The Blaze: “Hustler” smears S.E. Cupp; Update: Planned Parenthood, Sandra Fluke denounce

posted at 1:23 pm on May 23, 2012 by Allahpundit

Follow the link to see what I mean. Pure degradation, and not the first time an “adult magazine” has taken special aim at conservative women. Playboy did it too with their “hate f***” piece in 2009, but that got pulled after the outcry threatened the mag’s reputation for being kinda sorta respectable. How do you shame “Hustler,” though?

Better question: Can she sue? My gut reaction was no, partly because “Hustler” has famously been down this constitutional road before and came out a big winner. But note the fine print in that decision:

This case presents us with a novel question involving First Amendment limitations upon a State’s authority to protect its citizens from the intentional infliction of emotional distress. We must decide whether a public figure may recover damages for emotional harm caused by the publication of an ad parody offensive to him, and doubtless gross and repugnant in the eyes of most. Respondent would have us find that a State’s interest in protecting public figures from emotional distress is sufficient to deny First Amendment protection to speech that is patently offensive and is intended to inflict emotional injury, even when that speech could not reasonably have been interpreted as stating actual facts about the public figure involved. This we decline to do…

We conclude that public figures and public officials may not recover for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress by reason of publications such as the one here at issue without showing in addition that the publication contains a false statement of fact which was made with “actual malice,” i. e., with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to whether or not it was true.

The image in the Falwell case was a caricature; no one could have mistaken it for reality. A photoshop is different. The question for the court would be whether the disclaimer that “Hustler” posted alongside the image of Cupp is enough to make clear that it’s a parody or whether, in the age of the Internet and Google Images, the image has to be considered in isolation. (In that case, would they be off the hook if they simply slapped a “Satire” label in the corner of the image itself? Probably.) A separate question is what claim(s) Cupp would assert and whether the legal standards for each would be materially different. Remember, the Falwell case wasn’t a defamation claim, it was a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, although the legal touchstone that a public figure needs to show “actual malice” is the same in both. Could Cupp show that “Hustler” had reckless disregard for the truth here notwithstanding the big disclaimer next to the photoshop? It’d be a heavy lift, but we might get to find out.

Here she is chatting with Beck about it this morning. Exit quotation from her statement to The Blaze: “The outrage of Sandra Fluke will not be matched on my side. It seems that feminism has devolved into an institution that has picked losers and winners and has decided that some women qualify for respect and other women do not.”

Update: This is starting to get some movement on the left now, with Planned Parenthood and Sandra Fluke tweeting their condemnations of “Hustler.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 9

“Hi, S.E., this is me, Barack…the president of the United States of the World…aaaa…uhhhh…I wanted to say that if I had a daughter…she’d look like you in that Hustler picture…I want to be clear…I’m with you…don’t forget in Nov. vote for me”.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Allahpundit on May 23, 2012 at 1:49 PM

I wouldn’t give them the satisfaction, it’s bad enough that they will get publicity to make sure that the double standard is put on display.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

I doubt she’d win if she sued, particularly with the “disclaimer” they have with the pic.

Regardless, we’re clearly past the point of asking if they (Hustler, and the Left in general) have any shame, and no doubt if a liberal woman were featured in such a picture the outrage meter would be off the charts. That’s what galls me…they wouldn’t dare try that with Michelle Obama, for example, but conservative women are fair game. Sad.

changer1701 on May 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Is this “HOw would such-and-such celeb look with…” a thing they do in every issue? I honestly don’t think that has to do with her being a conservative/libertarian. I think this has to do with her being hot.

Not defending what they did. However, this seems more like “outragiously outraged” then anything. Don’t go down that road.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 23, 2012 at 1:38 PM

With all due respect, Bullsh1t. From the text next to the photo (emphasis mine):

S.E. Cupp is a lovely young lady who read too much Ayn Rand in high school and ended up joining the dark side. Cupp, an author and media commentator who often shows up on Fox News programs, is undeniably cute. But her hotness is diminished when she espouses dumb ideas like defunding Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the method pictured here is Ms. Cupp’s suggestion for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.

