Let me start by saying that I like and respect Kirsten Powers. She is still officially the News Hounds “Best in Show” for her courageous confrontation with Megyn Kelly for using the bogus New Black Panther Party “controversy” to turn President Obama into a “scary black man.” But, unfortunately, I can’t find anything positive or constructive about Powers’ decision to jump into the Limbaugh/Fluke fray with a gratuitous attack on the left.
Powers is both a Fox News analyst and a Daily Beast columnist. On Sunday (3/4/12), she wrote a Daily Beast column called Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist. In it, she argued, as The Daily Beast summarized, that “liberals who led the charge (against Limbaugh) need to start holding their own side accountable.”
In the first place, I think it’s a false equivalency to compare, as she does, Bill Maher’s comments about Sarah Palin (he called her a “dumb twat,” a “bimbo,” “boob,” the c-word, etc.) with Limbaugh’s multi-day attacks on Sandra Fluke. For example, Limbaugh said, “Who bought your condoms in sixth grade?” on the same day he called her a “slut” and a “prostitute.” On another day, he said, “So, Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here’s the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it, and I’ll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.” He also said, Fluke was “having so much sex, it’s amazing she can still walk,” and “She’s having sex so frequently that she can’t afford all the birth-control pills that she needs”. He accused her of being “an anti-Catholic plant from the get-go on this.” This kind of talk went on for three days before Limbaugh issued his less-than-convincing apology over the weekend.
I’m not here to talk up the c-word or Bill Maher. But there’s a difference between a casual utterance – no matter how offensive – and a tirade of misogynistic accusations. Moreover, Palin and the other conservative women named by Powers as victims of liberal misogyny: Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and Hillary Clinton – are all public figures who make a living putting their views before the public. With the exception of Clinton, their stock in trade is hate mongering. They’ve all given as good as they got. Sandra Fluke, on the other hand, is a law student who testified before Congress for what she sees as a need for contraception coverage in health insurance. Yes, she may be an activist but she’s hardly the kind of person who frequents and slugs it out in the political arena.
But most importantly, the outrage at Limbaugh is about hate speech. Let’s face it, hate mongering is what makes Limbaugh Limbaugh and there’s no liberal counterpart. It’s not about a dropped C-word or an occasional “dumb twat” any more than it’s about “slut” or “prostitute.” It’s about Limbaugh's over-the-top tirades of unmitigated hostility aimed at his political foes.
Let’s say, at least for the sake of argument, that Powers has a valid concern. I don’t like hate mongering or misogyny no matter who the recipient is. But what is the point of attacking the left in a situation where even Powers agreed that the outrage is justified? What we need is a national discussion about what’s acceptable rhetoric and what isn’t. Accusing the left of hypocrisy just gives Fox News an excuse to change the subject to more attacks on the left.
Sure enough, that’s exactly what happened yesterday on Fox. Powers got at least two appearances on Fox where she willingly participated in an “attack-the-left-over-Limbaugh” discussion. During the day, on America Live, in a segment FoxNews.com gleefully called, “Liberal columnist says ‘double standard’ in attacks on Rush”, the discussion quickly (and predictably) turned into an attack on Maher. Host Megyn Kelly (she of the scary black man meme) said she found it “interesting” that “none other than Gloria Steinem goes on his show and doesn’t confront him about it.” Who did? Ann Coulter. “Why do they get away with it when somebody like Rush does not?” Kelly asked. As if Limbaugh has not gotten away with it for all these years.
Powers argued that the reason for the double standard is that the outrage is more about politics than offense. Liberals “see an opportunity,” she and Kelly agreed. And conservatives don't? It happens on Fox News regularly. Has Powers missed that?
Later, on Hannity, FoxNews.com called Powers’ segment, “Left’s war on women.” Sean Hannity announced “there is a glaring double standard” in the media. “Tonight we thought we’d remind you of some of the disgraceful rhetoric that the left has used when talking about women on the right side of the political spectrum.” To “balance” Powers, she appeared with African American Tea Party pundit, Deneen Borelli. Borelli added her own examples of being vilified by the left. “It’s a huge double standard,” she complained and immediately suggested that somehow President Obama is at fault. “President Obama is bringing the country down to the dim light of the valley,” she said, comparing him to Reagan’s vision of America as the “shining city on the hill.”
