<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Rush Limbaugh</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/rush_limbaugh/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 06:12:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Can radio regulate sexism?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/23/can_radio_regulate_sexism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/23/can_radio_regulate_sexism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12725231</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Los Angeles' move to muzzle stupidity on the airwaves is wrongheaded -- and will only backfire]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When KFI-AM radio hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou referred to the late Whitney Houston as a "crack ho" on the air, it was a crass dig. And when Rush Limbaugh went on his <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/rush_limbaugh_media_victim/singleton/">three-day rant against Sandra Fluke</a> calling her a "slut" and a "prostitute," it was a revolting, dishonest display. But should being a bigoted jerk be an actionable offense? I'll say this – good luck trying to enforce that one, Los Angeles.</p><p>By a sweeping 13–2 vote earlier this week, the L.A. City Council passed a resolution that Clear Channel, home to Limbaugh along with Kobylt and Chiampou's "John and Ken Show," <a href="http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2012/12-0342_RESO_03-07-12.pdf">"ensure that their on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs over public airwaves in the city of Los Angeles."</a> The resolution also noted that "derogatory language … has no place on public airwaves in the city of Los Angeles or anywhere in America" and urged Clear Channel to reflect diversity with a workforce that includes more "women, African-Americans, Latinos, and Asians." Clear Channel's L.A. station KFI employs only one woman on-air personality and no African-Americans.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/23/can_radio_regulate_sexism/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/23/can_radio_regulate_sexism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>59</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>To reclaim or reject &#8220;slut&#8221;?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/11/to_reclaim_or_reject_slut/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/11/to_reclaim_or_reject_slut/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Mar 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12656681</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Limbaugh controversy is a perfect example of the complexities of reappropriating, or renouncing, the slur]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Until now, reclaiming the word "slut" never appealed to me. I fully supported the message of SlutWalk -- that women don't ask to be raped by dressing a certain way -- but I had no interest in applying the slur to myself. But this Limbaugh thing has me singing a different tune.</p><p>I'm not exactly scrawling "slut" on my forehead, but suddenly, reclaiming the word seems potentially exciting. I'm not the only one recognizing a shift in the conversation about reclamation. Megan Gibson of Time <a href="http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/03/08/in-rush-limbaughs-wake-women-are-reclaiming-the-word-slut/">wrote</a>, "While the motivation [for SlutWalk] was inarguably sound ... the protest caused controversy, in part because many were wary to associate themselves with the word slut." She continues, "Remarkably, thanks to Limbaugh’s ignorant vitriol, we're seeing a marked change in that wariness."</p><p>That said, in identifying with Sandra Fluke, the target of Limbaugh's rant, some women have instead chosen to distance themselves from the term, which perfectly illustrates how complicated reclamation can be.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/11/to_reclaim_or_reject_slut/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/11/to_reclaim_or_reject_slut/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>153</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The right wing&#8217;s pornography of resentment</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/10/the_right_wings_pornography_of_resentment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/10/the_right_wings_pornography_of_resentment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Mar 2012 22:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12664381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Rush Limbaugh calls women sluts and asks for their sex tapes, he's not the first prude who wants to watch]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The sliming that Sandra Fluke has endured -- from Rush Limbaugh, of course, but also from his rabid cheering section like Atlas Shrugged’s <a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/03/contact-carbonite-drop-ed-schultz.html">Pam Geller</a> (“She is banging it five times a day…. Calling this whore a slut was a softball”) and the blogger <a href="http://mediamatters.org/iphone/blog/201203020019">Ace of Spades</a> (“A shiftless rent-a-cooch from East Whoreville”) — is bizarre and over-the-top enough.</p><p>But even weirder was Limbaugh’s proposition: If “Miss Fluke and the rest of you Feminazis” expect us to pay you to have sex, “we want something for it,” Limbaugh said last week. “We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.” (Those words were later erased from Limbaugh’s official transcript of the show; <a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/03/rush-scrubs-demand-for-fluke-sex-tapes/49643/">Atlantic Wire</a> preserved them.