"What does it say about the college coed Susan Fluke [sic], 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."

- Rush Limbaugh

"Some things are hard, such as the fact that liberals can't stand the truth. That's why they have to resort to name-calling."

- Richard Reeb

...and note, too, how the completely non-elitist (despite his having 3 COLLEGE degrees!) Rick Santorum eloquently and articulately spoke of the Limbaugh/Fluke imbroglio (using the standby "He's an entertainer" cop-out - yeah, an entertainer who makes keynote speeches at CPAC and has politicians licking his feet):

Santorum, on Blitzer's "Situation Room" - Friday, 3/2/12:

"Well, he's taking -- you know, he's being absurd. But that's, you know, an entertainer can be absurd. And -- and he's taking the absurd, you know, the asurd -- absurd, you know, sort of, you know, point of view here as to how -- how far do you go?

And, look, I'm -- he's -- he's in a very different business than I am.

I'm -- I'm -- I'm concerned about the public policy of this president imposing his values on the people -- on -- on -- on -- on people of faith who morally object to -- to the government telling them they have to do something which they believe is a grave moral wrong. And government should not be in the business of telling -- you know, when you talk about the separation of church and state, you hear it all the time."

==

"Imposing his values on the people"? Has Santorum seen any polling lately on just how huge of a majority of the public has Obama's back on these issues - including Catholics?

Neither Rush or anyone else has used "name calling"' on Fluke. She is a slut. She says is cost her and her female companions a thousand dollars a year to have safe sex. Birthcontrol such as condoms and other devices are really not that expensive. Fluke is not married - in order to spend a $1,000 dollars a year on condoms and other birthcontrol, she is having sex at least twice a day while attending college and she wants the American taxpayer for fork over the money so she can have sex twice a day. One can only assume she would want the American taxpayer to fork over the 1,200 for the abortion in case the condom breaks.

Not only is she truly a liberal - wanting other people to pay for her lifestye, but she is a slut. Just like Ted Kennedy is a drunk, murderer and womanizer. No one is name calling here -

It is called THE TRUTH.

Cow, you're lucky this isn't actually a GOP-led forum on the topic - your presence would be entirely unwelcome; your view would not be needed. For the purposes of Ashbrook maintaining the appearance of a 21st century organization, the rule seems to be that they'll allow 2 female bloggers (but only 1 can be semi-active), and 2 female blog commenters - but even they should constantly exalt manliness in a quasi-obsessive fashion.

And if the term "insulting" is at all synonymous with "name-calling" (I'd say that it is) then even rush himself has conceded that he engaged in name-calling [I forgot to mention that he also brushed off his old, trademarked hateful slur of "feminazi" to describe her - I suppose that wasn't name-calling, either, right?]. I hate to break it to you, but he of the Oxycontin-Viagra cocktail has apologized to Fluke... sort of:

https://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/03/437166/limbaugh-apologizes-fluke/

He starts out with a ludicrous and dishonest revision of recent, recorded history:

"In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke."

(Apparently, he literally has no control over the words that spew from his mouth, day after day after day - even when he has time to reconsider and he chooses to ratchet up the vitriol at total strangers)

and he finishes by begrudgingly conceding that he called her names:

"My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices."

Not manly.

(It is tempting to speculate - given that Limbaugh has had a long history of describing feminists in insulting terms, and saying that they're feminists - "feminazis" - because they're ugly and no man would ever want to - ahem - BE with them - that Limbaugh's spittle-flecked rants originated from some sort of envy. He's envious, as he realizes that he WANTS to have the sex life he conjures up out of thin air and ascribes to this classy lady, and frustrated that his nasty, hateful interior is always going to be discovered under his wuvvable, teddy-bear facade; that he almost certainly will never be able to keep a long-term relationship intact (consider his track record), and that he even wishes he could have a secret rendezvous with Sandra Fluke (or at least watch her do it with someone else on his computer screen in his locked office - I reference his own recent words here) - but he knows he can never get a classy lady like that - never.)

When he went on to ask Fluke to put sex videos online, that was like watching a creepy old guy at a bar (picture...Limbaugh) putting the moves on some young law student. Clearly he's indulging in a fantasy there. Kinda reminded me of that time when Glenn Beck openly propositioned some woman (and not for a romantic dinner) he was supposed to be interviewing (she clearly didn't like the idea).

That was easy to find - Googled "glenn beck creepy camera interview"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY9IC7njYYc

A smaller scale of creepiness than Limbaugh's recent sleaze, but still... pathetic.

You are a mass of contradictions.You get your panties in a wad because Rush is name calling (when actually he is telling the truth - Fluke is a slut asking for people to pay for her birth control) and that Breibart is calling Ted Kennedy names shortly after the murdering, drunk died (again Andrew is telling the truth) You berate Rush Limbaugh for what he said, gloat at his apology and then in a rant of name calling and personal attacks you say that Rush Limbaugh WANTs to have the sex life he conjures up out of thin air. Thank you for your continuous mass of contradictions. It proves my point that liberalism is a mental illness.

By the way, if you want to know who real men act, think and exist, I strongly suggest see "Act of Valor". No wait, the men in "Act of Valor" have a pair and it would be overwhelming for you to watch. You would have no idea how to handle real men.

Well, this is encouraging.

"UPDATE

A Statement from David Friend, CEO of Carbonite as of 6:45pm ET, March 3:

“No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse.”

——

Original post:
Over the past two days we have received a tremendous amount of feedback on Rush Limbaugh’s recent comments. I too am offended and very concerned about his comments. Limbaugh’s remarks have us rethinking our future use of talk radio.

We use more than 40 talk show hosts to help get the Carbonite message out to the public. The nature of talk radio is that from time to time listeners are offended by a host and ask that we pull our advertising. This goes for conservatives like Limbaugh and progressives like Stephanie Miller and Ed Shultz. We even get customers who demand that we pull the plug on NPR. As an advertiser, we do not have control over a show’s editorial content or what they say on air. Carbonite does not endorse the opinions of the shows or their hosts.

However, the outcry over Limbaugh is the worst we’ve ever seen. I have scheduled a face-to-face meeting next week with Limbaugh during which I will impress upon him that his comments were offensive to many of our customers and employees alike.

Please know your voice has been heard and that we are taking this matter very seriously.

Sincerely,
David Friend"

====

https://www.carbonite.com/en/blog/A-Message-from-Carbonite-CEO-David-Friend-Regarding-Ads-on-Limbaugh

Equality. Women become pregnant through sex and men don't and that's not fair. For women to have an equal right to sexual pleasure, they must be allowed to have sex without fear of consequences, just like men. Government is obligated to protect equality, therefore it is obligated to protect women from the unequal burden imposed by pregnancy.

That's what the girls tell me and they are pretty glib about it.

Unnaturally protecting yourself from the natural consequences of sex is being claimed as a natural right. Equality trumps morality in America and now it even trumps nature.

That's the point. Not the brouhaha above. Rush was making a point with sarcasm, the sting of the gadfly, and if he were not making a conservative point, people of the American Left would have loved it.

Let Carbonite withdraw - who has a use for whimpy companies who shy away from truth-telling. This is why I for one have never been a rah-rah libertarian elevating hero-capitalists onto pedestals. Some of these people really would sell you the rope you hang them with (hat tip to Lenin). Alas, we must struggle to save such people despite themselves.

Carbonite, like you pumpkin, is a mass of contradictions. They still advertise on Ed Schulz's show. You know the guy who called Laura Inghram a "slut" and then apologized. The only difference between Laura and Fluke is that Fluke is a slut and Laura is not.

Hippocrite company!!!

"Unnaturally protecting yourself from the natural consequences of sex is being claimed as a natural right."

Hold on there, Kate. Who has claimed it to be a "natural right"? Who made this claim? Fluke?

After speaking on behalf of a married woman and a gay woman who couldn't get or couldn't afford prescriptions through the insurance coverage they (and not you or I, nor taxpayers) had paid for, Fluke offered this:

"In the media lately, conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what
did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we
expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable
burdens that impede our academic success. We expected that our schools would
live up to the Jesuit creed of cura personalis, to care for the whole person, by
meeting all of our medical needs. We expected that when we told our universities
of the problems this policy created for students, they would help us. We expected
that when 94% of students opposed the policy, the university would respect our
choices regarding insurance students pay for completely unsubsidized by the
university. We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that
if we wanted comprehensive insurance that met our needs, not just those of men,
we should have gone to school elsewhere, even if that meant a less prestigious
university. We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health, and we
resent that, in the 21st century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make this
choice simply because we are women.
Many of the women whose stories I’ve shared are Catholic women, so ours is not a
war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the healthcare we need."

