Hypocrisy?

I don't mind opinions that are different from mine. Oh, I don't think I relish them, but like A. Lincoln, I find reading and hearing different opinions to be healthy. Hence the book by Susan Jacoby, The Age of American Reason. But I am not fond of hypocrites. Opinions have to be thoughtful, insightful. I don't always agree with what Leonard Pitts writes in his columns--in fact, sometimes think he is dead wrong--but he always expresses himself, well, thoughtfully and insightfully (is that a word?).

But this recent flap over Limbaugh's comments takes this month's cake for hypocrisy. Anyone who knows me realizes I'm not a fan of his--hardly. He's bombastic, a blowhard, and more--but he's in the entertainment business. I cringe that so many take his word for the right path, particularly when he often cannot defend himself against callers who disagree. Instead, he merely hangs up on them and calls them names, such as "typical lib." I don't listen to him often, but occasionally do just to pass time in the car. So, he's hardly a beacon to me....

So, his comments about this Fluke woman.... What's the big deal? He called her some names. I hear people get called names every day. I was called names, inaccurate names, by people (like Limbaugh?) who, when they couldn't defend their ideas/programs, resorted to name-calling. I would never have, at least not publicly, made comments like this about Fluke. But aren't there more important things the media should attend to--how about the US Senate's failure to pass a budget for more than three years? And, of course, there are other things. (No, the return of Dancing with the Stars isn't one of them!)

There are lots of things I could say, but won't. Hmmmm.... Why would a woman, not accurately portray by the way, endeavor for unlimited access to contraceptives? If I had a daughter, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want her parading before the US House and a national audience as it turned out to advocate for something that encourages unlimited sex. I suppose I'm "out of touch," "behind the times," etc. But promiscuity doesn't seem to me to be a desired attribute. (I really have a tough time accepting that she was advocating for a friend with some illness given then nature of Fluke's history.) And, how would people react if a Jew or Muslim advocated that a school he/she attended be forced to serve pork, you know, against their religious beliefs? Apples and oranges? Maybe; maybe not.

Yet what really irks me isn't that Limbaugh is criticized for being boorish, among many other things. No, that's not it. It's how some people, often the same people, are allowed to get away with the same "boorish" behavior with not a peep said, withouth any consequences. Gee, the Tea Parties are called "racist," "bigoted," etc. Palin and Bachmann were/are called names much worse than those delivered Fluke's way. Hey, Palin's daughter was even attacked verbally. What about Michelle Malkin and other conservative women writers? (Black conservatives, such as Sowell and Williams, are off limits. They don't get criticized, just ignored.) How do the media- and Hollywood-types get away with calling conservatives names, names just as bad and, in most cases, perhaps not as a propos? In fact, instead of calling for boycotts, for sponsors to pull their ads, the "right-thinking people" take contributions from name-callers of the "right side."

And, so this Fluke lady was insulted. OK, I've noted this is boorish behavior, something in which I'd never engage. Limbaugh is correctly castigated. What about the boorish behavior of Bill Clinton? C'mon, wouldn't, say a former state superintendent of Michigan schools, be "boiling" with anger, as he recently wrote of Limbaugh's comments, if Clinton had pulled a "Monica" with "my daughter?" Well, he should be. And wasn't Monica dragged through a lot more, a lot more, than Fluke? Why didn't this former state superintendent--and others who are now so self-righteously offended--speak out against Letterman, Maher, etc.? There are only a couple of logical reasons, neither very flattering.

I don't have time, but I could then go on about the type of people who have led and are leading our schools. (BTW, if really surprised me to see/read the liberal Susan Jacoby in "Unreason" so critical of the schools, what they've become, and how they've so become.)

Anyway, more time later--midterms to grade, chapters to revise, and articles to write. Happy Pi Day today and "Beware the Ides of March" tomorrow!