Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: I have another example of being on the cutting edge of societal evolution. You know, one of the Undeniable Truths of Life — wait a minute, it was not an Undeniable Truth of Life. It was a stand alone commentary way, way back. In fact, first aired by me in Kansas City, would have been the early eighties, in which I suggested (there was a recession back then) that maybe the ugly be banned from the streets during daytime to prolong the economic activity and recovery, given that, you know, ugly people wandering around the mall or a retail outlet might deter others from entering or staying if they were inside. And I remember I was lauded for this commentary. That established me as a deep and great thinker and a person of great compassion and sensitivity, if you heard the whole thing.

Well, get this. There’s a dating website out there and they have just banned 30,000 ugly subscribers. “It was meant to be a dating website exclusively for the use of ‘beautiful men and women,’ where members ruthlessly selected and excluded those who did not match their definitions of good looks. But last month when BeautifulPeople.com was attacked by a computer virus, some claim standards slipped and around 30,000 new members gained admittance.” Thirty thousand ugly people, people who otherwise would not have been admitted got in via hacking. So the BeautifulPeople.com website was overrun with 30,000 ugly people, which upset the people that run the website and the other beautiful people who think they were beautiful people who were at the website as customers.

“Now, in a move which has made those rejected ‘apoplectic’ with rage, they have been unceremoniously booted off at a financial cost of more than $100,000 (62,000) to the site’s operators.” Basically the site’s operators, cost of doing business, they said, “Okay it’s worth it, a hundred grand to get the ugly off our website,” and they did it. The virus that allowed 30,000 ugly people — (laughing) I know you’re asking, “Who decides who’s ugly?” And that’s the point, folks. It’s voluntary. Everybody knows. This is one of these hard, cold, callous realities. The ugly know who they are. It’s just sad. It is a most unfortunate thing, but they do. I remember I once worked with a guy who thought he lived in the fifties. He had one of those swept-back Wayne Newton duck-tail hairdos and wore two-tone green leisure suits from Kmart. He did it on purpose. You had to figure he thought he looked classy. You had to figure he thought he was cutting edge. I mean these things happen. That’s probably the kind of guy that ended up here on the website.

They named the virus that allowed 30,000 ugly people to end up on this website Shrek, after the animated film about how looks should not matter, and the virus attacked the software used to screen potential members. So they had a piece of software doing this apparently, not human beings making judgments on who was ugly and what wasn’t. A helpline has now been set up with counselors on hand to help the ugly deal with it. (laughing) Sorry for laughing. This is the kind of news you wouldn’t want made public about your website, but it’s gotten out. There will be, obviously, lawsuits now for pain and suffering no matter what they do.

“‘We have to stick to our founding principles of only accepting beautiful people — that’s what our members have paid for,’ said Greg Hodge, managing director of BeautifulPeople.com. ‘We can’t just sweep 30,000 ugly people under the carpet.'” We can’t leave ’em here and just pretend that nobody knows what’s up here. They had to actually get rid of ’em. “Hodge reckoned the Shrek virus — which may have been posted by a disgruntled former employee — had affected the software that existing members use to rate prospective new entrants, allowing anyone to join.” Oh, that’s how they did it. I guess the existing members decide who gets in and the software bollixed up whatever they said, didn’t matter, anybody got in.

“The website boasts that ‘beauty lies in the eyes of the voter’ who are able to rank aspiring members on a type of traffic light scale where red is ‘absolutely not’ and bright green is ‘beautiful.’ The site posts applicants’ photographs alongside information.” See, we’ve been there, done that, too. Talk about cutting edge, we did that years ago here on the EIB Network. It used to be if you were female and wanted to appear on the program you had to have a photo on file with us. Those days have come and gone, but we did it. Been there, done that.

“BeautifulPeople.com posts applicants’ photographs alongside information about their weight and height and ask candidates to describe their ‘body type’ as well as whether they own a car or home along with their zodiac sign.” So it’s not like these people are shallow, folks. (laughing) Zodiac sign? These are people of great depth at BeautifulPeople.com. The guy that runs the website, Hodge, told the UK Guardian, “We got suspicious when tens of thousands of new members were accepted over a six-week period, many of whom were no oil painting,” which I guess is his way of describing the fact that they were not beautiful people. We’re still looking for a photograph of Mr. Hodge. We can’t find a photograph of him. We’d like to find one.

“The brutal axing of the 30,000 hopefuls is not the site’s first brush with controversy. Last year, about 5,000 members were removed from the site after they had appeared to put on weight during the Christmas period.” (laughing) How do they know? What, do you have to update your picture every month or so? This is not an article from The Onion, folks. This is a genuine accredited news story. “This month, the website triggered anger in Ireland when it said that Irish men were among the ugliest in the world. This was based on the reasoning that only 9% of male Irish applicants to the site were accepted. Only 20% of Irish women are accepted, compared with nearly 70% of Swedish women who sign up.” Who woulda thought? Who woulda thought that Scandinavian women are beautiful? Who would have needed a survey for that?

“The prospects are even worse for British men, as according to Hodge, they are the most likely be rejected. ‘It’s a bit of a sting as I’m a Brit,’ said Hodge,” whose picture we haven’t seen, “who is based at the site’s head office in Los Angeles.” Oh my gosh, this guy’s here. We are here in Los Angeles all week. “On average one in seven people are rejected from the site which has around 700,000 members in 190 countries. He said Norwegian women and Swedish men have the greatest chance of being accepted into the club, while Brazilian and Danish men are also popular — along with women from Sweden and Iceland.” UK takes it hard. Yeah, not just Britain, apparently the entire UK.

“Rachel Godfrey, a 31-year-old Australian nanny living in LA, said she received an email telling her she was rejected two weeks after being accepted. ‘I was getting on really well with this American guy and we were going to go on a date and then they said I’d been chucked off and they locked me out of the site,’ she said. ‘Now I can’t get in touch with him.’ Godfrey said she is planning to have a makeover and professional photo shoot before reapplying to the website. ‘What if he’s the one? This is only way I’ll be able to get in touch with him,’ she said. ‘If that doesn’t work I’ll see what I can do with Photoshop.'” Ah, my friends, what a triumph, what an absolute triumph here of the indomitable human spirit. Woman thinks she’s found Mr. Right, gonna go get a makeover, Photoshopped, professional photo shoot, whatever it takes, despite being proclaimed ugly and thrown off the BeautifulPeople.com website.


*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This