As he loses advertisers by the handful over his comments about Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh’s supporters (there are a few!) and a few other commentators have found what I guess they believe is a good counter-argument: If you’re so offended by Limbaugh’s sexist, demeaning rants, they why are you silent about Bill Maher?
Some see a clear double standard. Fox News liberal Kirsten Powers wrote a column denouncing the left’s near-silence on the misogyny of Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Matt Taibbi and Ed Schultz. And as one adviser to a Gingrich Super PAC put it, “Did USA Today call advertisers on Bill Maher’s show after what he said about Sarah Palin?”
That would be a pretty good argument if Maher’s commercial-free HBO show had advertisers.
One thing should be clear: Bill Maher has said some awfully offensive things. (He’d likely be the first to point this out to you.) He’s talked about the perils of dating Arab men (“Talk to women who’ve ever dated an Arab man. The results are not good”), called the Qu’ran a “hate-filled holy book” and expressed alarm about the popularity of the name Mohammed in Britain. (“Am I a racist to feel that I’m alarmed by that? Because I am. And it’s not because of the race, it’s ’cause of the religion. I don’t have to apologize, do I, for not wanting the Western world to be taken over by Islam in 300 years?”)
His misogynistic outbursts, many directed at Republican women, are numerous—Sarah Palin is a “dumb twat,” a Fox News anchor is a “blonde twink” and so on. Maher’s comments have provoked controversy, and leading feminists have taken him on over the years.
No sensible person would argue that Maher’s comments aren’t offensive. The real issue here, though, is the attempt to compare Limbaugh to Maher.
Rush Limbaugh (cc photo: Nicolas Shayko/Wikimedia)
On that score, there’s no contest. Rush Limbaugh is a key player in the right-wing media machine, arguably still the most important voice in the conservative movement. Republican politicians—as we saw from the reactions of most of the presidential candidates—are leery of being seen as criticizing Limbaugh. The former head of the Republican National Committee quickly apologized for some critical remarks he made in 2009. Limbaugh’s power in (or over, perhaps) the Republican Party goes way back; he addressed the GOP freshmen who were of the 1994 “Republican revolution” after his tireless promotion of the Gingrich Contract with America.
And Bill Maher…? Well, he hosts a television show on HBO. Politicians appear on it, as do liberal commentators (and more than a few Republicans and conservatives). That is not to diminish the ugliness of his rhetoric or the media power he has. But the two are clearly not in the same business. Limbaugh’s daily commentary on politics is heard by millions, and is part of a Republican messaging infrastructure that includes dozens of other talk show hosts and a national cable news channel.The same cannot be said for Maher. He’s donated a million dollars recently to an Obama Super PAC. Limbaugh’s in-kind donations to the Republican Party are many times greater.
Should people be offended by Maher? Sure. He’d like that. And, of course, he’s not unfamiliar with the concept of losing a media gig over comments that advertisers find toxic. If anything, the right’s frantic, fruitless search to find a Limbaugh of the Left tells you a lot about what kind of media system we have in this country.
Maher GOOD…Limpburger BAD.
See my comments in the following article:
Title: ALL THEM FAMILY GUYS
Link: http://deyanbrashich.com/home/2012/3/8/all-them-family-guys.html
Misogynistic is misogynistic. Uncriticised misogyny of progressives is every bit as detrimental as uncriticised misogyny of conservatives.
The Maher remarks cited here are only offensive to those who are ethically timorous and utterly without the ability to perceive anything except a chance to be offended. I suppose if he were to call Rick Santorum a “dick” he’d be anti-man. The guy — a comedian — was insulting political candidates, and doing what political cartoonists do: Exaggerating obvious features to make a point and create an effect. You may not like that route — it’s ad hominem, but can you imagine comedy without that? — but calling the remarks misogynist is utterly without basis. Similarly, critique of the Koran (or the Bible) on the grounds Maher provided may offend morons, but not thinking people. And talking about what it’s like to date Arab men — or white men, or latinos, etc. — is, like, standard comedy fare.
Matthews, you’re welcome to call him anything you like. Except you called him liberal. That’s just completely insane.
Comic, comedian.. News commentator, bobble head. Not the same.
I’m offended by the overwhelming stupidity of the right. They should not be allowed to carry weapons, drive cars, fly airplanes, or operate heavy machinery of any kind. We can allow them to have shovels as long as they put them down when they finish digging their own graves.
So Bill Maher is just a good old down-home white guy who we like to think is a liberal and not a red neck like Rush Limbaugh. He’s also nothing but a zionist. Maybe your type of guy, but I think the world could get by with a few less like him. http://siratyst.blogspot.com/2010/06/boycott-bill-maher-zionist-apologist.html
Little stories people.A blip on the corner of page 17.Moving on
I don’t pay for HBO, so don’t watch Maher’s tee vee gig. I did, however, watch a DVD collection of his and would agree that his language, is at times, pretty strong. But his stage presence, mannerisms, personality and more are mashed potatoes next to Limbaugh’s ribeye cooked very rare. I recall feeling entertained after watching the Maher DVD. The last time I listened to a Limbaugh gig (on the chief photographer’s radio at the Pennsylvania newspaper where In once worked) I was flabbergasted by the yelling and screaming stage presence of Mr. Limbaugh. Entertainment value? Nada.
Maher is not a “liberal” in the cartoonish Gingrich-defined sense.
He is a self-declared libertarian. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher)
I’m surprised to learn that Maher is supposed to be one of us. Many have commented already that they don’t think he is. A million dollars to the conservative Obama is proof enough for me that he isn’t.
So just who or what is Rush Limbaugh? He’s a provocateur, we all know that. But at different times throughout his 25-plus years as a radio talk show host, Rush has claimed to be an entertainer. He has even sometimes referred to himself as a comedian. On the other hand, Rush has also claimed to be a serious political commentator, a truth-detector for conservatism. He does not dispute that he is an influencer of the Republican Party, and he proudly carries the mantle the right-wing has laid upon him as a spokesman for the conservative movement in this country. So when Limbaugh makes disparaging remarks about Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke, which is he? Is he the lampooning entertainer, or is he the captain of conservatism looked up to by myriad Republicans? Rush can’t have it both waysâ┚¬“not with the type of misogynistic, vile, cruel and possibly slanderous remarks aimed at Ms. Fluke. He can’t claim to be a mouthpiece for conservatives AND be simply an entertainer. If he’s an entertainer, or a comedian, that says to me he’s not to be taken seriously. Does that then mean Rush’s trashing of everything liberal is just a joke, that it isn’t meant to be serious? That would make him a fake, a fraud. Either Rush is preaching genuine conservative philosophy or he’s not. One day it appears he is. But on another day, after criticism pours in about some â┚¬Ã…“over the topâ┚¬Ã‚ commentary of his, Rush always comes back with the excuse that he was merely â┚¬Ã…“entertaining.â┚¬Ã‚ (What, little ol’ me, the Maha Rushie? Nah, I was just kidding. Can’t you libs take a joke?) Well, which is it? When do we know he’s sincere? Was Rush serious when he was belittling Ms. Fluke? Sure sounded like it. Advertisers (some, anyway) certainly seem to think so. They’re pulling their ads. In response to this backlash, Rush has been forced to apologize. He now says he did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke and that he used insulting word choices. I was not expecting that. I fully expected he would revert to his excuse that his bombastic outbursts were simply sarcasm and that he was lampooning to make his point. (Of course, he did make sure not to leave that point out of his apology.) This time, though, it may not work. Because his remarks regarding Ms. Fluke were beyond â┚¬Ã…“over the top,â┚¬Ã‚ that excuse may have just run its course. And his apology may be too little, too late. Never before has Rush experienced this amount of adverse reaction. Advertisers have never been pressured like this to pull their commercials and a growing number of them are courageously responding to that pressure, even after the apology. To be sure, Rush has survived past embarrassment and shame, such as his prescription drug addiction and allegations of sex tourism in the Dominican Republic. He has also come through fairly unscathed following his many previous bigoted, homophobic and sexist rants. But this latest provocative (and perverted) act aimed at Ms. Fluke, in which he actually urged her to post videos of her having sex so he could watch, may well be the beginning of his end. Sorry Rush, but your attempt to be humorous there didn’t quite cut it. Other media folk, as well as comedians and entertainers, have made similar foolish, foul and offensive remarks, and have gotten suspended or fired. Why not Rush? Don’t misunderstand. I’m a First Amendment freak and am against nearly all forms of censorship. I’m not calling for Limbaugh to be taken off the air nor demanding radio stations that carry his program stop carrying it. Rush has a First Amendment right to say what he wants. Just as Ms. Fluke has a First Amendment right to state her views on insurance coverage for contraception. And in a free society, the rest of us have a right to denounce speech that smears. There are repercussions for remarks that clearly cross the lines of decency. Reactions can include protests and boycotts. In Rush’s case, advertisers are reacting in a way they deem necessary. Unfortunately, Republicans are not. Those who have responded have chosen words that fall short of a real repudiation of Rush’s remarks. Rush will later probably want to claim the liberal media is trying to force him off the air. But actually (ironically?), it’s the very principles of freedom of speech and choice that he espouses that may end up doing so.
