{"id":34485,"date":"2010-01-22T01:01:01","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T01:25:32","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2011-05-19T01:25:32","modified_gmt":"2011-05-19T01:25:32","slug":"left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/","title":{"rendered":"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The left is outraged over the Supreme Court decision that stood up for the First Amendment and free speech. They are beside themselves both in print and in politics and in the broadcast media. Last night on MSNBC Barney Frank was asked for his reaction to the Supreme Court ruling saying that corporations can advertise as often and wherever they want in political campaigns.<\/p>\n

FRANK: Fortunately, there is an approach we can take. What we can do what\u2019s perfectly possible and constitutional, I believe, unassailable is to impose restrictions as a matter of corporate law on what corporations can do. We can limit what corporations do. And we limit it not as a matter of campaign finance regulation per se, but as a matter of corporate law. We will be cooperating with the Obama administration in drafting the toughest possible constitutional legislation to prevent the drowning of American democracy in corporate dollars. There\u2019s no other way to say it.<\/p>\n

RUSH: That\u2019s right, because we want the American democracy to continue to choke on union dollars. We don\u2019t want competition, we don\u2019t want fairness. Your Democrat Party against the First Amendment, Barney Frank, shell-shocked over what happened in Massachusetts. <\/p>\n

(playing of Barney Frank spoof) <\/p>\n

Barney Frank from a district won by Scott Brown and Massachusetts and the day they lost Massachusetts. By the way, speaking of Massachusetts, folks, do you remember, do you remember how the media and the Democrats were linking me to Scott Brown? They put me in Scott Brown ads. I had said not a word about this campaign. They linked me with Scott Brown before the vote. He wins in a near landslide and now they ignore that I had something to do with it by their own admission and trying to call him a moderate and they\u2019re peppering him with questions, ‘What are you going to do to work with Democrats?\u2019<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Now, the Supreme Court came out with this big free speech decision yesterday. It\u2019s sweeping. It is huge. Did you hear Obama\u2019s response? Obama said that he needs to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing else, a forceful response. Now, I want to point out that Obama was a law professor, or technically a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago law school for 12 years. Now, why would a law professor oppose a Supreme Court decision on a matter of constitutional law and not respect the authority of the court and honor our system of separation of powers? Why? Of course it\u2019s easy. Because he doesn\u2019t like the Constitution. And this we know. He thinks the Constitution restrains him and restricts him for doing things to people. The Constitution spells out what the government may not do, and that\u2019s what he doesn\u2019t like. <\/p>\n

Thomas Lifson writing about this in the AmericanThinker.com: ‘No more need to set up political action committees in order to have a constrained voice. [Corporations] can pay for their own ads, though they cannot contribute directly to campaigns. … The political dialogue in America will become more varied and intense, with for-profit and nonprofit corporations able to spend money in order to influence politics. The changes should be far-reaching. This diminishes the power of the left, overall, as corporations now have the ability to speak as loud or louder than unions, who have been unfettered. … ‘Today\u2019s Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case means that the anti-incumbent furor that has been growing is partly released from the shackles created by ‘incumbent protection\u2019 election and campaign finance laws,” which is exactly how I characterized McCain-Feingold, the Incumbent Protection Act. ‘The dirty little secret about all campaign finance laws passed by Congress since 1972 is that they were designed to protect incumbents by stifling competition,\u2019 and restraining their opponents. <\/p>\n

The more I hear people react to this on the left and the more I read, the more I understand just what a huge win for freedom and liberty this decision was. The liberals are having a fit. Here\u2019s Howard Fineman: ‘I rarely attend a Supreme Court argument, but I did last fall for a ‘rehearing\u2019 of the campaign-spending case. I wrote a column about it, predicting that the Roberts Court would sweep away long-established restrictions on spending by corporations. The most vivid image I saw was the red-faced Chief Justice John Roberts, veins popping on his neck as he vibrated with disgust at the idea that government could limit what a corporate entity could do or say in the political arena. The 5-4 opinion issued Thursday by the Roberts Court — written by swing voter Anthony Kennedy — was even more sweeping than I had imagined and predicted.<\/p>\n

