Skip to comments.The left loses a piece of its soul
Posted on 03/10/2012 7:40:05 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
On paper, it was a great week for the left.
On paper, Rush Limbaugh swallowed hard and finally did get that piece of humble pie to go down.
On paper -- and HBO -- the cool kids, it turns out, aren't finished piling on Sarah Palin.
On paper, Newt Gingrich is still in love with the sound of his own voice, Rick Santorum still sees delegate math as one of those things only college snobs care about, Ron Paul is still the crazy uncle you left up in the attic, and what's left of a torn and tattered Mitt Romney is still being asked to apologize for winning battleground states and collecting delegates, meaning the Great GOP Slog of 2012 goes on. And on. And on.
Yep, the left had themselves a good week.
But, as the inhabitants of the blogosphere never tire of reminding us newsroom dinosaurs, paper is dead.
And, upon closer look, so is a little piece of the left.
The left sold a rather sizable portion of its soul last week -- leaving both sides coming up significantly short on that score. When it comes to the Washington, D.C., reality show of Selective Outrage, it was the left's turn to have its hypocrisy exposed. This past week, they were the ones left out in the cold, longingly staring through the window at the warm, sensible reasoning inside.
The Big Chill started with Limbaugh's apology for calling a law student arguing for contraception coverage in health plans "a slut" and "a prostitute." It ended with Limbaugh's detractors stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that their side has many times dabbled -- apology free -- in that kind of misogyny, and worse yet, spinning that their brand of vile was actually acceptable.
Back to Rush. As apologies go, it wasn't much. To listen carefully was to catch about as much actual sincerity as was intended. That would be none.
But at least Limbaugh mustered up enough humility -- with the considerable jump-start of a bevy of fleeing advertisers -- to at least go through the motions.
That's more than the roaming band of apologists for left-wing pundits Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz and Matt Taibbi have been able to deliver.
Olbermann has never been shy about scraping the bottom of his thesaurus for Rush-sized vitriol toward Sarah Palin, or right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin, whom he called "a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it." Schultz, meanwhile, has called pundit Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut."
None, however, compare to Maher who, once you get past his persistent streak of religious bigotry, has quite the misogynist streak himself. But it's apparently OK -- funny, even -- because he saves the brunt of his ugliness, with words that a blowhard like Limbaugh hasn't even dared use on the air, for ... wait for it ... Sarah Palin.
Maher went so low as to call Palin "the c-word" -- let's just say it rhymes with the term of sacrificing the runner in baseball.
And the outcry? The calls for apologies? Boycotts? Firings?
Maher can't lose sponsors, because he's on HBO. But where is the boycott talk? We're not sure if Olbermann's 13 viewers on Current TV qualify him for sponsors, but we do know there's been no call for boycotts there.
Why, the White House is so steamed with Maher, there's talk of senior adviser David Axelrod appearing on Maher's show, where he'll be joined by the usual parade of other voices -- outrage free --from the left.
The calls for apologies from the left aren't piling up, but the questions for the rest of us are. If Limbaugh is still considered to be an actual wing of the Republican Party, shouldn't Maher's $1 million donation to an Obama SuperPac -- you know, the SuperPacs President Perfect was going to have no part of -- at least give the comedian a metaphorical corner office in the Democratic Party?
The double-standard on the reaction to Limbaugh's language and the shrug at the venom of Maher and the rest is, if nothing else, comical. It's the actual attempt at reasoning that's the painful part.
Palin and Ingraham, you see, are famous. Or they're asking for it. I forget which, but I know each attempt at excusing the language directed at them comes out strained, yet with a gallant attempt at a straight face.
Here's the thing with the reasoning. It's actually worse than it sounds. Selective outrage, puffed up anger with an agenda, never truly works. Never has, never will. Oh sure, it flies high and mighty on the sets of Fox and MSNBC, but for the rest of us? Nope.
Once you've strayed where Maher's apologists dared go last week, and you've gone about the absurd process of carefully explaining just how it's OK for your guy to use vile, misogynist language toward women, but not their guy, well, there's no coming back from that.
Limbaugh, a stale cliché of a windbag, may well lose more advertisers. He may even lose his job.
