some small frys. They were rightly condemned, but at least there is some sportmanship when you’re picking on someone your own size.

    Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, is an out-and-out bully. He has one of the biggest soapboxes in the nation and he goes on a 3 day smear campaign against a private citizen who has very little resources for which she can defend herself with. The sexism is bad, but it’s the bullying that pisses me off.

  83. 83
    patrick II says:

    It was the combination of:

    Literalness of the attacks.
    Untruth of the attacks
    The Blank Slate that is Sandra Flukes in the public eye
    Relentlessness of the attacks
    The size of Limbaugh’s audience
    The intimidation of witnesses

    As SteveM: points out above, Rush’s attack on Ms. Flukes was literal, not figurative. He was not name calling as Maher called Palin a twat. He was saying she was a slut with multiple sex partners and she was getting paid for it. He was describing a person not calling a name.

    And of course, Rush’s attacks were untrue. Her testimony never mentioned her own personal sexual situation, she only described how the lack of contraception had caused medical problems for fellow students. Rush made up his description of the type of person Ms. Fluke was out of whole cloth.

    And since Ms Flukes was a public blank slate, Rush’s untrue “literal” description of her is what has defined her for millions of his followers and the people they write emails to or read their comments. Check the comments on some right wing sites to see what the “really” think of Ms. Flukes.

    And Rush was relentless, repeating his lies 57 times over three days. And, as we all know, a lie repeated enough times becomes the truth to the true believers. There is nothing now that can be said that will repair the reputation of Ms. Flukes. She will be considered a whore for the rest of her life now in the circles of the “true believers”.

    And the circles of Rush’s true believing dittoheads is large. Best estimate is 15 million people listen to his show — and then turn and spread his lies to their ignorant friends.

    And finally, Ms. Flukes is not the only target. Witnesses who may be called to testify have seen what happens. There are neighborhoods where cops cannot solve a crime because they can get no witnesses to testify against the criminal power. Rush and his ilk are trying to make the entire country a bad neighborhood deterring witnesses against power from testifying so their criminal reign may continue.

    So, Rush has lied about, sullied the reputation of, and attempted to intimidate a fine young lady. I am glad to see that she has stood up to his intimidation and finally their are enough of us to push back. Over the cliff I hope.

  84. 84
    Jay in Oregon says:

    That’s why the apology isn’t cutting it with the advertisers and most sane people.

    It’s not just one comment. It was a THREE-DAY TIRADE that got progressively more vile as it went on. (And it didn’t start on a high point.)

    And that doesn’t touch the fact that Limbaugh completely lied about Fluke’s testimony to kick the whole thing off.

    I think Limbaugh heard “Woman testifying about birth control” and the lizard part of his brain went “I can score points with the mouthbreathers who listen to me by saying she’s a dirty slutty slut slut.”

  85. 85
    Fanshawe says:

    @Bob2:

    From Sully:

    “It simply remains a guiding principle of mine that you argue your case, you counter and expose arguments that don’t work, or lies that can be debunked, or smears that are disgusting.”

    Ok cool. But how does my going to Neflix and saying “Hey, I just wanted to expose you to the fact that your corporate brand is now being associated with disgusting smears and debunked lies,” violate Sully’s deeply held guiding principle?

    I mean, I know the answer in this case is “I’m Sully and I have, or I pretend to have, a childlike understanding of how the world works.” But what about for other people who say similar things and actually care about making reasonable arguments?

  86. 86
    Tom says:

    @ Brian S

    Exactly.

    I don’t remember a single liberal coming to Schultz’s defense or screaming “BOTH SIDES TO IT.”

    No one called for a boycott of MSNBC because they suspended him. What he did was plainly wrong. And he sincerely apologized. Watch it and compare it to Rush’s apology.

    The money line for me is “it doesn’t matter what the circumstances were.” He didn’t continue to try and make the point that led to him calling her slut a la Rush. He knew his behavior rendered his point obsolete. He just apologized.

  87. 87
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    @Fanshawe:
    In the conservative world of ideologues like Sully, money simply does not exist when it comes to any analysis or understanding of power relationships. Except when dirty stinking liberals introduce it into the picture, like Satan’s apple in the Garden of Eden. How dare they!

    I suppose if you dressed everybody up in period costume you could pretend to yourself that The Price is Right is actually a made-for-TV staging of Paradise Lost. That would make about as much sense as Sully’s view of how politics works in the real world.

  88. 88
    redshirt says:

    @Martin: OH, I’m with you on all that. At the same time, it’s no surprise to me – since I expect competence out of this Administration, and that’s what we get, day in, day out.

    I thought I missed something particularly awesome in the last few days.

    So good to have Adults back in charge!

  89. 89
    JGabriel says:

    @Bob2:

    Doug,
    __
    http://andrewsullivan.thedaily.....k-ctd.html
    __
    I think it’s time for another mocking.

