Even though the controversial SOPA has been met with such negative views from the public, the government is still considering another bill very similar to it called CISPA. Even though Rush Limbaugh was met with such negative public outcry for what he said, his advertisers are slowly crawling...

+139 Even though the controversial SOPA has been met with such negative views from the public, the government is still considering another bill very similar to it called CISPA. Even though Rush Limbaugh was met with such negative public outcry for what he said, his advertisers are slowly crawling back to him. This just proves that no matter how passionate or angry the masses are at something, the government or the powerful or the rich will always get what they want in the end, amirite?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm so disgusted with the amount of greed in this world and this country especially that I don't even know what to do with myself. In the end it all comes down to making the rich richer.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And the poor poorer.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Sometimes life seems so unfortunate That's why I don't give a shit The poor stay poor and The rich get richer It's just so disproportionate

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Eminem. I have so much appreciation for rappers who use their influence to say meaningful things. Tupac's song Keep Ya Head Up is a prime example.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Ya and his songs like changes and Brenda's got a baby. It annoys me so much when people are like 'rappers don't rap about anything meaningful' well maybe your just listening to the wrong rap

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't expect them to all rap about politics or social issues. It's just a nice change when they do. There's nothing wrong with a rapper who raps about bitches and drugs, it's their music. I just get a different kind of respect towards them when they show the world their serious side.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh I agree. It's just that people will complain about that and I'll say that not all rap is like that

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What the heck did Rush say?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If you want free birth control, you are a prostitute and should film yourself having sex so that taxpayers get what they pay for.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Did he also publically call a woman a slut for advocating for increased access to birth control?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, for advocating for free birth control. That's a very controversial subject and should be debated with civility, not by telling a woman to make him some porn.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Hey, rush may have over-done it, but he was right about what he was arguing about.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't really like the idea of free birth control, and I probably would've agreed with Rush if he presented me with reasonable facts and opinions, but all respect has been lost by calling this person who just wanted to voice her opinion a prostitute/whore. It also seemed really sexist too, and nothing like that said by anyone should be tolerated.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

As i said, he over-did it. But he's not the only one who has done it. He tried to buy a football team once upon a time, but wasn't allowed to because he was deemed "Racist."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

He is a racist, so I don't know why you put that in quotes, and yeah, that's how business works. Limbaugh is quoted as saying "Let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it." I wouldn't expect any NFL team to want to have anything to do with him after that. Also, aren't you the girl who would prefer to have a rape baby rather than get pregnant by a person you like? Maybe I'm not surprised you don't support free contraception.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Ok now hold on, the rape baby thing is a completely different issue so don't use that as an argument here. Although he may have said that, that doesn't mean he's racist. Just because he's stereotyping doesn't make him racist.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, saying there are a lot of blacks in the NFL is stereotyping, not racism. However, comparing them to violent gangs is. It's like me saying going to a McDonald's is like seeing a slave auction without any slaves. Semi-bad analogy but you get my point. It's really offensive and completely unnecessary.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't actually think it is. They're violent, it's just their job to be. And the majority of them have tattoos, which isn't unlike gang members.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Wait, really? It's a soldier's job to be violent, and the majority of them have tattoos. I guess seeing them on the battlefield is like seeing a gang fight! Most NFL players are male, and so are most gang members, therefore if you are a male you are a gang member? Most gang members have organs, so if you have organs you are a gang member? No. Football players =/= gang members. Gang members = gang members.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It was just a harmless observation that wasn't intended to be racist. It was definitely blown out of proportion. And he must have not had anything against them if he was willing to buy a team.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Whether he's racist or not isn't really relevant to buying a football team though, or do I just have no idea what you guys are talking about?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It is relevant though. Companies care about their public image. Would you expect Steve Jobs to appear in a Dell commercial? Would you expect to see Lenscrafters advertising in a LASIK surgeon's office? If the goals of one company are inconsistent with the goals of another, you wouldn't expect them to want to associate with each other. Since the NFL has a lot of black players and since they appeal to a huge, racially diverse group of people, you wouldn't expect them to associate with a racist sponsor. This is also the reason advertisers pulled their ads from Limbaugh's show after he made the slut comments.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

inb4 something akin to the French Revolution occurs in this country. They're pretty much asking for it at this point. Also, this image summarizes the government/corporations pretty well. http://img.ctrlv.in/4f9ca341e5bde.jpg

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Meh, I certainly value the Constitution over the Bible, and I'm not the government. I like the filthy pirate one a lot though haha.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It was saying the politicians treat the Bible like it's the Constitution.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Well yeah, with an attitude like that what do you expect to happen? Honestly, I don't think the masses of America give that much of a shit about anything that involves getting up off their asses. The "passion" they have is a few thousand blogs where they bitch and moan about things they don't like. When an internet censorship bill comes along the bloggers and webmasters click a few links to black out their page and that's it. They don't even leave the house. If the masses actually made an effort to boycott the things they hate, got rid of this "we can't do anything about it" attitude, then some progress would be made. The reason Rush's sponsors are crawling back to him is because they know that people aren't going to stop listening to him. Why? Because he's a dick. People like listening to all of the outrageous things he spews out of his fat mouth; they like being offended. I could go on and on analyzing it all, but no matter what he says, people are still going to listen to him, and advertisers are going to follow whatever gets the most listens or views.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Just because people don't go out on the streets and riot doesn't mean no one's angry about it. The internet is an extremely powerful tool, and people "clicking a few links" aided the Libyan revolution. Protesting on the internet is a way to protest too, and when you see such a huge negative response towards an issue you expect the government to respond. Google even blacked out for SOPA. Then what happened? The government said goodbye to it. Now, they sneakily introduce a bill almost just like it. It's all manipulation. The government sees such a huge corporation wanting to get rid of SOPA so they would look bad if they continued. Now, no one knows. I do agree that people can't give up, but it's hard to be optimistic if everything you rally for doesn't end up happening. Companies gave up Rush for show and because people boycotted them. They don't give a crap, they just want money. Even if a whole bunch of people cried out against Rush and protested outside the street of his radio show, that doesn't stop people from listening to him. Rush will then proceed to tell the protesters to get a job and his listeners will worship him even more. His advertisers will make the same profit.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't think people on the internet were the biggest reason for them not doing SOPA. I think they didn't go through with SOPA because it's stupid and they knew it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Derp

by Anonymous 11 years ago

ANARCHY! *smashes something for dramatic effect*

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's so annoying because when the US government introduces a bill such as SOPA it affects the whole world! And it's not as if I can launch a protest from where I'm from because, honestly, how would a protest in little New Zealand affect them at all?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

By writing to your Government or donating to politicians that you share the same views as. No person is powerless.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

In my opinion, SOPA wasn't bad. The only problem was it was so badly worded. If they made a bill to stop piracy that didn't give so much power to the government to shut down any website it would be fine with me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago