As opposed to Republican activists who are only doing it for the greater good of mankind, of course.
I see what you are trying to argue. Fluke was the head of an advocacy group, and she spoke because of her position as the representative of the group, to present the issues and concerns of that group. In that sense, she was acting in a public capacity that is somewhat similar to a politician.
The difference is that Limbaugh’s remarks were a blanket accusation that any woman wanting to use birth control who wasn’t married was necessarily a slut. It’s a blanket attack on women based upon an incorrect presumption about how birth control pills work. Plus, Fluke gave several specific examples of incidents that involved other women, and did not mention her own situation. Rush directed his remarks about Fluke. Maher’s remarks are aimed at specific women about their specific behaviors and words, not the actions of women as a whole, and not about statements they made on behalf of someone else.
Miller used to be that way, but since he’s drunk the conservative kool-aid, he seems more inclined to play the humor as criticism angle.
And there’s in principle nothing wrong with that. Rush, however, is mean, nasty, and hate-filled in his so-called humor.
No, I don’t think there is any equivalent.
It’d have to be:
– Blatantly and unabashedly partisan to the left (Maher disagrees with the mainstream left enough to exclude him)
– Not even have a pretense of journalism (so that excludes Amy Goodman)
– Popular (What’s the listenership of Schultz?)
– Controls the mic to an unacceptable degree (the closest I can come to Rush is O’Reilly who certainly isn’t left)