Day: 7/24/2013

Rush Limbaugh’s War On The War On Women: Attacking Huma Abedin

Posted by on July 24, 2013 at 8:48 pm. 6 Comments :

I suppose it had to come to this. With most of the conventional media piling on Anthony Weiner – who had no extramarital affairs, and was not unfaithful to his wife – it has been left to Rush Limbaugh to sink to the most disgusting depths of personal vilification with his attack on Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin.

Rush Limbaugh
Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook

Limbaugh’s daily sermonette was dripping with contempt as he lashed out at Abedin for what he claimed was her effort to “normalize their depravity.” He said that Abedin was making it common and noble to stand by a misbehaving spouse, thereby enabling his misbehavior. And make no mistake, this is not Limbaugh complaining about Weiner. He is aiming his animus directly at Abedin:

Limbaugh: “Huma Abedin is doing everything she can to make sure that women are seen as steppingstones and doormats.”

It takes a truckload of gall for Limbaugh, a drug-abuser who is presently on his fourth wife, to pretend that he has any grounds for lecturing others on morality. Yet that is precisely what he did for much of his radio broadcast today. It is a typical Republican approach to ethics wherein they readily condemn their political foes for behavior they engage in at least as often.

What’s more, conservative hypocrites are all too ready to forgive those on their side of the aisle who stray. That’s why GOP scoundrels like Sen. David Vitter, Rep. Mark Sanford, and even former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, generally remain in their official posts while Democrats have the decency to resign and withdraw from public life for a while. And for some reason, the allegedly “family values” posers on the right frequently abandon their marriage vows, but still have the temerity to complain when Democratic couples succeed in keeping their families in tact. Limbaugh criticized that very aspect of the Weiners’ relationship, suggesting that by preserving their marriage Abedin was demonstrating poor character and weakness. These right-wing freaks actually root for divorce and broken families, but will surely condemn that as well should it occur down the road. Nothing irks them more than the fact that Bill and Hillary Clinton stayed together, raised their daughter, and continue to support one another.

Not surprisingly, Limbaugh couched his obnoxious assault in starkly political terms. In doing so he managed to prove that he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. He sneered that his interest in these matters was because “feminism is a political arm of the Democrat Party” (which is a plus for Democrats), and that Democrats condone the sort of activity that Weiner has engaged in. Of course, the truth is that no one is more critical of Weiner than his fellow Democrats and certainly not one has come close to condoning anything he did. But Limbaugh’s demented political perspective goes even further to entirely slip the bounds of reason:

Limbaugh: “I don’t want to ever hear another word about a Republican War on Women, because Democrat women are doing more to set women and whatever causes they might have back to the Dark Ages.”

Apparently, Limbaugh thinks that the “War on Women” has something to do with marital infidelity. Obviously it does not. When Democrats accuse Republicans of conducting a War on Women, they are referring to the GOP’s overt opposition to issues that women support and that directly impact their freedom and well being. Republicans, as a group, oppose equal pay for equal work; they voted against the Violence Against Women Act; they fought allowing women soldiers into combat roles; they resist laws mandating gender equality in the workplace; and they don’t trust women to make reproductive decisions about their own bodies. That’s what the War on Women is, not some personal melodrama. But Limbaugh can’t understand this. He complains that Democrats are “making a mockery of women” by staying in nurturing relationships with them instead of casting them aside. And then he let’s loose this tirade boasting that Republicans are somehow superior in their treatment of the women they regard as inferior:

“It’s not us using them. It’s not us chewing ’em up and spitting ’em out. It’s not us making fools of them. It’s not us disrespecting them. It’s not us doing any of this stuff. Not as a political party.”

Actually, Rush, it is you. It is you and your party that belittles and suppresses women. It is you who disrespect them. Ask the former Mrs. Giuliani, or the former Mrs. Sanford, or the several former Mrs. Gingrichs, or any of your own cast-offs, if they feel as if they were chewed up and spit out. Then ask Huma Abedin how she feels about you disparaging her character and passing judgment on her decision to work on and repair her marriage for the sake of herself, her husband, and her infant son.

Limbaugh began this broadcast saying that he “didn’t ever want to hear another word about a Republican War on Women.” Well, I don’t ever want to hear another word about Republican family values. At least not from neanderthals like Limbaugh who clearly do not value families.

[Update] Not to be outdone, Fox News hosted right-wing radio talker Michael Graham to bash Abedin. He rabidly pronounced that she is “even worse” than Weiner.

Fox Nation Hypes Ted Nugent’s Unhinged Promotion Of A Chicago Boycott

Posted by on July 24, 2013 at 10:56 am. 4 Comments :

The cognitive dysfunction at Fox News sometimes gets so severe that it’s hard to believe they aren’t satirizing themselves. The latest example is an article on their community web site, the lie-riddled Fox Nation, that features Ted Nugent retching up another of his repugnant rants.

Fox Nation Ted Nugent

In order to advance the argument that it is somehow improper for celebrities to take a principled stance against the “kill at will” law (aka stand your ground), the Fox Nationalists recruited their version of a celebrity, the washed-up schlock-rocker, Ted Nugent. True to form, Nugent, who is also a board member of the National Rifle Association, let loose a tirade that was filled with his signature bombast and ignorance. His tantrum was centered on his apparent disgust for free speech and civil activism.

“[Y]ou can pretend by boycotting a single city with a stand your ground law that somehow you don’t have to boycott Chicago, where 700 people are slaughtered every year because they’re not standing their ground.”

It’s surprising how much idiocy can be drawn from that brief statement. Let’s start with the observation that Nugent doesn’t know what a boycott is. Those who are not intellectually impaired know that a boycott is an organized effort to influence policy or behavior that is objectionable. Therefore, a boycott of Florida aimed at persuading the state’s legislators to amend a law that is racist and exacerbates violence, could be an appropriate course of action that might achieve the desired result. But who is it that Nugent is proposing to boycott in Chicago? The behavior that he objects to is that of criminals who are not very likely to be swayed by tourists refusing to visit the city.

Then Nugent takes note of the high murder rate in Chicago and seems to be utterly unaware of situation on the ground. He thinks that the victims generally were harmed as result of their not being well enough armed to defend themselves. However, a majority of the shooting deaths in Chicago are gang-related. That means that in most circumstances both the shooter and the victim had access to lethal weaponry. Any sane observer knows that the problem in Chicago is not an absence of firepower, it’s an obvious over-abundance.

In many ways Chicago is a model of the NRA-theist utopia where everyone has a gun and the streets are rife with old west style shootouts. In effect, everybody is standing their ground and the result is a landscape of corpses. That’s what Nugent and his NRA cronies lust for, and Florida is seeking to become. Trayvon Martin, whom the nauseating Nugent called a “dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe,” is the tragic progenitor of this dystopian worldview. Nugent would do us all a favor if he would keep the promise he made over a year ago when he said that he would be either “dead or in jail” by now.