The Rush Limbaugh "Phony Fluke" Controversy

[Jarhead]

To get Birth control pills, don't you need doctor visits, tests and lab work?

I doubt that medication is "one type serves all"

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

What does condoms have to do with the expense of Birth Control Pills?

it is the most effective and least costly form of birth control.
Other than the pleasure of having sex without a condom, what would be the reason one would insist on the expense of BC pills over the use of a condom?

 

[rightwinger]

We're not talking about doctor's visits, tests, and lab work. We're only talking about birth control moron.

To get Birth control pills, don't you need doctor visits, tests and lab work?

I doubt that medication is "one type serves all"

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

Let me explain something guy to guy

It is the men in the relationship who bitch about using a condom and the men who push for sex " just this one time without a condom". It is women who get stuck with the consequences

 

[Jarhead]

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

What does condoms have to do with the expense of Birth Control Pills?

I hear they are excellent for clouding the issue.

wrong. They make a point.
I will ask you the same thing...

Other than the pleasure of not having to use a condom during sex, why would one opt for the expensive alternative of birth control pills?

 

[amrchaos]

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

What does condoms have to do with the expense of Birth Control Pills?

it is the most effective and least costly form of birth control.
Other than the pleasure of having sex without a condom, what would be the reason one would insist on the expense of BC pills over the use of a condom?

Better yet, why do you keep on insisting that a woman use a condom versus the Pill when use of BOTH is more effective?

 

[Jarhead]

To get Birth control pills, don't you need doctor visits, tests and lab work?

I doubt that medication is "one type serves all"

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

Let me explain something guy to guy

It is the men in the relationship who bitch about using a condom and the men who push for sex " just this one time without a condom". It is women who get stuck with the consequences

So now we are getting siomewhere.

So it is all about people not willing to do it the smart way or the least expensive way.

It is all about doing it the easiest way as long as the tax payer pays for it.

 

[rightwinger]

At least our president is showing some class

Obama: Limbaugh's name calling is 'reprehensible'


President Obama today telephoned the Georgetown University law student who was called a "slut" and "prostitute" by Rush Limbaugh, who is getting hit from all sides.


CAPTIONBy AP
Obama called to express his "disappointmnent" that Sandra Fluke has been subjected to "inappropriate personal attacks," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

The president found Limbaugh's comments "reprehensible" and "crude," Carney said.

Limbaugh took fire from Republicans as well: House Speaker John Boehner said the comments are "inappropriate." Ex-Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, a former Senate candidate, said the words were "insulting" and "incendiary." Democrats want an apology.

Ha, Limbaugh apologizes!

You guys do not know WHO Rush Limbaugh is!

What are you going to do, sue him?

Democrats make me laugh! Ha Ha Ha!

I don't expect Limbaugh to apologize, he never does it is bad for business. Calling liberal women sluts is what gets him ratings

The ones who get squeamish are the Republican leadership who have to grovel to appear on his show

 

[OrackBobama]

To get Birth control pills, don't you need doctor visits, tests and lab work?

I doubt that medication is "one type serves all"

they are $35 for exam at Planned Parenthood.

apparently, a far cry from $1000, and certainly not $1000 of exams ever year to get the pill.

Did you include the cost of the pill? Or are you just trying to say the exam costs 35 and the pills are absolutely free?

even if it is 50 a month, which is triple what PP quotes. thats still 635$ EVERY year. Not $1000/ the exam happens at the beginning of the prescription and is covered already on the poor people.

She should just make her studs give her a stipend to pay for the pills anyway.

There is just no reason it needs to be free. If she doesnt want to work for a church that doesnt prove coverage, she can go work somewhere else, or take the Gov't plan.

 

[Jarhead]

What does condoms have to do with the expense of Birth Control Pills?

it is the most effective and least costly form of birth control.
Other than the pleasure of having sex without a condom, what would be the reason one would insist on the expense of BC pills over the use of a condom?

Better yet, why do you keep on insisting that a woman use a condom versus the Pill when use of BOTH is more effective?

Really?

Are you really going there?

I mean...hell.....it is smarter AND safer to have air bags in every nook and cranny of a car. Should we mandate that as well?

Airplanes would be a lot safer with 4 in the cockpit JUST IN CASE 3 of them die of a heart attack....should we mandate that as well?

Heck...we would have less accidents on our raods if they were all 8 lanes going each way....l;ets force all munbicipalities to make 16 lane roads.

Jeez.....so maybe we should have all women get an IUD, AND the pill AND the sponge AND a diaphram aLL FOR FREEE TO MAKE SURE!

Man....you took a valid question of mine and diverted it with such a childish response.

SO I will ask again......why would one opt to use the pill at such a great expense if they can use a condom at the cost of about a buck?

