If Limbaugh had called her a c***, it would have been much worse and you would have had your panties in a tighter wad. You can twist it to justify what Maher did, but it doesn't make what Maher did acceptable.

Except that her argument holds for married couples as well. Pretty hard to find your way to calling a married, monogamous woman a slut using any sort of logical thought process.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

You are dancing pretty fast there dude.

---

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

"One is an intentionally divisive person...?" And that gives somebody else the right to then start in with the whole cunt thing, even if your characterization of Palin's demeanor were true? And it's okay as long as the person doing the cunt-calling sides with civil rights? Hell, Barry, I'm a brown skinned fellow who's actually been on the receiving end of "spic," "taco bender," "wetback," "greaser," "Injun Joe" (for my Navajo blood), "hippie" (that was back in the early 70s) and the like, and I support civil rights for my oppressed black, brown, yellow and red brothers and sisters. So, can I call Fluke (of nature) a whore and a slut, and that'd be okay? I mean, it seems to me that she was attempting to be deliberately divisive, and I'm sure more people than just me would say so.

Do you even realize how hypocritical you're being here, sir? Now, if you'd made the argument on libel or slander (especially slander) grounds and buttressed that with an explanation about public persons versus private persons (though I believe Ms. Fluke gave up the right to being called a private person when she took up the banner of "community activism") you might have a stronger leg upon which to stand. Maybe.

Me? I'm going to hide behind my brown skin, especially when all you whiteys start getting up to well-meaning mischief in trying to 'take care' of me and my people, and really start calling Fluke (of nature) a slut and a whore because, after all, it's okay when I do it because I'm some sorta minority or something. And please show me where contraception -- or even health care, inter alia -- is an inalienable right under the Constitution. I can find an inalienable right to freedom of religious and other moral conscience, of course. But the whole contraception thing? Not as yet.


T.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

That would be a good point if Fluke were married, she's not, and she was the subject of his rant. It is what it is.

They're all using some bizarro pretzel logic to excuse Maher and indict Limbaugh when both are just two sides of the same coin in this case. But it's okay when it's done by the Left, correct? (I was going to say, "But it's okay when it's done by the Left, right?" but that would've been too hackneyed even for me ;-)

No but its slightly disturbing that you can.

As was said, Mahers comments were based on pure hatred and nothing more.

Rushs comments were to bring attention to the lunacy of expecting everyone else to pay for your choice to have sex and acting as if its a big issue. Its not to 99% of the people in this country.

Did you catch the part where she said that she was upset that the faculty gets theirs covered but the students don't? She is nothing more than an activist without a clue and when you put yourself on the political stage and make demands like hers you have to expect some arrows to fly your way.

If I really believed he thought she was a slut for having sex then I might feel differently. I was listening on my way home the day this all went down and it was obvious to anyone with a clue what he was trying to point out by being over the top. Hatred was not the deciding factor.

I nearly drove off the road laughing because I knew what the response would be and I havent been disappointed one bit. He will laugh all the way to the bank.

---

~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson

---

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06

I've gone over the script, and then listened, to what Limbaugh says, and his ultimate thesis was actually valid. The whole slut thing is just the Left's way of screaming "Look! A big, bright, shiny object!" while pointing away from Ms. Fluke and her inane chatter in a place she really hadn't even been invited to speak at.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

In Rush's words:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/...ized_to_sandra_fluke

---

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

What you're essentially saying, then, is that he was making a personal attack, rather than an attack on her argument. Not that it matters much to me what Rush Limbaugh has to say, or how he goes about saying it.

Regardless, she was there not as an advocate for herself, but for women as a group. Her testimony included anecdotes of married students in her predicament (such that it is).

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Not really. I think they are both idiots that expect that this little silly divide you have constructed will play out. It's funny. The supporters/detractors, not the so-called entertainers.

((rolls eyes))

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I could be wrong but doesn't doesn't the inclusion of contraception actually lessen the cost of an insurance premium?

My guess is that it varies by state and insurer.