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/10/the_right_wings_pornography_of_resentment/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/10/the_right_wings_pornography_of_resentment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>79</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rush Limbaugh, media victim</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/rush_limbaugh_media_victim/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/rush_limbaugh_media_victim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12663791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Washington Post writer apologizes to Rush for an error. Because Limbaugh takes nothing more seriously than truth!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don't you just hate it when someone in the media reports something about you without checking the facts first? Isn't it a cheap shot when you're inaccurately depicted as some kind of opportunistic jerk? My God, isn't that just <em>the worst</em>? No wonder poor, misunderstood Rush Limbaugh is upset. No wonder he had no recourse but to take to <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/rush-limbaugh-advertisers-sandra-fluke-297817 ">what's left of his airwaves</a> Thursday to clear his name after Washington Post writer Alexandra Petri erroneously stated that his show <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/rush-limbaughs-show-targets-jerks-judging-from-the-latest-ads/2012/03/07/gIQAiwQLxR_blog.html">"targets jerks."</a> And did you see how the guy with a bit of an image problem with the ladies was forced to bust out the "B word"?</p><p>Writing about the way advertisers have been dumping Limbaugh's show like it's toxic waste – exactly like it's toxic waste, really – Petri had reported that among his new sponsors, "So far, he's picked up AshleyMadison.com, the site where you go to cheat on your wife, and another web site that is explicitly for sugar-daddy matchmaking." Except that Limbaugh had done no such thing. Why, it's as if Petri thought Limbaugh had no integrity or something.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/rush_limbaugh_media_victim/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/rush_limbaugh_media_victim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>50</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The hidden meaning of Rush&#8217;s apology</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/the_hidden_meaning_of_rushs_apology/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/the_hidden_meaning_of_rushs_apology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12653801</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The fact that the radio host said sorry at all is the result of a welcome push for a more civil discourse]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>During his long career as the most famous talk radio host in modern history, Rush Limbaugh has only rarely apologized for his rhetoric -- so when he does, it's worth pondering the contrition's deeper meaning. Was his apology last week for calling a Georgetown student a "slut" just a shrewd move to undercut a potential defamation lawsuit? Was it a frightened response to an intensifying backlash from advertisers? Does it prove the power of the liberal political organizations that have an ideological ax to grind against Limbaugh?</p><p>The answer to all those queries is yes -- but none of those factors is the genuine news of the matter. Instead, what makes Limbaugh's apology so important is its context. Capping off other similar brouhahas from across the mediasphere, Limbaugh's mea culpa -- however insincere -- is significant because it is proof that America may be both setting some basic standards for political discourse and rejecting the right-wing shrieks about "censorship" and "political correctness."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/the_hidden_meaning_of_rushs_apology/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/09/the_hidden_meaning_of_rushs_apology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bill Maher wants you to forgive Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/bill_maher_wants_you_to_forgive_rush/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/bill_maher_wants_you_to_forgive_rush/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Maher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12600391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A privileged white guy who makes sexist comments would like us to pardon a privileged white guy for doing the same]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week in rich, delicious irony: A privileged, middle-aged man known for making sexist, derogatory comments would like America to forgive a privileged, middle-aged man for making sexist, derogatory comments.</p><p>After admitting that he does <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/billmaher/status/177186344697733120">"Hate to defend #RushLimbaugh,"</a> Bill Maher went on to tweet Tuesday, about the radio host: "he apologized, liberals looking bad not accepting. Also hate intimidation by sponsor pullout." Wait, who looks bad here? My sides, they're splitting!</p><p>Maher, of course, is a professional provocateur, a guy who views himself as an equal opportunity fly in everyone's ointment. But he's also the man who recently gave a cool million dollars to Obama's super PAC and once suggested "don't ask, don't tell" be overturned purely "because it will make Rush Limbaugh explode like a bag full of meat dropped from a helicopter." As such, he no doubt felt uniquely qualified to appeal to the left's sense of justice. And no doubt there are plenty of talking heads – the ones who erroneously <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html">keep insisting</a> that liberals and feminists have no problem with Maher's track record of offensive remarks – who'd go along with him.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/bill_maher_wants_you_to_forgive_rush/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/bill_maher_wants_you_to_forgive_rush/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>216</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Online dating king embraces Limbaugh</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/online_pimp_embraces_limbaugh/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/online_pimp_embraces_limbaugh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12588921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As advertisers flee the right-wing talk show host, Mr. Sugar Daddy wants to buy airtime]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some progressives may dare to dream that the day is coming when Rush Limbaugh's bray no longer cranks out of every wavelength orifice in the American radio dial. In the wake of his attacks on Sandra Fluke, blue chip advertisers like Netflix, Allstate, John Deere and Capital One are either dropping him as fast as they can, or publicly saying their ads on his show have been “mistakes.”</p><p>But, the formerly oxycontin-addicted, thrice-married broadcaster is only now finding his true friends.  One businessman eager to replace those who cut and run is Brandon Wade, the founder of a website called SeekingArrangements.com that pairs college girls needing money (Sugar Babies) with older men (Sugar Daddies) needing, well,  “an arrangement.”</p><p>Yesterday, the dating site offered to start buying 30- and 60-second spots on Rush’s show. If approved, the ads will run next month.</p><p>In a plot twist Stephen Colbert’s writers might have dreamed up on a slow news day, Wade hailed the doughy bellower as a model for guys who like ‘em young, hot and financially needy.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/online_pimp_embraces_limbaugh/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/07/online_pimp_embraces_limbaugh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>White conservative manhood crisis</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/white_conservative_manhood_crisis/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/white_conservative_manhood_crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12521711</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent GOP assault on women's rights stems from the same fears as the racist attacks on Obama]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santorum's attacks on women's reproductive rights didn't happen in a vacuum. They're part of a larger conservative backlash against women, minorities and the poor. Chauncey DeVega explains:</p><blockquote><p>Since the election of Barack Obama, the Tea Party GOP has embraced a kamikaze-like politics in which they are willing to destroy the proverbial village in order to liberate it. This appetite for destruction has reached a fever pitch during the last few weeks. Rick Santorum and the Republican Party have called for limiting women’s reproductive rights under the guise of defending “religion” from the “tyranny” of the Obama administration. <a href="http://wearerespectablenegroes.blogspot.com/2012/03/nonracist-federal-judge-says-that-mutt.html">A federal judge was caught forwarding an email</a> to his friends suggesting that Barack Obama’s conception was the product of drunken sex between his mother Ann Dunham and a dog. And Rush Limbaugh launched a viciously misogynistic attack on Sandra Fluke, a private citizen, who dared to testify before Congress in defense of a woman’s right to have equal access to birth control.</p>
<p>On the surface, these incidents appear to be unrelated. They are simply the desperate graspings and mouth utterances of an increasingly fringe and desperate Republican Party which is determined to defeat Barack Obama by any means necessary. However, these events are all symptoms of a bigger problem. In the Age of Obama, white manhood — and a particular type of conservative white masculinity — is frightened, unsettled and terrified of its obsolescence. White (conservative) masculinity finds itself in an existential crisis.</p></blockquote><p>Read more on Chauncey DeVega's <a href="http://open.salon.com/blog/chauncey_devega/2012/03/06/rush_limbaugh_and_the_crisis_in_white_conservative_manhood">Open Salon blog</a>.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/white_conservative_manhood_crisis/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/white_conservative_manhood_crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>63</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The pro-choice reawakening</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/the_pro_choice_reawakening/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/the_pro_choice_reawakening/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Birth Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12485141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new rise in anger at attacks on reproductive freedom ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monday, at around the same time that the Democratic National Committee launched <a href="http://my.democrats.org/page/s/stand-with-sandra?source=DNC_HQB">Stand With Sandra,</a> to fundraise over the loathsome attacks on the reproductive rights activist Sandra Fluke, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150720349477642.471133.48762312641&amp;type=1">images</a> of police in riot gear arresting peaceful protesters of Virginia’s mandatory ultrasound law were spreading on Facebook. “Never dreamed I’d be protesting for women’s rights in 2012 in Virginia,” read one sign.</p><p>Not everyone was surprised. The activists who have for years protested online, in person or in the courts – when women were attacked with fierce misogyny simply for existing in public, when women’s healthcare was stigmatized and subject to punishing double standards, or, for that matter, when seven states passed mandatory ultrasound laws – had another <a href="http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3153061117173&amp;set=a.3152905913293.2138758.1584525122&amp;type=1&amp;theater  ">sign</a> to represent them: "I cannot believe I <em>still</em> have to protest this shit." But this time, they weren't drowned out, they were joined with fierce, spontaneous energy. As my colleague Mary Elizabeth Williams put it, though she worries about her daughters facing a "harder and meaner" world for women than the one she grew up in, “I haven't felt this strong a sense of ‘We are not helpless and this is not OK’ in a long time."