Rally For Rush: Just How Stupid Is WaPo’s Alexandra Petri?

March 8, 2012

Well, at least now I know why they call Alexandra Petri's column "Compost." How's that for irony? Her banner claims she puts the pun in punditry. Her Limbaugh item reads more like she puts the snot in dumb as…. She reveals what an idiot she is on more than one level.

Advertisers learned something about Rush Limbaugh’s demographic this week. “Here we thought lots of pleasant, upstanding people were listening to and enjoying the rational things Rush had to say,” dozens of companies said. “Apparently not.” It turns out that people who really, truly still enjoy Rush Limbaugh’s show are — how do I put this? — jerks.

The demographics of Rush's audience haven't somehow shifted overnight. The advertisers on Rush's show, even ones that fled, many temporarily, know far better what those demographics are everyday, than Petri will ever know. What, does the idiot think companies spend all that money without knowing precisely who they are reaching everyday? Was she born yesterday, or simply ignorant of the real world because she makes a living inside the bubble of the Post? Her entire premise, that Rush's listeners are now, or suddenly, low-rent, is laughable.

They are the same good people all the companies she listed want to do business with as any other Limbaugh advertiser, be it a retailer, mattress manufacturer, or whatever. Petri also either can't read, or doesn't comprehend English very well. The bulk of those that pulled their ads from Limbaugh suspended them. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what that means.

They are capitalist enterprises. To the extent they advertise, they will do it where they can reach the largest number of potential customers in a cost competitive manner. As long as Rush maintains his audience, the largest in all of talk radio by far, and remains cost competitive, that's where the advertising dollars are ultimately going to go. 

Here's how this will play out. Most that pulled will seek cover via a suspension, the Democratic Party's witchhunt that comes with ugly, Obama inspired death threats, will blow over, the ads will be back because it makes good business sense – and Alexandra Petri will continue to be a moron with a Washington Post column, just as sure as the sun is going to rise in the morning. Yawn.

AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
  1. Ragspierre says:

    This is just a retread of a retreaded retread.
    It’s all the Collective has…

  2. jharp says:

    It is comedy Dan. Geeze.
    How’s that hot new tape of Breitbart’s doing for your side?

  3. Ah. Comedy. OK. Sure thing, Sparky. It’s just comedy that this bimbo insulted millions of Americans. By that same token, we can simply deem Rush’s comments “comedy”, and that makes it OK. Problem solved!

  4. Ragspierre says:

    100% Teach.

  5. jharp says:

    Hey Teach,
    The democratic leaders don’t take their marching orders from Petri nor Jon Stewart.
    The GOP, on the other hand…
    God you people are stupid.
    Keep on that Breitbart tape though. It is the best humor your side has done in a long time.
    And keep up the war on women and contraception because all women know that it is up to their boss whether they can use birth control or not.
    Can you say 4 more years?

  6. Ragspierre says:

    Odd, jharp…
    I don’t know a single woman who feels her boss has any say in whether or not she uses contraceptives…including some who are sleeping with their boss.
    What a moron.

  7. Ragspierre says:

    Critical race theory, of which Bell was essentially the founder and the greatest proponent, is explicitly incompatible with “liberalism” as classically defined; in truth, it is more of a radical Leftist idea. As a result of the claims it makes, CRT is utterly incompatible with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and with American — and Western — ideals of equality, justice, and colorblindness, not to mention that its philosophical underpinnings stand in diametric opposition to that most cherished of conservative principles — belief in external reality. Ultimately, CRT relegates objective reality and our responses to it to a collection of human “constructs.” It is post-modern and it is radical. It is quite literally un-American.
    Such suggestions would not, in fact, be rejected by advocates of CRT and other constructivist theories. If racism is ingrained into the fabric of American society, then our society inherently excludes those outside of the racial majority and the system needs smashing.
    ***But as a result, most of those who do reject wholesale the American “construct” do not seek its presidency.***
    This is where is becomes relevant. It is fine for Americans to consider themselves outside of the system, but we should know about it if they are running the show. On CNN this morning, Amy Holmes — playing the sole voice of reason in a disastrous segment — correctly pointed out that Obama may well have changed his mind on various things since his college days, but that if he hasn’t it is important for Americans to consider the wisdom of his being president. Most of us have matured as we’ve got older, and the president may well have as well — we’ll probably never know, given the media’s double-standard on questions about Obama’s past — but, if he has not, then he is indeed a subversive, for it is one thing to look at the entire structure of government, law, and society, and claim it to be an intractably racist tool of white hegemony, and quite another to seek the highest office within it.
    –Charles Cooke

