Majority says fire Rush Limbaugh


Survey / PollBloomberg asked likely voters whether Rush Limbaugh should be relieved of his duties behind the mic after the uproar over his Sandra Fluke remarks, and by a 53%-42% margin, America said yes. 5% were unsure.

The poll predictably found that women were more likely to favor Limbaugh’s ouster than men. The scores respectively were 56% and 49%.

The underlying birth control issue has been characterized in general by one side as a battle over women’s health rights, and by the other as a battle over religious freedom.

According to the Bloomberg poll, the women’s health side is winning that battle by a 62%-33% margin.

77% believe the issue of contraception should not even be part of the current political dialog.

RBR-TVBR observation: Two takeaways: The speech of those protesting Rush Limbaugh and Limbaugh’s own speech are equally protected; and we believe that the last thing Rush’s opponents should really want is his firing.

As long as Limbaugh stays within the pale of murky and indecipherable FCC indecency constraints, his speech should be protected. While he did stray over toward the sexual content side, we think the finest prosecutors in history would be hard pressed to make the case that he even wandered into the gray area, much less crossed the line.

Meanwhile, it cannot be said that those trying to silence Limbaugh are attempting to deprive him of his First Amendment rights. They are just as free to make their objections known as Limbaugh is to offend them, and they are also free to encourage others to avoid Limbaugh’s program and the products and services of his sponsors.

Finally, countless members of the anti-Limbaugh crowd were given media megaphones they otherwise would not have had. Limbaugh’s fame elevated the audience available to his opponents. Rather than force him to the sidelines, they should be waiting patiently to pounce again the next time he provides an opportunity.


  1. It’s not a question of censorship, since the poll is not talking about government action, just whether or not he deserves to remain on the air by his employer. Putting aside his obvious right to speak his opinion, what is far worse is that he doesn’t know the facts, whether it pertains to contraception (and the point of Mr. Fluke’s testimony which was about medical treatment requiring contraceptives for non-birth control related reasons – something rarely mentioned in the debate) or other matters, or his continued distortion or misstatements about other various factual matters (I won’t use the “L” word as nobody in the main stream media seems able to call a “L” a “L”). Rush is certainly entitled to hi opinions, but not his own set of facts.

  2. I think the correct headline should read,”Majority of Lefty Hypocrites Says Fire Limbaugh”. Bloomberg? Another Lefty. Ms. Fluke is another tool used by the democrats; smokescreen an issue to detract from the obvious failure this administration is. Of course, neither the Bloomies or other Libs opposed the names Sarah Palin was called. It just kills the people that they haven’t killed talk radio!

    • Deb, you say “Lefty” like that’s a bad thing.

      Don’t see how that’s any worse than being a tool of the nuts on the right wing. Jefferson said that the real threat to any democracy is an uneducated populace – getting all of your news from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News is a good start.

  3. Re: “The speech of those protesting Rush Limbaugh and Limbaugh’s own speech are equally protected.”

    Please correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this the case when both parties are tossing accusations around on a street corner, in a bar, or at a gathering? The moment you place an FCC licensed microphone in front of either they are bound by “community standards,” dictated by a station’s license, which supersedes 1st Amendment rights. I am not a lawyer – and wish one would offer comment – but I believe Clear Channel would not have installed a “Zero Tolerance” policy if this were not the case.

    As we saw this morning with WDAE’s Dan Sileo, Clear Channel is not beyond firing one of its own for making unsavory comments. As parent company for Premiere Radio Networks, should the same rules not apply on this network?

    About “…countless members of the anti-Limbaugh crowd were given media megaphones they otherwise would not have had.” I think you need to reassess this statement as this “crowd” has been making nearly everything happen online – mostly away from commercial media’s megaphones. Reporters from both sides may be hashing this out on newscasts with “guests,” but guests appear picked for the political lean of the programs they appear on. How many radio stations are giving air time to those who oppose RL’s actions?
    (Yes, that is a question I do not have an answer for.)

    Perhaps the most improbable argument to use is “Libs opposed the names Sarah Palin…” and similar notes. I am against these “lib” jabs too, but they need to be brought up at the time of occurrence.

    We can get into long rows about other right winged comments such as Ted Nugent’s tirade’s against Hillary Clinton, etc., which occurred outside of FCC controlled airwaves (as did Bill Maher’s indefensible comments). There are numerous barbs posted on both sides but, at this time, the object of the conversation is Rush Limbaugh’s three day blast of a 30 year old women, with him using language that should not be broadcast (an innuendos that have no place in civil discourse).

    As a close, who is it that wants to “kill talk radio”? This has nothing to do with hosts who approach their craft using an intellectual approach. Our society needs them, and talk radio.

    Again, please correct me if I’m wrong but I haven’t heard anyone say kill talk radio, though there have been plenty of people urging broadcasters to get back to civility on commercial airwaves.

  4. How indignant the left is over Rush’s insulting the fair maiden. You hear worse language than that…from girls… within 3 minutes of entering any mall in the country

  5. A radio is not a megaphone. The audience must have tuners, and tune them in. Arguably, you should be allowed to speak your mind with whatever words you choose with even more freedom on the radio than with a megaphone– depending on where you wield the megaphone.

    Regardless, the First Amendment should protect Rush Limbaugh (he still may be sued for slander) no matter how stupid or offensive his speech.

    The First Amendment should also protect any speech calling for a boycott of Limbaugh’s sponsors or calling for him to be fired, or merely calling his speech stupid and offensive– whether from a radio or a megaphone.

  6. Putting my lawyer hat on, there is nothing that Rush said (that I’ve heard so far in the context of this particular matter) that would require or justify FCC action for indecency. At least as best as can be determined from the FCC’s overly vague indecency policy enforcement. None of that justifies anything Rush said, nor precludes his employer from taking appropriate action. Nor does it alter anything I said in my initial comments.

  7. It will be a sad day for broadcasting industry if allow popular opinion to influence what airs. This pole was crazy. Most people who were poled probably don’t listen to Rush (I rarely do myself). What if most people don’t like having country stations… or hispanic stations on the air? What if we voted about religious programming? Radio needs to have diverse opinions and entertainment that may not meet the majority of our standards. Having sponsors pull their support is how it should work. If sponsors do not want to associate with a broadcast, they have that option. But firing someone for an opinion is a not good. Firing them because they can’t get sponsors is a completely different story.

  8. first who would believe anything coming out of bloomberg,, its content is so far to the left, ,, it mostly aligns with the administration,, plus this fluke woman was a plant by the adminstration,, uncovered by bill o’riley,,

  9. Fluke is the perfect example of what is wrong with the prog/left. Adult spending way to much for education with a wealthy signicant other unwilling to spend less than a can of coke a day spotlighted by out of touch limousine liberals during a hearing that had nothing to do with her testimony Rush may have used an offensive word but Maher calling Palin a Cxxt (you won’t allow the word to be posted). Since she is a single woman admittedly having coitus she is a sxxt perhaps he should have called her an adulteress or a wanton nympho or a harlot. (not that there is anything wrong with that)
    The aspect that is wrong is that Rush descended to the level of the libs, he usually is better than that.

  10. I do not listen to this arrogant, hypocritical, insensitive blowhard. I only hear about his senseless babble on the news and it is never complementary. I think this jack*** causes more problems than he solves. Dump his butt for the good of all mankind.

Comments are closed.