ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Limbaugh To Convene A ‘Female Summit’ To Figure Out Why Women Hate Him

By Amanda Terkel on Feb 25, 2009 at 7:45 pm

limbaughher.jpg Women don’t really like Rush Limbaugh. On Feb. 23, Public Policy Polling released findings showing that only 37 percent of women hold a favorable opinion of the hate radio host, compared to 56 percent of men.

As Jill Zimon notes, Limbaugh brought up this poll yesterday on his radio show, noting that it was one of the largest gender gaps Public Policy Polling has seen on any issue it has polled in the past year. His solution? To convene a summit of women to find out why they dislike him:

We’ll have a summit of all the women in this audience — or as many of them as we can get into breakout groups — and perhaps devote an hour in an upcoming program to calls only from women who genuinely want to talk to me. They can be liberal, conservative. They could be non-audience members, could be audience members. But I want some of these women to start telling me what it is I must do to close the gender gap — or, if not what it is I must do to close the gender gap, what it is I’ve done that has caused the gender gap; assuming the gender gap is true and that the poll is true. [...]

I own the men, and what must I do now to own women? And who better to ask than women? Including some of those who may agree that that I’m unfavorable. So stand by for that.

Listen here:

Women generally don’t like sexist remarks. A quick scan through some of Rush’s past statements shows that he does:

– “She’s actually a very smart cat. She gets loved. She gets adoration. She gets petted. She gets fed. And she doesn’t have to do anything for it, which is why I say this cat’s taught me more about women, than anything my whole life.” [11/30/06]

– “He’s trying to figure out how he can get involved in the deal down there at Duke where the lacrosse team…supposedly, you know, raped, some, uh, hos.” [3/31/06]

– “You know, there’s a crisis of young man-boy education in the schools. And they did this on purpose, to eliminate male competition in the work force. This is part of feminazi grand plan.” [5/21/08]

– “Classic example of the castrati, the new castrati. Jack Carter is — has been castrated by the feminization of this culture since he grew up.” [2/21/06]

– “I just heard Erin Burnett sounding a little wifey. … Well [she was] whining.” [10/23/07]

Rush later followed up, saying, “The first unsolicited reports from the upcoming female summit already in. They’re saying it’s a waste of time, women will not like me any more than the ones that already do, that you have to be an Oprah today in the media to attract.” He said that he was nevertheless still intent on holding a summit.

Face it, Rush. We’re just not that into you.

Update

Jill Zimon updates on how day one of Limbaugh’s “EIB Network Female Summit” went today. One highlight:

One thing about the Female Summit: sorry, no transsexuals. We’re not going to have anybody who’s had an addadictomy, and we’re not going to have anybody who’s had a chopadickoffamy. We’re going to have women from birth.

Health

Obama Health Budget: It’s A Boat Load Of Money, But Good Health Reform Demands Even More

By Igor Volsky on Feb 25, 2009 at 7:42 pm

Details are slowly leaking about the health care provisions in Obama’s budget and so far, the news sounds promising. The administration plans to set aside $634 billion over 10 years for reforming the health care system, lower costs and expand coverage.

Because this is a budget proposal, we have some details on where the money is coming from, but we don’t really know how that money will be spent. The basic idea is this: cut-back on the waste in our health care system, improve the efficiency of Medicare and Medicaid and then re-invest that money back into the fund (for health care reform).

Where will the $634 billion come from? The administration wants to limit “the tax break on itemized deductions for families with incomes above $250,000″ and strip approximately $300 billion from both Medicare and Medicaid, without cutting benefits.

They believe that there is enough waste in the health system to finance at least part of the down payment for reform:

- Eliminate Medicare Advantage overpayments and modernize the competitive bidding process.

- Drug companies would be required to increase the rebate they now provide for medications sold to Medicaid.

- Competition in generic medications (move forward with creating a generic version of biologic drugs)

- Bundle payments for post-hospital providers.

Overall, the fund is a good start, but it’s certainly not enough to reach universal coverage. Still, the Obama administration has learned from the mistakes of past reform efforts. Unlike the Clinton strategy, which didn’t include any money for health reform in the budget, and left Congress to digest a 700+ page health plan, Obama and Congress will fill in the details of reform.

They’ll decide how to spend the fund and divide the pie between preventive care, managed care, reimbursement reform, etc. This leaves a lot of room for compromise, but in working out the details of reform, progressive principles of true universality and affordability must remain intact.

Politics

Colorado state senator says HIV testing for pregnant women rewards ‘sexual promiscuity.’

By Guest Blogger on Feb 25, 2009 at 6:55 pm

sen09.jpg Today, Colorado State Sen. Dave Schultheis (R) caused outrage by announcing that he would vote against a bill requiring HIV tests for pregnant women because the disease “stems from sexual promiscuity” and he doesn’t think the government should reward “unacceptable behavior.” Schultheis explained his motives before casting the lone vote against the bill:

We do things continually to remove the negative consequences that take place from poor behavior and unacceptable behavior, quite frankly, and I don’t think that’s the role of this body.

As a result of that I finally came to the conclusion I would have to be a no vote on this because this stems from sexual promiscuity for the most part, and I just can’t vote on this bill and I wanted to explain to this body why I was going to be a no vote on this.

- Matt Finkelstein

Related Posts

Economy

U.S. Ranks Last In Progress Toward ‘Knowledge-Based Innovation Economy’ Over Last Decade

By Pat Garofalo on Feb 25, 2009 at 6:30 pm

innovateii.jpgToday, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) released a study examining six areas — human capital, innovation capacity, entrepreneurship, IT infrastructure, economic policy factors and economic performance — to assess the extent to which nations are able to compete globally on the basis of innovation.

The ITIF found that the U.S.’s overall position in terms of innovation-based competitiveness is slipping, and that America “ranks last in progress toward the new knowledge-based innovation economy over the last decade”:

[T]he prevailing view among many Washington policymakers is that the United States has been number 1 for so long it will continue to be number 1. Given this situation, the thinking goes, there is no real need for the United States to develop and implement a national economic development or competitiveness strategy. But this report finds that not only is the U.S. not number 1, but that its position is slipping rapidly. Absent a coherent national innovation strategy, the U.S. position will likely continue to slip, and with it, relative U.S. living standards.

According to the ITIF, “it’s time for U.S. federal policymakers to realize that the U.S. economy now competes with other nations, and like states after World War II did, it too needs to put in place a robust economic development policy.” The U.S. is one of only three industrialized nations that lacks a national innovation policy.

Related Posts

Climate Progress

Reid: Cap and trade bill is third in line

By Joe Romm on Feb 25, 2009 at 6:18 pm

The Senate climate legislation process seems to have hit a speed bump the same day the House process did. Greenwire (subs. req’d) reports:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said today that Congress could meet President Obama’s call for passing sweeping energy legislation this year — including a climate cap-and-trade measure — though it might take three bills to do it.

The Nevada Democrat outlined what he sees as a three-pronged strategy for meeting the goals Obama laid out in his speech to Congress last night and said the Senate could pass all the bills by the end of the year.

First comes a clean energy bill, then a transmission bill, then a cap-and-trade. I suppose it is theoretically possible the Senate could pass all three by the end of the year (plus a budget and healthcare and everything else).

But I do think this vindicates my earlier prediction that Obama would not get a bill on his desk this year, since the Senate bill would still have to be reconciled with the House bill and then passed by both houses — and I don’t think that’s terribly easy. But again, I think that is probably a good thing because “Obama can get a better climate bill in 2010.”

Now I do take exception to Greenwire‘s interpretation of what Obama said about timing:

Read more

Yglesias

DeMint: The Richest 0.7 Percent of the Population is “Lots of People”

By Matthew Yglesias on Feb 25, 2009 at 5:58 pm

The right-wing is flinging smokescreen rhetoric about income taxes and small businesses so quickly that it’s difficult to keep track of what they’re saying. But the important things to recall are that very few people find themselves in the top two tax brackets, and that though some of these people are small businessmen they’re paying taxes on net income. These are brackets for a small number of unusually prosperous people. For example, here’s Jim Demint:

It looks like he’s gonna try to get a lot of that revenue from raising payroll taxes on upper income and that sounds good but basically that affects small businesses and their ability to hire people. So I just think it shows a lack of understanding of the private sector. A lot of people make — who are reporting a quarter million dollars — you know, I’ve done that before in my small business, and I was actually taking home like 50 or 40.

In fact, about 0.7 percent of households file in the top two brackets:

taxes.png

Meanwhile, I don’t know why DeMint thinks people who are only taking home $40k or $50k would be filing as people who earn $250,000. I think he wants people to think that the government is taxing gross business receipts, so that if I spend $230,000 on my business to earn $300,000 in revenue, that I’m taxed on all $300,000. But that’s not how it works at all. You deduct business expenses and pay taxes on your net income. Any small businessman who’s earning a middle class income isn’t paying in the top two brackets, just as any salaried employee who’s earning a middle class income isn’t paying in the top two brackets.

Politics

Sanford: Rush Limbaugh is an ‘idiot.’

By Lee Fang on Feb 25, 2009 at 5:45 pm

In an interview with the website Real Clear Politics, Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) was asked about the “view that perhaps Republicans are rooting for President Obama to fail.” This question was a clear reference to Rush Limbaugh, who infamously said, “I hope Obama fails.” Sanford responded in unequivocal terms:

SANFORD: I don’t want him to fail. Anybody who wants him to fail is an idiot, because it means we’re all in trouble.

