Patterico's Pontifications

3/3/2012

Video: Rush Limbaugh Apologizes to Sandra Fluke

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:24 pm

Link courtesy of katy at Hot Air:

This video is a horrible way to treat a real victim. Luckily, it appears Ms. Fluke is no such thing.

204 Comments

  1. And here I just got through telling my neighbor, whom we were having over for some barbecue, that Rush would never apologize.

    Comment by Patterico (feda6b) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:30 pm

  2. The sponsors are caving. The left has a system for this. They bombard them until the receptionists almost quit and the the CEOs are answering phones. It is not reality but it feels like doomsday to the company at the time.

    Comment by Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:35 pm

  3. in Barack Obama’s America, it’s whores ascendant

    and the sky’s the limit, h8rs

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:37 pm

  4. p.s.

    According to the IMF, China will become the dominant economic power by 2016.

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:38 pm

  5. reloading as fast as possible.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:31 pm

  6. ribs, pork shoulder, brisket or seafood?

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:18 am

  7. The sponsors are caving. The left has a system for this. They bombard them until the receptionists almost quit and the the CEOs are answering phones. It is not reality but it feels like doomsday to the company at the time.

    Why does not the right have similar tactics?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:37 am

  8. because they belong to the grand OAF party.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:04 am

  9. go with the brisket just smoke it for 10 hours.

    if the right doesn’t wake up guess wh will be in the white house another four years

    Comment by alan (d74c59) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:02 am

  10. Rush can take the heat. He’s suffered boycotts and sponsor trouble in the past. Companies are lining up to advertise on his show.

    I’m not being snarky when I say that this, too, is part of how the market works. The companies who choose to no longer advertise with Rush may see a drop in their overall sales. Because, you know, all those Hollywood libs aren’t really going to buy a Sleep Train mattress any time soon.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:54 am

  11. You are utterly missing the point;

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/the_bell_tolls_for_breitbart.html

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:05 am

  12. Give them a piece of your mind,

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/03/carbonite-drops-rush/

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:34 am

  13. You are utterly missing the point

    Am I? I thought the point was we shouldn’t get distracted by this sort of crap, and that we should continue to focus the conversation on our lousy economy and the SCOAMF in the White House.

    Rush knows the risks of his own business better than anyone. For all we know, he was trying to shake loose some lousy advertisers in order to get out of unprofitable contracts.

    But whatever you wish to focus on, go ahead. Call up Carbonite and tell them who they should advertise with. I’m sure they’d love to learn the truth about Ms. Fluke.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:43 am

  14. Right, like they did to Beck, that was spontaneous
    too, like the Levick campaign on Gitmo, or the astroturf behind CFR.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:44 am

  15. I agree with you that it’s not spontaneous, but instead organized and strategic.

    I guess my point is: when your opponent sets a trap for you, and you put your foot in the trap, and it bites you, it doesn’t do any good to hop up and down and say “My opponent set a trap!”

    Take you foot out of the trap and play the damn game. Rush isn’t a novice at this; he knows what he’s doing. What I’m saying is, don’t worry about him.

    Go ahead and fight the fight, but I’m not going to be outraged by the Lefts organized outrage at Rush’s outrageous outrage. I’m not going to follow their playbook.

    I say, if a sponsor wants to end their contract with Rush legally in the face of panty-twisting and pants-wetting, well, that’s certainly their right. Let them eat the consequences.

    And if those consequences include a bunch of emails and phone calls from Rush supporters, then go do what you have to do.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:53 am

  16. I’m reminded of this, no pressure;

    http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=A2KLqILFg1NPx0sAoxD7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrOTlpOGs3BHNlYwNzZWFyY2gEdnRpZ

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:02 am

  17. #16 — that doesn’t work for me, it takes me to a Yahoo “LATEST VIDEO SEARCH TRENDS” page

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:08 am

  18. It’s a clip from ‘Fish called Wanda’ where Kevin Kline is holding John Cleese upside down.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:10 am

  19. Great scene!

    Also, I thought the point of this post was brisket.

    Really, ten hours seems like a long time. How do you keep it from drying out? Do you wrap it in foil?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:13 am

  20. All I can do is notice that two days ago every website and newscast in America told us that bad Rush called poor Sandra a slut. And this morning every website, and news program in America is announcing that bad Rush apologized to poor Sandra for calling her a slut. Later today, every guest of either party on every Sunday morning political show will be asked to opine on the poor Sandra – bad Rush brouhaha and in the case of team R, the guests will be badgered to condemn Limbaugh. A few of the moderators will no doubt editorialize on the terrible ickiness of political discourse.

    So we (who really are the good guys in this struggle for national survival) gained a lot of political ground and won over a lot of very needed independent voters over the past two days. Right? Right?

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:16 am

  21. If Rush called me a slut, would Barcky call me? This whole thing was choreographed.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:16 am

  22. Sandra was not a prostitute. She willingly went and gave it away because she hearts her ideology. They didn’t even have to pay her.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:18 am

  23. Well Team R, is totally splunge, with some exceptions like Newt who doesn’t take the premise.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:19 am

  24. So we (who really are the good guys in this struggle for national survival) gained a lot of political ground and won over a lot of very needed independent voters over the past two days. Right? Right?

    No, we didn’t. We got played. Rush got played. It was an unforced error, and an own goal.

    What hurts most to me is that AB might could have turned this around, and we don’t have him.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:20 am

  25. YOU MUST PROVIDE FREE RUBBERZ FOR SANDRA OR SHE WILL GO BROKE!!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:28 am

  26. HOW ABOUT LUBE? IS THAT ON THE TABLE?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:31 am

  27. What you forgot the local D.A. put O’Keefe in jail, so the meme of Watergate 2, down in N. Orleans would
    stick, this is just par for the course,

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:31 am

  28. The MFM completely whored themselves out, yet again, on this. 30 year old professional leftist activist.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:34 am

  29. @ 26 and 25 And what about the cost of foil that’s needed to keep it from drying out? Or were you referring to something else at that point in the above comment, Pious?

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:36 am

  30. LUBE IS A TOOL OF TEH PATRIARCHY

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:36 am

  31. It’s only a matter of time and effort, elissa.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:38 am

  32. Limbaugh let he and his big mouth get punk’d… AGAIN. Another “How many times will it take ’til he knows…” moment. Elissa got it right.

    “I don’t care how many Cadillacs Mitt Romney owns, how many earmarks he requested, or how many individual mandates he approved. This is an extraordinary man.