JusDreamin on May 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

She shouldn’t sue them. She should challenge Obama, NOW, Michelle Obama and etc. to denounce such, or be the same.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

What if this pic was of Michelle Obama ?
or Sebelius ? Or Huffington ?

burrata on May 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

That’s like asking what if Nancy Pelosi suggested OWS was astroturf.

MeatHeadinCA on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

If “should be pointed out” involves, um, rubbing it the leftist ladies’ faces, I’d go with that. It’s less about “shaming” them (they’re beyond that) than heightening the hypocrisy of their silence for interested onlookers.

de rigueur on May 23, 2012 at 1:51 PM

We’re locked in violent agreement.

Purple Fury on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

You know, maybe Larry Flynt has been working the old “hey, look at this shiny object” routine on the NAGs for quite some time.
NAGs are always railing on the objectivication and degradation of women in porn and have felt Hustler is near the top of the degradation list.
BUT, b/c Flynt is an avid, vocal super libertard and abortion activist (the “shiny object”), they leave him alone.
If he hadn’t been so open, there would be a chance NAGs would do something about this.

gonnjos on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Anyone up for shopping a pic of Larry Flynt having sex with animals?

John the Libertarian on May 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Animal on animals…he’d love it.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

War on Women.

vcferlita on May 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

She shouldn’t sue them. She should challenge Obama, NOW, Michelle Obama and etc. to denounce such, or be the same.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Yep x 100

And that’s what she’s doing.

MeatHeadinCA on May 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Maybe it is time that we on the right put pressure on Hustler’s advertisers. I don’t read the magazine but I would assume that there must be lots of men’s products, alcohol, and automobile ads.

mrveritas on May 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

But, hey, Rush called a Fluke a slut.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

P0rn is victimless?

hawkdriver on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Anyone up for shopping a pic of Larry Flynt having sex with animals?

John the Libertarian on May 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

I’m sure they already exist somewhere. No photoshop necessary.

Kataklysmic on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

She’d probably lose the lawsuit, but she would bring some attention to this insulting hit job. Not sure if that attention would help or hurt her cause, though.

cd98 on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Many suits are filed that have little to no chance of winning in court, but are intended to have consequences outside the courtroom.

Those lawsuits have a couple of things in common. They are very expensive to pursue, and if a court later decides you filed in bad faith, there can be Hell to pay. So you need at least an arguably colorable claim, attorneys willing to risk their licenses to pursue it, and money enough to pay them for the risk.

I’m not sure she has even a colorable claim here, given the precedent.

novaculus on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Agreed!

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

“Hi, S.E., this is me, Barack…the president of the United States of the World…aaaa…uhhhh…I wanted to say that if I had a daughter…she’d look like you in that Hustler picture…I want to be clear…I’m with you…don’t forget in Nov. vote for me”.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Well, I’m sure this outrage against Conservative women will be a cause celeb for the NSM in short order…………….

Chip on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

What if this pic was of Michelle Obama ?
or Sebelius ? Or Huffington ?

burrata on May 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Or Barney Frank.

Oh…

Bruno Strozek on May 23, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Larry and Bill Maher should team up: Obama supporters that degrade women.

MeatHeadinCA on May 23, 2012 at 1:39 PM

..is there a record of Flynt contributing to Obama’s campaign? Of course, the weasel is going to vote for him. That would make a pretty tough ad — you know, both Flynt and Maher along with that vid of Teh Won sniggering and flipping off Hillary back in 2008.

The War Planner on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

It’s called parody and Falwell lost that case already.

You might have heard about it.

Moesart on May 23, 2012 at 1:31 PM

…Yeah, I heard about it. I actually quoted the opinion in this very post.

She’d have a very hard time winning, but as I say, the Falwell case involved a caricature and this involves a photoshop. Is it a “parody”? Would people presented with the image in isolation see it that way? And should the image be considered in isolation or with the disclaimer next to it?

Allahpundit on May 23, 2012 at 1:40 PM

You’re not going to get an answer from Moe for two reasons. The first is that he’s a liberal troll. The second is because he’s probably off somewhere with a copy of Hustler…

trigon on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Let the record show that the left seeks to secure followers not by the power of persuasion, but by the threat that those who fail to fall into line will be publicly abused.

