Stranger Fruit

Rush Limbaugh yesterday had the following to say about women serving in the US military:

So what does it tell you they of the military? Its nothing but a little social playground for experimentation, by the way since they’re liberals they’d love to weaken it and love to tear it apart and cause all kinds of controversy and strife, and they do it under the guise of women’s rights, I’m sure there are some imminently qualified women in the military I am not talking about their ability to do, I am talking about the institution and what it says about a cultured civilized society that it will
round up babes send them off to basic training and send them off to the foxholes. It can be done, but its not recommended.

Yup, those “babes” are “rounded up” and forced into the military. I have a niece in the army. She graduated from West Point with a degree in engineering (which is more than college dropout Limbaugh could ever do). She has served in Iraq (which is more than Vietnam-era Limbaugh did) and probably will be headed back there again. She’d also beat Limbaugh into a bloody pulp.

Are we going to hear the Right take down this idiot? Probably not.

I’m sure Mike Dunford would have something to say on this, considering his wife is a “babe” sent “off to the foxholes” in Iraq.

Update: Mike does indeed respond.

Comments

#1 John McKay
January 27, 2007

“She’d also beat Limbaugh into a bloody pulp.”

I probably not the only one of your readers who would pay to watch that. Though, as a liberal and a pacifist, I would be obligated to occasionally take a break from cheering her on to say, “tut-tut, this is awful; why doesn’t anyone do something to stop it.” Then I’d have anuther sip of my beer and go back to cheering her on.
#2 intepid
January 27, 2007

I’m with John, especially on the tut-tut part
#3 squeaky
January 27, 2007

“what it says about a cultured civilized society that it will round up babes send them off to basic training and send them off to the foxholes.”

Huh–this could be the most liberal statement he’s ever made, assuming by “babes” he means that it is deplorable to send young men and women fresh out of highschool off to fight an unjust war. Oh wait, it’s Limbaugh…”babes” are his enlightened reference to women. So, he saying “keep ‘em off the battlefields and barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen”!

When will the right abandon this hippo, er, hypocrite?
#4 John Lynch
January 27, 2007

> When will the right abandon this hippo, er, hypocrite?

Round about the same time they abandon Coulter.
#5 AndyS
January 27, 2007

NPR interviewd Limbaugh the other day then had Glen Beck on to say Limbaugh was too batshit crazy. When Glen Beck says that of a guy on the right — well, the person must be too crazy for words.

The size of Limbaugh’s audience is one of the scariest measures of our lack of cultural advancement. He’s just “professional” wrestling for the radio.
#6 steve s
January 27, 2007

Women still aren’t allowed in combat, technically, though they often find themselves in harm’s way these days as the nature of fighting has changed.

BTW, when I was in the Air Force, I knew a slender redheaded marine chick who reminded me of the Terminator. Nice lithe exterior, but you got the distinct impression that if she turned on you, she’d cut out your heart and eat it while you watched.

The whole question is like the question of gays in the military. If they’ll do the job, I don’t give a rat’s ass about peripheral matters. I don’t care if they paint the tanks pink, every gay soldier is occupying a slot I don’t have to fill.
#7 Louise
January 27, 2007

The last world war brought out the best in society. African Americans were allowed to fly combat planes, forming the famous Tuskegee Airmen. The Women’s Air Force Service Pilots (WASPS) flew fighters in training and ferry missions. With the end of WW2, woman and African American pilots were returned to society, making combat flying a white man’s game for decades. (Disclaimer: The author flew in combat planes along with other women aircrew.)
#8 ThomasHobbes
January 27, 2007

I’m increasingly convinced that Rush, like most opiate addicts, is probably a complete and total wuss when it comes to handling pain. It’s not that he’s incapable of withstanding the pain–he just shies away from anything that makes him at all uncomfortable. Thus, I submit that if he were to be placed in the same room with ten female boot camp graduates, and forced to talk to them, he would break down within an hour or so. That tough exterior would not last long.

As for the “little social playground,” I say that if someone wants to serve their country, we should give them an opportunity to try, be they gay, straight, male, female, white, black, etc. Some will make it, some won’t, but we will have a broad swath of civic-minded people ready to serve their nation. When and if they graduate, they will be as able to fight as anyone else.

Finally, forgive me for asking a rhetorical question: if Rush were around in 1948, do you think he would have criticized Truman’s desegregation of the military as a “social experiment”?
#9 June
January 27, 2007

Rush Limburger loves to bash “the media” without apparently realizing he is one of them (though he does look like two of them).
#10 Douglas Watts
January 27, 2007

How does Rush Limbaugh know anything about the military? Did he enlist without telling us?
#11 Kseniya
January 27, 2007

The hypocrisy of wretched blowhards like Limbaugh knows no bounds. He’s shamless, and a symbol (and proponent) of much that is wrong with this country. Too bad I’m preaching to the choir, and that anybody who doesn’t already agree with this assessment never will anyway. Sigh.