What's interesting, in reading Fluke's testimony - which prompted Limbaugh to describe her as "slut," a "prostitute," and a "Feminazi" - is that she only refers to the difficulties that OTHERS have faced in Georgetown dictating to the insurance company which services will actually be covered (despite which services are actually included in the policy). She doesn't hint at her own situation. And, honestly, her sex life isn't my business, nor yours. One would think that Limbaugh agrees:

"I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities...(...) In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom."

...except that he wrongly finished that statement (in his pseudo-apology) with this:

"before members of Congress."

Fluke did no such thing. She did share this, though:

"A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome
and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries.
Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown insurance because it’s not
intended to prevent pregnancy. Under many religious institutions’ insurance plans,
it wouldn’t be, and under Senator Blunt’s amendment, Senator Rubio’s bill, or
Representative Fortenberry’s bill, there’s no requirement that an exception be
made for such medical needs. When they do exist, these exceptions don’t
accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let university
administrators or other employers, rather than women and their doctors, dictate
whose medical needs are legitimate and whose aren’t, a woman’s health takes a
back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body."

I remember my sister took The Pill from early on in high school because she had periods that would cripple her for days. I guess, in addition to giving her an easy opportunity to become a Feminazi slut prostitute, this was also "Unnaturally protecting [her]self from the natural consequences of" her menstrual cycle?

Kate, I don't know if you've considered this before, but a very large portion of modern medicine is designed to protect us from the "natural" consequences of our actions, our behavior, whatever it might be. Curiously, when humans engage in the scientific process and conduct medical research and develop new techniques and new pharmaceuticals, that is a natural thing (and this should not be controversial for theists who believe that God has granted us with curiosity, a desire to learn new things, and free will.).

The problem with Limbaugh's obvious retro-washing of his remarks as attempts at standup (or, sorry, in his case, sit-down) comedy, of using absurdity to make a point, is that the absurdist element was entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand. Fluke said nothing of her own sexual behavior, and Rush knows nothing about it - although apparently he thinks he should (via online videos - seriously, wasn't that creepy more than funny?).

Then, in his pseudo-apology he again trotted out the falsehood about "American citizens", "taxpayers" (presumably referring to those w/ no connection to Georgetown) paying for these "social activities." In her statement to the committee, Fluke mentioned a married woman at her school who had to stop her contraception because it became unaffordable (without insurance coverage) - is marital sex a "social activity" to Limbaugh? She also mentioned her lesbian friend who was supposed to be covered for The Pill to treat her ovarian cysts (which, using Limbaughian/Christian rightist "logic" she probably got as a punishment for being a lesbian, I know.). Her friend should have been written the prescription - technically, G-town allows for The Pill in such cases - but since there was an assumption and/or suspicion that she, too, was an Undercover Slut, she couldn't get approval and ended up losing an ovary to the cysts ("Oh well, no big whoop, she's a lesbian!" good Christians might say...)

It is rather mind-boggling how, once again, the Right is not able to offer anyone better than, or is just happy to embrace, someone like Rush Limbaugh as a moral scold.

Recently, Newt Gingrich was the man to teach us all about the sanctity of marriage and fidelity (and he plans to continue imparting his wisdom no matter how many times he has to marry before he dies!)

And now Rush Limbaugh - the drug abuser who wants all drug abusers, except him, to rot in prison - will be the referee for a debate on healthcare matters.

Limbaugh, on his TV show, Oct. 5, 1995:

"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."

(Wouldn't a principled person who felt so strongly about the issue just insist to the judge that they should be "sent up" - so that they could help save the country that they love?)

Rush Limbaugh - the guy who was visiting the Dominican Republic with someone ELSE's Viagra (he was unmarried at the time!) pills in his possession (which also was a violation of his earlier agreement... oh nevermind..)? THIS is the guy that the right will allow to speak for them in criticizing women for engaging in "sexual recreational activities" (and I can read conservative Christian dog-whistle code, too: if it's recreational, then it isn't PROcreational, and therefore, in their minds, to varying degrees, it is unnatural and immoral. See many Catholic beliefs and teachings, for starters) while he himself will visit an island country well known for sex tourism (Yay - island hedonism recreation!) with someone else's prescription-only drug that's specifically designed for "unnaturally protecting [one]self from the natural consequences of" ...ageing?

https://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2001/07/44888

"Indeed, the Dominican Republic is one of the biggest sex tourism destinations in the world, thanks in part to Internet sites that extol the country as a "single man's paradise. (...) [On the sex tourism websites discussed in the article] They share tips and warnings, such as this post from a tourist who visited Boca Chica, a beachside town in southern Dominican Republic:
'If you go there, beware of a girl named Caroline. Bad, bad news: underage, pregnant and on drugs....'"

