What Rush Limbaugh Considers An 'Ugly' Truth About Women

Rush Limbaugh has done it again. The Supreme Alienator, who once built his reputation with repeated references to 'femi-nazis,' continues to insure his irrelevance in 2009.

According to his Friday program, as transcribed at Media Matters, Rush had the following to say:

LIMBAUGH: This is a strange piece, but, nevertheless, this piece, if it gets wide distribution, will set feminism back 50 years.

It's a story from a website called BitterLawyer.com -- BitterLawyer.com: "Law professors won't tell their female students this, but one method some women use to get ahead in the corporate world has nothing to do with grades, or professionalism, or hard work -- just fake boobs. In a recent Bitter Lawyer poll, 58 percent of those asked said that boob implants could only help a woman's career, the remainder of respondents were split on the matter. Just over 23 percent of those polled paid -- said that such cosmetic changes were 'irrelevant.' "

[...]

LIMBAUGH: Can I redirect you to feminist truth number 24 -- undeniable truth of life number 24 -- written by me in the mid-80s? Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society. It's proved practically every day in our modern culture.

This particular rant begs a couple of questions.

First, why would any self-respecting woman, irregardless of her politics, give this man any credibility whatsoever? A woman who can listen to that and still find this man refreshing and entertaining needs a bit of help in the self-esteem department, no matter her political leanings.

Second, has anyone provided Rush Limbaugh with a mirror?

Maybe his comments are borne out of rejection. Whatever the rationale, it merely makes the man look like a pathetic narcissist (not that he needs much help to further that assumption along).

You have to hand it to Rush Limbaugh, he has no desire to speak to anybody but the hardest core of the GOP. And he obviously has no wish to attempt to persuade any moderates or independents to grow his audience. If he did, why would he keep shooting himself in the foot by revealing what a shallow, vacuous individual he is?