    We first heard about it in the 2008 campaign: how Romney saved the teenaged daughter of a Bain Capital colleague in 1996. Here’s what Mitt did when he learned the girl had gone missing after sneaking from her home in Connecticut to a party in New York City: he shut down the whole office and flew the staff from Boston to New York; he had fliers printed up and got employees at Duane Reade (in which Bain invested) to stuff one into every customer’s bag; he set up a phone hotline; he personally, along with his Bain people and their New York accountants and lawyers, pounded the city’s pavements looking for the girl and asking teenagers if they’d seen her. After a few days of all this – and the publicity it generated – they traced the hotline call of someone asking for a reward and found the girl, who had overdosed on Ecstasy, in the basement of a New Jersey home.

    The New York Times is treating the campaign’s current retelling of the story with predictable snide cynicism (“Pressed for Anecdote, Romney Recounts Tale of Missing Girl”); and — surprise, surprise – is trying to gin up some controversy around the ad one of his super PACs is running about it…”

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/03/04/romney-good-man/

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:41 am

  33. Sandra was not a prostitute…

    Comment by JD — 3/4/2012 @ 7:18 am

    Yet… But she is keeping her fingers crossed…

    Comment by Ghost (c104c9) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:42 am

  34. and Pious Agnostic tells it like it is.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:43 am

  35. They lie, Colonel, no matter what the subject;

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-deceits-of-seymour-hersh/

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:45 am

  36. Speaking of apologies, Barack Obama and his band o’ Democrats all owe America the Mother of ALL Apologies for doing their utmost to destroy everything this nation stands for.

    Don’t hold your breath.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:46 am

  37. They lied about Bork, to get Kennedy, they lied about Gitmo to give terrorist lawyers, they lied
    about bankruptcy to get Dodd/Frank, (that was Red
    Liz’s scam) about the evil Carbon monster to ban the lightbulb, etc, etc, no wonder Breitbart was
    at wit’s ends sometimes,

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:53 am

  38. Do you suppose the economic travails of the government subsidized Chevy Volt will be included as a meaty discussion segment on the Sunday talk shows?

    (Just kidding. Nah, me neither.)

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:53 am

  39. Rush was an idiot, handing ammunition to his (and conservatism’s) enemies. He has also made this woman’s career — we will be seeing much more of Sandra Fluke, now — so ironically, she should be thanking him, while he should also be apologizing to all conservatives for his incredibly stupid own-goal.

    This latest controversy has for many people moved the debate from whether the Catholic church has conscience rights, to the merits of birth control per se. This may, in a close race, even tip the general election to Obama, especially, but not only, if Santorum is the nominee.

    A reasoned criticism would be for Rush to have pointed out that everyone can get effective birth control for under $200 a year, that Ms. Fluke is dishonest when she speaks of $1,000 per year costs, except for people relying on condoms, paying full retail, and using 3 a day. And that people going to Georgetown can probably afford that, and in any case, that Catholic institution should be under no more obligation to subsidize that right than any other employer should be to buy me a gun every year because I have a 2nd-Amendment-guaranteed right to keep arms.

    Comment by DWPittelli (87401c) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:54 am

  40. Well said, DWPittelli.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:59 am

  41. What Clint Eastwood has spoken, Halftime in America, yadda yadda,

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:01 am

  42. Our buddy Simon gets a shout out from Glenn Reynolds!

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/138296/

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:02 am

  43. #42 I saw that too but then forgot about it.

    Well done Simon!

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:03 am

  44. Own goal my as*. What other rhetorical ground are we going to cede? Fight to get in the front of the line to disavow this bad man.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:09 am

  45. Dw,
    Rush Limbaugh IS their ammunition. And the republican party’s weakness is that, in the words of Jesse Lacey, I’ve seen more spine in jellyfish; I’ve seen more guts in eleven year old kids.

    That republicans buy into this groupthink of “someone who agrees with me on something said something mean so I have to apologize.” Boehner apologizes for everyone. When’s the last time Sharkmouth had to apologize for Special Ed, Madcow, Godawful-o, Overbite, or Shitster?

    Maybe thats what we need: a bunch of citizen journalists asking Debbie whatshername-shitz why she thinks all republican women are sluts, which she obviously must think because she never apologized for Ed, therefore she thinks all republican women are sluts.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    Comment by Ghost (c104c9) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:10 am

  46. You’re being very ‘unhelpful’ JD.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:14 am

  47. If Romney stood up today and called the president a SCOAMF (but spelled out the words) I would stand up and cheer.

    And then I’d reconcile myself to 4 more years of Obama.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:16 am

  48. I have already done so, Pious.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:18 am

  49. Oh, and my buddy and I were discussing the right to bear arms for low income folks, and how buying a gun can be financially burdensome, so the government should give all low income families at least one gun and a three year supply of ammunition.

    What, you want poor people getting robbed and raped because they can’t afford a gun? What kind of monster are you? Why the war on the poverty stricken? Why do you want to make it illegal for poor people to own guns? Why are you trying to ban guns for everybody?

    Of course, the problem with making this argument are the big govt republicans who month think its actually a good idea…

    Comment by Ghost (c104c9) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:18 am

  50. Ghost, I think that some would argue that giving a poor person a gun is the first step to income redistribution.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:20 am

  51. Unforced, dumb-assed errors.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:22 am

  52. I don’t think that Limbaugh is a “bad man,” but he’s hardly an unmixed blessing for the Right.

    He makes mistakes all the time. And knowing that there are billion-dollar organizations waiting for him to screw up so that his words can be used as flails to torture Republican candidates, don’t you think he maybe should have used his little blue pencil and crossed-out the word “slut?”

    I’ll defend to the death his right to say it, yadda yadda, but I’ll still call it a mistake.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:26 am

  53. And Obama is a good man, Colonel. You are more willing to attack Mitts’ opponents.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:26 am

  54. bullscat, JD.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:48 am

  55. One can make an effective point without hyperbole. The media is the enemy. Don’t take the friggin’ bait every time the trap is laid.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:50 am

  56. Rush is a very smart man and he should know better.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:52 am

  57. As I’ve mentioned numerous times, I will not only contribute cash and vote for the eventual nominee, I will campaign door-to-door in my own community for our guy.

    We need to ensure Obama is not given another 4 years to wreak destruction.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:56 am

  58. Bullscat. The MFM and the Left would have just created another outrageous outrage to get outraged by. This was a choreographed Dem propaganda campaign. I am glad he called them out on it.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:56 am

  59. 19- dry rub overnight, basic beer mop every time you need to add wood, charcoal, or wood chips. Keep temp between 200-220 degrees. smoke 1-1/14 hrs/lb. 8 lb=12 hours. With the right ingredients you will have yourself some “Braggin’-Rights Brisket”
    I prefer Pork Shoulder.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:57 am

  60. and yet he’s the one on his knees.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 8:57 am

  61. Maybe this will work better, Narciso…

    http://youtu.be/m7mIy97_rlo

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:01 am

  62. He was unhelpful to the electability crowd, who brought us McCain, and now Mittens. Rolling over and showing your belly doesn’t strike me as effective.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:11 am

  63. He doesn’t need to convince us, JD. What’s the takeaway for the folks who don’t follow politics as much? I suspect it’s something like Rush called that young woman a slut and then he had to apologize.

    A Pyrrhic victory, at best.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:17 am

  64. Here’s an effective spotlight on media perfidy:

    http://t.co/iVoMujRt

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:26 am

  65. Feel good. Feel proud, Colonel. You stood up to the evil unhelpful Limbaugh.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:27 am

  66. They’re doing it For The Children…

    http://t.co/8rUEKcOK

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:27 am

  67. You either get it, or you don’t, JD. Here’s to hoping you soon will.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:30 am

  68. But you get it?!?! King Romney supporter.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:33 am

  69. A man who felt secure about the righteousness/ effectiveness of his position wouldn’t feel obligated to drop to his knees seeking forgiveness.

    Just my opinion…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:34 am

  70. I’ll wholeheartedly support our nominee, whether it’s Santorum, Gingrich or Romney. Who gets it now?

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:36 am

  71. He did no such thing. A man who was secure about his candidate would not spend his time trashing everyone else. A man who was secure about his position would not feel the need to mischaracterize his apology, as you just did.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:36 am

  72. Who will you contribute to? Who will you support, JD? Other than just incessantly pitchin’ a b*tch.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:38 am

  73. C’mon. Rush went after this woman for three days. He adamantly refused to back down. Once his sponsors started deserting him, he suddenly saw the light. And did it on a weekend- something he always lambastes Obama for doing.

    Comment by jimboster (12cd47) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:39 am

  74. enough of this, it’s not productive.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:40 am

  75. As Breitbart said at cpac-abo.

    Comment by sickofrinos (44de53) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:54 am

  76. http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/04/bromance-on-david-brooks-revels-in-obamas-intelligence-sophistication/

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:54 am

  77. ________________________________________________

    If Limbaugh felt he had to apologize, why didn’t he do it in sort of a backhanded way, or sort of what like that character played by Paul Newman does in the video?

    I never listen to Limbaugh’s show, but for the sake of his fans, I hope he explains on his program tomorrow why he sounds like someone who’s eaten a lot of crow. But if political correctness run amok has snagged even him, why should anyone be surprised?

    Once again, keep in mind that even within the context of the US military — and NOT in the context of the workplace of, say, the ACLU, Green Peace, the NAACP, the ABA, the Rainbow Coalition, etc — the deranged anti-US, pro-Islamic rantings of Nidal Hasan not only weren’t prevented, they were actually tolerated right up until the day of the Fort Hood massacre. So no one should be surprised by just how ass-backwards and loony modern American society can become or has become.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 3/4/2012 @ 9:55 am

  78. I enjoy and learn from Limbaugh… when I’m not busy at work and have a chance to listen to him. But – in the end – this was not productive.

    An unforced error.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:00 am

  79. Is this the purity test? If I don’t support Limbaugh 100% in everything he says and does then I am objectively supporting Obama?

    Screw that.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:01 am

  80. __________________________________________

    I’ll wholeheartedly support our nominee, whether it’s Santorum, Gingrich or Romney.

    This nation — assuming it doesn’t want to be another Argentina/Greece/Mexico/Venezuela — has been in dire straits since 2008, so I’ve always felt that way.

    We’re on the SS Titanic right now, tilting further and further to the left, so some of the debates about the Republican candidates have reminded me of people arguing over whether the deck chairs should be arranged in rows or clusters, or whether they’re the right color or not.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:02 am

  81. “No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse.”

    Comment by Not David Friend, CEO of Carbonite (826205) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:32 am

  82. SCOAMF…

    Which one of his pinhead advisers told Obama to take a “listening tour” in an armored Canadian bus and then to go soothe his sore earflaps in Nantucket luxury? And what the mind-numbing nutcrunch was the crap Dana Milbank drooled about “integrative complexity”?… “integrative complexity” his ability to keep multiple variables and trade-offs in mind… the simpering bumblef*ck can’t even answer the telephone without a teleprompter. Unemployment? It went over 10% and what does he do? He put us over a trillion in the hole while playing 18 on the fairway. King Putt… “Teh One”… the only thing that interests him is golf and he can barely get his balls in THAT hole…

    http://youtu.be/PbzSi0LTu0s

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (8bcbba) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:39 am

  83. ‘…you think he maybe should have used his little blue pencil and crossed-out the word “slut?”’

    No, I think she is a slut, and worse, she’s demanding that other people pay the costs of her sluttery.

    And, I’m in favor of telling the truth, especially when some “professional” welfare leech and perpetual student (which is apparently what she is, as far as I can tell she’s never had a real job in her life) is part of a plot to get the government to subsidize them for LIFE, by having the government make me pay their bills.

    And, I’m not too much in favor of having guys with guns force me to pay for the hobbies of people who don’t have any visible means of support, but somehow manage to come up with the dough to spend virtually their entire adult lives attending expensive institutions like Cornell and Georgetown, or lazing around being an “activist” on the taxppayer’s dime…which is all this slut has ever done in her thirty years (or so) on earth.

    Maybe you want to pay for this stupid slut’s birth control (and all her other expenses) in perpetuity, but I don’t.

    And as far as I’m concerned it’s crap like this that is THE PROBLEM. This isn’t a distraction, this is what it’s all about.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:50 am

  84. “No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult…”

    What insult?

    She’s not married, but she claims to be spending $1,000 per year on birth control. Condoms are 50 cents a pop (I was just looking at an ad).

    Do the math, sport.

    She’s either a liar (which I take as a given, seeing as how she’s a leftard) and/or she’s the biggest slut on God’s green earth.

    “She [Fluke] claimed that over the three years as a law student, birth control would cost an estimated $3,000.”–wiki

    Maybe…if you’re a hooker.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:03 am

  85. Other than satisfying an itch by calling her a slut, how has this advanced our fight?

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:05 am

  86. “how has this advanced our fight?”