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/the_pro_choice_reawakening/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/the_pro_choice_reawakening/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rush&#8217;s big enabler: The army</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/rushs_big_enabler_the_army/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/rushs_big_enabler_the_army/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reproductive Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12484031</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A government-funded radio station beams Limbaugh to service members around the globe]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Rush Limbaugh faces more<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/business/media/limbaugh-advertisers-flee-show-amid-storm.html?_r=1"> heat</a> over his<a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/02/hold_this_between_your_knees_rush_limbaugh/singleton/"> attempts</a> to "slut"-shame Sandra Fluke for testifying before Congress in support of student healthcare-covered birth control, there's one big supporter of the conservative talk show host that's largely avoided scrutiny: the U.S. military. On Open Salon, Heather Michon explains:</p><blockquote><p>One of Rush's biggest enablers has so far escaped attention: the American Forces Network. For years, Limbaugh's show has been beamed around the globe to service members, military support staff and families. Other attempts have been made to remove him from that network and have failed.</p>
<p>This is the time.</p>
<p>In his more customized attacks on Fluke, it's easy to overlook the fact that Limbaugh has a two-decade-long track record of classifying women as inferior goods. This is the man who coined the term "Feminazi," who once stated that "feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream." In Rush World, most <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/201012170035">women are either babes, sluts or whores</a>. They're cunning and manipulative or whiny and weak. There's not much middle ground.</p></blockquote><p>Read the whole post on <a href="http://open.salon.com/blog/heather_michon/2012/03/05/should_rush_limbaugh_be_on_the_armed_forces_radio_network">Open Salon</a>.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/rushs_big_enabler_the_army/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/rushs_big_enabler_the_army/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>88</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hold this between your knees, Rush Limbaugh</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/02/hold_this_between_your_knees_rush_limbaugh/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/02/hold_this_between_your_knees_rush_limbaugh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 19:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Birth Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inside Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reproductive Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12469591</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Help enrage America\'s top misogynist. Support women – and join Salon Core]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought I'd lost my capacity to be disgusted by Rush Limbaugh. He lives for that; why give him the satisfaction? But he crossed into new territory with his attacks on Sandra Fluke, who used to be a private citizen working toward a Georgetown University law degree, until the Catholic bishops <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/catholics_need_to_preach_what_we_practice/singleton/">meddled in American politics and in her personal life</a>, and she decided to tell her story.</p><p>Fluke tried to testify on behalf of President Obama's contraception coverage requirements at Rep. Darrell Issa's Inquisition; excuse me, his hearing on the regulations, which featured an all-male panel to lead off. But she was denied permission, on the grounds that Issa was interested in threats to religious liberty, not women's lives. That was bad enough. After the GOP congressman shut her down, she told her story to House Democrats as well as journalists. Limbaugh called her a "slut" and a "prostitute," and promised to buy Fluke and Georgetown women "as much aspirin to put between their knees as they want. We are paying her for having sex. We are getting screwed. So Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal: If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it, and I'll tell you what it is: We want you to post the videos online, so we can all watch."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/02/hold_this_between_your_knees_rush_limbaugh/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/02/hold_this_between_your_knees_rush_limbaugh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>415</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rush Limbaugh, secret Democrat</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/17/rush_limbaugh_secret_democrat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/17/rush_limbaugh_secret_democrat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12381721</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That's the only explanation for why the right-wing blowhard is leading the GOP off a culture-war cliff]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I've decided Rush Limbaugh must be a closeted Democrat. I can't think of any other reason he would be leading the Republican Party over a political cliff by advising that they double down on the culture wars.