This option will reset the home page of The Hayride restoring closed widgets and categories.

Reset The Hayride homepage
RSS Feed Facebook twitter

NOW’s War On Rush—Exclusive Hayride Video


Keeping in mind that fools rush in where angels fear to tread, I attended a meeting of the National Organization of Women (NOW) on Saturday that was held in conjunction with the Independent Women’s Organization (IWO).

Maybe I should be getting hazardous duty pay for this job, as I did back in the army when I wondered into perilous territory.

The keynote speaker for the event was NOW President Terry O’Neill, who addressed a fiery feminist-filled room before taking part in a panel discussion titled “Fighting Back of the War On Women, Issues of the 2012 National Election.”

While the NOW gang might believe that the Republican Party is waging a war against the fairer sex, it’s clear who’s in their cross-hairs—-Rush Limbaugh.

The feminazis—as Limbaugh likes to call them—are smelling blood in the water in the wake of the talk show host calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” and other rancorous remarks delivered from his “golden EIB microphone”—which he has apologized for.

Fluke is the Georgetown law student working on a $100,000 degree who testified in front of Congress that taxpayers should pay for her extracurricular sexual escapades.

Some of Limbaugh’s advertisers have ended their association with him because of the Fluke fracus and a couple of radio stations have dropped his show.

As soon as O’Neill moved from the panel table to the podium, she called Limbaugh a “Godsend” for giving them an issue to distract voters with in the current political climate—one in which President Obama has major weaknesses on multiple fronts.

“Moving ahead” means pressuring more of Limbaugh’s advertisers to bail on him and to “making more stations” cancel his show.

For progressives, this controversy carries the added bonus that they might could use it to silence  their most effective radio talk show critic, whom they have not be able to counter through such efforts as the now-defunct Air America. I apologize for the annoying clicking you can hear in this next clip. It was caused by a malfunction in my recording equipment that I have previously experienced. I thought the problem with my camera was in the past, but apparently it isn’t:

O’Neill’s assertion that Limbaugh is “politicizing birth control ” is a dubious one. Limbaugh wasn’t talking about birth control—and nobody else was either—before the push-back against the Obamacare mandate forcing Catholic institutions to pay for contraceptive services that run counter to their religious teachings.

It’s a made-to-order issue first bizarrely brought up by ABC newsman and former Clinton Administration Senior Advisor on Policy and Strategy George Stephanopoulos during the Republican New Hampshire primary debate back in January. None of this has happened by accident.

In the next clip, O’Neill references David Frum’s column, which contends that Limbaugh’s crass treatment of Fluke is more egregious than comments made by leftist comedians and commentators—many which I believe are for worse than what Rush said—because they don’t have Limbaugh’s clout.

What Frum, a “conservative” CNN contributor as well as a contributing editor for Newsweek and The Daily Beast, leaves out is that Limbaugh is almost a singular voice dishing out irreverent rancor to the left that Hollywood and most of the media have given conservatives for years. The reason that pop-culture and the Main-Stream-Media have not been able to produce their own Limbaugh is because they don’t have anyone who can stand toe-to-toe with him. It’s not from lack of trying.

O’Neill says that Republican presidential candidates won’t condemn Limbaugh because they are afraid of him. They aren’t the only ones. Progressives are who really fear Limbaugh and that’s why he has to be shut down. If they weren’t using the Fluke controversy, they would be using something else. They have been waiting with baited breath for this opportunity for years:

What this is really all about—far beyond women’s “right” to force others to pay for their birth control—is silencing voices that disagree with progressives, instead of the left meeting people like Limbaugh on the battlefield of the market-place of ideas. That’s always been the progressive way, this is just the latest example:

I asked O’Neill whether NOW equally condemns vitriolic remarks by Bill Maher against conservative women like Sarah Palin. Maher has donated $1 million to Obama’s Super PAC. She said that NOW is against any such language used by men against any woman, but the money shouldn’t be returned—Obama has to re-elected, after all:

The re-election of Obama, of course, is why this birth control nonsense was drummed up in the first place. The left is trying to morph a debate about who should pay for birth control into one designed to scare women into thinking that Republicans want to ban birth control. It’s an emotional appeal to women voters they want to see help give Obama a second term and I doubt it’s going to work.

This is a very different election cycle and American women, as well as men, are hurting in an economy that has averaged over nine percent unemployment under Obama with soaring gasoline prices and national debt.

Progressives would love to be able to forever silence opposition voices like Limbaugh, but they will be unsuccessful in that as well.

Rush will survive this latest attempt to shut him down—maybe ending up a little wiser, but nevertheless as loud as ever in defense of liberty and American traditionalism.

There is more good stuff from the NOW meeting that I might post later.


42 Comments

  1. Lilly_easterly says:

    She is so out of touch. Thanks for posting this.  I for one will boycott any advertiser that drops Rush and will not listen to any radio station that cancels him.  Guess she gets a thrill up her leg every time Mahr and his kind spew their hatred as long as money for Obama is attached. What do they call a woman who thinks it is ok to take money from someone such as he?
     

  2. Jim Ryals says:

    Call your cable/satellite company and drop HBO even though you’ll have to drop an entire tier of programming.  Buy a Roku instead.  When you do drop it, tell the company why – Bill Maher and that hit piece on Sara Palin.

  3. Anonymous says:

    “she called Limbaugh a “Godsend” for giving them an issue to distract voters with in the current political climate—one in which President Obama has major weaknesses on multiple fronts.”Yeah, I’m sure when unemployed voters have to pack $5 a gallon this summer, they’ll focus on how Rush called a woman paying $1000 in contraception a slut.

  4. Vondon811 says:

    Isn’t it amazing how NOW just stands up for the liberal women.  They are a disgrace to women everywhere.  This country has real issues not made up ones.

  5. purusha says:

    A suggestion: stop lying.

    Taxpayers do not pay for coverage of contraception. Thus the statement above “…who testified in front of Congress that taxpayers should pay for her extracurricular sexual escapades” is completely false. 

    • Anonymous says:

       The issue with Fluke is that the Dems want to abolish any separation between church and state and the way to begin is insurance coverage.  That being said, the Catholic Church does not have any issue with “The Pill” being prescribed as a remedy for medical conditions.  That is unless YOU think that pregnancy is an affliction.

      IS that what you think?

      They actually do want the public to pay for birth control.  They have done so in the past via Planned Parenthood.

      • Barbara says:

        “That being said, the Catholic Church does not have any issue with “The Pill” being prescribed as a remedy for medical conditions.”
        Wrong. The Catholic Church refuses to provide the pill for any reason, even conditions that have nothing to do with pregnancy.

    • Rob Miller says:

       In the first place, Fluke’s testimony was all about getting the government to pay for her healthcare.

      Second, Ms. Fluke testified that ’40%’ of her fellow Georgetown coeds struggle to pay for contraception according to her ‘survey’. Are you telling me  all of them are suffering from ovarian cysts and similar conditions?

      This was about taking the spotlight off President  Obama’s abysmal performance, and covering for his assault on the First Amendment’s freedom of practice and establishment clauses, and they simply found a long time far Left Democrat operative to do it.

      Stop lying? Excellent advice, and I suggest you start practicing it.

      Regards,
      Rob Miller @ Joshuapundit

      • Barbara says:

        “In the first place, Fluke’s testimony was all about getting the government to pay for her healthcare.”
        No, it was not about the government paying for her healthcare. It was about a federal mandate that health insurance companies cover contraception without co-pays. In Fluke’s case, she was talking about the group insurance policy for students at Georgetown, and premiums for those plans are part of the fees she is paying Georgetown. No taxpayer money is involved, and the Catholic Church does not have to pay any part of this. 

        Also, at no point in Fluke’s testimony did she speak about her own sexual activities. She could be celibate for all we know. 

        • Anonymous says:

          Good grief, even a mental midget knows that mandating something as “free” in health insurance means that cost will be redistributed amongst other policy holders.  Nothing is “free” in healthcare.  Period. 