Powers said “all of the pro-Obama people” thought it was “fair game” to go after Hillary Clinton during the 2008 campaign with sexist attacks and misogynist attacks. “What you see is that they stand up when it suits them,” Powers said.
Perhaps she's right about the left's self-serving outrage. But the thing is, Powers somehow overlooked the kind of below-the-belt personal attacks that go on over at Fox News every day, especially on Hannity’s shows. Here are just a few examples:
Curtis Sliwa said on Hannity & Colmes that he wanted a bat to go after Rosie O’Donnell “like a human piñata.” Do you think Hannity objected? Or how about Hannity promoting Donald Trump’s birtherism, even after Obama presented the long-form birth certificate? Or what about Hannity’s pal, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, saying that “most blacks” in Tennessee are racists? Just a few days ago, Ann Coulter announced on the Hannity show that Ted Kennedy deserved to be called a “pile of human excrement” when he died. No objection from Hannity about that! Recently, Hannity praised Hank Williams, Jr. for refusing to apologize for calling President Obama "the enemy."
And speaking of misogyny, Bill O’Reilly recently mimicked Limbaugh’s tactics by painting Fluke as a slut but just not coming out and saying so.
Powers said she thought President Obama should give back Bill Maher’s $1 million donation. So I ask, how on earth can she justify accepting money from Fox News?
I'll reiterate my respect for Powers and I'll add that I think her concern about speaking out against sexism is genuine and well intended. But, as the saying goes, the road to you-know-where is paved with good intentions. It's hard to see how attacking the left at a time when they are indisputedly right (pardon the pun) - and on Fox, no less - leads to anywhere good.
Once again, this seems a great time to re-embed Jon Stewart’s “Special Victim” segment in which he highlighted the hypocrisy of Fox News pundits complaining about a double standard. I hope Powers sees it, too.
You would have thought it was like they were saying the f-word. Too funny … also embarrassing.
So you’re calling people names because they support people who call people names?
That’s some outstanding right wing nut “logic” right there!
Do you know what courage it took to accomplish that for a little boy?
He’s lower than whale poop, and he is getting what he deserves.
I don’t know anyone on the left saying that it’s okay for Bill Maher to make nasty comments about Sarah Palin or anyone else. And the whole David Letterman thing was something he apologized for, on the air. As for Ed Schultz making a nasty comment about Laura Ingraham (who herself has been openly nasty to people), he apologized both on the air and in a phone call to her the day he did it. He also took himself off the air. Essentially, he lost his temper and acted badly – he admitted it, and both he and Ingraham moved on.
In the case of Rush Limbaugh, it’s not just that he called Sandra Fluke names. And it’s not just two words. He did rant after rant about her for days, even after he knew he was in the wrong. He only offered a token apology over last weekend when his advertisers began jumping ship.
If anyone is having an issue with their ideology taking precedence over their morals, Rush Limbaugh would be a good place to start. I’d argue that Bill Maher would also fall into the same category.
It’s just sad that Fox News and Limbaugh are trying so desperately to spin this situation into something else. This is akin to when Limbaugh insulted and imitated Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s Disease symptoms, or when Limbaugh called anti-war Iraq veterans “phony soldiers” and then tried to hide behind Jesse MacBeth. It would do Rush Limbaugh a world of good to simply own up to the things he’s done and to humbly apologize for his behavior. Not try to justify himself or say that he picked the wrong words. Not try to say that he was “using the tactics of the left”. But to do the right thing, the honorable thing, the human thing and just say that he was wrong, admit it and move on.
