The Somewhat False Equivalency of Bill Maher & Rush Limbaugh
Just as Rush Limbaugh has his many detractors, he has his many supporters, and almost in a chorus, those supporters have spent the last couple of days arguing that the other side says horrible things about women, too, but never seem to face this kind of tidal wave of public criticism.
Their case in chief: Bill Maher.
The argument is not entirely without merit. Maher is one of a class of political pundits whose various hang-ups about women frequently leak into their commentary. It’s not that hard to talk about the many flaws of Sarah Palin without employing the word “cunt.” Or to debate the merits of Michele Bachmann without calling her a “bimbo.” Maher’s never been able to make that leap. (Remember, this is the guy who opined back in 1993 that “though claiming to be feminists, don’t many women – when it suits them, when it’s convenient – retreat back to their pre-feminist role of manipulating men through helpless, deferential behavior?”) And while it’s incorrect to claim that Maher is never criticized for his more outrageous comments by the feminist movement in general, it’s accurate to say that high-profile Democratic and progressive women have been somewhat reluctant to call him on those statements.
At the end of the day, though, it’s comparing a rotten crab-apple to a rotund, mealy orange.
Rush Limbaugh is on hundreds of radio stations across the country and, thanks to the government, around the world, three hours a day, five days a week. Bill Maher has weekly one-hour show on a paid cable station for between 20 and 30 weeks a year.
Maher hasn’t been around as long as Rush, doesn’t have the cultural reach, and doesn’t hold himself up as the Grand Poohbah of an entire political movement – all of which makes him a much smaller target.
Just as a functional matter, his place on HBO, with no sponsors to contact and no recourse other than to cancel their service, limits that type of action the public can take to hold him to task for offensive comments (a fact Maher was quick to point out in his most recent episode of “Real Time.”)
It completely wrong to say that the “elite liberal media” has given Maher complete cover over the years. Keep in mind that the main reason Maher is on HBO is because of public pressure after comments he made on his ABC show, Politically Incorrect. On the September 17, 2001 broadcast, talking with Dinesh D’Souza, he said: “We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it's not cowardly.”
Sponsors pulled their support and affiliates began dropping him. Maher went on an apology tour that allowed him regain his footing and stay on the air through the end of the season. ABC dropped him in 2002, ostensibly because low ratings, but more likely due to the controversy and subsequent difficulty in finding sponsors.
One of the people who spoke in Maher’s defense that fall was Rush Limbaugh. “In a way, he was right,” Limbaugh said on his show in response to a comment over how Maher was likely to be fired after the controversy. “To get canned over this – it’s strange. What is the title of the show? It’s called ‘Politically Incorrect.’”
Yesterday, Maher sort of repaid the favor, posting on Twitter: "Hate to defend #RushLimbaugh but he apologized, liberals looking bad not accepting. Also hate intimidation by sponsor pullout."
In fewer than 140 characters, Maher summed up the problem of on-air controversy and the solution: you can’t really “apologize” for basing a good part of your lucrative career on casually denigrating an entire gender, gender bashings is not so much a “liberal” issue as a “human” issue….and contacting sponsors to say this is not the type of attitude that should be rewarded or funded is pretty much all the general public can do voice their displeasure.


Salon.com
Comments
Frankly, I've been expecting Rush to self-destruct long ago. Since you opened up the wonderful world of metaphors with this -- "At the end of the day, though, it’s comparing a rotten crab-apple to a rotund, mealy orange" -- I hope you'll permit me a couple. In my neighborhood, we call Rush's over-reaching "stepping on your dick", but in his case I don't think that's possible. For him, this is more a case of him"getting his tit caught in a wringer".
Wonder if he'll have Rush on anytime soon?
Can't stand them both , but dislike Maher even more.
So, if anything this overblown broo ha ha has shown that women are willing to accept bad behavior from people they "like" but want to crucify those they don't. It has been the women who have made this into a circus, and you know what, the issue Fluke was raising awareness of has been lost. No one is discussing it since she has become nothing but a political pawn in an election year. Sorry ladies but look for your rights heroes at people doing it without trying to get a book deal and on talk shows to keep saying how wronged she was.
He really could be funny, until he started huffing GOP right wing ass candy... Now, he's just as vapid and vacuous as the best of the right wing. He loves to play victim, and finds his new found 'humor' just hysterical...
He thinks that he is 'misunderstood' and is going to 'make it big' just any day now... Yeah, Dennis... Don't quit your vainglorious day job. At least you have a very small group of people that will listen to you.
And then there's Victoria Jackson... Who knew she was really that mental when she worked at SNL...
Maher is a punk. He is a slightly refined version of the turd slinging Limbaugh's, Hannity's and O'Reailly's of the right wing. The biggest difference is that Maher thinks he's a lefty. He's not as left as he thinks...
he could hope to draw in the independents who do not read, partake in political debate or other exchanges. He thinks that it does not matter if he is right or wrong, but to build the slam against progressives and maintain his spokesman-like status for the unspoken for right, his dumb heads, aka Ditto heads, which are a demagog's dream.