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

Let me explain something guy to guy

It is the men in the relationship who bitch about using a condom and the men who push for sex " just this one time without a condom". It is women who get stuck with the consequences

So now we are getting siomewhere.

So it is all about people not willing to do it the smart way or the least expensive way.

It is all about doing it the easiest way as long as the tax payer pays for it.

I think you have a point. Men should have full responsibility and use condoms. I hope the house passes a bill stating this, I would support it.

 

[OrackBobama]

At least our president is showing some class




President Obama today telephoned the Georgetown University law student who was called a "slut" and "prostitute" by Rush Limbaugh, who is getting hit from all sides.


CAPTIONBy AP
Obama called to express his "disappointmnent" that Sandra Fluke has been subjected to "inappropriate personal attacks," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

The president found Limbaugh's comments "reprehensible" and "crude," Carney said.

Limbaugh took fire from Republicans as well: House Speaker John Boehner said the comments are "inappropriate." Ex-Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, a former Senate candidate, said the words were "insulting" and "incendiary." Democrats want an apology.

Ha, Limbaugh apologizes!

You guys do not know WHO Rush Limbaugh is!

What are you going to do, sue him?

Democrats make me laugh! Ha Ha Ha!

I don't expect Limbaugh to apologize, he never does it is bad for business. Calling liberal women sluts is what gets him ratings

The ones who get squeamish are the Republican leadership who have to grovel to appear on his show

He's not calling liberal women sluts. Only women that want to be paid for having sex are sluts.

 

[amrchaos]

At least our president is showing some class

Obama: Limbaugh's name calling is 'reprehensible'


President Obama today telephoned the Georgetown University law student who was called a "slut" and "prostitute" by Rush Limbaugh, who is getting hit from all sides.


CAPTIONBy AP
Obama called to express his "disappointmnent" that Sandra Fluke has been subjected to "inappropriate personal attacks," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

The president found Limbaugh's comments "reprehensible" and "crude," Carney said.

Limbaugh took fire from Republicans as well: House Speaker John Boehner said the comments are "inappropriate." Ex-Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, a former Senate candidate, said the words were "insulting" and "incendiary." Democrats want an apology.

Ha, Limbaugh apologizes!

You guys do not know WHO Rush Limbaugh is!

What are you going to do, sue him?

Democrats make me laugh! Ha Ha Ha!

I don't expect Limbaugh to apologize, he never does it is bad for business. Calling liberal women sluts is what gets him ratings

The ones who get squeamish are the Republican leadership who have to grovel to appear on his show

The Republican leadership only uses Rush arguements when they are stumped on how to argue a point.

This belief that Republican politicians hold Rush in high esteem is more of a ploy by the Democrats to discredit Republican politicians. Giving time, the Republicans can make a more reasonable arguement for their agenda.

Unfortunately, Rush gets to talk about the Republicans agenda before the Republican party can! It does make for interesting politics on the right.....

 

[rightwinger]

do you need a doctors physical and tests to use a condom?

Or is sex just not as pleasurable with a condom so that is not an option?

And FYI....condoms are safer for the health of the woman than pills; do not have any affect on normal hormone activity; have not been found to cause any side affects (except for the small percentage that are allergic to the material), and have been proven to be more reliable.

Let me explain something guy to guy

It is the men in the relationship who bitch about using a condom and the men who push for sex " just this one time without a condom". It is women who get stuck with the consequences

So now we are getting siomewhere.

So it is all about people not willing to do it the smart way or the least expensive way.

It is all about doing it the easiest way as long as the tax payer pays for it.

Tax payer has nothing to do with it. The issue is insurance companies. Some insurance companies will pay for Viagra and not birth control pills

When my wife and I first got married, we had to pay for BC out of pocket. It was a medical expense we really didn't need at that time and it would have been great to have insurance pay for it.

Each of our children cost about $20 thousand for the insurance company. Any "accidents" would have cost them a lot more than monthly pills

 

[edthecynic]

» Hypocrisy on Capitol Hill: Deconstructing a Dishonest Speech About Birth Control - Big Government

I don't care how many threads have been started about this, I'm going to say my piece.

When I heard Sandra Fluke's speech about having so much sex in law school she needs to spend a thousand bucks a year on birth control. My, instant response (before I heard Rush's broadcast) was "WHAT KIND OF WHORE GOES TO CAPITAL HILL AND TELLS PEOPLE 'I'M SUCH A SLUT, I NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO PAY A THOUSAND BUCKS ON BIRTH CONTROL.'"

I'm married and I don't spend a thousand bucks a year on birth control. If I did my husband wouldn't be able to stop smiling until he saw the bill for birth control and even HE would say the sex train has to be slowed down if are spending THAT much on birth control.

