In case you missed it | Limbaugh logic

none | Boulder Weekly


By now, you are either familiar with Rush Limbaugh’s most recent sexist assault on an innocent college student over her remarks before a Congressional subcommittee regarding contraception, or you have recently passed away or are living in a plywood structure in the woods above Ward.

The short version is that Limbaugh explained to America that any woman using a contraceptive paid for by anyone other than herself, and particularly by taxpayers, is actually a prostitute who should be forced to put all of her sexual encounters online for Rush and his listeners to watch.

Rush, of course, was being paid, and quite well, while he was making these statements. We point this out because by Limbaugh’s own logic, albeit twisted logic, this means that he was profiting from those same prostitutes, which makes him a pimp. Fortunately, as only a pimp and not a hooker himself, we don’t have to take the extra step of suggesting that Rush “Huggy Bear” Limbaugh post his sexual exploits online for all of us to see.

Sorry for that visual. But it is pathetic that the advertisers who dumped Limbaugh after his insane tirade against women are being praised in some circles. We would do well to remember that 43 advertisers who have left Rush so far are the same companies that made it possible for Limbaugh to be on the air in the first place.

And they didn’t pull their ads during the past three years — despite Limbaugh’s racist attacks on the first family and his ongoing anti-Black, anti-Hispanic and sexist rants.


So the Colorado Supreme Court thinks that the Board of Regents doesn’t have the authority to ban guns on campus.

We side with the gun-rights gang on many issues. The First and Second amendments to the Constitution kind of go hand-in-hand — we should have the right to see and comment on what our elected government is doing, and if things get really desperate, we should have the right to overthrow the government by bearing arms. A pretty good system of checks and balances.

But this campus gun ban is tricky. On the one hand, it would be nice to have an armed student nearby the next time some whacko goes on a shooting spree. Might save some lives. On the other hand, there are some narrowly defined places where most would agree that guns are not appropriate, and it wouldn’t infringe on the safeguards established by our forefathers to ban firearms — as long as no one was able to smuggle them into such places, like child care centers and schools.

To provide some context to the sensational headlines about this decision, we’re talking about a very small percentage of people here. First, those who can carry concealed weapons on the Boulder campus must be at least 21 years old, and CU officials estimate that is about 7 percent of the resident student body. They also say that less than 0.6 percent of all CU faculty, staff and students have a concealed-carry permit.

The kind of loonies we are worried about being trigger-happy for the wrong reasons are probably not going to sit through training classes and undergo background checks for a concealed-carry permit, so let’s all just take a deep breath.

Then again, this is the same university that, after a uproar over an admittedly roughly executed satirical column about race, cut funding for the campus newspaper to the point that the print product was eliminated and it became an online-only publication. If you aren’t going trust these students with free speech, how are you going to trust them with guns?