Wow, she REALLY sounds like a slut, eh? (Would Rush have avoided her, sought her out as part of a slumming fetish, or given her a hundred dollar bill to help her turn her life around? The possibilities boggle the mind.)

Anyway, I can't believe conservatives are willing to back this guy up. Well, maybe I can...

Lastly, it's interesting to note that the obvious retreat Limbaugh made (after 3 days of attacking Fluke) seemed to be more of a reaction to his increasing loss of sponsors, the loss of those financially supporting him and his show.

Guess what word this definition falls under: "a person who willingly uses his or her talent or ability in a base and unworthy way, usually for money."

When comparing Fluke's congressional statement to Limbaugh's public criminal record, I think we can readily make an educated guess (is that elitist?) as to who really engages in promiscuities of various sorts.

Here's a great take on this matter from a lefty who is able to abstain from... parentheses much better than I am:

https://lionoftheleft.blogspot.com/2012/03/rush-to-judgment.html

"This is about women having access to healthcare and not being held hostage by moralizing, promiscuous men who want to use them, and control them at the same time. In Rush's universe, a woman who uses birth control is a slut. She wants "us" to pay for her contraceptives, so she is also a prostitute and as such she should videotape all sexual encounters and upload them to YouTube for Rush and his ilk to watch. I couldn't make this up if I tried.

The latest polls show 65% of Americans believe employers should have to provide contraceptive coverage in their health insurance plans. Clearly, Rush has a lot of work to do transporting Americans back to a time of higher morality and God-fearing folks. It's no accident the American Catholic bishops are already there waiting."

From Lefty Kirsten Powers - one of your own Pumpkin:

Let it be shouted from the rooftops that Rush Limbaugh should not have called Ms. Fluke a slut or, as he added later, a “prostitute” who should post her sex tapes. It’s unlikely that his apology will assuage the people on a warpath for his scalp, and after all, why should it? He spent days attacking a woman as a slut and prostitute and refused to relent. Now because he doesn’t want to lose advertisers, he apologizes. What’s in order is something more like groveling—and of course a phone call to Ms. Fluke—if you ask me.

But if Limbaugh’s actions demand a boycott—and they do—then what about the army of swine on the left?

During the 2008 election Ed Schultz said on his radio show that Sarah Palin set off a “bimbo alert.” He called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.” (He later apologized.) He once even took to his blog to call yours truly a “bimbo” for the offense of quoting him accurately in a New York Post column.

Keith Olbermann has said that conservative commentator S.E. Cupp should have been aborted by her parents, apparently because he finds her having opinions offensive. He called Michelle Malkin a “mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick.” He found it newsworthy to discuss Carrie Prejean’s breasts on his MSNBC show. His solution for dealing with Hillary Clinton, who he thought should drop out of the presidential race, was to find “somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.” Olbermann now works for über-leftist and former Democratic vice president Al Gore at Current TV.

Left-wing darling Matt Taibbi wrote on his blog in 2009, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth.” In a Rolling Stone article about Secretary of State Clinton, he referred to her “flabby arms.” When feminist writer Erica Jong criticized him for it, he responded by referring to Jong as an “800-year old sex novelist.” (Jong is almost 70, which apparently makes her an irrelevant human being.) In Taibbi’s profile of Congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann he labeled her “batshit crazy.” (Oh, those “crazy” women with their hormones and all.)

Chris Matthews’s sickening misogyny was made famous in 2008, when he obsessively tore down Hillary Clinton for standing between Barack Obama and the presidency, something that Matthews could not abide. . . .

But the grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher—who also happens to be a favorite of liberals—who has given $1 million to President Obama’s super PAC. Maher has called Palin a “dumb twat” and dropped the C-word in describing the former Alaska governor. He called Palin and Congresswoman Bachmann “boobs” and “two bimbos.” He said of the former vice-presidential candidate, “She is not a mean girl. She is a crazy girl with mean ideas.” He recently made a joke about Rick Santorum’s wife using a vibrator. Imagine now the same joke during the 2008 primary with Michelle Obama’s name in it, and tell me that he would still have a job.