    It’s hard to win a fight, if you can’t even bring yourself to call the enemy what it is.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:20 am

  87. Keeping in mind that I believe we are solidly on the same team with respect to the large issues of the day and also with respect to getting Obama un-elected and out of the White house, I am curious. How many new, enthusiastic independent and/or youthful voters do you think “we” picked up over the last few days of the Rush/Sandra media firestorm? I’ll direct this specifically to Dave S. and JD but will welcome anybody else’s response.

    I ask this because I think we lost ground, big ground, over a nothingburger leftist inspired charade and distraction that Rush foolishly stepped in and the hostile media exploited. But it appears some others whose opinions I regularly respect see the potential vote count situation quite differently and I’d like to better understand their view on how this has all been a plus or can end up being an upside for us in November.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:23 am

  88. ____________________________________________

    could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady.

    I can often detect a liberal from a mile away. But I also thought, well, maybe I’m wrong in this case. After all, wouldn’t the owner of Carbonite have known that his company was providing ad dollars to Rush Limbaugh, a person whose politics the CEO should have been well aware of?

    corporationwiki.com: These campaign contributions may be related to David Friend. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) maintains these records. The results below are based on a name and ZIP code proximity match and are provided as a possible research tool only.

    Transaction: 7/1/2008
    Occupation: Carbonite, Inc/CEO
    Location: Boston, MA
    Committee: Obama Victory Fund
    Amount: $2,000.00

    ^ Surprise, surprise! A guy living in Massachusetts, of all places, probably is a (drum roll, please) limousine liberal.

    If he was aware of his company advertising with Limbaugh, maybe he saw it as a sop to illustrate his “progressive” humanity, compassion and tolerance. Probably more likely his people in the advertising department were throwing ad dollars around like darts at a cork board, seeing whatever good might end up sticking, where ever and whenever.

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:27 am

  89. The larger issue is whether Fluke’s testimony is accurate or exaggerated. As has been pointed out elsewhere, you can get birth control pills at Wal-Mart for $4 a month, or $10 for a 90-day supply. That’s just over $40 a year. So were Fluke’s pills gold-plated?

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (1d7ca4) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:29 am

  90. Newt on Fluke/Limbaugh.

    Yes.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:30 am

  91. of course, it’s exaggerated. Far lefties lie and they do so shamelessly.

    She could have had a diamond in da back… sun-roof top and been diggin’ the scene with a gangsta lean with what she contended…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:33 am

  92. ==If he was aware of his company advertising with Limbaugh, maybe he saw it as a sop to illustrate his “progressive” humanity, compassion and tolerance. Probably more likely his people in the advertising department were throwing ad dollars around like darts at a cork board, seeing whatever good might end up sticking, where ever and whenever==

    Or maybe the long plan has always been to dramatically and strategically “withdraw” his company’s adverts from Limbaugh when the political timing was right.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:34 am

  93. She’s obviously an activist, and perhaps some of the rest of her story is problematic.

    But you elide the most important aspect of this. At the time he called her a slut and a prostitute, Rush Limbaugh apparently believed she was what the media portrayed her to be — a student speaking out on behalf of other students who believe a certain policy should be changed.
    Period.
    He called her a slut and a prostitute etc. on that belief, but with some curious context, which I’ll now mention with a smile:
    The funniest part of all of this is that Limbaugh’s comments — “slut” and “prostitute” and calling for her to publish her personal porn videos — apparently stem from his astoundingly ignorant misunderstanding of the use of the pill, e.g. hormonal contraception.
    Limbaugh’s comments indicated a belief that a woman or girl takes such a pill either after or before after having sex. Not just a daily regimen, sex or not. The more sex this gal had, Limbaugh figured, the more it would cost those of us subsidizing her activity through insurance premiums.
    It’s the Limbaugh way. Shoot from the lip.
    Recall just a few months ago when he blasted the Obama Administration for sending in military advisers to help battle the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda. Limbaugh bellowed on the air that they were good Christians battling Muslims, and how dare the Muslim-loving Obama go against them.
    Then Limbaugh got yet another of those Emily Latella moments when he got schooled — the LRA is basically a bunch of marauding criminals slaughtering and maiming innocents.
    Oh, never mind.

    Comment by Larry Reilly (e0fb3f) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:38 am

  94. lawry writhing… incoming douchebag alert!

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:39 am

  95. Go ahead and play kissy-face with these guys, and see what it gets you.

    It’s going to get you the same thing it’s gotten you for generations: an ever increasing, ever more intrusive, ever more totalitarian, and ever more expensive government.

    I, OTOH, am going to fight that every which way I can, and that includes calling people like Fluke exactly what they are: liars, would be thieves, parasites on society, and, yes, sluts who claims to need $1,000 a year worth of birth control.

    She must spend pretty much all her time on her back with her legs wide open, if she’s running up those kind of condom bills.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:43 am

  96. Remind us again, Larry, what elected office Rush holds or is running for. BTW before you drop in here again have you read Kristen Powers’ quite good essay in the Daily Beast about media misogynists and anti-women poo flingers on both the right and left? You really should read it.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:44 am

  97. “He called her a slut and a prostitute”

    Go figure. She has no visible of support, she’s not married, yet she can afford to attend Cornell and Georgetown, and at the same time claims she’s spending $1,000 a year on contraception.

    Try connecting the dots.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:48 am

  98. No visible MEANS of support, I meant to say.

    I gotta get an editor one of these days.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:54 am

  99. ==It’s going to get you the same thing it’s gotten you for generations: an ever increasing, ever more intrusive, ever more totalitarian, and ever more expensive government==

    So if it’s only about the fighting words where do we magically get the votes? Where do enough newly converted voters come from who are necessary to turn this all around. That’s my question. It’s a real dilemma I think.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 11:55 am

  100. Limbaugh is responsible for his own comments, but you have to love liberals trying to hold all conservatives hostage over what he says.

    Sorry, no dice.

    According to teleprompterjesus last night the delicate daffodils of Georgetown Law School are unable to engage in any family planning unless contraception is on the menu of services offered by their student health plan.

    When will liberals stop infantilizing women?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:02 pm

  101. David Gregory absolutely turns my stomach, daley.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:04 pm

  102. carbonite is gayer than putin in a pirate shirt

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:08 pm

  103. When will liberals stop infantilizing women?

    Comment by daleyrocks

    along with most of the rest of their contituency…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:10 pm

  104. Rush is still the top-rated talk radio host in the country. He will pick up new advertisers in a flash, and those that ran away will soon regret the subsequent loss in sales they will undoubtedly experience as a result of their politically correct cowardness.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:24 pm

  105. Larry Reilly:

    Limbaugh’s comments indicated a belief that a woman or girl takes such a pill either after or before after having sex. Not just a daily regimen, sex or not. The more sex this gal had, Limbaugh figured, the more it would cost those of us subsidizing her activity through insurance premiums.

