Rush Limbaugh has now confirmed what I wrote last week, explaining to a caller on Friday, November 18th that the elephant in the room in the Penn State scandal was that the alleged pedophile acts committed by Jerry Sandusky were homosexual in nature.
So much for those who scorned the suggestion, and kudos to Rush for speaking his mind.
In the first article I stated that, “I personally believe that the great majority of homosexual men also deplore Sandusky’s alleged acts. At the same time, there is a very large pedophile elephant that is hiding in the gay activist closet.” (I was referring to the celebration of pederasty in gay history, along with the fact that a number of 20th century gay icons supported NAMBLA, the notorious North American Man Boy Love Association.)
As for Rush, I drew attention to a statement he made to a caller on November 8th about Penn State, namely, that, “Nobody has the guts to actually give the explanation for what was going on and why there was trepidation in reporting it, and that’s all I’ll say.”
In response to this I asked, “Could it be that the sex abuse scandal involved a man abusing boys, meaning that the acts were homosexual in nature? . . . Of course, the fact that there are homosexual pedophiles does not mean that all (or most) gays are child abusers. Certainly not! And yet even Rush Limbaugh, it appears, would not address this directly.”
After the National Organization for Marriage excerpted my article, gay websites like Equality Matters and Towel Road drew mocking attention to it, writing, “Brown, of course, had his own theory for what Limbaugh was referring to,” and RightWingWatch felt my words deserved to be scorned.
Some readers also dismissed my conclusion: “It’s not the gay community Rush is worried about, it’s the sports fans”; “Call it a hunch but the author of ‘A Queer Thing Happened to America’, probably has an agenda and an ax to grind”; “Oh, stop. I really don’t think he is worried about that”; “Mr. Brown is creating a straw man argument in order to imply that Rush Limbaugh is a braggart and not really unafraid to discuss any subject”; “Michael Brown ridiculously delights in prattling on about nothing”; and, “I think we've had Rush around long enough to know, there is no way in hell he is going to bow down to the idea of political incorrectness. I’d be willing to bet my life, you don't have the full story, and you don't know what his implications were.”
The best comment came via email from a Townhall reader: “What’s your angle here you moron; by the way who are you, never heard of you and never will read anything from you again. Another 4th string writer taking a shot at Rush...he can handle it though. I can only assume your motivation is via money ‘under the table’ being sent to you. Good luck to you Pal; perhaps you should start looking at retiring.”
This past Friday, Rush set the record straight:
CALLER: I’d like to take a stab at the elephant in the room that you mentioned regarding Jerry Sandusky.
RUSH: Yeah, okay.
CALLER: I think that the thing you said everybody is afraid to mention is that we’re always told that homosexuals are not pedophiles, but in this case he sure was and the same thing with Michael Jackson. Is that what you had in mind?
RUSH: Not pedophiles, but I do think it’s the elephant in the room that it’s not called a homosexual problem or scandal or what have you, and the reason, there is a very powerful political gay movement, and it’s oriented towards supporting the Democrat Party. Just like in every segment of society, not every gay person is a predator, just like not every man is a predator like the feminists tried to say. Every group of people has its own bad actors. But because the political aspects homosexuality, which they’ve got a very powerful lobby and they’re liberal and they support the Democrat Party, they succeed in stifling conversation about it. And so you don’t dare mention it. People don’t mention it. It’s like not showing cartoons of Muslims. You just don’t go there because they wreak havoc on you, and it’s the path of least resistance.
But, yeah, it’s not so much pedophilia, although that’s what this is, but it’s Sandusky has to be a gay guy. Nobody’s mentioning that aspect because it’s too dangerous. And the reason why is because of the power of the gay lobby, which is very leftist. But I don’t want to be misunderstood. Sandusky does not represent all of homosexuality, just like the priests in the Catholic church don’t represent all of homosexuality, just like the aberrant criminals in heterosexual society don’t represent all heterosexuals, but because the gay lobby is very powerful, people don’t go there, people don’t address it, they don’t talk about it, and as such an element of the problem never gets dealt with.
Whether you agree with what he had to say, you can no longer dispute what he danced around on November 8th, and to be candid, it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out.