Why Did, And Why Do, So Many Self-Proclaimed Conservative Side w/Rush On Sandra Fluke

[theHawk]

When citizen Sandra Fluke's story first hit the media the response from Rush was to INSTANTLY and IMMEDIATELY attack her. He distorted her words and message to say that she wants the government to pay for her to have sex. He went as far as suggesting that we all should watch her have sex. He literally went THAT far.

The worst part of the story isn't how disgusting that fat slob and bastard is, but that there was not ONE Republican, not one self-proclaimed Conservative, not one fundamentalist RW Christian that stood up against Rush and that reprehensible message. What we saw instead were many RWers who immediately began parroting him and that bigoted message. On this very board even...and quite recently too.

I mean, do you really agree with that? Do you REALLY believe that Sara Fluke believes in having the government pay for her to have sex? Do you side with Rush in wanting to see her have sex, since, in your minds, you are already paying for it, so you might as well be able to watch it <--- that was his reasoning by the way.

Edit: He even called the girl a slut on national radio, for at least 4 days straight...no apologies.

Has The Republican Party sunk so low?

Why?!?!??

We side with him because he was right about her. She was a prop thrown up there by the Dems for their own agenda. He was being facetious when talking of Fluke:

RUSH: What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns? No! We're not the johns. (interruption) Yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word. Okay, so she's not a slut. She's "round heeled." I take it back.

Was he wrong on his facts? No, he wasn't. She was there to testify that contraception should be paid for. So he made a joke about it, whoopty shit. Anyone that's going to Congress to testify isn't just some innocent private citizen, she was a political hack putting on a show for her Democrat masters.

So please, grow a ******* pair and stop acting like you're still butt-hurt about Rush's jokes on Sandra "the Slut" Fluke.

Apparently someone's not entirely clear on the distinction between a "joke" and "character assassination".

Just for a starter-hint, "jokes" do not go on for three days.
Duh.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1oOjKQflN0]53 of Rush Limbaugh's most vile smears against Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke - YouTube[/ame]

"Was he wrong about the facts?" Just for one example at 6:31: "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it.". No, it was not, because Fluke never talked about herself; it was Rash Pimpjob who said that, and no one else. Do me a favor and count up how many times he repeats the same lie, because I can't sit through it.

Had Limblob's rant actually been about the issue of funding sources of contraception, that would be the issue remembered and discussed. It wasn't. Limblob as usual makes it a personal fantasy, spewing his ad hominem all over Fluke (and others, e.g. Nancy Pelosi) so that the issue that remains, even now a year later, is the personal attack by the fake morals of a man on his fourth wife who was busted coming back from the DR with a stash of Viagra.

Only a misogynist could possibly defend that level of self-indulgent subhumanoid hypocrisy.

The only person that commited "character assassination" was Sandra Fluke, destroying her own character. Don't blame Rush for pointing that out.

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy." -- Sandra Fluke

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

 

[koshergrl]

Free if you walk to the nearest clinic, which is, generally speaking, located within walking distance of most universities.

 

[koshergrl]

There's a reason they call them street walkers, after all. One presumes even the student hookers can walk a couple of blocks, if the cookie they receive is FREE CONTRACEPTION!!

 

[koshergrl]

Plus maybe they can pick up a coupla bucks on the way...

 

[Pogo]

Was he wrong on his facts? No, he wasn't. She was there to testify that contraception should be paid for. So he made a joke about it, whoopty shit. Anyone that's going to Congress to testify isn't just some innocent private citizen, she was a political hack putting on a show for her Democrat masters.

He said she wanted the government to pay for her contraception.

She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex.

That was and is a complete lie. She wanted the health care, which she paid for in her $30,000 per year tuition, and which she had no choice but to accept, to pay for her contraception. I don't think that's being unreasonable.

And no she is not a slut, but you're definitely an asshole.

It was hyperbole, learn the difference.

Oh poster please.

The statement "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it." is not "hyperbole". It's a flat declarative statement. And since the statement has no basis whatsoever in fact (i.e. Fluke never said any such thing) it has another name: slander.

That is a direct quote. It's in the video. You can post all the denials you want; it doesn't change the history. Don't come waddling in here insulting everybody's intelligence with this "hyperbole" bullshit.

And this from the same guy who posted:

I don't recall siding with Rush.

