Posted on 06/12/2004 1:32:23 PM PDT by NavySEAL F-16
RUSH Limbaugh put out a statement yesterday that he and his third wife, Marta, had separated but only after PAGE SIX called to confirm what we'd learned exclusively. Sources in Palm Beach say Marta dumped the burly blowhard and vacated the couple's home on North Ocean Boulevard. The two are quietly working out a divorce agreement. Limbaugh met Marta on the Internet and they married in 1994. Since
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Wouldn't matter. Rush wasn't sending launching tomahawks at the same time.
Rush said today that he was the one who filed, for what it's worth.
Rush needs to retire.
haven't had time to keep up with the Rush threads today, has anyone posted any pictures of Marta? Before & after the knife?
I guess the sources were wrong.
RUSH REQUESTED THE DIVORCE, NOT MARTA.
RUSH REQUESTED THE DIVORCE, NOT MARTA.
Excuse me? How did he "violate our trust?" What trust was that? That he was perfect? That he couldn't become addicted to Oxycontin? That he was immune to divorce?
As a public figure, Rush has been "fair game" for years. But as you can see from the supermarket tabloids, being "fair game" doesn't mean that you are treated fairly. I don't delight in nasty gossip about celebs that I don't like, because most of the time, it's nonsense whipped up because even overblown news about them moves magazines.
You sound like those people who say that Dr. Laura is a "hypocrite" because it was revealed that two decades previously, she had begun a relationship with a married man (who later betrayed her by publishing nude photos of her) and later began her relationship with her current husband while he was still married. The problem with those people is that they don't understand the meaning of the word "hypocrite," and chose not to acknowledge that those actions were before her religious re-awakening. They instead chose to irrationally react as if she was just found in a motel room with her chauffeur.
If Dr. Laura's marriage disintegrated after having written her latest bestseller The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands, that would be another matter completely.
I first had my doubts about Rush in the mid-1990's, when all he talked about was high taxes. Then I saw a photo of him on a golf course (with famous friends) with a fat cigar in his mouth, and I realized that he was a big phony. He's a big act.
I was only a casual listener many years ago when I heard the now-legendary call from the whiner in Nagocdoches, TX, who leveled this same criticism to Rush -- 'Now that you're a big success, you're not one of US anymore!' Exactly what the dickens was Rush supposed to do when he became the most successful broadcaster in talk radio history? Drive a Dodge Dart around NYC, vacation in a Motel 6 in Atlantic City, blow off famous fans, and go only to municipal golf courses with rented clubs because he didn't want to 'lose touch with the people' in Nagocdoches? It is this kind of latent class envy that has my "Get a life!" trigger finger itching, but I won't pull it. Oops, I did it again. Sorry! : )
Rush has done exactly what untold thousands have been doing for as long as there has been a USA: arriving with nothing, finding their niche, doing it well, never giving up, and hitting it big. That's what you can do in America in a way that you can't do in any other country in the world, and Rush has always celebrated those who have made their own way. And what is contradictory about having famous friends, smoking big cigars, and talking about tax cuts? Now that Rush is a multi-millionaire, he probably pays more in taxes than you make annually. What's the problem? What makes him a "phony?"
For him to issue the divorce press release late on the same day that his "idol" was being laid to rest sickens me. EIB should fire this manipulative scum. This has nothing to do with taxes or politics; it has everything to do with honesty, decency, and respect to his core audience and Ronald Reagan.
You're right -- "it" has nothing to do with taxes or politics. It also has nothing to do "with honesty, decency, and respect to his core audience and Ronald Reagan." As I told trillium, Rush's announcement had no effect on the Reagan memorial proceedings whatsoever. So, what is "it" about? Apparently, mysterious nonsense with no basis in anything relevant.
Want to prove me wrong? It's simple. Tell me, in your opinion, when Rush was supposed to make the announcement in light of the fact that if he didn't do it Friday, the decidedly unfriendly gossip columnist for the New York Post was going to do it Saturday. Give me a REAL reason why he shouldn't have done it Friday.
Oh, BTW -- you aren't very perceptive if you don't realize that the Excellence In Broadcasting network can't fire Rush. Rush IS the Excellence In Broadcasting network.
A couple of times, that I can remember...
Agreed. I believe Rush's main point was more the "benefits of freedom" than the "benefits of Christiam morality."
Some on this thread write like they took his bluster about "Talent on loan from God..." and all that other stuff he says when coming back from a break seriously, and felt like he really was portraying himself as the divinely dispatched disciple of all things conservative. THAT'S "an act." His conservatism is not.
I swear, some of these people sound like they would have bailed on Reagan as a leader because he turned out to be the first divorced President.
And, please, stop your droning! You say the same thing, over and over and over.
You mean the John McCain that called Rush a "clown?"
Well said.
What hogwash. You've never paid a dime to listen to Rush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.