(Not to get in the way of kravitz's fine diary and the excellent record-keeping within, I think it's important that people know just what it was that got Rush upset at a "bee-eye-itchy" Washington Post "reporter" and how easily he was [to use an expression that makes my hemorrhoids itch] "pwned." So think of this diary as a supplementation and not a usurpation. Thank you!)
Rush's bad week continued as Rush's lawyers contacted Rush and demanded that Rush cease and desist from using Rush on Rush's show. And that's not even the worst of it.
The Fabulous Thunderbirds have joined the rock group Rush and Peter Gabriel in their demand that the porcine misogynist refrain from using their music on his show.
Then there's the fact that at least 46 advertisers have dropped Rush Limbaugh like he was a hot, fat, drug-abusing rock. Yesterday (March 7), there were reports that on New York radio, during many commercial breaks on Rush's three-hour hate fest, public service announcements aired instead of paid commercials on a radio program that is ordinarily sold out months in advance. This does not mean Limbaugh has suddenly become a public-spirited citizen giving away free, valuable air time. It means the radio station did not have paying advertisers to plug into these vacant spots generated during breaks on a syndicated radio show.
Today, reports indicate that there were not even enough PSA's to fill the space and that dead air was heard during Limbaugh's commercial breaks.
More evidence of Rush's bad week?
On today's (March 8) show, he was owned by a Washington, DC, comedy writer.
El Rushbo went on at length about a Washington Post "reporter" named Alexandra Petri. Rush was MAD at Ms. Petri and her "reporting." She said things that Rush said just were not true, and included her opinion in her story. He even called her opinion "Bee-Eye-Itchy!" Because she's a woman with an opinion and Rush doesn't much care for that sort of thing is why.
Rush would have every right to be angry about a Washington Post reporter who injected her opinion, "bee-eye-itchy" or otherwise, into a news story.
Except for one thing...
It didn't happen.
What Rush was reading and not comprehending was a clearly labeled humor column written on the Washington Post online edition by DC Humorist and Satirist Alexandra Petri. This is what the head of her column, her column head if you will, looks like.

That is correct. Rush was looking at the same image you see right here. He just did not comprehend that there might be a difference between an online newspaper humorist, "using absurdity to highlight the absurd" and an actual news reporter.
Rush knows a thing or two about "using absurdity to highlight the absurd" since that's the very weak and pale excuse he offered during his very weak and pale apology for what you will see in the space directly below this paragraph.
See, it's OK if RUSH "uses absurdity to highlight the absurd." Just don't let him catch some "bee-eye-itchy" WOMAN doing the same thing to HIM, in a limited, much gentler, actually funny piece of satire.