    I don’t know what Limbaugh thought but birth control pills can be taken regularly and also taken in higher doses as an emergency contraceptive. Since birth control pills are 92%-99% effective, a woman who is especially reluctant to get pregnant or is otherwise concerned about effectiveness (such as someone taking antibiotics or other medications, or who missed one or more doses) might decide to do both … in which case she would need substantially more birth control pills if she had frequent sex.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:34 pm

  106. “So if it’s only about the fighting words where do we magically get the votes?”

    Hey, if you see this as a battle between an ever more totalitarian welfare state vs. individual freedom (which is how I see it), you’ve been playing nice…and losing at the ballot box for decades.

    So, what’s the point of playing nice with people who don’t deserve it, if you’re going to lose anyway?

    And, if you want my opinion…I don’t think we have a chance in hell of winning at the ballot box, anyway. Not over the long run.

    If you think guys like Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich are going to get rid of our giant, bloated, thieving, tyrannical government…you’re living in a dream world.

    I think we have about as much chance of winning through existing political institutions as the American colonialists had back in 1775…which is zippo.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:40 pm

  107. Sorry. I wrote #103 before reading Pious Agnostic’s comments above. That’s what I get for sleeping once in awhile!

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:42 pm

  108. 51. don’t you think he maybe should have used his little blue pencil and crossed-out the word “slut?”

    – You’re implying that Rush actually thought out the words he was going to say before he said them. Doubtful.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:47 pm

  109. “It’s the Limbaugh way. Shoot from the lip.”

    Well, that’s kind of what talk show hosts do, Larry. And, consequently the often get things wrong.

    But, in this particular case, Limbaugh pretty much nailed it.

    If you’re not married and you’re spending $1,000 per year on birth control, you’re pretty much for sure, a pro.

    Either that, or Ms. Fluke is a liar.

    Also, if you’re demanding that other people pay you to have sex, that pretty much makes you a prostitute, and a particularly dishonest one at that, since the people she wants to pay, aren’t the ones securing some sort of a benefit from her sexual activities.

    I have a lot more respect for free market style prostitutes, then I have for a socialist cockroach of a whore, like her.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:51 pm

  110. So not the purity test has been refined. Not only do I have to believe every word uttered by the lips of Limbaugh, but I now need to believe that Fluke is literally a prostitute.

    Wow.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:55 pm

  111. Sorry. now the purity test

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:55 pm

  112. Thanks Dave Surls @ 12:40. I did want your opinion and I was not looking for a fight. Now I do better understand where you are coming from.

    It is pretty obvious that one’s personal viewpoint and strategy during an election would be significantly different if one thinks there is a good chance of winning (or at least staunching the bleeding) in contrast to the strategy of someone such as yourself who apparently believes it’s all already a lost cause.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:56 pm

  113. We are toast. Concentrate on House and Senate.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 12:59 pm

  114. If he was aware of his company advertising with Limbaugh, maybe he saw it as a sop to illustrate his “progressive” humanity, compassion and tolerance. Probably more likely his people in the advertising department were throwing ad dollars around like darts at a cork board, seeing whatever good might end up sticking, where ever and whenever.
    Comment by Mark — 3/4/2012 @ 11:27 am

    – Mark, Carbonite advertised on Rush’s show, and continues to advertise on several other conservative talk radio shows for two reasons: 1) high ratings, which equals many potential customers; and, 2) demographic studies that show radio listeners to be computer users. The reasons you came up with are . . . frankly, silly.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:02 pm

  115. “but I now need to believe that Fluke is literally a prostitute.”

    Believe anything you want.

    But, if you believe anyone spends a thousand dollars per annum on birth control, except for prostitutes…you’re daft.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:03 pm

  116. We are NOT “toast”! Lest your defeatism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, that is.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:04 pm

  117. Oh, for the love of….

    Can we stipulate that the $1000 per year figure is probably a rhetorical flourish at best and an outright lie at worst, and that any and all arguments that follow from pretending to believe that it is an accurate figure are frivolous?

    Any and all arguments, including 1) that young women’s health is suffering due to this huge sum; and 2) that anyone who requires this many condoms must be a professional sex worker.

    It’s stupid to pretend that this number means anything. As a starting point for an argument, it’s idiotic. Stop pretending that anyone takes it seriously.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:12 pm

  118. “I was not looking for a fight.”

    I’m looking for a fight, but not with folks like yourself.

    I’m looking for a fight with people like Fluke and her backers. People that think I ought to be forced, at gunpoint, to pay for their private expenses.

    Only, I don’t think it’s a fight that’s going to be won through elections. It’s going to take people defying the government,tossing the tea in the harbor, and eventually it’s going to take violence…just like in 1775 or 1861.

    At this point the totalitarian, redistributionist welfare state is every bit as entrenched as the British monarchy or slavery were, and it ain’t going without a fight. And, I mean a physical fight.

    Sad, but true.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:14 pm

  119. “Can we stipulate that…”

    …Fluke is a stone cold liar, amongst other things?

    Sure. No problem. Dishonesty and would be thievery often go hand in hand.

    Consider it so stipulated.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:16 pm

  120. …Fluke is a stone cold liar, amongst other things?

    Sure. No problem. Dishonesty and would be thievery often go hand in hand.

    Consider it so stipulated.

    Great! And now that Rush also sees that it’s unwise to deviate from this line of argument, we’re all in agreement.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:23 pm

  121. We are NOT “toast”! Lest your defeatism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, that is.

    Comment by Icy

    Woe is them… sheesh.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:23 pm

  122. We are toast. Concentrate on House and Senate.

    Must be jelly, cuz jam don’t quake like that.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:25 pm

  123. Surls, she is a feminist activist. She is NOT saying that she literally needs lots of contraception for herself. This is all about the left’s unending desire for the government to — in the interest of their totally skewed, warped, and unrealistic view of what constitutes “fairness” and “equality” — decide who gets what, and how when & where they will get it.

    That she will unabashedly and unashamedly LIE in order to advance her Socialist agenda is what Rush should have focused on. Instead of “slut” he should have said “LIAR”; instead of “prostitute” he should have said “leftist liar”. She absolutely deserves to be soundly criticized, but the way in which Rush chose to do it . . . he effed up, and now the focus is on his reaction rather than on the outrageous things that SHE said.

