That’s how a friend put it, and of course, Limbaugh’s statement has all the concern trolls sighing their self-satisfied sighs.
Ed Driscoll keeps his cool, and issues the clearest talking points, although no doubt hysterics will read “she asked for it” into these and other mature, measured, commonsensical analyses.
I think Rush did the right thing in apologizing to Fluke. However, let’s keep in mind that it was Fluke who made her sexual activity a matter of national political debate by insisting that the government pass laws and regulations forcing employers and insurers to provide her free contraception, and apparently as much as she and others demand.
It’s Republicans who believe that contraception should remain a private affair, and that employers and insurers should be free to decide whether to cover contraception for their employees and customers or not. Democrats used Fluke to demand that those choices be stripped from private enterprises and instead be forced by the executive branch to entirely subsidize contraception.
That is the argument we should be making, as Republicans and conservatives. If you want your sexual choices to remain private, don’t use the government to force other people to subsidize them. Then we won’t have to turn the sex lives of Georgetown law school students into topics for political speculation.
Now fluke is considering suing Limbaugh, but as the broadcasting industry reminds everyone this morning, Fluke made herself a “public figure” and pace NYT v Sullivan (and Hustler Magazine, Inc. vs. Falwell): tough noogies.
Except that Hustler‘s lawyer’s successful defense was that no reasonable person would actually believe that a virginal Jerry Falwell was seduced in an outhouse by his drunken mother.
Whereas… is Fluke a “slut”?
What is a “slut” in the galaxy of Paris Hilton anyhow?
How many penises can dance on the head of a twat before you’re a “slut”?
I thought being a “slut” was something to be proud of just last year, re: all those “slut walks”…
Does anyone have evidence of Fluke praising slut walks or better yet, marching in one?
I do hope “The People vs Zombie Mohammed” goes to the Supreme Court.
But this one?
Not so much, for Rush’s sake, because Fluke could end up with millions of his (our) dollars. As further pointed out by Talker’s legal editor, Fluke’s lawyer might prove “actual malice” in this case:
Alternatively, it also could be considered that Limbaugh’s comments could be considered to be indefensible even using the lower standard presented by the malice test because his comments could be interpreted as having been made with malice – that is he knew they were false – or made with a reckless disregard for the truth. Thus there may be some significant liability on Limbaugh’s part in regard to libelous comments that he made about Fluke.
Limbaugh may argue that his actions were not to be considered as literal and that they were merely hyperbole.
He may also argue in his defense that no one would believe what he said to be accurate which might be a fascinating defense that could ultimately hurt him overall more than losing a defamation claim.
After all, that would “prove” the familiar liberal critique of rightwing punditry:
That the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter don’t mean a word they say and are simply spouting off to get rich.
Anyway, thanks to Talkers.com for reminding us of Brennan’s decision in Sullivan:
…there is a “profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open…”
Anyhow: Rush has lost seven advertisers as of this writing.
I’m re-upping my premium subscription this morning.
And you wouldn’t want to miss his show today at noon, would you?