Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, it has been a long time, we’re gonna go back to the Grooveyard of Forgotten Favorites, dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut. A feminist update. The feminazis are livid at me because of — well, general principles, but because of what we did on Wednesday.

(feminist update theme song: Men by the Forester Sisters.)

RUSH: The vocal portrayal here of the song is the Forrester Sisters. And for those of you relatively new to the program and have not heard this as our feminist update theme in a while, that’s actual audio from a pro-choice rally on the Mall — or the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, somewhere, Capitol Building in Washington — way, way back in the nineties. ‘We’re fierce. We’re feminists. We’re in your face.’ And all we did was speed it up and we chipmunked it a little bit but those were the actual words spoken. Now, the feminist update today comes from the Associated Press: ‘Even with many high-profile female candidates, the just-ended campaign was rife with sexism ranging from snarky fashion critiques to sexual innuendo. And when all the ballots are counted, women may hold fewer seats in the new Congress than the outgoing one.’ This is presented as a problem. Somebody tell me what the problem is. The voters have spoken. It’s a free society. It’s a republic. ‘And when the ballots are counted women may hold fewer seats in the new Congress than the outgoing one.’ Of course this is all a slap at Republicans, but the simple fact of the matter is if you dig deep, it was Republicans for whom women voted in this election. The independents made a huge shift in voting Republican.

I’ve got the story coming up here in the stack. I mentioned to you that the Republicans, I’ve been saying this for a long time, need to make arguments that are philosophical and ideological in nature, and to the extent that they have, it has worked. The number of independents identifying themselves as conservatives has doubled since the last election in 2008. That is crucial, folks. That is huge. No matter how you slice the electorate right now, you cannot say that liberalism outnumbers conservatives or even moderates any way you slice it. Liberals are at the bottom of every category here. But when you have a number of independents identifying themselves as conservative independents going from 20 to 40%, I guarantee you in the private cloakrooms the Democrats are looking at this and they’re not happy about it. They’re not happy about much of anything that’s happening.

Siobhan Bennett, who is president of the Women’s Campaign Forum Foundation, said at a teleconference Thursday discussing the prevalence of political sexism, ‘It looks as if we’re going backward rather than forward.’ Now, they can’t be mad at me because I, of course, was the author of Operation Reverse Chaos, and the purpose of Reverse Operation Chaos was to make amends for Mrs. Clinton. I mean, I steadfastly had myself on her side. And yet the feminazis are mad at me. If you read all the way through the story, you’ll find that they are livid at me, even though I’ve called nobody a ‘bitch,’ I called nobody a ‘whore,’ I called nobody a ‘slut,’ as some called Sharron Angle and some called Meg Whitman. All Republican women were called b-i-itch, slut and whore. I didn’t do it, and yet in this story sexism remains a problem for women seeking office. The focus of the NAGs is me. You want to know why? One simple reason. On Wednesday after the election we happened to play a tune. After opening with Wipeout, we played The Fifth Estate.

(playing Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead)

RUSH: Stop the music. They get the idea. When we played the song on Wednesday we did not even identify about whom we were playing it. We didn’t mention a name here. We just played Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead following Wipeout and the feminazis have all assumed I was talking about Pelosi. And that’s at the end of the story, you find here: ‘Women’s groups monitoring campaign sexism felt that some of the GOP attacks on Pelosi were misogynistic and were irked that conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh played ‘Ding-Dong! The Witch is Dead’ on his radio show Wednesday to celebrate Pelosi’s impending demotion.’ Well, we didn’t mention her name. What liberal wasn’t playing it about O’Donnell? What liberal wasn’t out there actually calling O’Donnell a witch — or worse, a b-i-itch, a slut or a whore? It wasn’t I. We didn’t even identify the song as being aimed at Pelosi, and yet the feminazis did. It was the feminazis who assumed that we were calling Pelosi a witch. We didn’t say we were. This is how easy it is to tweak these people.

‘Two years after Hillary Rodham Clinton nearly captured the Democratic presidential nomination and Sarah Palin was the Republican vice presidential nominee, female candidates dealt with comments about their hair and seamy, anonymous Web postings. Speaker Nancy Pelosi — second in the presidential line of succession — was widely vilified by Republican candidates in ways that often seemed gender-specific.’ They’re serious about this. They are serious. You can run around and you can call Republican women anything in the book and the feminazis will not speak up.

More women voted than men in this election, and we got a story about how there’s fewer women in elective office. Well, whose fault is this? Are we supposed to repudiate the will of women who voted, who ended up electing more men than women? I agree with the feminazis, Sharron Angle shoulda won. I agree with the feminazis, Christine O’Donnell shoulda won. I agree that Linda McMahon shoulda won. Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina should have won. But now the feminazis are clearly supporting witches, as in the case of Pelosi. If anybody got burned at the stake out there it was Christine O’Donnell by the feminazis.


RUSH: You know, where were the feminists, by the way, attacking Chris Matthews? He was mocking Michele Bachmann. Or maybe that was considered girl-on-girl action and they decided it wouldn’t be worth the trouble.


RUSH: From The Daily Beast, ”Fat Studies’ Go To College’, by Eve Binder. She is a senior at Yale, and ‘currently serves as managing editor for the college blog IvyGate.’ ‘A handful of colleges now offer classes entirely devoted to the overweight and obese. But are they intellectually topical — or just feel-good, pro-fat propaganda?’ I am not making this up. This is an actual story. ‘Jacqueline Johnson knows what it’s like to be shunned because of her weight. In the early 2000s fat activism was edging into existence, and Johnson, a weight studies scholar — you mean to tell me that parents are paying $25,000 a year to send kids away to school to become ‘weight studies scholars’? I guess it is a natural progression from women’s studies, lesbian studies, African-American studies, to now weight studies?


How in the world do you flunk this course? Fat studies? You parents are paying 25 grand for your kids to go take Fat Studies at major institutions of higher learning? ‘But despite such courses’ popularity among students, critics worry that such classes emphasize bleeding-heart politics over intellectual rigor.’ How in the world do they get that? ‘Despite such courses’ popularity among students, critics worry that such classes emphasize bleeding-heart politics…’ Fat Studies? As I say, it’s a natural progression out there from Women’s Studies, Lesbian Studies, African-American Studies, and now Fat Studies.


RUSH: Say, folks, have you ever noticed something? We were talking about Fat Studies here and Lesbian Studies and all this stuff. We all know that Fat Studies is simply a new avenue to teach liberalism. If you want to start getting into the politics of fat, it’s a way to disguise implementing liberal indoctrination, Fat Studies, food justice. But it’s all pointless. Have you ever noticed that feminist studies do not make women any more feminine than black studies make people more black? It’s something that’s amazed me for as long as I’ve been studying higher education. Feminist studies. And I haven’t noticed any increased femininity out there. Black studies doesn’t seem to make people blacker. And now fat studies. What’s the objective here, to make more people fat? Explain it away?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This