One more question for those conservative hypocrites, Rush was caught a number of years ago arriving in the Bahamas with a bag of drugs which including Viagra now I am wondering who paid for those pills Rush you or your insurance company. You guys seem to frame all issues in a format which misleads most viewers or reader to believe your forgone conclusions. Try telling the unabridged true for once and see what happens
I still find the word objectionable myself, and agree Limbaugh should be roundly condemned, but this does mitigate things slightly. And to try to defend a real misogynist like Maher on the grounds that he’s not as bad as somebody who used a word feminists themselves have used, is just nutty.
Powers, give her credit, actually cares about this issue, and doesn’t like seeing women run down no matter who’s doing it. That’s a far cry better than people who only care about the issue in so far as it helps win them elections.
In the case of Bill Maher, I don’t know anyone that spends much time watching his show. He’s known for being unpleasant, which makes his show one to miss. I do think his comments about Sarah Palin are fairly nasty, and I don’t think he’s ever owned up to them. But I also think it’s a cheap shot to tell the President to return a campaign donation to a Super PAC just so that Fox News can have the satisfaction of messing with him. (This is the same mentality that drove the whole Christmas break mess in December)
In the case of Limbaugh, there is a clear and repeated pattern of outrageous and obnoxious behavior. And in this case, it became so repellant that his own sponsors began leaving him – and that was the only thing that prodded him to any statement. He didn’t apologize for that entire tirade. He just said that two words were badly chosen. That’s not an apology.
It’s further infuriating that Bill O’Reilly is trying to dare Sandra Fluke onto his program where he can presumably ambush her for his own aggrandizement.
That’s devoid of meaning. Personally, I don’t know anyone who watches him – let along likes him or his humor.
Compare Boss BlunderRush to Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. What have they ever said that they have had to apologize for?
I just found that servicepeople E-3 and under make so little that they pay very little if any at all in the way of taxes. So I suggest this headline.
“Republicans Tell Military Amputees – Stop Complaining About Entitlements And Get Some Of Your Own Skin In The Game.”
There. No Name calling. So this should be just fine with them.
Clarify: Conservative shock jock to 2012 presidential candidates. Seriously, Stewart’s rip of this is already up, and he nailed it there. He can pull up the left condemning the left, but in a case like Limbaugh where the outrage should be universal… IOKIYAR.
The small amount of outrage from the right seems to be “we’re all upset, move on!”- even though many of these same people brayed about liberal line crossers for close to a month each count.
Like Ellen said, Maher and Schultz aren’t comparable to what’s being done to Fluke. One casual utterance in which both sides were outraged does not compare to three days of constant attacks, which are condoned and supported by everyone from a local shock jock living in Frogs Balls, whatever state to presidential candidates.
Even the few conservatives who condemned Limbaugh, like Baher’s panel? They weren’t nearly as concerned with him as they were slut shaming Fluke… “well, I wouldn’t use his words, but he had a point, she is…”
NO- no no no no no no NO! You don’t get on your high horse for a liberal misogynist, then say a conservative misogynists only mistake was his choice of words. You condemn Beck the same as Schultz for their words, Limbaugh same as Maher for their viciousness, Sanford the same as Weiner for their lies.
Granted, she should have had the numbers at hand, given that this wasn’t her first time on the show, but she was so flustered by that moment that the point is nearly moot.
There’s also an additional issue – Hannity and O’Reilly tried to hide behind the fictional notion that Limbaugh made a mistake, immediately apologized and should be allowed to move on. Except that Limbaugh didn’t just make a mistake – he made a consistent series of nasty statements – and it wasn’t just two words. He did not once, not twice, but so many times that it goes far beyond just a mistaken use of two words. And he didn’t immediately apologize. He spent the rest of the week doubling down on the attacks. It was only when his sponsors started to back out of his show that he realized he couldn’t get away with it this time. So he did a “limited hang-out mode” apology to try to minimize the damage.
As for Bill Maher, I’m forced to agree that his comments are terrible – and that the slams on Palin are indefensible. And I don’t know that he’s ever apologized for this. Yes, he’s talking about a public figure, but he shouldn’t be talking about anyone in that manner.