Rush Limbaugh: Liberal Women Are To Blame For The Weiner Scandal
Some people, liberal feminists in particular, probably won’t like Rush Limbaugh’s take on the Anthony Weiner. However, there’s a lot of truth to it. A whole lot of truth…
It’s impossible for women to engage in sexual missteps like Weiner did. Of course, who are all those school teachers that are engaging in predatory behavior with young male — young boy — students? Who are those people? This is absurd. You know, here’s the thing. I wonder: Why is it that Anthony Weiner turns out to be the kind of guy he is? How does that happen? If we’re gonna bring this stuff up, folks, let’s talk about it. Let’s bring it up! What kinda women has Anthony Weiner been around his whole life? He has been around a bunch of these kinds of women who have been attacking testosterone, who have been attacking traditional male roles.
He’s been around women to whom the idea of a real guy is some metrosexual. Is it any wonder, ladies and gentlemen? I wonder if it occurs to women like Claire Shipman or “Torie” Clarke that Weiner did what he did because he’s been surrounded with women like them for his whole adult life. You know, I told you that I had this story from last week. Hollywood is working on four or five (it might even be six) sitcoms about how men have basically just been just beaten down to pantywaist, Milquetoast wimps — and they’re comedies. It’s in vogue to make fun of weak, worthless, wimp sissies. That’s who the men are in these upcoming shows. Now, how do these men turn out that way? Who makes them that way?
‘Cause that’s not their natural state. I mean, you look at Weiner. We cannot blame what happened to Weiner on testosterone. We’re looking at a guy here who is kiddie whipped. You want to get down to brass tacks on this? We’re looking at somebody here who’s been hanging around these kind of women — and he’s doing anything he can to break out. He’s doing everything he can to step out and get away from their control. This, to Anthony Weiner, is being a guy. He’s not allowed to be a guy hanging around a bunch of liberal women. (interruption) No, Snerdley, I’m not defending the action.
…No, I really believe, when I say that it’s the women that Weiner hung around with, that he worked with, the women that influenced him growing up, that’s why he’s the way he is. And I think being surrounded by, raised by, in the same orb as, judged by, what have you, a bunch of feminist oriented liberal women explains why it is that politicians need to keep cutting loose. It’s no different than why Obama goes and grabs fast food every time he gets away from Michelle. At home he’s gotta eat bean sprouts and watercress and vinaigrette salad dressing. When he gets a chance to get away from all that, what does he do? Burgers, hot dogs, double order of fries, loaded up with mayonnaise, all the rotten stuff.
Now, let’s bring morality in it for a second. Liberals and others are the ones who tell us to ignore the moral issues. In fact, there are even some Republicans that say, “Hey, let’s not get into the social issues. We don’t want to go there. We’re just made to order for hypocrisy and so forth. You know, get away from faith.” And they now tell us that morality does matter and women are more moral than men! That’s what Claire Shipman and the gang were saying. So they can’t have it both ways as far as I’m concerned. Every other day of the week, morality, how old-fashioned is that? Don’t tell me about your morality. Don’t impose your morality on me. And let Weiner get into trouble because of the women he’s been hanging around and all of a sudden women become more moral than men, Claire Shipman and “Torie” Clarke and whoever else on that panel, far more deserving of positions of power than Weiner as they are more moral.
Now, this is important. Weiner was their guy, and for a while they tried to circle the wagons around their Weiner. Just last week we had a story about all the liberal women doing everything they could to save Weiner. Remember? While at the same time on this program and in my e-mail all kinds of conservative women are dumping all over Sarah Palin. And I’m sitting here as the host trying to explain all this to people, trying to understand it myself half the time. But Weiner was their guy. He’s a huge, huge, big-government liberal. He dismissed social, moral issues as web issues, and now all of a sudden Weiner is an example of all men and their immorality? That’s what these babes on the Sunday ABC show meant when is this is a great moment for women in politics because Weiner is representative of all men, they’re all that way, some of them just smarter than others and never get caught.
…When was the last time you heard — now, I’m serious — when’s the last time you heard about a Navy SEAL or a race car driver or car mechanic getting caught in a sex scandal? They don’t have anything to prove about their masculinity. But Weiner, there’s no question that’s what he’s doing. He’s proving his masculinity in the only way he knows how, taking a picture of it because his behavior is not allowed. But men who are not afraid of being who they are have no reason to prove their masculinity. But Weiner, pencil-necked geek and everything, felt the need to do so. Why? He’s not allowed to be a guy. Look at the women on the ABC show. “This is a great moment for women. Men screw things up, too much testosterone, that’s why we’re at war, all this stupid stuff.”
Women have neutered the business of politics so effectively that the men who are involved in politics constantly have to prove their masculinity to themselves and to others. As I say, in Weiner’s case, extending all the way to taking a picture of his real congressional member and sending it out on Twitter. You know, the subhead in every picture is, “I really am a man. I really am a man. Look at me.” Do you think it’s possible — just indulge me here for a second — is it possible that Hillary had some role in making Bill Clinton Bill Clinton? Okay, okay. So Snerdley says absolutely no question.
… What’s that, Snerdley? They’re angry at you out there? Oh, they’re angry at me? Who’s angry? Women are angry at me? Let me tell you something: Christiane Amanpour, “Torie” Clarke, and Claire Shipman started this. I am not gonna sit here and let all this pass. I’m just not gonna sit idly by and do what the modern man’s supposed to do: Whatever some feminist women say, “Okay, okay, okay, okay! That’s it. Whatever you say.” No way. You can’t sit there and tell us for all of these years to ignore the moral issues, to stay away from faith and now tell us all of a sudden that morality does matter when we got Weiner and Clinton and whatever the guys engaging in these transgressions are.
All of a sudden now morality matters when it never did to liberals before? Now it does because women are more moral than men and thus more qualified for positions of power? I mean, this is not something I just let go in one ear and out the other. Weiner was your guy. He is a huge, big-government liberal who himself laughed at and pooh-poohed all of these social and moral issues. He looked at ’em as wedge issues. We weren’t supposed to bring all of that stuff up. Now all of a sudden he has become an example of all men and their immorality, and all of a sudden now Weiner’s gotta go? I don’t care whether he goes or not. Frankly, I want him to stay! I frankly wish my conservative brothers would stop going on television and joining this endless chorus (which is easy) for Weiner to go.
…Everybody said, “Okay, I guess what we are is bad, and we’re supposed to change and supposed to become something else based on what these feminists are telling us.” But nobody knew who they were supposed to be. All they were told was that who they really were was not good. They were racists, sexists, bigots, they were predators, rapists, what have you. And so the cowed among the men started on a path to try to prove that all these premises were incorrect, and they ended up emasculating themselves. It’s been a giant mess. I’ll tell you, this militant feminism has been a huge, huge mess. It’s caused I can’t tell you how many problems in our culture and in our society, not the least of which is Roe v. Wade.
…Okay, Weiner is a creep. There’s no question. This is, as I said, not defending what he did, but, look: All the while they’re telling us morality doesn’t matter, Julie. Follow me on this. Throughout my 22 or 23 years behind the microphone, the left has told us, “Social issues? Get rid of ’em! Morality is none of anybody’s business! Don’t be judgmental. It’s not your job. You have no right to tell anybody what’s right or wrong. Who are you to say something is moral or immoral?” Not to me, but just to conservatives in general and society at large. As such the family values crowd and the moral majority and people who have sought to live in moral ways are often called hypocrites when they fall, when they slip.
The Democrats say, “We don’t have to be moral because we’ve never said to anybody that we are. We don’t believe in morality. We don’t believe in the social issues. We’ve never trumpeted them or any of that,” but look what happens. Weiner comes along and all of a sudden guess who cares about morality? They do! Guess who it is pushing for Weiner to quit? They are, because Weiner is not right. Weiner is immoral. The very people who spent all of my life telling me that that doesn’t matter, that it’s nobody’s business, are now the ones doing the 180 and suggesting Weiner has to go because of moral failings. It’s the ultimate in hypocrisy.
They tell us to ignore moral issues, to get away from God, to get away from faith, and now they tell us that morality does matter — and on a Sunday show yesterday they told us that women are more moral than men! Ergo, my response. Weiner was their guy. He’s a huge, big government lib. They loved Weiner. They dismissed the social and moral issues. They didn’t like it. And now Weiner gets ensnared by ’em, and they tried to save him for a while. But now even they admit that he’s gotta go. And on the Sunday show it’s Weiner that became the example of all men and their immorality as articulated by the guests on the show, not mine. I’m repeating what they said and reacting to it, and what I’m saying to Weiner is: Don’t let ’em lick you! You hang in there and don’t quit.
Aren’t liberals the ones who mock people for talking about family values? Don’t they sneer at Christianity? Aren’t they the ones who say lying about sex isn’t a lie at all? When a conservative cheats, isn’t their primary beef that the conservative is being a “hypocrite,” not that the conservative did something immoral? Didn’t liberals steadfastly defend Bill Clinton for behaving worse than Weiner did? Aren’t they the ones who say if it feels good, do it, and it’s nobody else’s business? Don’t they accuse anyone who opposes immoral sexual behavior of engaging in “slut shaming” or being some sort of uptight prude who needs to get laid? Aren’t they the ones who are willing to excuse just about any moral lapse imaginable as long as the person involved is a loyal liberal who’s still politically useful?
Then it’s how in the world could Anthony Weiner have done something this? Well, maybe he actually took the messages that liberals bombard people with on a daily basis to heart.
Obama’s highly politicized Attorney General Eric Holder lost a fight against legal gun owners this week when a federal judge
U.S. Representative Judy Biggert (R, Hinsdale, IL) introduced legislation last week intended to prevent misuse of federal housing counseling funds.
Kerry Picket had an interesting report in the Washington Times on the 28th. Apparently President Obama’s uncle Omar, an illegal