I still believe it’s a good thing to air this stuff out, though. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
#12 stand
January 27, 2007

How can you construe this as anything other than an insult to our military? I don’t want to hear him talk about how John Kerry insulted the troops back in October.
#13 anna
January 27, 2007

I think all combat positions should be opened to women. No quotas or lower standards, just an equal chance for everyone. Perhaps very few women will attain such positions, but at least all women will at last have a real chance to be all they can be.
#14 Keanus
January 27, 2007

Limbaugh’s “toughness” reminds me of an experience I had in army basic training circa 1962. Coming from NYC I took basic at Ft. Dix in the swamps of South Jersey. Among my fellow trainees were a couple of young toughs from Brooklyn who let it be known they were in the Mafia (whether they were for sure I never found out). One tough just refused to do anything he was ordered, so he spent time in lock-up while awaiiting his dishonorable discharge.

The other guy figured he was real tough. I found out otherwise in two instances. In night navigation (where we were dropped off in the woods in the dark and had to negotiate our way through a swamp with waist deep water, ditches, woods and no lights to a specific point at a specific distance) he was petrified; to put him at ease I invited him to hold onto my shoulders the entire two miles in the dark. Then when faced with throwing a live hand grenade, he turned white as a sheet and refused to even touch it. The DI’s, having encountered this before were only too happy to oblige; the last thing they wanted was some joker dropping a live grenade at their feet out of sheer fear. Ever afterward I’ve always taken bar room bravado with a very large grain of salt.
#15 Brian X
January 27, 2007

I dare Rush Limbaugh to go up to, say, Jessica Lynch and say that. I remember the interview I saw with her. Maybe she was scared in combat; I bet a lot of guys are too. And it’s true her importance in the grand scheme of things was pumped up for propaganda purposes; she said as much. And yet, when she was interviewed, even despite her injuries, she was still a soldier every bit as much as a woman.

I’m sure she’d kick his ass even if she was still wheelchair bound (though I believe she gets around on just a leg brace these days, doesn’t she?).
#16 beepbeepitsme
January 28, 2007

Hawks annoy me. Especially ones who are always “gung -ho” but can’t get the lid off a peanut butter jar on their own.

They can’t possibly believe some of the drivel that they spew, can they?

Limbaugh is all talk and no walk.
#17 Amy
January 28, 2007

I listened to Limbaugh on the radio once, back in 1988 or so. My husband was taking me out to lunch, and said “You have to hear this guy, he’s completely insane.” He turned on the radio, and there was Limbaugh, ranting about women in the military. I believe he claimed women would never make effective soldiers unless they were feminazi lesbians with PMS. He envisioned rotating platoons of terrifying PMS-enraged lesbians…at which point I told my husband to turn off the radio, since I had a headache.

Limbaugh is frightened of women, terrified of menstruation, and a real piece of work to boot. He should be ashamed of his comments.
#18 Phoenician in a time of Romans
January 28, 2007

I’m with John, especially on the tut-tut part

I’d be happy to help protect him by pulling her off – except I’ve got this terribly painful cyst, see…
#19 Ick of the East
January 28, 2007

Now now. Rush is probably worried that his possible future fourth ex-wife will be killed in combat before he has a chance to meet her.
#20 rtdeadeye
January 28, 2007

one’s opinion is worth the expertise that is behind it, Rush has no credentials, academic or otherwise, and his opinions are therefore worth nothing. He is a very talented entertainer that fills some void in the lives of some very pathetic people.
#21 Ric
January 28, 2007

I think Limbaugh is back on the drugs again.
#22 Andrew Brown
January 28, 2007

I can’t think of Rush Limbaugh without thinking of Bill Hicks.
“Doesn’t he look like a man who likes to sit in a tub whilst other men pee on him?”

The rest of the routine is ruder and funnier but he certainly looks like that kind of person to me!
#23 Steven
January 28, 2007

Said it on Pharyngula and I’ll say it here “Rush Limbaugh is a huge nuclear galaxy sized douchebag. I feel he could be pulling ahead of John Edwards and Kent Hovind for douchebag of the multiverse.”
#24 Hawkdriver
January 29, 2007

Women still aren’t allowed in combat, technically, though they often find themselves in harm’s way these days as the nature of fighting has changed.

Absolutely not correct! This is one of the most common misconceptions about women in the military. The so-called “combat exclustion laws” only prohibited women in the Air Force and the Navy from being assigned to certain combat positions on aircraft and aboard ships. They never applied to women in the Army, and in any case, were repealed in the early 90′s. Full disclosure – I’m a retired female Army officer and was a combat arms officer for my entire career, from 1980 to 2006. Women’s assignments in the Army are governed only by Army policy. The only effect this policy ever had was to limit the career opportunities for women. It never prevented us from engaging in actual combat.

One thing I’ve noticed about Limbaugh – he always relies on the wingnut assumption that the military had to water down the standards so the “babes” could qualify. In fact, there is only one area in which the standards for men and women are different, and that’s the physical fitness test. The events on that test are designed to assess a person’s overall level of fitness. They are not related to anything we do in actual combat. When it comes to skills required in combat (M16 qualification, driving a HUMMV under fire, helicopter gunnery, etc.), ALL of the standards are completely gender neutral.

Oh, and that physical fitness test – since women were integrated into the Regular Army in 1978, we’ve raised the standards for both men and women three times. So much for women lowering the standards in the military.
#25 Rhampton
January 29, 2007

Does Rush Limbuaugh realize that his comment is decidedly anti-Israeli?
(military service is compulsory for both males and females)