Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
We all know the storm Rush's comments have caused this week. Since I listened to an entire hour of his show on the Fluke incident, it was easy for me to digest his point: "It is so absurd to assert that otherwise free Americans should subsidize your optional sexual activities so that you face no consequences, I will counter that with other absurd notions, like demanding you posting a video of it so others can receive something in return." Rush didn't say he wanted this. He said it because he felt is was absurd, like what Fluke was demanding.
Each Friday I go into Legalzoom.com's headquarters in Glendale to provide free legal advice to anyone who wants it on Legalzoom's Facebook page. This is a private enterprise making FREE services available to people who cannot afford to start up an account at a law firm for whatever reason. Legal Zoom sponsors this voluntarily because they are a good Corporation that cares about the community. It's done efficiently, private sector style.
This was hard to do on Friday because evidently one of Rush's enemies on the Hill encouraged people to launch a boycott against Rush's sponsors. So there we were, courtesy of a private company, supplying people, any takers, with my FREE services, relieving the public burden with private resources, voluntarily supplied. But ironically, this became very difficult because so many people were posting complaints about Rush being opposed to the government forcing Catholic institutions to provide other free services which violate their religious conscience, we were having trouble providing my free services to people with real problems, in need of real help, some urgently.
This program sponsored by Legalzoom is called "Free Joe Friday." Anyone can go to Legalzoom's facebook wall for Friday and see the juxtaposition of me trying to help people, but suffering though a maze of people trying to put a stop to it. If a "buycott" seems in order to you, use Rush's promo code, which is his first name, and let them know there are two sides to this.
- Comment (47)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Nov '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/03/carbonite-drops-rush/#comments
'Carbonite still is listed as a sponsor of the Ed Schultz Show, demonstrating an amazing hyprocrisy on the part of Carbonite. Indeed, at the same link as the update above, Carbonite’s President defending continuing to advertise on controversial talk shows such as Schultz’s'
sheesh. both deserve socialism.
Edited on March 4, 2012 at 5:31amApr '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Six sponsors have dropped Rush?
Spinelessness reigns.
Nov '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
It's interesting that we've dedicated March to 'getting things done' which includes some legal work. We were going to try LegalZoom.com for the first time, and my husband brought up why not LawDepot? I said, no no can't you trust something like this on something free and Rush recommends LegalZoom (this part sort of as a joke...) Which should we use now?
Jul '10
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
It was probably the right thing for Rush to do. While he had a point, his description of her wasn't worthy of him. As to advertisers pulling ads, heaven forbid if Rush should lose prominence over this, especially with our loss of Andrew Breitbart.
Speaking of which, does anyone think the people who spewed vile comments over Breitbart’s passing will ever apologize? In no way am I equating these circumstances, but bring it up only with respect to apologies following some self reflection. I only read one or two, but did watch the clip of Bill Press on the Breitbart homepage and was sickened at the venom and absolute distortions he was spreading over the airwaves.
Oct '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
The silly words people are so disturbed about are really nothing when listening to this woman call herself far worse and f a r more brainless. Embarassing hearing Ms. Fluke struggle for a thought worth thinking..
Nov '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Wow, I was pretty sure that the Republican was going to win the next presidential election quite easily. Obama was at an extremely high-water mark in 2008 in just about every way except perhaps a few more Democratic-leaning Hispanic voters.
However, when I see surrenders from advertisers from stuff like this I have to wonder sometimes.
It looks like just the typical business and media weinees to me though, but you never can tell.
I didn't see anything wrong with the comment, except perhaps the fact that maybe he shouldn't have used her name in the comment. This is all about the word slut or prostitute? As anyone gone to a comedy movie or listened to a song in the last 20 years?
Fornication is now something that we are supposed to celebrate and subsidize? This reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Bart uses the correct meaning of the word bastard several times in one minute.
They think that since they got Beck off the air that Limbaugh is next?
Don't these companies have lawyers that know that conservatives remember what companies abandon them?
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Legalzoom hasn't dropped me. Promo code: Vandals. It's a great company dealing with a nasty crisis. Give them the benefit of the doubt. They are up against crazies. They've got employees to consider. There's lots of stuff we don't know.
Nov '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Breitbart like most conservatives knew what Media Matters is up to.
They remind me of that 1981 Dr. Johnny Fever quote from WKRPin Cincinnati:
"Boy, I can see 'em now, huddled there in the corner ..., playing every record slower and slower... then suddenly, "There's a naughty word!"
Mar '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
don't know.
Billy: I also think he has manipulated this event into a conservative win.
· 2 hours ago
I cannot see how.Prior to this, the argument against the mandate seemed to be going in our favor. Obama’s administration had been shamed and criticized and forced to back pedal. The citizenry saw clearly the consequences of his bill.But then a national radio host used his platform to attack a college student, and in the process could not have done more to embody the caricature that far left activists always employ against conservatives—he put ideology before everything (including common sense, good manners, and proportionality in his language), and was seen to be a blustering middle-aged man raging at a young person half his age about their sex life. He managed to turn an argument about religious liberty and conscience in the face of an intolerable law into one about whether or not a girl should be called a slut for being on the pill.
Mar '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
This incident allowed the same President, who before had been roundly denounced by people even in his own party for his overreach, to grandstand in a phone call that made him seem the more gracious and adult of the two parties.
Democratic leaders baited the hook and Rush fell face first into it. He realized it immediately too. He apologized on air moments later and now has issued a written apology.
But these later steps will do nothing to dispel the notion that the first thought he expressed is how conservatives think.