But the left? This was the week they lost their credibility.
Obviously not part of the liberal Main Stream Media - maybe there is just a bit of hope yet. Of course they just may be catering to the vast majority of Americans.
The headline presupposes the left had a soul to begin with...
The far left don’t have any souls, they never had any to begin with
Beat me to it...
Bill Mahrer DOES have sponsors. HBO’s parent corporation is Time-Li(f)e-Warner-Turner.
BOYCOTT Time-Warner. Pull the plug on cable.
BOYCOTT CNN’s advertiser’s. For a mere “comedian” CNN (a news network) sure has him on for political commentary enough times. Does Chris Rock get quizzed on CNN about the issues of the day?
“But the left? This was the week they lost their credibility.”
You can’t lose something you never had.
Forget about it.
NOW defended Bill Clinton's sexual harassment of a young intern. Gloria Steinem defended Bill Clinton's sexual groping of a woman. His unwanted physical advances? No big deal. The very credible claims of violent rape on Clinton's part? [shrug] Why is that so wrong? Men have needs.
No, the Left crossed this line a long time ago. They can do anything they want. Republicans? We're animals and we don't deserve to have rights. We're sub-human, and the Left knows how to deal with scum like us.
It's only fair to point out that Schultz apologized. And unlike Rush, he made an actual apology for what he said, not just for a "poor choice of words."
IMO it is dishonest to report the Schultz slue without at least noting his apology.
There are, broadly speaking, two approaches to life: where reality is external and consists of timeless principles, standards and facts, or where reality is substantially internal and consists of preferences and passions.
A person whose reality is external seeks to bring his thinking and behavior into harmony with outside considerations. If an outside fact contradicts one of the things he desires, he rejects that desire. If an outside law tells him that coveting and theft are wrong, he rejects thoughts that lead him to covet or attempt to steal.
A person whose reality is internal only accepts events and facts from the outside that are in harmony with the world as he prefers it in his own mind. Indeed, his internal reality is malleable, almost plastic, and continually morphs and changes so that what was true and correct changes from one moment to the next. This reality must be maintained and protected. This reality is his very idea of himself.
Since such as person is human, while he devises and maintains his own morality, he also continually fails to adhere it it. So, he must continually excuse his failures and faults. He does so by making exceptions and even changes to the rules themselves. Such people reject the concept of sin because in their own minds they cannot sin, because every failing is excusable. Yet, giving themselves a pass causes deep dissatisfaction with their own human nature, and this is why these people project anger. They are often heard complaining that conservatives are “angry” when in fact they are just projecting their own anger with themselves.
People with internal realities are never constrained by any principles. If they don’t reject the principle, they will excuse why the principle doesn’t apply in the case at hand. Having rejected principles, they must respect power. Indeed, they become power-oriented. Only power restrains them externally, for nothing restrains their internal reality.
This explains the two main world views that we see struggling to control our lives today. This explains why we can see politicians who claim one thing in the morning and contradict themselves in the afternoon with equal sincerity. This explains why a politician can claim to be for something before he was against it. And it explains why they thing they can print and borrow their way to full employment and prosperity for all.
Slur, not slue.
this is no different to the double standard of “targets on map” and somehow a call for violence by gop, but not a call for violence when democrats actually call for their followers go punch people twice as hard or target sign on politicians faces
Seriously, what did Palin DO that warrents such an insult? Have the AUDACITY to think for herself? Run for VP? Who does she think she is, a WOMAN, considering herself an intellectual equal to a MAN like bigmouth Maher?
Whoopi On Roman Polanski: It Wasnt Rape-Rape
Schultz, meanwhile, has called pundit Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.”
“It’s only fair to point out that Schultz apologized. And unlike Rush, he made an actual apology for what he said, not just for a “poor choice of words.””
Or retire or run for office or do something else or do TV again or blog or become Breitbart or???
Not ruddy likely!
You’re right about Clear Channel, the bigger risk (which isn’t much of one) is that other major radio companies, namely Cumulus, get tired of putting money into the coffers of their rival CC by paying for Rush, and drop him and the other Premiere programs. In which case another station would snap them right up, so it would be a small ripple.