Here's a non-partisan fact-checking site's analysis of the question:

http://www.factcheck.org/...contraception-costs/

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

What is so hard for you people to understand? This is nothing to do with cost, and everything to do with liberty vs tyranny. Why should a religous organization be forced to fund or provide at not cost a service that runs contrary to its beliefs, no matter how arcane and out of date their beliefs are? Why do you same people throw the wall separating church and state when a gov't building has had "In God We Trust" since the 1800, but have no problem with our gov't mandating that a religous institution provide services that are contrary to their beliefs? This lady chose to attend a Catholic University. By doing so, she has accepted that they hold certain beliefs that might be contrary to hers. Yet she felt the value of a degree from their outweighed her disagreement with the church cannons. Or did she? Like many activist, she may well just wish to make an issue where there is none. I'm pretty sure a 10 minute metro ride would get you in close proximity to a public health clinic which would provide all she sought at affordable prices or even free of charge. This is a non-issue that unfortunately Rush Limbaugh, an entertainer taken way too seriously by both his sycophants and leftist social engineers, stepped in. But in the end, this is a non-issue serving as a distraction driven by liberals who cannot defend a single thing this failure of a president has done.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Don't be so hard on the goyim, boychik. After all, he learned that from the Left, with it's "this is an apology, but not really an apology" apologia techniques. ;-) Didn't "climate scientist" Pete Gleick kind of use the same technique when he got busted using lies and deceptions to obtain inside communications from the Heartland Institute? You know: " I had to lie and cheat in order to do this, and descend to the climate deniers' level, in order to serve a higher cause," that kind of thing?

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

I hear ya, and here is my question...why should some taxpayers of this country be forced to fund, through it's tax exempt status, any (all) religious institutions if we don't want to.

. . . and Catholic Hospitals should then stop receiving funds from State and Federal governments - and end their participation with programs such as Medicare and Medicaid - - - then that argument would hold water.

That is a different argument with infinite possibilities. And is a debate well beyond a one sentence question. They deserve tax benefits because they also provide charitable service which I would argue is the business of a religous organization. In fact, I think they are a better provider than our gov't for such welfare. But if you want to really expand the scope of the discussion by all means. Why should my tax dollars provide food stamps that can be used to buy junkfood contributing to obesity and more health cost, when a charity can do so cheaper, with better controls to prevent fraud? Why should my tax dollars go to fund advocacy groups that steer public policy, in many cases with junk science? Why does my taxpayers dollars go to subsidize alternative fuels that absent subsidies would never pass a cost benefit analysis? On the same note, why are my taxpayers going to oil subsidies that make oil artificially cheap so we do not seek alternative sources of energy? In other words, each issue is complex and goes beyond a simple question. While we are at it, why am I paying income taxes, when for 200 years our federal gov't was funded solely on tariffs and taxes on foreign goods?

So if you want to really discuss this, why don't you give me more details to support your question?

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Love how he blames the left for everything. Pretty straight forward. He called her a slut and a prostitute. No need for the left to do anything but watch the shit hit the fan, by his own doing.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce

Quote:

You are dancing pretty fast there dude.

I give up. You all are right. There is absolutley no difference between calling a woman a cunt for being devisive and calling a woman a slut and a whore for using birth control. It also makes absolutely no difference who is using the term.


I tried to give you the answer as to *why* sponsors are pulling their ads from Limbaugh's show and you think I'm wrong. The real reason is the left wing liberal nutjobs have a lot of power over the companies that advertise on Limbaugh's show and they are forcing them to pull their ads. Yeah, that's it!

Good grief, this ain't rocket science! Using a demeaning term related to a demographic gets some people riled up. When you insinuate that an activity that a large group of people partake in makes you a slut, you are surprised that that large group gets *more* upset?????



You all asked why ads get pulled for what Limbaugh said and not for what Maher said and I told you. Keep in mind, these aren't special interest groups and these aren't liberals posting on ST. These are corporations who had previously thought that Rush Limbaugh's show would be a great place to advertise. As usual, if the answer doesn't fit your preconceived world view, then you ain't listening.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I don't suppport that kind of language and he is eating appropriate crap for it.

Interesting on how that whole hearing went down though, right?

---

_________________________________
I'll be what I am
A solitary man

http://www.politifact.com/...ulings/promise-kept/

Here is a little short list but don't let facts get in the way of your partisan talking point. You might not like what he has accomplished but he has accomplished quite a bit.

I would be inclined to agree with you, but unfortunately gov't has oozed its way into all avenues of our life, that you could argue that parents who recieve Earned Income Tax Credits should follow child rearing guidelines in accordance with gov't standars. This same argument came up when there was talk of regulating the salaries at banks who received bailout money. A valid concern, but then it becomes a slippery slope that can be applied to any company that ever received a tax credit, in otherwords any business unfortunate enough to get into the radar of politicians seeking a political enemy. So in my ideal world, Catholic Hospitals would nto be getting this taxpayer money with the exception of not-for profit status to begin with. And that would assume they provide a standard level of service to those who cannot afford medical care with minimal red tape and harrassment. The tradeoff for not paying taxes.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden