Slut Or Not??

[Foxfyre]

All this fluke had to do is walk a few miles from Georgetown in either of 4 different ways, east, west, north or south.
A Planned Parenthood facility would have provided her with either low cost or free contraceptives to fit all her needs.
But no, all of you right wing hacks fell right for the Democratic bait and took it hook, line and sinker.
Played right into Obama's hands in all of this making an issue out of nothing.
And as a result of the typical religous right wing kook knee jerk reaction Obama's #s amongst moderate women jump double digits in the last 10 days.
Dumb asses.

Some dumb like foxes however.

After stepping back and really looking at the disingenuousness and improbability about this whole thing, and how invconsequential it really is, I am convinced that Fluke was handpicked as the poster girl to deflect the national debate from issues less defensible by the Administration. Rush wasn't quick enough on his feet and took the bait and, because he didn't think before he spoke, poured a whole tanker of gasoline on the fire. The Obama surrogate media was more than happy to fan the flames and our more leftist friends here, as the planners knew they would be, are more than happy to be gullible patsies to advance the process.

The plot was brilliantly conceived and executed. We on the other side of the fence need to sharpen our skills here.

The religous right wing Republicans took the bait and fanned the flames the most.
Led by the naive and gullible Santorum.
Do we want a President that so weak and easily gets suckered in on a non issue like this?
He took the bait quicker than a bass on a plug.

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

 

[Gadawg73]

Some dumb like foxes however.

After stepping back and really looking at the disingenuousness and improbability about this whole thing, and how invconsequential it really is, I am convinced that Fluke was handpicked as the poster girl to deflect the national debate from issues less defensible by the Administration. Rush wasn't quick enough on his feet and took the bait and, because he didn't think before he spoke, poured a whole tanker of gasoline on the fire. The Obama surrogate media was more than happy to fan the flames and our more leftist friends here, as the planners knew they would be, are more than happy to be gullible patsies to advance the process.

The plot was brilliantly conceived and executed. We on the other side of the fence need to sharpen our skills here.

The religous right wing Republicans took the bait and fanned the flames the most.
Led by the naive and gullible Santorum.
Do we want a President that so weak and easily gets suckered in on a non issue like this?
He took the bait quicker than a bass on a plug.

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

 

[Si modo]

The religous right wing Republicans took the bait and fanned the flames the most.
Led by the naive and gullible Santorum.
Do we want a President that so weak and easily gets suckered in on a non issue like this?
He took the bait quicker than a bass on a plug.

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

Funny thing is, many of us you label as "kooks" happen not to have any religion. Yet, we also see the importance of protecting First Amendment rights.

The fact that O-bots surrender that so easily because of adoration is stunning and frightening.

 

[Gadawg73]

ALL the Republicans had to do was what I stated time and time again:
"Hey you, go down the street to any of 4 different Planned Parenthood locations within 2 miles of Georgetown to get whatever you need."
They were the ones that twisted this into some kind of legal issue when all they had to do was say the obvious.
And the dumb broad would have gone away. But NO, they just had to make this some form of The Christian Soldiers versus the "anti and non religous".
Sorry folks, this old street 'gator calls them as he sees them. Just because many of you got suckered into this does not make chicken soup out of chicken poop.
Sooner than later, and I hope sooner as I can not take 4 more years of Obammie, the religous right has to admit that as hard as they try and try and try, YOU CAN NOT POLISH A TURD.

 

[Gadawg73]

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

Funny thing is, many of us you label as "kooks" happen not to have any religion. Yet, we also see the importance of protecting First Amendment rights.

The fact that O-bots surrender that so easily because of adoration is stunning and frightening.

I vote Republican Moe. This had nothing to do with 1st Amendment rights. This was a publicity stunt. The woman was a fraud.
Wouldn't it be wise to have checked out this woman TO BEGIN WITH?
You may want to give credibility to this woman and respond to her preposterous claims but how stupid does that make us look when the real firing starts in the general election?
We have to know when to pick our battles.
It is best to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and REMOVE ALL DOUBT.
We took a beating on this one. If you do not know that then I will tell you again.

 

[Foxfyre]

The religous right wing Republicans took the bait and fanned the flames the most.
Led by the naive and gullible Santorum.
Do we want a President that so weak and easily gets suckered in on a non issue like this?
He took the bait quicker than a bass on a plug.