Just a little inside baseball ;-)
Hubby said Rush would make great "Pirate Radio".
Funniest line of the whole piece.
The Left is soulless. Its minions will soon be burning in a place which they do not believe even exists.
Ms. Fluke herself came to Marher’s defense and said his comments were “nuanced”.
Rush Limbaugh did not label ALL women who are single and take birth control “sluts” or “prostitutes”. He was being absurd and said that a woman, by his calculation who is spending $3 a day on condoms and pills, must be having sex 2-3 times a day for 3 solid years. And that she wanted people to “pay” for her to do this.
She IS a publicity whore and someone who TARGETED a Catholic university for her political activism.
It’s possible she is not even active in a heterosexual relationship. But then she gave commentary (NOT SWORN TESTIMONY) that her case study subjects needed “birth control” for reasons other than preventing pregnancy (like cysts, etc.).
So why shouldn’t diabetics get FREE medicine? Why should they have a co-pay?
“This was the week they lost their credibility.”
Good piece, nice writing, but sorry, they lost their credibility on the sexual politics issues back in the Clinton/Lewinsky days.
Right around the time Nina Burleigh (thank you google!) expressed her willingness to give President Clinton the full Monica for (let’s not forget THIS part) KEEPING ABORTION LEGAL.
It’s all abortion, all the time for these folks.
We can’t stand it, they revere it above all things.
Abortion is the line in the sand.
So, sorry Mitch Daniels (very popular wish you’d run for president guy) there won’t be any truce on social issues. Not as long as the Left reveres baby killing and want you, you mother and your priest to pay for it.
“Ms. Fluke herself came to Marhers defense and said his comments were nuanced.
Now that is rich. It is impossible to use the word c*nt with nuance.
You’d think any slut at Georgetown would know that.
Did you just agree with the Author of the piece that Rush's Apology was not heart felt and sincere?
Rush apologized in print and then again on his Radio Show after the weekend feeding frenzy. His apology was not empty.
He explained that he chose the wrong words, apologized to Ms. Fluke, who unlike Laura Ingraham, did not accept the apology (surprise - surprise) and made a point that he did not attach those same words to her personally.
Because he didn't send a Campaign Contribution to Barack Obama to make up for making Ms. Fluke an instant celebrity, does not infer that his apology was any less than sincere.
Is mind reading a hobby for you, or are you are actually The Amazing Kreskin using an anonymous FR pen name?
Limbaugh's detractors stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that their side has many times dabbled -- apology free -- in that kind of misogyny, and worse yet, spinning that their brand of vile was actually acceptable.Thanks 2ndDivisionVet. Sidebars:
Identity politics only matter when you serve The Party. Otherwise you are a pariah and a race traitor.
Someone wondered if there are photos of Ms. Fluke at last year’s Georgetown “slut walk” feminist protest.
“Someone wondered if there are photos of Ms. Fluke at last years Georgetown slut walk feminist protest.”
LOL, I have no doubt she was there.
I’ve always wanted to write a novel and have old-fashioned sub-titles for chapters just so I could have a chapter with the subheading: In which the shoe fits on the other foot and therefore is to be worn.
Just to squinch the toes of dopes like Sandra Fluke, et al., et al., et so many al.
The left has a soul?
I wish FR had a “like” button! LMBO!!!
The media conspired with the DNC on this story as they did in the forged Bush memos story and the 2006 October Surprise of the emails between the homosexual Republican and an aide (the media and DNC knew more earlier and “did nothing”).
I got rid of my television in 2008 when the bullstalin got too high to tolerate anymore.
The State Media pushes the daily DNC talking points around the clock.
“Identity politics only matter when you serve The Party. “
“The Issue is never the real issue - the real issue is always the Revolution.”
They are going to get nailed on their diversity racism, too. As soon as the racists come out to defend Bell and people hear and see them... O’Brien on CNN was a warm up.
Louis Farrahkan spoke at Harvard. They are coming out of Obama’s closet.
What do Islamists, Nazis, and Communists all have in common?
They tell their political followers that it is all about The Struggle.
If you forever see yourself as a victim, you will never have any strength.