Because Ms. Fluke stepped into the public arena and spoke before Congress, her testimony and ideas are open to criticism. She ought to receive that criticism for the incoherence of the ideas underlying her position, for the preposterous claim that she looks around her campus and sees students attending a $50,000 a year institution who can't afford birth control, for her misrepresentation of Jesuit teaching, and for her bad faith in choosing to attend a university whose policy she knew well in advance, and then having the gall to argue she's been put upon.
All of that can be done without calling her a slut.
Nov '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Joe Escalante: Legalzoom hasn't dropped me. Promo code: Vandals. It's a great company dealing with a nasty crisis. Give them the benefit of the doubt. They are up against crazies. They've got employees to consider. There's lots of stuff we don't know.
Actually we've given up boycotting as it turns out the other company can be just as bad, or worse. I have never understood why companies get involved at all and alienate 50% of their customers either way. LegalZoom could have just kept quiet-would anything have happened at all if they just ignored it? But I will say I respected them for just advertising on Rush- the biggest radio audience in the world, duh. Also I do blame corps for contributing to their own eventual downfall. Socialism is bad for business. (kudos for getting in your promo code! seriously : )
Edited on March 4, 2012 at 3:42pmDec '10
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
For Rush, "the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about". I think Oscar Wilde said that. I predict Rush will be fine.
For Ms. Fluke, she is a self proclaimed woman of low morals who expects others to pay for or subsidize her elective, immoral behavior. I think that qualifies her as a "slut" or at least espousing "slutty" behavior.
I was uneasy when Rush made his request that if we subsidize the birth control, they provide video footage so that we get something for our money. I thought nothing else was over the top. Yet, I already see our side willing to toss Rush under the bus for this perceived misstep.
Boys and girls, it is time to rally the troops in unapologetic support of Rush and not abandon him in his hour of need. What did the Dems do toward Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy and most recently Anthony Weiner and scores of others.
I say, go buy some tea!
Apr '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
I understand the Ms. Fluke expects to spend $3,000 on women's health during her visit to Georgetown.
Checking on the internet, condoms are available in a twelve-pack for $15. That would provide Ms. Fluke with 2,400 condoms, 800 per year, during her stay. 800 per year would be 2 per day on weekdays and 3 per day on week-ends with a one week break for finals.
Sounds pretty active to me.
May '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Carbonite isn't in the business of taking moral stands.
If advertising on Rush is an unnessary risk to their bottom line, they are doing the right thing by pulling their ads.
It's like the poor ESPN editor who got fired for his Jeremy Lin headline. The risk of keeping him wasn't worth alienating customers.
The moral merits of the issue are irrelevant, all that matters is perception.
Oct '10
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Crow's Nest: don't know.
He managed to turn an argument about religious liberty and conscience in the face of an intolerable law into one about whether or not a girl should be called a slut for being on the pill. · 8 hours ago
She wasn't called a slut for going on the pill. She was called a slut because despite her finances making it (allegedly, and absurdly) impossible for her to afford birth control pills, she was incapable of refraining from engaging in sexual activity. That is, she couldn't stop having sex despite not being able to afford birth control pills. What's another word for someone like that? Slut. Or nymphomaniac.
Obviously, that's not factually correct, but that's the absurdity Rush was demonstrating by calling her a slut...which is someone who cannot refrain from having sex no matter what. He was using an absurdity to demonstrate an absurdity in order to make a larger point about personal responsibility and what happens when you cede personal responsibility to the all-powerful State.
That's also what he was trying to demonstrate by calling her a prostitute.
Edited on March 5, 2012 at 4:07pmSep '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
No one is throwing anyone under a bus. Anyone who talks for a living will say the wrong thing from time to time; when that inevitably happens, apologizing is the right thing to do. Liberals never apologize, because they are shameless. I don't want conservatives to become shameless too; we won't win the country back from liberalism by emulating it.
Oct '10
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Ningrim: Carbonite isn't in the business of taking moral stands.
If advertising on Rush is an unnessary risk to their bottom line, they are doing the right thing by pulling their ads.
It's like the poor ESPN editor who got fired for his Jeremy Lin headline. The risk of keeping him wasn't worth alienating customers.
The moral merits of the issue are irrelevant, all that matters is perception. · 21 minutes ago
The problem is, half of Carbonite's customers and half of ESPN's customers are on each side of most issues. So by reacting in ANY way, they're taking a moral stand. And unnecessarily risking their bottom line. I'll never use Carbonite again, and I'll direct people who ask my opinion to look at Mozy and Dropbox instead.
Jan '12
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
So demonizing those who step into the public conversation is wrong.
Got it.
I look forward to Obama's apology to the Kochs.
Mar '11
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Ningrim: Carbonite isn't in the business of taking moral stands.
If advertising on Rush is an unnessary risk to their bottom line, they are doing the right thing by pulling their ads.
It's like the poor ESPN editor who got fired for his Jeremy Lin headline. The risk of keeping him wasn't worth alienating customers.
Agreed. I don't listen to Rush so I have no opinion on his comments, but I find the reaction to his sponsors by some on this site puzzling.
After the Citizens United decision, we on the right explained that there was no need to panic, because corporations place profits above politics and would not risk alienating valuable customers by expressing controversial political views. But once a successful company pulls its ads from Rush, accusations of political posturing arise.
So, do we believe that companies put profit above politics, or not? Personally, I feel confident that Legalzoom.com understands its own financial interest better than any of us (except perhaps Joe) do.
Dec '10
Re: Irony In The Eye Of One Of Rush Limbaugh's Storms
Mendel, I agree with you. Let these companies do what they feel is in their best financial interest. I would say only about half of respondents see this as political and not perceptually financial. If the conservatives are a significant portion of their clients, I hope they pay a price and see their financial concerns were not borne out by their decision.
Further , I suspect this will pass like the tempest in a teapot that it is.
Edited on March 4, 2012 at 8:40pm