Boycott Causes Rush Limbaugh to Crack and Blame Spanx for His Troubles

Apr 26 2012 Published by under Featured News

In a desperate attempt to get his advertisers back, Rush Limbaugh is blaming Spanx, and not himself, for ‘killing’ the women’s movement.

Here is the audio from Media Matters:

Limbaugh was quoting from a story in Time about Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin meeting with Spanx creator Sara Blakely, when things got weird,

Now, Huma doesn’t need a Spanx. I wouldn’t think. So they sent somebody over to Blakely’s table to get her and come back over to Huma and Hillary’s table, and the New York Post says that the event organizer was dispatched, Blakely came over and “the Spanx sensation was soon seen in deep conversation with Clinton. A discreet Blakely, 41, the world’s youngest female self-made billionaire after founding Spanx in 2000, didn’t tell us if Clinton admitted to wearing Spanx, but said, ‘She told me she read my story in the issue and liked it.

Now, the Blakely story is a great story. I think it is. Very American. She invents a product. People wanted to buy it. There were no government handouts or no slush funds. There were no subsidies. Hillary actually could learn a lot from Sara Blakely. I’ll tell you what I was just told. Even women who don’t need a girdle-like thing the Spanx is wear them anyway because of why? Okay. Okay. It’s more professional. It makes a woman look more professional because there’s no sexy jiggle. The Spanx keeps everything firm and taut and there’s no jiggle. Okay, well, I’ve just lost interest in it, then. Professional or not.

If what Dawn told us is right, that Spanx stops the jiggles and therefore you have a more professional, well, I’ll tell you what: It isn’t old El Rushbo that’s killing the women’s movement; it’s Spanx. It ain’t me.

Limbaugh used Spanx to launch another misogynistic attack on women, but what is interesting here is that this convoluted argument is his latest attempt to get his advertisers back and end the boycott.

Limbaugh’s “Spanx defense” was nothing more than a new spin on his latest attempt to blame the victim. His position was that women who want to be taken seriously and not treated like eye candy deserve to be called sluts. To him women like Sandra Fluke deserve the personal attacks and insults because they wanted to be taken seriously. Limbaugh was arguing that if women just knew their role, and showed up at the office dressed like they worked at Hooters all would be well with the world.

Rush Limbaugh has unsuccessfully tried various tactics to bring an end to the boycott. He issued a non-apology apology, hired a firm to handle damage control, and claimed that the boycott was having no impact at all. He also blamed Bill Maher, called Sandra Fluke a secret Obama operative, and now he is claiming that Spanx are to blame for harming the women’s movement. With each attempt, his desperation is almost visible to the naked eye.

Spanx have no relation to the women’s movement whatsoever, but even if they did so what? A woman is free to use any product that she wants for any reason that she wants. Her body, her choice. Wearing Spanx is no different than a man wearing a hairpiece. It doesn’t matter if he wears the hairpiece to feel better about himself, of if he thinks he needs the hairpiece in order to look younger and land a job. It doesn’t matter. Both men and women should be equally free to make these types of personal decisions, but the reality is that women aren’t free. Men like Rush Limbaugh are always on the sidelines lifting themselves to a superior position and judging women.

Limbaugh’s latest claim that he is not the real problem, Spanx are, shows how mentally disturbed this boycott is making him. The advertiser boycott was designed to hold Rush Limbaugh accountable for his attacks on Sandra Fluke, but it looks like the boycotters are on the verge of fracturing Rush Limbaugh possibly already damaged psyche.

Rush is on the crazy train now, and if the boycotters keep up the pressure, it is only a matter of time until he completely derails.

Comments are off for this post