 

[koshergrl]

Pssst...nobody gives a shit. Fluke's primary motivation was to earn herself a spot as a commentator with the State Propaganda Corps.

And I think she got it.

 

[Dragonlady]

The only person that commited "character assassination" was Sandra Fluke, destroying her own character. Don't blame Rush for pointing that out.

&#8220;Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that&#8217;s practically an entire summer&#8217;s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy." -- Sandra Fluke

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

You know nothing about birth control, do you? First off, the birth control pill must be taken whether or not the woman is having sex at all, because it's not good to stop and start. Going on and off the pill and makes the possibilty of failure higher.

Secondly, Fluke said "over $3,000 during law school", not in one year - in Canada, that's a total of 6 years - 4 for your BA, and 2 years for your LLB. In order to get the pill, you have to have a doctor's prescription, and an annual pap smear. Those doctor visits and tests are not covered by the Georgetown health insurance plan and add substantially to the costs of obtaining contraception. What she said was a female student has to work an entire summer to make that kind of money, and she's correct.

The female students in law school completed a survey and 40% said these additional costs were a hardship for them, and why wouldn't they be, since most are already going into debt for school. Any additional expense, especially one that should be covered by their health insurance, which they've already paid for, is going to increase their level of debt once they graduate.

 

[koshergrl]

No, she's not correct. If they are low income, they are eligible to receive free screenings and birth control at the nearest county clinic.

Try again.

 

[Pogo]

Are you trying to tell me that struggling financially actually means they can afford it? Because, if that is what you are saying, then you just called Fluke a liar.

Are you actually going to dip into the dumpster of denialism to defy the meaning of words in the English language to the point where "report struggling financially" (verb: report) and "cannot afford" (verb: can) are the same thing?

That very loose indeed. Why you play loose with facts?
Because you loose, dat why.

What do you think the difference between struggle financially and cannot afford is? $5?

"What the difference is" is irrelevant. The point is you claimed Fluke was "lying" thusly:

Are you saying she did not claim that 40% of Georgetown students cannot afford birth control? Because I can ******* prove that is exactly what she said.

Well now, I quoted the testimony and it seems you ******* can't prove that at all, so you're ******* wrong. Testifying that 40% "report struggling financially" is in no way the same thing as declaring they "can't afford" it. Again, and I told you this yesterday, the verb there is "report".

Moreover, at the same time back there you said:

No she wasn't, she said that the average co ed couldn't afford any form of contraception, even free condoms from Planned Parenthood or the $10 bucks a month at the local WalMart to get the pill, and admitted she deliberately went to a Catholic University to force them to provide birth control to everyone free of charge.

-- None of which exists in the transcript.

So there is lying here, but Sandra Fluke ain't the one doing it.

Back on, as it happens, Valentine's Day, some other wag named Longknife who also apparently didn't bother to read the transcript, also came in spewing the Limblob lies about stuff Fluke never said. I immediately challenged him to back that up. He backed up so far that he never returned to the thread at all, and that was five days ago. But at least he didn't keep beating a dead horse that had no legs to run on.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He said she wanted the government to pay for her contraception.

That was and is a complete lie. She wanted the health care, which she paid for in her $30,000 per year tuition, and which she had no choice but to accept, to pay for her contraception. I don't think that's being unreasonable.

And no she is not a slut, but you're definitely an asshole.

It was hyperbole, learn the difference.

Oh poster please.

The statement "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it." is not "hyperbole". It's a flat declarative statement. And since the statement has no basis whatsoever in fact (i.e. Fluke never said any such thing) it has another name: slander.

That is a direct quote. It's in the video. You can post all the denials you want; it doesn't change the history. Don't come waddling in here insulting everybody's intelligence with this "hyperbole" bullshit.

And this from the same guy who posted:

I don't recall siding with Rush.

​

Incredible.

If you read the post I responded to you won't find a single comment about how much sex Fluke was having. The specific claim I was responding to was that Rush said she wanted taxpayers to pay for her contraception. That is hyperbole, and thus you are the one that pegged this meter, not me.

By the way, have you figured out how much the difference between "Struggle financially" and "Can't afford" is? I am still curious about exactly how much it is, especially since you took so much time to bash on me for not knowing what the difference is.

 

[Pogo]

We side with him because he was right about her. She was a prop thrown up there by the Dems for their own agenda. He was being facetious when talking of Fluke:

RUSH: What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns? No! We're not the johns. (interruption) Yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word. Okay, so she's not a slut. She's "round heeled." I take it back.