    And for everyone spouting this “the MSM laid a trap” silliness, just remember that Rush was the dumb bunny with a self-control problem that stepped into it. I personally listen to Rush almost every day, but I won’t hesitate to say that he screwed up on this one. Rush and his show will recover from this just fine, but “the brand” has been damaged by this.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:25 pm

  124. we might could be toast, given the weakness of our candidates, but obama is a weak-ass little bitch himself

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:26 pm

  125. Icy gets it. Thanks for expressing it so well.

    Comment by Pious Agnostic (149706) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:28 pm

  126. You are wise, Icy. But there is a sadness to your wisdom.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:38 pm

  127. “She is NOT saying that she literally needs lots of contraception for herself.”

    So, she’s just a mouthpiece for other sluts, who want their sluttery paid forby others, by law?

    How noble of her.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:38 pm

  128. This is about presenting a an untruth as truth. This about purposely creating a narrative and throwing out a straw man. Because it works.

    From Fluke’s testimony,

    Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy. One told us of how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn’t covered, and had to walk away because she couldn’t afford it. Students like her have no choice but to go without contraception.

    This patently untrue. A lie. The correct and truthful statement is,

    Students like her have no choice but to go without contraception or go without sex.

    There is not only one choice that can be made. They are not without choice(s). And isn’t that what we women always scream for: CHOICE?

    They can abstain, they can wait until they find a partner who can afford a condom, they can wait until they are gainfully employed and buy their own contraception. These are choices. Yet everyone keeps falling for the lie.

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:44 pm

  129. how much wood could a wood slut slut if a wood slut could slut wood?

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:45 pm

  130. There is not only one choice that can be made. They are not without choice(s). And isn’t that what we women always scream for: CHOICE?

    In Fluke’s case, it’s probably a cry for “MORE HOSE!”… okay, that wasn’t helpful.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (b3edb7) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:48 pm

  131. “Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.”

    Like I said…if you’re a prostitute.

    Several condoms a day, plus the oddd abortion…it starts adding up.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:10 pm

  132. Comment by Dave Surls — 3/4/2012 @ 11:03 am

    She’s not married, but she claims to be spending $1,000 per year on birth control.

    “She [Fluke] claimed that over the three years as a law student, birth control would cost an estimated $3,000.”–wiki

    She was not claiming to be spending that much money herself. She was maybe not even saying people she knew were spending that. She cam up with, or more accurately the group she was working for came up with, a (exaggerated as much as possible but justified by some calculation) estimate of what it would cost for birth control pills.

    They managed to get this figure into the news, while keeping their calculations out of the news.

    I still don’t know what their calculation was. But you can be sure there was something – just enough to prevent her from being accused of making up a number.

    This kind of thing is quite common with lobbyists.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (bbe5c1) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:19 pm

  133. “Go figure. She has no visible of support, she’s not married, yet she can afford to attend Cornell and Georgetown, and at the same time claims she’s spending $1,000 a year on contraception.”

    She didn’t claim to spend a $1000 a year on contraception. Reread her statement. Rush spent 3 days slinging mud and defaming her and now he’s apologizing to the people who pay him.

    Comment by N0Bama (826205) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:20 pm

  134. The lie about her age, while caught maybe in an interview or two and some blogs, did not make it into the major media, and the head of Carbonite evidently doesn’t know it.

    She is/was not aged 23, about the minimum age should she could be – the age she would be if she had gone straight out of college into law school – but 29 or 30 years old.

    It’s not 100% clear from what I read but it seems like the organization she was with, which may be based in California, was paying her tuition. She may have picked Georgetown because she could combine studies with some “womens’ rights” activism.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (bbe5c1) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:28 pm

  135. she needs the bone

    so pay up

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:28 pm

  136. If only we had some kind of organization that asked questions, and then explained what they saw;

    http://minx.cc/?post=327190

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:30 pm

  137. Nobama is a specious concern troll.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 2:51 pm

  138. “She didn’t claim to spend a $1000 a year on contraception.”

    Oh yeah?

    “Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during
    law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships,
    that’s practically an entire summer’s salary.”–Sandra Fluke

    Sounds like she’s talking about herself to me.

    Except, not for a second do I believe her.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:08 pm

  139. “Sounds like she’s talking about herself to me.”

    The problem though, is that’s not what the words she used mean.

    Comment by N0Bama (518b93) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:23 pm

  140. She took her secprogg ideals to Georgetown wi the intention of trying to get the Church to bend to her whims.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:27 pm

  141. Judge Bean was a con-man but he was a real man at a time when not being a real man in Texas made you crowbait. Rush Limbaugh is only a con-man at a time when talking heads have replaced men of value.

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:27 pm

  142. “Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during
    law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships,
    that’s practically an entire summer’s salary.”–Sandra Fluke

    Like me – clearly excluding herself from the group she is speaking of. Bugger off, troll.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:29 pm

  143. “The problem though, is that’s not what the words she used mean.”

    I must be missing out on why she would be bringing herself into the equation, if she’s not part of the equation.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:30 pm

  144. Even at her age thirty, the girl could be my daughter. I might beat her up were she to hold a gun on me, or directly threaten somebody I love, but not for this nonsense.

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:31 pm

  145. “I must be missing out on why she would be bringing herself into the equation, if she’s not part of the equation.”

    She says “like me” to the part about pay. But says what “can” cost 1000 a year in general. This is not hard for people to understand.

    Comment by N0Bama (518b93) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:34 pm

  146. This is not hard to understand. Nobama has commented here under a seemingly endless number of names.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:38 pm

  147. Wondering if Kirsten Powers will be “Juaned” for suggesting that there are plenty of misogynistic pigs on the left? Fox Nation has pix of Chrissie “I squat to pee/Obama gives me a thrill up my leg” Matthews and Bill “Palin is a c***/911 terrorists were courageous” Maher that accompany the story. Six degrees of separation- Kirtsen dated Anthony Wiener. Of course Ann Coulter dated Bill Maher. So neither had taste for kaka.
    Someone over at Belmont Club was suggesting rumors of college video dirt on Urkel will force his resignation. Would that mean Slow Joe taking over and the Hildebeast running in for Potus in the fall?

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    Comment by Calypso Louie Farrakhan (d32e4c) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:45 pm

  148. I gotta get an editor one of these days.
    Comment by Dave Surls — 3/4/2012 @ 11:54 am

    – I work cheap: a box of Cheez-its & some Diet Mountain Dew and I’m good.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:46 pm

  149. New Cialis or Viagra ads should have in their disclaimer “if you have an erection for more than 4 hours, call a Georgetown Law student”

    [note: fished from spam filter. --Stashiu]

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:51 pm

  150. New Ci@lis and Vi@gra ads should include in their disclaimer ” for erections lasting longer than 4 hours, please contact a Georgetown Law student”.

