Posted on 03/05/2012 6:20:47 PM PST by mamelukesabre
What the heck does he think he's accomplishing with his asinine APOLOGY? With his STUPID apology, he has just pandered to the left. He has just had his first "Don Imus" moment. Is Rush going senile? I just don't get it. Maybe the guy really isn't all that bright.
I sure do hope Rush doesn't have to be unemployed for a period before recovering from his little apology moment like Don Imus did.
What a knucklehead.
|
No. Because you are stubborn in your understanding and weak in your resolve you will be taken to the ovens against your will. Honesty goes out the door when defending your sanctimonious self, I see. Very selective and must work well for you. Integrity little? |
A liberal pushing the liberal agenda? ;)
ITA.
Rush made it sound as if she personally was spending $3000 over her law school career on condoms. That would make her a slut.
That is not what I took from the testimony. She lied about the price of birth control pills. She wasn’t arguing condoms or she wouldn’t have said the women went to the pharmacy counter just to find out her contraception wasn’t covered. You don’t go to the pharmacy for condoms. If she was talking about condoms she wouldn’t have cited the medical uses (PSOS and endometriosis). Condoms don’t treat those conditions.
The $3000 she said was spent on contraception was the (FALSE) price of BC pills. She even said her friend could no longer afford $100 a month for her birth control pills. 100 month for 12 months is $1200 times 3 years is over $3000 dollars.
‘Honesty goes out the door when defending your sanctimonious self, I see. Very selective and must work well for you’
What did I lie about to defend myself? And how am I being sactimonious? Because I don’t believe lying is a good way to win an argument?
‘And, you’re still allowing them to control the discussion, imo.’
When I am talking to them I am debating the topic and not talking about Rush.
I am not talking to them here.
‘Because you are stubborn in your understanding and weak in your resolve you will be taken to the ovens against your will.’
Lol. And you came to this conclusion how exactly? You know nothing about me.
“Again you keep calling women who use birth control sluts.”
Stop right there. TE hasn’t done that.
And, you are allowing the discussion/debate/issue, being some 30 yr old liberal political activist pushing an agenda, to be boiled down to her being called a slut. TE isn’t saying that in his posts. You are.
Playing right into the hands of the agenda setting media, imo.
She mentioned that her friend could no longer afford $100 a month for her BC pills.
You can get them at Kroger/Walmart for $4 a month so she was definitely lying.
We settled this already upthread. Just a miscommunication. I couldn’t understand why TE was saying she was advocating for sluts because she was talking about birth control.
TE explained that he/she thinks Fluke was talking about $3000 worth of condoms. Which I would agree makes any woman a slut.
I thought Fluke was lying about the price of BC Pills and saying that BC pills cost $1000 a year. If Fluke is talking about BC pills, they cost the same whether or not you have 1 partner or 500. So just because a woman takes BC doesn’t mean she is a slut.
After TE explained $3000 worth of condoms, I understood that we were coming at this from two different prospectives. And I agreed only a slut would need $3000 worth of condoms.
Totally
sorry forgot to ping you in 190
“Rush made it sound as if she personally was spending $3000 over her law school career on condoms. That would make her a slut”
Really? I didn’t get that from his commentary. Again, I think you were the one who misinterpreted his commentary. I think a lot of people did. And, you get to decide what makes her a slut? So if she’s using “many” condoms, she’s a slut in your opinion? How many is many? Do you see where this is going?
“You don’t go to the pharmacy for condoms. If she was talking about condoms she wouldn’t have cited the medical uses (PSOS and endometriosis). Condoms don’t treat those conditions”
I’m aware of that. I’m starting to wonder about the rest of the world.
Yes, she used anecdotal stories to prove her position. She got called on it and the firestorm happened. Liberals don’t like facts nor do they like their anecdotal stories being questioned.
LOL
No one has agreed with my interpretation that she may have been speaking in 3rd person narrative. She blithely mentions she is a 3rd year student and the quantified just how much we owe her and any other woman who make a claim of rights.
GEEZUS. I was only thinking it was a dude and willing to accept she/he was a a lesbo.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Nuttin slips by you.
Like.
She’s a liar.
You don’t hear the media or many others calling her that because far too many are hooked on the slut comment.
So let’s pound it that she’s a liar. Sandra Fluke is a liar.
I'm afraid you just don't understand what the left's agenda is here. They do want insurance to cover the cost of condoms as well as all contraceptive devices and they want it covered 100% because "cost sharing" is such a burden to women.
The Case for Insurance Coverage of Contraceptive Services And Supplies Without Cost-SharingA provision in the 2010 health reform legislation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), requires all new private health plans to cover certain specified preventive health services without any out-of-pocket costs to consumers, such as copayments or deductibles. An initial list of such services, based on three sets of existing guidelines, began affecting insurance plans in September 2010. Reproductive health services on that list include cervical cancer screening, screening and counseling for HIV and several other sexually transmitted infections, and vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV).
In November 2010, an advisory panel convened by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) began to develop a fourth set of guidelines—for women’s preventive health care—as required under an amendment to the ACA authored by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). Debate on the Senate floor made clear that the Mikulski amendment was intended by its supporters to include contraceptive counseling, services and supplies, as well as an annual well-woman gynecologic exam and other key services. The IOM panel is scheduled to make its recommendations in the spring to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), which is charged with adopting a final set of guidelines and has set a goal of doing so by August.
(snip)
Additional Health Benefits
(snip)
And, of course, the male and female condom can help prevent sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, among sexually active women and men. According to the most recent summary of the evidence by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), consistent and correct use of latex condoms is highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV. It also reduces the risk of other sexually transmitted infections, particularly those transmitted by genital secretions, and may reduce the risk for HPV infection.
This is all part of the 0bamaCare mandate and Fluke's testimony was aimed squarely at influencing Congress to pass these very recommendations. Condoms may not be Rx and insurers may not cover them now but the plan is to mandate 100% coverage for them real soon and they intend to mandate that all insurers carry that coverage.
Cat fight!
ping to #198
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.