I Guess Rush Hasn't Been Getting Enough Press Lately....

[Gob]

Limbaugh has been married four times and has no children

a) I think I see why he dislikes contraception.
b) Thank christ for small mercies.

[Rick]

Which reminds of the story about a woman that was sent a "3rd world" country to introduce the indignants to condoms. Having found herself woefully ill equipped she decided to improvise, she used a broom handle for the demo.

A year later during the follow up each bedroom had a broom in the corner with a condom on it...

[Sue U]

Hell yeah! If people get ill through preventable diseases, that's their fucking fault, let the fuckers die!!!

Not really helping ...

[Gob]

Sorry Sue, I was doing my impression of a Libertarian American.

[Joe Guy]

Limbaugh has been married four times and has no children

Limbaugh has been married four times and has no children

a) I think I see why he dislikes contraception.
b) Thank christ for small mercies.

That's either proof there is a God or that he is functionally a Rush Limp-baugh.

[Grim Reaper]

Mr. Limbaugh has so far managed to lose at least three sponsors over this.

[Gob]

Now there's a face with "Punch Me" written all over it.

[BoSoxGal]

dgs, you are a fucking idiot.

FYI different pills cause different side effects in different women and what should govern isn't cost, but what is prescribed by the MD at his/her discretion.

FYI many women take oral contraceptives for many other reasons than prevention of pregnancy. I've been on them the majority of the past 25 years to treat a reproductive organs ailment that caused me significant pain from the time I started menses at age 11. Taking oral contraceptives all those years has much diminished my risk of ovarian cancer, one of the deadliest forms of cancer.

For the VAST majority of the time I've taken the pill, I've been celibate.

So,

[Crackpot]

Rush and Dave know deep down you're a slut

[rubato]

Providing birth control reduces the cost of health care. And the much larger costs to society overall. You would have to really hate women enough to deprive them of birth control only to pay for a child ($12,000/yr) plus school ( $8,000/yr) plus the increased social costs of having more unwed mothers and single-parent families.

I guess that's why it is Republican states have made that choice for decades ... they hate women enough to suffer for it.





yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

The testimony before this quasi-committee was not about taking the pill for any other reason than the prevention of pregnancy (or, in the case of the so-called "morning after pill" for the early termination of a pregnancy). In fact, if it were about an MD prescribing such pills for treatment of a disease or condition, or even for a woman for whom pregnancy would be life-threatening, this discussion would not even be taking place.

Most people learn in law school to identify the salient issues. Guess that concept illuded you, BSG.

Nor, Andrubato, is it about whether it is a good idea generally for people who are in no position to have kids to take precautions against having kids.

It is about whether other insurance customers (or the taxpayer) should be compelled to pay for "free" contraception for college students attending religious-affiliated colleges, when the sponsoring religion considers the use of such products FOR CONTRACEPTION to be sinful.

As stated above, it is absurd to have these products paid for under compulsory insurance, as pregnancy is not a disease and the insurance rightly covers injuries and disease, and not casual lifestyle accommodations.

On a related issue, this insurance is provided at low cost by the insurance providers on the presumption - backed by actuarial data - that college students are generally a low-risk group. What is being suggested is that female college students be provided benefits under such policies that cost MULTIPLES of the total premiums paid by the female students for this coverage (over a three school-year period). Would any of you who think this coverage should be included be willing to allow the insurance carrier to re-calculate the rates, based on this new entitlement? How about creating separate rates for male and female policy beneficiaries? That would only be fair.

I doubt it. It's always about getting something for nothing - providing benefits for one group that some other group has to pay for, in the name of "compassion."

O.P.M.

If I were her father I would be mortified and would cut her off totally. Slut.

[rubato]

"...

If I were her father I would be mortified and would cut her off totally. Slut.

Some people go through life looking for opportunities to feel anger, express hatred, and practice sadism.

What miserable lives they lead.


yrs,
rubato

[dales]

[Lord Jim]

Mr. Limbaugh has so far managed to lose at least three sponsors over this.

So long as Limbaugh's show remains as popular as it is, (and this whole bru-ha-ha will likely increase his listenership...which undoubtedly was the whole objective of his doing this in the first place) there will always be plenty more sponsors to replace any who leave...

