Looks like a bunch of his formera advertisers agree:

"A 7th advertiser pulls out of Limbaugh's show"

http://news.yahoo.com/7th-advertiser-pulls-limbaughs-show-194641519.html

I read this morning that people are bombarding his sponsors' websites, Facebook pages, etc -- with their dislike of Rush's rant.

Keep up the good work, peeps!! It would be great to see this wind-bag off the air.

Rush needed to apologize and we're all glad he did. Maybe it was too late in the sense that he is taking hits and will continue to.

Now, shall we demand the same of these out of line, disgusting remarks towards various women by men in the media?
Is this just common place? Maybe we are far too quick to judge WHO said what? None of these are worse or better than the others, in my opinion.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html

Men behave badly.  When women allow it to be partisan, they will continue to behave badly.  When Anthony Weiner just had to show his stuff, it was his fellow Democrat rep, Nikki Tsongas who led the charge for him to resign.  It continues, nonetheless, and that is what I meant when I compared Mad Men to today.  There are some things which have not changed.

So why aren't we protesting these people? I had no idea there were THIS many and they were that foul?
Advertiser's need to pull their money and these people should not have a platform, should they?

From the link:
"During the 2008 election Ed Schultz said on his radio show that Sarah Palin set off a “bimbo alert.”

He called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing sl*t.” (He later apologized.)

Called Kirsten Powers--a “bimbo” for the offense of quoting him.

Keith Olbermann has said that conservative commentator S.E. Cupp "should have been aborted by her parents"

He called Michelle Malkin a “mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick.”

Left-wing darling Matt Taibbi wrote on his blog in 2009, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of... " WHAT?

Chris Matthews’s -called Hillary “she-devil,” “Nurse Ratched,” and “Madame Defarge", and once claimed she won her Senate seat only because her “husband messed around.”

But the grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher—who also happens to be a favorite of liberals—who has given $1 million to President Obama’s super PAC. Maher has called Palin a “dumb tw*t” and dropped the
C-word.

He called Palin and Congresswoman Bachmann “b**bs” and “two bimbos.”

He recently made a joke about Rick Santorum’s wife using a vib**tor.

And there you have it.  We can rightfully blame the GOP for a non-commital diss of Rush; but it has been going on.  I cannot listen to Matthews or Olbermann because of their anti-Hillary rhetoric of 4 years ago.  Granted, Sandra Fluke is not a political candidate, but if the political candidates have not spoken up in the past, it is just going to happen again.

There is no excuse for any of it.
So...? Why are we not boycotting their advertisers and more importantly why is our POTUS taking a 1 Million dollar donation from the worst offender of them all?

I actually am pretty disappointed in Ruch for making this "apology".  I don't feel it was needed or warranted.  As for the sponsors, I'm pretty sure there are plenty to fill the space.

 

This woman put HERSELF out there with her testifying.  Unless I am confused.  Was she paid by someone for her testimony?  If she were, in fact, all Helen Reddy "I am woman hear me roar" about her birth control, so much so she WANTED to testify, I find it hard to believe one guy can be such a damage to her psyche.

 

Furthermore, I absolutely believe the President should have much more pressing issues on his plate, than to call this woman.  But alas, it is proven again that this President's main goal is PR, and playing to the fawning.

Sorry mom.  Cannot make excuses for Rush.  Sandra Fluke had the right to make her speech (don't know where she was paid for it comes from) and Rush had a right to make his.  But at some point, we have to draw a line when a grown man uses middle school slurs and bullies simply because it pays to be Rush.  TIme to turn off the faucet.

Liz, I'm not making excuses for him.  (Heaven knows he doesn't need me for that).  My point is she said what she said.  She has to be able to take the heat and/or the praise for that.  As does he.  My questions about her being paid is was it here choice to testify, that she now regerets because she is being called out?  Or was she paid and now has to have the "team" come out to defend her?

 

I believe if you make a statement, stand by it.  If you are going to backpeddle, the minute some throw some mud, they both should shut their traps to being with.

I agree. He went way over the line of decency and he gets what he deserves from that. It was wrong to go after her personally and so harshly.

I also agree Obama used this as a political opportunity-- also wrong.

I still want to know did Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc---did any of them have the cajones to "man up" and denounce Maher, Olbermann, Schulz?

Men behave badly, there is no question. The problem is that many are just as sexist as some men are. Imagine if women got together on the issue of sexism-- men, being the minority, wouldn't stand a chance.

I believe if you make a statement, stand by it.  If you are going to backpeddle, the minute some throw some mud, they both should shut their traps to being with.

XXXXXXX

So if yountalk about birth control, you've opened yourself to be called a "s l u t"? This is what I'm talking about: women are some of the worst sexists out there.

And Amy iS right.. EVERYONE has to be called out on this kind of thing. EVERYONE.

As an offshoot of that, Survivor this season has started out as women v. men.  The gender stereotyping works for tv and ads and money.  But it just still gobsmacks me.

So if yountalk about birth control, you've opened yourself to be called a "s l u t"?

------------------------------------------

 

If you put yourself out there as a "face" of an issue, you need to be prepared for anything.  And I think that is pretty much all-encompassing.  If you're asking me to support her, because she's a woman, my response is no.  That is just as wrong as going against her because she is a woman, IMO.

I'm not surprised at the sexism of men. What has always surprised me is when women turn on one another in this area and cling to gender stereotyping. I saw it with H. Clinton's bid for the nomination- some of the most sexist attitudes came from women. I've been called many things in my time for expressing what some call "feminist" ideas.

If you put yourself out there as a "face" of an issue, you need to be prepared for anything.  And I think that is pretty much all-encompassing.  If you're asking me to support her, because she's a woman, my response is no.  That is just as wrong as going against her because she is a woman, IMO.

XXXXXXX
How about if when you don't support someone you address the issue and not call names?