Limbaugh is not too big to fail: 34 Advertisers and Counting Leave

Voting with money, voting with one's feet, works as well in an election year as any ballot at a polling place.

If enough people express their position on this, if enough companies decide to look at consumer response instead of only short term profits, then people win, then the marketplace and free speech combined both work.  One station in Washington actually is POLLING listeners about dumping Rush, specifically.

If Rush Limbaugh is the proponent of capitalism and the free markets, then he has to acknowledge when it tells him he is bad and when he is wrong (and he is both, doubling down on his misogyny in subsequent broadcasts).

The best twist of all is that in his apology, Limbaugh satisfied no one.  In his apology, apparently he finished himself, he shot himself down with his listeners, his rabid rabble of reactionaries, to whom he had pandered with his rants in the first place.  Apparently they are angry with him for 'caving'.  It never was about being a joke, or being absurd, what Limbaugh said.  He was ALWAYS absolutely serious in his statements, and now they don't like it that he is claiming he was joking.  They weren't joking, not one bit, they really believe that what he said was true, they really hold those opinions of women and sexuality and contraception.  They are a certain stripe of conservatives, stripes like those that would be found on a diseased, ill-tempered skunk.  In Missouri, Limbaugh's home state, a state legislator wants to induct Limbaugh into a hall of fame for famous people from Missouri, ranging from Harry Truman to Dredd Scott.  There is a petition, one of so very many petitions, to stop that inclusion in the Hall of Fame; I hope Penigma readers will take a few moments to sign it.  There is a huge difference between the sex tourist with the suitcase full of Viagra who cruises the Caribbean for underage girls, and who makes the kind of attacks Limbaugh does, and two of the most revered figures in our history.  The heroes are famous; Limbaugh is merely notorious, a celebrity of sorts, but in a bad way.

There are a few conservatives who are better than that, who aren't afraid of Limbaugh, like Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska who more emphatically condemned Limbaugh for his appalling words.  There ARE principled conservatives, but the conservative side of the aisle has largely been hijacked by special interests, as evidenced by the ALEC legislation they funnel for special interest big money, both corporate and individual, and by extremist culture war ideologues.  Moderates are not welcome and women are not tolerated if they fail to fall in line, which  more than explains the retirement of Olympia Snowe from the Senate, a blow to Republicans, because they do not have a strong candidate to replace her, and are not likely to find one.

As of this writing we are at 34 sponsors who have abandoned Limbaugh - you can read the list here, with more contemplating doing so.  There is not a big pool of people, other than Nut Gingrich's SuperPAC who want to take up that slack.  It was the same kind of advertiser boycott in response to similar excesses by Glenn Beck that led to his eventual disgrace with Faux News, and the loss of listeners.  Beck became an embarrassment; Limbaugh is becoming an embarrassment, for his arrogance, his over-reach with his hatred. 

Beck used to think he had a loyal power base; they left him.  Limbaugh thinks he has a loyal power base; he puts the number of his listeners at 20,000,000.  That number is false, it is inaccurate, and it is grossly overinflated.

Unlike big banks, Limbaugh is NOT too big to fail.  The 34 Advertiser number, that is growing; the listener numbers, that is not.  When the money stops being generated, when the influence is no longer perceived to be real, Rush goes down that long circular swirl into well-earned, well deserved drain of obscurity.  Romney, and Bain Capital, and the Republicans who have had to be nice to Rush even if they didn't really like him...well, let's just say that I don't see them keeping a toothless attack dog on their leash.

Update to Limbaugh - 2 stations dump him, 11 - 12 Advertisers quit him

According to ThinkProgress, the bad ship Rush Limbaugh begins its slow swirl down the drain into obscurity, with a total of an even dozen advertisers leaving, and now two radio stations dumping him.

The trend appears to be continuing, he hasn't hit bottom yet.

An interesting aspect to the Rush Limbaugh show is the claim that he has 20 million listeners.  Apparently that is an unsubstantiated number that exists only in press releases from the Limbaugh radio show, which, given the most casual and rare acquaintance he demonstrates with facts, makes the number less believable.