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

When the State presumes to dictate to a religious group that they MUST go against their religious convictions, that is clearly both a violation of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. It was a no brainer for anybody, religious or not, and no court in the land that respected any part of Constitution would have upheld that.
And when the Administration realized they couldn't win on that one, they tried to put the burden on the insurance companies. That didn't fly either because those of us who defend the First Amendment also saw that the same issues applied and it was still government overstepping its authority to require a private industry to sell a specific product. That is the whole issue that will be debated by SCOTUS re Obamacare. And when the Administration saw they weren't scoring any points there either. . . .

So they recruit Fluke, a brilliant diversionary tactic to distract the gullible and create a new and more sellable thesis.

And I don't care who does the speaking, if they are on the right side of the issue, their motives are their own business.
Right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of the motives for doing either.

 

[daveman]

It's a shame really that after fighting so long and so hard to be taken seriously as women and not be dismissed as mere sex objects, we have women now fighting twice as hard to be reduced to nothing BUT sex objects.

FUCK you. The ability to CHOSE if we get pregnant or not does not reduce US, you little asshole, and it only reduces YOU in your wimpy little pants.

Yes, you have the ability to not get pregnant.

But since I'm not the one having sex with you, I see no reason why I should pay for the prevention.

 

[daveman]

It was already a covered benefit. Because the government mandates it makes is evil? REALLY? Can you people HEAR yourselves? CAN you?

When the government mandates it to a religious organization, it doesn't make it evil, rather it's a violation of the First Amendment.

You know better Si, you do. You pay attention to whats going on. And honestly, the first was not to be used as an excuse to deny this.

Who says nobody can buy their own birth control?

Oh, yeah -- nobody.

 

[Gadawg73]

Sorry, but I think the religious right's position is defensible on this one. The non religious and anti-religious won't come to the defense of the First Amendment religion clause, but the initial issue was a blatant and intentional attack on that clause. The Administration was loising big time on that issue because most fair minded and Consittutional conscious Americans saw the dishonesty and oversteeping of government authority on that one and the danger to all our freedoms if it was allowed to stand.

So they used Fluke to change the debate to a women's health issue. And everybody is now focused and talking about that and no longer seeing it as a Church/State issue. That isn't Santorum's fault.

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

When the State presumes to dictate to a religious group that they MUST go against their religious convictions, that is clearly both a violation of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. It was a no brainer for anybody, religious or not, and no court in the land that respected any part of Constitution would have upheld that.
And when the Administration realized they couldn't win on that one, they tried to put the burden on the insurance companies. That didn't fly either because those of us who defend the First Amendment also saw that the same issues applied and it was still government overstepping its authority to require a private industry to sell a specific product. That is the whole issue that will be debated by SCOTUS re Obamacare. And when the Administration saw they weren't scoring any points there either. . . .

So they recruit Fluke, a brilliant diversionary tactic to distract the gullible and create a new and more sellable thesis.

And I don't care who does the speaking, if they are on the right side of the issue, their motives are their own business.
Right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of the motives for doing either.

The state was out of this one other than rhetoric.
Once the court case would have started count me on your side.
But that never happened and would have never have happened.
Much ado about nothing. The woman was a plant and they knew she would be discovered.
The Republicans look about as stupid as ever on this one.
You do not order a fleet of B-52s to strafe a platoon of 32 men.
Speak silently and carry a big stick. Choose your battles wisely.
That was not done here no matter how one spins it.
This was an automatic Democratic victory the second anyone stooped to Fluke's level to respond to it.
And that hurts us.
If it is ethics we seek then entering into this fray for publicity in an election year is always the wrong approach. Folks either have the dicsipline to research and plan their game plan before they start their planned defense or they just go on emotion and what feels good at the time.
This one was a no brainer from the start. We lost a lot of ground on this one. We should have totally ignored becuase we were right from the start.
You do not give credibility to frauds.

 

[daveman]

Ya' know, Dave....we have to give credit where credit is due...

the Obama strategy of spotlighting this fake contraception issue- hundreds of posts on the subject....
...has kept the conversation far away from the flops and failures of the Pretender of Pennsylvania Avenue.


Kudos, Barack!

He learned politics in Chicago. Nothing is ever as it seems.

<hr.

Do, DOCTOR....explain how a condom is going to help a woman that needs hormones for a medical condition. How will condoms help regulate your periods, for example?
I'm patiently awaiting your "educated" explanation.....


Hours and hours later I'm STILL waiting for your explanation of how condoms supply hormones for medical conditions......hmmmm....doesn't say much for your expertise on the subject, eh?