Marxist regimes resort to more than public abuse to get people to fall in line. It will start here soon enough. The left always defaults to violence. Political power is won at the barrel of a gun.

tdarrington on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Maybe it is time that we on the right put pressure on Hustler’s advertisers. I don’t read the magazine but I would assume that there must be lots of men’s products, alcohol, and automobile ads.

mrveritas on May 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

I’m not about to read that tripe to find out who advertises. I probably don’t use any product that is in the Hustler demographic anyway.

tdarrington on May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Obama, with his indecency and thuggery, has done more to divide the land than anyone possibly could have imagined.

Some ‘hope ‘n change’, indeed!

A leader he definitely is NOT.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I hope Ms. Cupp decides to ignore this tripe; taking that sleaze factory to court would only increase their profits from this tasteless slime job.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

It’s interesting that the left was so upset when Rush called someone a slut who apparently sleeps around (and seemingly quite often, at that, given the cost of her birth control). Yet, the left believes it is OK to portray someone who did not make her sexual experiences an issue with a callous disregard for her reputation. I’m not seeing parody here so much as smearing an innocent person. If feminists were outraged over Fluke, this is 10 times worse. We should be hearing from them any minute, I’m sure.

Incredulous1 on May 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I’m not about to read that tripe to find out who advertises. I probably don’t use any product that is in the Hustler demographic anyway.

tdarrington on May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I hope Ms. Cupp decides to ignore this tripe; taking that sleaze factory to court would only increase their profits from this tasteless slime job.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

It’s official. Tripe it is.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:11 PM

How do you shame “Hustler,” though?

You don’t. But you go after every Dem who has ever accepted campaign money from him.

And the Blaze was wrong in how they handled the picture. It’s backwards. They should distort her face (just like they would do an innocent victim who needs protection) and keep the x-rated part visible. Then put it out there for everyone to see. All over the internet. Let people get offended because they should be offended.

CJ on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

i guess i am the only one, but it doesnt bother me. make a joke, do something tasteless about anyone you want; personally i dont give a crap. it was funny. sort of. i would replace cupp with hillary and it would be funnier. have her biting down and it be bills. even funnier. see. this is fun. why all this hub bub.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

“The outrage of Sandra Fluke will not be matched on my side. It seems that feminism has devolved into an institution that has picked losers and winners and has decided that some women qualify for respect and other women do not.”

Juanita Broaddrick couldn’t possible have been a clue for that…

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Then put it out there for everyone to see. All over the internet. Let people get offended because they should be offended.

CJ on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

why is it offensive, if it was intended as a joke. as rushes comment about fluke was. should every joke thats ever told thats taseteless be a crime? who defines taste? this whole thing is silly. where are the libertarians here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

i guess i am the only one, but it doesnt bother me.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Sadly, you’re probably not the only one.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

You can’t shame Hustler but you can sure shame these “women’s” groups.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 1:32 PM

…”women’s” groups?…they’ve proven their mutation in the past…unless some conservative says something they can jump on

KOOLAID2 on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Nothing to see here folks, its a conservative woman. Now, imagine the outrage if that was Michelle Obama in that picture.

milcus on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

The outrage of Sandra Fluke will not be matched on my side. It seems that feminism has devolved into an institution that has picked losers and winners and has decided that some women qualify for respect and other women do not.”

Maybe not from the leftists women S.E. but it certainly is from the right – men and women.

#istandwithsecupp

kirsten powers ‏@kirstenpowers10

It should go without saying that Hustler is a disgusting mag run by disgusting people and their photoshopping of SE Cupp is, yes, disgusting

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Get ready S.E. The Prez will be calling very soon. NOW will hold a presser at the West Side of the Capitol.

This after reading about that murderer? Krauthhammer was right. We’ll be taking a lot of showers after this filthy, Democrat-run trip through the muck.

