The irony in the Limbaugh situation is, as the author observes, that no one is actually offended. It's a game. She's a liberal... she can ruffle her feathers, strut about and act indignant, but you couldn't find a group that is MORE crass or difficult to offend. It's downright impossible to offend people who believe, essentially, that "it's all good." Anything goes. Morality is an antiquity with no more relevance to modern society than, say, the U.S. Constitution.
As evidence of this, I want to remind you of 2010, when Jerry Brown called his opponent, Meg Whitman, a "whore" http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/meg-whitman-called-whore-jerry-brown-phone-message/story?id=11833112 and suffered *NO* political backlash. Why? It's not because of his heartfelt apology. He didn't apologize, though he DID send a spokesman to do so. The reason there was no backlash was because California is controlled by liberals, and liberals do not get offended by such things.
So, this editorial nails it. Nobody is actually offended by what Limbaugh has done, but everyone must PRETEND that they are - even down to the advertisers who are now forced to pretend concern over the terrible thing Limbaugh said.
He made a gaffe. And a gaffe, as pointed out in this editorial, is when a politicized individual speaks truth.
More's the pity.
March 6, 2012
The Case Against the Case Against Rush Limbaugh
Michael Kinsley
Bloomberg.com
The people who want to drive Rush Limbaugh off the air are not assuaged or persuaded by his apology over the weekend. They say he was not sincere: He only apologized, for calling a Georgetown University law student a “slut” and a “prostitute,” because of pressure from advertisers.
Well, of course he wasn’t sincere. And of course he was only apologizing to pacify advertisers -- who were getting pressured to pressure Limbaugh by these very critics. Oh, there might have been a political calculation, too, that he’d gone too far for the good of his ratings or his celebrityhood. But any apology induced in these circumstances is almost by definition insincere. You can’t demand a public recantation and then expect sincerity along with the humble pie. If they wanted a sincere apology, Limbaugh’s critics would have had to defend his right to make these offensive remarks, and then attempt to change his mind using nothing but sweet reason. Go ahead and try.
These umbrage episodes that have become the principal narrative line of our politics are orgies of insincerity. Pols declare that they are distraught, offended, outraged by some stray remark by a political opponent, or judicial nominee, or radio talk-show host. They demand apology, firing, crucifixion. The target resists for a few days, then caves in and steps down or apologizes. Occasionally they survive, as Limbaugh probably will, but wounded and more careful from now on.
More careful means less interesting. Limbaugh is under no obligation to keep saying offensive things just to keep me entertained. Still, it’s a pity.
Sadness or Euphoria
Of course, the insincerity is on both sides. The pursuers all pretend to be horrified and “saddened” by this unexpected turn of events. In fact, they are delighted. Why not? Their opponent has committed the cardinal political sin: a gaffe.
More: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-06/the-case-against-the-case-against-limbaugh-commentary-by-michael-kinsley.html
Gold is $1,581/oz today. When it hits $2,000, it will be up 26.5%. Let's see how long that takes. - De 3/11/2013 - ANSWER: 7 Years, 5 Months
| 