  8. jharp says:

    Odd, jharp “I don’t know a single woman who feels her boss has any say in whether or not she uses contraceptives”
    I’d be glad to help and thanks for asking.
    Senators Kelly Ayotte, Susan Collins, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and Lisa Murkowski are 4 pretty influential ones who just voted to give everyone’s boss exactly that power.

  9. Ragspierre says:

    Cite to the bill.
    ‘Cause I’m calling you a liar.
    So, let’s look, shall we…???

  10. Andrew says:

    to JHarp
    I think your opinion on the contraception issue is so off base its almost comical. NO ONE IS TELLING A WOMAN NOT TO USE CONTRACEPTION!! they are just saying that the boss, in this particular case, a religious institution should not have to pay for something they dont support. By the way, any woman can ask a man to use a condom or havent you heard of that? OR she can go to Walmart and get it for $9/month, not 3k per year like the non activist/activist Fluke said. Those pills better be made of gold for 3k per year. And no, i am not against contraception, my wife uses it too and it doesnt cost us that kind of money. YOu dont want Catholic beliefs pushed on you, well, maybe Catholics dont want your beliefs pushed on them?
    But you dont think of it that way, because only your beliefs matter (along with the other libertards)

  11. jharp says:

    Andrew. Please. If you don’t have $9 a month and your boss refuses to cover contraception you are not going to be able to use contraception.
    And guess who gets to pay to raise baby. Dumbass.

  12. jharp says:

    Cite to the bill.
    Posted by: Ragspierre | Thursday, March 08, 2012 at 05:01 PM
    Sure. The Blunt amendment. And I believe it was to be attached to the transportaion bill.

  13. jharp says:

    to JHarp
    I think your opinion on the contraception issue is so off base its almost comical. NO ONE IS TELLING A WOMAN NOT TO USE CONTRACEPTION!! they are just saying that the boss, in this particular case, a religious institution should not have to pay for something they dont support.
    Andrew. My religion forbids me from paying for war.
    Do I get to opt out of paying taxes that go towards war?
    God you people are stupid.

  14. Ragspierre says:

    “If you don’t have $9 a month and your boss refuses to cover contraception you are not going to be able to use contraception.”
    Well, I really don’t need to say anything after that. You’ve just shown you are too stupid to live…
    Thanks for helping with the demonstration.

  15. dinglewoodnorwoodbill says:

    Let’s see, 9 bucks. Ok, like for Netflix? You cannot come up with 9 bucks? Are you sure you are mature enough for sex?
    War? R U seriously comparing these 2 situations?
    God, you *liberal* people are stupid.
    There, I fixed that for ‘ya…

  16. TexasMom2102 says:

    Hello try not screwing around if u do not have or are not able to beg or borrow the $9 for contraceptives. But if a company doesn’t want to pay for them based on religious objections then they should not be forced to provide birth control, the morning after abortion pill or have to pay for abortions. Try some personal responsibility or get another job. Lib ‘tolerance’ only applies to their views or beliefs, never anyone’s beliefs or views on the right. I am so tired of gimmee gimmee, I demand someone else pays for what I want, not please help me with what I desperately need. It took me eight years of mostly night school to get through college, working and paying my own way. My husband worked two jobs, paid for his college and sent money home to help support his younger siblings. We have paid our way. Why should we now have to be forced pay others way? I am sick of the idiot Occupy Wall Streeters who took the easy liberal arts path, not studying a field that results in a career and now they want their debts paid, hahahaha. They all have cell phones and computers, cameras etc. No way.

