I was just on the website: thenation.com reading an opinion article, "OpinionNation: Should Feminists Push the FCC to Get Limbaugh Off the Air?", dated, March 16, 2012. It was a two part debate, the first part was written by Gloria Feldt, a former president of Planned Parenthood, and the second section was written by Wendy Kaminer, a lawyer and author. Ms. Feldt feels that the FCC should take Rush Limbaugh off the air due to his bombastic language; Ms. Kaminer supports freedom of speech, even in the wake of "Limbaugh's sexist screeds."
Ms. Feldt's writing included the following quote from David Sirota of the Sun Journal:
"broadcasting ideas is a privilege, not a right" and Mr. Sirota further wondered why the right-wing media "portrayed conservatives as victims, marshaling anti-censorship arguments to insinuate that bigotry, anti-Semitism, homophobia and sexism are somehow entitled to a constitutionally protected place in a major media outlet."
I don't think the FCC should be involved...I support freedom of speech - we can say what we want without government repercussions...so let's exercise "free enterprise" and continue to boycott Limbaugh's supporters and sponsors...money, and the withdrawal of such, is the best way to get your point across...empty Limbaugh's pocketbook (or in his case "man-bag")...and perhaps a lesson will be learned.
Another reader brought the core issue back into the discussion:
Posting by Glsgwgrl:
"As much as I dislike Rush Limbaugh, he should be allowed to say what he wants to say. I wish he would instead focus on something more "dear" to his own life: the use of Viagra and whether or not insurance companies should pay for men to fill prescriptions for that medication. Maybe Rush could inform his listeners about the other medical uses for Viagra, since it may be that not all men take Viagra to maintain an erection. Perhaps there are other reasons for maintaining an erection that have nothing to do with sex?"
I wrote back that "I totally agree with you (Glsgsgrl)...but I did ask my pharmacist about Viagra...it does have some medical uses...most notably for heart conditions...it is even administered to children in small doses...just like birth control pills have uses other than contraception... my question is, for the usual use, how does a doctor determine if a man should be prescribed Viagra? Are the men required to demonstrate their need? Or do the doctors just take their word for it? To get a birth control pill prescription, a woman mus have a gynecological exam...and additional exams each time they need to renew the prescription. A woman cannot just waltz into the Wal-Mart and plop down $9.00 and get some BC pills (as the media is leading the medically-uninformed public to believe). Birth Control pills (and devices) are prescribed for the individual patient - it is not "one-size-fits-all!" I think men don't understand this entire situation because they do not have to have the intrusive examinations that women undergo just to maintain a healthy life...and don't bring up that men get rectal exams...women get those too!"
So, the verdict? Limbaugh is entitled to free speech, but if enough of us are offended enough to care and take action, we can look forward to watching his broadcast career die a slow and embarrassing death...as he fades away into suggested retirement!