About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Levin on his "National Organization of Ugly Women" remark: "[F]or now on, it's the National Organization of Really Ugly Women"

September 09, 2008 6:57 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Addressing his September 4 comments, in which he called the National Organization for Women, the "National Organization of Ugly Women," Mark Levin said: "I just wanted to underscore that maybe I shouldn't have called them the National Organization of Ugly Women. For now on, it's the National Organization of Really Ugly Women."

44 Comments

During the September 8 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Mark Levin addressed his September 4 comments, in which he called the National Organization for Women, the "National Organization of Ugly Women," saying: "National Organization of Ugly Women, that's very rude. So I think I should call them National Organization of Women Who Look Like Men; or National Organization of Mustachioed Women; or National Organization of Really Ugly Women. And so, I want to apologize for using just National Organization of Ugly Women. I'll pick another one."

Levin later said of Media Matters for America -- which noted Levin's September 4 comments -- and other unspecified "entities": "I know they hate talk radio. They think, 'Hey, did you hear Levin? He said National Organization of Ugly Women.' Well, the truth hurts." Levin added: "What's the head of that group? [NOW president] Kim Gandy? Well, let your eyes speak for themselves. And so, I just wanted to underscore that maybe I shouldn't have called them the National Organization of Ugly Women. For now on, it's the National Organization of Really Ugly Women."

From the September 8 broadcast of ABC Radio Networks' The Mark Levin Show:

LEVIN: Well, I feel so embarrassed. I really do. I feel so embarrassed. This group Media Matters for America, which is of course a tax-exempt nonprofit charitable organization -- set up by George Soros and Hillary Clinton to attack talk radio and others -- they've pointed out that on The Sean Hannity Show, I called the National Organization of Women, the National Organization of Ugly Women. And in fact, I have called them the National Organization of Ugly Women for the longest time. You know, we have a free website. They don't really need to record this stuff or monitor it. They can just go on to my website, MarkLevinShow.com, and play it, and download it, and send it to their left-wing friends.

But they do have a point -- National Organization of Ugly Women, that's very rude. So I think I should call them National Organization of Women Who Look Like Men; or National Organization of Mustachioed Women; or National Organization of Really Ugly Women. And so, I want to apologize for using just National Organization of Ugly Women. I'll pick another one.

You see, ladies and gentlemen, this group, NOW, it doesn't represent the vast majority of women in this country. Maybe it has a couple hundred thousand members, maybe not, maybe less, but just because they beat their so-called chests and claim to represent women and claim to represent progress doesn't make it so. Just because Media Matters claims to be a nonpartisan charitable organization doesn't make it so. Just because these entities try and intimidate and silence people like me doesn't make it happen. I know they hate talk radio. They think, "Hey, did you hear Levin? He said National Organization of Ugly Women." Well, the truth hurts. What's the head of that group? Kim Gandy? Well, let your eyes speak for themselves.

And so, I just wanted to underscore that maybe I shouldn't have called them the National Organization of Ugly Women. For now on, it's the National Organization of Really Ugly Women. But I wanted to clear that up.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by pete592 (September 09, 2008 7:09 pm ET)
         

      "Just because Media Matters claims to be a nonpartisan charitable organization doesn't make it so."

      I've never seen MMFA claim to be nonpartisan.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by DAWUSS (September 09, 2008 7:15 pm ET)
           

        I wish it would be a bit more nonpartisan in its reporting of misinformation, though, but that's another story.

         

        And now we're back to the Soros-Clinton-MMFA debacle, which I STILL have no clue about. I know Boortz and Savage like to assert the same thing, but none of them ever really go into it at any detail...

        Report Abuse
        • Author by open_mind (September 09, 2008 7:32 pm ET)
             
          It is just ad hominem. Boortz, Hannity, Savage, O'Reilly &al never want to address the actual substance of MMFA's critiques.  Who cares if it is Soros' money or whatever - just address the points being made.  They never do.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by annes10 (September 10, 2008 8:45 am ET)
             

          If you are really interested in studying up on fat-cat bazillionaires who've fueled partisan politics, just google "Richard Mellon Scaife".

