A Tale Of Two Opportunists: Sandra Fluke And Rush Limbaugh

I would like to take this time to share my thoughts on the controversy between conservative Rush Limbaugh and liberal 30-year old Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke. I will start with Ms. Fluke.

Very simply, Fluke is a hypocrite. In a future edition of one of the most popular dictionaries in the country, I would not be surprised if I opened one up and saw her picture right next to the word “hypocrite.” While liberals like her typically demand that the government (rightfully) stay out of one’s bedroom and womb, she is demanding at the same time that the government pay for birth control and abortions (which is not in the Constitution). If she is not a hypocrite, then no one out of the 7 billion plus people living on earth today is. You either want the government involved in your bedroom or you don’t. Choose wisely; there is no middle ground here.

Besides, she admitted in her testimony that Georgetown’s health insurance does pay for contraceptives if a doctor says that a woman needs it for real medical issues.

No one, I repeat NO ONE, is denying Ms. Fluke contraception. A bill banning birth control nationwide (which has yet to be introduced this session of Congress as far as I know) and a bill reversing the Obamacare birth control mandate (like Missouri Senator Roy Blunt’s amendment) are two very different things. To say that they are the same is like comparing an apple to an orange. Even the Washington Post recently fact-checked the rhetoric of flaming liberals like Chuck Schumer on this issue, calling some of the things they are saying “over the top.”

Why should we, the taxpayers be required to pay for anyone’s birth control, especially one who apparently can afford to attend one of the most expensive law schools in the country?  It’s that sense of entitlement that frankly offends me.

And considering how she seemingly revealed how hurt her feelings were again and again during her self-promotion tour last week on MSNBC, the Today show, and other media outlets, she sure doesn’t seem to mind the fact that Democrats are taking advantage of Limbaugh’s comments  to raise money in order to re-take the House of Representatives this fall. If I were attacked like she was, I would oppose anyone trying to profit off what I endured, even if I agreed with them politically. Where is the outrage towards the Democrats, Ms. Fluke? Or are you just an opportunist?

However, conservatives, I have some criticism for Rush as well.

I do not use the term “slut” or similar derogatory terms towards any woman as my mother brought me up to believe that these words were not only genuinely hurtful but inconsistent with the Golden Rule that Jesus gave in Matthew 7:12. I think Limbaugh blew an opportunity to make a winning argument against Ms. Fluke’s rather misguided opinion by using the words he did. He needs to be called out for that, especially by his listeners. I believe he made those comments purely for entertainment; if he had cared about advocating a position on the feds subsidizing birth control, he should have used other words.

And I am not convinced that Limbaugh was really sorry about saying these words. After all, he apologized three days after he made those comments about Ms. Fluke, as opposed to three hours or even three minutes. During those three days, he lost at least half a dozen advertisers to his show.  I just can’t see the apology coincidentally happening after this loss of advertisers. Unlike many conservatives, I see Limbaugh as an entertainer and not a prophet.

He is forgiven for actions that conservatives, especially social conservatives, gladly criticize the American public for. These actions include abusing prescription drugs, marrying and divorcing multiple times, and indicating an interest in watching pornography (as Limbaugh did when he called Ms. Fluke a slut.) My intention is not to judge Rush personally (as I certainly have my own flaws) but to make a point that whether one is a conservative or liberal seems to have more to do with the “leaders” of each side instead of one’s beliefs in the size and role of government.

Glenn Beck has been receiving a lot of criticism as he recently attacked Sheriff Joe Arpaio for investigating Obama’s selective service paperwork and his birth certificate. Shouldn’t Rush be looking into this as well? Or does he only care about politics? In my opinion, if he genuinely cared about the future of our country, he would give people like Sheriff Joe a platform (but he doesn’t.)

Some might not know that Limbaugh actually endorsed Mitt Romney for President…in Feb. 2008 during the last election. Of course, now he is against Romney. It is possible that Rush genuinely changed his mind about Romney. Just like Romney changed his mind about abortion (and about a million other issues) conveniently, before he started running for president. I think Limbaugh stands to gain by getting involved in the politics of this election as this gains him higher ratings, ratings that surged after Obama was elected in 2008. If he were to back Romney this time around, he would risk losing viewers fed up with big-government Republicanism.

Of course, as a libertarian I do believe in free speech. I do not think Rush should be forced off the air or should end up, in the words of His Holiness Chris Matthews, like the next Don Imus. And I would immediately speak out against any bill introduced in Congress by a Democrat to authorize the FCC (I think that stands for the Federal Censorship committee, right?) to crack down on “offensive” or “degrading” speech, for example.

I am tired of the mud-slinging that both sides do to each other. I am sick and tired of so many partisans from the right and the left acting like children all the time, who end up treating each other in the same manner. A political disagreement with someone does not warrant the use of terms like “slut” towards the person you have the disagreement with. Can’t we just call a spade a spade?