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:55 pm

  151. I get it it’s cause of how they crave penis

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 3:57 pm

  152. So, she’s just a mouthpiece for other sluts, who want their sluttery paid forby others, by law? How noble of her.
    Comment by Dave Surls — 3/4/2012 @ 1:38 pm

    – NOW you’re on the right track.

    [And yes, typing "now" in all caps was a pun.]

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:00 pm

  153. Why do you want to deny free rubbers to Sandra?

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:09 pm

  154. “This is not hard for people to understand.”

    Yeah, it’s hard to understand why she would mention herself, unless she was trying to make it sound like she is one of the people affected by the policies she objects to.

    But, since her claim is total nonsense, who knows what she’s trying to convey?

    It’s always hard to figure out what liars actually mean.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:10 pm

  155. I might beat her up were she to hold a gun on me, or directly threaten somebody I love

    – Or if she got in your face in a public sidewalk; don’t forget that one!

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:11 pm

  156. or if she kicked my dog

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:11 pm

  157. also if she had this insipid cow look on her face when I tried to explain how ass-raped our little country is financially

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:12 pm

  158. I must be missing out on why she would be bringing herself into the equation, if she’s not part of the equation.
    Comment by Dave Surls — 3/4/2012 @ 3:30 pm

    – She IS saying that she’s part of the equation. What she is NOT saying is that she personally has a lot of sex. She’s just inflating the cost of contraception in a pathetic bid to portray the “prohibitive” cost of birth control as outweighing the dictates of conscience on the part of the institution.

    IOW, she isn’t a f***ing slut, she’s a f***ing LIAR.

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:18 pm

  159. “NOW you’re on the right track.”

    Well, none of us actually believed her crock of crap about forking out a grand a year on birth control. We’re just making fun of her, as if it actually WAS true.

    In point of fact, I doubt if she spends any money on birth control.

    I liked the pun, though.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:25 pm

  160. she’s certainly not saying she DOESN’T love love love to have gobs and gobs of sex after midnight in cars parked in the Food 4 Less loading zone with random teen guys she meets online

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:28 pm

  161. If nothing else Sandra’s fame and successes in the nation’s capitol should put to rest once and for all any worried parent’s concerns about what their ambitious young-un can accomplish with a “gender and sexuality studies” degree.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:35 pm

  162. Her folks prolly wanted her to go into something stupid like engineering. Ha.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:37 pm

  163. “I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraception coverage in its student health plan. Just as we students have faced financial, emotional, and medical burdens as a
    result…”–More Flukey stuff

    She sure makes it sound like she’s one of the people directly affected by the horrors of the no free contraception policy.

    When she follows that up with a claim that students are forking out a grand a year to buy bulk lots of condoms, naturally I assume she’s one of them, out there buying up Trojans, like they’re going out of style, and renting forklifts to move them all.

    Except…I don’t believe her.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:38 pm

  164. What we has here is a Canadian money-grubbing, dope-addict saying nasty things about an American girl for what she said. If a fat, adulterous, drug addict don’t like what our genuine American daughters say, he should get his fat ass back to Canada.

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:41 pm

  165. They don’t have freedom of speech, there.

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:41 pm

  166. “I work cheap: a box of Cheez-its & some Diet Mountain Dew and I’m good.”

    Yeah, but I want an editor with good taste.

    ;)

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:43 pm

  167. Frum is the Canadian Mr. Limbaugh I think is American like those people what go to nascar and walmart

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:43 pm

  168. “If nothing else Sandra’s fame and successes in the nation’s capitol should put to rest once and for all any worried parent’s concerns about what their ambitious young-un can accomplish with a “gender and sexuality studies” degree.”

    Yeah, it’s amazing how far you can go, without ever doing anything productive, if you just hook up with the Democrats, and their vast welfare state.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:46 pm

  169. Thanks for keeping it light, happyfeet, but if calling O’Keefe a felon, even by implication, is slander, what is it calling a woman you don’t even know a prostitute?

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:47 pm

  170. it’s wrong Mr. nk but if it helps keep a bright spotlight on the controversial issue of contraception then in the end it can only help the Republican Party in November

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:48 pm

  171. Nom, he’s the Canadian David Brooks, as outlined above, always trite, reductionist and often wrong,

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:49 pm

  172. Contraception should not be controversial. We are not 1,000 B.C. Jews. Christ talked about irressponsible sex. St. Paul about male and female enslavery for sexual purposes. Neither about having sex only when you want to have a baby. Who cares what closeted and latent homosexuals, i.e., Catholic priests and bishops, say?

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:54 pm

  173. I may have missed it. Have any of Ms Fluke’s former or current paramours come forward to support her? Or been ferreted out by the media?

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:56 pm

  174. You’re not alone. Republican focus groups at the beginning of the campaign showed that a LOT of people don’t think contraception should be controversial.

    This is about winning hearts and minds.

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:57 pm

  175. That only happens to the likes of Carrie Prejean,
    or else they just make it up,

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 4:58 pm

  176. Well look what we have here;

    http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2012/03/carbonite-head-david-friend-a-move-on-supporter.html#comments

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:03 pm

  177. In days of old
    When men were bold
    And rubbers were’t invented;
    They tied a sock around their cock
    And babies were prevented.

    Comment by nk (dec503) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:20 pm

  178. feel like a Yardbird
    over under sideways down
    ain’t misbehavin’

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (bcfd1c) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:27 pm

  179. “Contraception should not be controversial.”

    Well, it’s not. It’s the idea that government should force person A to pay for person B’s birth control expense that’s controversial.

    That’s stealing, pure and simple. And, I reckon stealing ought to be controversial.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:30 pm

  180. Only if it’s done without a government imprimatur.

    Comment by AD-RtR/OS! (abb459) — 3/4/2012 @ 5:34 pm

  181. “Only if it’s done without a government imprimatur.”

    Sadly, theft by government is so common now…it’s not really controversial. it’s just a fact of life.

    But, calling a worthless parasite who advocates theft by government a “slut” is controversial.

    Luckily, I don’t mind controversy. As a matter of fact, i kinda enjoy stirring things up. Especially, if it makes socialist thieves stroke out.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:21 pm

  182. “But, calling a worthless parasite who advocates theft by government a “slut” is controversial.”

    Dave – Not if it’s done by the left. Barack Obama did not call Laura Ingraham to find out if she was okay after Ed Schultz called her a slut.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:31 pm

  183. We need to let Sandra and other contraception addicts know that we’ve heard their cries for help.

    Remember: love the sinner, hate the sin.