Tim before I say anything on Rush-are you forgetting something?Want to really go to that place where all conservative woman are personally insulted(including their families)by the left.It goes on everyday.The rule seems to be that that is A –ok.HOW DARE you or anyone on the left believe you have any moral ground on how to speak to woman.You shed that years ago.Rush apologized to his listeners…not you.If he makes a mistake on his show he readily admits it.Maybe what happened here is a good thing.It will force the left to act just as Rush did and apologize for saying something personally insulting.
As far as his show you don’t get it and that is OK.Turn the dial.
What does it say when the comments section provides (hilarie, min-mouth) far more serious, intelligent reaction than the piffle served by the poster, Peter Hart? And that even our resident fascist here, michael e., makes far more cogent points about his love for the American Goering than Hart’s “timorous” blue-blood danydisms? michael e’s basic point, that this alleged “offensiveness” about some fascist stooge’s remarks, words, just pure blather is itself “offensive” in a world of drone-murdered babies, corporate destruction of all forms of life and happiness, dying Rust Belt meth zones, and the dumbest election, on al lsides, since the invention of fire.
FAIR, FAIR, I guess it’s over.
Martin what in anything I have ever written ,said or done in my life ,would lead you to believe that I am in any way a fascist?I just re read the definition of fascist for the um-teenth time ,and for the life of me I can’t see one thing I agree with.That said I think you meant the American Goebbels.As you think Rush is spouting propaganda on your side ,I think that is a better fit.Goering was head of the German air force.I do agree with you that this is such nonsense, in a world of so much pain
Okay, michael e., you have my word, no more “fascist” for you – you’ve done your part to reject the label. Would you like to go with “conservative”? “Constitutionalist”? Perhaps no label is necessary,and you certainly have your detractors here, but you do a real service by coming here.
The difference I find in BIll Maher and Rush Limblaugh is that Bill Maher says most of his crude remarks during his opening or his “comedy” part of his show..once a week. The sometimes crude remarks are really no different from those made, or shown by other comedians, including Jon Stewart, who can get rather graphic sometimes. I don’t think that BIll Maher expects anyone to believe all the things he says – he is just ryingn to make a buck as as stand up comedian during that part of his show. Rush, on the other hand, has a three hour talk show every morning of the week and it is broadcast around the world, and to our arms forces. The things he says are believed by many Republicans and are REPEATED by them as the gospel. I too wonder sometimes why some of his listeners don’t do a fact check on some of the things he says. He is so Republican that he believes that if a Republican is president that he cannot change the price of a gallon of gasoline, whereas, it is the fault of a Democratic president if the price of gasoline goes up….it is his failed policies. I find it obnoxious that he has his Countdown until Obama leaves office. It is rather shocking that Rush has such a huge following since he rants and raves and tells lies. I seldom turn to his dial as I have found that my mornings are much nicer without listening to him. Unfortunately, I heard some of his horrific remarks make about Ms. Fluke. I have also heard what he calls an apology. And, that was no apology. Having a poor choice of words, as Mitt Romney says, doesn’t mean in your heart you are really sorry, and that you have gone too far. Rush needs to get down on his hands and knees and make a real apology before this firestorm stops. That apology should be extended to all young women who want to express their opinions on any of the political issues in our country. On the other hand, I find myself chuckling when I watch the Bill Maher show on Friday nights. He has a very interesting show, where Democrats and Republicans alike are invited to join him at the table following his comedy part of the show…for an enlightened discussion. I do not mind his comments on Christianity, as I am not religious, myself and I actually agree with some of the ones he makes and the problems being religious have gotten us into. I have never thought of Mahen as a Liberal as I don’t think voting for Obama makes one a Liberal. Many of my Republican friends voted for Obama in 2008, and I’m sure they will again in 2012….because, unlike what Rush would like his listeners to believe, and what Maher has pointed out, is that he has made a difference…and is doing a good job. I doubt the Republicans will invite Rush to be one of their convention speakers again, as that would be another one of their plans that wasn’t too well thought out.
Limbaugh is, pure and simple, a right-wing demagogue. A couple of excellent books from the mid-1990s do a great job of exposing him, “The Great Limbaugh Con (and Other Right-Wing Assaults on Common Sense” by Charles M. Kelly, and FAIR’s own “The Way Thing’s Aren’t (Rush Limbaugh’s Reign of Error)” by FAIR’s Rendall/Naureckas/Cohen. I’m not going to try to summarize the excellent job that both books due (I never was any good at writing book reports), but would just recommend anyone interested-in/affected-by Limbaugh to read either of them, with the FAIR book having the easier format.
Maher is first and foremost a comedian, who — by his own admission — has a ‘foul mouth’. I enjoy the humor in his opening monologue and his closing “New Rules”, but I just DVR it and only watch those parts since I’m not a fan of the talk show, even when the host has a lot of the same political beliefs as myself (though he’s more a libertarian than a progressive). His references to fornication are often juvenile, but I DID like the fact that Maher called fellow comedian Jon Stewart to task for equating the amount of right-wing extremists to left-wing extremists in the media of this country back when Stewart/Colbert had their DC rally, though Maher’s anti-Arab/Muslim stuff gets a little stronger than I would propose,. Even there, he was also calling US citizens to task for driving the big SUVs (remember those? When gas was temporarily in seemingly plentiful supply, and people who never get off-road were buying 4-wheel drive vehicles [primarily designed for off-road use] that get 8-12 mpg) because it obviously increases our dependence on foreign [including mid-East] oil), so it’s not like he tries to entirely scapegoat on Muslims. It’s primarily part of it is his anti-religiousness, and he often bashes Christians & Jews as well.
Maher is nowhere near as influential on the left as Limbaugh is on the right – – – it’s like comparing a college football player to a NFL player in terms of the exposure and influence.
For those calling for fair play and punishment for radio talk show hosts, pundits and commentators on both the left and the right because of their offensive remarks, I agree. Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Ed Schulz, Don Imus â┚¬“ they, along with Rush Limbaugh, have all used ugly and distasteful words. None of that, whether from conservatives or liberals, adds to the intelligent and informative discourse we should be having on the pressing issues of the day. But for you folks on the right who feel that left-leaning opinion-givers always get a break — remember that in the cases of Olbermann, Schulz, Imus, as well as David Schuster — all were punished by either being suspended or terminated. And in the case of Bill Maher, don’t forget that before his current “Real Time”show on HBO, his “Politically Incorrect” show was forced off the air for some controversial remarks he made. Remember? As a free speech fanatic, I’m not saying I agree with those actions. But for you folks on the right complaining about an uneven playing field and advocating for equal punishment, well if you want to play fair, then Rush Limbaugh must also, at the very least, be suspended for his reprehensible remarks aimed at Sandra Fluke. That way, you folks on the right can avoid being called hypocrites.
Here’s the problem with Rush Limbaugh: if he’s just an entertainer, and not meant to be taken seriously, then why isn’t he funny? Bill Maher is funny; Rush Limbaugh is not. Why does Rush talk with such an air of impassioned sincerity? Why does he sit on his punch lines, and worry them to death? A good comedian knows you get in quick and get quicker.
Humor relies on astonishment and the unexpected; Limbaugh gives out the same old thing day after day.
Humor also relies on hostility, but the hostility has to be disguised. Rush emanates hostility from every pore.