‘It\u2019s nothing short of revolutionary. Here\u2019s how I add up the possible consequences: It adds to Republican chances of pickups in red states with small, cheap media markets. It turns the cottage industry of campaign consulting into a Hollywood-lucrative major media sector. It reduces candidates and political parties to mere appendages in their own campaigns. It will turn corporate boardrooms into political cockfighting pits, since that is where the key decisions will be made. It gives President Obama a populist issue, if he has the cojones and imagination and sense of injustice to take it on. It rips the veil of ‘conservatism\u2019 from this court, which just rendered one of the most wildly ‘activist\u2019 opinions in decades. It makes a mockery of the legal theory of ‘original intent.\u2019 The Founders would be rolling over in their graves. Other than that, it\u2019s not much of a story.\u2019<\/p>\n

The left thinks this is judicial activism? That\u2019s where we\u2019ve come to. Judicial activism is standing up for the First Amendment. Judicial activism is simply recognizing the constitutionality of speech. That, to the left, is an abomination. Judicial activism is rewriting the Constitution to say things it doesn\u2019t say, interpreting it in ways that were never intended to be interpreted. Writing new law from the bench is activism. But simply upholding the constitutionality of the First Amendment? That is original intent. It\u2019s certainly not activism in any way, shape, manner, or form. <\/p>\n

I\u2019ll tell you, the Washington Post has a story here, and the argument that was advanced by the government in this case, you will not believe this. It all started with David Bossie, ‘a veteran Republican campaign operative who made his mark investigating the Clintons, thought his group could offer a conservative answer to Michael Moore\u2019s successful films. After Moore\u2019s ‘Fahrenheit 9\/11\u2019 premiered in 2004, Bossie\u2019s Citizens United group released ‘Celsius 41.11.\u2019And after it became clear that Bossie\u2019s longtime enemy Hillary Rodham Clinton would run for president, Citizens United released another flick: ‘Hillary: The Movie.\u2019 Featuring a who\u2019s-who cast of right-wing commentators, the 2008 film takes viewers on a savaging journey through Clinton\u2019s scandals. The sole compliment about the then-senator comes from conservative firebrand Ann Coulter: ‘Looks good in a pantsuit.\u2019 But ‘Hillary: The Movie\u2019 never became a blockbuster. The Federal Election Commission restricted Citizens United\u2019s ability to advertise the film during the 2008 primary season, a decision that Bossie and other conservative activists saw as a threat to their freedom of speech. ‘The marketplace for my movie was completely and totally shut down by the Federal Election Commission,\u2019 Bossie said in an interview Thursday. So he sued — and thus was born Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.<\/p>\n

‘Bossie said Ted Olson was ‘singularly responsible for our winning this case.\u2019 Olson transformed the case from a narrow one about McCain-Feingold to an assault on the law\u2019s constitutionality, helping crystallize the issue for the justices. When the Supreme Court first heard the case in March, Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart, representing the FEC –‘ this is Obama\u2019s lawyer ‘– was pulled into a discussion of an issue that took him down a slippery slope: If the movie were a book, would the government ban publishing the book if it mentioned a candidate for office within the election timeframe?\u2019 And this guy representing the FEC said, yes, the government would ban the book, and the justices shot up, stood up and said what the hell are you talking about. ‘That\u2019s pretty incredible,\u2019 Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said. Then came questions about electronic devices such as the Kindle. ‘If it has one name, one use of the candidate\u2019s name, it would be covered, correct?\u2019 Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked. ‘That\u2019s correct,\u2019 Stewart replied. ‘It\u2019s a 500-page book, and at the end it says, ‘And so vote for X,\u2019 the government could ban that?\u2019 Roberts asked.\u2019 The government lawyer said yes. He had to. If he\u2019s going to ban a movie, he\u2019s gotta be consistent. ‘Bossie said this was the argument that turned a majority of the bench against the FEC and in favor of Citizens United.\u2019<\/p>\n

