Disconnect

Violence and turmoil erupted again last night. This time, tear gas was used. Rocks were thrown. (More) Journalists were arrested. And Ferguson endured its most brutal night of conflict yet.

Ferguson has become a flashpoint in the growing conflict over police brutality, ongoing economic injustice, and institutionalized racism. But for G-O-TEA media pundits, this is just another chance for them to peddle conspiracy theories and inflammatory rhetoric.



Apparently, they haven't paid close enough attention to what's happening in Ferguson. While police continue to attack both protesters and journalists, most of the protesters have been dissenting peacefully. Oh, and they've also been cleaning up the street every morning. That's certainly something we typically don't hear from G-O-TEA media spinners decrying the "lawlessness" of Ferguson.



Even CNN's Don Lemon had to experience firsthand the reality of what's happening there.



This unrest first erupted because of public anger over the murder "good police work" of Michael Brown. Yet instead of answering questions and allowing for any kind of justice, police have added fuel to the fire by unleashing so much brutal force on both protesters and reporters. And now they're wondering why Ferguson is so tense and why a few demonstators have turned to rocks and Molotov cocktails to fight back.

Now don't get us wrong, we never condone violence. Two wrongs never make a right. No one should be celebrating the suffering of real human beings. So why don't Ferguson city officials and their G-O-TEA media apologists understand this?

Ironically, these very G-O-TEA media spinners were condemning local and federal law enforcement here in Nevada when they were trying to simply enforce the law in Bunkerville. When Cliven Bundy and his Patriot Movement militia buddies were engaging in armed conflict against federal agents, G-O-TEA politicians & pundits were praising them as "freedom fighters". Yet when a very large majority of protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, demonstrate against the wrongful execution of an innocent man, they're demanding water cannons and condemning voter registration drives.

Does anyone else notice the disconnect here? We wonder what may be causing this logical disconnect. We wonder why they're describing something that's far different from what the rest of us are actually seeing there. And we wonder why they're condemning protests that are less violent than the protests they championed on live TV 24/7 just four months ago. Why are we seeing this disconnect?

A Brighter Future

Jeff & Hillary Whittington have a six year old son. Their son, Ryland Whittington, is enjoying a happy childhood. One of the reasons why Ryland Whittington is enjoying a happy childhood is because his parents decided to listen to him when he gave them a critical message.



Isn't this what ultimately matters? Doesn't Ryland deserve a happy and fruitful childhood? Must he endure the kind of pain, hardship, suffering, and sometimes even abuse that defined the childhoods of so many of us who had to hide in the closet when we were young?

Even after growing up, far too many transgender Americans still experience immense hardship. They're at risk of being shut out of the locker room, questioned over their actual identity, denied shelter, thrown out of the classroom, beaten on a train, and even murdered. This isn't rhetoric. This is reality.

Perhaps all of this is a joke to Rush Limbaugh, but not to the trans* community. Perhaps he and some others want to keep "debating language". But for the rest of us, this isn't a debate. This isn't "rhetoric". This is real life.



Why should we force anyone to suffer? Why must we subject certain people to wrongful discrimination simply because of who they are? Why should anyone have to hide one's true self?

Zoe and Ofelia have had to tackle these questions because this is their life. Zoe is a 7th grader who attends a Los Angeles County public school, and Ofelia is her mother. Zoe had been struggling because she felt no one else truly understood her. But when her mom provided her with love & support, and when the State of California took action to ensure safe schools for all, Zoe had the space she needed to flourish.



Now this is what we call family values. And if Cresent Hardy (or anyone else, for that matter) still has questions about "segregation laws", perhaps he should speak with Zoe & Ofelia and the Whittingtons. We're sure they can educate him on value of true acceptance and the meaning of equality.

And really, we can all learn something from them. After all, don't we want to give more kids the chance to enjoy a happy childhood? Shouldn't we give all our kids a brighter future?

Notice Anything Different?

Gotta love that "Republican rebranding". Late last month, G-O-TEA media personalities were rushing to defend embattled racist billionaire slumlord Donald Sterling soon after they finished their worship ceremony for embattled racist "welfare cowboy" Cliven Bundy.

But now, Donald Sterling is trying to defend himself. So he went on CNN yesterday. And he declared Magic Johnson is not "a good example for the children"...



Because he is HIV positive. Oh, yes. That's right. He went there. (/facepalm)

After all, abusing one's tenants is far more honorable than someone who actually puts his money where his mouth is. How dare that Magic Johnson give back to his community! What kind of example is he setting up for the children?

Oh, but he's HIV positive! Yes... So? A number of Americans are. And they go on to live their lives. HIV is not a crime.

Harrassing tenants, however, is. And being a negligent landlord most certainly is. And Donald Sterling is most certainly guilty on both counts.

And speaking of negligent, let's return to our favorite negligent "welfare cowboy".



As we mentioned yesterday, the BLM is pursuing another court challenge to make Cliven Bundy pay up. Yet somehow, not even this is stopping his fan club from making a pilgrimage to Salt Lake City tomorrow to demand the feds give up land that has been federal land ever since The West became US territory. After all, Cliven Bundy knows a thing or two about "proper stewardship"...

And about [redacted]. And now, Ann Coulter & Rush Limbaugh want to tell us something they know about First Lady Michelle Obama. Because she dared to go to Twitter to demand Boko Haram release the 300+ Nigerian school girls they kidnapped.

Apparently, screaming at Michael Sam and HGTV wasn't enough. So G-O-TEA Culture Warriors are now throwing shade at Michelle Obama for demanding the safe return of the kidnapped Nigerian school girls. And they're reading Magic Johnson to filth for giving back to his community. And of course, they're still lusting after that "Range War" Cliven Bundy promised them.

So how's that "Republican rebranding" coming along? We're still wondering what's changed. Has the "brand" even been changed? We don't notice anything different.

From "Rebranding" to Crash Landing...

Here we go again. Once more, G-O-TEA politicians must pay the consequences of paying too much attention to the bullshit "words of wisdom" that drop from Rush Limbaugh's mouth. Once again, "El Rushbo" threw a temper tantrum over Jason Collins' return to the NBA courts and Michael Sam's possible entry into the NFL. And once again, G-O-TEA "playaz" are trying to turn Limbaugh's temper tantrum into actual legislation (and losing lobbying clients while doing so).

Oh, and speaking of actual legislation, Rush Limbaugh also had something to say about Arizona's SB 1062, aka Arizona's version of the "License to Discriminate" Bill. Surprise, he loves it! Surprise, he hates the "drive-by media" reporting on the real danger this bill presents. And surprise, he makes absolutely no sense when he claims Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) has been "bullied" over this bill.



We guess Rush Limbaugh would know, since he's the biggest bully of them all. And he's now stooping to new lows (even for him!) to promote the Koch-TEA Empire's greatest legislative masterpiece yet.

Unfortunately for him and other fans of "legalized" wrongful discrimination, the rest of America doesn't feel the same way. The NFL threatened to move the Super Bowl out of the state if SB 1062 had become law. And now, we know Governor Jan Brewer (R) just vetoed it. So there we have it...

Except that's not all. While Arizona faced a potentially horrendous anti-LGBTQ statute, Texas faced a potentially paradigm shifting courtroom decision while California faced one fewer ballot initiative this year. In California, proponents of a ballot initiative to overturn a new law guaranteeing civil rights for transgender students failed to gather enough valid signatures to place this initiative on the 2014 ballot. And in Texas, a federal judge just struck down Texas' marriage ban. Just as we've been saying here for some time, H8 is so outdated and marriage discrimination has no legal leg left to stand on... Not even in Texas.

Of course, the 21st Century Know Nothings are seething in rage tonight. That's why they're reveling in frivolous law suits, accidentally endorsing marriage equality on Twitter, and attacking each other for daring to "attack god". Oh, yes. That's right. They're really going there.

Meanwhile closer to home, the Nevada Republican Party continues to struggle with acceptance of the 21st century. After State Senator and Lt. Governor candidate Mark Hutchison (R-Las Vegas) boasted of his cosponsorship of SB 192 and Governor Brian Sandoval's (R) support for his bill, Sandoval himself then rebuked his own favored running mate Senator Hutchison and promised to veto anything resembling SB 1062. And that would have meant a veto for the original version of SB 192 that Hutchison supported.