</p><p>With new poll data showing that President Obama is quickly gaining ground among women voters, at least partly due to Republican extremism on contraception, <a href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/02/16/see_i_told_you_so_obama_approval_up_jobless_rate_down_culture_war_revived_all_manipulated_by_lib_media_to_dispirit_you">Limbaugh told his listeners</a> Thursday that the GOP would win the election if it's decided on culture-war terms.</p><p>“Something tells me, that if the upcoming election could be decided on social issues, the Republicans could win that in a landslide, because we are on the right side of the culture war,” he said. “The problem is, we’re scared to death of it. The Republican establishment wants no part of it.”</p><p>Smart Republicans are indeed afraid of the culture wars – because they know they're on the losing side. Sadly, there aren't very many smart Republicans anymore; or at least there aren't very many who will stand up to extremists in their base and say enough is enough on their jihad against birth control.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/17/rush_limbaugh_secret_democrat/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/17/rush_limbaugh_secret_democrat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>127</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Limbaugh rejects teachings of Jesus</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/18/limbaugh_rejects_teachings_of_jesus/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/18/limbaugh_rejects_teachings_of_jesus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10493301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[He mentions the Christian savior often but usually abuses his message ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>America’s most popular talk show host has spoken the word "Jesus" approximately 2,420 times during his last 20 years on the air. He has mentioned "Christ" 2,130 times and the "Messiah" 4,038 times, according to <a href="http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/Rush-Quotes-on-Christ-and-Christianity.html">one blogger</a> with a whole lot of time on his hands. The purpose of his exhaustive research was to dispel doubts about Limbaugh’s Christian credentials, which have been under fire lately by <a href="http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1030.html">certain evangelicals</a> who cite the fact that Rush -- according to his own brother, David -- was never “born again.”</p><p>This is a hot topic for fundamentalists. “Is Rush a real Christian?” is the most <a href="http://www.google.com/trends?q=+rush+limbaugh&amp;ctab=0&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0">frequently Googled question </a> about the controversial radio personality.</p><p>So I decided to do a little research of my own, which I hoped might shed some light on the impending holiday season. Do Rush Limbaugh and the Prince of Peace really see eye to eye? Often the answer is no.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/18/limbaugh_rejects_teachings_of_jesus/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/18/limbaugh_rejects_teachings_of_jesus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>325</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Limbaugh embraces Ugandan killers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/26/limbaugh_embraces_ugandan_killers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/26/limbaugh_embraces_ugandan_killers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10145442</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Radio gasbag praises Lord's Resistance Army, which specializes in abusing Christian children]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong></strong>If you blinked, you might have missed it -- a recent movie called "Machine Gun Preacher<em>." </em>The film hasn’t burned up the box office and the title may have kept you away from your local picture palace in the mistaken belief that it was some kind of exploitation flick or the latest Quentin Tarantino exercise in postmodernism and ironic bloodbaths. In which case, who could blame you?</p><p>In fact, "Machine Gun Preacher" is the improbable but true story of Sam Childers (played by the improbable but true Gerard Butler, the shiny, muscle-bound Spartan king of "300" fame). After a misbegotten life as a violent biker/drug dealer/ex-con, Childers had a come-to-Jesus epiphany and became a born-again Christian with his own congregation in rural Pennsylvania. But it was when he heard a missionary speak about church work in East Africa that he found his true calling. He went on to build an orphanage in the Sudan and protect the kids there by becoming a vigilante fighting alongside the ill-equipped and undermanned local militia. That’s where the machine gun part comes in.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/26/limbaugh_embraces_ugandan_killers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/26/limbaugh_embraces_ugandan_killers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt has a Rush Limbaugh problem</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/mitt_has_a_rush_limbaugh_problem/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/mitt_has_a_rush_limbaugh_problem/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opening Shot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10112788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[... and it tells us an awful lot about the evolution of right-wing politics in the Obama era]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Rush Limbaugh goes on the air this afternoon, Mitt Romney's opponents might want to tune in. Because if Limbaugh's final broadcast of the week is anything like the two that came before it, he's going to be giving them some serious ammunition.