In the past, Limbaugh has attacked other Republicans who have expressed hope for President Obama to succeed, declaring that they are “drinking the Kool-Aid… they’re afraid of being called racists.”

Yglesias

How Realistic Are Obama’s College Graduation Targets

By Matthew Yglesias on Feb 25, 2009 at 5:44 pm

graduates_1.png

One very interesting portion of Obama’s speech last night was when he took note of how the United States has started to fall behind other countries in terms of college graduation rates. He vowed to turn this around: “By 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. That is a goal we can meet.” What would that actually entail? As Kevin Carey explains it depends what you’re talking about:

If we want to be #1 in the percent of adults age 25-64 with a bachelor’s degree, that won’t be too hard, because we currently trail only Norway, 31% to 30%.

If we want to be #1 in the percent of adults 25-34 with a bachelor’s degree, it will be much harder. We’re still at 30% on that measure–educational attainment in the U.S. has been steady for a long time–but Norway is at 40%, the Netherlands 34%, Korea 33%, Denmark 32%, and Sweden 31%, Israel 30%. This is the trend that has everyone so worried–the difference between the two age cohorts shows that we used to be much better than everyone else (we’re far ahead in the 55-64 age bracket), but other countries have since caught up and moved ahead.

In terms of the percent of adults 25-64 with a bachelor’s or associates degree, we’re #3 at 39%, behind Canada (47%) and Japan (40%). In the 25-34 cohort, however, we’re 12th (also 39%), and some countries like Canada, Japan, and Korea are so far ahead (55%, 54%, 53%) that catching up in eleven years is unrealistic.

When Obama said this, I immediately turned to my girlfriend and started complaining. It’s part and parcel of a thread of social policy nationalism that runs through a lot of Obama’s rhetoric and that I don’t particularly care for. Mark Kleiman and Andrew Sabl debate it a bit here. I don’t, personally, like the implication that the problem with our stagnating college completion rate is that Norwegians are doing better. After all, given the actual capabilities and social structure of the United States, it would be a lot easier for us to just bomb Norway into oblivion than to undertake systematic improvements in high school seniors’ level of preparation for higher education. More generally, it’s actually good for us that Canada, Japan, and Korea have such well-educated populations. It’s even better for them, but ultimately it’s good for everyone. The positive-sum nature of the global community is an important strand in Obama’s rhetoric about foreign policy, but it tends to go missing on social policy.

At the same time, if invoking the spirit of competition is what it takes to get Americans excited about better schools and new investments in clean energy, I’m not sure that’s all that terrible.

Climate Progress

Can the House get its act together on climate legislation?

By Joe Romm on Feb 25, 2009 at 5:36 pm

E&E News PM (subs. req’d) reports:

The House Ways and Means Committee plans to mark up global warming emissions legislation by Memorial Day, setting up a possible turf fight among powerful Democratic committee leaders over one of President Obama’s signature agenda items.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said he wants to move a climate bill within the next three months and has asked committee members to begin sorting through at least four different legislative proposals that would place a price on greenhouse gas emissions that scientists attribute to global warming.

Rangel’s committee members also are sifting through any jurisdictional issues associated with their climate bills to determine what crossover they may have with the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Rangel’s tax-writing panel is likely to claim jurisdiction over climate legislation that generates revenues for the Treasury, a challenge of sorts for Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) as he produces his own comprehensive energy and climate measure.

Now if this slows things down a bit, I think that is probably a good thing because “Obama can get a better climate bill in 2010.”

We know that while Sen. Reid (D-NV) says he’d like to see a global warming bill on Senate floor “hopefully late this summer,” the Senate bill is also going to go through multiple committees (see “Sen. Boxer makes clear U.S. won’t pass a climate bill this year“). And the Senate bill will probably be quite different from the House bill. So again I just don’t see how Obama gets a bill on his desk this year, which, again, is not necessarily bad.

Here is the rest of the story:
Read more

Politics

Right-wing TV hosts gain viewers since Obama victory.

By Faiz Shakir on Feb 25, 2009 at 5:10 pm

foxnews.gif“Conservative talk hosts, or at least those who anchor Fox News Channel’s lineup, are enjoying a solid post-election bump,” Variety reports. Fox News saw its daily viewership increase by 24% last month, compared to Feb. 2008. Bill O’Reilly was up 33% (3.6 million viewers) in February compared to the previous year. Sean Hannity rose 38% (to nearly 2.8 million). And newly-minted right-wing talker Glenn Beck “has doubled his timeslot.” Liberal hosts Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow posted gains of 32% and 134%, respectively, in total viewers since one year ago. “But both programs experienced ratings erosion versus last month.” Olbermann was down 4% and Maddow was down 8%.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up