Serial libido killer Rush Limbaugh is making angry noises about maybe suing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee because it quoted him accurately. He claims the DCCC defamed him and made him look bad and is trying to hurt his business -- and his feelings -- by accurately quoting a portion of his Sept. 15 radio broadcast, but out of context in a way that might suggest that Rush misses the good old days when you were free to rape any lady you wanted, without any dumb consent laws in the way.
This should be interesting, to paraphrase the words of Judge Kent:
"However, it is well known around these parts that [the DCCC's] lawyer is equally likable and has been writing crisply in ink since the second grade. Some old-timers even spin yarns of an ability to type. The Court cannot speak to the veracity of such loose talk, but out of caution, the Court suggests that Plaintiff's lovable counsel had best upgrade to a nice shiny No. 2 pencil or at least sharpen what's left of the stubs of his crayons for what remains of this heart-stopping, spine-tingling action."
This threatened lawsuit has as much chance of advancing in court as John of Orange's suit against Barry for destroying the Constitution by delaying implementation of one part of the Affordable Care Act for one year.
This threatened lawsuit also serves the same purpose, which is not to right a wrong but to attract publicity and to throw meat to the howling jackals of the right who, if they had their way, would rewrite the laws so lawsuits such as this one are much harder to file, except when they&#039;re really pissed at somebody because, c&#039;<i>mon,</i> man! Did you hear what he <i>said?</i>
At a minimum, OxyBlob should man up and own his exquisite lack of clarity. &quot;His condemnation of the &ldquo;&lsquo;no&rsquo; means &lsquo;yes&rsquo;&rdquo; concept&quot; is thoroughly mangled, for someone who gets paid vast sums of money to entertain with the use of words.
Salted, let&#039;s hope.
There&#039;s also this thing that&#039;s an absolute defense. Rush isn&#039;t familar with it.
He&#039;s so swave and deboner.
This should be interesting, to paraphrase the words of Judge Kent:
&quot;However, it is well known around these parts that [the DCCC&#039;s] lawyer is equally likable and has been writing crisply in ink since the second grade. Some old-timers even spin yarns of an ability to type. The Court cannot speak to the veracity of such loose talk, but out of caution, the Court suggests that Plaintiff&#039;s lovable counsel had best upgrade to a nice shiny No. 2 pencil or at least sharpen what&#039;s left of the stubs of his crayons for what remains of this heart-stopping, spine-tingling action.&quot;
Is Rush against rape? He says &quot;yes&quot;, but he means, &quot;no&quot;.
That would make Roger Ailes the John Drewe of skirt chasers.
No, I&#039;m pretty sure that what makes Rash Limpdick look bad is that he is a fucking idiot.
This threatened lawsuit has as much chance of advancing in court as John of Orange&#039;s suit against Barry for destroying the Constitution by delaying implementation of one part of the Affordable Care Act for one year.
This threatened lawsuit also serves the same purpose, which is not to right a wrong but to attract publicity and to throw meat to the howling jackals of the right who, if they had their way, would rewrite the laws so lawsuits such as this one are much harder to file, except when they&#039;re really pissed at somebody because, c&#039;<i>mon,</i> man! Did you hear what he <i>said?</i>
Calling Rush Limbaugh a small business is like saying Chris Christie is a model of small government.
Tortfeasor, wasn&#039;t that a Paula Deen dessert recipe?
At a minimum, OxyBlob should man up and own his exquisite lack of clarity. &quot;His condemnation of the &ldquo;&lsquo;no&rsquo; means &lsquo;yes&rsquo;&rdquo; concept&quot; is thoroughly mangled, for someone who gets paid vast sums of money to entertain with the use of words.