Defending Limbaugh: The Case for Rush

Now before you tar and feather this article, you’ve got to understand that while the controversial Rush Limbaugh has many detractors, remember that he also has a lot of supporters too. How else could he have gotten away with… well… everything for as long as he has? You won’t find me sticking up for or criticizing Rush in this article (that’s between you and the comments section), but I wanted to let you in on a surprising and interesting twist: a liberal (with a capital-L) has jumped into the discussion, and believe it or not, he’s standing with Rush.

Paul Theroux is the advocate on the dais. He said that he didn’t know whether he’d “yawn or puke” just before reading Rush’s now-infamous remarks concerning the Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, and after he did, he figured it’d “go away” and he could get back to living his life. But after the deluge of criticism pointed at Rush, Theroux decided he couldn’t take it anymore and cried “hypocrisy!”

He absolutely concedes that the Rush’s comments about Sandra Fluke amounted to “offensive hyperbole,” and “odd for the man whose idea of a good time is a week in the Dominican Republic with a bagful of Viagra,” but asks, what about those on the left who dismiss “George Bush as a chimp, and Sarah Palin as a skank”?

“You have to give Limbaugh a pass,” Theroux argues, “otherwise you lose the right to go on calling Gingrich and Eric Cantor pimps for Israel, and Rick Santorum a mental midget, and if you foreswear colorful, if not robust or wicked language altogether you might as well shut up.”

Theroux’s entire post on The Daily Beast is linked at “yawn or puke”. Read it through and let us know what you think.

Does Rush deserve a pass? Is there hypocrisy afoot? I’d dying to know, dear readers!