Don't worry, it is nowhere near as revolting as it sounds.
Turns out it's worse for the OxyMoron than even I thought...
If you have listened to Fluke's testimony, (if you haven't now you can) and then listen to the three-day long assault by the OxyMoron, one thing stands out crystal clear.
The premise of Limbaugh's "joke" is completely false, and baseless.
"A Georgetown co-ed told Rep. Nancy Pelosi's hearing that the women in her law school program are having so much sex that they're going broke, so you and I should pay for their birth control.
That's not a joke. That's a lie. That's calumny.
There is no point in Sandra Fluke's testimony where she says she needs birth control because she is having, to quote the OxyMoron "so much sex" that she is going broke. In fact, her testimony isn't about the contraceptive use of estrogen and progesterone.
Yet he makes that defamatory claim -- repeatedly -- over the course of DAYS. And then he goes further. He calls her
"a woman who is happily presenting herself as an immoral, baseless, no-purpose-to-her-life woman."
Again, no basis in fact. She actually begins her testimony by detailing her academic and social achievements.
Not content to demean her professional achievements, with a wanton disregard for the facts, he calls her a sex addict. That's a serious charge that can have ramifications in terms of your employability. What does he base that on?
"It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex, she can't afford it...By her own admission, in her own words, Sandra Fluke is having so much sex that she can't afford it.
Again, that is totally false. She never said anything like that. None of those statements can be pawned off as a "joke" when they have no basis in reality. You want to make fun of Nancy Pelosi for using botox (as he did in the opening of his attack), you got a basis. But calling this woman a slut who has SO much sex "it's surprising she can still walk" is flat out slander.
Not content to slander her in the present, the OxyMoron reaches back to her childhood and really goes wild.
"Ms. Fluke, who bought your condoms in junior high? Who bought your condoms in the sixth grade, or your contraception?"
This is the verbal equivalent of curb-stomping. Those aren't jokes. Again, there is no basis for them. You want to make fun of Kim Kardashian or Snooki like that, at least you might have a basis for the tasteless joke. But Sandra Fluke has never said or done anything that remotely resembles the fantasy Rush is spinning.
But wait, there's more -- He defames ALL the women at Georgetown Law School. ALL of them. Repeatedly.
"...she and her co-ed classmates are having sex nearly three times a day for three years straight, apparently these deadbeat boyfriends or random hookups that these babes are encountering here, having sex with nearly three times a day..."
Again, with no basis in fact. Nothing to support this. When you consider the impact recent sex scandals at Penn State are having on alumni and prospective students, this is not something women who go to Georgetown law school can laugh off. Who knows how this is going to effect future interviews. This sounds like it might merit a whole separate legal action; a class action lawsuit.
This is no joke. Rush makes it clear that he is doing all this because his intention is to change the story based on lying about it.
I'm not making any of it up. You put all the details that she brought forth. She's struggling financially. Why? Just quote her. Her sex life is active and she's having sex so frequently that she can't afford all the birth control pills that she needs. Is what she's saying. You put that in the story and it changes for everybody. [emphasis added]
And here's the kicker. By his own admission, he did this for the money. He is crystal clear about his motivation for prolonging this attack.
"I want to go back and get this out of the way 'cause I'm sure that there is voluminous tune-in today to hear ..."
That's the bottom line. He knew this would generate controversy, and that means attention. And that means ratings. And that means money. Who cares if some innocent woman is damaged? Who cares if the reputation of an institution is trashed? This wanton disregard for the facts or the consequences of his actions and the repetitive nature of these vicious lies demand restitution.
The big ticket item would be to seek punitive damages. Those are completely appropriate for this sort of behavior. They were designed for precisely this sort of scenario.
This is the sort of case that people build their careers on. There is no doubt this case would be attractive on a contingency basis to any competent lawyer specializing in defamation cases. This is right up there with Carol Burnett's classic attack on the National Enquirer several decades ago.
The costs to the OxyMoron will be devastating, even at his inflated salary. There is no prayer of a summary judgment dismissing this case. Discovery alone will run into the millions. For the first time, he will have to show his actual audience size. He will be forced to document things he has claimed for years, that many suspect are false. There is plenty of reason to believe this artificial controversy was intended to hoist his sagging ratings now that more accurate measures are showing his audience is about as flaccid as .... well... stuff that shouldn't be flaccid if you are going to run around showing it off in public.
Even after the lawyers fees, Sandra Fluke will be able to pay off all her student debt and have money left over to fund clinics that provide free contraceptives to students at Georgetown in perpetuity. And it will all be financed by the OxyMoron. That will be an exceptionally bitter pill for him to swallow. Contrary to his persistent ranting about how these women are asking "us" to pay for their birth control... a widely publicized report from HHS titled, "The Cost of Covering Contraceptives through Health Insurance " was published earlier in February. It's opening line?
Evidence from well-documented prior expansions of contraceptive coverage indicates that the cost to issuers of including coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods in insurance offered to an employed population is zero.
So not only do we have the lie that Sandra Fluke is having so much sex she can't pay for contraceptives, not only do we have the lie that women at Georgetown Law School are sex-addicts who screw all day like bunnies, there is NO cost to insurance companies to provide this service and thus no cost to taxpayers. Why? Because the cost of preventing pregnancies is a fraction of the cost for managing pregnancies and deliveries.
When I consider this sorry spectacle, I remember Grandma used to say, "A fish kills itself with its mouth." It doesn't take a lawyer to see how much trouble this guy is in. It will take some seriously motivated attorneys to go after this pig when he lawyers up. But that's why lawyers get contingency fees.
UPDATE": From the comments (h/t Gooserock).
Retired Trial Lawyer Called Thom Hartmann Yesterdy
Had worked with a very famous lawyer, might've been Melvin Belli.
He said when he heard Rush's first accusation he had to go outside and scream.
He next said that since Rush had accused her of an actual crime --prostitution-- it simplified aspects of a lawsuit. One thing was there was no need to determine dollar damages on that count.
Adding fuel to that fire, we didn't have to wait long for evidence of damages to surface. A cartoon echoing Rush's slander was published by a cartoonist featured in the Rome (Ga.) News- Tribune. Here is a copy of the cartoon.
(h/t Denise Oliver Velez)
With that kind of firepower, you have no need to even consider settling. This could drag on for years. The only question now is whether Sandra Fluke will want to keep his jet or donate it to Planned Parenthood so they can provide transport for women in need.