    I think you’re right. Especially loved this tidbit from Andrew:

    The right way to counter [Limbaugh’s] speech, in my view, is with speech, not threats to his livelihood.

    Limbaugh is worth how many millions? Last I read, Limbaugh’s current radio contract alone is worth $38 million, and that doesn’t take into account any of his other assets or franchises.

    Limbaugh has enough money to pay for his meals, housing, mulitple cars, and erectile dysfunction prescriptions, for the rest of his goddamn life. No one is threatening his livelihood. They (we) are threatening his revenue from being a radio mouthpiece for vile and disgusting beliefs.

    We’re not even threatening to take Limbaugh off the air: he certainly has enough money to fund own his show without advertisers or salary if he wants.

    And if Limbaugh doesn’t have enough money to fund it himself, then that’s due to his own irresponsible spending, as Rush would be the first to say of any impoverished uninsured person who went hungry to pay for meds.

    Don’t ask or expect me to feel sorry for that rich obscene fat fuck, Sully.

    .

  90. 90
    Mark says:

    Who cares about the Fonz? I heard Renee Montagne say “both sides do it” when talking about Rush yesterday. Renee fucking Montagne, the most liberal of the supposed liberal media.

  91. 91
    catclub says:

    @Martin: ““Whoops, we fucked that up”

    I can almost think of the name of the ambassador in the Middle east (not to Iraq, I think) who told (or Saddam Hussein heard) Saddam that we did not particularly care about border disputes between Iraq and Kuwait.

    That was an oops.

  92. 92
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @catclub: April Gillespie.

    @Mark: Everyone Renee Montagne knows knows both sides do it.

  93. 93

    Liberals hate Chris Matthews, and Democratic politicians don’t give two hoots about him. What a bizarre attempt at false equivalence.

    Gillespie does help from a sociological perspective, at least: movement libertarians, are part of the right-wing machine. That’s being reinforced at Cato right now. jfxgillis once commented, “when libertarians matter they suck, and when they don’t suck they don’t matter.”

  94. 94
    Rafer Janders says:

    @Fanshawe:

    “It simply remains a guiding principle of mine that you argue your case, you counter and expose arguments that don’t work, or lies that can be debunked, or smears that are disgusting.”

    And how exactly do I, as an individual, do that against Rush Limbaugh, who has a nationally syndicated radio show?

    Shorter Andrew: a gentleman must always bring a knife to a gunfight.

  95. 95
    shortstop says:

    I think it creeps people (or at least me) out so much that they don’t want to refer to it at all.

    I hope that’s why people aren’t talking about it. I assure you that when wimmen are alone, that’s the part of the whole incident that takes center stage in the discussion. But I’ve had several conversations with liberal, feminist, goodly-hearted male friends who seem to think the “slut” comment was the acme of the apex of bad news, and don’t quite seem to understand why the sex tape bit tripled down on the viciousness and outright contempt for women.

    Interesting conversations ensued in which I felt I needed to explain that although I am porn-friendly except in cases of non-consent, the subtext of that remark was: “Fucking bitches, you want to fuck? You want to fuck someone other than us? Then we get to see it, whores.” It’s just a whole new level of misogyny from calling someone a slut.

  96. 96
    supa says:

    While his writers are funny, Maher is a pretenious douche. Having said that I think it’s funny the only people on the left that the right can point to for comparison are comedians and muppets.

  97. 97
    catclub says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: April Glaspie, now that you wrote Gillespie, is what my memory tells me.

  98. 98
    catclub says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: On the other hand, I was wrong in that she was the Ambassador to Iraq. First woman ambassador to an Arab country.
    Also ambassador to Kuwait, I think.

  99. 99
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    Shorter Andrew: a gentleman must always bring a knife to a gunfight.

    with a side of the idea that social-shaming (which is what a boycott amounts to), the classic Tory solution to problems like this, is only for the upper-crust. The common rabble must not be permitted to play a game that is the birthright of the aristocracy.

  100. 100
    Roy G. says:

    Not to defend Bill Maher per se, however, in English English, aka the UK, a ‘twat’ means a stupid person. I know this from experience with an English colleague who used to regularly refer to people as twats, which I thought was kind of coarse, until I asked him about it and got the straight dope.

    Btw, they pronounce it ‘twaaat’ not ‘twot’.

  101. 101
    th says:

    “Fucking bitches, you want to fuck? You want to fuck someone other than us? Then we get to see it, whores.” It’s just a whole new level of misogyny from calling someone a slut.

    This.