Judge for yourself.
Schultz: It doesnt matter what the circumstances were. It doesnt matter that I was on radio and I was ad-libbing. None of that matters. What matters is what I said was terribly vile and not of the standards that I or any other person should adhere to. ... I want all of you to know tonight that I did call Laura Ingraham today and did not make contact with her, and I will apologize to her as I did in the message that I left for her today.
Limbaugh: “For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke. ... My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”
Till researching it to reply to you, this was the only Limbaugh apology I was aware of. It was posted on his website Saturday. I just discovered he issued a more heartfelt apology over the air on Monday.
“I acted too much like the leftists who despise me. I descended to their level, using names and exaggerations to describe Sandra Fluke. It’s what we have come to know and expect from them, but it’s way beneath me. And it’s way beneath you. It was wrong, and that’s why I’ve apologized, ‘cause I succumbed. ... Don’t be mad at them or mad at her. Everybody here was being true to their nature except me. I’m the one who had the failing on this, and for that I genuinely apologized for using those words to describe Ms. Fluke.”
Schultz’s apology and Limbaugh’s second apology are roughly equivalent and I will give both the benefit of the doubt as to sincerity.
Limbaugh’s first apology, IMO, was a classic example of the non-apology apology. (”I am sorry anyone was offended.” “I apologize for my choice of words.”)
I apologize (sincerely) for not being more up to date on the situation before criticizing Rush.
But the author made sure he got his own rude insult of Limbaugh in n ear the end.
The first written apology from Rush was curt, but having listened to him for many years, I expected he would expand on it when he opened his Radio Show the following Monday.
My ultimate issue is simply this, Laura Ingraham accepted Special Ed's apology and the issue faded away. When Laura went on the View and it was discussed, the Liberals laughed the whole thing off, with Baba saying that Joy calls her a Slut all the time, hardy-har-har-cackle...
The other thing is that Laura didn't sit in front of a Congressional panel wailing and lying about something to deflect the fact that the Constitution itself is under attack and she is actively pursuing elimination of parts of the First Amendment. That is exactly what Ms. Fluke has and is attempting to accomplish with the help of Pelosi and the Obama cabal.
When Rush made his comments the Left set out to ruin him, personally attacking his motives (misogynist), and financially impacting him, his Family and Employees with the ultimate goal of ending his Radio Broadcast Career to silence Conservative views and opinion. The Liberal Wet Dream if you will.
Do I wish Rush had just laughed off the whole thing and not mentioned Ms. Fluke by name?, you betcha. Then again, Rush is very astute and he saw the obvious implications of what was happening.
That's why he is the successful guy on the radio and I'm the guy trying to figure out how my Wife and I will get by after she gets laid off from her job later this month.
I quite agree that the difference in response is quite revealing of the difference between right and left.
But then that doesn’t surprise us, does it?
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE www.nationalreview.com
The Fluke Charade
By Mark Steyn
March 10, 2012 4:00 A.M.
Im writing this from Australia, so, if Im not quite up to speed on recent events in the United States, bear with me the telegraph updates are a bit slow here in the bush. As I understand it, Sandra Fluke is a young coed who attends Georgetown Law, and recently testified before Congress.
Oh, wait, no. Update: It wasnt a congressional hearing; the Democrats just got it up to look like one, like summer stock, with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid doing the show right here in the barn, and providing a cardboard set for the world premiere of Miss Fluke Goes to Washington, with full supporting cast led by Chuck Schumer strolling in through the French windows in tennis whites and drawling, Anyone for bull****?
Oh, and the young coed turns out to be 30, which is what less evolved cultures refer to as early middle age. Shes a couple of years younger than Mozart was at the time he croaked, but, if the Dems are to be believed, the plucky little Grade 24 schoolgirl has already made an even greater contribution to humanity. Shes had the courage to stand up in public and demand that someone else (and this is where one is obliged to tiptoe cautiously, lest offense is given to gallant defenders of the good name of American maidenhood such as the many prestigious soon-to-be-former sponsors of this column whove booked Bill Maher for their corporate retreat with his amusing Sarah Palin is a c*** routine . . . )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.