  17. Ragspierre says:

    “Do I get to opt out of paying taxes that go towards war?”
    Many of us here would say you should. So?
    Ever heard of a conscientious objector, you moron…???
    “My religion forbids me from paying for war.”
    What religion is that, liar…???

  18. jharp says:

    “What religion is that, liar…???”
    Quakers. And I am not referencing conscience objector exceptions you ignorant jackass.
    I talking about using my tax dollars to pay for war.
    And just like Catholics don’t have to use birth control a conscience objector doesn’t have to fight in a war. But he still has to pay for it.
    Get it?
    God you people are stupid.

  19. Ragspierre says:

    Do you refuse to pay taxes on your religious scruples, liar?
    Do you see a distinction between a national emergency and being forced to pay for someone’s birth control? Are they REMOTELY analogous…???
    As I noted earlier…too stupid to live.

  20. Ragspierre says:

    “My religion forbids me from paying for war.
    God you people are stupid.”
    Yeah, you are a lying sack of sh!t. You are not a Quaker. You are a hater.

  21. dinglewoodnorwoodbill says:

    The trouble, Rags, is this guy IS serious and worse, he represents a substantial amount of left wing “thinking” on these issues. The basic fundamental problem is they contort logic beyond all comprehension to support what they personally want or feel is entitled to them. A few minutes looking at dailykos threads reveals this.
    A person saying now they just do not want to be forced to finance contraception (soon sex change ops, abortions, etc. insert whatever new infantile need is currently being championed by the collective) means the persons who want to be left alone who do not interfere with actual access or manufacturing or distribution of contraceptives, are “waging a war on women” or are “sending women back to the 1950’s” “want women to be barefoot and pregnant” etc.
    IOW, they extrapolate 1,500 different unconnected consequences from refusal to agree to their previously unvoiced demands as if those problems were forced in a sequence inexorably unless taxpayers are forced to subsidize women having sex.
    It’s just amazingly pathological.
    Notice I did not say “intellectually dishonest” since you have to REALIZE you are trying to deceive first to be that. The left useful idiot branch, if not the organizational/political leadership, actually believes this irrational anti-logic without seeing how absurd it is.

  22. Ragspierre says:

    Wull, duh.
    Here’s the structure of the argument…
    *Your boss controls what you can eat every night.
    How, and WTF…???
    *Your boss does not provide you steak ad lib.
    But THAT doesn’t control how I spend my money. It just means my boss does not give me steak out the ass. Nobody is keeping me from eating steak every night if I want.
    *Unless your boss is required by law to provide you steak ad lib, you are denied your right to choose what to eat.
    I have all kinds of choices of how to feed myself. I can even choose to fast for a meal or two.

  23. Bill G. says:

    The true question in all of this is how did Bam-Bam decide that he has the authority to issue a ukase and force anyone to do anything?
    Buy insurance?
    Offer insurance to employees?
    Include a specific measure in the insurance program?
    So far, the Constitution still stands as law of the land.
    Congress passes bills.
    The president signs,or vetoes, them.
    Then it becomes a law.
    Bam-Bam does not have the right to create law with a wagglee of his finger.

  24. Ragspierre says:

    I’ve said it here and there before…
    President Pond-Scum is NOT a dictator wanna-be…
    He IS a dictator. That is reinforced almost daily.
    That will give you a little recap of the BDS of the intelligentsia, and it will also show you how the same people are cool with Obama doing what they fantasized about BOOOOOOoooosh.