In the LA Times on the opinion page: ‘Conservatives Embrace Judicial Activism in Campaign Finance Ruling — The Supreme Court\u2019s decision in favor of corporate spending in elections makes previous rhetoric laughable.\u2019 Look, if they want to call me an activist for speech and liberty then I\u2019ll raise my hand, I\u2019ll gladly be an activist. You know, it\u2019s a sad damn thing we need activists for speech and liberty in the United States of America, folks. It\u2019s a damn sorry sight that we need activists for speech and liberty. The liberals say that the framers never meant to protect corporations. The hatred for corporations on the American left, I\u2019m still dialing in on that. It is more intense than even I was aware of. Snerdley, I\u2019m not surprised the ruling wasn\u2019t unanimous. I mean you got four huge libs. I\u2019m not surprised at all it wasn\u2019t unanimous. The left is a monster the likes of which average people still have not come to grips with. <\/p>\n

The Washington Post: High Court Shows it Might be Willing to Act Boldly. And Roberts said, all you people disagreeing here, if we held — see, the liberals think stare decisis is that\u2019s it, you cannot overturn precedents, ever. And Roberts said, oh, yeah? If we held to precedent, segregation would still be legal. Minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional. The government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without a warrant. If stare decisis cannot be seen as inexorable command, if we can\u2019t overturn precedent then I\u2019m sure you liberals do not want to go that route. The New York Times: ‘The Court\u2019s Blow to Democracy.\u2019 Listen to this characterization of the New York Times: ‘The majority is deeply wrong on the law. Most wrongheaded of all is its insistence that corporations are just like people and entitled to the same First Amendment rights. It is an odd claim since companies are creations of the state that exist to make money. They are given special privileges, including different tax rates, to do just that. It was a fundamental misreading of the Constitution to say that these artificial legal constructs have the same right to spend money on politics as ordinary Americans have to speak out in support of a candidate.\u2019 Well, corporations are made up of ordinary Americans. What does he mean here, corporations are created by the state? (interruption) Because you gotta give a charter? Well, no, he means the state, the central planners, corporations are created. The state creates nothing. They may grant the creators of an idea permission to do it, but they create zilch.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: You know, it is amazing what these libs are saying. We cannot compete with the unions. We can\u2019t compete with unions. One alone gave Obama $60 million! We can\u2019t compete. One union gave him $60 million. This is just leveling the playing field. Howard Fineman says it\u2019s an activist opinion. All corporations are to be censored during elections? Why are media corporations accepted, then? This is one question I would love to ask all of these people in the media. You work for corporations! ‘Yeah, but we are the press, the First Amendment.\u2019 <\/p>\n

Well, everybody has First Amendment protections. Everybody is acknowledged to have the right to free speech. ‘Yeah, but we\u2019re special, we\u2019re the press.\u2019 Yeah, but you work for corporations. Your corporations are putting you out there. You\u2019re not independent contractors. Look at your paycheck. It\u2019s coming from ABC or Disney or it\u2019s coming from GE or NBC, or coming from CBS and whoever the hell else. You work for corporations, and you despise \u2019em. What the lib media are trying to do here, folks — and the Democrats as well — is they\u2019re trying to misuse the language again. I mean, the simple fact of the matter is that when the court upholds the Constitution, that\u2019s not activism. When the court rejects activist precedent from prior courts, that\u2019s not activism. Rejecting the Constitution is activism — and they\u2019re trying to misappropriate this word, ‘activism,\u2019 for their own purposes. <\/p>\n

