(CNN) - Rush Limbaugh - radio host, conservative firebrand and... children's book author of the year?
The Children’s Book Council and its Every Child a Reader program released on Thursday their author-of-the-year finalists for their annual Children’s and Teen Choice Book Awards.
Limbaugh is one of the four finalists, and his nomination has prompted outrage on social media, given the host’s often-incendiary nature.
Limbaugh's book is titled, "Rush Revere and The Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans" – a time-traveling tale of colonial America and the latest of two books in the "Rush Revere Series" published last year by Simon & Schuster.
Limbaugh, an outspoken figure in the political world, often expresses controversial sentiments on his radio program. Recently, Limbaugh blasted Pope Francis' economic views as "pure Marxism," and, in 2012, he called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and "prostitute" for her support of women's access to birth control.
The Children’s Book Council issued a public letter, posted to its website and Facebook page, defending its finalist selection process following the uproar online and insisting that the author of the year finalists "are determined solely based on titles’ performances on the bestseller lists."
"Some of you have voiced concerns over the selection of finalists from bestseller lists, which you feel are potentially-manipulable indications of the success of a title. We can take this into consideration going forward, but cannot change our procedure for selecting finalists after the fact," the organization said in the letter.
The CBC letter goes on to say the kids, who will start voting next week, ultimately decide which author wins in each of the six categories, including best author. The letter goes on to assure that the organization has a procedure in place to protect against fraud and adult's voting in the contest.
"This program has never been about CBC or ECAR endorsing finalists," the letter says.
Limbaugh touted the apparent success of his book series on his radio program on Thursday.
"We just found out last night that on the New York Times Best-Seller List of March the 30th, ‘Rush Revere and the First Patriots’ will open at number one, and ‘Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims’ moves up to number four," said, according to a transcript of the audio.
Limbaugh’s book landed at the number-5 spot on the New York Times best seller’s list for the week of March 23.
CNN's Dana Davidsen contributed to this report.
"Limbaugh’s book landed at the number-5 spot on the New York Times best seller’s list for the week of March 23."
The staff at CNN is so bias about this guy they can not even bring themselves to acknowledging how much kids like and enjoy his book. More people read his book than watch CNN. The book is likely more factual than most CNN reporting.
And I find it amusing that conservatives are so very quickly called out on calling "names". If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like a duck....well,you know the rest. But heaven forbid if we criticize a liberal for name calling. They live by the most incredible double standard ever.
I'm enjoying reading the comments and realizing even on CNN, everyone is not a Liberal drone who is buying this crp anymore. Great book Rush!
For your own edification, Rush didn't say it or joke it. He asked the question: "What is a woman who gets paid for having sex? A whore? A slut?" That was the extent of it. The payment, or course, one might surmise, would be all the free birth-control Fluke wanted. In any case, it was a rhetorical question. If you equate that to Fluke being called a whore and slut, as does the slimy left/press............well, if the shoe fits................! You try to act smart and show your stupidity. And the word is "indignant."
She did not testify re access to, but rather demanded that someone else pay for it.
Also left out is that Limbaugh apologized for the statements and clarified his intent for speaking out, none of which is reported in the article. I thought reporters and editors are supposed to make sure the public is presented with the facts, not opinions of the writer?
Your years of listening to Rush have resulting in your skewing the facts, just as he does. Fluke was not demanding that coverage be provided to her. Fluke was protesting about the fact that coverage had been provided for years, and now the ACA was suddenly being used as an excuse to deny the coverage in the future.
Rush didn't exactly apologize, either. He carried on for days with his negative words and remarks. He defended himself in the court of public opinion. Unfortunately, money talks louder than he does. As his major sponsors began pulling out one by one, as radio stations began dropping him one by one, it was not until then that he manufactured a non-apology to Fluke. If he was truly sorry for his words, then he never would have defended them and defended them, until it started hitting him in the wallet pretty hard.
Fluke described her daily sex life as so extensive she and other females needed free contraceptives. Limbaugh questioned whether her characterization of her daily sex life was no different than a slut or prostitute.