Once again, we're seeing the result of all that "Republican rebranding". And what's the result? Just take a look at California, Arizona, & Texas. Republican "leaders" are struggling to save face as their own base demands more and more extreme legislation... Along with a divorce from 21st century America. And funny enough, they're the ones claiming to "defend family values & traditional marriage". Yep, those Republicans are enjoying quite the "rebranding" lately...

Follow the Leader

On Monday, we saw a major turnaround. In a fascinating about face, both Governor Brian Sandoval (R) and Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto agreed to drop their plan to defend the state’s ban on marriage equality in federal court. Overall, their decision has been met with many sighs of relief here in Nevada. Why waste the state’s time and money on a losing war to deny thousands of Nevada families their civil rights?

However, not everyone feels that way. Already, Nevada’s top G-O-TEA politicians are going against their own Governor and decrying his decision to stop fighting marriage equality in court. Attorney General candidate Adam Laxalt (R) has been trying to differentiate himself from Sandoval, Cortez Masto, and his likely Democratic opponent this fall (outgoing Secretary of State Ross Miller) with his loud opposition to marriage equality and a promise to reinstate the state’s legal fight against it. And Washoe County District Attorney Dick Gammick (R) went on "Nevada Newsmakers" yesterday to declare he's sick & tired of LGBTQ Nevadans "throwing it in his face" (whatever that means).

We've known for some time that Brian Sandoval has very little juice left in his own party. But now, it's becoming crystal clear that most Nevada Republicans would rather take marching orders from G-O-TEA Shock Jock Rush Limbaugh than from their own Governor. Wait, what?!

No really, think about it. Earlier this week, Rush Limbaugh had a panic attack when University of Missouri football star and potential NFL recruit Michael Sam came out as gay. He then went on to declare that heterosexuals are somehow "under assault". How?



As usual, "El Rushbo" made absolutely no sense. He just doesn't like the idea of out athletes. He probably also doesn't like out Eagle Scouts, out Bandstand dancers, and/or out Navy SEALs. And he still refuses to accept 21st century America.

But then again, so do the 21st Century Know Nothings who consider him, Laura Ingraham, and the other leading G-O-TEA Shock Jocks to be the "true leaders of the movement". They're afraid of 21st Century America, and they see growing acceptance of LGBTQ Americans as a "threat to traditional values". And because they are the base of today's Republican Party, G-O-TEA politicians (such as Adam Laxalt & Dick Gammick) will pander to their fears in order to further their own careers.

That's all we're seeing now. G-O-TEA politicians are just following their leaders. And no, Brian Sandoval isn't one of those leaders.

What a "Stunt": "Free Speech for Me, But Not for Thee"

Yesterday, The R-J posted a ridiculously whiny editorial bashing Shelley Berkley for merely pointing out Dean Heller's voting record and asking him to join her in saying no to secretive Super PAC campaigns here in Nevada. According to The R-J, the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision only affirmed "free speech", and those big, bad "LIB'RUL!!!" women should stop attacking poor lil' Rush Limbaugh and his "free speech" rights to have advertisers pay for time on his radio show so he can continue attacking America's women.

Sorry, R-J editoral board (and all the shortsighted white male pundits who think they have a good point), but give me a f**king break!

There's disgust across the political spectrum for the system we now have that allows for the likes of the Koch family to buy elections whenever they want. Back in January, former Republican Presidential Candidate and current US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) joined with former US Senator Russ Feingold to release this statement on the two-year anniversary of Citizens United.

“Two years ago, the Supreme Court handed down one of the worst, and most radically activist decisions in the Court’s history, Citizens United. Overturning more than a century of settled law, and with an unprecedented naiveté of the political process, the Court charted a course for legalized bribery. Sadly, both Democrats and Republicans are now following the dangerous road of unlimited money in politics. There is no question whether scandal will arise from this decision; the only question is when. On this anniversary, we call on both parties to work together to remedy the obvious damage to our political system caused by the Citizens United decision.”

Another former Republican Presidential Candidate, Mike Huckabee, has also chimed in with his disapproval of the post Citizens United political landscape of unlimited secret money-bombs exploding onto our airwaves.



This obviously is NOT about free speech. Rather, Americans from across the political spectrum are increasingly fearful of a tiny group of super-wealthy donors using their Super PACs to exert massive influence over elections and gain control of government. After all, why is "free speech" no longer free? So now we're all required to raise massive amounts of money just to have the same "free speech" rights as David Koch and Sheldon Adelson?



This is why a 69% supermajority of Americans want an end to this Super PAC madness. Does The R-J editorial board think that's just a "stunt"?

And then, there's Rush-bo. When did the First Amendment guarantee the right to a multi-million dollar national talk radio contract and a full slate of advertisers? News flash to The R-J: It does NOT.

I thought the "free market libertarians" at The R-J believed in the sanctity of "the free market". So how can they legitimately complain about "the free market" determining that Rush Limbaugh's radio show is no longer a valuable commodity? At least 52 advertisers have pulled out of sponsoring Limbaugh's radio show as of last Friday. And last I checked, there's no "First Amendment mandate" for those corporate advertisers to sponsor Rush Limbaugh. Are they just as guilty as Shelley Berkley of "actively working to silence someone" who's been making a living off spewing hateful bile about women?

Yes, Rush Limbaugh has the same First Amendment rights as all the rest of us. And that's all. None of us has a guaranteed right to a multi-million dollar radio contract, and neither does Limbaugh. So if citizens like Shelley Berkley put up petitions to cancel Limbaugh's show and corporate advertisers respond by pulling their ads, that's just the American "free market" at work.

It just sounds to me like the radical "tea party" right (that The R-J loved before it became the new brand of "GOP cool") is pulling its own "desperate stunt" to change the subject because it's now starting to fear a painful loss in its War on Women. Even John McCain is now joining Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and other prominent Republicans in begging G-O-TEA leadership to drop the anti-contraception nonsense.



The polling is looking increasingly ugly for Republicans, so now some of them want to drop the birth control fight in an effort to save face. Others, however, seem to think that the bad poll numbers will just go away if they spin harder and try to turn this into an "attack on religious liberty"... And apparently now, an "attack on free speech".

What a crock of crap.

It's not Shelley Berkley's fault that Dean Heller faces consequences for supporting Rush Limbaugh over Nevada women. Her move to point out Heller's vote to restrict women's access to needed health care is not a "stunt". And her denunciation of Rush Limbaugh is not some nefarious effort to "silence free speech". If G-O-TEA politicians like Heller and "tea party" cheerleaders like The R-J editorial board really cared about free speech, they could have said something when House Republicans denied Sandra Fluke the chance to testify on her own health care.

Dean Heller Can Run "Green", But Can He Hide from His Own Dirty Record?

So now Dean Heller is claiming "independence" on energy policy.

With the economy as the leading issue in every campaign, Heller and other Republicans who back federal support for renewables have so far couched it as an important part of recovery efforts.

“Renewable-energy development could lead to thousands of new jobs in Nevada at a time when the state leads the nation in unemployment,” Heller campaign spokeswoman Chandler Smith told Politico.

That’s a tack voters will respond to and reward, said Rocky Fernandez, the communications director at the Clean Energy Project, a statewide advocacy group.

“The candidates who want to do things and step up and make these industries thrive in Nevada, they’re the ones who are going to be successful in these upcoming elections,” Fernandez said. “If we don’t do it, other states are going to take it and we’ll have missed a huge opportunity.”

However, not everyone is buying it.

“Voters aren’t buying appointed Sen. Dean Heller’s election year scramble to paper over his pro-Big Oil, abysmal record on renewable-energy jobs,” Berkley campaign spokesman Eric Koch said. “Instead of making clean-energy job creation in Nevada a priority, Heller has spent his Washington career voting to protect taxpayer giveaways to Big Oil companies already making record profits.”

Berkley’s campaign has a stockpile of ammo countering Heller’s claim to be a leader in clean energy, from votes in Congress against certain renewable-energy and energy-efficiency measures to a 2008 letter questioning the cost-effectiveness of alternative sources of energy.

But hey, don't just buy what Shelley Berkley's campaign is saying. Take a look at Desert Beacon's scoreboard of actual House votes taken.

For example, Heller had two shots at voting in favor of H.R. 6 (the Energy Act) in 2007, and voted “nay” both times. He also voted against H.R. 2776 and H.R. 3221, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act. Representative Berkley voted in favor of these bills. He voted against H.R. 5351 (Energy Law Amendments) on February 27, 2008, and against H.R. 6049 (Alternative Energy Tax Incentives) on May 21, 2008. Representative Berkley voted in favor of these measures.