Portia46 on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Sadly, you’re probably not the only one.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

jim, have you ever told a taseless joke? ever.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I’m not a big fan of turn about is fair play, I would hope that most viewers of this product prefer willing participants.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Shaming a woman’s group or the left supporters of tolerance requires there to be shame in them. And I don’t mean the shame they have because of white privilege or the shame of being born to an upper class family etc that they are forced to go through as part of their HS/College/Lib education. I’m talking the shame you learned when you knew you did something horrible and how it ate your guts until you made amends. Those individuals don’t have that, whether it was never developed or it was surgically removed, and as such its a pointless endeavour

Defector01 on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Moesart, how did you miss AP’s reference to the Falwell case?

blink on May 23, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Bite me, Amadaeus.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on May 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

KOOLAID2 on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Exactly the point. There are lots of people out there who will see and note the double standard.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

So if this were your mother/sister/aunt/wife/daughter/girlfriend you’d find nothing wrong with it?

Ha Ha, it was just a “tasteless joke”, huh?

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Yawn. This is Chump Change compared to what Flynt’s misogynists did to Sarah Palin 4 years ago.

Never forget.

Del Dolemonte on May 23, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Hmmm.

When asked about the possibility of backlash, Lisa Ann replied “Maybe some crazy right-wing activist will try and burn my house down… But I put myself in that target spot and it is what it is.”

Seems our little freak of plastic surgery/professional Fluke fancies herself being quite the martyr, putting out for anything and everything. I wonder if her house ever burnt down? No? Good, as I look forward to our fearless warrior making the film, Who’s Mowin’ Mohammad.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

…but don’t you dare comparing the Obama family to movie characters!

Archivarix on May 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

jim, have you ever told a taseless joke? ever.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Are you kidding me? I AM a tasteless joke.

This is beyond tasteless; it is vile.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Am I mistaken or are there zero (0) posts on this thread from inthemiddle, libfreeordie, lester, uppereastside, and/or urban elitist?
 
Weird.
 

I guess it doesn’t gel with the narrative.
 
inthemiddle on May 22, 2012 at 1:51 PM

rogerb on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

jim, have you ever told a taseless joke? ever.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

The fact that you can in any way equate what Hustler has done with the telling of a tasteless joke leaves me speechless…

Shump on May 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

jim, have you ever told a taseless joke? ever.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

No, but sometimes he tells jokes, tasteless or not.

You are beyond a joke, though.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

rogerb on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Superb, yet again.

John the Libertarian on May 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

I guess they can’t figure out any other way to counter what Cupp has to say…

Pretty lame when this is all you have to resort to. But that’s about all the leftist have now …

I heard Obama say the other day that ” Romney IS NOT trying to run on his record.”

Uhhh. excuse me but just when did Obama start running on HIS record? I didn’t notice.. Hell half of Obama’s record is still sealed and hidden for some unknown reason.. Why is that?

libs are so pathetic.

RockyJ. on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Exactly the point. There are lots of people out there who will see and note the double standard.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

newsflash: if it wasnt for double standards liberals would have none at all. does anybody else ever get tired of pointing it out? everyone knows this. why do we waste time always pointing it out. liberals dont care, and all sane people already know it. why is this even a discussion point “look! look! see! there it is AGAIN! liberal hypocracy. double standards!” so what. and its a day of the week that ends with Y. this was a joke. i dont want to stoop to their level and act all faux “outraged” about it. waste time pointing out the hypocracy if you want to, sure, fine. but i will pass on the outrage part. thats what they do. always outraged about something. tedious. ponderous.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

This after reading about that murderer? Krauthhammer was right. We’ll be taking a lot of showers after this filthy, Democrat-run trip through the muck.

Portia46 on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

After this carnival moves out, the entire land needs a big chlorine dump unto itself.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

The fact that you can in any way equate what Hustler has done with the telling of a tasteless joke leaves me speechless…

Shump on May 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

enjoy your speachless outrage. it appears a lot of folks are really reveling in it. kinda gross really. more offensive than some damn photoshopped joke picture. sorry.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

this whole thing is silly. where are the libertarians here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

I’ll go there. I bet no one would have ever heard of this if not for the outrageous outrage. It’s certainly good PR for Cupp. Let’s face it. She’s probably happy about having arrived into the first tier of conservative commentators, having reduced leftist males who are too big of collective pu$$ies to argue her ideas, to openly fantasizing about getting a Lewinsky from her.