CAN ANY of you girls (my age at least) imagine going out in public (when you were in your 20s) and saying (let alone going to Capital Hill), "Hi, I'm a slut and I need you to pay for me to have sex!"

THIS is how Obama plans to get re-elected. The slut vote?

This is ridiculous. It's so over the top I can't imagine this not having a huge blowback.

People are going to figure out, (even the very stupid) no one wants to take away their birth control. We just don't want to pay for it.

How many presidents have we had (both Democrat and Republican) and somehow we girls have always been able to get our birth control. No one has tried to take it away.

Now, all of a sudden, because Obama wants the government and tax payers to go EVEN MORE BROKE paying for another government goodie, women aren't going to have birth control UNLESS they get it for free courtesy of the American tax payer.

WHAT A BS SHAM!

Who is STUPID ENOUGH to buy this? Oh yeah, I forgot, LIBERALS.

Just when I think liberals can't possibly try to dumb down the populace at large any further, I'm proved to be wrong.

If this stupidity works, it IS time to give up on the American public.

Now, of course, she didn't say that "having so much sex" is the reason birth control pills and the doctor examinations required for the prescription cost $3,000 for her years in Law School, that is the lie CON$ made up to rationalize their calling her a slut and a prostitute. CON$ are proud of the fact that they can rationalize any lie they tell without feeling any shame in lying. Their lies are always justified by their rationalizations.

Here is a link to her transcript, please quote the part that has her saying she had "so much sex" it caused her to spend $1,000 per year on birth control.

Transcript: Sandra Fluke testifies on why women should be allowed access to contraception and reproductive health care | What The Folly?!

 

[Jarhead]

Let me explain something guy to guy

It is the men in the relationship who bitch about using a condom and the men who push for sex " just this one time without a condom". It is women who get stuck with the consequences

So now we are getting siomewhere.

So it is all about people not willing to do it the smart way or the least expensive way.

It is all about doing it the easiest way as long as the tax payer pays for it.

Tax payer has nothing to do with it. The issue is insurance companies. Some insurance companies will pay for Viagra and not birth control pills

When my wife and I first got married, we had to pay for BC out of pocket. It was a medical expense we really didn't need at that time and it would have been great to have insurance pay for it.

Each of our children cost about $20 thousand for the insurance company. Any "accidents" would have cost them a lot more than monthly pills

So it woiuld make sense for an insurance company to WANT to cover BC. Sop if they do, great...if they dont, such was their choice.

But tell me....why were you spending so much on BC if condoms are more realiable and much cheaper?

Why is no one asnwering that?

 

[amrchaos]

it is the most effective and least costly form of birth control.
Other than the pleasure of having sex without a condom, what would be the reason one would insist on the expense of BC pills over the use of a condom?

Better yet, why do you keep on insisting that a woman use a condom versus the Pill when use of BOTH is more effective?

Really?

Are you really going there?

I mean...hell.....it is smarter AND safer to have air bags in every nook and cranny of a car. Should we mandate that as well?

Airplanes would be a lot safer with 4 in the cockpit JUST IN CASE 3 of them die of a heart attack....should we mandate that as well?

Heck...we would have less accidents on our raods if they were all 8 lanes going each way....l;ets force all munbicipalities to make 16 lane roads.

Jeez.....so maybe we should have all women get an IUD, AND the pill AND the sponge AND a diaphram aLL FOR FREEE TO MAKE SURE!

Man....you took a valid question of mine and diverted it with such a childish response.

SO I will ask again......why would one opt to use the pill at such a great expense if they can use a condom at the cost of about a buck?

So we jumped from the expense of Birth control pills, to whether it is plausible to using only condoms versus Birth control pills versus both(which will include the cost of Birth control pills) to mandates.

Can we stick to the topic of Birth control pills and their costs?

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

So now we are getting siomewhere.

So it is all about people not willing to do it the smart way or the least expensive way.

It is all about doing it the easiest way as long as the tax payer pays for it.

Tax payer has nothing to do with it. The issue is insurance companies. Some insurance companies will pay for Viagra and not birth control pills

When my wife and I first got married, we had to pay for BC out of pocket. It was a medical expense we really didn't need at that time and it would have been great to have insurance pay for it.

Each of our children cost about $20 thousand for the insurance company. Any "accidents" would have cost them a lot more than monthly pills

So it woiuld make sense for an insurance company to WANT to cover BC. Sop if they do, great...if they dont, such was their choice.

But tell me....why were you spending so much on BC if condoms are more realiable and much cheaper?

Why is no one asnwering that?

Jarhead you know the answer, why do you need it typed out? Because people like the wet and wild au natural.