If I were her father I would be mortified and would cut her off totally. Slut.

Dave:

Why do you insist on undermining whatever legitimate points for discussion about this that you may have, (like cost issues, for example) and making yourself look like a fool by repeatedly referring to a 30 year old law school student about who's sexual behavior you know nothing (beyond the fact that presumably she must have sex sometime with someone ) as a "slut"?

Do you simply believe that any unmarried 30 year old woman, who is sexually active to any extent at all (no matter how infrequently, or with how few partners) is by definition a "slut?" Because that's the only way that I see your repeated insistence on referring to this woman as a "slut" as making any logical sense...

If your real objections here related to cost, or the appropriateness of the government backed healthcare picking up the tab, why wouldn't you refer to her as a "freeloader"? Why do you keep picking "slut"?

It seems to me that questions about cost and who pays are issues that could be legitimately argued, (though personally I am persuaded that the cost involved represents a fairly sound use of money versus the costs to the taxpayer of the alternatives) and yet you keep creating a diversion from that discussion, and undermining whatever credibility your arguments might have, by what seems to be a pretty irrational application of the word "slut"...

To draw an analogy, if someone ended every post they made arguing against racial quotas by calling someone a " lazy nigger" any debatable points they might have to make would pretty much get lost....

Frankly, I can not help but wonder if the level of viciousness you have expressed in characterizing this woman as a "slut" isn't in some way colored by your own experience.

You have shared on this board the pain you have experienced by being unable to have children, despite strong efforts to do so. (For which you have my complete sympathy; I know I would have felt an enormous sense of loss if I had found myself in that situation)

I really have to wonder if the understandable disappointment you have felt over this, isn't manifesting itself in a visceral anger and resentment towards those that seek to avoid pregnancy, when they could easily become pregnant.

In any event, whatever the motivation is for you repeatedly calling someone a slut who no one this side of a Sharia Court would consider to be one, it certainly isn't helping you make a credible case about the merits of insurance coverage for contraception.

[rubato]

Rush, Coulter, Savage, O'Reilly; they're all just a fever swamp of hatred and lies. Other than the Republican Base, who would listen to such pure acid-dripping shit?

yrs,
rubato

[Econoline]

Dave: So you--and Rush, and the RCC--are against insurance paying for the prevention of pregnancy by "people who are in no position to have kids" (your words), but have no problem with that same insurance paying much much more for prenatal care, delivery, neonatal care, and pediatric care? (Not to mention taxpayers paying for at least 13 years of public education...but that there's a whole 'nother can of worms; let's not open it here in this thread.)

In the immortal words of Ricky Ricardo, you got some splainin to do!

[Lord Jim]

Having milked all the publicity out of this he could, Rush now backs down:

Limbaugh apologizes to law student for insult

By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press – 11 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh apologized Saturday to a Georgetown University law student he had branded a "slut" and "prostitute" after fellow Republicans as well as Democrats criticized him and several advertisers left his program.

The student, Sandra Fluke, had testified to congressional Democrats in support of their national health care policy that would compel her college to offer health plans that cover her birth control.

"My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir," Limbaugh said on his website. "I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... 116355ca6b

So now the apology will bring another wave of publicity...

And not coincidentally also reduce the heat on his advertisers....

[Andrew D]

Nor, Andrubato ....

Are you fucking kidding me?

Let me put that another way.

Are you fucking kidding me?

Until now, I have not posted a single word in this thread.

You want to go after my opinions, fine. You want to go after his, fine.

But if you keep conjoining me with him, or with anyone else, you will make yourself fair game.

I will quote Handyone's opinions -- or anyone else's, as the mood strikes me -- as yours.

And you will have no ground for objection.

[Andrew D]

Let's give Spurt's words their actual meaning:

My choice of words was not the best accomplished exactly what I intended it to accomplish. And now that I have done my assigned work, I will, as always slink away.

[BoSoxGal]

I don't know where you are getting YOUR information, dgs; but in fact, Ms. Fluke testified about a friend at GULC who was taking oral contraceptives for a health condition, not as birth control - and because she couldn't afford to pay out of pocket, she quit taking them and suffered an adverse medical emergency.

So much for your grasp of the essential issues.