  25. Drago says:

    jharp: “God you people are stupid.”
    No jharp, you are stupid. Quite stupid.
    An you analogy regarding some of the taxes you supposedly pay going to military activities doesn’t hold at all.
    I’ll make it as simple as I can for you, since you are clearly one of the OWS-like sheep of the left:
    The Federal government (led by the President as Commander in Chief) is constitutionally mandated to execute those military activities as they deem appropriate. Hence the Federal Government is acting within it’s constitutional duties in using tax dollars for those purposes.
    Now, compare that with what obambi is attempting to do with the contraceptives discussion: In that case the President of the United States is attempting to force private citizens and private organizations to purchase goods and services directly from another private enterprise, the purchase of which would violate the private citizens/private organizations religious beliefs.
    Do you get it now?
    Here, let me help you a bit more: what if a future Republican President wanted to force you to purchase newly issued shares of Halliburton stock in order to provide Halliburton the requisite capital needed for purchase of a military arms producing company.
    According to your very own “logic” (LOL), you should have no problem with that at all.
    But something tells me you just might! LOL
    I would also like to say that I’m really finding it amusing that the lefties have taken time out of their busy days calling conservative women whores, sluts, bags of meat, etc to complain about Rushs treatment of this poor, innocent, “just a gal on the street” Fluke!
    Just another example, as if we needed any more, of the following FACT:
    The left does not,and has never, actually believed a single thing that they lecture the rest of us about.
    BTW, anyone catch olbermann jumping into the fray with a “years too late” “apology”?
    But that’s ok jharp. You just keep on truckin’ with your lectures on the lefts superior “morality”!

  26. jharp says:

    The Federal government (led by the President as Commander in Chief) is constitutionally mandated to execute ObamaCare as they deem appropriate. Hence the Federal Government is acting within it’s constitutional duties in using tax dollars for those purposes.
    Posted by: Drago | Thursday, March 08, 2012 at 07:42 PM
    On this we agree. Thanks.

  27. Ragspierre says:

    Total Waste Of Time.

  28. dinglewoodnorwoodbill says:

    No, jharp, since Obamacare is totally unconstitutional.
    Obamacare makes citizens slaves, then threatens them with consequences for *non*-participation. One can only imagine what Barry Goldwater, known for criticizing the abuse of the Commerce Clause in the Wickard v. Filburn case, would have thought of this beast in terms of its contorted justifications…

  29. Dave in Dallas says:

    The stupidity of the Petri story is that she claimed Rush was being sponsored by Ashley Madison, but that was a local advertiser. Not only does Rush not make money from it, but his team requests that unsavory advertisers be pulled from local spot time whenever they discover such things. Her premise was that if Ashley Madison is a Rush sponsor, then he was profiting from an audience of men trying to cheat on their wives. He joked that perhaps the local station had got wind that Bill Clinton was listening. But he would not, did not make a dime from AM or sign off on their ads running in his show.

  30. Drago says:

    I guess doctoring my comment qualifies as “funny” or “edgy” to jharp.
    It’s sad really.
    They really have nothing else.
    Which once again raises the eternal question: Are the democrats ultimately helped or harmed by the fact that their base is this blindingly dumb and easily led?
    On the one hand, simply by ringing a bell the lefties can call our their “grassroots” OWS “soldiers”.
    On the other hand, the left, by agressively choosing to live in their cocoon and refusing to confront reality, are left dumbstruck by even the most basic logical observations/confrontations.
    We’ll have to see if they are as easily defeated as they were in 2010, which, as you all recall, they were desperately trying to convince everyone that they hadn’t actually been in charge for the previous 4 years in Congress.
    It will be interesting.

  31. Ragspierre says:

    Sleep Train stopped advertising on Limbaugh’s show after he called a law student advocating for birth control coverage at Georgetown University a “slut” and a “prostitute” over her stance on contraception. The retailer said it can’t “condone such negative comments directed toward any person.”
    Limbaugh, through his spokesman Brian Glicklich, turned aside Sleep Train’s attempts to resume advertising on the show.
    “Unfortunately, your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the Future.”
    Dale Carlsen, head of Sleep Train, issued a statement saying: “We confirm that Rush Limbaugh will no longer be one of Sleep Train’s radio endorsers.”
    Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/08/4323061/limbaugh-rebuffs-attempt-by-sleep.html#storylink=cpy
    Heh, heh, hehhh…

  32. sickofrinos says:

    jfart-get off your sister and get back to the huff and puff site.

  33. Ragspierre says:

    Excellent points in that piece…
    one being that in a system of compulsion, we are not able to just leave each other alone.
    This is a point I’ve been making for decades. The so-called Religious Right has less interest in controlling you than controlling the too powerful government, and only became active to counter the incursions of the Collective.
    So…easy fix. Shrink the power of government. (See the period…???)