Let's focus on the real issues instead of wallow too.
Embattled conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh made a huge mistake when he called Georgetown Law Center student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute" and muses about her doing sex tapes.
President Obama owes Limbaugh big time, for shifting attention away from what is critically important--religious liberty and conscience protection--to a distraction like Fluke.
Fluke, 30, a Protestant who chose to attend Georgetown University, a Catholic institution established in 1789, wants George University to provide contraception insurance coverage for her, notwithstanding its religious-based objection to doing so.
Last month Fluke spoke before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on contraception.
Limbaugh foolishly extended Fluke's 15 minutes of fame by calling Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute" and suggesting that if she wanted contraception insurance she should post sex tapes in return.
It was unreal and unhelpful.
A firestorm predictably ensued, and Limbaugh lost advertisers, both before and after he apologized.
Limbaugh's apology did not satisfy either Fluke or Imus In The Morning host Don Imus.
Imus expressed anger over Limbaugh’s website apology.
“A lame apology on his website, in which he says he didn’t mean to personally attack her,” Imus said, “is gutless.”
Imus, who himself lost his job, even though he quickly apologized for referring to female college basketball players as "nappy headed hoes," blasted Limbaugh's “sustained, vile, personal attack” on Fluke over three days and opined that to apologize, you have to “go sit down with her” and apologize.
It's been terrible, but perhaps some conservatives who think that the proper response to Leftist excess is to use outrageous Alinskyite tactics themselves will realize that is not only wrong, but counterproductive.
Limbaugh later told his listeners, “I do not think she is either of those two words. I did not think last week that she is either of those two words. The apology to her over the weekend was sincere.”
Taking Limbaugh at his word that he did not actually believe Fluke was a "slut" or a "prostitute," the question that needs to be answered is, why did he used those words.
Limbaugh explained that he stooped to the level of the liberal opposition who, he says, “will do and say anything to push their agenda.”
“This is the mistake I made: In fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them," Limbaugh said. "Against my own instincts, against my own knowledge, against everything I know to be right and wrong, I descended to their level when I used those two words to describe Sandra Fluke. That was my error."
Stated otherwise, Limbaugh used outrageous Alinskyite tactics.
For Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, demonizing the opposition is key, ridicule is a favorite weapon and truth is unimportant.
Alinsky believed that ridicule is man's most potent weapon and a tactic that your people enjoy is a good tactic.
Instead of simply saying that Fluke is a distraction from the real issues--religious liberty and conscience protection, Limbaugh made Fluke's sex life and desire to have contraception covered by her insurance policy (regardless of the tenets of the Catholic Church) the focus of the news and himself an easy target for his political enemies.
The late Andrew Breitbart, a liberal turned conservative and self-described secularist, enthusiastically advocated the use by the Right of the tactics of the Far Left's Saul Alinsky.
It is a fundamentally flawed strategy, as Limbaugh's experience with Fluke shows.
In ridiculing Fluke, perhaps Limbaugh was emulating Breitbart "[a]gainst [his] own instincts, against [his] own knowledge, against everything [he] know[s] to be right and wrong."
Limbaugh should have gone with his own instincts, knowledge and understanding of right and wrong.
Let's focus on the real issues instead of wallow too.
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.