Rush Limbaugh and the Year of the Squirrel
[Posted by Karl]
It seems like most of the mediasphere cannot stop talking about Rush Limbaugh’s insult of political operative Sandra Fluke. I cannot stop thinking of Up‘s Dug the Dog:
While I like Up, I have seen this version of the movie before:
At Hot Air, Ed Morrissey and Allahpundit think they have a disagreement over the point of the anti-Rush Limbaugh campaign being waged by Obama Administration, labor unions and the establishment media. Morrissey calls it a deliberate strategy to cover up the Democrats’ economic incompetence and massively ineffective spending programs. Allahpundit that “the Democrats are really trying to do is rebrand the GOP.” Morrissey thinks any rebranding is ”secondary.”
The reality is that the focus on Limbaugh is all of those things. The GOP is a minority party with no single titular leader at the moment. Obama’s Alinskyite politics require that the Left “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” The folks running this effort thus go to the influential – yet polarizing — figure of Rush Limbaugh. Doing so necessarily promotes him, with the hope of forcing Republicans to either downplay Limbaugh (driving a wedge between them and their conservative base) or defend him (thereby making a polarizing figure more the face of the GOP). It is no surprise to learn that James Carville and Paul Begala are part of this effort, as it is a variation of the Clinton Administration’s effort to make Newt Gingrich Bob Dole’s running mate in 1996. The people behind this campaign do not see it as an “either-or” proposition; they see it as a “win-win” proposition.
Morrissey is also correct in asserting that it keeps the GOP on defense, though this is largely because GOP functionaries are only now figuring out that the attack on Limbaugh can be used to paint the Democrats as not keeping their eye on the economy, or trying to distract from the poor reception the Democrats’ agenda is getting in the financial markets. The GOP might eventually figure out that they could have used the media’s uncritical parroting of the Left’s campaign against the media, which would quickly stop them from pursuing GOP functionaries about it.
Here we are again, with the WaPo proclaiming Republicans can no longer avoid their “Rush Limbaugh problem,” paired with the obligatory “question raising” coverage in its news coverage. And tiresome concern troll Conor Friedersdorf again demands that the folks at National Review denounce Rush. Meanwhile, Friedersdorf will politely disagree with his mentor Andrew Sullivan on Trig Trutherism and Sullivan’s baseless, ghoulish attempt to blame Sarah Palin for the Gabrielle Giffords shooting without indignantly admitting that Sullivan’s unhinged bile corrodes the public discourse in the same way Friedersdorf believes Rush does. It is all very transparent, but the GOP and its supposed leaders bite anyway. Then again, no one ever accused the GOP of being the Smart Party.
Barack Obama’s campaign to convince voters that “America is back” is a dud, so they want everyone to look at the squirrel. When the media comes asking about Limbaugh, the Republican politician’s response ought to be: “I want to discuss the issues Americans actually care about — don’t you?”
–Karl
Ding!
Karl (6f7ecd) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:53 amExcellent post, Karl.
Clonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:02 amThat does it. I will not write in Rush in my primary ballot due to electability concerns.
This is transparent, of course. They have this notion that they can define the GOP as the most outspoken radio host. It’s obviously a position all the other conservative radio woulds would love to be in.
There is something deeply irritating about this lady who has such privilege as to attend a T-14 law school and has her hand out for free stuff she doesn’t really need.
I think the most interesting thing about the democrats political outlook these days is that they actually chose this. They actually think this is the least bad hill to die on.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:04 amdon’t play the stupid game cause I’m a different kinda squirrel
Miss Sandra if you're Nasty (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:07 amSpot on!
Frank (167bb8) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:08 am“I want to discuss the issues Americans actually care about — don’t you?”
We have to be relentless… dogged… determined… and tenacious as we do this. Obama, and the Democrats in Congress, do not have a record of success, and so they will do whatever they can – as will their mainstream media stenographers – to try to steer the national conversation using the “squirrel strategy”.
Clonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:09 am“America is back” is even gayer than what Putin said when I told him this Sandra Fluke had consumed $3000 worth of penis
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:10 amas to Socialist/activist/li’l Ms. Roundheels Fluke… I enjoyed this short and sweet read:
“When did Georgetown Law start admitting Kardashians?”
http://thecollegeconservative.com/2012/03/02/sandra-fluke-does-not-speak-for-me/
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:14 amYes, she’s a squirrel. Look, Sandra Fluke is a 30 year old professional “women’s rights” activist” posing/being sold as a random 23 year old starving college girl and trotted out by the administration for a sympathetic and quite fake media dog and pony show. Perhaps if Rush had said *that*–instead of calling her a slut it would have been more helpful and might have actually accomplished something?
But no. Rush went there. Regardless of the clearly nefarious Dem strategies and games that have been highlighted by Allah P. and Ed M., Rush played right into the left’s hand on this and thereby once again became the story himself. I’m getting really sick of the unforced errors.
elissa (097996) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:17 amI really hate that our discourse as a country is like this.
I know, I know, that makes folks react that I’m fruity mc gay gay and too sensitive, but I really am disappointed that our culture is such that this is how we reply to a ridiculous argument on Capitol Hill (if not actually in the hearing itself).
She is no Joe the Plumber… her trip to the spotlight was premeditated and she’s supposedly political active and sophisticated. But still, I don’t like the fact that if I went up to the Hill and gave an argument that many didn’t like, some ridiculous ugliness would be the response.
I don’t think politics was always like this, either. It’s always been heated and full of personal attacks, but I don’t think this is how this woman would have been treated twenty, forty, 100 years ago.
She’s wrong, not a slut.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:19 amFor anyone who may not know what I am referring to above, check out Gateway Pundit for several recent posts giving the scoop on the lovely and talented Ms Fluke.
elissa (097996) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:22 am“I’m getting really sick of the unforced errors.”
Bungles to Booter to Buckner.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:23 am“I’m fruity mc gay gay and too sensitive”
seems unduly harsh.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:24 am“She’s wrong,
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:27 amnot a slut”and she’s an operative who is letting herself be used in a cynical attempt to lead the national political conversation off course and down a rabbit trail.“IN A DEMOCRACY, standards of civil discourse are as important as they are indefinable. Yet wherever one draws the line, Rush Limbaugh’s vile rants against Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke crossed it.”–WAPO
Yeah?
Anyone who suggests that I be forced to pay for some slut’s contraception costs, or go to prison (the usual consequence when it comes to refusing to pay up when the government demands it), is the scum of the earth, and no better than any other thief, which is exactly what Fluke is doing.
I don’t know about y’all, but I’m not inclined to be overly civil when someone tries to rob me.
“What we are saying is that Mr. Limbaugh has abused his unique position within the conservative media to smear and vilify a citizen engaged in the exercise of her First Amendment rights, and in the process he debased a national political discourse that needs no further debasing.”–More WAPO
Spare me. The leftards are proposing that the government exercise unconstitutional powers to force me to pay for their personal hobbies, at the point of a gun. They’re just a pack of lowlife lawbreakers, and robbers, and there’s no point in pretending otherwise.
Andrew Sullivan (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:30 amWhen POTUS takes the time out of his day to step into the fray involving, but not surprisingly, none other than Rush Limbaugh (Titular Head of the Republican Party), to make a supportive phone call to Ms.Fluke, it’s an easy read between the lines.
By calling Fluke and injecting himself into the Limbaugh controversy, Obama sent a message to more than one law student. He was reaching out to young voters and women — two groups whose support he needs in this re-election year. And he was underscoring that the White House, despite bungling its rollout of the birth control policy, sees it as a winning issue and welcomes Obama’s name next to it.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:31 ammove over sandra – gimme the keys!
I wanna try and tame your little red love machine!
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:33 amI’ve posted this all over creation. I claim that this example is in essence no different from Fluke’s plea:
Fred Beloit (4edfb1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:37 amGee I need help. I’ve got this bad masturbation problem, six to eight times a day. Is there a way I can get money from the government so I can buy more paper towels? I’m going broke.
As far as the birth control/health insurance matter itself: when did birth control for sex become a medical condition? I always thought having sex was a personal decision of choice one made.
And isn’t the freedom of choice the very thing that women have caterwauled about for forever?
What is stunning is yet again, women reveal the most basic lessons in life flew right past them: With the freedom to choose, comes responsibility.
Either pay for your own damn contraception or keep your legs closed. That, too, is exercising freedom of choice and it places no burden on anyone else. And isn’t that what we’ve always wanted? The absolute power to choose.
Personal responsibility: It’s a good thing.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:40 amIt rubs the lotion on it’s skin, or else it gets the hose again, Fred.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:40 amIt’s only a choice insofar as you have a right to privacy in the fake Bill of Rights.
What I find particularly disturbing is the idea of someone being sexually active when they are too irresponsible to be able to afford a condom.
That is the path to dependency on food stamps. It is sad that this is the democrat idea of a martyr… someone with their hand out for irresponsible behavior.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:42 amFluke can bump uglies with the Sixth Fleet for all I care, but she needs to keep her hands off my wallet.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:43 amHubs has been referring to it as “Operation Bamboozle” and R’s fell for it, hard.
At least, at this point I have to believe O et minions made a very astute calculation that many R’s would pour oxygen on this story in a way that tended to put conservatives in a bad light.
That is to say, they would be unable to stick to any “not the role of the federal government” but go out into the weeds – a large contingent wouldn’t even make it about mooching (a weak case because students in the group pay the entire premium and don’t get taxpayer or School subsidy of the premium) but would turn it into a slurfest and make it all about contraceptives and sex and say ignorant things about BCPs. They calculated it would be irresistable. I guess they figured right.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:48 amSee, even Haiku thinks he’d be paying for it somehow.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:49 amcontraception is a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be is my understanding, as a Republican
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:52 amDoes it really take a village for a woman to have sex whenever she wants to?
Yep.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:52 amIowahawk’s list of taxpayer funded BasicHumanRights:
* Members Only jackets
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:54 am* Hai Karate musk
* sculptured pile van carpeting
* PBR and Axe body spray
* a slightly shorter/uglier wing man to accompany me to Ladies Nite at Chuck’s Karaoke palace.
Naw… I don’t actually give a rat’s ass what people want to do in private. Perhaps I do at some level, but I know it’s none of my business.
All I’m asking is people take care of this stuff on their own. Don’t force others to get involved and fund it.
And if you’re too poor for a condom, you shouldn’t be having sex until you are able to afford kids without being dependent on food stamps.