Was he wrong on his facts? No, he wasn't. She was there to testify that contraception should be paid for. So he made a joke about it, whoopty shit. Anyone that's going to Congress to testify isn't just some innocent private citizen, she was a political hack putting on a show for her Democrat masters.

So please, grow a ******* pair and stop acting like you're still butt-hurt about Rush's jokes on Sandra "the Slut" Fluke.

Apparently someone's not entirely clear on the distinction between a "joke" and "character assassination".

Just for a starter-hint, "jokes" do not go on for three days.
Duh.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1oOjKQflN0]53 of Rush Limbaugh's most vile smears against Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke - YouTube[/ame]

"Was he wrong about the facts?" Just for one example at 6:31: "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it.". No, it was not, because Fluke never talked about herself; it was Rash Pimpjob who said that, and no one else. Do me a favor and count up how many times he repeats the same lie, because I can't sit through it.

Had Limblob's rant actually been about the issue of funding sources of contraception, that would be the issue remembered and discussed. It wasn't. Limblob as usual makes it a personal fantasy, spewing his ad hominem all over Fluke (and others, e.g. Nancy Pelosi) so that the issue that remains, even now a year later, is the personal attack by the fake morals of a man on his fourth wife who was busted coming back from the DR with a stash of Viagra.

Only a misogynist could possibly defend that level of self-indulgent subhumanoid hypocrisy.

The only person that commited "character assassination" was Sandra Fluke, destroying her own character. Don't blame Rush for pointing that out.

&#8220;Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that&#8217;s practically an entire summer&#8217;s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy." -- Sandra Fluke

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

And if you think you can get through law school in a year you must be an idiot. Or Rush Limbaugh. But I repeat myself.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The only person that commited "character assassination" was Sandra Fluke, destroying her own character. Don't blame Rush for pointing that out.

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy." -- Sandra Fluke

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

You know nothing about birth control, do you? First off, the birth control pill must be taken whether or not the woman is having sex at all, because it's not good to stop and start. Going on and off the pill and makes the possibilty of failure higher.

Secondly, Fluke said "over $3,000 during law school", not in one year - in Canada, that's a total of 6 years - 4 for your BA, and 2 years for your LLB. In order to get the pill, you have to have a doctor's prescription, and an annual pap smear. Those doctor visits and tests are not covered by the Georgetown health insurance plan and add substantially to the costs of obtaining contraception. What she said was a female student has to work an entire summer to make that kind of money, and she's correct.

The female students in law school completed a survey and 40% said these additional costs were a hardship for them, and why wouldn't they be, since most are already going into debt for school. Any additional expense, especially one that should be covered by their health insurance, which they've already paid for, is going to increase their level of debt once they graduate.

Not true. If you have a prescription for contraception that you take every day there is at least a week out of every cycle that you are not actually taking any medication.

 

[Pogo]

It was hyperbole, learn the difference.

Oh poster please.

The statement "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it." is not "hyperbole". It's a flat declarative statement. And since the statement has no basis whatsoever in fact (i.e. Fluke never said any such thing) it has another name: slander.

That is a direct quote. It's in the video. You can post all the denials you want; it doesn't change the history. Don't come waddling in here insulting everybody's intelligence with this "hyperbole" bullshit.

And this from the same guy who posted:

I don't recall siding with Rush.

​

Incredible.

If you read the post I responded to you won't find a single comment about how much sex Fluke was having. The specific claim I was responding to was that Rush said she wanted taxpayers to pay for her contraception. That is hyperbole, and thus you are the one that pegged this meter, not me.

By the way, have you figured out how much the difference between "Struggle financially" and "Can't afford" is? I am still curious about exactly how much it is, especially since you took so much time to bash on me for not knowing what the difference is.

Already addressed. The difference is irrelevant. You're trying to ask me how much an apple is different from an orange. A false equivalence is a false equivalence; it's not a relative comparison.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Are you actually going to dip into the dumpster of denialism to defy the meaning of words in the English language to the point where "report struggling financially" (verb: report) and "cannot afford" (verb: can) are the same thing?

That very loose indeed. Why you play loose with facts?
Because you loose, dat why.

What do you think the difference between struggle financially and cannot afford is? $5?