Craig, "equality" in some form is a natural right. Reread what I wrote with that in mind. Please, also consider that I am not looking at Miss Fluke, but reflecting on the idea of birth control as a medical necessity and what my young friends say on that topic.

I am guilty of not reading all of what you wrote, partly because I don't have time and partly because after all this time we've been arguing, I can guess what all of that says. I'll glance through it again.... I see nothing that refutes what I wrote. It is gallant of you to defend Miss Fluke's honor. I read the following about her today:

"Fluke has a long history of feminist advocacy," reports the Daily Caller: "While [an undergraduate] at Cornell, Fluke's organized activities centered on the far-left feminist and gender equity movements. Fluke participated in rallies supporting abortion, protests against war in Iraq and efforts to recruit other womens' [sic] rights activists to campus." She even got a bachelor's degree in something called "Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies."

She sounds like an expert on sex, which is a nicer way of saying what Rush said.

I saw a poster which seems apropos, "Hypocrisy: demanding that government stay out of your bedroom and womb while simultaneously demanding they pay for your birth control and abortions."

*Cowgirl -- good point. I was referring to that kind of thing briefly in the last sentence of my comment. As long as the quote is, you could find so many more examples.

"I am guilty of not reading all of what you wrote, partly because I don't have time and partly because after all this time we've been arguing, I can guess what all of that says. I'll glance through it again.... I see nothing that refutes what I wrote."

Of course you don't.

I'm not sure what your point was in quoting that info. on Fluke (after saying that you're "not looking at Miss Fluke") from Tucker Carlson's blog, other than to just encourage a quick dismissal of her by your fellow righties here. I'm sure such efforts on your part are entirely superfluous. "Far-left feminist....against the war in Iraq" - yeah, we get it, this is a person who's not to be taken seriously (unlike Limbaugh).

"She sounds like an expert on sex, which is a nicer way of saying what Rush said."

Wow, so just KNOWING about sex now makes one a slut? So, she's not only an obvious elitist - what with her fancy-pants (not a fancy-skirt, either!) degree and her expert knowledge! - she's still a slut because she knows about human sexuality. I guess, for conservatives, its not just that ignorance is bliss, it's also a kind of virginal purity. Amazing.

"I saw a poster which seems apropos,"

Apropos to what? You were just writing about Fluke - is this apropos to her and the Limbaugh smear?

"Hypocrisy: demanding that government stay out of your bedroom and womb while simultaneously demanding they pay for your birth control and abortions."

The issue was contraception, and Fluke wasn't talking about the government (i.e., taxpayers) paying for it. She was referring directly to the Georgetown student health insurance program, in which students pay 100% of the insurance premiums.

"It is gallant of you to defend Miss Fluke's honor."
Uh-oh, I detect some of Kate's trademark sarcasm. I don't see why you interpret it that way. I don't know Miss Fluke any better than you or Limbaugh do; I just think that a) Limbaugh really has no credibility at this point on issues of sexual morality and b) it speaks more about her haters than it does about her when they label her a slut simply because she offered her opinion and spoke out on behalf of others to help them out. Again, she shared no information on her sex life and to twist her statement into an admission that she's promiscuous and/or a prostitute, well, it's juvenile and tactless. I'm sure that Miss Fluke can take care of herself; I'm just annoyed by the poor reasoning and all the pointless hate coming from Limbaugh and his defenders - although it is gallant of you to defend the honor of The High Priest of Right-Wing Media and the Republican Party.

This is a pretty interesting scenario going here. Two women defending some undeniably sleazy behavior (even Julie's not touching this one, I noticed... yet). It's somehow charming or funny that he requested she post videos of herself having sex for him to watch? Huh? Anyway, and then cow posts some silliness by Alan Colmes' replacement as the play-act pinata liberal at FoxNews (Kirsten Powers). You are so lucky that the GOP isn't running this forum - you wouldn't even be allowed to speak. When speaking on the issue of women's health or sexual morality, there's simply no need to hear what women have to say! Did you miss that memo?