Here is the summary from ThinkProgress of the rats, or in this case, the MONEY, that is leaving the Titanic Limbaugh.  First the news update/ news flash:

Second radio station drops Limbaugh

Earlier today, a Hawaii radio station announced they would no longer air Rush Limbaugh’s radio show because he “crossed a line of decency.” Now, a second radio station — in Pittsfield, Massachusetts — has said it is no longer going to put up with Limbaugh’s antics. “The nature of Rush’s programming has always presented challenges for us and he’s always pushed the envelope. But this time he’s taken it too far,” said WBEC’s General Manager Peter Barry. Armed Forces Radio is also under pressure by VoteVets to pull Limbaugh out of its programming.

A Hawaiian station, why that's Obama's home state.  A Massachusetts station?  But ... but.......isn't that ROMNEY territory?
A rumored dozen advertisers have left; although there is some question as to one of the companies being cited widely actually having been an advertiser.  Here is the ThinkProgress list:
Moments ago, Bonobos, a men’s outfitter, announced on Twitter that it was dropping any of its advertisements that are appearing on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show:

Scott Candage

@ScottCandage 5 Mar 12 .@Bonobos Thank you very much for that. Very gladdening to hear. Let us know your findings, if you could.

Bonobos

✔@Bonobos @ScottCandage Looks like we were running on it, but we've told them to pull us from the show indefinitely. Thanks for letting us know!

5 Mar 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite

Sears announced that they, too, are dropping Limbaugh:

Sears and Kmart did not intentionally advertise on the Rush Limbaugh show. Sears Holdings has taken actions to ensure our ads do not run on this show. We appreciate our customers, fans and followers and thank you for your business.

According to a ThinkProgress count, Bonobos and Sears are the 10th and 11th advertisers to drop Limbaugh in the wake of his sexist and hateful attacks on Sandra Fluke.

Other companies are considering doing so, and monitoring the protests of Limbaugh.

Rush Limbaugh’s Advertisers Facing Social Media Firestorm


By Adam Peck on Mar 2, 2012 at 3:40 pm

Rush Limbaugh’s latest misogynistic tirade against Georgetown University Law Student Sandra Fluke may be the last straw for many of the shock jock’s corporate sponsors. Thousands of angry customers have been inundating dozens of Limbaugh’s corporate sponsors, demanding that they cut ties with the program.

So far, Sleep Number, The Sleep Train, Quicken Loans, Legal Zoom, Citrix, Carbonite, ProFlowers, Tax Resolution, AOL, Bonobos, Sears, and Allstate Insurance have pulled ads from the program, and several others are considering following their lead.

ThinkProgress is collecting reactions from social media sites like Twitter and Facebook on Storify. Here’s a look at some responses so far:

Other companies though have been slow to react, or are simply ignoring mounting feedback.

We need to take a stand now against his revolting behavior. Sign our petition and let Sandra Fluke know that you are on her side.
Update

An earlier version of this post listed the Cleveland Cavaliers as one of the companies that dropped Limbaugh, based on a report from WFNY. Although the Cavaliers have the same owner as Quicken Loans, WFNY’s report was subsequently removed. It does not appear that the Cavaliers advertised on Limbaugh’s show

Limbaugh - Romney Surrogate? GOP Enforcer? All of the Above?Absurd?Obscene? They sound similar, but they mean very different things

I think there is an excellent case to be made that Romney and Limbaugh are inextricably linked by money and influence.  Limbaugh appears to function as both a Romney surrogate, stating the things that Romney and conservatives want said, but doesn't want to be caught saying them.  It appears equally evident that Limbaugh is a hatchet man, a political enforcer, given the number of right wingers he's forced to recant and to conform. 