On July 23, 2008 he did vote “yes” on H.R. 3221 (Housing Bill with Energy Tax Credit Extensions) and then voted “no” on H.R. 7060 (Renewable Energy Credits & other business and individual credits) on September 26, 2008. Congresswoman Berkley voted in favor of H.R. 7060. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R. 1) which contained green energy and energy conservation programs got no support from then-Representative Heller in 2009. Nor did Representative Heller support the “Cash for Clunkers” bill to incentivize consumers to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles (H.R. 2751) on June 9, 2009.

On September 16, 2010, Heller voted against H.R. 4785 which would have authorized loans for energy efficiency purposes. Representative Berkley voted in favor of H.R. 4785.

Given this voting record it is difficult to place Senator Heller among the choir of voices calling for energy conservation, energy technology, and alternative energy source development.

You see, Dean Heller's actual record not as "green" as he wants us to believe. Rather, he and his BFFs in the fossil fuel industry are "green-washing" his record. In fact, Heller has voted consistently for taxpayer funded bailouts for Big Oil while rejecting investment in renewable energy jobs that can help Nevada's economy while also helping our nation conquer the climate crisis. Dean Heller may tell one story to the media, but his actual record tells an entirely different story.

Sure, Heller is now trying to distance himself from the national G-O-TEA leadership. He has to. His BFF Willard "Mr. 1%" Romney is sounding increasingly insane and delusional when he bashes clean energy, along with Romney's BFF Rush Limbaugh. Heller realizes that the Romney-Limbaugh-"Tea Party" agenda of funneling more taxpayer dollars at the fossil fuel industry while passing up clean energy opportunities just doesn't fly here in Nevada.

But as much as Dean Heller tries to run from his own record, he can't really hide. It's still there for all of us to see. And his long time G-O-TEA buddies on Capitol Hill are making sure that we don't forget who Heller & Co. really serve. Nevadans aren't about to be fooled by a quick "green-washing".

Ralston's False Equivolence

I understand Jon Ralston likes to be an "equal opportunity offender" when it comes to attacking politicians and political parties. And typically, I'm OK with that. However, I can't stay silent on his Sun column today.

Basically, he has a "pox on both their houses" attitude and he's arguing that progressives are just as guilty of character assassination as Rush Limbaugh may be because a few people on Twitter said some not-so-nice things about Andrew Breitbart just after he died. Really? Honestly, I didn't want to say anything about Breitbart. And I suspect I'm not the only one who felt that way. There was no "coordinated left wing assault on Breitbart's family", despite progressives' overall disgust with what he did to other people. I still don't really want to touch that, but I do think it's a bit of a stretch to compare Matt Taibbi's Rolling Stone essay and a few comments on Twitter to the coordinated radical right attack on Sandra Fluke and all other American women who just happen to have used birth control at some point in their lives.

When did these women ever start web sites to attack politicians they didn't like? And when did these women ever work for Matt Drudge and Arianna Huffington before building their own media empire? It's not as if they were ever "fair game"... Unless being invited to a Congressional hearing is now "fair game" to engage in full politics of personal destruction.

And then, there's this. Ralston compared right wing "insensitivity" to women's reproductive rights and women's health needs to "liberals look[ing] down on sincere people of faith who value their religion above almost everything". Really? I have many friends and family who are very much in tune with their faith, and I have nothing but the utmost respect for that. This is NOT about people of faith, or about churches being forced to do something against their beliefs. This is about ensuring women have the same access to contraception that men have to whatever sexual health care they desire... At least until Limbaugh opened his mouth and called Sandra Fluke a "slut" for ever using birth control.



Thank you, Jon Stewart, for explaining what this whole argument should really be about. It's just too bad that Jon Ralston seems to be missing the point.

Seriously, when did so many in the media decide that contraception is supposed to be "controversial"? When did it become just another "partisan poop fight" when women are being called "sluts" and "prostitutes" for simply expecting their health insurance to cover birth control? Are the media really becoming this ridiculous?