           

          Report Abuse
      • Author by pointofview (September 09, 2008 7:46 pm ET)
           

        Ok....we have to settle this once and for all.

        I propose we get pictures of all all the NOW officers and then we can decide if they are:  Babes, Ugly, or Really Ugly.  I see no other way at this point. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (September 09, 2008 7:54 pm ET)
             
          I know...get out the mirror.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (September 10, 2008 9:19 am ET)
               

            I know...get out the mirror.

            Wouldn't do any good - POV would look in the mirror and it would shatter in a matter of microseconds.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 10, 2008 10:26 am ET)
                 
              Or, as a certified GOP bloodsucker, there would be no image in the mirror for him to see.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (September 09, 2008 7:57 pm ET)
             

          POV, and after that would it be okay to the same with your family? ;>)

          POV...you saw the repost of McCains flip-flop-flips and flops. Now a return of a posters family may appear and you can start judging them. (But the babe in the pront is mine).

          Report Abuse
        • Author by MoonbatYouBet (September 09, 2008 8:14 pm ET)
             
          And the relevancy of someone's physical appearance to the quality of their ideas is?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by open_mind (September 09, 2008 8:57 pm ET)
             
          Is every decision with you based upon the attractiveness of the messenger?  It would seem to be plausible considering the weakness of your ostensible arguments.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DAWUSS (September 09, 2008 9:15 pm ET)
               
            Attractiveness does have an impact on believability, IIRC. People are bound to believe attractive people more often than they would unattractive people.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by open_mind (September 09, 2008 10:31 pm ET)
                 
              That very well may be so.  However it is a fallacy to mistake believability with the truth - as Dana Perino seems to demonstrate on a daily basis.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by annes10 (September 10, 2008 8:48 am ET)
                 
              So where does that put McCain?
              Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (September 10, 2008 9:17 am ET)
           

        "Just because Media Matters claims to be a nonpartisan charitable organization doesn't make it so."

        And just because M. Rotten Levin claims to be an intelligent human being doesn't make it so.  He's the worst thing to happen to AM radio since static.  And just as annoying.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by SwissMiss (September 11, 2008 12:58 pm ET)
           
        How old is this guy? He must be a dinosaur. He's using the same arguments that were used against women's suffrage back in the 19th century.  Women who fought for voting rights were called "ugly" (+ slutty) by men who had no legitimate arguments.  I've heard of "retro" but this is silly. Can't wait for these sexist dinosaurs to become extinct :) !!!!!!
        Report Abuse
      • Author by greatjob (September 11, 2008 3:04 pm ET)
           
        He means that that is how they represent themselves to the IRS.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by greatjob (September 11, 2008 3:06 pm ET)
           
        He means that that is how they represent themselves to the IRS.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Graydogs (September 09, 2008 7:12 pm ET)
         
      I loved it when Keith Olberman showed his photo and said something along the line of ... now this man knows ugly.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (September 09, 2008 7:19 pm ET)
         
      Now that is really funny
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (September 09, 2008 7:19 pm ET)
         
      A little off-topic, but are there people who can do a really good Mark Levin impersonation? Might make for some good parodies
      Report Abuse
      • Author by open_mind (September 09, 2008 7:34 pm ET)
           
        I've said it before, but Tim Kazurinsky from the old SNL sounds exactly like Levin - except maybe a little more masculine and tough than Levin does - but I am sure Kazurinsky could mouse it down a little.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by sportsguydave (September 09, 2008 9:31 pm ET)
         

      And Levin has a face made for radio ....

      What was that about people in glass houses again???

      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (September 09, 2008 10:37 pm ET)
         

      Some long threads today.

      The emotional reaction to Palin in many ways copies the emtional reaction to shrub. The reasons for pulling the level for her and her side kick Yawnie are the same ones that lead to shrub and the shambles that our country is today.

      Kind of like a gamboling addict pulling the level because he'll surely win the jackpot on the next pull. Just so the next republican adminstration will fullfill all their dreams, reward the worthy, distroy the unworthy, operate as if the New Testament and select portions of the Old Testament had been seemlessly inserted into our constitution.