In the following clip, I was particularly intrigued with the observations of Michelle Bernard, a woman prominent in conservative and independent politics,  a woman of color, and as she notes here - a graduate of the same Georgetown University Law School attended by Ms. Fluke.  Ms. Bernard has had both public and private interactions with Limbaugh which apply to this controversy.  Those comments occur approximately 7 minutes into this clip, but watch the lead in as well to those 7 minutes; it is well worth it.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

It is not only the conservative Ms. Bernard who makes the observations about Limbaugh as enforcer; similar observations have come from a variety of conservative pundits, like this interview with George Will:

ABC’s George Will told me Sunday on “This Week” that GOP leaders have steered clear of harshly denouncing Limbaugh’s comments because “Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh.”

“[House Speaker John] Boehner comes out and says Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using the salad fork for your entrée, that’s inappropriate. Not this stuff,” Will said. “And it was depressing because what it indicates is that the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh. They want to bomb Iran, but they’re afraid of Rush Limbaugh.”

Limbaugh doesn't appear to be the only one that Romney has on a Bain-owned leash; Hannity and the disgraced Glenn Beck are on the same radio shows roster.  While Romney's holdings are operated by a blind trust, it is no secret that approx. 45% of his holdings are Bain Capital.

The latest efforts to be a surrogate, and to be an enforcer have appeared to backfire, if the intent was to create a controversy that would energize the base for Romney and the GOP.  Advertisers are departing, and continuing to suspend their business, in some cases terminating business, despite the non-apology apology.

The wording between Romney and Limbaugh has been similar; that they woulda coulda shoulda used different words.  It was not only the choice of words that is the problem; it was the intent, it was the concept, it was the entire position.

Sandra Fluke spoke about contraception used for non-contraceptive therapeutic use.  She spoke about a woman who needed it in order to preserve her remaining ovary due to an ovarian condition, a disease.  The woman in question who needed but could not afford contraceptive therapy for that condition is gay; I do not know as of this writing if she is married or not.  Ms. Fluke did not assert that she was seeking contraception coverage for her own sexual activity, or indeed for any one's sexual activity specifically.  She wanted an important form of medication to be available to students who needed it.  What Limbaugh said was a gross misrepresentation of fact, and how he said it was an extremely offensive personal attack.  That the attack came from a man who appears to have been a Dominican Republic sex tourist, stopped with an unusually large amount of Viagra by Homeland Security in 2006, which you can read about here.  The Dominican Republic is notorious not only for its sexual tourism, but specifically for the availability and sexploitation of underage girls.

In that context, I found Limbaugh's observations about underage girls and sex that he made on March 1, 2012 particularly disturbing:

"Who bought your condoms in junior high? Who bought your condoms in the sixth grade? Or your contraception. Who bought your contraceptive pills in high school?"

So not only do we have a leap that a young woman who is seeking hormone therapy to help her friend save her ovaries from disease, pain, and expensive surgery; not only do we have an unfounded leap that this woman is sexually promiscuous; we have Limbaugh publicly asserting that this woman has been sexually active since she was 11 or 12 years old.  But he would have us believe this is not a personal attack on her, or that it is not an attack on girls and women?  He wants us to believe that this was......some kind of attempted humor, and that he is the real victim here?  NO. NO WAY. HELL NO.

The right would have us believe there is no 'culture war on women'; the evidence that there is very much a war on women is to overwhelming for that denial to be credible.  The right would have us believe this is a ploy by the left to shift attention away from the economy-----except that the topic has been brought up, consistently, by the right, not the left.  The economic news is largely better for the policies of the left than the right; no way that the left wants to change the subject now.  These are 'spaghetti' arguments; throw  half-cooked ideas at the public, like a wall, and see what sticks.  NOTHING ABOUT THE APOLOGY FROM LIMBAUGH HAS BEEN CREDIBLE OR PERSUASIVE. Even  Limbaugh's fellow conservatives are not buying it, and his advertisers continue to leave him, one after the other, despite his crappy non-apology apology.

But there was more that was offensive, more that exceeds, by vast distances, the notion of a mere bad choice of words' line of crap from both Romney and Limbaugh.  From the wikipedia article on the Limbaugh Fluke controversy - and yes, there IS one :

He continued that Fluke is "having so much sex, it's amazing she can still walk".