"What the difference is" is irrelevant. The point is you claimed Fluke was "lying" thusly:

Are you saying she did not claim that 40% of Georgetown students cannot afford birth control? Because I can ******* prove that is exactly what she said.

Well now, I quoted the testimony and it seems you ******* can't prove that at all, so you're ******* wrong. Testifying that 40% "report struggling financially" is in no way the same thing as declaring they "can't afford" it. Again, and I told you this yesterday, the verb there is "report".

Moreover, at the same time back there you said:

No she wasn't, she said that the average co ed couldn't afford any form of contraception, even free condoms from Planned Parenthood or the $10 bucks a month at the local WalMart to get the pill, and admitted she deliberately went to a Catholic University to force them to provide birth control to everyone free of charge.

-- None of which exists in the transcript.

So there is lying here, but Sandra Fluke ain't the one doing it.

Back on, as it happens, Valentine's Day, some other wag named Longknife who also apparently didn't bother to read the transcript, also came in spewing the Limblob lies about stuff Fluke never said. I immediately challenged him to back that up. He backed up so far that he never returned to the thread at all, and that was five days ago. But at least he didn't keep beating a dead horse that had no legs to run on.

No, the point is that, unless you can tell me what the **** the difference is, she lied. Since you just admitted you can't tell me what it is I will take this as a concession on your part.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh poster please.

The statement "It was Sandra Fluke who said that she was having so much sex she can't afford it." is not "hyperbole". It's a flat declarative statement. And since the statement has no basis whatsoever in fact (i.e. Fluke never said any such thing) it has another name: slander.

That is a direct quote. It's in the video. You can post all the denials you want; it doesn't change the history. Don't come waddling in here insulting everybody's intelligence with this "hyperbole" bullshit.

And this from the same guy who posted:

​

Incredible.

If you read the post I responded to you won't find a single comment about how much sex Fluke was having. The specific claim I was responding to was that Rush said she wanted taxpayers to pay for her contraception. That is hyperbole, and thus you are the one that pegged this meter, not me.

By the way, have you figured out how much the difference between "Struggle financially" and "Can't afford" is? I am still curious about exactly how much it is, especially since you took so much time to bash on me for not knowing what the difference is.

Already addressed. The difference is irrelevant. You're trying to ask me how much an apple is different from an orange. A false equivalence is a false equivalence; it's not a relative comparison.

What the **** does fruit have to do with this discussion? There is no difference between the two phrases other than whatever exist in your deluded mind. It there was one you would be able to explain it.

Fluke lied, end of discussion.

 

[Care4all]

Jimminne Christmas the Hawk, how uninformed are you about birth control pills?

It costs no more a year, to be on birth control pills if you screw every day, screw 10 times a day, screw once a week or screw once a YEAR....You don't take the pill only the day you get laid, you have to take it every single day of the week in most forms of it.

Why in the world did you say:

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

Are you truly that ignorant on the topic of Birth Control Pill use?

In addition to all of this garbage being said by all of you who "side with Rush",

YOU ARE NOT PAYING FOR THE COVERAGE at Georgetown university or anywhere....It costs no more money for the insurance companies to cover birth control, policies with birth control coverage vs without birth control coverage is the same.... Actuaries for the insurance companies have put a pencil to it, and with birth control coverage it saves them in areas of health care that 'the without coverage' costs them such as more in pregnancy coverage...thus the price of the pills etc, pay for themselves....it's a break even and insurance policies are NOT higher with birth control coverage.

So what's the beef all about?

 

[Pogo]

What do you think the difference between struggle financially and cannot afford is? $5?

"What the difference is" is irrelevant. The point is you claimed Fluke was "lying" thusly:


Well now, I quoted the testimony and it seems you ******* can't prove that at all, so you're ******* wrong. Testifying that 40% "report struggling financially" is in no way the same thing as declaring they "can't afford" it. Again, and I told you this yesterday, the verb there is "report".

Moreover, at the same time back there you said:

No she wasn't, she said that the average co ed couldn't afford any form of contraception, even free condoms from Planned Parenthood or the $10 bucks a month at the local WalMart to get the pill, and admitted she deliberately went to a Catholic University to force them to provide birth control to everyone free of charge.

-- None of which exists in the transcript.

So there is lying here, but Sandra Fluke ain't the one doing it.

