A few days ago the Washington Post broke down and revealed that the Rush Limbaugh boycott had failed. Hotair quoted the paper:

Limbaugh’s advertising losses may have been less than media accounts suggested. While more than 100 advertisers told Premiere that they didn’t want to be associated with “controversial” radio programs of any kind in the wake of the flap, some of these companies weren’t regular Limbaugh sponsors in the first place.

Carusone said most of the advertiser exodus over the past month appeared to be among companies whose ads aired only in regional or local markets, he said. “Fewer than five” nationwide sponsors of the program actually pulled out, he said…

Today while writing my “Under the Fedora” column I went to the Washington Post page and suddenly this paragraph looks…different.

Carusone said most of the advertiser exodus over the past month appeared to be among companies whose ads aired only in regional or local markets, he said.

Interestingly enough the sentence saying “fewer than five” is gone. Here is the screen shot from HotAir:

and here is a screen shot of the Washington Post link as of 2:20 p.m. this afternoon (Click to enlarge):

I guess the reality of the numbers is just too much for the Post to leave posted for posterity.

Update: Instalanche, thanks Glenn and this from comments that deserves repeating:

If Woodward and Berstein were dead, they’d be turning over in their graves…except that Woodward is now the executive editor.

It’s one thing to chase down Nixon…quite another to tell the truth about Rush.

Update 2: Don Surber links and says:

Paul Fahri made the mistake of telling the truth about Rush Limbaugh. That must be a violation of the Washington Post’s stylebook.


Update 3:
Under the Fedora is now up.

As I was walking toward the Supreme Court to cover the Obamacare protests on day 2 I noticed several people in seemingly Pro-Israeli shirts. Being a supporter of Israel I instantly asked for an interview and to my surprise found that it was J-Street

I didn’t think anything much about the encounter as more than an oddity until later in the day. The group I came down with was scheduled to meet with representative of Senator Scott Brown. I arrived early and sat down to wait reading the paper copies of Politico, the Hill & the Washington Examiner (yes I’d rather read the print version than the online ones any day).

Much to my surprise a large contingent of people from J-Street showed up. Apparently they were the Massachusetts contingent that the convention of about 35 and they had scheduled a meeting with Brown’s folks at 11 as well.

I engaged one of the young men who argued for the two state solution, saying that once the Palestinian’s had a state they would lose their fear of the Israeli’s which causes the problem I asked if the “Palestinian” state was to be Judenrein. He seemed visibly taken aback by my question asking why I used that word. I pointed out that the Arab/Islamic world was becoming effectively Judenrein pointing out the problem wasn’t Palestinian fear, it was Palestinian/Arab/Islamic hatred of Jews that is propagated in their media and culture.

He insisted that a Palestinian state would assuage this problem but I contended that until the Arab/Islamic people actually changed it would only mean one more official launching ground for new attacks on Israel.

At this point the time came for the meeting and the entire group went into the conference room, while a second Brown aide shortly afterwards spoke to us in the hallway.

There is nothing odd about Sen Brown or his staff meeting with these guys, they’re all Massachusetts men and women and they have just as proper a claim on his time as anyone else in the state.

What I do have a problem with is what their argument means.

I am not a Jew, my parents are not Jews, I am not acquainted with a single ancestor of mine who is Jewish. My only connection to anything Jewish besides my appearance is a single nephew out of 12 who married a Jewish girl. One might say I don’t have much of a dog in this fight, but I’m making it my fight because in my opinion J-Street’s proposed solutions, no matter what they actually intend, leads back to the final solution.

From the votes in Egypt to the slayings in France the issue is not the boarders of a Jewish state, it is the Existence of the Jewish state in general and Jews in particular as anything other than an underclass in Arab/Islamic lands and beyond.

I don’t know if these people are idealistic, unrealistic or playing the game of intellectuals that Victor Davis Hanson described:

For many intellectuals, the choice of lauding or disliking Israel was not just based on careerist self-interest, but also on a careful calculus that Western nations, for all their talk of free speech, were as terrified of terrorists as were the latters’ targets. Criticize or caricature radical Islam, and a terrorist was more likely to get you than your fearful Western government was to protect you. Ask Salman Rushdie or Kurt Westergaard.

Whatever their motive it doesn’t matter. In the end the Arab world and those who celebrate dead Jews will be happy to support their status as useful idiots…

…right up until the time they are no longer useful and discover to their shock that the fate reserved for those who resist or warn others such as Pam Geller, belongs to them as well.

Tom Weaver held a small meet and greet at the Williams Restaurant in Gardner Mass on Wednesday evening.

It was a small event but it included the mayor of the city and state Rep Rick Bastien.

He spoke to several local issues that were raised by the group:

And stood for a short interview as well

His web site is here.

Update: Should have said Ma-3 corrected