To Whom This May Concern:
I appreciate and cherish that America is a country with a rich diversity of opinions and the right to speak freely without government sanction. This unique and wonderful freedom that we citizens enjoy comes with a responsibility for us to adjudicate what we find agreeable and to dissociate ourselves from that which is harmful and offensive. The time has come for Clear Channel to decide whether it truly wishes to have its brand tied to the increasingly repulsive views of Rush Limbaugh. His on-air defamation and verbal sexual degradation of Sandra Fluke, a decent, young Georgetown student, crossed a line from political debate to indefensible slander.
Rush Limbaugh is a provocateur. He's built his brand on that, and there are people who enjoy what he and they consider his form of entertainment. He makes money for himself and your organization. That's all well and good, but at some point you have to look at what it is you are profits are coming from; hit men, after all, perform a similar service for crime syndicates.
Perhaps the above analogy is an overreach. But is it really any more of a stretch than calling a respectable woman a "Slut" and a "Prostitute" for the simple fact of her using the same legal medicines that millions of her fellow Americans take every day? Rush Limbaugh is a known user of Viagra. Does that make him a sexual criminal? And, again, mine was but a mere analogy. I'm not suggesting Limbaugh actually perform violence; your radio personality, however, is using your airwaves to attempt to cajole Ms. Fluke into making pornography for his enjoyment.
While it is one thing to offer political commentary and to lampoon public figures, it is far beyond the bounds of propriety to defame a private individual in this vile manner. Rush has had other controversies, but this is a new low even for him. ABC decided several years ago that they did not want to allow their airwaves to be used as a platform for Rush's outdated racial views. Clear Channel is at a similar crossroads regarding this individual's airing of unmitigated sexism.
Differences of opinion in politics are to be expected and explored; the bullying of women is not. Clear Channel needs to send a message to the millions of people that tune in to their many stations. If the company supports its airwaves being employed for the unprovoked and sexually demeaning slander of women in this country, then it need do nothing. If it objects to that, as I would hope it does, than meaningful public sanction--beginning with a suspension up to dropping him from your network entirely--must be imposed on Rush Limbaugh by Clear Channel. The choice is yours, but that is indeed the choice.