I just read the prologue on Amazon, and I bought it straight away for my kids.
I love all these libs saying Rush spews hatred when they probably haven't ever listened to his show. They get their info from their lib websites which skew everything he says. They should give it a try and they might actually learn a few things. Speaking of lib skewing things Rush never tried to deny a woman access to birth control, he said it should be their responsibility to pay for it not ours. Amazing how someone can skew the truth.
Limbaugh, an outspoken figure in the political world, often expresses controversial sentiments on his radio program.
And CNN always LIES in their stories about conservatives.
Hilarious that progressives want to silence anyone who is not in their tank. CNN has no credibility anymore.Stop using "Breaking News" every ten seconds over nothing. You're getting closer to the dump everyday.
Double standard. If some "thought provoking" progressive twit from an irrelevant corner of the lame stream media released a children's book he'd be hailed as a hero.
These are great books. They are well written facts of history and not distorted by people who want to change the way our young people view our history. My grandson loves it and quite frankly I think it should be manitory reading for all schools. It's about someone tells the truth and doesn't fill our future generation with the crap the political correct crowd want to brain wash our kids with.
If his books are best sellers, it is not because kids are begging mommy and dayy to buy them the books, it is because his "dittoheads" are buying it and more than likely forcing their kids to read them or aere simply reading thenm to the kids .
Children will say they like anything in most cases to please an adult, especially if they aren't familiar with it.
"prompted outrage on social media, given the host’s often-incendiary nature."
It's not Rush's incendiary nature that prompts outrage, it's his support of the US Constitution, individual freedom, and responsible government that offends people who want bigger government to rule over the people so they won't have to be responsible for their own lives.
I'm getting a kick out of this. The only "controversial" of this is intentionally created by socialists who delight in attempting to rewrite U.S. history in an effort to denigrate it to the youth. The hope being they will spawn more socialists and eventually overthrow from within. So obvious that the nose on ones face couldn't be plainer. Of course these are the same socialists crying fowl over Texas now getting first shots called on who buys the high school text books, the long time held purview of socialists in Sacramento California. The backlash has begun and the lefties are crying.
Hooray And congrats to Rush!! The tone of this cnn "reporting" is part of the books' successes. People are tired of the PC America bashing In the public schools. We say nothing because then the racist card is played to silence us. Can't wait for November!!
So being anti-Marxist is now "incendiary" at CNN
in 2012, he called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and "prostitute" for her support of women's access to birth control.---------–
Typical MSM CNN BS. He didn' call her a slut for her support of womens access to control.... He called her a SLUT for wanting him and the rest of America to pay for her slut activities.
If anyone at CNN or any other liberal actually LISTENED to Rush instead of the drivel printed by the MSM they would form a very different opinion of the man.
Dear CNN Political Ticker: Rush Limbaugh did not call Pope Francis's 'views' Marxist; he was alluding to the Pope's comments. One's comments may or may not be consistent with one's views. True?
Also, "Access to birth control" should never be confused with forcing a morally opposed institution into paying for it. Rush used the word "slut" as an absurdity; in that Ms. Fluke's argument was that her ability to engage in sex was thwarted because paying for her own birth control would impose a financial hardship. Try a little critical thinking on your subject matter next time. Articles like this come off as 'cut and paste' rote.
Funny, even kids are more intellectual than liberals. Keep crying away at it Marxists, thats the best you can do. Sorry your indoctrination hasn't robbed the youth of their ability to think and reason.
Should be required reading in schools depending on the literacy rate.
in 2012, he called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and "prostitute" for her support of women's access to birth control.
No, he called her a slut for saying she needs $180 per for birth control. given the price of a condom, that's a lot of sex even for a college student.
What we liberals should encourage in this case is book burning & censorship! That makes good sense doesn't it!
The left is all about mob attacks.. .. purely childish bullying. Good job Rush! The left shows their inolerance once again.
I didn't realize that the definition of incendiary was changed to "Doesn't agree with radical left wing".