So, with that, let's get back to David Frum, who handily picks apart Powers' poorly-written piece (and others like it):

https://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/05/opinion/frum-rush-limbaugh-fairness/index.html

Lastly, this, from the campus of Georgetown:

"The resolution calls on the Administration to “to publicly clarify by both ‘faith and reason’ the inconsistency and apparent discrimination in the institutional stance towards faculty and students regarding health insurance coverage for contraception.”

The “inconsistency” referred to is based on a comparison of the healthcare offered to University employees and that provided to students. “[C]ontraceptive coverage is an already available and subsidized option to faculty and staff” while the student health plan excludes coverage for contraception and is “unsubsidized.” As evidence, the resolution cites an employee health insurance policy document, obtained independently by the Law Weekly, that expressly lists coverage for “contraceptive drugs and devices.”

The language on “faith and reason” comes from the “Mission Statement of the Georgetown University Jesuits” (emphasis added):

We witness to the compatibility of faith and reason, work to extend knowledge and cultivate a University community that reflects the conviction that the good life is a life lived generously in the service of others.

The resolution further notes that “77% of other Jesuit/Catholic” law schools in the U.S. News top 100 provide coverage for contraception."

https://www.gulawweekly.org/news/2012/2/29/sba-commends-fluke-asks-georgetown-to-explain-inconsistent-c.html

Well pumpkin, Sandra Fluke is not only a slut, but she is a fluke.

Your favorite person and website just outed her and her connections:

"As a student at Cornell and treasurer of a pro-choice organization at the school, Sandra Fluke, helped shut down a pro-life speech on Cornell's campus by counter protesting. She argued that a pro-life organization at Cornell was about "manipulating [students'] emotions" with misleading statistics about abortion. But when it is her turn to speak on Capitol Hill, the third-year Georgetown Law Student demands she gets her say in a hearing that has nothing to do with birth control."

Drum Roll: Thanks to Andrew Breibart's Website and Charles Johnson who found the information about the Flukey Slut.

So she is none other than a Liberal Troll trying to take the spolight off of the Most Intelligent President's failed presidency and put it on women's rights. Yes, right liberals are all for women's rights - including murdering them if you get them pregnant - thanks Ted, and raping them - Thanks Bill and screwing around and making illegimate children when your wife is dying of cancer - thanks John.

Furthermore Pumpkin, Breibart's site has justed out all the "wonderful sponsors" that left Rush's show - they are all connected to left wing organizations including Move On. This has got to hurt the left though. These organizations give money to Rush because he makes money. The left is so hippocritical.

But you better keep something in mind, us righties are sick and tired of the one-sided mud slinging. I for one will no longer be nice. In honor of Andrew Breibart, go screw yourself Pumpkin and get on the first plane to Russia and go live your dream of socialism. And don't come back when they run out of money.

cow, could you please help out your fellow RONLT and post the links to the articles you cite?

I was just over at Breitbart and could not locate the one by Charles C. Johnson that you quoted (at first I thought you were talking about the Little Green Footballs guy, but of course that would be next to impossible!).

I also couldn't find any article where all of Rush's former sponsors were outed for their far left connections (at this point, I'm guessing that includes the Girl Scouts).

I'm not saying these articles don't exist or aren't accurate (because really, who could ever doubt the journalistic integrity of the Breitbart empire or the honesty and seriousness of cowgirl? Not I!), I just couldn't find them in 10 mins. or so of scouring Breitbart. It makes it a bit harder to evaluate them without being able to read them in their entirety. For being such a big deal, that site is really set up in an awful way; not efficient to navigate at all. So, if you're taking the trouble to copy and paste text, why not just go all out and copy and paste the LINK, too?

"But you better keep something in mind, us righties are sick and tired of the one-sided mud slinging. I for one will no longer be nice."

Wow. So, that's been your charming side all this time, eh?

"In honor of Andrew Breibart, go screw yourself Pumpkin and get on the first plane to Russia and go live your dream of socialism."

I think in order for me to go to the Russia you're thinking of I'll need a time machine, not a plane.

Anyway, I've yet to see anyone (Kate?) address the utter b.s. involved in Rush's repeated claim that what Sandra Fluke was speaking about was having sex (with contraception) on "us" - the taxpayers. She was speaking of Georgetown's student insurance program, in which students pay 100% of the premiums. The non-tax-paying Catholic Church has no involvement in the insurance program.

That's a crucial deception that's going on here with Limbaugh and his obnoxious defenders - this isn't about taxpayers footing the bill for Fluke's (if she even uses it, which we don't know) or any Georgetown woman's contraception. It simply isn't. But, I know, the right has gotten rather comfortable in its facts-be-damned environment.

But Jon Stewart (don't tell me you hate Jews now! - just kidding!) put it rather well. Even IF that were the issue here - and it is not - the complaint is about certain conservatives paying for things that offend them or bother them or that are an affront to their conscience or value system or religious principles. "Join the f***ing club!"

https://gawker.com/5890752/

Indeed, Pope John Paul II spoke out against the war in Iraq (and others, as well). Many believers (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, etc.) found that war to run counter to their values. Not to mention the CIA black sites, Abu Ghraib and Gitmo and the disgusting things that have occurred in those places.

And guess what, when we paid our taxes we helped to pay for all of those things. Your response, to the extent you'd even have one, would seem to be "suck it up.' Interesting.

Stewart's quite right. Reimburse our tax dollars for Iraq and the subsidies to the profit-gushing oil commpanies (for starters), and then we will gladly shell out for any woman's contraceptives. We'll have cash to spare.

Lastly, I love the entirely predictable and pathetic victim schtick that the right-wing is cranking up to a deafening shriek. "They're trying to silence Rush! He who speaks truth to power!" (yada, yada, yada) Yes, people are silencing Rush, preventing him from speaking, denying him his first amendment RIGHTS (like you ever care about those anyway when anyone to your left wants to use them). Nobody is silencing Rush. This is freedom at work, sorry. Free citizens are free to contact advertisers on Rush's show and tell them that they won't be buying their products if they continue to do so. And private firms that air Rush's show (i.e., radio stations) or that advertise on it are free to stop airing it and free to stop advertising on it. They're even free to do it if their executives, using their own judgment, find Rush to be, say, or do anything inappropriate. Boycott tactics operate in free environments. Advertisers can sink their heels in (to Rush's steady stream of deep b.s.) and tell those objecting to his remarks to go fly a kite, and continue to advertise on his show - if they wish to. And of course, these tactics have often been used by conservative, right-wing, and religious groups many, many times. Lovers of Liberty (in which, typically, liberty translates only to mean that private companies can do whatever they wish without restrictions or regulations) should find nothing at all here to object to. If Rush should lose his show because no one will advertise on it, or no station will opt to air it, or no single benefactor will support him or create a Rush-only radio station (there's a fantasy for you!), then he's still free - like me - to say whatever he wishes by standing on an orange crate in the public park (provided there IS a public park where he lives - public parks are evidence of a Stalinist society, you know!) or at the end of his driveway. He's free as a bird.

That said, too many people are painfully dumb, and if these boycotts prove to be too successful or too many advertisers drop his show, and too many stations drop him from their schedule, such people will buy into his free-speech-rights-denied whine-fest, and they'll play along, if not take to the streets with their AK-47s strapped on (after all, LAST time - during the Tea Parties - they said "We come unarmed...this time!" I'm guessing that was the final straw). Targets: Georgetown (duh!), The White House, MoveOn, dirty hippies, latte drinkers, women who have used birth control pills, sluts, FemiNazis (TM), and any and every dirty, Pinko hippy who thinks that there's anything plausible about evolution or global warming. Rush will be the new Rosa Parks!

(and here's some fun from Colbert:)

https://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/colbert-rush-limbaugh-prostitute-who-will-d

Yes, what Rush said was crude sarcasm and he ought to be ashamed of himself for getting carried away. He keeps apologizing, so we can suppose he is.

I wasn't being sarcastic with you. I thought it was gallant of you try to protect Miss. Fluke's honor. I still cannot understand what is noble and courageous about telling Congress and the world that someone needs to help you pay for birth control given your active sex life. However, I am burdened by an older morality. I grant it is no longer fashionable. That ethic says, one, that our sexuality is a private matter, not subject for public discussion. Two, that we don't ask for help from government or anyone unless we rally need it.

I must have misunderstood. Why was Miss Fluke complaining to Congress about Georgetown University's policy on birth control? She is not asking the federal government to control the policies of a private entity?

get a job.

Here you go Pumpkin:

https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/02/29/hypocrisy-on-capitol-hill-deconstructing-a-dishonest-speech-about-birth-control

It was right below the posting about the 3 Ocuppiers in Oakland charged with rape, robbery and hate crimes.
WOW - Occupiers raping, robbing and now hate crimes? What is going on with you peaceful lefties... Not FEELing too good lately - you know it is all about FEELing good.