I suspect Ralston thought it would be in good taste to knock Shelley Berkley for some fundraising email and compare some comments on Twitter regarding Breitbart's death to the whole radical right effort to support Rush Limbaugh's attacks on American women while mildly criticizing Limbaugh and misstating what's actually at stake with the new rule proposed by President Obama to require health insurance coverage of contraception. It's not. And it's saddening to see media pundits yet again choose a false sense of "fair and balanced" over explaining why something is really in the news.

Here Are the Women.

Ever since Rush Limbaugh started attacking American women for using contraceptives, there's been an intense firestorm over not just women's reproductive rights, but also more basic issues of where women stand in America today. Last night, Nevada's own Harry Reid discussed this with Lawrence O'Donnell on his MSNBC show.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

“Even in the Rush Limbaugh world, there’s certain things you can’t say. And what brought his attention to this is lots and lots of sponsors of his program said, no more, you’ve gone too far,” Reid said in an exclusive interview with MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell. “Rush Limbaugh, each day that goes by, is becoming less credible with the American people.”

Rush Limbaugh offered another half-ish apology to Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student he called a “slut” and a “prostitute” on his show last week. She spoke before a congressional hearing in support of health insurance policies covering birth control, which riled up the conservative radio show host.

“We cannot have something like this take place, that’s embarrassing to our country. It’s embarrassing to the Congress to have a woman who had something to say — she was invited to testify and was disinvited by an all-male group of people,” said Reid, a frequent political target of Limbaugh. “You can’t do that to women in America anymore.” [...]

“Women are entitled for contraception, so their contraceptives of their choice. That’s what this was all about,” Reid told O’Donnell. “We should never run into the firestorm that we did, that people calling this fine woman, by all means.”

For the past three weeks, we've been hearing plenty from certain G-O-TEA men about what women are supposed to be doing with their bodies. But now, the women (and Democrats) are fighting back.

“No one had any clue that Sen. Blunt would be offering this amendment or that any of this debate would be unfolding,” Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) (pictured above) told TPM Friday. Baldwin is one of a group of women senators and challengers set to barnstorm several western states this week to raise money and awareness for Democrats.

There are more women running for Senate this year than there were in 1992 — the so-called “Year of the Woman” — Baldwin noted, and she suggested that will put Democrats in a good position this fall.

“You can hazard your own guess: Is it a coincidence?” Baldwin said of the number of women running. “Maybe it’s not a coincidence that there are a lot of women running and we feel as though there are so many economic issues that impact women that are being fought right now.”

The western tour had been planned for weeks before Blunt’s amendment and Limbaugh’s attack on Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke overtook the national debate. The group is ready to take advantage of the fortuitous timing.

“I would certainly say that, for example, when you have a panel on women’s health that’s all men called to testify, it does show that a lot of the folks in charge today are out of touch and just don’t get it,” Baldwin said. “I think we’ll probably draw some attention to that.”

Of course, one of the women that the DSCC is highlighting happens to be none other than Nevada's own Shelley Berkley. Now that Dean Heller is on record opposing women's access to contraception, Berkley is reminding us of what he just voted for.

So what did he vote for? Simply put, Dean Heller voted to allow employers to deny insurance coverage of any kind of preventive health care due to "moral objections". And of course, the one type of preventive health care getting the most attention here has been contraception. Contraception is not just important preventive health care for women, but it's also beneficial to our economy. Yet for some reason, we don't often hear that from the likes of Dean Heller. Nope, it seems like we've just been hearing plenty of lies and misperceptions.



Even some Republican women seem to be backing away from Rush Limbaugh and the Blunt Amendment. It just goes to show how extreme the G-O-TEA has gone in its embrace of Rush Limbaugh and the "CUL'CHUR WARZZZ!!!" against America's women.

It's starting to look like the women are not going to take it any more.

Why Do They Serve Rush Limbaugh Over Nevada's Women?

Earlier today, President Obama called Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown University in DC, to thank her for speaking up for America's women.

President Obama called the Georgetown University law student who testified at a House contraception hearing last week, thanking her for speaking out about the concerns of American women.

Sandra Fluke told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the president called her while she was in the green room waiting to go on television. Obama “said I should tell my parents that they should be proud,” Fluke told Mitchell.