      On a brighter note, since 2006 two million new voters have registered as Democrats. At the same time the number of registered Republicans has gone down by 344,000. No matter how the MSM dances and shouts this trend will continue.

      But its still possible that the machine can put another winner in the WH. Giving no doubt, further evidence that knowing how to win an election has zip to do with the quality of the following leadership. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (September 09, 2008 11:29 pm ET)
           

        The emotional reaction to Palin in many ways copies the emtional reaction to shrub.

        Thanks for reminding me, EW. I heard a caller to Jeff Christie today telling El Rushbo a story about meeting Palin (for the record, I don't believe that most of Rush's callers are real). The guy was gushing about how friendly she was, even mentioning that Palin kissed his little girl.

        "That's amazing" sez Rush. Politicians kissing babies is a tired cliche to normal people, but in DittoTown, it's "amazing".

        Then the caller summed up his meeting with the Palin family with a sentence that made me shudder;

        "I felt like I could have a pizza & beer with them."

        I had to think, if there was some positive outcome from 8 years of our current "leadership", it would be that even the thickest, most emotional and easily suckered Americans might have taken a little lesson away-- maybe your dopey drinking buddy isn't a good model to use when voting for higher elected offices.

        I didn't think Bush had a chance either time, but I've learned not to count out the stoopid-American vote. Palin has energized those voters who were thinking of sitting out the election because McCain wasn't enough of an idiot. Palin has taken the dumbing down of the American electorate to a new level.The GOP knows their base.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (September 10, 2008 12:13 am ET)
         

      Yep Col, and there's money people onboard along with the newly glad religious folk.

      Its going to be a very strange two months. I hope we and all our friends here find some relief when it goes down.

      ;-)

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mari2jj2970 (September 10, 2008 2:44 am ET)
         
      I find it amazing that Levin branded all women belonging to that group as UGLY.  Not certain if Levin is a Christian, but no matter his religious persuasion, that is a very hateful statement and verboten in most religious groups.  Of course, what else to expect from a card carrying conservative thzat says one thing and then acts just the opposite of any caring person.  Any thought that I might vote for McCain is gone now since the Republicans and their supporters are so obviously anti-women in their approach to governing, even with their token Veep candidate.  I just sent off an email to my daughters also.  They are really disgusted with Republicans due to their sexist thinking this election cycle. These guys really know how to chase women away for sure.  None of my family belongs to NOW but we all support women's causes.  I have two widowed daughters as am I and equality in the workplace means a lot to this Republican, so blab on Mr. Levin.  It is your attitude that makes us know you are not interested in protecting our rights
      Report Abuse
      • Author by annes10 (September 10, 2008 9:15 am ET)
           

        There's a type of cold-call telephone solicitor who sees no downside in calling people names (like moron, or ugly) once it is clear those folks aren't buying after being spoken to politely. 

        That's Levin's role, and his primary tactic. He's the pundint on the team they have to call people names after they've ignored Hannity's incessant invitations to become a great american just like him, after they've not been assimilated by Limbaugh.

        These b*st*rds are used-car salesmen ... gold dust triplets who don't want to let you off their lot. You aren't anything more to them than a-pigeon-who-is-getting away. The stakes are high: their commissions, and the national body politic.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (September 10, 2008 11:00 am ET)
           

        Not certain if Levin is a Christian...

        He's Jewish.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (September 10, 2008 10:30 am ET)
         

      Let he who is without "ug" cast the first stone.

      That stone should have been nowhere near Levin.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by historygeek001 (September 10, 2008 11:46 am ET)
         
      Levin is a typical Replutocrat.  He can't argue issues, so he yells a lot, insults people a lot, and hopes nobody notices that he doesn't make any sense.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by USA-USA-USA (September 10, 2008 12:00 pm ET)
         

      I just love the hypocrisy. If a woman does not believe in NOW, she's not a woman. If Mark Levin makes fun of the typical NOW woman, he's irreligious, he's a misogynist! Saint O is our savior. We want to believe. We have to believe. Anything is better than Bush.

      I hate when Mark Levin goes on his name-calling rampages. It demeans his message and gives yokels plenty of manure to step into.

      Report Abuse