It also means Beck’s network is leaving a Mark as that’s the only place I know her from.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

That’s the price of being a “hot” female spokesman for conservative political ideology.

How much longer ’till they do the same thing with Amy Holmes?

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

This is beyond tasteless; it is vile.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

define “vile” for me there guy. have you ever noticed some folks laugh at some jokes and some folks frown? have you ever noticed what some folks consider vile is funny? ya know something you think is tasteless some might say is….um…vile! what happens then? jim, do you see a larger point here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Hustler is still being published?

What’s next–Bob Guccione doing a hit piece on the Tea Party in Penthouse? [I would not be at all shocked to learn this actually happened.]

I think Cupp is handling this just right: remind everyone that the image is fake, emphasize the lack of Fluking outrage from so-called women’s rights activists, and then move on.

Flynt lives for publicity, so don’t give him any more than absolutely necessary. Jerry Falwell’s ill-advised lawsuit was the best thing that ever happened to Larry Flynt, so don’t repeat that mistake.

MidniteRambler on May 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Meh, not a big deal. This sort of thing has been going from time immemorial. It’s an unavoidable aspect of public life, especially today. And, hey, if you’re not getting flak, you’re not over target. She’s probably laughing it off and taking it as a compliment. She’s not dumb; she knows guys think she’s hot. And she is right about Hustler at least being honest about treating different women by different standards according to their political positions. The MSM and organizations like NOW do the same thing but try to lie and pretend they don’t.

Love ya SE!

WhatSlushfund on May 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

She use to be on Fox all the time and wrote for the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard.

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

How do you shame “Hustler,” though?

Shame those who advertise with Flynt,
and all those politicians who take Flynt’s money and support , like Hussein.

burrata on May 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

why is it offensive, if it was intended as a joke. as rushes comment about fluke was. should every joke thats ever told thats taseteless be a crime? who defines taste? this whole thing is silly. where are the libertarians here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Maybe people should just have higher standards and a basic respect. And yes, that includes Rush. He’s a very smart man and could have made his point a lot cleaner and stronger with degenerating to name calling.

kim roy on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Is this somehow going to morph into “Hey come on, get a sense of humor all you humorless conservatives. This is why there’s only liberals in comedy”?
If so, I’m not amused.

“S.E. Cupp is undeniably hot”, about the only real thing in Hustler mags these days, written or pictured.

smfic on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

It also means Beck’s network is leaving a Mark as that’s the only place I know her from.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

.
Yes, GBTV is leaving a “mark”. : )

And no disrespect meant, but Ms Cupp and Ms Holmes are HOT.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

define “vile” for me there guy. have you ever noticed some folks laugh at some jokes and some folks frown? have you ever noticed what some folks consider vile is funny? ya know something you think is tasteless some might say is….um…vile! what happens then? jim, do you see a larger point here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

I’m sure you know how to use an online dictionary.

Some people think joking about someone’s recent death is hi-fricking-larious too. I’m not one of them.

I’m not giving this insidious sht! a pass. It is vile.

hillbillyjim on May 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM

enjoy your speachless outrage. it appears a lot of folks are really reveling in it. kinda gross really. more offensive than some damn photoshopped joke picture. sorry.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Actually, I’m more offended you can’t bother with spelling and capitalization in order to make your points about free “speach” and how we should accept bad taste and lack of respect as “funny”.

If you are going to lecture us on rights and ask where the libertarians are, at least have the intelligence to present your words coherently.

kim roy on May 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It also means Beck’s network is leaving a Mark as that’s the only place I know her from.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

You don’t pay much attention to politics, do you?

S.E. Cupp is author of the new book “Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack on Christianity,” which comes out April 27th (Simon & Schuster). She is also co-author of “Why You’re Wrong About The Right,” which was published by Simon & Schuster in June of 2008. “After two terms of George W. Bush, it’s harder than ever to know what it means to be a conservative, though for a working definition, this book is an excellent place to start.. Cupp and Joshpe have thought it through, and write with the sort of easy wit we could use more of on the right.” — Tucker Carlson.