    Just because someone does slutty things doesn’t mean they’re a slut. They’re just trying to fill a hole in their lives.

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:49 pm

  184. President Obama did not call Sarah Palin after Bill Maher called her a “c***”… but perhaps that’s because President Obama agreed that it was just a comedian being edgy,

    It’s that fearlessness — he [Maher] acknowledged that some people would probably be uncomfortable with some of his remarks about religion, not to mention calling Sarah Palin a “cunt” (“there’s just no other word for her”) — that makes Maher the most dangerous person in comedy.

    And this about a woman who was a sitting governor and running for vice president. Shouldn’t that supersede a 3rd year college student in terms of our President showing support to?

    But that’s different… always.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    Comment by Dana (4eca6e) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:54 pm

  185. Oh Mr Feets– a double entendre! How clever.

    Comment by elissa (097996) — 3/4/2012 @ 6:58 pm

  186. One was reminded on Hot Air, that the Dems invited
    Stephen Colbert, to testify, it’s just as much a sham as in the 80s, when they brought Jessica Lange
    and Meryl Streep to testify about things.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:00 pm

  187. leggo of my eggo

    Comment by pdbuttons (526671) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:08 pm

  188. http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/04/a-quick-note-to-everyone-who-howled-at-me-for-criticizing-david-lettermans-comments-on-sarah-palin-and-her-daughters-and-who-are-now-scolding-rush-limbaugh/

    In the comments, self awareness is not some one’s strong suit;

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:19 pm

  189. All a tempest in a teapot. I’m sure Urkel chastised Bill Maher for calling Palin a c**t before taking his million dollar donation. The important news now is that many really stupid American Jews will vote for O again since he insists that HE has Israel’s back. BUT Bibi better not attack Iran before the US election.

    Comment by Calypso Louie Farrakhan (d32e4c) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:27 pm

  190. ‘Is this thing on;

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/04/obama-claims-bush-administration-dropped-the-ball-on-iran/

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:32 pm

  191. Barry Bonds must wonder why its so easy for some people to get away with telling Congress a bunch of “facts”.

    Comment by MayBee (081489) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:36 pm

  192. buttons!!

    Comment by happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:36 pm

  193. Have any of Ms Fluke’s former or current paramours come forward to support her?

    – Given her career choice and list of “accomplishments” I’m gonna guess that it’s an extremely short list. And what’s her selling point for future ‘paramours’? “Yeah, she’s a radical militant feminist ballbuster, but at least she’s on the pill!”

    Comment by Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:37 pm

  194. “Barack Obama did not call Laura Ingraham to find out if she was okay after Ed Schultz called her a slut.”

    Yeah, Ed did say that, and Laura wasn’t even moaning about her need for government paid for contraceptives, so who knows what the “slut” thing was all about.

    I think it’s mostly about Ed being a couple of cans short of a six pack.

    As for Obambi’s hypocrisy…color me surprised.

    Not.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:37 pm

  195. He threatened to burn down the studio, if he didn’t get the anchor slot during the primaries, it’s a little more than that.

    Comment by narciso (87e966) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:44 pm

  196. “It’s the idea that government should force person A to pay for person B’s birth control expense that’s controversial.”

    And the slut prostitute sluttyness oh no.

    Comment by N0Bama (826205) — 3/4/2012 @ 7:52 pm

  197. “And the slut prostitute sluttyness oh no.”

    Sure, pal. As if leftards had any moral problem with promiscuity or adultery.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:15 pm

  198. A picture of Sandra Fluke’s character.

    Comment by Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/4/2012 @ 10:43 pm

  199. Rush relied on this article:

    http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/sex-crazed-co-eds-going-broke-buying-birth-control-student-tells-pelosi-hearing

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/5/2012 @ 1:56 pm

  200. Eugene Volokh saw what was wrong with this right away (Media Matters linked to him but I can’t seem to find it directly on the website)

    http://volokh.com/2012/03/01/how-charming/

    One of the problems was taht Rush limbaugh thought she was actually testifying about herself.

    He relied entirely on the CNS article. I’ve noticed a lot of relying on third parties.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/5/2012 @ 2:43 pm

  201. Rush Limbaugh mentioned CNS on his show today, which is how I knew to look for it. He didn’t explain CNS had it wrong.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/5/2012 @ 2:44 pm

  202. Like me clearly referred to not her

    Comment by JD (ddebbb) — 3/5/2012 @ 2:49 pm

  203. “One of the problems was taht Rush limbaugh thought she was actually testifying about herself.”

    Well, that’s probably because, in her testimony, she repeatedly included herself amongst the poor oppressed class of people who are spending a grand a year on contraceptives (not), and need to have it paid for by other people, on account of they’re so poor; although not so poor that they can’t afford to pay the six figure tuition expense that one pays to go through Georgetown’s law program.

    Comment by Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/5/2012 @ 9:47 pm

  204. Rush Limbaugh in his apology on the radio show March 5 said he should have talked about the whole story of how Sandra Lynn was substituted.

    The reason he didn’t do that, was that he didn’t know it and he didn’t investigate the story.

    Rush Limbaugh basically repeated what CNS News had said. He thinks if he says somethinbg that somebody already said it’s safe. He doesn’t wnat to admit he gets lots of his material from other places and he doesn’t do all that original Internet research himself, but he relies on aggregatrs. Anyone who reads others things can see it happens. It’s not quite plagiarism.

    Now the Democrats are interested in making it asppear that Rush Limbaugh came up with the idea himself. It’s not true. But it is an important lie to the Democrats. Even though Rush Limbaugh barely mentioned CNS on his show ( it caused Media Matters to put up a whole thing as to how this was not the fault of CNS but of Rush Limbaugh.

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203050006

    Their headline goes:

    Limbaugh’s Justification For Attacking Fluke Is Nonsense….

    For support, Limbaugh has referenced a CNS News blog post by CNS communications director Craig Bannister that’s headlined “Sex-Crazed Co-Eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control, Student Tells Pelosi Hearing Touting Freebie Mandate.” …

    And then it goes on as to how that post is all nonsense. Of couyrse that should clear Limbaugh of a lot of the blame, but they don’t want to do that.

    Rush Limbaugh was not saying on March 5 that his attack had been justified. he did mentioned he had gotten his information from CNS.

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/05/why_i_apologized_to_sandra_fluke

    The story at the Cybercast News Service characterized a portion of her testimony as sounding like (based on her own financial figures) she was engaging in sexual activity so often she couldn’t afford it. I focused on that because it was simple trying to persuade people, change people’s minds.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/6/2012 @ 11:34 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4469 secs.