Yes, it would certainly be better if everyone waited until marriage and stability, but that concept has been pushed all the way to where someone wants me to fund their sex they can’t afford and at some point this starts to seem like the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:55 amwhen did birth control for sex become a medical condition?
Birth control is not a medical condition.
Pregnancy is a state with risks that contraception mitigates. And beyond that, many women resort to pills for other or for reasons that combine contraception and medical benefit.
Lighter or much less frequent menses, pain, reduction in risk of ovarian cancer and endometrial cancer. They even reduce the /riskseverity of some kinds of infection. They can improve the complexion, eliminate mood swings – being a fertile woman is a natural state, however, ovulation/fertility could be considered analagous to natural processes that are treated in medicine.
All of this is perfectly irrelevent to the question of whether the federal government should order employers or Schools or administrators of group plans to cover specific line items, much less in a specific way.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:58 amSarah W @ 9:48–
elissa (097996) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:00 amVery well analyzed and very well stated (by both you and your Hubs). I agree totally with what you posted.
SarahW, I wasn’t ‘asking’ re medical condition, but rather making a larger point. Dustin got it.
What I find particularly disturbing is the idea of someone being sexually active when they are too irresponsible to be able to afford a condom.
And to carry this thought further, if the man one is contemplating having sex with cannot afford a condom, rest assured he cannot afford to support a baby. It’s not difficult to figure out.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:08 am“What we are saying is that Mr. Limbaugh has abused his unique position within the conservative media to smear and vilify a citizen engaged in the exercise of her First Amendment rights, and in the process he debased a national political discourse that needs no further debasing.”–More WAPO
The Kock brothers could not be reached for comment.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:08 amthe problem is that Team R is all too happy to go along with the idea that the abomination of obamacare’s fascist dictates of what health care plans must include is somehow ameliorated if you carve out a religious exemption for a paltry few
it doesn’t
and it doesn’t help that a good portion of these religious beliefs Team R is so keen to accommodate are stupid
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:10 amYou can’t expect Sullivan’s Kramerica intern to admonish his former boss.
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:11 amMore BasicHumanRights from Iowahawk:
* hair plugs
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:17 am* elevator shoes
* Binaca
iowahawkblog “I don’t know if I can live in a country where a grad student at a $55k/year school can be mocked for demanding free birth control.” #faint
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:18 amShe is no grad student. She is a 30 year old activist. And more importantly, a hater of the 1st Amendment, and a liar.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:21 amSarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, and the ladies on Fox could not be reached for comment.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:22 amFrom the NYT,
The shots are still being called and the debate still being framed by the left. As noted in the post, the response should be, “I want to discuss the issues Americans actually care about — don’t you?” The economy, energy, Obamacare as a whole, etc. The GOP still doesn’t get it.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:26 amWell the Times has been known to be wrong about 14,000 times, so that’s new to them.
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:28 amdidn’t this all start cause Darrell Issa thought it would be a neat idea to make holding hearings about contraception an agenda item?
He’s a deeply stupid person.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:35 amNo, it began when a follower of the partial birth abortion doctor, Kathleen Sibelius, our health commissar wrote that rule in the book.
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:39 amHappyfeet – this all started when Teh Won decided to drop a deuce on the 1st Amendment.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:45 amThe basis of this argument is not, as Sandra Flukes stated, contraception, it is about the First Amendment, something that Flukes, as a third year law student, should be well versed in. Obviously, she is not, which should alarm people as to the quality of lawyers law schools are churning out.
The left understands they cannot win on a religious freedom debate, so they change the dialog to make it one about contraceptives, and reproductive “justice.” Unfortunately for conservatives, the GOP absolutely fails in controlling the dialog.
Now, there has been some question as to Rush’s wisdom in calling Sandra Flukes a “slut.” But I would profer that any woman who claims to spend $1,000/yr on birth control, is obviously in need of more than the occasional condom, which I am sure her partners would be more than happy to furnish. This poses the question; does Sandra Flukes care more about having other participants of a health insurance program picking up the tab for her sexual activities through their premiums than she does in utilizing the free education in law that is being provided to her by the Womens Lawyer’s Association of Los Angeles at a tony law school? And if being able to engage in reckless sex is her primary goal, how does that not make her a slut? The only difference between a slut and a prostitute is that the prostitute is smart enough to get paid for what she does.
What Sandra Flukes does exhibit it the quality of law students that are being churned out at great expense.
As a side note, it should be pointed out that the President felt so badly for this professional agitator/activist (for that is truely what Flukes is) that he called her. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s family still waits for that call from the Oval Office. Not to hard to distinquish Obama’s priorities, is it?
retire05 (a4365a) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:45 amor you could go back to when the catholic bishops were waving their pom poms for obamacare like slutty slutty cheerleaders
Mr. George Will was succinct and also apt on this matter…
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:46 am“Morrissey is also correct in asserting that it keeps the GOP on defense”
Well, I don’t know about the GOP, but I’m always going to be on the defense. All I’m trying to do is to stop people like Fluke and Obambi from robbing me blind to pay for their personal expenses (birth control for sluts, vacations for useless First ladies…whatever). This isn’t a situation where I’m going to be on the offensive. I don’t want anything from these douchebags, except to get their fucking hands off my wallet.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:49 amSame could be said the first time these Obama supporters try to get health care for their elderly parent whose quality of life doesn’t satisfy the requirements on form 234234-Z.
Same could be said of the New Yorkers who supported the tyrant King George when he demanded they pay tax but don’t get to vote.
Ultimately, this is not about the people who have a right. It’s about the right.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:49 amAnd if being able to engage in reckless sex is her primary goal, how does that not make her a slut?
The only answer, clearly, is to make this election a referendum on contraception.
This is the hill.
Now is the time.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:50 amThere’s a good piece over at big journalism about this, where he asks the question, “why doesn’t Obama have to denounce Bill “Sarah palin is a c*nt, and I’m donating a million to obama’s super PAC” Maher?”
Keep shining that light on them.
Alex Jones (c104c9) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:54 amWell in point of fact, that is their priorities, not more MRIs or elder care, in fact any cancer
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:54 amscreening is discouraged according to their protocols, ‘what you don’t know, can kill you’
Oops. Sock off.
Ghost (c104c9) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:55 amUltimately, this is not about the people who have a right. It’s about the right.
Me personally I’d be happy to have the Supreme Court look at it and tell us if in fact any religious freedoms are being violated, and if so they can just strike the HHS provision down and we can all pick a time when Sandra isn’t getting busy and have a tasty pancake breakfast.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:55 amI wanted pancakes for breakfast, but the wife said “oatmeal.”
This is the hill.
Now is the time.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:56 amIt is clear that Obambi and the MFM lapdogs prefer to talk about killing babies, rubbers, social justice, and the Koch brothers as opposed to the economy, jobs, energy, or $4.00 gasoline.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:01 amWho thought the notion, that your property was your own (Kelo) was even debatable, or that free speech should be portioned off (McCain/Feingold) or that
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:03 amthe very C02 we breeze out, should be regulated,
in order not to anger the Mutant Star Goat of global warming.
or the unholy deficit
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:03 amI’m so distraught, I don’t know what to do anymore.
That mean mean Rush Limbaugh called a Kommunist Kunt who wants to take one more of our FREEDOMS away A SLUT!!!
OH THE HUMANITY. While the MOTHERFUXING Obama Marists take one liberty after another, the MEAN MEAN RUSH LIMBAUGH called Sandra Fluke a Slut.
I’d call her worse.
Sit back folks, take your Obama care and eat your fuxing SOYLENT GREEN. Oh, and pay your GOOONION DUES.
Gus (36e9a7) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:04 amMr. narciso it helps to just think of the Supreme Court as an expensive pompous dispute resolution mechanism run by whorish Ivy League twats
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:06 amThat is a bit much, Gus. No?
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:07 amThe only problem I see with our economy is that government spending has gone from around 10% of GDP a hundred years ago to over 40% now.
That’s it. There is no problem, other than the government stealing us blind (so we can have the privilege of paying for some stupid whore’s birth control…at the point of a gun).
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:08 amThe best of which like Scalia and Thomas, were demagogued by Leahy’s staff (Podesta and the other guy now at DOJ) for being too lifeydoodle, Biden was proud of demagoguing Bork and Alito, and he sits at the Naval Observatory, ‘we really dodged
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:09 ama bullet there’
It is clear that Obambi and the MFM lapdogs prefer to talk about killing babies, rubbers, social justice, and the Koch brothers as opposed to the economy, jobs, energy, or $4.00 gasoline.
Comment by JD
As clear as clear can ever be.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:10 am(so we can have the privilege of paying for some stupid whore’s birth control…at the point of a gun)
we’ll all still be paying for birth control whether Georgetown and a handful of other institutions get a hall pass or not
and you can thank a catholic bishop for that
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:12 amIt seems like allowing a dlcktator to run roughshod over the 1st Amendment just because you don’t care for the group whose rights are being trampled on is a dangerous precedent.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:14 am“As a side note, it should be pointed out that the President felt so badly for this professional agitator/activist (for that is truly what Flukes is) that he called her. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s family still waits for that call from the Oval Office. Not to hard to distinguish Obama’s priorities, is it?”
Comment by retire05
Sadly true. If one waits to see common decency in Barack Obama, one will be left waiting for a long, long time.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:14 amIt ain’t a handful, Happyfeet. Nowhere freakin close.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:15 amNo JD. But thanks for playing. No parting gifts for you.
Gus (36e9a7) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:16 amOr consider the families of those officers, whose lives were ended, after he ‘calmed down’ the situation with the Korans,
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:16 amGoing ALLCAPS and dropping the C-bomb is over the line, Gus.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:17 amIt ain’t a handful, Happyfeet. Nowhere freakin close.
Comment by JD
Stop yer braggin’, Hoss.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:18 amMr. JD I’ve said I’m more than eager to put this before the Supreme Court and have them weigh the birth control mandate’s constitutionality – both with respect to my own personal health care plan as well with respect to Sandra’s
but not as a favor to a bunch of corrupt catholic bishops who were perfectly happy to boisterously rape everyone else’s freedoms and jobs and prosperity and only started whining when they got bit in the ass by their socialist bedmates
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:19 amJD thanks for sharing your opinion. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Gus (36e9a7) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:20 amSandra Fluke is the Cindy Sheehan of 2012.
Mr. D (063632) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:22 am“Anyone who suggests that I be forced to pay for some slut’s contraception costs,”
Who do you think pays for student health care in private universities? Do you think perhaps the people paying tuition do?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:26 am30 year old activist. Preszzydenta of the Contraceptive Justice org on campus. And proud to go on national tv and demand that others pay for her dental dams.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:26 amHappyfeet, I had a conversation with a young Conservative Priest at my Parish last Sunday.
Gus (36e9a7) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:27 amI told him that the majority of his fellow Churchmen, willingly bought passage about Obama’s USS SOCIAL JUSTICE. When you get in bed with a Commie, you usually end up in misery or dead. Marxists do not recognize a God. Never have never will. I think for most LIBTARD Catholics, the Social Justice phoniness is to ease their conscience. Same with SECULAR LIBTARDS. They buy a clean conscience with YOUR TAX MONEY and FREEDOMS.
I am neither old nor young but in all my years I have never ever seen such an incompetent, tone-deaf bunch culturally unaware bunch of Republican communicators at high levels such as those we see (or more importantly DONT see) every day.
the worst President in over a century and the GOP is doing its level best to re-elect him becuase their candidates are AA benchwarmers at best, and the communicative and strategic acumen of their top managers (in and out of Congress) is more like a 5 year old than supposedly seasoned pros.
miked (04e8ba) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:27 amwhores, sluts, prostitutes, c*nts???
Perhaps not confirming the left’s suspicion of the right-leaning males issues with women and sex would be a good thing, no?
(Left or right, all men have issues with women and sex, but it only counts on one side). 🙂
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:27 amWhy should a Catholic school be forced to do this, TOTUS?
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:28 amIt ain’t a handful, Happyfeet.
Mr. JD this mandatey thing only really affects people who run catholic institutions who don’t want to provide birth control through their health plans
it’s a very small number of people
the employees of these organizations? Even if their plans received a religious exemption, they’d still be supporting birth control every time they engaged in commerce in Barack Obama’s America.
And that’s assuming any large number of these employees really care either way.
What I know is no small percentage of these employees voted for Obama with the fiery glow of hope and change in their eyes.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:28 amMr. Gus what did the priest say in reply?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:29 amit’s a very small number of people
Wrong, again.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:30 amwell how many people is it?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:32 amCatholic churches. Catholic hospitals. Catholic charities. Catholic high schools. Catholic middle schools. Catholic grade schools. Catholic pre-schools. For starters.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:35 amSandra Fluke is the Cindy Sheehan of 2012.
Comment by Mr. D
very astute of you!
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:36 amyes, but how many people involved in those institutions are on Team Catholic Bishop?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:37 amWomen are saints, angels and better halves.
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:38 amMr. Gus what did the priest say in reply?
Comment by happyfeet
“Wash your mouth out with soap, say three “Hail Mary”s and sin no more, my son.”
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:40 amI don’t think the patients, students, homeless people, teachers, etc. get to dictate to the Church what their doctrine is. When they suddenly become unemployed, thanks to freedom hating leftists, they should thank Barcky.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:42 amRepublicans don’t need better candidates. The GOP’s candidates are better than the Democratic candidates. What the GOP needs is better tacticians and advisers, especially those who know how to deal with the media. Andrew Breitbart was good but Lee Atwater was better.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:43 am“Mr. JD I’ve said I’m more than eager to put this before the Supreme Court…”
Waste of time.
Eventually, we’re going to have to do the same thing the Tea Partiers of the 18th Century did…dump the Tea in the harbor and refuse to cooperate with the authorities when they try to rob us….which is EXACTLY what they are doing.
These guys (liberal socialists) ain’t going to deal, and there’s not a chance in hell the SCOTUS, an arm of our ever more socialist government, is going to do zip about the ever increasing power of the federal government they work for.
People can try putting this stuff in front of the SCOTUS if they want to…but, it ain’t going to work. Not over the long haul.
Remember where you heard it first.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:44 amShe is no Joe the Plumber
— Are you sure? ’cause I heard that she spends a lot of time clearing pipes.
I don’t actually give a rat’s ass what people want to do in private.
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:44 am— If it’s Richard Gere there very well could be a rat’s ass in the mix somewhere.
If Sarah Palin’s family was fair game because she used them as a prop in her campaign, shouldn’t Sandra Fluke’s sex life be fair game also?
Although if Fluke isn’t an employee of Georgetown, her testimony is as illicit as her behavior.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:45 amand it doesn’t help that a good portion of these religious beliefs Team R is so keen to accommodate are stupid
Comment by happyfeet — 3/3/2012 @ 10:10 am
— It is freedom of religion and freedom of conscience that Team R is keen to “accommodate”.
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:49 amI don’t think they get to dictate doctrine either, but the doctrines in question are deeply silly and anachronistic.
And there’s no real good reason for people to get all excited about carving out an exemption for the catholic church what leaves everyone else yoked to this heinous rapey job-killing health care reform this same church enthusiastically supported, and I don’t think Team R should get all excited either.
Not our problem.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:49 amLee Atwater was better.
Tom DeLay was no slouch either.
An odious douche, but no slouch.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:51 amI always thought the First Amendment protects ideas, even “deeply silly and anachronistic” ones. How silly and anachronistic of me.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:52 amWe should introduce legislation mandating all mosques serve applewood smoked thick cut bacon.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:54 amRepublicans don’t need better candidates. The GOP’s candidates are better than the Democratic candidates.
But that’s such a low bar.
Better tacticians and advisers, yes, but it is troubling how unaware being played and manipulated as conservative (??) individuals they are.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:55 am“Catholic churches. Catholic hospitals. Catholic charities. Catholic high schools. Catholic middle schools. Catholic grade schools. Catholic pre-schools. For starters.”
Only the ones that don’t already offer it. For example, the Catholic Health Association supports the Obama admin accommodation
“– Are you sure? ’cause I heard that she spends a lot of time clearing pipes.”
On the radio?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:56 amThe CHA does not speak for the Church. You are not good at this.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:59 amDRJ the courts will decide if first amendment rights were violated. Suits have already been filed asking that the courts render judgement.
Personally I suspect if these bishops get their exemption, they’ll be only all the more inspired to continue in their mission to foist socialism and redistribution on our sad little country.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:02 pmWhy is it so hard for Leftists to be honest?
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:02 pmJD,
Ghost (c104c9) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:03 pmIn Gus’s defense, she does seem to be someone who would fall into the category of Can’t Understand Normal Thinking…
We should introduce legislation mandating all mosques serve applewood smoked thick cut bacon.
Comment by JD
Insh’allah, on the Mother of All Club Sammiches!
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:03 pmDemocrats believe we should be tolerant of other people’s beliefs.
Whenever it furthers the liberal agenda.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:11 pmhundred bucks says Fluke
Colonel Haiku (0b9d52) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:15 pmspeaks in prime-time at this year’s
damn Dem convention
Team R’s proper response is to say hi Catholic Bishops we’re very sorry what happened to you. Yeah it’s a pickle. But we’re more interested in getting rid of this health care law you supported than in tweaking it to make it more palatable.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:19 pm“The CHA does not speak for the Church. You are not good at this.”
There’s more than “the church” as your list indicated.
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:22 pmOn the radio?
Comment by TeleprompterJesus — 3/3/2012 @ 11:56 am
— No, Dimwit. I did not hear it on the radio.
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:25 pmAfter Eugene Robinson’s articles attacking Sarah Palin, WaPo no longer has credibility on this issue.
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:28 pmDana:
I don’t think they’re unaware. Republican candidates are typically more concerned about losing votes than appealing to supporters, which is why some focus on looking PC and not offending PC moderates/the media. But that’s not surprising since the media is very powerful and conservatives are inherently cautious by nature. IMO the best thing about this election is how the not-Romney candidates occasionally seem interested in appealing to their supporters rather than worrying about offending someone.
happyfeet:
There was a time when adults didn’t need a court to tell them which ideas were protected by the First Amendment. Most adults, especially young ones, knew that even silly and anachronistic ideas are protected. Apparently our liberal educational system has squelched that notion.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:28 pmThe Democratic message is very clear. Men have nothing to do with contraception, and pregnancy affects them not at all.
This forms a nice picture of the inner-city dependency they have crafted for generations.
Birth control “is not a male issue, it’s a female issue. I’ve never met a man that had the need for birth control.”
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:28 pmDemocratic Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson
http://thehill.com/video/house/211215-dem-congresswoman-says-ive-never-met-a-man-that-had-the-need-for-birth-control-
None of the entities get to speak on behalf of the Church, not the least of which is the CHA. Find another name, troll.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:33 pmDRJ nobody’s saying the catholic bishops aren’t free to rail against the evils of birth control to their hearts’ delight…
and what’s ironic is that Obama has actually handed them a huge opportunity to put their anti-contraception message in front of millions of people.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:35 pmDemocratic Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson — A REGISTERED NURSE — has never met a man that had the need for birth control.
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:37 pmDRJ nobody’s saying the catholic bishops aren’t free to rail against the evils of birth control to their hearts’ delight…
I don’t recall anyone making the point you are arguing against.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:39 pmYeah happyfeet, but there’s still a problem with your “forget about religious exemptions, focus on repealing the whole damn thing” approach.
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:40 pmMr. JD DRJ said that…
Most adults, especially young ones, knew that even silly and anachronistic ideas are protected.
I’m saying that these ideas are not being threatened, they’re actually being handed ground in which to flourish. Team R is leading America in a national discussion about contraception.
Now it’s up the Team Catholic Bishop to make the most of the opportunity.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:43 pmNow it’s up to Team Catholic Bishop I mean
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:43 pm“– No, Dimwit. I did not hear it on the radio.”
How did you hear it then?
“The Democratic message is very clear. Men have nothing to do with contraception, and pregnancy affects them not at all.”
Myself I think the opposite, pregnancy very much affects men, thus it’s not so bad that they join in subsidizing its coverage.
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:44 pmthere’s still a problem with your “forget about religious exemptions, focus on repealing the whole damn thing” approach
well another approach Mr. Icy is that everyone can just focus on electing a Republican and he can repeal the HHS mandate
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:45 pmTeam R did not pick this fight. Obama did. They are not being denied a right, just being forced tipsy for something against their teachings. Cute.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:48 pm“tellyjesus” what other names have you commented under?
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:49 pm“None of the entities get to speak on behalf of the Church, not the least of which is the CHA.”
But they do have their own freedom of conscience, separate from “the church.”
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:50 pmSo, list for us all of the Catholic organizations that provide coverage for abortions and contraceptives. We will patiently await your asshattery.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:52 pmSo, by requiring health insurers to include contraceptive coverage in their default policies, they are requiring men, even gay men, to pay for birth control if they pay for a health insurance policy.
Or a national discussion of whether insurers should be required to cover contraception. And here is a fact.
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:53 pmJust so we are clear, “tellyJesus” has been repeatedly banned.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:55 pmthe Catholic church worked very hard to force us ALL to pay for their dippy obamacare redistribution scheme
they can suck it
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:56 pmIn sum, this infringement on freedom due to the insurance mandate does nothing to enable people to buy or sell birth control pills. But it does make insurance more expensive for people who do not use birth control.
I agree. Nobody but nobody should be forced by the fascist and morally bankrupt American government to pay into a health care plan what arbitrarily offers birth control coverage.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:59 pm“So, list for us all of the Catholic organizations that provide coverage for abortions and contraceptives.”
I already mentioned the CHA. Then there’s the organizations that work in states that already have the mandate.
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 12:59 pmTellyJesus – thank you for failing to meet the decidedly low expectations we have for you. And for bing a mendoucheous coward. And for showing how much you hate the 1st Amendment.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:07 pmhappyfeet:
Are you saying the Catholic bishops have been hypocrites about ObamaCare, so why should we care about protecting their doctrines?
If so, there will never be a perfect plaintiff — each has faults and drawbacks — but the political sticking point for ObamaCare has always been religion. From the Stupak Amendment to this, why give up on an issue that could be driving up the polls against ObamaCare?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:13 pmMaybe this is an up-and-coming conservative adviser.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:14 pmFrom the Stupak Amendment to this, why give up on an issue that could be driving up the polls against ObamaCare?
I’m saying if the bishops are so so aggrieved by the birth control thing then they need to work with Team R to repeal obamacare. Team R does NOT need to work with Team Socialist Catholic Bishops to make obamacare a happy and wonderful thing for them.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:19 pmhappyfeet:
You’re back to sarcasm now? At first, I thought you believed abortion and contraception are losing social-con issues that you don’t want to talk about and you don’t want GOP candidates to talk about. Then you seemed to do an about face, but now we’re back to this and I think my first thoughts were correct.
Please state your position.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:19 pmI whould like someone to explain to me why any man would vote for a Democrat, after virtually all of them showed their contempt for men by claiming that reproduction is an exclusively female issue.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:19 pmPlease state your position.
I think Obamacare is a wholesale and uncommonly vicious rape of economic freedom against which the sufferings of the poor Catholic bishops who supported it pale into insignificance.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:21 pmWe cross-posted. What if the Catholic issue helped defeat ObamaCare? Are you so aggrieved with the Catholic bishops and their position on abortion and contraception that you don’t want Republicans to even talk about that issue? IOW, are they so distasteful to you that their rights don’t matter?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:22 pmAmphipolis,
Some men will do anything to please the women in their lives.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:23 pmWhat if the Catholic issue helped defeat ObamaCare?
Rubio just offered an amendment to make “the Catholic issue” go bye bye, did he not?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:24 pmI thought we were talking about principles, not politics. If this is only about politics, I assume you think this issue hurts Republicans and helps Democrats. That’s probably true in your community but it isn’t true everywhere.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:28 pmAre you so aggrieved with the Catholic bishops and their position on abortion and contraception that you don’t want Republicans to even talk about that issue?
There is no stopping Republicans from babbling ad nauseum about abortion, and we all know that.
It’s a thing.
But no I don’t want Republicans even talking about contraception. It’s creepy.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:28 pmWell said. A father is an afterthought and the way these issues are labelled “women’s” is annoying.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:30 pmThe inevitable conclusion;
http://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Twitter-@iowahawkblog-government-subsidized-sex1.jpg
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:32 pmAnd Democrats get to talk about this issue, and mandate that insurance companies cover contraception?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:35 pmI would also point out that when these so-called bishops were advocating for their precious job-raping obamacare bill, they were doing so from a position of maximal job security.
Bishops simply don’t never ever get laid off cause of rising health care costs.
They were never the ones who were gonna pay a real price for their socialist folly, and they’re still not.
They just hate feeling dissed I think.
They’re just gonna have to deal while the rest of us clean up their mess.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:39 pmWhit
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:40 pm23 year old college student
As the 2010 recipient of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles Fran Kandel Public Interest Grant, she researched, wrote, and produced an instructional film on how to apply for a domestic violence restraining order in pro per. She has also interned with the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking; Polaris Project; Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County; Break the Cycle; the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project; NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund; Crime Victim and Sexual Assault Services; and the Human Services Coalition of Tompkins County.
Through Georgetown’s clinic programs, Sandra has proposed legislation based on fact-finding in Kenya regarding child trafficking for domestic work, and has represented victims of domestic violence in protection order cases. Sandra is the Development Editor of the Journal of Gender and the Law, and served as the President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, and the Vice President of the Women’s Legal Alliance. In her first year, she also co-founded a campus committee addressing human trafficking. Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.
Sandra Fluke (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:40 pmBut no I don’t want Republicans even talking about contraception. It’s creepy
The 1st Amendment should be ignored, when inconvenient.
Sandra Fluke (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:42 pmSorry
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:43 pmWhen she claims a new right to have free contraception, her lifestyle becomes my business.
The lifestyle she wants underwritten is inherently irresponsible.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:44 pmI don’t think the first amendment should be ignored I’m eager for this question of a contraception mandate to go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Mostly just cause I’m curious how they’ll rule and why.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:45 pmwell another approach Mr. Icy is that everyone can just focus on electing a Republican and he can repeal the HHS mandate
— What are those Catholic institutions supposed to do for the next 8 months until election day, or the next ten and a half months until inauguration day, tell people “Here’s your spermicide, please don’t use it”?
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:46 pmthat’s sorta not my problem Mr. Icy
they’re just gonna have to cope best they can, poor dears
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:47 pmI will say that I think this idea that they’re just gonna shut down their children’s hospitals if they don’t get their way doesn’t reflect well on them really.
What one can’t cure one must endure and all that.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:51 pmI will say that I think this idea that they’re just gonna shut down their children’s hospitals if they don’t get their way doesn’t reflect well on them really.
They should really just let the leftist 1st Amendment hating Bill of Rights rapists tell them how they must practice their religion.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:55 pmhappyfeet –
Why don’t we order them to also perform lethal injections, or female circumcision? They’ll just have to endure it.
Whose children’s hospitals are they, any way?
I know – let’s seize your garage to store cluster bombs.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:56 pmThey should speak out about their grievances by all means but helping sick children is just… it’s just such a nice thing to do I think and I’d hope they’d find a way to carry on with these sorts of endeavours.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 1:58 pmAt what price?
They are Catholic hospitals. They are not the ones who forced this change. Obama seems to want them closed.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:00 pmThe Fluke deal is 100% Move-On fodder to mobilize women who vote based on what their friends post on Facebook
Auntie Fraud (2f38aa) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:01 pmAlso note that insurance mandates effectively require gay men to pay for the sexual practices of straight women.
Now, many of you may be thinking that the mandate requires insurance companies to cover contraception for gay men as much as it covers contraception for straight women. But them does not the Defense of Marriage Act allow gay men to receive federal marriage benefits if they marry someone of the opposite sex, just as it allows straight women to receive federal marriage benefits if they marry someone of the opposite sex?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:01 pmsuck it up, cupcake, is what I would say to the people what run these hospitals
you have work to do
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:01 pmWhen she claims a new right to have free contraception, her lifestyle becomes my business.
The lifestyle she wants underwritten is inherently irresponsible.
Absolutely. On every level. Whether we’re talking politics or principles. Nothing is free, somebody has to pay.
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:06 pmSo we should expect them to act based on their conscience, their obligation to help children and all. That’s really important – conscience.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:08 pmJesus would want them to put the sick children first and their fealty to silly anachronistic contraception doctrine second I think
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:09 pmYou think – I know that.
They’re not your hospitals, cupcake.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:17 pmno they’re not my hospitals this is true
but they’re probably just joshing about closing them anyway and if anything they’d just sell them or let someone else run them, if they really felt they couldn’t endure another second of the oppressive obamacare contraception policies
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:21 pmIt’s not really an either/or situation, Mr feets. Who is really considering closing down their children’s hospital, anyway?
Icy (8c44ff) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:21 pmyes Mr. Icy I tend to agree
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:21 pmWhen your religion is the state, it is okay to tell religions how they must practice. All while getting the vapors about how Team R wants to get all up in people’s beds.
It amazes me when otherwise wise people actively push the leftist narratives.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:22 pmThey stopped their adoptions when govt tried to force them to act counter to their doctrine.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:23 pmthey did… but didn’t that just mean they didn’t bid for an adoption services contract, which someone else went ahead and grabbed?
Meaning did it have any effect on the sum total of adoptions in that state?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:26 pmthey’d just sell them or let someone else run them
And the blatant violation of their civil rights – guaranteed for centuries – counts for nothing?
All this, to address a manufactured political crisis.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:28 pmRush just apologized. I don’t think he should have, but my female family members have informed me I am wrong.
The pearls-clutching media (b0b671) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:32 pmYou are free to practice your religion as long as it conforms to Government demands. Otherwise, we will freely allow you to sell everything you have.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:33 pmWhether or not the sum total of adoptions changed is not relevant. They chose to stop, rather than let govt dictate doctrine.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:34 pmI know everyone here is all squirreled up about saving their freedoms but the bad news is you won’t have much use for them for the remainder of your miserable lives.
Sleazer proposes cuts of $500 Billion. We’ll just be generous and assume that’s per year. That leaves a deficit of $1 Trillion to be financed by the Fed out of thin air, or 8% of GDP.
This means 7% instead of the current 8% inflation, while your homes continue to lose value, you still lose ground and that tax reduction of 20% begets a VAT.
We start a trade war with China over central bank policy, we do nothing about securing the borders except lock up some restauranteurs, yada, yada.
And after 4 more years of misery the Donks hold all branches of government.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:38 pmI would note that what they learned from that experience did nothing to dissuade them from enthusiastically supporting a vast and horrifying jobs- and freedom-raping expansion of state power into the health care sector
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:39 pmThe idea that we must pay for contraception is surely antiquated. We all know that this stuff is as free as the air we breathe. It’s as American as…never mind. Apple Pie.
It’s only Republicans and Catholic bitter-enders who want to deny access to these things, and who are against women’s health.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:44 pmThey’ll take my birth control pills when they pry them from the cold, dead fingahs of my hand that’s not carrying a Starbucks soy latté.
Linda Richman (b7499c) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:53 pmI note that Lord of the Flies has the meat all wound up about shades of redness, while they continue to rot and provide maggots a nursery.
The only hope for change is to change the rules, carrion.
If you can’t mount a write in campaign via the internet, you won’t have one next time.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:54 pmsoy latté… like buttah or like coffee without the cream?… discuss.
Linda Richman (b7499c) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:55 pmI don’t think the Catholics quite understood that the people of this country simply doesn’t care about freedom of conscience any more, at least not for people with whom they disagree.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 2:56 pm181. Up here in flyover dairy land we gots all the uppity choices for the wimmin folk but the beasts of burden get 99 cent caffine enriched dark roast with three fingers of half & half.
The plus is no tongue ring starin’ back at you when you pay.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:00 pmIn my area of a quarter million, the only decent hospital is Catholic. If they’re forced to close because the have to pay for abortion SWHTF.
No way Romney carries either MN or WI.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:08 pmCA and IL are going Ogabe, regardless, and no one will bail their lame azzes out.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:12 pm178. “who want to deny access to these things, and who are against women’s health”
Poseur alert. Dimmi in da house.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:14 pm_______________________________________
“America is back” is even gayer
There ‘ya go again, happyfeet. Using “gay” in a derogatory manner. Now you may rationalize away the meaning of “gay” in such instances to refer to something very different from “gay” gay. But I’d say you’re actually revealing a subtle — yet not uncommon — disquiet about gay, period. IOW, your cultural liberalism about things like same-sex marriage is sort of analogous to, say, the do-gooders who publicly proclaim their love for the public school system while sending their own kids to private schools (hi, Barry and Michele Obama!—as residents of Chicago and now DC).
Just keep this in mind during the many occasions you slam Republicans for being “gay” or whatever when they cite socio-cultural matters as a major problem. BTW, the strength and stability of a nation’s economy are certainly affected by the type of society that families are raising their kids in. So lowering unemployment rates is a just a tad, tiny, wee bit tougher when many households are made up of single parents and kids into mischief or certainly prone to delinquency, surrounded by a “do your own thang” culture.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:15 pm177. Yeah, lets rip the congentially uninitiate with effete verisimilitude.
Since they’re too stupid to fight Obamacare we’ll just abandon the whole contest, that’ll fix their sanctimonius cracker azzes.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:17 pmRush has posted an apology on his site. Should I hold my breath waiting for Maher to apologize for calling Sarah Palin a word that begins with “c” and rhymes with “punt”?
Old Coot (4198ba) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:18 pmIt’s only Republicans and Catholic bitter-enders who want to deny access to these things, and who are against women’s health.
Amphibolis, are you being sarcastic?
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:19 pm190. Yeah, obviously, it was seamless and I was suckered.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:21 pmhappyfeet #157:
Catholic Charities in Illinois, DC, and Massachusetts lost their state foster care and adoption contracts because of a dispute with the government over placement with unmarried couples, including gay couples. However, the Illinois-based charity plans to continue serving the community by seeking donations. It might surprise and please you to learn why Illinois’ Catholic leadership refused to lobby for an exemption:
happyfeet #171:
I’ll look but it may be too soon to tell. However, here’s some statistics about Catholic Charities in America:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:22 pmAmphipolis:
I think that’s generally true but it’s especially true regarding people of religious conscience.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:24 pm192. In my area of 250K local Catholic charities provide 1.5 Million lbs of food to something over 2000 families.
Good by charity when the government takes it over. Trickle down benevolence will cost 10 times as much.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:25 pm“Jake Tapper Finally Gives Hero of the Left A Chance To Speak Without Being Questioned About Her Claims
So says Sandra Fluke, thanking Jake Tapper for finally allowing her some camera-time, without challenge.
Until now she’s been silenced.
I’ve attempted to get Jake Tapper to answer the question “Did you ask her about the $9 per month pills at Target, 2.8 miles from Georgetown U’s campus?”
As he has ignored every single question along these lines, I have to take the answer to be ‘No.'”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/327188.php
Colonel Haiku (b7499c) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:26 pmDana – YES
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:28 pmShould freedoms of conscience be elevated above the basic economic freedoms that these obamacare-loving Catholic bishops are so contemptuous of?
I say no.
We all hang together or we all hang separately or some of us hang and some of us don’t hand or maybe we alternate.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:29 pmsome of us don’t hang I mean
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:29 pm__________________________________________
She’s wrong, not a slut.
This very telling controversy reminds me of the time when Bill Clinton finally was revealed to have been receiving oral pleasure from a White House intern but was perceived by various people as not necessarily deserving the description “scumbag.”
But the use of “slut” or “scumbag” are nothing compared with how heartless and intolerant we as a modern, hip, friendly society would have been if third-party observers had come down hard on, for example, Nidal Hasan while he was in the US military ranting against America and touting Islamism.
Too much candor and a lack of enough political correctness are such unkind facets of modern Western culture. We need to work on that.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:30 pmshe may or may not be a slut I think
but for sure she’s a hooch
and also she’s a skanky socialist cooze what’s blithely consigning the children she may or may not ever have to a life in the squalid oppressive failed third world whorestate obama has wrought
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:33 pmThe more the Left attempts to demonstrate how superior they are vis-a-vis the “Neanderthal Right”, the more that they show the world how utterly beneath contempt that they truly are!
Now, as Larry Elder is wont to say:
AD-RtR/OS! (ff190a) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:35 pmDon’t bother me, I’ve got a world to save.
happyfeet –
So if they get the economic one wrong, we can use that as an excuse to not defend their freedom of conscience? Is that what you are saying?
Because this thread is addressing freedom of conscience, and you say they should just deal with it.
And aren’t your basic economic freedoms also ultimately based on conscience?
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:40 pmMr. Amphipolis I’m saying that the second the asshole bishops get their conscience exemption they’ll go back to holding America’s legs while obamacare rapes her silly.
It’s just how they roll.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:48 pm______________________________________________
When she claims a new right to have free contraception, her lifestyle becomes my business.
But if a rather large number of people are feeling pangs of sympathy and compassion for her, that truly will be another example of just how ultra-liberal American society has become. I mean shedding tears for a woman who not only spends lots of money per year on condoms and other contraceptive what-not, but who believes it’s her constitutional right to be compensated by the government (and the taxpayers) for that expenditure?
The leftwing in Western culture has gone off the cliff. Sort of a parallel to the pro-Sharia-law types throughout the Middle East. The two sides deserve one another.
BTW, dental care probably has as much (if not more of) an impact on the health of a person as whether she (or he) is using contraception. So it would make no less sense for Obamacare to mandate that Americans get free visits to the dentist’s office instead of free packets of Trojans.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/3/2012 @ 3:53 pmhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/03/rush-limbaugh-apologizes-to-sandra-fluke
“FIDO says it couldn’t be any better.” NASA PAO, STS-1, 4/14/81
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:02 pmIMP is a freakin clown.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:05 pmIMP approves of liars.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:06 pmCompassion is no vice. I’ve seen a number of folks who can’t stand Breitbart’s work show compassion for him anyway. Even though they are convinced of many untrue things about him, they have compassion, which is of real value to society.
We assume too much. They do and we do.
You assume this woman is really spending all this money on condoms. The truth is she was lying… she isn’t really having sex three times per day. That was a joke.
Of course she is dead wrong on what she’s entitled to, and of course that entitlement view is destructive. Of course she should be ashamed of that, but slut? Nope. She’s just wrong.
Martyr she is not, but class is a big factor in politics.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:07 pmLying in a manner such as she did is decidedly unclassy.
JD (ddebbb) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:12 pmBuy your own diaphram, 30 year old Fluke woman. Play like you’re one half of the “Beast With Two Backs” as many times a day as you’d like, just keep your mitts off my wallet.
Colonel Haiku (63f20b) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:23 pmThis is all a set up. The Dems polled pro abortion politics and found that it is not popular so they made up this issue to rally the “uninformed” voter.
This is their new abortion debate. They can’t win arguing things like gas prices or the economy. We can’t win if we argue these wedge issues (because the media are basically liars and propagandists).
We should buy this woman a U-Haul full of condoms and move on.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:41 pmThe obvious solution to any of these fights is to repeal Ocare, end the mandated coverage tinkering, and do what should have been done in the first place . That would be to encourage private purchase of health insurance or self-pay for medical costs by giving direct consumers the same tax breaks employers get. Confiscate less money. Shelter it from fica and income tax and capital gains taxes.in tax free health accounts. Put more skin in the game for consumers, and encourage cost transparency so consumers can plan, and so that payouts are determined by the market….less artificial price setting and gouging the uninsured- bar insurers from interfering with prices offered to the uninsured.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:45 pmCA TEA PARTY GROUPS CRASHED BY “PUBLIC ENEMY” after Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson (BOND, So LA Tea Party) speaks about fighting racism. Pictures, interviews are most illuminating.
Mutnodjmet (c77c33) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:46 pmColonel’s definition of Bipartisanship:
I’ll Hug Your Elephant
You Kiss my Ass
Colonel Haiku (63f20b) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:48 pmhappyfeet,
I know you care about fiscal issues, but are there any cultural or social values important enough to win or lose your vote? If so, which ones?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:51 pmHaiku, in this one instance, shes not in your wallet, though. Students there pay the entire premium themselves.
That the second time you’ve implied you pay her premium
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 4:52 pmThat’s very true. And that’s what she did. She inflated the cost of this issue dishonestly.
A store with a $9 a month generic pill is 2 miles away. She wanted to violate our freedom of association so she twisted the situation into an absurd one. Bizarre extreme cases are how the democrats have fought many issues. For example, Pro life = ‘forcing the raped incest 14 year child to deliver a baby’.
What she did was wrong and shameful. It’s not out of any sense of chivalry and certainly not support that I prefer the above to debating how slutty she is.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:06 pmWhat is she asking for, SaraW? Why is she “testifying” in front of the cameras in the phony Pelosi-orchestrated clownfest? Is she not asking for the taxpayer to foot the bill for that which her insurance policy does not cover?
Colonel Haiku (63f20b) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:13 pm“That the second time you’ve implied you pay her premium.”
Well, that’s she’s asking for. For someone else to pick up the tab for her use of thousands of dollars (according to her) worth of contraception per annum, and for that someone to be forced to do it by our ever-tyrannical government.
If she wanted to pay for it herself, then it wouldn’t be an issue.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:16 pmIf Fluke isn’t paying for it, someone else is. No free lunch.
Colonel Haiku (63f20b) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:17 pmMr. Feets – Your argument about the silly and anachronistic Catholic Bishops supporting the passage of ObamaCare so they should shut their moufs about wimmins issues now is a complete red herring thank you very much.
This is one of those Granny McRictusbotoxface pass the bill to see what’s in it clause issues, not somethingm hinted at before the passage of the bill Mr. Feets. The bill, just like so much legislation under President O’Blameless left details to be filled in at the discretion of administrators later, in this case Secretary Sebelius.
Can you point to any actions prior to the passage of the law indicating Obama intended to violate the Religious Conscience Act (or whatever the heck it’s called) with the passage of ObamaCare, especially with measure such as the Stupak Amendment getting tossed around? I don’t think so.
I think the Bishops believed themselves on safe ground that existing conscience exemptions would be preserved along with their First Amendment rights.
I suggest a different argument.
Larry Flynt (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:17 pmDustin, this is true: bcps are not all identical and women can’t always tolerate the generics at walmart.
She didn’t refer to some minimum, but a typical pill pack cost.
It’s so frustrating and irritating to have to be talking about what she said or didn’t and is she lying or is she a ( insert slur here).
It DOESN’T EVEN MATTER. That just buys into half the progressive premise that it’s tolerable interference by the fed if the medicine or procedure is “worthy” or not.
It wouldn’t be tolerable interference if it were chemotherapy, it wouldn’t be tolerable if it were a useful screening test like colonoscopy. It wouldn’t be tolerable if it were Viagra or maternity care.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:18 pmWell, that’s comical…I have a comment apparently in moderation because it mentions a specific drug.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:21 pmDamn sock
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:22 pmDave, but not taxpayers and not the school. Subscribers to that plan, yes.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:23 pmCan somebody get that comment out of moderation?
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:24 pm“Students there pay the entire premium themselves.”
Saraw – At Georgetown perhaps, but Fluke is against the conscience exemption in general, and insureds do not always pay 100% of the cost.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:24 pmWhen someone in a rare moment of honesty, characterized their opponents as ‘bitter clingers’
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:26 pm“What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex — what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute,” Limbaugh said. “She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex.”–via HuffPo
Yeah, that pretty well nails it all right.
But, the more important issue is that she’s trying to get the govt. to force me to pay for her whoring (with the full on approval of liberal scum in the government)…and that makes her and them would be thieves.
They’re no different than the gangbangers that the host of this blog puts in jail for a living.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:26 pmSorry if I am repeating somebody’s point but I am tired of the GOP stepping in crap because they never seem to look down. They didn’t have to dignify this. I blame Santorum but that is no excuse for Rush and others. Stay away from these clumsy traps !
Mike K (326cba) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:28 pmI’m typing with my thumbs on a dang iPad and don’t want to try to reconstruct that comment, I guess no one is about to get it out of limbo?
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:28 pmDave, I get right to the point in that locked out comment. I’m sure we agree in essentials.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:31 pmLimbaugh and Hannity pretend to be the voice of conservatism. Whether Republicans win or lose in November makes no difference to them. They make 100s of millions distorting the political landscape. They are characters and their programs do not help the country. It is freaking show business. To be sure, they are good at seeming sincere, which they are not.
It is sad. Conservatives defend Limbaugh and Hannity; that gives the Liberals the awesome talking point of saying if you want to be a Republican, you want to sound like Limbaugh and Hannity.
Wesson (1dbab0) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:35 pmSarahw’s comment is free! #222
Karl (6f7ecd) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:35 pm“Dave, but not taxpayers and not the school. Subscribers to that plan, yes.”
The government is trying to force everyone onto healthcare insurance. They’re trying to force all healthcare providers to provide contraception as part of their package, and they have special deals already set up for people they think ought to get breaks (both under existing programs, like Medicare, and under this Obamacare commie crap).
You ARE going to pay her way. That’s the whole point of the exercise.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:35 pmThe church’s mission and value system, is being forced someone who doesn’t subscribe to the institution, she willingly joined, with the power
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:35 pmof the state, that is the point, the fact that the Journolist, and Media Matters and likely Color of Change, forced a concession, is beside the point,
I’m not sold that this rises to the level of requiring a conscience exemption DRJ. The Catholic church wanted them some obamacare and they got it and now they don’t like how it tastes.
Too bad so sad.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:46 pmI have a comment apparently in moderation because it mentions a specific drug.
Love is the drug I’m thinking of.
A shout out to Roxy Music lovers!
Colonel Haiku (083105) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:48 pmColonoscopy’s not a “tolerable interference” in my book. The last one felt like the operator had a few drinks and was driving on a wet Grand Prix track.
Colonel Haiku (083105) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:53 pmFluke is a lying liar what lies. Period. Full stop.
Barcky doing this is an absolute infringement upon the Church’s actual spelled out in the Bill of Rights Rights. As opposed to the right to free rubbers.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 5:59 pmThe problem lies in what the late Cardinal Bernardin coined ‘the seamless garment’ support for life, is subordinated to the overall leftwing agenda, the signature example is the radical pastor
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:01 pmMichael Pflueger, who wanted to close down all the gunshops in Chicago, and needless to say, is a mentor for Obama.
happyfeet,
I said:
And then you said:
Is that your final answer?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:02 pm“The Catholic church wanted them some obamacare and they got it and now they don’t like how it tastes.”
Mr. Feets – Did they want the part where you wouldn’t have to change your doctor or some other lying lie part?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:03 pmThen again, happyfeet, maybe your point was whether this is a valid First Amendment issue. If so, has the Catholic Church been dishonest about its position on contraceptives? It sounds like you’re saying the Church deserves to be punished because you don’t like the Church’s reaction to ObamaCare. That’s a novel approach to First Amendment law.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:08 pm__________________________________________
Compassion is no vice.
Dustin, not when it’s become as cheap, corrupted and meaningless as it has grown to be in this era of “Feel-Good” and “I’m okay, you’re okay.” Compassion today is sort of like grade inflation in the classroom, where teachers are handing out As and Bs to any and every student, no matter what.
In some parts of the world women are being stoned to death for having the audacity to be raped. Or they’re being punished for driving a car, or for walking around without a veil. Meanwhile, we in the Western World (and keep in mind that the US, so far, isn’t quite as socially-culturally liberal as European nations have become) are grappling with a woman who’s unhappy because her condoms or birth-control pills may not be subsidized.
Mark (31bbb6) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:11 pmmy favorite social issues usually involve legalizing things and deregulating them
for example I think everyone should be able to take ephedra and drink milk straight from the udder if the want to
also they should be free to spit on their elected officials
also people should be allowed to sell old children’s books, and they should be allowed to have pet ferrets in Los Angeles
in an ideal world the government wouldn’t be able to tell the catholic church what kind of health care plan it had to offer anymore than it could tell the rest of us
that’s the world we should all work for together
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:12 pmif *they* want to I mean
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:13 pm“also they should be free to spit on their elected officials”
Sounds like a waste of spit, though I appreciate the sentiment.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:17 pmYou sound like a libertarian, happyfeet. I don’t object to that but if that’s a fair description of your political philosophy, I think it’s unfair for you to criticize conservatives for not meeting your expectations.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:20 pmthirty year old Fluke
Colonel haiku (083105) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:24 pmand my name ain’t Sanders but
she’s no Spring chicken
Moralists come in all stripes.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:25 pmwhether this is a valid First Amendment issue
yes I think it’s borderline at best
nobody’s being forced to take the devil’s contraceptives
and so we’re left with some people whining about having to offer health care plans what cover the pill and whatnot
I just can’t get too excited.
Once you’ve acquiesced to state-mandated health care, which the bishops were super-excited about, then by definition you’ve firmly ensconced health care in the secular realm, and it’s not an issue what has any bearing on your free exercise of religion.
You’re still free to belly-ache about rubbers and iuds and spones and the pill to anyone what will listen, and explain to them how they’re all going to hell if they don’t repent.
Hey did you know Haiti was 80% Catholic? True story.
But anyway, at the end of the day, our bishop pals got way way more than half a loaf.
The Catholic church wanted really bad for the government to regulate the mother-loving crap out of healthcare.
Asked and answered.
So let’s just chalk this one up to being careful what we wish for.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:28 pmI think it’s unfair for you to criticize conservatives for not meeting your expectations.
It used to be unfair DRJ until our little country became mired in debt and fail of such calamitous dimensions that her priorities are perforce vastly re-ordered.
We’re not gonna make it.
Not without a for reals plan.
And so… contraception? Not a bfd. This issue joins other social con concerns such as the gay marriage and the abortion with the deck chairs of the Titanic.
It’s positively inane, how consumed our politics are with the irrelevant.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:35 pmAMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law … Prohibiting the free exercise thereof. There is no clause that they can decide what is the free exercise thereof, or a clause that allows them to do so, but only a little, or only to groups of people who have offended us by their past actions.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:36 pmSaw that Rush apologized for “inappropriate language” directed towards Ms. Fluke.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:39 pmSeems to me that Rush was not the only one who took her words and extrapolated her life-style from them,
and came up with someone who looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and walks like a duck.
Rush was not wrong, just not circumspect.
But then, she’s a creature of the Left, who seem to be all liars and whores (of one form or another).
I mean, come on, if you’re going through $1K/yr on condoms at a buck a pop, you’re playing a lot of mattress hockey,
and she’s not even enrolled in a Kinsey Study.
*sponges* I mean
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:45 pmHer appearance was just a scouting party to see what her digs on Capitol Hill or K Street would look like, I got a flashback to that film ‘St. Elmo’s Fire, and the Demi Moore character.
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:46 pmMr. Feets – A funny thing happened on the way to filling in the details of ObamaCare. The Divine Ms. Sebelius admitted to Congress that she had not sought the advice of the DOJ on whether the inclusion of a contraception mandate violated existing laws on religious freedom.
Another funny thing, HillaryCare had the exact same religious conscience exemption language Blunt was trying to push through the Senate. That guy, he’s just a silly anachronism.
“As Congress continues to debate the Obamacare mandate forcing religious institutions to provide “free” coverage of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs, a new report could put supporters of the mandate on the defensive. It turns out that the Democrats’ 1994 health care care bill (i.e. “Hillarycare”) included the exact same conscience protections that Republicans and some Democrats are now pushing in the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act.
The 1994 legislation gave “any employer” an exemption from purchasing health care that covered “abortion or other services” if “the employer objects to such services on the basis of a religious belief or moral conviction.””
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillarycare-had-conscience-protections-obamacare-lacks_632950.html
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:46 pmExcept for spitting on elected officials (which is assault), I agree.
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:46 pmMr. daley what law would you cite if you had to argue the unconstitutionality of Sebelius’ giddy promotion of contraception coverage?
Are you saying amendment uno is by itself insufficient?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:54 pmThere is no clause that they can decide what is the free exercise thereof, or a clause that allows them to do so, but only a little, or only to groups of people who have offended us by their past actions.
If this were true Mr. JD then mormons would still be allowed to keep harems and amish people would be allowed to sell raw milk.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:55 pmI was hoping Rush would be a man of principle, that he would dig his heels in……etc.
Larry Reilly (350101) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:57 pmNope. He apologized. But then, it was starting to look like his Sleep Number was up.
He wants to live (well, as in wealth) and continue to go on child sex tours in the Third World, with aspirin tablets between his ears.
Mr. daley what law would you cite if you had to argue the unconstitutionality of Sebelius’ giddy promotion of contraception coverage?
AMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
That should suffice.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:57 pmLarry Reilly is a drooling moron.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:58 pmLadies and gentlemen … Larry Reilly is a JournoList.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 6:58 pmNo, he’s more like a Kramerica intern with the Journolist, but you can see the patterns on memeorandum
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:04 pmhappyfeet:
That’s your view and you’re certainly entitled to it, just as I’m entitled to believe social issues are relevant because they impact our ability to respond to the fiscal issues. It will be a lot easier to solve our financial problems if we are predominantly a nation of working families instead of single-parent and adult-only households, with a growing instead of an ever-shrinking population. Secular values aren’t accomplishing those goals — in fact, they are undermining them.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:06 pm“Are you saying amendment uno is by itself insufficient?”
Mr. Feets – I would cite the laws referenced in the article and Amendment 1.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:06 pmbut Hillarycare never passed Mr. daley it was never a for reals law
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:07 pmMr. Feets – Did ObamaCare specifically say it was repealing or superseding prior law regarding religious conscience? I you believe so, can you point me to the section?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:08 pmIt will be a lot easier to solve our financial problems if we are predominantly a nation of working families
see this is one of the reasons I support gay marriage case of it might can help people form more resilient economic units
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:09 pm“but Hillarycare never passed Mr. daley it was never a for reals law”
Mr. Feets – Nobody never tells me nothing.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:09 pmDid ObamaCare specifically say it was repealing or superseding prior law regarding religious conscience?
I think actually Obama lied and promised promised promised he was gonna catholic it up six ways to Sunday.
He’s such a scamp.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:10 pm“When she claims a new right to have free contraception, her lifestyle becomes my business.”
How “free” do you think something a private school provides is to people paying tuition there? Could it be that students pay, but the school decides what is in the group plan?
“The lifestyle she wants underwritten is inherently irresponsible.”
What, family planning?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:10 pmTellyJezus – how many different names have you tried out so far?
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:12 pmIt is the pinnacle of responsibility to demand consequence free sex on someone else’s dime.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:15 pmNo matter what handle he uses, it still fails the
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:17 pm‘Otto’ test, and comes within striking distance of Billy Madison
at 70 miles per hour
Colonel Haiku (77f6ae) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:17 pmrain drops hit my windshield
they look like little sperm cells
as they wiggle their way toward the roof of the car
“It is the pinnacle of responsibility to demand consequence free sex on someone else’s dime.”
There’s lots of married people, with insurance coverage for contraception, doing this right now. You do realize that, right? Tell me, who do you think pays for student health insurance at a private school like Georgetown?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:17 pmdo you mopes know how much money Rain-X costs a 59 year old geezer?!?!
Colonel Haiku (77f6ae) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:19 pmI shall tell you nothing, coward. You are a pathetic vile troll.
She demands that the Church break it’s doctrine to provide contraception coverage for people that chose to attend one of their schools. But she doesn’t stop there, she demands it be free.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:20 pmhappyfeet,
I think Ed Whelan has done an excellent job explaining why the Obama Administration’s contraception mandate is unlawful under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. I view the RFRA as codifying and clarifying the First Amendment free exercise of religion clause, the provisions of which had slowly eroded over the years.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:22 pm47. Comment by happyfeet — 3/3/2012 @ 10:50 am
The only answer, clearly, is to make this election a referendum on contraception.
This is the hill.
Now is the time.
March 3, 2012 New York Times Op-Ed article by Op-Ed columnist Charles M. Blow:
Santorum and the Sexual Revolution
Rick Santorum wants to bring sexy back … to the 1950s, when he was born.
That is because Santorum seems to have an unhealthy fixation with, and passionate disdain for, the 1960s and the sexual freedoms that followed.
To fully understand Santorum’s strident rejection of the 1960s, it’s instructive to recall a speech and question-and-answer session he gave in 2008 to a course on religion and politics at the Oxford Center for Religion and Public Life in Washington.
Recall? I doubt that he knew about it before somebody sent it to him, probably with comments.
He then quotes (disapprovingly) from the questions and answers in the transcript.
Example:
While explaining what he saw as a shift in the Democratic Party away from “blue-collar working-class folks with traditional values” Santorum said:
“What changed was the ’60s. What changed was sex. What changed was the social and cultural issues that have huge amounts of money because if you look — I haven’t seen numbers on this, but I’m sure it’s true — if you go socioeconomic scale, the higher the income, the more socially liberal you are. The more you know you can buy your way out of the problems that sexual libertinism causes you. You have an abortion, well, I have the money to take care of it. If I want to live an extravagant life and get diseases, I can. … You can always take care of everything. If you have money, you can get away with things that if you’re poor you can’t.”
Further in the column by Charles Blow:
Santorum may now cloak his current views in Catholic fundamentalism and Constitutional literalism, but, at their root, they are his reaction to, and revulsion for, the social-sexual liberation that began in the 1960s.
His column ends with:
Santorum’s stances are not about our Constitution, but his. He views personal freedoms as a personal affront. His thinking exists in a pre-1960s era of aspirin-between-the-knees contraception and read-between-the-lines sexuality.
The kind of conservatism that Santorum represents has been described as a war on women, but I would rephrase that. It’s a war on sex beyond the confines of traditional marriage and strict heterosexuality in which women, particularly poor ones, and gays, particularly open ones, are likely to suffer the greatest casualties.
There is a sidebar there in the printed newspaper (it is separate article on the web) that has very large print graphics of numbers.
It cites three polls, two Gallup polls of May 8, 2011 and December 18 2011, and a New York Times CBS News poll of February 13, 2012. Itemsm cited from the May 8, 2011 Gallup poll:
Percentage finding the following things “morally acceptable:”
Sex Between an unmarried man and woman: 60%
Having a baby outside of marriage: 54%
Gay or lesbian relations: 56%
Can you spot the problem with the poll?
It’s interesting that, no matter what it is, it is all about the same percentage. Maybe adultery (which isn’t cited) is different because it may involve deception, while these issues don’t seem to involve ethics.
(I think part of the explanation is the definition of the word morality which many people limit to wrongs between one human being and another. If they asked if these things were wrong they might get a different answer. And if they were asked if they were disapproved, or if they were deplorable, or a bad idea, even more, and the answers wouldn’t be so close to each other for these three very different things.)
There’s also an Op-Ed column by Joe Nocera called “Rooting for Santorum” who hopes Santorum will win, because it will kill social issues like contraception, the way McGovern and Mondale helped bring back the Democratic Party from its extreme flank. An alcoholic, he writes, doesn’t stop drinking till he hits bottom.
(Q. If McGovern did that why was Mondale still necessary 12 years later?)
Sammy Finkelman (bbe5c1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:24 pmhappyfeet:
Then you understand how social values can impact economic issues. Why, then, do you persist in acting like they don’t matter?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:26 pm“She demands that the Church break it’s doctrine to provide contraception coverage for people that chose to attend one of their schools. ”
Again, who do you think pays for things at a private school? Is it the people paying tuition? Did you not even consider that until I brought it up?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:28 pmAgain, your cowardly cowardly douchenozzlery makes no never mind to me. She demands free. Free. Just like Barcky demands the insurance companies pay for it.
Now, tell everyone all of the names you have used, coward.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:30 pm“…then mormons would still be allowed to keep harems and amish people would be allowed to sell raw milk…”
Someone knows not the difference between polygamy (having multiple wives one is married to), and harems/concubines; nor that govt can regulate commercial activity in, but not personal use of, non-pasteurized milk.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:31 pmBecause students pay tuition the federal government can mandate that the Catholic Church do whatever the govt feels like making them do. Unassailable logic.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:32 pm“She demands free. Free.”
Georgetown law has a fitness center that is free for the students. Also a library. Who do you think pays for that? Do you think it’s the people paying tuition?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:32 pmI love how you are too cowardly to own up to your own actions.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:33 pmMaybe you can show us, in Catholic doctrine, where physicL fitness equipment and libraries are contrary to the Church’s teachings.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:34 pmJD, never argue money (economics) with a Leftist –
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:36 pmit is an alien concept to them as the Tooth Fairy shall provide for all.
So you didn’t realize that married women use insurance covered contraception, and you didn’t realize that students at a private school pay for what the school offers. What else can we get you to learn in the next few comments?
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:36 pmTeleprompterJesus,
Inside Higher Ed summarized a 2008 GAO report that college student health plans vary significantly, and most students are covered by their parents’ policies:
Since you’ve brought it up twice, why don’t you tell us specifically about the Georgetown Law School student health coverage?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:36 pmDRJ if Ed is right then people should have no trouble getting the Sebelius intervention slapped down in court under existing law.
Why then do we need Rubio flouncing about passing unnecessary and duplicative laws?
Everyone should just chillax and enjoy the imminence of spring.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:37 pmSo you didn’t realize …
You are a clown.
Why are you unwilling to own up to your own actions?
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:39 pmWe really want to trust the fate of religious liberty to epic fumble man Anthony Kennedy, it’s
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:40 pmbad enough that Obamacare could still survive thanks
to him,
Why then do we need Rubio flouncing about passing unnecessary and duplicative laws?
Are you saying that Rubio is a little light in the loafers?
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:40 pmCourts can’t fix everything, happyfeet, especially with this Administration. The Louisiana federal court held the Obama Administration in contempt regarding its offshore drilling permits, and the contempt order was ignored. We can’t depend solely on the courts.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:40 pm“Inside Higher Ed summarized a 2008 GAO report that college student health plans vary significantly, and most students are covered by their parents’ policies:”
The PPACA did require coverage of children up to 26, but Fluke is over that age, as many law students are.
TeleprompterJesus (518b93) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:43 pmThen you understand how social values can impact economic issues. Why, then, do you persist in acting like they don’t matter?
Limited government properly executed leaves very little room for our silly and profoundly amoral federal government to intersect with our social values.
It’s simply not its job.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:45 pmAre you saying that Rubio is a little light in the loafers?
No.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:45 pmwhat do you know something?
Nobody tells me anything.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:46 pmthis is what it looks like when a mandolin floats ashore
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:48 pmfeets, accusing someone of “flouncing about” presents a certain image.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:55 pmGeorgetown Law School requires most students enroll and pay for its health care plan (called Premier Plan) unless the student already has a comparable policy and opts out. Premier Plan appears to exclude birth control and contraceptives as set forth in exclusions 19(b) and 21 on page 29.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:56 pmMaybe imdw could post some pics of Patterico’s house again. Or run long to chill with Kimberlin, and Rauhowser, and Freidman. Or get it’s joooooooo hate on.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:57 pmI just meant “flouncing about” in the sense of making a big show of trying to pass a bill what is duplicative of current law. It’s like the fourth or so usage listed in Merriam’s I’m pretty sure.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:57 pmGee, DRJ, just why would they do that?
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:58 pmWell with pikachu, the terms are more metaphorical
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 7:59 pmthan actual,
I don’t know about Merriams, but Random House doesn’t mention anything about making a big show, but do talk about impatient, angry, or impertinent movement of the body; or trim on women’s wardrobe; or material used in making flounces.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:02 pmI don’t know, AD. Doesn’t Georgetown University realize what a cost savings it is to pay for students’ birth control and contraceptives?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:03 pmThey probably do if they could just figure out a way to seperate themselves from those Vatican apron strings.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:06 pmYou may be right about that.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:10 pmSometimes national politics resembles an argument between 3rd graders on the playground, with the teacher taking the side of the one who is obviously lying about what happened.
Rush often says things in ways which I do not think are helpful, but then again, he has so many examples of where he said something reasonable that was deliberately twisted I understand his somewhat nihilistic view of what people think of what he says.
But I think complaining about Rush being made the center of the discussion is a little like complaining that quite a few people are (still) backing Santorum:
If there were people visible and in positions of authority making a strong and clear case for conservative principles and playing offense not defense (or at least a blitzing defense) then there would not be a vacuum demanding to be filled.
And if those voices are there but not being given air time, well, whose responsibility is that?
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:11 pmWell said, Doc.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:13 pmI wonder what Reince Priebus thinks about all this
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:13 pmhah just kidding
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:14 pmInteresting how some of the sponsors who abandoned
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:17 pmRush, support Ed Schultz, a rampant misogynist and
blihering psycho, but the Media Matters and other
enterprises aren’t driving toward that goal.
I think Rush only meant that Fluke is a slut in the sense of her having an uncommonly voracious appetite for sex to where she really needs a lot of sex all the time, so much sex that the sex she needs is a quantifiable budgetary line item every month. Not like in a bad way.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:21 pmAnd Georgetown is mandated to offer a library and a physical fitness center by the government?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:24 pmeconomy… jobs… right track/wrong track… out of control spending… politicization of the Justice Department… amateur foreign policy… domestic incompetence… dismal tide… etc., etc.
Colonel Haiku (8ba502) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:26 pmFitness centers and libraries clearly run contrary to Catholic doctrine.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:29 pmget your heads in the game, Republicans! Everything to win and much to lose.
Colonel Haiku (8ba502) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:29 pmI really don’t think I would worry about Rush too much.
Ag80 (b0b671) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:29 pmAgreed, Ag. If they were not faking OUTRAGE over this, they would be faking OUTRAGE over something he didn’t say.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:31 pmFrom Winifred Young
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:31 pmA major part of this story also has to do with activists on places like Reddit hammering Rush’s advertisers. I don’t know if conservative could mount the same kind of attack if it was warranted. Twitter? Maybe. Never seen it happen though.
Bill Maher is still on HBO. Ed Schultz is still on. etc. etc.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:33 pmWhy does Winifred Young hate women and want to deny them their reproductive choices?
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:33 pmI remember when the big issue was that too many people couldn’t afford insurance and were having to do without.
Now the issue is too many people can’t afford a $10 copay and so they are having to do without.
creep creep creep. What’s next?
MayBee (081489) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:35 pmWinifred likes her beats fast and her bass down low I bet
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:35 pmWell you know, it’s a great deal, Maybee, pray they don’t alter it further,
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:40 pmAD at #256 pointed out that Rush has issued an apology at: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/03/a_statement_from_rush
He states he was not trying to insult the person as much to “make the absurd more absurd”.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:40 pmFrom The Spearhead:
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:43 pmIt’s easy Maybee, we just tax the 1 percent and eliminate copay altogether! I am so smart. =]
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:44 pmFREE RUBBRZ FOR ALL LAW STUDENTS !!!!!!!!
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:47 pmFree Rubbers? It’s easy. You tax the 1 percent, problem solved!
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:48 pmthe world is already so absurd MD, the worm hole has collapsed, like that Nero character in Star
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:49 pmTrek did,
Excellent rejoinder.
I still am annoyed by how the argument’s facts are extreme, but you’re right to point back to the actual issue. If someone wants to associate or not associate with a certain practice like any of the above, that’s just freedom in a nutshell. This kind of control robs us of freedom and will have countless consequences until it’s finally repealed altogether.
Yeah, she’s no martyr and all of us here have a lot to be grateful for, relative to many other situations in the world.
Still pleased that Rush was strong enough to walk back from his comment.
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:51 pmLOL. I replied to Sarah but foolishly quoted the part that got moderated before.
Anyway, good comment, Sarah.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:51 pmI just wonder if the cost of insurance is even a thing anymore.
MayBee (081489) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:54 pmThey will just mandate that it be free, MayBee.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:55 pm“If you want to use birth control to prevent pregnancy, than[sic] pay for it yourself. ”
As DRJ points out, the students at Georgetown are paying for it themselves. This is likely the case in most universities. But slut slut slutty mcslut is the kind of woman who, apparently, is on the normal regimen of hormonal birth control. Because the only way some people seem to understand how birth control works with the menstrual cycle is to imagine that it involves lots and lots of sex. Go to your local library (FREE) and read a copy of “Our Bodies, Our Selves.”
TeleprompterJesus (826205) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:57 pmI tried to tell a liberal friend that conservatives really don’t give a crap about this whole contraceptive contretemp. He didn’t care. They think they have a winner.
Of course, he never heard of Breitbart.
They think we’ve lost the zeal and the focus to save this nation.
My inner-Breitbart tells me they are wrong. They have no idea what they are dealing with.
Ag80 (b0b671) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:57 pmIamadimwit is slow slow slow.
JD (318f81) — 3/3/2012 @ 8:59 pmWe’re so inundated with their mindset, but we know where to challenge it.whereas they know no other alternative,
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:02 pmFrom the Caucus blog of the New York Times by Brian Stelter, March 3, 2012, 6:16 pm (EST)
Limbaugh Sorry for Attack on Student in Birth Control Furor
There’s a link there to http://www.rushlimbaugh.com
The following statement appears there:
For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone’s bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.
This isn’t completely thought out, or accurate. What is being proposed, well, where Medicaid is concerned, yes, taxpayers, but this is mandatory insurance so whoever pays for the insurance policy would have to pay for that..
Rush Limbaugh simply used a very bad argument here. He used some bad arguments before, but said many other things that were to the point, and examples of good arguments is what should be brought up.
Sammy Finkelman (bbe5c1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:16 pmMawry Reilly repeating the stale lie that Rush has gone on ‘third-world child sex tours’. *YAWN*
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:21 pmThey give away the game,
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/03/carbonite-drops-rush/
funny how ridiculing Christians, Tea Partiers, wishing for the death of a fmr. Vicepresident,that
narciso (87e966) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:22 pmnever is considered objectionable by sponsors, so much so, that the issuer of said comments who is all for the 99% can afford to kick a million to the Obama pac.
Mark Stein: According to the IMF, China will become the dominant economic power by 2016.
Rush Limbaugh: Hey get a load of this filthy contraception slut
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:25 pm*y*
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:25 pmIf the left loves their first world problems they better start helping in keeping us there.
Noodles (3681c4) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:29 pmWhite Punks On Dope, TellyJesus dribbled:
Could it be that students pay, but the school decides what is in the group plan
— Yes, IF Fraulien Sibelius and Der Furor allow it.
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:34 pmTell me, who do you think pays for student health insurance at a private school like Georgetown?
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:43 pm— Telepompous seems to think that the students pay 100% of the premiums, while the school pays zero. Sorry, Bubba, but that ain’t the way it usually works.
do you mopes know how much money Rain-X costs a 59 year old geezer?!?!
Comment by Colonel Haiku — 3/3/2012 @ 7:19 pm
— Fifty-nine? Holy crap! It’s about time to take away your license before you start plowing over innocent civilians on your way to the Hometown Buffet!!!
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 9:50 pmYou’ll have to pry them outta my cold, arthritic finger claws, sonny boy!
Colonel Haiku (fc04bc) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:05 pmMaybe you can show us, in Catholic doctrine, where physicL fitness equipment and libraries are contrary to the Church’s teachings.
Comment by JD — 3/3/2012 @ 7:34 pm
— Well, the libraries . . . but not so much anymore.
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:06 pmBetter yet, show me where in the Constitution the President can give a companies product to his voters for free!!!
Gus (694db4) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:08 pmthis is where I’m not supposed to say lol
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:09 pmMy 46-year-old pre-arthritic claws probably couldn’t manage it.
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:20 pmBetter yet, show me where in the Constitution the President can give a companies product to his voters for free!!!
Comment by Gus — 3/3/2012 @ 10:08 pm
— It’s right there in the micro-printing beneath the Commerce Clause. You know, the part that says the government can tell consumers what they MUST buy and tell companies what they MUST charge.
It’s all there in the Anti-Meme-Gouging Executive Order, signed by Pesident Fair Share on Day 1.
Icy (cf507d) — 3/3/2012 @ 10:43 pmAAHHHH Thanks ICY. Right next to the ABORTION CLAUSE!!!
Gus (694db4) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:04 pmComment by Icy — 3/3/2012 @ 9:50 pm
Comment by Colonel Haiku — 3/3/2012 @ 10:05 pm
Would you kids hold it down, you’re interrupting my nap.
AD-RtR/OS! (87f0c7) — 3/3/2012 @ 11:17 pmSorry, old timer.
Icy (cf507d) — 3/4/2012 @ 1:57 am