S.E. is a political columnist and culture critic. She has a regular online column at the New York Daily News, and a regular feature at The Daily Caller. She is a contributing editor at Townhall magazine, and a regular contributor to Politico’s “Arena.” She has been published in the Washington Post, Newsmax, Slate, Human Events, American Spectator, Townhall, FOXNews.com, Sports Illustrated online, Maxim online, NASCAR.com, FrontPage, Detroit Free Press and others.

S.E. is a political commentator. She has appeared on FOXNews, MSNBC, CNN, CSPAN, Al Harra and others. She is a regular guest on “Hannity,” “Larry King Live,” “Fox & Friends,” “Geraldo,” and “Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld.” She has been heard on dozens of radio shows, including The Dennis Miller Show, The Mancow Show, The Curtis Sliwa Show, Bubba the Love Sponge, Andrew Wilkow, The Alan Colmes Show and others. Source

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It’s such a shame this happened to her.

The double standard at play also makes me sick, maybe doubly so since I am a conservative woman.

Those on the left can print and publish (or say on their tv shows) all sorts of vile photos or comments about women on the right, but if someone on the right says or does something not nearly as vulgar or hateful, Republicans, right wingers, conservatives are said to hate women.

Anyway, someone said,

I’m not about to read that tripe to find out who advertises. I probably don’t use any product that is in the Hustler demographic anyway.

tdarrington on May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

There might be other ways of finding out the information.

Has anyone done a google on “hustler magazine advertisers”? (Though I’m afraid of what else might turn up in a search like that.)

Would a publication such as “Advertising Age” carry that kind of information?

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 2:41 PM

The better analogy is the howls of Outrageous Outrage when that silly Photoshop of Michelle Obama as Marie Antoinette made the rounds on the Internet. I guarantee the same people will be silent on this true defamation of S.E. Cupp.

rockmom on May 23, 2012 at 2:42 PM

People still “read” Hustler?

jdkchem on May 23, 2012 at 2:43 PM

So if this were your mother/sister/aunt/wife/daughter/girlfriend you’d find nothing wrong with it?

Ha Ha, it was just a “tasteless joke”, huh?

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

*crickets*

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

I just went to the Advertising Age site, and irony of ironies, I clicked on a front page link to read it, and was taken to a page with a big ad on it.

At least I assume it was an ad.

My ad-blocking software presented me with a big, blank page, except for the phrase “Advertising Age” text on the left and the word “Skip” on the upper right (to skip the ad, I presume. Clicking it did nothing).

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Here’s the raw material photoshoppers, have at it: Obama Swallowing Hot Dog Whole

slickwillie2001 on May 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

And no disrespect meant, but Ms Cupp and Ms Holmes are HOT.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Smart and hawt are a deadly combination to leftist beta males. No wonder they feel the need to put their fantasies into writing.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

rockmom on May 23, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Since Chelsea Clinton has become a member of the media, how would these folks like to see same picture done of her?

Cindy Munford on May 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Absolutely vile and disgusting. For NOW and liberal women to remain silent on this shows their utter hypocrisy. This is the true war on (conservative) women.

ConservativeMom on May 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

It’s interesting that the left was so upset when Rush called someone a slut who apparently sleeps around (and seemingly quite often, at that, given the cost of her birth control). Yet, the left believes it is OK to portray someone who did not make her sexual experiences an issue with a callous disregard for her reputation. I’m not seeing parody here so much as smearing an innocent person. If feminists were outraged over Fluke, this is 10 times worse. We should be hearing from them any minute, I’m sure.

Incredulous1 on May 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I totally agree.

I agree with Rush a lot about a lot of things, but not that incident. I did not like it when Rush called that woman a slut – maybe technically, her behavior was slutty, but I didn’t agree with him handling it like he did, but this situation with S E Cupp is a billion times worse.

She’s being attacked in an obscene manner for being right wing.

Isn’t it interesting that editors and writers at a pr0n magazine such as Hustler is defending an organization that supplies abortion?

(Apparently their huge quibble with Cupp and their reason for creating the smutty photoshopped image is that she said in an interview that Planned Parenthood should be defunded). I would assume most employees at Hustler are males.

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 2:51 PM

…do you see a larger point here?

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

You’re a d***?

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

yes flora. i would. i’m very sorry for your outrage. i hope you find some peace.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Anyone up for shopping a pic of Larry Flynt having sex with animals?

John the Libertarian on May 23, 2012 at 1:53 PM

True story straight from Larry Flynt’s gurgling maw — Larry Flynt’s first sexual experience, in which he lost his virginity, was with a chicken — at age 9 years old — and he’s proud of it.

Larry Flynt has no morals. Larry Flynt has no scruples. Larry Flynt has no shame. What Larry Flynt does have, though, is a heart and soul both of which are as black as nothingness.

Via the UK Independent — May 2011:

He lost his own virginity at the age of nine, to a chicken. He describes penetrating its egg sack, and how “when I let the chicken go, it started towards the main house, staggering, squawking and bleeding” – so he immediately killed it. Did you feel bad for the chicken? “What? No. It was a” – long breath, gasp – “chicken.”

FlatFoot on May 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

You don’t pay much attention to politics, do you?

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM

It could be as simple as I don’t have cable. Believe it or not, there’s more to politics than watching the same tired TV shows, throwing back the same tired talking points.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:56 PM

You’re a d***?

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

now THATS funny. as in all good jokes there is a kernel of truth. this one has a big kernel.

can i feign outrage tho? it sure seems to be all the rage. i could point out the hypocracy of liberals. OH! it would be so grand!

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Years ago when I first saw the Cuppster- it was like WOW ! Another conservative brainy Babe- who can write- You just knew Leftist weanies would come unglued and attack- (ala- Sarah be thy Name) The entire leftist spectrum can not deal with this type of decency. A smart – popular- attractive conservative WOMAN gaining notariety ?

I told my HS daughter then- HERE is your role model (and that it was a very good reason to dvr Red Eye !)

Unfortunately S.E. is being ridiculed for the pervs reading hustler- (Who reads Hustler anyway? – Political content ? Who knew !)

But you just know Axelfraud shad his pants when he saw this….. Will Barry defend this ? Sad yes- But it is ANOTHER Bill Mahr type indefensible (yet teachable) moment !

The Left’s War on Women Indeed ! Booya !!

FlaMurph on May 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM

It could be as simple as I don’t have cable. Believe it or not, there’s more to politics than watching the same tired TV shows, throwing back the same tired talking points.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 2:56 PM

I don’t watch TV, but I’m aware of who S.E. is by reading her columns about political issues.

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Anyone who can’t connect “vile” to what has been done to S.E. pretty much has define himself.

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM

yes flora. i would. i’m very sorry for your outrage. i hope you find some peace.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

I’m very sorry for your lack of human decency.

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 3:03 PM

yes flora. i would. i’m very sorry for your outrage. i hope you find some peace.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

This was the question:

So if this were your mother/sister/aunt/wife/daughter/girlfriend you’d find nothing wrong with it?

Ha Ha, it was just a “tasteless joke”, huh?

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

So I guess we know where this chap’s moral compass lies and what he thinks about the women in his life.

Nothing more than a greasy troll. Set phasers to ignore.

kim roy on May 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Anyone who can’t connect “vile” to what has been done to S.E. pretty much has define himself.

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM

amen brother. i dont pretend to be offended like others. i guess i have been “fedined”. and being outraged is a waste of time. if you got it to waste, i applaud you. find peace. it comes easy. and can come fast, if you let it.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM

kim roy on May 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Set.

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Absolutely vile and disgusting. For NOW and liberal women to remain silent on this shows their utter hypocrisy. This is the true war on (conservative) women.

ConservativeMom on May 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

At some point, those honest liberal women- like those on the “View”-
will have some ‘splainin to do.

FlaMurph on May 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

But, hey, Rush called a Fluke a slut.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I dont think Rush called Fluke a slut, he seemed to think her claim of spending 3000 bucks in 3 years on birth control was bogus. He was calling her a liar, and asserted that somebody spending that kind of money on sex is having a lot of sex.