Dred Scott would be the law of the land. Slavery would be the law of the land. Plessy v. Ferguson would be the law of the land. That\u2019s segregation. Korematsu would be the law of the land, ladies and gentlemen. That\u2019s the internment of the Japanese-Americans. On and on and on, all of these things. If we couldn\u2019t overturn precedent, we\u2019d still have slavery and segregation. Following the Constitution can never be activism. Following the Constitution is fidelity to the law. Corporations are nothing more than individuals organized into a group to the purpose of conducting business. At the core of the attacks on this decision is the hate for liberty and competition and debate. That is what the media doesn\u2019t like, it\u2019s what the Democrat Party doesn\u2019t like, and of course the left doesn\u2019t like any of that: Liberty, competition, and debate. As far as I\u2019m concerned, the left does not get to decide, my friends, which parts of the Constitution have meaning which question parts do not. But they want to have that power. It is we, the conservatives, who stand for the Bill of Rights. They don\u2019t. The right to speech, the right to religious liberty and freedom, the right to bear arms, the right to private property, et cetera. Thank God for the Bill of Rights, and it has just been freed. Freedom awoke from a 100-year coma yesterday with this decision. Here\u2019s David ‘Rodham\u2019 Gergen and… It\u2019s actually a montage here of a bunch of people who do not like this one bit.<\/p>\n

DAVID GERGEN: The court here is guilty of, uh, something conservatives say they don\u2019t like, and that is judicial activism.<\/p>\n

SIMON ROSENBERG: This is judicial activism.<\/p>\n

BOB EDGAR: What the Supreme Court has done today is they\u2019ve shown their political activism.<\/p>\n

BARNEY FRANK: The conservatives talk about not having interference with the democratic process. This is judicial striking down of the law.<\/p>\n

HOWARD FINEMAN: The notion that John Roberts and his court were careful proceduralists who looked to original intent and, you know, only went incrementally the law that\u2019s completely out the window. This is one of most radical decisions in a long, long time.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Ah, they\u2019re squealing like stuck pigs. It tells you how good a decision it is. The media wants freedom of speech all to themselves, even if they do work for corporations.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

RUSH: Let me put this in perspective, this caterwauling of the left over upholding the First Amendment. These people who are upset with American citizens who happen to work in corporations, who happen to be directors in corporations, having the ability to participate in our political process, these are the same people who want to grant constitutional rights to terrorists, and do. These are the same people that want to put on a show trial with the masterminds of the 9\/11 disaster, grant them freedom of speech, grant them every constitutional right, including Miranda rights — the Fruit of Kaboom Bomber — and yet they hate American corporations. They have some ingrained, genetic ‘despisal\u2019 of corporations because corporations are competitive. They foster and thrive in free, open markets, all of which are opposed by the left. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The left is outraged over the Supreme Court decision that stood up for the First Amendment and free speech. They are beside themselves both in print and in politics and in the broadcast media. Last night on MSNBC Barney Frank was asked for his reaction to the Supreme Court ruling saying that corporations can advertise […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nLeft Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"The left is outraged over the Supreme Court decision that stood up for the First Amendment and free speech. They are beside themselves both in print and in politics and in the broadcast media. Last night on MSNBC Barney Frank was asked for his reaction to the Supreme Court ruling saying that corporations can advertise […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/\",\"name\":\"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T01:25:32+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2011-05-19T01:25:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"The left is outraged over the Supreme Court decision that stood up for the First Amendment and free speech. They are beside themselves both in print and in politics and in the broadcast media. Last night on MSNBC Barney Frank was asked for his reaction to the Supreme Court ruling saying that corporations can advertise […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125109.Par.89380.ImageFile_579144af29df2.jpg"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/","name":"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2011-05-19T01:25:32+00:00","dateModified":"2011-05-19T01:25:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2010\/01\/22\/left_outraged_by_scotus_ruling3\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Left Outraged by SCOTUS Ruling"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34485"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34485\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}