Where did I claim to be a doctor?

Oh, yeah -- nowhere.

She was talking about contraceptives. I showed you where you can get 'em for 65 cents a pop.

Surely a college student can afford 65 cents. If not -- perhaps she shouldn't have sex.

But no one has yet adequately explained to me why people who aren't having sex with her should pay for her contraceptives.

You wanna give it a shot?

 

[daveman]

He learned politics in Chicago. Nothing is ever as it seems.

<hr.

Do, DOCTOR....explain how a condom is going to help a woman that needs hormones for a medical condition. How will condoms help regulate your periods, for example?
I'm patiently awaiting your "educated" explanation.....

Relevance?

Apparently, unregulated periods are my responsibility, too.

Right, Scout?

 

[Foxfyre]

There was no court case here. All this amounted to was a publicity stunt.
And the religous right wing kooks wanted just as much or more publicity so they entered into the fray as well.
Love ya there but if you do not know that everyone of the Republicans entered into this fray for political gain only then you are as naive as they were on this one.
Fox, in the real world of politics and the law you have to know when and how to pick your battles.
This was no First Amendment battle. This was a side show publicity stunt set up by the Democrats. The Republicans bit and fought a pissin contest battle with blanks in their guns.
No offense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the non religous or anti religous. This was ALL ABOUT POLITICS.

When the State presumes to dictate to a religious group that they MUST go against their religious convictions, that is clearly both a violation of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. It was a no brainer for anybody, religious or not, and no court in the land that respected any part of Constitution would have upheld that.
And when the Administration realized they couldn't win on that one, they tried to put the burden on the insurance companies. That didn't fly either because those of us who defend the First Amendment also saw that the same issues applied and it was still government overstepping its authority to require a private industry to sell a specific product. That is the whole issue that will be debated by SCOTUS re Obamacare. And when the Administration saw they weren't scoring any points there either. . . .

So they recruit Fluke, a brilliant diversionary tactic to distract the gullible and create a new and more sellable thesis.

And I don't care who does the speaking, if they are on the right side of the issue, their motives are their own business.
Right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of the motives for doing either.

The state was out of this one other than rhetoric.
Once the court case would have started count me on your side.
But that never happened and would have never have happened.
Much ado about nothing. The woman was a plant and they knew she would be discovered.
The Republicans look about as stupid as ever on this one.
You do not order a fleet of B-52s to strafe a platoon of 32 men.
Speak silently and carry a big stick. Choose your battles wisely.
That was not done here no matter how one spins it.
This was an automatic Democratic victory the second anyone stooped to Fluke's level to respond to it.
And that hurts us.
If it is ethics we seek then entering into this fray for publicity in an election year is always the wrong approach. Folks either have the dicsipline to research and plan their game plan before they start their planned defense or they just go on emotion and what feels good at the time.
This one was a no brainer from the start. We lost a lot of ground on this one. We should have totally ignored becuase we were right from the start.
You do not give credibility to frauds.

It was a public Senate hearing with all the media invited. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats who also have the advantage of the bully pulpit. Nothing the Republicans said or contributed in that meeting was the least bit controversial. The media was going to blow it out of proportion regardless and Rush unfortunately helped them do that big time. He gave the Democrats a huge gift which is probably why they haven't called for his head to roll this time. They hope he will be their useful idiot and keep the focvus on the new issue.

Yes Rush should have been a lot smarter. A lot of folks should have been a lot smarter. That's why I gave the point to the Leftists. It was an intentional scheme brilliantly executed and it worked.

Which brings us to the point of our next choice. We can choose to make political hay out of it to punish one or more GOP presidential contenders. We can choose to get in personal digs at a political party. And by doing that, we just make it better and better results for the Fluke plan.

Or we can return the debate to the issues it should be focused on.

 

[daveman]

I dont know. Most folks I know are focused on life sucking, not rubbers paied for by insurance companeys.

apparently not on the left. They're worried about getting free condoms over the economy.

Today free condoms. Tomorrow a free Volt.

Poor analogy.

They're still making condoms.

 

[daveman]

Birth control is used for things other than to prevent conception. Where do you get that her needs for birth control were escalating, or that she had any birth control needs at all?
She referenced in her testimony a person who needed the pills for something other than contraception. Likely the operation to remove the woman's ovary cost more than many years of the pill.



Meet The Georgetown Law Student Rush Limbaugh Called A 'Slut' - Business Insider

There are many women on the pill who are not sexually active at all, and there is no indication that she is, at least not from what I read. I've been to law school, and I know the demands on time. So, if she is, more power to her, she would be quite a woman to have much of any life at all outside law school.

I think Limbaugh has crossed a line here, which is deeper than any line he has crossed previously. If republicans have any sense, they will distance themselves from him. Who is he to talk anyway. He got caught coming back from the Dominican Republic with Viagra that had someone else's name on it.

He is nothing but an entertainer no different than a hell fire and brimstone televangelist.

Oh BTW: the VA pays for Levitra for vets.

Did Rush Limbaugh make someone else pay for his viagra? Shoud possession of viagra be a crime? Liberal democrats may want conservatives to distance themselves from him, or condemn him. That's democrats, clearly if democrats don't realize by now that he's fully supported by conservative republicans there is something wrong with the democrat cognitive abiityl

Ms. Fluke never asked anyone to pay for anyone else's birth control.....try again

Do you have any idea how insurance works? Because it doesn't look like you do.

 

[daveman]

Maybe those who can't afford to buy contraceptives shouldn't enroll at pricey Jesuit or Catholic university and choose a more modestly priced university that does have that in their insurance coverage? Is that so difficult a concept?

From what I understand, she chose to enroll at Georgetown, knowing what their policy was, and intended to get all activist on them.

In other words, just another leftist busybody who thinks the world should bend to her demands.

 

[daveman]

Wouldn't that correctly be "for which everyone pays premiums"?

Perhaps our friend is under the same illusion that fools people into believing that anything the government provides to them is free. It would logically follow that if the insurance company covers prescriptions for contraceptives, that would also be free.

Unfortunately, for those of us who actually pay insurance premiums and taxes, we know that nothing is really free other than what God or the universe itself provides for us.

Did she claim insurance is free?

I have insurance. I pay for premiums.

A week and a half ago, I picked up $330 worth of medications for my wife. It cost me $27.

Where did the extra money come from?

 

[daveman]

You know better Si, you do. You pay attention to whats going on. And honestly, the first was not to be used as an excuse to deny this.

1. This isn't denying women any rights at all. If they want to work for a religious based organization or contract their services, then they know full well going into it what to expect. There are many other organizations offering the same services or for whom they could work.

2. The First Amendment is there to keep government out of religion and religion out of government. That is NEVER a one-way street. Without the integrity of the first, the gains in women's rights would crash and burn. (It reminds me of folks in recovery who put their sobriety first and always - without that, nothing else is possible for them.)

If you want to work for a religious based organization, then once you collect your wages and benefits, the gov't should protect you from that religious organization's attempts to control how you spend it.

Really? The Catholics said anyone who works for the Church can't buy their own contraceptives?

 

[Foxfyre]

1. This isn't denying women any rights at all. If they want to work for a religious based organization or contract their services, then they know full well going into it what to expect. There are many other organizations offering the same services or for whom they could work.

2. The First Amendment is there to keep government out of religion and religion out of government. That is NEVER a one-way street. Without the integrity of the first, the gains in women's rights would crash and burn. (It reminds me of folks in recovery who put their sobriety first and always - without that, nothing else is possible for them.)

If you want to work for a religious based organization, then once you collect your wages and benefits, the gov't should protect you from that religious organization's attempts to control how you spend it.

Really? The Catholics said anyone who works for the Church can't buy their own contraceptives?

Or buy your own insurance that covers them if you want to for that matter. I worked for the Catholics for three and a half years, and I cannot recall being told that I could not do ANYTHING. Except place a banner across the front of the hospital. (I was in charge of public relations among other things.) But anything extra curricular, nope. Nothing verbally expressed. Nothing in the personnel policy. I was free as a bird to buy and use all the contraceptives I wanted during that entire time.

 

[daveman]

Religious colleges ought to make up their minds if they want secular students or not.

Of course they can have secular students.

But the secular students don't get to dictate policy, do they?

If you walk into a bar, you're going to see people drinking. If that offends you, don't walk into a bar.

But you look like a petulant child if you demand the bar stop serving alcohol so your tender sensibilities aren't offended.

 

[daveman]

The left is about choices, expanding traditional gender roles. Women having the opportunity to work and have a family, or to be a stay at home mom, or to work full time and have the husband be the stay at home parent.

You're digging out obscure writings from thirty plus years ago, PC. Why is that?

The left supports choice...as long as you make the left-approved choice.