</p><p>The past few weeks have felt like something of a turning point in the GOP race, with Chris Christie and Sarah Palin both declining to run, Rick Perry <a href="politics.salon.com/2011/10/12/rick_perry_is_quickly_becoming_an_afterthought/">completing his decline</a> from clear front-runner to just another guy on the stage, and Romney finally <a href="http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/83888/romney-back-in-manhattan-in-november/">starting to reel in</a> some of the party's heavy hitters who'd been on the sidelines. The catch is that actual Republican voters are proving stubbornly resistant to Romney, who remains stuck in the low- to mid-20s in national polls, even in the face of Perry's collapse. And to the 75 percent or so of GOP voters who still refuse to back Romney, Limbaugh has delivered an emphatic message these past few days: Keep resisting!</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/mitt_has_a_rush_limbaugh_problem/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/mitt_has_a_rush_limbaugh_problem/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Washington&#8217;s favorite pundits explain why we&#8217;re doomed</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/26/congress_debt_pundits/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/26/congress_debt_pundits/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt ceiling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Cantor, R-Va.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner, R-Ohio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/07/26/congress_debt_pundits</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The guys our legislators listen to -- and answer to -- show why there's no hope for sensible debt ceiling policy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot of people were alarmed Monday -- with good reason -- to learn that the House Republicans were relying on radio entertainer Rush Limbaugh and vile blogger Erick Erickson to tell them what to do about this whole debt ceiling thing. As everyone in Washington went into separate rooms to write their own horrible debt ceiling plans (my one-step approach: NO new revenue, ten zillion dollars in cuts to non-defense spending, Social Security replaced by personalized/market-based packs of roving hyenas), <a href="http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/25/the-absolution-i-cannot-give/">Erickson reported</a> that he's been taking "call after call" from unnamed "members of the United States Congress," all of whom were seeking his approval, because this dumb, disingenuous hack is who the Republican Party is actually accountable to.</p><p>Meanwhile, John Boehner, the speaker of the House, gave his five-step "two-step" plan to famous shouty radio guy Rush Limbaugh, before he showed it to <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/173311-boehner-briefed-limbaugh-on-debt-plan">his own conference.</a> (Of course, his conference is full of morons and extremists, many of whom wouldn't have known what to think about Boehner's plan until Uncle Rush explained it, so this was more shrewd than disrespectful.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/26/congress_debt_pundits/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/26/congress_debt_pundits/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>78</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to make Rush Limbaugh happy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/25/how_to_make_rush_limbaugh_happy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/25/how_to_make_rush_limbaugh_happy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 21:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget Showdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt ceiling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How the World Works]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Boehner, R-Ohio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works//2011/07/25/how_to_make_rush_limbaugh_happy</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On the debt ceiling, John Boehner finds a way to accuse Obama of holding the nation hostage]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All you really need to know about House Speaker John Boehner's <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/boehners-plan/2011/07/11/gIQABzV3YI_blog.html?wprss=ezra-klein">new plan</a> to raise the debt ceiling is the <a href="http://www.politico.com/static/PPM156_boehner_conference_072511.html">title:</a>&#160;"Two Step Approach To Hold President Obama Accountable."</p><p>You see, it's all about <em>Obama.</em> It's not about grand bargains or complex efforts to devise a long-term bipartisan plan that will bring down the deficit without further endangering the economy and savaging the safety net. It's not about maintaining the full faith and credit of the United States. It's not about the difficulty of finding grounds for reasonable compromise. <em>It's all about Obama.</em></p><p>And it makes sense. House Republicans were getting some bad press for their reckless willingness to extract huge concessions by holding the debt ceiling and the nation's credit-worthiness hostage. Lots of polling indicates that, outside of the Republican base, most Americans support compromise, and a "balanced" approach to deficit reduction that includes revenue increases as well as spending cuts. But no matter what Obama offered the GOP, Boehner could not agree to it, because any kind of a deal with the president would have the unbearable downside of making Obama look like a presidential problem-solver. And that would be an abomination.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/25/how_to_make_rush_limbaugh_happy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/25/how_to_make_rush_limbaugh_happy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>49</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The mindless hysteria of right-wing sheep</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/lyons_limbaugh/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/lyons_limbaugh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/29/lyons_limbaugh</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey, Dittoheads: You're being played for suckers!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Politics makes people stupid even in good times. Fear provokes irrationality. Given the parlous state of the U.S. economy, it's no surprise that the national conversation has grown shrill. Even so, the level of vituperation and unreason comes as a continuing revelation.</p><p>Not that I'm complaining. As a native of New Jersey, the Insult State (official motto: "Oh yeah, who says?"), there's no level of invective to which I can't sink. Anybody who writes provocatively shouldn't complain when readers are provoked. Besides, it's less the anger than the sheer, boneheaded illogic that amazes me.</p><p>One could compile a textbook on logical fallacies from my email queue. If people used reason in their daily lives as poorly as they do when their political passions are engaged, we'd be in worse shape than we are. Luckily, most don't. Or if they do, civility prevents them from the kind of heedless venting encouraged by Internet anonymity.</p><p>A recent blog post by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman set me off. A world-renowned economist by trade, Krugman had posted an item arguing that a Greek bank-debt default might not be a total disaster. He mentioned that Argentina's economy had a strong recovery after it defaulted in 2001 -- stipulating that there are big differences between the two countries.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/lyons_limbaugh/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/lyons_limbaugh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>161</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why people become chickenhawks</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/29/chickenhawk_origins/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/29/chickenhawk_origins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dick Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Military]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/06/29/chickenhawk_origins</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new study sheds light on why non-veterans like Cheney and Limbaugh are such avid militarists]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since at least the Iraq War if not earlier, chickenhawkery has been a hallmark of American politics. From the <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=101st%20fighting%20keyboarders">101st Fighting Keyboarders</a> to the professional Draft-Dodging Neoconservatives to the Self-Labeled "Liberal Hawks" who disproportionately populate Washington green rooms, our nation's scowling legion of chickenhawks has sculpted a new archetype -- that of the chest-thumping pundit/politician who aggressively demands others fight and die in wars, but who himself either refuses to enlist or fled the battlefield when his country called.</p><p>What makes chickenhawkery such a distinctly American phenomenon is our culture's coupling of aggressive militarism with a lack of anything even resembling shared sacrifice. Quite bizarrely, we celebrate those who rhetorically promote wars as "tough" and "strong" without requiring those very warmongers to walk their talk. Shielded from any personal risk of injury or death, the chickenhawk is thus permitted to wrap himself in an American flag and goose step his way through television studios as the alleged personification of patriotic bravery.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/29/chickenhawk_origins/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/29/chickenhawk_origins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>147</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The conservative movement is an elaborate moneymaking venture</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/16/pay_play_rush/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/16/pay_play_rush/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/16/pay_play_rush</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course right-wing talk radio hosts sell their endorsements -- their listeners are the movement's cash cow]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The conservative movement is primarily a means by which the wealth of rabid right-wingers is redistributed to celebrities. Sometimes the money comes from billionaires, who know exactly what they're buying when they fund advocacy groups and think tanks, but the whole scheme is basically powered by regular right-wing folks who are kept riled up and angry enough to keep sending checks to frauds and buying books full of alarming lies.</p><p>Yesterday, <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56997.html">Politico reported what</a> an educated listener could've guessed: Right-wing radio pundits are paid by conservative organizations to mention them favorably. FreedomWorks pays Glenn Beck to talk about how great FreedomWorks is, Rush Limbaugh wholeheartedly endorses the Heritage Foundation because the Heritage Foundation pays him, and Mark Levin receives a check for telling you that donating to Americans for Prosperity will help defeat Obama.</p><p>Glenn Beck is the most obvious and tacky about it, and he has learned that there is essentially no downside to being obvious and tacky about it. He is a very rich man and still inventing ways of getting richer by bleeding his incredibly devoted followers. He is now asking them to directly send him money in order to watch his show, which was formerly included in the cost of people's cable or satellite subscriptions.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/16/pay_play_rush/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/16/pay_play_rush/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>51</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