  6. Anonymous says:

    NOW and Fluke are the typical Leftists who want women dependent upon government.  Women are not poor little weaklings who can’t handle their own birth control or health issues without NOW’s or Fluke’s input or guidance.  There is no war on women.  This is an issue of freedom of religion…Obamacare has no Constitutional right to force us to forego our religious beliefs. Fluke and her ilk are all for the government take-over of our medical/health/insurance system in America.  Did you know that Fluke actually thinks insurance should pay for sex change operations and the physical mutilation that entails?  And since private insurance under Obamacare will soon be a thing of the past, it will be the taxpayer paying for this body mutilation. Fluke is a political Leftist activist who presented examples of some of the sorriest females America has produced when it comes to being able to take care of themselves.  Her testimony was reprehensible as is her portrayal of females.

  7. 34vdfc says:

    It had nothing to do with “taxpayers.”  It was about private health insurance.  You can’t site one sentence form Fluke’s testimony to back up your lie that it was about tax money.  Stop lying, you right-wing scumbag.

  8. [...] The Hayride has an interesting post and video, NOW’s war on Rush. 541      [...]

  9. piniella says:

    Fluke is the Georgetown law student working on a $100,000 degree who
    testified in front of Congress that taxpayers should pay for her
    extracurricular sexual escapades.

    THIS IS A LIE. SHE DID NOT MENTION HER SEX LIFE.

  10. [...] that this media-created scandal was never about principles… It was always about politics. The Hayride attended O’Neil’s speech in New Orleans this [...]

  11. Wbsimb says:

    Where was this woman when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the C Word?   She’s a hypocrite. Selective Morality… I’m a woman and these people make me ill.

  12. Jack Sherman says:

    O’Neill’s assertion that Limbaugh is “politicizing birth control ”

    Take a look in the mirror honey – if you can stand it

  13. Jfbroussard says:

    The left forgets it is their fault Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest even exist.  Piniella and 34vdc (VD for Children?) need to open their ears even if their minds are closed.  The Fluke quote was, “It costs me $3,000 for birth control.  That’s a whole summer’s wages.”  Fluke admitted she has no health problems requiring the pill so it can only be a purely a recreational contraceptive.   

  14. Coffeyp55 says:

    What an idiot!  Of course she does not want Obama to give the money back, she does not care when a liberal says about a woman, because nobody cares what they say!

  15. Saintno says:

    I have a problem with Rush calling this woman a whore he is using that word rather loosely as most women are whores not just this woman. Women use their sexuality to gain ground in all facets of life from the strip clubs, selling products through advertising, sex with men for money, control of men through marriage, breaking through the glass ceiling in the corporate theater, and various other means to empower themselves. Their manipulation of the male species has brought many a civilization to an end. If mankind could develop a way to procreate without them there would be no need for them.       

  16. Laurie Bertram Roberts says:

    The GOP wanting to ban BC is not a myth. I am from MS where we have been battling against personhood legislation. EVERY GOP candidate for president supports "personhood", personhood would indeed outlaw most forms of birth control and it is not by accident the people behind it, believe the pill is murder. So do not write that there is not a republican war on contraception. The White House did not start this debate Newt Gingrich decided to bring this up on the campaign trail, Issa called an all malel hearing, and Rush launched his attack on Ms. Fluke all on their own.

    • Scott McKay says:

      You're cracked, Laurie.

    • Laurie Bertram Roberts says:

      Scott McKay keep it classy Scott! maybe I should be specific they believe that the pill is murder as in they believe it causes abortions if you don't believe me do your own research. Personhood USA and Personhood MS both originally stated on their own web pages that their proposed laws would ban many forms of BC when they found it was unpopular they took it down. The screen shots are still out there.

    • Scott McKay says:

      Laurie Bertram Roberts Nobody – NOBODY – on the Republican side is proposing banning birth control. That's been quite clear from the start.

      The Sandra Fluke issue came from the Obama administration – which has now designated the Vatican as a possible center for money laundering, of all things, as evidence of what it thinks of the Catholic Church – attempting to dictate to religious organizations that they would have to subsidize behavior they find morally objectionable and is contrary to their teachings. That's it. Not contraception, not a "war on women."

      O'Neill and her crowd are attempting to force a government-mandated leftist social agenda down the throats of the public, including people who should be able to enjoy First Amendment protection from such federal overreach. And when met with resistance their response is to call for another assault on free speech, namely to dictate who can and can't broadcast over the airwaves.

      To drive this discussion in the direction of a supposed war on contraception is, in fact, an invalid and cracked thing to do.

