Sponsors are dropping rush.

[Big Fitz]

Up until now, radio stations have paid to have Ol' Limp's programs on their stations. Bet that will change in the near future.

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I suggest you listen today and find out how many PSAs and station promos are on the air. I know I'll be listening to see how big a change in the advertising has occurred.

I doubt it'll be that big.

 

[Big Fitz]

I am appalled that I live in a society that publicly discusses such personal things and, most of all, that it attaches political significance to it.

Two mottos of the left.

"The Personal IS Political."
"Everything is Political."

 

[thereisnospoon]

Up until now, radio stations have paid to have Ol' Limp's programs on their stations. Bet that will change in the near future.

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

Yeah ok...SO threre are no longer ANY sponsors for the show....
Tell me a another one.
What's next, Ocean front real estate sale just outside Scottsdale, AZ?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Up until now, radio stations have paid to have Ol' Limp's programs on their stations. Bet that will change in the near future.

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

Keep wishing.

 

[thereisnospoon]

This memo from Premiere Networks states that the number of advertisers no longer sponsoring Rush is now 350. Many are also pulling their spots from Hannity and Levin. I guess they finally figured out that women are consumers as well.

Just liberal women.

Conservative woman don't use contraception? Conservative women don't find find Rush's idiotic statement demeaning? I think you'll find many that do and do. Hell, some real conservatives don't like the idea of the state interfering with reproductive freedoms at all.

Your post does not rise to the level of stupid.
I would imagine only the perpetually offended would find it demeaning.
And of course the hypersensitive who have nothing better to do than find things to bother themselves.
Get this straight...No one is interfering with anyone's access to birth control.
That however is not the debate.
The left has turned this into a political issue.
That is where the failure occurrs.

 

[tenthertoo]

I am appalled that I live in a society that publicly discusses such personal things and, most of all, that it attaches political significance to it.

Two mottos of the left.

"The Personal IS Political."
"Everything is Political."

Quite true and even more shame to regret.

 

[Dot Com]

 

[tenthertoo]

I can't imagine what the issue is all about. The availability or contraception devices has never been a problem.

I'm 73 years old and by the time I was old enough to need one me and every guy I knew had a condom in our wallets (the only reason we needed a wallet - don't know anybody who actually got to use it). Then when the "pill" became available in my early 20's birth control became a total non issue.

What is the problem?

 

[Old Rocks]

Ask Ol' Limp

 

[Synthaholic]

Just liberal women.

I don't think Republican women enjoy being called sluts, either.

These are very highly rated shows. Other sponsors will leap at the chance to advertise.
And what "you think" is irrelevant. Do not pretend to speak for others.
And who called "all liberal women" sluts?
This is where you liberal lose on every issue. You are hung up on words. You fear them. You are controlled not by intelligence but you emotions.

How do you know? Because Rush tells you that he has 20 million listeners? He also says he has talent on loan from God.

You'll believe anything.

And I'll change that to "I'm sure" that Republican women do not like being called sluts. How's that?

 

[Dick Tuck]

We object based on the premise that the need for these things is the result of "choice".

So's Viagra. You, and your side, doesn't seem to get the fact that the "choice" is of the woman who owns the body, not by a bunch of middle-aged, white males, who want to ignore the prohibition of the first amendment regarding creation of laws recognizing any establishment, so they may create their own form of an American theocracy.

You do realize, btw, that there's many off-label uses for female contraception, including reduction of the hassle of menopause? Probably not.

First. you can stop the racist crap.

My racist crap? The fact remains that the House panel, advising on the Blunt amendment, consisted of six, middle aged, white men. Women were excluded from that august panel, in spite of it being their right to decide. BTW, so were the research doctors from The National Institutes of Health, who proposed that reproductive planning be part of the Health Insurance Reform Act, for reasons of good public policy.

Second. You are 100% correct. Women do own their bodies. And as a condition of that ownership are responsible for their own needs. Get it?
Non is denying anyone anything.
You people just want to have others pay for your choices.
That is not how it works.

So middle aged, white males are the ones to decide public policy regarding preventative care, when it comes to areas of reproduction, and women don't have anything to add on the issue?

We as human beings can choose "to" or choose "not to"..
BTW, That is correct. For males who require things to enhance their performance, they should have to pay for it themselves.

The Blunt amendment didn't even bother to address those popular penile dysfunction drugs. Your selective outrage over female contraceptives, and ignorance of their off-label use shows that you want this to be a political football, rather than a public health policy issue.

First Amendment? Please. This is a financial issue.

So why did that congressional panel come with religious collars on?

Insurance carriers are already over regulated with federal mandates that require different types of coverage. That is without regard to whether the individual needs the coverage or not.

Of course they're regulated. Many insurance carriers have tried to deny coverage to people with melanoma because their clients had zit treatment in their teens. Insurance is shared risk. I'm sure that many priests are covered by policies which also cover pregnancy and childbirth. If you have an issue with that shared risk, you should have brought it up with your carrier, about 60 years ago.

For example, since you decided to bring up womanhood, I as a man am required to carry coverage on my policy for ovarian cancer and other maladies that affect women only. Yes, it's required by federal mandate.
How much sense does that make?.
It's the same as owning a car and having to insure a motorcycle.
I'd like the choice what to cover and what not to cover.

So the Amish don't drive, so why should they support regulations that require safe seatbelts? Sorry, but I never heard them bitch about a law that is for the public good.

Now, I will stipulate that if a woman requires medication for non target maladies, then by all means insurance should cover the item as a matter of health concerns.
But, ONLY under a doctor's care and ONLY by prescription.
In other words if "the pill" is recommended for a health reason it should be covered. If it's just for someone who wants to have unprotected sex and not have to worry about the consequences of her actions, then no, I object to that as an insurance mandate. Let her pay for it herself.

So Blunt's amendment makes those distinctions in what way? Would you include those woman who had a history of high-risk pregnancies, still wanting to bop their belly, with the one they love? Would you also demand that those women who really want a kid, to be denied fertility treatments, since that too is a choice?

 

[Synthaholic]

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I suggest you listen today and find out how many PSAs and station promos are on the air. I know I'll be listening to see how big a change in the advertising has occurred.

I doubt it'll be that big.

In the note to traffic managers, Premiere Networks says the unusual two-week suspension "does not apply to in-program commercials provided by Premiere within any of its live news/talk programming." But the suspension of the usual requirement related to the barter spots is effective immediately for news/talk stations, for the weeks of March 12 and March 19. Affiliates normally run those spots in return for the programming. Premiere does not offer a reason, and does not mention a possible connection to Rush Limbaugh. Some radio advertisers have pulled out of the Premiere-syndicated Limbaugh show itself, and others want to avoid all controversial programming. Radio-Info.com has a copy of today's memo:

"Attention Traffic Managers of Premiere News/Talk Affiliates:

"We are suspending the requirement to run barter spots for two weeks, March 12th and March 19th, for our News/Talk affiliates only.

"Please replace/re-traffic any Premiere barter spots immediately. Contractual requirements to run barter spots are being suspended for these two weeks only. Replace them with Lifelock and Lear Financial or a local spot of your choice.

"This suspension does not apply to in-program commercial provided by Premiere within any of its live news/talk programming."​

 

[Synthaholic]

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I suggest you listen today and find out how many PSAs and station promos are on the air. I know I'll be listening to see how big a change in the advertising has occurred.

I doubt it'll be that big.

How about you listening for me?

 

[Katzndogz]

Up until now, radio stations have paid to have Ol' Limp's programs on their stations. Bet that will change in the near future.

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I'm listening right now. Just as many commercials as ever. On what do you base your assertion that there is no on-air advertising?

 

[Synthaholic]

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

Keep wishing.

You know, just a few Google clicks would prevent you from looking so much like a fool.

 

[Synthaholic]

I can't imagine what the issue is all about. The availability or contraception devices has never been a problem.

I'm 73 years old and by the time I was old enough to need one me and every guy I knew had a condom in our wallets (the only reason we needed a wallet - don't know anybody who actually got to use it). Then when the "pill" became available in my early 20's birth control became a total non issue.

What is the problem?

There is no problem. Insurance companies are going to cover birth control.

 

[Big Fitz]

First AllState commercial just played.

So much for the cartoon.

 

[Synthaholic]

So's Viagra. You, and your side, doesn't seem to get the fact that the "choice" is of the woman who owns the body, not by a bunch of middle-aged, white males, who want to ignore the prohibition of the first amendment regarding creation of laws recognizing any establishment, so they may create their own form of an American theocracy.

You do realize, btw, that there's many off-label uses for female contraception, including reduction of the hassle of menopause? Probably not.

First. you can stop the racist crap.

My racist crap? The fact remains that the House panel, advising on the Blunt amendment, consisted of six, middle aged, white men. Women were excluded from that august panel, in spite of it being their right to decide. BTW, so were the research doctors from The National Institutes of Health, who proposed that reproductive planning be part of the Health Insurance Reform Act, for reasons of good public policy.

Wingnuts have no problem pointing it out when some group or panel is all-Black, because that supposedly speaks to their motivation, but when you point out that some group or panel is all-White, you're spouting "racist crap".

Isn't that right, spoon-boy?

 

[Synthaholic]

Let's go $500....I say you're wrong.

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I'm listening right now. Just as many commercials as ever. On what do you base your assertion that there is no on-air advertising?

See post #812.

Perhaps they have some slots that need to cycle through.

 

[Katzndogz]

His radio show has ceased all on air advertising.

Not a good sign.

I'm listening right now. Just as many commercials as ever. On what do you base your assertion that there is no on-air advertising?

See post #812.

Perhaps they have some slots that need to cycle through.

Yeah, like all those new advertisers.

Either there is no on air advertising as you said, or there is on air advertising that we are all listening to. One or the other.

The newest campaign to hush Rush has fallen flat just like it does every time. Advertisers want that audience. They will pay to get it. They are.