Seriously, THIS from the man who was engaging in apparent sexual tourism with huge quantities of Viagra, in a third world country noted for underage prostitutes?

He also said Georgetown should establish a "Wilt Chamberlain scholarship ... exclusively for women". He described Fluke as "a woman who is happily presenting herself as an immoral, baseless, no-purpose-to-her life woman. She wants all the sex in the world whenever she wants it, all the time, no consequences. No responsibility for her behavior."[15]

Using her name so very frequently, with the false but very explicit statements that he does, that IS a personal attack.  It is the kind of attack, the specific use of sexual language that women recognize as a very specific form of intimidation, one that often goes with sexual harassment when it occurs in the work place.  It is nearly always something that the abuser, the harasser tries to pass off as just a little humor, in order to excuse his conduct.  Excusing one's conduct is not taking responsibility for that conduct, and in any apology, it negates that apology.  Effectively it says, 'I'm sorry for what I did wrong, except that I'm not sorry, and what I did was not wrong, and you're bad for making me the victim of what I did that wasn't wrong."

Limbaugh continued with his very personal attack on Ms. Fluke with factually inaccurate and not funny comments claiming rampant promiscuity, like these (again from the wikipedia article):

On March 3, 2012, Limbaugh defended his previous comments about Fluke and complained that "not one person says that, 'Well, did you ever think about maybe backing off the amount of sex that you have?". Limbaugh said that requiring insurance companies to cover contraception is "no different than if somebody knocked on my door that I don't know and said, 'You know what? I'm out of money. I can't afford birth-control pills, and I'm supposed to have sex with three guys tonight.' "

And we are supposed to believe that Limbaugh ISN'T the person projecting HIS OWN sexual proclivities here?  It is his mind, not Sandra Fluke's, that went in this direction.
As of this writing, some nine advertisers have left Limbaugh, and others are considering doing so.  We can only hope all of the advertisers have the sense to do so, the decency to do so, and are more skeptical of these statements that are not political humor, and are very much an attack on an individual of the worst kind, and an attack on the residents of this country who are female as well.  Limbaugh promotes the worst women-as-subordinate women-as-sexual conquest-for-exploitation  view.  He does so, because there is a segment of his base that thinks the same way, and there are far too many others among the Limbaugh audience who do not object, or do not object much to that world view.  While Limbaugh may have miscalculated - or maybe not - he was correct that there was an audience among his listeners to whom he directed the rants, Rush fans who DID go on record in agreement with those statements, as fact, as political ideology, NOT as humor.  Those were the people to whom Limbaugh was pandering, and those are the people among the conservative base to whom all of the candidates are pandering.  So were these.  This is the basis, the world view, the ideology for the right wing attack on women, on feminists, on gender and sexual equality. This is the pro-perversion segment of the ultra-conservative right.  It is not by any stretch all conservatives; but it is an accurate characterization of many more than the ones who are open and vocal.

But it is not only Limbaugh and his radio show and his advertisers who should be held accountable; Romney and his buddies at Bain, through their ownership of Clear Channel, are the ones who have profited by this, not just Limbaugh.  They have made money, and one could argue that they have made REPEATED political use - political capital - out of Limbaugh and the other extremists  in their employ who are the sock puppets for their ventriloquism.  This is an ideology that is reactionary, this is an ideology that is attempting to reverse the gender and racial equality of the past century, this is an ideology of hatred.

We need to call it what it is; we need to recognize it when we see it in the public square of politics, and most of all we need to identify and oppose the mechanism by which it works.  We do all of those things when we make the connections between the parties involved, and the working of the money flow and the power dynamic instead of regarding these events with only superficial understanding.

It is time for Limbaugh to be as 'over' as his colleague Glenn Beck.  Hannity and O'Reilly shouldn't be far behind in their departures to obscurity.  The line should form, appropriately, to the right for all the other right wing media hate mongers.  The exodus and the impetus needs to begin with the advertisers, continue with their audience, and end with those who made money from this ideology enforcement and surrogate speech repudiating the talking heads, emphatically, not sorta-kinda-maybe-justa-little.