Always a delight, Rush Limbaugh took to his platform on Wednesday to discuss marriage equality. Sometimes I wonder why I continue to give this butt-clown attention, but alas, it’s good to ensure that people know that, yes, these idiots are still out there, running loose. It’s like he’s deliberately raising the bar on crudeness. Every article I write about him, it seems that I say “Limbaugh sinks to a new low.” But, no. When you’re Rush Limbaugh, there are always “lower lows.”
Obsessed with the sex lives of gay people (and…well…anyone), Limbaugh is in hog heaven this week. Marriage equality is having its day in the highest court of the land, and he is leveraging it to his full advantage as he entertains and feeds the paranoia of his low-information voter audience:
“Yeah, same-sex marriage is so ingrained in the culture now that when you’re talking about regular, good old-fashioned marriage, you have to say “opposite-sex marriage” to let people know what you’re talking about.”
He went on to say that the term “marriage” has officially become unclear.
“Just describing, just talking about “marriage” doesn’t let anybody know what you mean anymore. You have to specify opposite-sex marriage.”
Limbaugh demonstrated what he learned in the one college course he took, and he was clearly in the loop as to “the original will of the framers [of the Constitution] on this issue.”
“You know, the 14th Amendment is what the same-sex marriage proponents are using, and that’s how they’re linking it to civil rights.” He continued: “[…] the 14th Amendment and the equal-protection clause, which is what the proponents argue, that’s where they go in the Constitution to advance the notion of same-sex marriage, the 14th Amendment was passed after the Civil War to apply to former slaves to ensure that they are treated like all other citizens.”
No, I don’t think the framers of the Constitution never once imagined that ever, in the history of humanity, would this question ever come up and be treated with validity. Do you think Washington and Adams and Jefferson and Monroe said, “You know, we can see three, 400 years down the line where marriage isn’t gonna be between a man and a woman.” Wouldn’t even consider it. What are you trying to get, original intent for marriage in the Constitution?”
And finally, at his most distasteful:
“It was never intended to have anything to do with gay marriage or animal marriage or any other kind of social contract. It was specific to slavery, and after the Civli [sic] War.”
Is this his most distasteful comment, though? Was comparing same-sex marriage to pedophilia perhaps worse?
Limbaugh thinks he’s an expert on many things, it seems: the Constitution, the 14th Amendment, and above all else, MARRIAGE. Clearly not an expert on any of those things, he particularly should shy away from the topic of marriage. He himself has a long history of serial marriages and rumors of cheating. His third wife, Marta Fitzgerald, was actually a married woman who left her husband for Limbaugh. And he supported New Gingrich’s long history of adultery during the 2012 election season, calling him a “victim.” (Source)
So, did the framers of the Constitution ever imagine this? Did they ever once imagine that a pig like Rush Limbaugh would have such an influential voice with conservative voters? Did “Washington and Adams and Jefferson and Monroe” imagine for a single moment that there would come a time when a man could marry three and four and five times? Was a disastrous personal life like Limbaugh’s the “original intent for marriage in the Constitution?”
I’m thinking not. I think they’d be just as appalled by someone like Rush-ter.
Thanks to Media Matters, we have it on tape. Enjoy!
I am an unapologetic member of the Christian Left, and have spent a lot of time working with “the least of these” and disadvantaged and oppressed populations. I’m passionate about their struggles. To stay on top of topics I discuss, visit my blog, subscribe to my public updates on Facebook, or follow me on Twitter. Find me somewhere and let’s discuss stuff.