 

[Jarhead]

Better yet, why do you keep on insisting that a woman use a condom versus the Pill when use of BOTH is more effective?

Really?

Are you really going there?

I mean...hell.....it is smarter AND safer to have air bags in every nook and cranny of a car. Should we mandate that as well?

Airplanes would be a lot safer with 4 in the cockpit JUST IN CASE 3 of them die of a heart attack....should we mandate that as well?

Heck...we would have less accidents on our raods if they were all 8 lanes going each way....l;ets force all munbicipalities to make 16 lane roads.

Jeez.....so maybe we should have all women get an IUD, AND the pill AND the sponge AND a diaphram aLL FOR FREEE TO MAKE SURE!

Man....you took a valid question of mine and diverted it with such a childish response.

SO I will ask again......why would one opt to use the pill at such a great expense if they can use a condom at the cost of about a buck?

So we jumped from the expense of Birth control pills, to whether it is plausible to using only condoms versus Birth control pills versus both(which will include the cost of Birth control pills) to mandates.

Can we stick to the topic of Birth control pills and their costs?

No...the topic was the cost for Birth Control...and that apparently it costs 3000 a year when yoiu include the cost of the pills, the doctor, the tests, etc.

So my question is valid.

Why not use the most reliable and cheapest form of birth contriol....condoms?

If one has sex 10 times a week it would cost 500 a year.

2500 less....why not?

 

[DiamondDave]

Sorry.....but I just can't understand the priorities of Conservatives

They state that their fundamental social objection is abortion. Morally, I see where they are coming from

But here we have the primary mechanism for preventing unwanted pregnancy and resulting abortions

But what do conservatives do? They scream.....I don't want MY insurance paying for YOUR birth control

Makes zero sense

Why on earth should anyone else or government pay for your recreational entertainment??

Now if a company, with leadership or ownership having beliefs against contraception, should have every right to decide what EXTRA BENEFITS it offers to its employees.. and the employees have the right to choose whether or not to work there and the right to pay for contraception themselves.... they do NOT have a right to FORCE the company against its beliefs, even with government backing...

This is not about 'my insurance' paying for 'your birth control'

idiot

And my point is that Republicans are encouraging an increase in the number of abortions

Not wanting mandated or forced participation and payment in contraception is not encouraging abortion.. nice leap though...

 

[Jarhead]

Tax payer has nothing to do with it. The issue is insurance companies. Some insurance companies will pay for Viagra and not birth control pills

When my wife and I first got married, we had to pay for BC out of pocket. It was a medical expense we really didn't need at that time and it would have been great to have insurance pay for it.

Each of our children cost about $20 thousand for the insurance company. Any "accidents" would have cost them a lot more than monthly pills

So it woiuld make sense for an insurance company to WANT to cover BC. Sop if they do, great...if they dont, such was their choice.

But tell me....why were you spending so much on BC if condoms are more realiable and much cheaper?

Why is no one asnwering that?

Jarhead you know the answer, why do you need it typed out? Because people like the wet and wild au natural.

so it is not about the health of the woman..

It is about pleasure.

Condoms are not as pleasurable....so people want to force insurance comnpanies to cover more expensive means of BC.....


Not a good enough reason.

 

[amrchaos]

Really?

Are you really going there?

I mean...hell.....it is smarter AND safer to have air bags in every nook and cranny of a car. Should we mandate that as well?

Airplanes would be a lot safer with 4 in the cockpit JUST IN CASE 3 of them die of a heart attack....should we mandate that as well?

Heck...we would have less accidents on our raods if they were all 8 lanes going each way....l;ets force all munbicipalities to make 16 lane roads.

Jeez.....so maybe we should have all women get an IUD, AND the pill AND the sponge AND a diaphram aLL FOR FREEE TO MAKE SURE!

Man....you took a valid question of mine and diverted it with such a childish response.

SO I will ask again......why would one opt to use the pill at such a great expense if they can use a condom at the cost of about a buck?

So we jumped from the expense of Birth control pills, to whether it is plausible to using only condoms versus Birth control pills versus both(which will include the cost of Birth control pills) to mandates.

Can we stick to the topic of Birth control pills and their costs?

No...the topic was the cost for Birth Control...and that apparently it costs 3000 a year when yoiu include the cost of the pills, the doctor, the tests, etc.

So my question is valid.

Why not use the most reliable and cheapest form of birth contriol....condoms?

If one has sex 10 times a week it would cost 500 a year.

2500 less....why not?

And why not use both
(By the way, I doubt birth control costs $3000 a year. Please stop misrepresenting the facts. I think Fluke said that the total cost of contraceptive while in law school(which takes several years) cost almost $3000. A big difference mind you.