Each of these arbiters of low to middle brow intake are there for those who like to hear the beat, music, for the lyrics that are to be yielded in their ready to be amused heads. Maher is often right on in his attacks of Palin, Bachman and the posers that he targets, most of whom are bumbling men. Lowbrow went way beyond the scale for even this carnival barker for the Repubs, not content with his criticism, but to make it wholesale water cooler stuff. It is obvious that he wants to continue to create a name for himself, whether it is right or wrong. Maher would never intentionally hurt an innocent person the way this character has. I will give you that Maher has made the wrong move, in a stage sense -- but it ends there. The other one is his own cartoon for fierce incivility and bad taste.
So, if anything this overblown broo ha ha has shown that women are willing to accept bad behavior from people they "like" but want to crucify those they don't."
Just remember Bill Clinton: adultery, lying, sexual deviancy, taking advantage of interns in the White House: N.O.W. defended him the entire time and called his accusers Trailer Trash. If they have a "D" after their name, they can call women cunts, if they have an "R" after their name, they are not allowed to say a thing.
This is exactly the kind of reasoning that keeps minority victims of a democratic republic right where they are....felling sorry for themselves and without the courage of independent thinkers like Herman Cain.
The fact that Open Salon put this article on their front page says volumes about their journalistic integrity and their associative timidity in the face the the big bad bugaboo of political correctness.
C'mon over to a real debate forum and let's see if you have the courage much less the facts of your conviction.
http://www.politicaljack.com/forums/forum.php
Here's the way I look at it. It's somewhat easier to tolerate boorish behavior from a person you don't viscerally despise. I'm sure Maher is a little prick, but Limbaugh is an infected pustule on the anus of humanity. (Kind of like the condition that got him out of serving in Vietnam.)
JMac
JMac
damn that's funny.
I also agree with previous posters who said that Maher is occasionally very funny whereas Limbaugh isn't.
The main distinction for me is that Maher went after public figures in his attacks on Palin and Bachman. Limbaugh, on the other hand, went after Fluke, a private citizen who had asked to address a congressional committee to speak out about women's health care concerns. Limbaugh's attack lasted 3 days and he unleashed 53 different slurs against Fluke. Maher's attacks were like sniper fire whereas Limbaugh's attacks were like a nuclear bomb.
For a comparison of Fluke's testimony vs. Limbaugh's comments, see the following link:
http://t.co/y2Nlw1il
Maher should get no passes for his on air misogamy. You want to do stand up comedy, fine. You want to do political commentary, then using words like "cunt" have no place in the discourse.
I pay as little attention to Maher as I do to Limbaugh, and that's going some. As far as I'm concerned, they're both obnoxious, ill-informed, pretentious blowhards.
Women politicians and national figures are all subjected to sexist abuse online and in the media routinely -- check out the sexists things said about Pelosi, Clinton, Boxer et al -- including comments made by "mainstream" commentators and, over the years, people like Matthews and Maher -- as well, of course, about high profile Republican women like Palin and Bachmann. (Research the obscene tee shirts featuring Hilary Clinton that have sold so briskly at CPAC and other conservative confabs over the years -- they're real eye-openers).
For the most part sexist and off color comments about women -- of any political persuasion -- AND the objections raised to them by feminist and others -- simply don't cause a stir in the media. Why? 1. Because they are so routine, and 2. because feminist viewpoints, especially their complaints ABOUT the media, don't get much airing IN the media.
another angle you havent considered. bill maher is a lover of women based on those he dates. its an interesting list. most interesting on that list, perhaps, is a remarkable woman named karrine steffans who coincidentally has a blog on here [bill maher did too for awhile-- I wish he would reactivate it!]. if you want a wild story, look up the history of karrine steffans. she seems to have faded from the public limelight last few yrs, but years ago had a huge cultural impact.
While this method worked to get an apology out of Rush, it may not be so pleasant if companies choose to pull funds next time.
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/listeningpost/2012/03/201239101841433193.html
While I don't resort to name calling, if I ever did, I would call Maher a dictator, leaving out the second syllable.
The point is Rush is the de facto leader of the GOP and Maher is a comedian who doesn't speak for a party. The other point is it's hilarious watching the low IQ ideologues of the Right trying to find an equivalence beyond that they're both personalities with audiences. If the Right doesn't like being criticized, they should grow adult brains. Their "leaders" have adolescent minds, implying their followers do as well.
If that isn't true, why the constant display of Neener-Neenerism?
Since I am neither a democrat or republican nor conservative or liberal, I find them both pandering hate mongers. They both use stereotypes, blanketed bigoted statements cloaked in humor and sell it as enlightenment. Both claim they are open minded and the other is closed minded. Both are selling is fear that plays to the base them/us mentality that has caused this massive gridlock in every level of government and society. Maybe the only good they are both doing is convincing the middle majority that a third party is the answer for the future not the same old tired political hate from both parties.
rate
http://news.yahoo.com/why-bill-maher-different-rush-limbaugh-190700842.html
There is nothing wrong with intimidation by sponsor pullout. It's about the only way that the public can voice disapproval of media content. It's a result of free speech.