Fluke has been subject to some very harsh words from Rush Limbaugh, who called Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.” And his remarks have set off a firestorm of criticism. Georgetown University President John DeGioia praised Fluke’s testimony and called Limbaugh’s comments “misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”

So what happened?



How many times have Republicans whined when one of their own gets negative media attention? Yet when a young woman is being attacked by their favorite media attack dog, they're afraid to say a peep. Even as corporate advertisers of Rush Limbaugh's radio show pull out (after realizing they look bad for sponsoring his BS), they're staying in.

Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh is doubling down, and even TRIPLING DOWN (!!!), on his vile, misogynistic hate speech. And he's not just attacking Sandra Fluke. He's attacking women everywhere.

As always, Desert Beacon has more.

According to the Census Bureau, there are 2,723,322 residents of the state of Nevada, and 49.5% of them are female. The Centers for Disease Control 2010 study tells us that nationwide 68% of Hispanic women, 89% of white women, and 78% of African American women have used “the pill.” [DB] We might reasonably assume that these statistics generally apply to women in Nevada. So, for the 1,348,045 women in Nevada we can estimate that some 72% (970,600) have used The Pill. Again, it isn’t necessary to repeat the term used by Mr. Limbaugh to characterize these women. [...]

As we would frown and tell a child that “That’s not funny,” or “That’s not appropriate,” in the home, we should frown and tell Mr. Limbaugh that his comments on women and ethnic group members are not acceptable. Freedom of Speech has never been a License to Insult and Defame. Respectable home have standards, and we should strive to make our nation a respectable, and respectful, place to live.

In the interest of raising the standards of our national discourse, in the interest of setting examples for our younger citizens, in the interest of advancing respect for all the residents of Nevada — white, African America, Hispanic, and women — I ask that you take exception to Mr. Limbaugh’s comments concerning Ms. Fluke, and that you ask him to apologize to the 49.5% of Nevadans to whom his discourse is objectionable, tasteless, and beneath any standard of civility.

Yesterday, Dean Heller joined his G-O-TEA colleagues Joe Heck and Mark Amodei in attacking American women and demonizing any woman who uses contraception. And even worse, they're repeating the lies that Limbaugh and his fellow "tea party" media flame throwers have tossed out. But that's just it: Limbaugh and his ilk are LYING, and Nevadans shouldn't have to worry about their members of Congress taking their marching orders from Limbaugh's lies in attacking American women.

While it’s difficult to believe that he doesn’t by know what Fluke actually said (her entire testimony is on video), Limbaugh and other conservatives like bloggers Erick Erickson and Michelle Malkin are fabricating the claim that Fluke wants taxpayers to pay for contraception. That is blatantly flase. Fluke’s testimony, and the entire contraception debate, is about insurance companies paying for contraception as part of their health coverage, they way they pay for any other medication, such as Viagra. Morevoer, Fluke’s testimony was not about herself, but about a friend who need contraception to fight cancer and other fellow law students.

This conservative narrative, which is pure fantasy, seems to be based on a single bogus article from CNS News, which Limbaugh repeatedly cites, with the ludicrous headline, “Sex-Crazed Co-Eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control, Student Tells Pelosi Hearing Touting Freebie Mandate.”

Meanwhile, Limbaugh apparently doesn’t understand how birth control works. His entire stance is premised on the notion that women need more birth control the more sex they have. Of course, as anyone who has taken an 8th grade sex ed class could inform him, that’s not how it works.

So if Rush Limbaugh, Dean Heller, Joe Heck, and Mark Amodei can expect their health insurance to cover Viagra and Cialis, why can't Sandra Fluke and Nevada women expect their health insurance to cover contraception? Is that really too much to ask?

Nevadans, including Nevada's women, deserve better representation in Congress. And perhaps instead of mumbling and groaning privately about the political implications of their choice to attack women and women's health care options, and perhaps instead of throwing a public temper tantrum on camera over Democrats pointing out the obvious, the (all male) Republicans of Nevada's Congressional Delegation should ask their buddy Rush Limbaugh to apologize for his disgusting, slanderous attacks on Sandra Fluke and the 98% of American women who have used birth control. And perhaps they themselves should apologize for pushing to strip Nevada's women of the ability to make their own health care decisions.

(And by the way, you can do something to make it right by signing the Center for American Progress' petition in support of Sandra Fluke!)