Dr. Tesla on May 23, 2012 at 3:10 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM

How about shooting me some pictures of your mom/wife/girlfriend/daughter? I want to make some stuff and publish some stuff you won’t be outraged about.

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Allah

I know you’re the smartest guy in the room, cough…

…but how is this parody?

Falwell’s was a parody because it was based on a pre-existing form of content.

Falwell v Hustler

The ad had context. That’s the point of satire. It’s reference, or nod, to something else, but done with a humorous slant.

Parody Definition

By definition, this does not fit any of them.

The problem is lawyers who are cowards at heart, which is why they go into law. Too many of them.

This can be won. The porn industry knows this.

From 2001 2010, the porn industry became full-out violent and misogynistic. Once the Tea Party movement happened, a shift began back towards parody porn of any movie or tv show. This wasn’t because of sales, it was the fact they knew; if someone had the balls to take them to court, they were going to be shut down enmasse. So the larger companies have adjusted because of what could be coming.

Cupp sues, she’ll win. The problem, is Hustler wants the lawsuit.

budfox on May 23, 2012 at 3:11 PM

kim roy on May 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM

kim kim. please. puill back from the ledge here. you guys are all stirred up. i wish you wouldnt get so upset and spend all this kharmic energy on this dumb picture. intended as a bad joke. just relax. it was a joke. i dont see it as an attack on women. if they put the d*** in romneys mouth is it an attack on men? what the hell? it was an attack with a sick joke on a human being. i dont care if it was a woman or a man. thats what THEY do, kim. rush makes a joke about sandra fluke and he is attacking ALL women? huh? no kim. thats NOT what we do. we dont act stupid like they do. we dont conflate like that; we are grownups. we dont make absurd attacks about popkle like “he is niot properly outraged (as muich as I am!) at a very sick vile joke about SE cupp so he hates and disreapects all women”. because kim that would be asinine. and liberals are asinine like that. not us.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 3:12 PM

I don’t know much about this Cupp woman but it seems like she can’t compalin about her looks being exploited too much b/c one could argue that her good looks is a big factor in why a lot of conservatives like her so much. If she was less attractive, do conservatives really care much about Cupp? I’m skeptical. Can’t prove it either way. :)

Dr. Tesla on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Go read the definition of parody, and tell me how this picture fits.

It doesn’t, which is why they jammed a disclaimer on top.

budfox on May 23, 2012 at 3:15 PM

How about shooting me some pictures of your mom/wife/girlfriend/daughter? I want to make some stuff and publish some stuff you won’t be outraged about.

mankai on May 23, 2012 at 3:10 PM

.

she is very good looioking but i have no such pictures. if you photshop them, you can post them though. since that would be equivalent. that is NOT a real picture of my wife, a photoshopedd one that everyone knows is not real. or did we forget that part. um, yeah. wait, no. sorry i cant go further down this road man. i wish you peace.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 3:15 PM

If any maggot deserved to go through life paralyzed, it’s Larry Flint. Why anyone buys that trash is beyond me.

bw222 on May 23, 2012 at 3:17 PM

It doesn’t, which is why they jammed a disclaimer on top.

budfox on May 23, 2012 at 3:15 PM

i dont think anyone claimed it was a parody. i think some have calimed it to be a form of joke. but not parody.

t8stlikchkn on May 23, 2012 at 3:17 PM

I don’t watch TV, but I’m aware of who S.E. is by reading her columns about political issues.

Flora Duh on May 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Never seen a column of hers. What I do see from Human Events scrolling down my facebook wall, and click on quite often, is Doc Zero’s columns. He’s turned into quite the powerhouse. Cupp’s, I’ve never seen.

Daily Caller?

http://dailycaller.com/buzz/s-e-cupp/

First column since last July was just published. Not real prolific.

You don’t have to know the details of every personality on TV or writing a column to know politics.

But, back to the gist of the argument that this issue is nothing but publicity. Publicity in letting us know that Hustler is even around, still, and publicity for SE Cupp becoming known to more and more.

MNHawk on May 23, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 9