I tried to get through all of this to be fair but when people write on at great length without a space, a pause, a punctuation, I have to give up. To require readers to slog through word after word and line after line is a very big error for anybody who cares to have their views read. Perhaps, the monitors of this space might suggest a little more attention in the appearance of the written word. I hope Tim and others will pay attention.
As for Limbaugh vs Maher – I recall very little that Maher says that is a mean and nasty frontal attack on a private individual, expressing her outrage at a gross injustice by a panel of creeps. Maher only works over celebrities, politicians and other public figures. The slime sack that is Limbaugh has no such limits on his vile poison.
I call Maher, along with some on MSNBC, Urban Rubes. “Rube” being one of Maher’s favorite, oh so subtle, put downs. He really thinks he’s smart, and all Americans who don’t live in California or the East, (the NE), are stupid. He, himself, says ignorant things, like believing vaccines cause autism. The NY Times uses the term “Hillbilly”, which, oddly, Appalachian folks don’t find amusing. I’d love to introduce Bill Maher to one of my friends in Ashe Co, NC. He’d find them more civilized than he. Certainly kinder. Rachel Maddow on Super Tuesday called two middle class Georgia ladies dressed in spangled red, white and blue dresses, “cob kickers”, and laughed about them on air. Just plain snobbery of the kind that makes so many working class whites turn against the left when it would be to their advantage and to ours to have them on board. Maher and Maddow are too busy having fun at someone else’s expense. Then there are cliche’s about the South, and the self drawn wool over eyes about racism elsewhere. Check out the Southern Poverty Law Center Hate Map. California has pride of place at most hate sites. Most KKK is Michigan. NY and NJ are scary just to look at. Densely packed around with hate, our citadels of liberalism.
During black history month did NPR go to Detroit to talk about transportation of blacks to work? Of course not! Straight to Atlanta went they. Even though Detroit is the most segregated city in the country, followed by Milwaukee and NYC. Detroit is a ring of well off white suburbs around a devastated black core. How do The Help get out to work, I’d like to know next year during Black History Month. And it would be nice to be reminded of Attica and other national burnings of neighborhoods in cities all over the North and West. Watts, for instance. No one white in the North wants to hear about Southern whites like me who were in the civil rights movement. Some whites ask me seriously,”On which side?” African Americans answer “That’s why they called it a movement.” The Times uses “discrimination” or “lack of diversity” for what in the South they call “racist Jim Crow” in regard to the new voting laws Rs are trying to push to limit voting by minorities, the poor, and young folks. If Giuliani had killed an unarmed black man every few weeks in Atlanta….? Mr Cohen of the SPLC told Rev Jackson there was more racism and more hate groups since Obama’s election, especially in NY and NJ, and said you must know that? Blank face. I have no idea what Mr Jackson thought.
Or the country that just won’t come to grips with itself.
Well, Mister Art W. you jammed your last three sentences a little tight, with not the normal amount of space that should be allowed between them.
Your accessment of Limbaugh verses Maher is well written, and is as I view the comparison.
We are a feminist society as surely as we are a capitalist or a Christian one. People are thus quick to see the misogyny in things thanks to a 50 year old program of social sensitization to any and every perceived slight of womankind.. However, I would dare anyone to try and prove that misogyny is any more prevalent in our society that misandry- the hatred and/or contempt of men- or that more derogatory sentiments regarding women find their way into the media than derogatory sentiments regarding men.
April’s right, the Left’s elitism on MSNBC is sickening, and off-putting to those who might tack toward our progessive causes. Notice how MSNBC sticks mostly to social issues, illustrating the idiocy of a certain segment of the Republican Party, which has backwards views on evolution, birth control, library books, and a host of other things. Gleeful and well-educated commentators make mince meat of the yokels and laugh about it. They drive the yokels and ‘rubes” right into the Limbaugh camp, where they are exploited no doubt, but not mocked. Then, notice how Rachel and her ilk stay away from major issues like defense spending, Mideast policy. and corporate influence. MSNBC is brought to you partially be defense contractor GE, partially by conservative Comcast. The folks now behind the mikes have seen Donahue, Arnette, and Olbermann fired, so they know their limits; and, not a single one of them has ever had Professor Chomsky on for a single second. When Chomsky passes on, they’ll talk about him, alright, but they’ll mischaracterize him and make him out to be a loon. Terrible that they won’t let Chomsky speak for himself today. And what did Reverend Al say before he got his new slot over progressive Cynq Unger? “I’m through attacking our President!” Supporting Obama is as far to the left as the MSNBC discourse is allowed to go. What an awful media we in the US have!
It’s impossible to argue that Bill Maher is not a more talented comedian than Rush Limbaugh, just as it’s impossible to argue which one has the greatest media influence (Maher’s one hour a week to Rush’s 15). But regardless of how well aligned in proximity Maher’s politics are with my own, it’s difficult not to recognize that he is still basically a narcissitic demagogue. The symptoms are clear, especially his use of indignant tone to talk over and drown out those guests he disagrees with. Something tells me he privately envies Limbaugh’s influence.
Back during the machismo honeymoon between 9/11 and the Iraq invasion, Maher’s standup included an entire theme dedicated to “the feminization of society”. Everything that was wrong with our country – PC, sensitivity, tolerance, perceived ‘softness’ – was the result of this phenomenon which Maher unambiguously portrayed as a negative element of society. This is beyond a ‘potty mouth’, and is fundamentally misogynistic, comparable to the Muslim societies he enjoys berating. Many of Maher’s views from this time are not well remembered, like the extent to which he gave Bush’s ‘spreading democracy in the Middle East’ the benefit of the doubt (like his friend Hitchens).
I would like to see FAIR dissect the voluminous misinformation provided by Michael Oren on Maher’s show this week concerning Iran. And even though Maher has been a steady beater of that particular war drum, even clearly antagonizing Peter Galbraith for questioning Iran’s offensive strategy, it was a relief to see Maher finally address the West Bank settler issue, an issue that was one of the more glaring omissions in his film “Religulous”.
I devoted a portion of my most recent weekly cable TV station show (video of that full show here; post on relevant part here) to the Limbaugh business, which included this bit on the particular point of the use of name-calling:
Now, it is true that those of us on the left can’t claim we don’t engage in name-calling – consider me, for example – even though our name-calling in many cases would better be called mockery than name-calling.
No matter. The thing is, there is an important difference: When we go after people, it is all but exclusively the famous, the rich, the powerful, while all too often the right goes after people like Sandra Fluke: an ordinary private individual of no particular power or influence of who you would likely still be unaware if Darrell Issajerk had had the minimal brains required to allow her to testify in the first place. The language used by the opposing forces may often enough be similar – but the status of the targets is not.
Maher went after Sarah Palin. Limbaugh went after Sandra Fluke. Yes, that difference matters.
It also seems to me that the focus on Maher reflects the use of two of The Rules employed by rightwingers to avoid debate and responsibility:
Rule #3: When facts are undeniable, change the subject. This can be done in various ways, for example: [snip]
– Apply Rule #4.
Whenever possible, insist that your changed subject is the “real” one under discussion.
Rule #4: Issue a lengthy, ranting denunciation of â┚¬Ã…“the leftâ┚¬Ã‚ of the form â┚¬Ã…“What about…,â┚¬Ã‚ being sure to include the words â┚¬Ã…“hypocritesâ┚¬Ã‚ and/or â┚¬Ã…“hypocrisy,â┚¬Ã‚ thereby arguing that the left can’t legitimately criticize the right, while by using this tactic insisting that the right can continue to criticize the left. (Note: Where possible, include the phrase â┚¬Ã…“you liberals.â┚¬Ã‚Â)
All the talk about Bill Maher is simply an attempt to shift attention away from Rush Limbaugh. Don’t let them get away with it.
Big Em, you forgot Al Franken’s books, Lying liars and the liars that tell them, and Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.
Art W, I get who you are referring to but he is impervious to changing so I just skip over his posts, as they are hard to read, but after reading I realize I could have ignored them just as well., as he said nothing.
Moet, easy Art W is right. Why is that a problem for you anyway?Nothing else to say.
Janson Croley, not true, Maher does not shout down or talk over anyone, you may not have seen the time when a former Congressman, a man, and a right winger, a woman ganged up and rattled off the basic Rethug talking points nonstop about obama is so bad and his policies are destroying Amurca, Maher tried hard to show facts to refute what they were saying, and he couldn’t get a word in edgewise, so you’re wrong there in this episode. I’m sure even you yourself do not live up to yoiur ideals of how things ought to be, so why hold Maher up to standards higher than yours ?
LarryE you said it all in a nutshell, it is a to deflect attention from Limbaugh.
Maher is a comedian, Limbaugh is not, plain and simple.
I think Maher could change his mind if someone reasoned out with him why he my be incorrect, not so Rush.
This is not just a right-wing tradition, but a widespread media tradition. See Kim’s 2001 study on gender roles in popular TV shows called ” rom Sex to Sexuality: Exposing the Heterosexual Script …”
Limbaugh is playing on a very old prejudice that goes back to early modern England, when women in the marketplace were either celebrated as useful eye candy or denounced as tempting, solicitous eye candy. (LarryE, this makes your distinction between rich and poor victims rather unimpressive).
Since it’s not just today’s economic scene that’s to blame, but the traditions from yesterday’s, props to Hart for basing his finger-wagging along based on power, privilege and money.
I also want to commend humanity for its one-two take-out of Limbaugh. The controversy around his sexism stirred the public’s kundalini, and was immediately followed by a campaign to publicize Kony, the “Christian” African warlord Limabugh defended without asking for evidence. Limbaugh has no choice to but to sit on his hands and pass up turning the remaining horniness in the public’s sentiments into profitable mass hysteria.
Thanks for that, john wolfe.
I think the main difference between Limbaugh and Maher is the poeople that are being attacked.Politicians are expected to be criticized and have means of redress, but ordinary citizens don’t. It is that inequaty that makes this so egregious and offensive!
“I would dare anyone to try and prove that misogyny is any more prevalent in our society that misandry- the hatred and/or contempt of men- or that more derogatory sentiments regarding women find their way into the media than derogatory sentiments regarding men.”
Yeah, there are lots of derogatory statements about men in the media, particularly in tv sit-coms. I think there’s more misogyny in the world than there is misandry, but for the sake of this argument, let’s say that there are equal derogatory sentiments about men and women in the media, or even more about men. So what? Men still have more power than women, men still injure and kill women in domestic violence, men still make more money than women, men still rape women, etc. etc…
Many points to be made here but let me make this one:
To quote FAIR from just above: “Bill Maher has said some awfully offensive things.”
I challenge conservatives to find an equivalent statement made about Rush by any of the right-wing media outlets like AIM or FOX.
Paste the link here if they exist.
(And nothing like “some people say. . .” – but a statment speaking for themselves.)
EFK I have not heard any conservative on any level say he should not of apologized. Conversly I have not heard anyone on the left EVER say Bill SHOULD apologize.If you can find anyone asking Bill to apologize please paste it….And nothing like some people say
Very good analysis.
I’ve gone through waves of watching Maher. The show has its moments of being really funny, thought-provoking, and/or entertaining. But I’m simply not drawn to it anymore because 1) so much of the content is just inane or dumb, and 2) the blatant sexism is seriously offensive, and also dumb. It’s also been very frustrating and disturbing to see feminists like Melissa Harris-Lacewell (Perry-Lacewell?) or Laura Flanders as guests on the show and watch as they pull punches in the face of Maher’s comments about women. If those two are treading lightly, you know there are some serious pressures at work. I wish I understood what those pressures were…
@michael e: Here ya go…
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/kirsten-powers-takes-on-bill-maher-his-comments-on-bachmann-palin-are-degrading-to-all-women/
“EFK I have not heard any conservative on any level say he should not of apologized.”
___________________________________
You do realize that not condemning an apology is not the same thing as endorsing it, right? Remember, too, that Limbaugh himself refused to apologize for a couple days.