  102. 102

    Just heard yesterday the Bill Maher comparison for the first time. Here’s another thing- Bill Maher is on cable; Rush is on publicly owned and licensed airwaves. So when HBO signs on Bill Maher to do a cable show, they pretty much know what they’re getting and they don’t have the same impact on public discourse because HBO is not broadcast via a public asset. They also don’t have to worry about losing advertisers. So after that it only comes down to viewers, and if Maher says “twat” and that drives viewers away or causes an uproar then one would expect them to make the most economically (or morally) viable decision, just as Limbaugh’s advertisers and some radio stations have.

  103. 103
    harlana says:

    How long before Rent-Boy becomes one of Limbaugh’s new, advertisers?

  104. 104
    Danny says:

    The biggest offense from Limbaugh imho was that “slut” and “prostitute” weren’t used as metaphors, he was slandering her as literally being a slut and a prostitute. That’s why the false equivalence B-S about Shultz, RFKJr etc, is so embarassingly off the mark: they used that word as a metaphor. Limbaugh’s whole… ‘argument’?… was that Fluke was having ‘so much sex’ she had to beg for money to finance it.

    ETA: If Rush had said that Fluke was testifying because she was a “slut” for fame and attention, he wouldn’t be in nearly as much trouble that he’s in.

  105. 105
    Jay says:

    Ugh. Kirsten Powers has been the absolute WORST on this for the past several days, filling Twitter, Fox, and the Daily Beast with her “more outraged by the outrage” brand of nonsense.

    I’d be impressed if, just once, Powers criticized the massive woman-hating by the big stars of her major cable employer, but she won’t, because she’d lose her job.

  106. 106
    Tony J says:

    @Roy G.:

    This is true, except that when we say ‘twat’ we mean stupid and – nasty – person.

    As in, “He said what? What a twat.”

    or

    “Oh, ignore her, she’s just a twat.”

    Also, “twat” has basically gone out of the lexicon over here insofar as describing ladyparts is concerned. It’s very, very 1970s, and I suspect that most people under the age of 30 wouldn’t have a clue that it ever was.

    And FTR, us Northerners pronouce it “T-Wat!” Double explosive t’s. Rhymes with “Say Wh’t?”

    Edumacation. Iz Free.

  107. 107
    ruemara says:

    When I heard Rush’s tone, before he even said what he said about posting tape, I knew what was coming. It was like when Nils Bjurman started talking to Lisabet Salander about being “friendly”. You know that this man is a creep, a bully, an abuser, a rapist. I don’t make those charges lightly and I think when Rush Limbaugh dies, probably in a creepy, disgusting way, the light that will be shed on his activities may make his name something unspoken for a decade or two, until the collective memory fades and a new standard bearer for the conservative hive mind can be unleashed on a sleeping world.

  108. 108
    Mnemosyne says:

    @patrick II:

    And finally, Ms. Flukes is not the only target. Witnesses who may be called to testify have seen what happens. There are neighborhoods where cops cannot solve a crime because they can get no witnesses to testify against the criminal power. Rush and his ilk are trying to make the entire country a bad neighborhood deterring witnesses against power from testifying so their criminal reign may continue.

    I wanted to highlight this, because I think that this is what the real purpose was — to make it so painful for people to testify against the Republicans that they won’t do it. Limbaugh’s aim was to make other women too afraid to make their feelings public because they would be treated the same way.

    It was intimidation, pure and simple.

  109. 109
    Jay in Oregon says:

    @shortstop:

    “Fucking bitches, you want to fuck? You want to fuck someone other than us? Then we get to see it, whores.” It’s just a whole new level of misogyny from calling someone a slut.

    @Danny:

    The biggest offense from Limbaugh imho was that “slut” and “prostitute” weren’t used as metaphors, he was slandering her as literally being a slut and a prostitute.

    These statements encapsulate the issue it perfectly.

  110. 110

    @Tony J:

    Twat? I cunt hear you!

  111. 111
    harlana says:

    sheesh, my grandmother used to use the word “twat” for heaven’s sake

  112. 112
    Kilkee says:

    @patrick II: This is precisely why I think she should sue his ass. It DOES matter that he lied about what her testimony said, in that it makes it virtually impossible for him to defend a slander action. Even if she were a public figure, which she is not, he couldn’t possibly meet even the high NY Times v. Sullivan standard of actual malice, i.e., knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for whtehr it was false or not. Assuming he actually heard what she said, he cannot possibly justify his 3-day rant about “she’s having so much sex…” based on that testimony.

    The compilation video from Daily Kos would be an absolutely devastating aid in closing argument. Just let that filth wash over the jurors and see what they do. And the accusations of buying condoms in junior high? Of being sexually active in high school? Of having sexual partners “lined up around the block?” God, they’d kill him. And I’m guessing that West Palm Beach is not a friendly venue for a fat, rich, white, racist misogynist.

  113. 113
    nellcote says:

    Maher is a mysoginist pig. But he’s not a Liberal so there’s that.