Not only am I charming, but my most dangerous attribute is telling the truth with facts.

The Seven Sponsors that dropped Rush:

Sleep Train
Sleep Number
Legal Zoom
Citrix
Quicken Loans
Carbonite
ProFlowers.

David Friend the CEO of Carbonite donates to MoveOn, Howard Dean campaign - Al Gore - he is a lefty. What is SOOOOOOOO Funny that in order to make money he advertises on the Limbaugh show because Limbaugh makes him money. HIPPOCRITE!!!

If you want more information Pumpkin, try the internet and using google to search for information. I know it is hard for you do that - obviously since you could not find the article about Fluke written by Charles Johnson on Breibart, but just keep trying....

Kate: There is no way that Pumpkin is acting gallant and trying to protect Fluke's honor. Liberal men have no honor.

Seven sponsors? Try 33, after JCPenney dropped him.

https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73675.html

Now I just saw 34... well, at least 30.

Time to write the poor fella a check, cow!

"If you want more information Pumpkin, try the internet and using google to search for information. I know it is hard for you do that - obviously since you could not find the article about Fluke written by Charles Johnson on Breibart, but just keep trying...."

Well, therein lies the problem. You tell me how useful the google search is for those 3 particular terms:

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&site=&q=fluke+%22charles+johnson%22+breitbart&oq=fluke+%22charles+johnson%22+breitbart&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2820l9014l0l9450l33l33l0l0l0l0l366l3858l20.11.0.2l33l0&gs_l=hp.3...2820l9014l0l9450l33l33l0l0l0l0l366l3858l20j11j0j2l33l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=75088d172d6db3cc&biw=1366&bih=622

Do you see a Breitbart URL in the first 3 pages of those search results (sorry, my ROI would be too low to go beyond 3 pages of results)? I didn't. This was the closest I came:
https://www.hyscience.com/archives/2012/03/more_scoop_on_s.php

and from there I followed the link to an American Spectator article by Jeffrey Lord, which MENTIONS the Johnson article but the link that it claims to offer for the article only goes to the Breitbart homepage. And it was at that point that I just needed to take a shower.

Aside from whether I can or can't use google effectively, I think the standard etiquette is that when you want people to read something you found online you generally, whenever possible, should post a link to it so they can check it themselves.

Watch out though, cow - I think Ashbrook is secretly funded by the Occupy hippies!

Let's go back in the time machine to 2006 for a moment:

https://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/rush-limbaughs-dominican-stag-party

When Rush was busted at Miami airport with 29 Viagra pills prescribed to his doctor:

"JULY 6--Rush Limbaugh was traveling with four other men--including the producers of the hit show "24"--when he was detained over a mislabeled bottle of Viagra found in his luggage during a Customs search, records show.

(...)

An affidavit sworn three days later by Limbaugh was also released. In that document, Limbaugh explains that the Viagra "was intended for my exclusive use" and that the drug had been prescribed in the name of his drug treatment doctor, Steven Strumwasser."

He traveled there with 4 other men. He was unmarried at the time. I've never known of Rush having a long-term traditional courtship with a woman from Dominican Republic. What were those pills for if not some sort of cheap, casual sex? And he wants to call Fluke a slut (and lie about what she wants (i.e. have "us" pay for her to have sex) ??

Please.

Wow, somehow I missed this little controversy surrounding CPAC. Sounds like, using the Rushboan standard (alone), CPAC had more than a few "sluts" of its own. Girls in short skirts, showing cleavage, and apparently the boys were getting condoms for some non-procreative sex.

The Onion really couldn't do any better...

https://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/02/17/conservatives_bloggers_debate_whether_or_not_to_hold_their_own_to_their_own_prudish_standards_.html

https://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B7F23932-4A4E-4649-A192-38A7EB9DF36A

RE: Rush not being influential or significant in politics, that he's merely an "entertainer" - somehow, despite all of the liberally-biased mainstream media I read, this one went under the radar:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/173311-boehner-briefed-limbaugh-on-debt-plan

"Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) outlined the GOP's debt-ceiling plan to conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh on Monday before showing it to his conference.

On Monday during his radio program, Limbaugh talked about the call he received from Boehner. Limbaugh's support of the plan would be advantageous to Republicans because it might help rally the conservative base."