From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh on Madonna (was Re: Summary Mon 10/5/92)
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:22:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.232140.1297@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> madkins@lonestar.utsa.edu (Martin L. Adkins) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.011858.13643@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
@ 	[Rush denegrades Madonna, deleted]

	Well, it's "denigrates".

@ This shouldn't be surprising to anyone, after all, Madonna makes more money
@ then Rush, is better looking then Rush, can sell more books, records, videos
@ then Rush, and isn't even as old as he is. By his own standards, she's more
@ sucessful then he is, and I'm sure it pisses him off.

>While Madonna may indeed make more money than Rush Limbaugh the fact is that
>her whole act is designed to ridicule traditional values.  As a result I'm
>sure that she wouldnt mind that Rush considers her less than morally upright.
>As a matter of fact as long as her image continues to sell records I'm quite
>sure she would be grateful for the advertisement.  Now as to whether or not
>a blatantly promiscuous lifestyle is something anyone should be demonstrating
>in this disease ridden time is another matter.  Come to think of it, with the
>book, the newsletter, the radio show and the television show I'm not so sure
>that Madonna does make more money than Rush and he dosent even have to
>publicly exploit himself!!

	"Ridicule traditional values" -- What are "traditional
values", and how does she do the ridiculing? I think that we have some
awfully thin skins here...

	I'm sure that she would agree with Alex Crain about RL being
jealous of her. And she is a lot more positive than RL also, whose
whole act seems to consist of: "Anything going wrong? Those *liberals*
(spoken in a tone of sneering contempt) are to blame." There are some
things that she criticizes, and not surprisingly, she comes down to
the opposite side from RL on many issues. I will concede that she may
represent an awkward dilemma for many liberals -- she has a lot of
$'s -- but I guess it's better her than the likes of Pat Robertson.

	Furthermore, Madonna has come out with several big-selling
albums, videos, and tours over the years, so it would be hard for RL
to compete money-wise.

	"Blatantly promiscuous lifestyle" -- like what??? Do you have
direct knowledge of who Madonna goes to bed with??? Not even the
National Enquirer...

	And there is another aspect of her career that is sure to
enrage a lot of conservatives -- she has gotten essentially no
government funding for her career. So that means that they can't order
the NEA to pull the financial plug on her. The closest she has ever
come to government funding was going to the University of Michigan on
a fine-arts scholarship to be a dancer and also her being in some NYC
dance troupes, which may have gotten some government money in the form
of grants. But no government money has ever gone into what she would
be doing after that, which has been financed in purely capitalistic
ways. And capitalism is something that conservatives are supposed to
admire. The hard work and entrepreneurship she has put into her career
are things celebrated as traditional American values, yet social
conservatives have not been very admiring of her.

	Ideologically, I think her career would fall into the
Libertarian mold -- liberal on social issues, conservative on economic
issues.

	Summary:

1958 or 1959: Born in Bay City, MI

1960's: Raised a strict Catholic, mother died, father remarried.

~1970: She made a fateful career choice: she decided against becoming
a nun, because nuns don't have sex lives, and decided to become a
movie star instead.

1976: Went to the U of M on a scholarship to become a ballet dancer.

~1978: Went to NYC to do modern dance; arrived there with $35 in
pocket.

~1979: Some French record producers want to make her a big star; she
quits after awhile.

~1979: She starts a series of rock bands, and poses nude because she
needed the money.

1981: She gets a record deal, but going solo.

1983: First album released, doesn't go very far at first.

1984: Costars in _Desperately Seeking Susan_, first album becomes a
hit, "Like a Virgin" released. Comments that "Crucifixes are sexy
because there's a naked man on them."

1985: Yuppie anthem "Material Girl" released, goes on "Virgin Tour",
the albums becomes a hit, marries Sean Penn.

1986: _Shanghai Surprise_ released, flops. "True Blue" a hit album.

1987: "Who's That Girl" -- the tour is a hit, the movie flops. She
comments that "if the Pope wants to see me, he can come to my show."

1988: Appears in the Broadway play "Speed-the-Plow" as a secretary for
two conniving Hollywood producers.

1989: She divorces Sean after a tumultuous marriage. A deal with Pepsi
to promote "Like a Prayer" album, single, video, and possible tour
signed. The first three are released, the album does fairly well, the
video is called blasphemous, and Pepsi pulls out, canceling the tour.
She walks away with the $5m of the deal.

1990: Goes on "Blonde Ambition" tour [I actually saw a show of it],
gets denounced by the Vatican for blasphemy. _Dick Tracy_, costarring
her and Warren Beatty, released.

1991: Releases tour movie _Truth or Dare_ and also "The Immaculate
Collection" of her greatest hits. Makes a video for "Justify my Love"
that MTV gags on as supposedly being too raunchy. Awkwardly defends
herself on _Nightline_, asks why violence is OK but sex isn't.

1992 [so far]: _A League of their Own_ is released, with Madonna in a
not-quite-starring role. She starts her own record label and (as I
write) is just about to release a rather raunchy album called
"Erotica" and a rather raunchy book called "Sex".


/Loren