Back on, as it happens, Valentine's Day, some other wag named Longknife who also apparently didn't bother to read the transcript, also came in spewing the Limblob lies about stuff Fluke never said. I immediately challenged him to back that up. He backed up so far that he never returned to the thread at all, and that was five days ago. But at least he didn't keep beating a dead horse that had no legs to run on.

No, the point is that, unless you can tell me what the **** the difference is, she lied. Since you just admitted you can't tell me what it is I will take this as a concession on your part.

You'll do no such thing, and I see you looking for a way out here but that ain't happening.
The fact that Fluke never actually said any of the things you and Rash Pimpjob would have us believe did, doesn't make her the liar. Perhaps this distinction is elusive.

Again for the slow reader:
"Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report ...."
is a different statement from the direct:
"Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law can't afford..."

- and you don't get to just morph other people's words to what would be more convenient to your agenda by some personal fiat. Moreover, she said nothing about "deliberately going to a Catholic University to force them to provide birth control to everyone free of charge". That's not in there either. Nor did she mention Planned Parenthood, Wal-Mart or "any form" of contraception or anything else.

You've apparently confused Fluke's words with Limblob's. This is why we linked the transcript -- so you could tell them apart.

 

[rightwinger]

Jimminne Christmas the Hawk, how uninformed are you about birth control pills?

It costs no more a year, to be on birth control pills if you screw every day, screw 10 times, screw once a week or screw once a YEAR....You don't take the pill only the day you get laid, you have to take it every single day of the week in most forms of it.

Why in the world did you say:

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

Are you truly that ignorant on the topic of Birth Control Pill use?

In addition to all of this garbage being said by all of you who "side with Rush",

YOU ARE NOT PAYING FOR THE COVERAGE at Georgetown university or anywhere....It costs no more money for the insurance companies to cover birth control, policies with birth control coverage vs without birth control coverage is the same.... Actuaries for the insurance companies have put a pencil to it, and with birth control coverage it saves them in areas of health care that 'the without coverage' costs them such as more in pregnancy coverage...thus the price of the pills etc, pay for themselves....it's a break even and insurance policies are NOT higher with birth control coverage.

So what's the beef all about?

My health insurance paid for a vasectomy. Cost a lot more than Sandra Flukes birth control pills

 

[Pogo]

Incredible.

If you read the post I responded to you won't find a single comment about how much sex Fluke was having. The specific claim I was responding to was that Rush said she wanted taxpayers to pay for her contraception. That is hyperbole, and thus you are the one that pegged this meter, not me.

By the way, have you figured out how much the difference between "Struggle financially" and "Can't afford" is? I am still curious about exactly how much it is, especially since you took so much time to bash on me for not knowing what the difference is.

Already addressed. The difference is irrelevant. You're trying to ask me how much an apple is different from an orange. A false equivalence is a false equivalence; it's not a relative comparison.

What the **** does fruit have to do with this discussion? There is no difference between the two phrases other than whatever exist in your deluded mind. It there was one you would be able to explain it.

Fluke lied, end of discussion.

Translation: "I can't prove it and I'm running away".
Apples and oranges is an analogy. You're trying to tell me two different things are in fact the same thing, because it's the only way you get to invent "lies" that were never there.

The liar is Limblob. You got caught up in those lies, which is why it's important to call them out for what they are. And so we do.

 

[Pogo]

Jimminne Christmas the Hawk, how uninformed are you about birth control pills?

It costs no more a year, to be on birth control pills if you screw every day, screw 10 times, screw once a week or screw once a YEAR....You don't take the pill only the day you get laid, you have to take it every single day of the week in most forms of it.

Why in the world did you say:

If a woman is spending 3k a year on contraception then she must be a prostitute.

Are you truly that ignorant on the topic of Birth Control Pill use?

In addition to all of this garbage being said by all of you who "side with Rush",

YOU ARE NOT PAYING FOR THE COVERAGE at Georgetown university or anywhere....It costs no more money for the insurance companies to cover birth control, policies with birth control coverage vs without birth control coverage is the same.... Actuaries for the insurance companies have put a pencil to it, and with birth control coverage it saves them in areas of health care that 'the without coverage' costs them such as more in pregnancy coverage...thus the price of the pills etc, pay for themselves....it's a break even and insurance policies are NOT higher with birth control coverage.

So what's the beef all about?

My health insurance paid for a vasectomy. Cost a lot more than Sandra Flukes birth control pills

Looking at your avatar I can see why it cost so much ...