    • Laurie Bertram Roberts says:

      Scott McKay this not about the church subsiding anything this is about when the church is running secular serving/employing institutions ie hospitals and schools where everyone is NOT catholic the same institutions that take federal money. May I remind these employees are contributing as well to their health care and are entitled to a full range of health care services including contraception. The church is still exempt from having to cover it for church workers. Some how the church has no objection to helping single men get their penises hard which is purely sexually but they won't help women receive BC which can and is used for more than just birth control. I know my 15 y/o daughter who is a virgin has been taking birth control since 13 because of endometriosis not because she's immoral. Do they also get to tell their employees they won't cover tubals and vasectomies because they don't believe in those either.

    • Scott McKay says:

      Laurie Bertram Roberts if they work for the church and the church is cutting the checks, the church has the freedom under the First Amendment – or has for better than 200 years – to make policy according to its teachings.

      This isn't about whether the church is right or wrong. It's about the fact that the Constitution limits the federal government's power to impose the will of overbearing politicians on the people.

      And if you don't like it, find yourself a church and/or employer more in tune with your beliefs. That's YOUR freedom under the First Amendment.

    • Laurie Bertram Roberts says:

      Scott McKay but the church is running a business not just doing the business of the church so that's fine let's have the Jehovah's Witnesses open hospitals like the Catholic church does and be the sole medical provider in the community in many places like the Catholic church is and see how popular their stance on blood transfusions is. You must be quite privileged to just think people have the luxury of simply walking away from their jobs like that in many communities if you want to work in health care the Catholic church is your only choice for employment so I guess they just don't have a right to be employed there and asked to be treated fairly. By a BUSINESS that is cutting CHECKS using FEDERAL money. Not their parishioners money, not their fundraising dollars, but the money they make from insurance and federal programs like medicaid, medicare, and CHIPS. In the case of colleges they are taking plenty of money by way of pell grants and federal loans. You didn't answer the question exactly how far do my employers first amendment rights get to go into my health care then since there are several religions that have beliefs regarding healthcare. Should they all get exemptions for the stuff they don't like?

    • Scott McKay says:

      Laurie Bertram Roberts Freedom is freedom. This stuff isn't complicated. And whoever taught you that your economic circumstances should somehow force someone else to compromise their beliefs did you a huge disservice.

    • Laurie Bertram Roberts says:

      Scott McKay nice deflection you didn't answer the question though #notsurprised got to go I have homeschooling activities to finish with my kids.

    • Jenoir Spiritwind says:

      Really>? No body is? What are the anti birth control bills being introduced in various states all about then? Are you going to seriously sit there and pretend they don't exist, when the backers of the bills have publicly admitted "Yes, we understand this will outlaw most forms of birth control"?
      I suggest keeping it in your pants the rest of your life or prepare to pay every penny you make in child support if you idiots get your way.

  17. Michael Kessler says:

    Why did you delete my post?

  18. Kathy Fletcher says:

    And now Jane Fonda – that upstanding patriot is jumping in. Her and her buddies are demanding that Rush be thrown off the air. Geez Jane why don't you just go jump off a cliff or better yet move on down by your buddy Chavez. They are in a feeding frenzy but wonder where they were when vile things were said about conservative women………..crickets…..

  19. [...] final irony of this entire episode comes not from NOW’s selective outrage in order to re-elect Obama, but from the web site that calls for a “sex strike.” In light of the recent war on [...]

  20. [...] final irony of this entire episode comes not from NOW selective outrage in order to re-elect Obama but from the web site calling for a Sex Strike In light of the recent war on women, we are calling [...]

  21. And the battle rages on…in quite comical fashion. On one side we have an emotional argument, seriously lacking intellectual foundation and on the other side we have an intellectual argument lacking emotion. The "emotional" side does not have a clue as to what this "argument" is about…if they did, they would change sides in a heart beat. Any government big enough to give you anything/everything you need and want is certainly big enough to take it away at any time…government involvement = control.

  22. Jill S. Butler says:

    This statement: "Fluke is the Georgetown law student working on a $100,000 degree who testified in front of Congress that taxpayers should pay for her extracurricular sexual escapades" is factually incorrect. Have you read her testimony? She said no such thing. People are not going to take you seriously if you don't do your homework.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.