Rush and women

Yesterday I watched and listened to Rush Limbaugh give his speech to the faithful of CPac. Since it was covered by FOX, he jokingly announced that it was his first address to the Nation and later on he called it his first International address, slyly noting that he was not using a teleprompter. I can remember when I'd turn off the radio if he came on but that was when there was a Democratic Party that I could identify with.

Full of himself with his usual bravado, the big guy seemed really nervous and coughed a lot. Like most of us he is much more confident alone behind his radio mic but despite all that he was his usual megaphone self, blasting away at the current administration and rallying the Conservatives to take back the country.

As he spoke, I was remembering his nasty misogyny, recalling a list of them I'd just read in a blog. Strangely, they didn't seem much when compared to what we endured during the Primaries from people who claimed to be Democrats, just like us. Damn, this is getting confusing. What happened to that Party? It picked up the values I shared and slammed them into the crapper.

Rush did a great job of slapping down current Democrats in power but came nowhere near in nastiness, to what Frat Boy-speech-writer did to Hillary. I've seen just as nasty stuff against Democratic women from the Obama crowd and written in our women's blogs. This was a favorite, oft repeated and never, never denounced by Democratic leadership, [even the women].

'Never Trust Something That Bleeds Five Days A Month And Doesn't Die."

Whatever you may think of Rush, he is consistent. He's the same nasty boy wisenheimer , whether his Party is in power or out. A stark contrast to the mealy mouthed mavens of the MSM and Dem Talk. There was no tingle up my legs listening to Rush - just bewilderment that Democratic perfidy has surpassed his record for vileness.

I believe I'm on the road to recovery - but still am unable to stomach those who betrayed my trust at AARadio - that was supposed to be representing all Democrats and their values. Sadly, what made Air America attractive was that it attacked the villainous Republicans. We were surprised and devastated when it attacked Hillary. Why did we let the Rachels, Thoms, Randis, Steph and her boys manipulate us that way? More to the point and more honestly, why did we allow ourselves to be manipulated?

Like many others, if the blogs are to be believed, I am just another person without a political affiliation. The internalization of that fact was what gave me the freedom and the wisdom to listen to Rush and others who mostly do not represent my political views. No, I didn't become a fan of his nor did I instantly put on the GOP, glorious, shining mantel of ... but hold on. Those shiny robes are now worn by the Glorious one, the Precious one who represents the Party opposed to Rush.

And women's votes put him in those robes and keep him there with their adoring cries. Even some who do not worship him are quick to forgive because he appointed women or mentioned support for health care, education etc. Is this just another example of the way women are conditioned to return to their abuser? We see it every day as battered women bring their children into a help center and then recant and return to the bastards that beat the shit out of them.

Sure women think they are free, liberated from the confines of the past and escaped from the dictates of society.
But the more liberated they think they are the more they mold themselves to men's fantasies thus validating them. It takes real courage to be free. So far most take the safest path and return to their abuser who promised to bring flowers of health care or reproductive freedom.

Rush, for all his warts, is The Man, a universal symbol of women's continued acceptance of her oppression. A big old piñata for them to hit with their sticks of hatred and feel they are winning their birthright while ignoring the clanging shackles put on them by a punishing society they support out of ignorance or fear.

But there is hope. Women who have finally recognized how our society conditions them and have pulled themselves free of its disastrous evils are showing what a morass of tradition they were tangled in. More and more of our daughters are DEFINING THEMSELVES AS WOMEN. They are throwing aside the traditional roles of doormat, prom queen, worker bee, sex doll [3 aps, count them!] and punching bag.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Hunh?

"For all his warts"?

Did you just give notorious misogynist Rush a nice juicy minimized free pass?

"We see it every day as battered women bring their children into a help center and then recant and return to the bastards that beat the shit out of them."

Did you just victim-blame?

Say it isn't so.

Reporter to Mahatma Gandhi: What do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi to reporter: I think it would be a good idea.

no, no, no

to your 1st. 3 questions and read jjmtacoma's post below for what you appear to have missed.

I'm a bit lost on this one, too n/t

.

Rush doesn't have warts

Rush has cysts. Let's try to keep these things straight.

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Interesting way to put this...

I did not catch the victim blaming here, it seemed that twandx was noticing that Rush, for all his disgusting crap, wasn't any worse than the crap women got to hear from the left this past year. Oh, and, they were supposed to be on our side!

Maybe the example of abuse victims returning to the abuser was objectionable as a comparison to women who stayed with or returned to the Democratic party? I don't think our lives are in immediate danger, so maybe the extreme example draws fire.

What happened was more along the lines of "don't worry your pretty little head about this complicated stuff" than an actual beating.

When somebody hits you, you know you got hit. When somebody just insults you, well, that one is subject to opinion and maybe we are just too sensitive. Right? They can always walk that back and say we didn't understand the context.

Thank you, jmtacoma

You obviously read the article all the way through.

Not so others who pick out lines and words as if those were all there was. That sort of jump reading leads to not understnding, and worse, not wanting to understand - just a desire to pick imagined scabs.

I would add that my analogy of the beaten woman going back to her abuser was meant to suggest that women have been abused in a sense by the Democratic Party but some just keep coming back to suffer more abuse. I was not suggesting death although that could be a result of campaign promises not kept for some women.

Again, my thanks

No, what this is is boosting Limbaugh

for not being more horrible than Favreau.
Eye of the beholder.

I spit upon the notion that anything that fat drug addled pusbag spews is worthy of an instant's attention.

Asking me to think that the Democratic party is worse than Limbaugh is an insult.


We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

1 John 4:18