  114. 114
    shortstop says:

    @Kilkee: Right now Fluke is respected by all but the hopelessly insane for her coolness, dignity and rationality, not to mention the soundness of her position. The second she sues Limbaugh, she loses the moral high ground in the minds of many people. She is prevailing partly by refusing to scuffle with him. She’s making the right decision.

  115. 115
    patrick II says:

    @shortstop:
    I’d like to see her sue Limbaugh, win a bazillion dollars, and give the money to Planned Parenthood.

  116. 116
    slightly-peeved says:

    Rush wants to fuck her. That’s the problem. Talking about what a dirty slut she is, asking for a video? Rush is getting hard saying this shit, at least as much as he can without a ticket to the Dominican Republic. The comparison to Antia Hill is apt, because Rush has really let his inner Clarence Thomas fly with this one, and I think that’s the reason the anger has reached a level beyond, say, making fun of Parkinson’s Disease.

  117. 117
    Brachiator says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I wanted to highlight this, because I think that this is what the real purpose was—to make it so painful for people to testify against the Republicans that they won’t do it. Limbaugh’s aim was to make other women too afraid to make their feelings public because they would be treated the same way.

    Yes.

    As bad as he has been in the past, when Rush was attacking Democrats, or “feminazis,” it was general. But he attacked Sandra Fluke specifically and individually, and his attack was vicious and despicable. But he has been doing this for so long that he thought that he could get away with it. And he thought that all his listeners would go along with it.

    His defenders are still trying to pretend that this is about the typical “us vs them” of politics. Or free speech. Or some other abstract BS.

    Rush was like some sick small town bully who has intimidated everyone for years, and is shocked when people finally stand up to him.

  118. 118
    Nutella says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    this is what the real purpose was—to make it so painful for people to testify against the Republicans that they won’t do it. Limbaugh’s aim was to make other women too afraid to make their feelings public because they would be treated the same way.
    __
    It was intimidation, pure and simple.

    Very true, with one small correction: Fluke didn’t talk publicly about her feelings. She testified about the practical consequences of employment laws and practices and she got a load of very, very personal hate for being so bold as to disagree publicly with the Republican party’s position.

    That quibble aside, I think this is the most important aspect of this kind of personalized reaction to congressional testimony. Its sole purpose is to intimidate, harass, and humiliate any private citizen who dares to state a non-Republican-approved opinion — like Malkin and the countertops but even worse.

  119. 119
    Rafer Janders says:

    @shortstop:

    Darling, you know I hate it when we fight, but I’m not sure I’m in complete agreement here. The view from the moral high ground is lovely, yes, but actually having to defend and then lose a libel action would be draining, time-consuming and costly to Limbaugh. It could be very useful pour descourager les autres, as Mitt Romney might say in French.

  120. 120
    Brachiator says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    Darling, you know I hate it when we fight, but I’m not sure I’m in complete agreement here. The view from the moral high ground is lovely, yes, but actually having to defend and then lose a libel action would be draining, time-consuming and costly to Limbaugh. It could be very useful pour descourager les autres, as Mitt Romney might say in French.

    Here’s how it works. Limbaugh has armies of attorneys to throw against Ms Fluke, who could probably get a good attorney to work for her pro bono. Still, it would be no sweat off Rush. And after dragging the thing out for months, if not years, there would be a quiet settlement, with no formal admission of anything significant on Rush’s part.

  121. 121
    shortstop says:

    @Rafer Janders: You’re not having any trouble seeing this from the perspective of Limbaugh (although I think you’re getting that wrong; he would love nothing better than to paint himself as the victim of attempted “censorship” from a money-grubbing bitch — a suit would solidify his base). You’re not understanding what it would put Fluke through or how she would trade the respect of many, many millions for a lifetime of “I was on her side until she tried to make money out of it — she turned out to be just in it for the attention and dough.”

    When I say “moral high ground” I don’t mean it in a lofty, principles uber alles sense, although of course the principle is very important. I mean that the absolute only way she can play this and come out relatively unscathed, dignity-, reputation- and career-wise, is exactly the way she’s doing it.

  122. 122
    CardinalRed says:

    I agree, that other sick bastard mark steyn is already drooling at the thought of getting sex details through discovery

  123. 123
    S. N. W. says:

    @artem1s:
    American taliban is all I can say. Didn’t think of the race issue but believe that Americans are moving past the line given reaction to Don Imus’ comments. Conservatives should be scared, really scared. They have awakened the sleeping giant i.e. the majority of the country’s population. Older women my age lived this crap and are fed up with it. Younger women simply won’t take it. You go girls! Chics rule and should govern. White males have lost the right to govern with the booms, bubbles, bust, frauds, wars, best democracy money can buy and mysogyny they have inflicted on working stiffs and stiffettes trying to negotiate the mine field they have created. They should take a powder and let the mothers of the country clean up their messes.

Comments are closed.