I have not watched much of Bil Maher. What I have seen, I haven’t much cared for, not that I would censor him for anything. I think he’s probably pretty much to the right of my politics, as is Obama, whom I never thought as much more than a mildly liberal mainstream democrat. But is the distinction between Rush and Maher so simple as one is a political figure and the other simply a comedian, as this article suggests and which so many people have endorsed? I mean, if we dismiss Maher as a comedian, should we dismiss Jon Stewart as a comedian? And Al Franken as well, at least before he became a senator? Does anyone remember seeing that attack on Franken by O’Reilly over Franken’s book “Liars and the Lying lies they Tell” (or something like that–good book by the way)? Fox News tried to blunt the whole discussion by dismissing Franken as a comedian. By doing so, Fox was trying to divert attention away from the content of the book by calling Franken a comedian. In debating circles that’s called “poisoning the well.” (Don’t listen to him; Franken’s just a comedian.) The line between comedy and politics has always been blurred. Will Rogers comes to mind. Some of the best policitcal commentary I’ve seen has been on the Daly Show. So I wouldn’t simply dismiss Maher as a comedian. He’s making political commentary. He may not be so closely identified with any poltical party, as is Limbaugh, but he is still a polticial figure.
Maher is really a hoot, isn’t he? I’ve been expecting for him to do a self-study one of these days, you know, something about his life. I can conceive of something like this: OMG! I’ve been effing a n****r! What a stinky, nasty c**t she is! Use more bleach, use more bleach. If she were to be with child, it would have to be destroyed because of inferior genes! OMG! How did I get into this mess? That is tremendously funny, isn’t it. I’m sure that Palin and others really get a kick out of Maher’s humor.
Rush Limbaugh is very passionate in what he does. I don’t think it’s fair, although I understand, for liberals to call him ignorant, and call all conservative Republicans stupid, because there’s plenty of liberals Democrats that are just as idiotic as their counterpart. Bill Maher, on the other hand, doesn’t really care about politics, I feel. He does what he does, and says what he says, to get a nice check. He is a comedian, although not as funny as his peers like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, but he’s still a comedian. I also feel that Maher is an opportunist…think about that. Anyway, for left-wingers who call the right “delusional hypocrisy,” just remember, you, too, are perceived that way to the bystander: the Moderate American.
Bill Maher is NOT “just” a comedian – and I use that term loosely to describe him. He also donated $1 million to a liberal SuperPAC, so that makes him a major player. I can’t give 1 mil to any political campaign. Can any of you?
Maher has also “joked” about Glenn Beck being shot dead by police. He was not joking about how much better off we all would be if Vice President Cheney had been assassinated in Afghanistan back in 2006. He really is a hate-filled, disgusting human being.
Liberal response? Sheila Jackson Lee ran away from a conservative reporter. Debbie Wasserman Schultz still went on his show – again. And the pundits at MSNBC drool all over themselves every time Maher shows up at that network.
Left-wing hypocrisy, folks. Plain and simple. This column is an epic fail.
CHARLIE HEBDO TERRORIST ATTACK – What have we LEARNED?
Some TOPICS just should be left off the TABLE – PERSONAL ATTACKS and FAITH BELIEFS seems to be two such TOPICS!
Left-Wing-Nuts including Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert and Tina Faye and Right-Wing-Nuts like Rush Limbaugh, are all Guilty of making Personal Attacks and Mocking certain People, certain Groups and certain Faiths!
This type of HUMOR must STOP, and it must STOP now, or more such TERRORISTS ATTACKS are likely to occur!
FACT: BILLIONS of PEOPLE are SICK and TIRED of being MOCKED, by IDIOTS and AZZHOLES like JON STEWART, BILL MAHER, STEPHEN COLBERT and TINY FAYE and RIGHT-WING-NUTS like RUSH LIMBAUGH!
NAAWP STANCE: If you what to tell JOKES and create SATIRE please continue to do so, but PERSONAL ATTACKS and FAITH BELIEFS should be left off the TABLE, because they are not FUNY and quite OFFENSIVE to a lot of FOLKS!
1) http://thedailybanter.com/2014/08/a-defense-of-offensive-comedy/
2) http://www.imdb.com/news/ni58153810/
3) http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/jon-stewart-conan-obrien-charlie-hebdo.html
4) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/media/stephen-colbert-prepares-final-colbert-report.html?_r=0
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION for the ADVANCEMENT of AMERICA – 2015