Posted on 03/05/2012 10:29:09 AM PST by Kaslin
I think Rush did the right thing and proved he has what the left lacks, Class.
Tell me what the mistake he made was. THe woman IS is a slut. Calling her what she is, is not a mistake. It’s accurate.
By any definition she is a slut. Now if that means women you know or women in your family could fall under that definition, ie a woman of loose virtues, sexually promiscuous, etc, then so be it. That is the definition of “slut” and it may be too bad that’s what they are, but if they act that way, they’re sluts. If that means labeling most modern women today sluts - hell, let’s just call them empowered sluts or liberated sluts because they’ve been brainwashed to think acting this way is awesome, then so be it. Let the label be slapped on.
Now if you’re upset we’re not labelling the guys who want them to act that way what they are, well, that’s a separate issue but I’d be fine discussing the terms I’d assign them to for their behavior.
If I said I needed $3,000 to cover the costs of my drinking habit, would it tell you anything about how much alcohol I use? Or probably use? Especially if I could buy 40 'drinks' for $11.46.
Does that old 'connecting the dots' thing kind of elude you...
Once anyone has testified before a Congressional Committee with that session open to the public, doesn't that event make one a 'public figure' who should be ready for a response from all sides?
I'll say it again. Limbaugh is a p****.
We will NOT lower ourselves to use their disgusting language. Even Rush understands this. Don’t take their bait.
As much as we’d like it to be so, that’s not how this will be portrayed. As much as we would like him to, Rush does not control the national media and its decisions on news coverage.
To them, he’s now the man who was faced down by Fluke. He may have made his point to us (and even though I don’t like the way he chose to make it, I certainly understand it) but whether it has the larger impact so many people here are suggesting is debatable at best.
He did retreat. For whatever reason, he retreated.
He showed it and he proved it
Now we have our side criticizing Rush for being ‘chicken’ and recanting.
The fact is that his statements were stupid and unnecessary and he knew or should have known they would be inflamatory and non-productive. He has made the Democrats day (or week or month)on this issue by drawing attention away from the imposition of government controls on religious institutions.
I heard him say something a few weeks ago that was also a ‘no-no’ which he covered up quickly. Perhaps Rush is getting to the age where he speaks his mind and not his intelligence.
Are you sure you read MY post? If so, it might be wise to get your vision checked.
Since when does having a favorable opinion of Rush Limbaugh or having happened to join FR in May 2011 make someone a troll?
I think then Rush has a distorted set of ethics in this regard, then, if you cannot call a woman who is clearly a slut, a slut. And begging for money from others to keep being a slut.
Calling someone something they are, how can that be a violation of ethics? It’s like not calling a muslim terrorist a muslim terrorist. This is how we wind up having people call what Major Hasan, a muslim extremist terrorist in our own army, instead of calling it a terrorist act, “workplace violence”.
Don’t apologize or be afraid to call things what they are.
Thanks, that is a relevant part of this.
HBO's “Real Time” host Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a 'twat'.
I doubt either of us would use that word. But there was no outcry - liberal women were not offended -they joined in the laughter.
On a political level, I find it hard being force to accept Maher's comments - while also being forced, by the Democrat-media complex to condemn Rush's comment.
Jumping from "Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school" (her statement) to an assumption that 'hormonal contraceptives don't cost that much, so she must have been talking about condoms, which means that she must be using 60 condoms a day' is not "connecting the dots." It's making a gigantic leap.
Yup. Damn right.
If I told you I needed $3,000 a month to cover my ‘bar bill’ - would you make any kind of assumption about how much alcohol I consume?
Nancy Pelosi’s initiative to convince Sandra Fluke to testify to the principle of contraception as a health care necessity is simply wrong. Colleges and universities provide accidental injury/major medical and not traditional employee health insurance to students. Since students are generally young and not subject to the myriad diseases confronting older people or families with children, the coverage is limited. Not only contraceptives, but many medical procedures and drugs are not included. Since sexual intercourse is an optional, and not a required activity of law school students, contraceptives should not be among policy provisions.
Ms. Fluke testified that 40% of the women in law school considered sexual intercourse a compelling or preferred recreational activity. Therefore, the proper place to make her case is with the Georgetown University Student Association. The university encourages students to actively engage in more than 200 co-curricular clubs and activities. She testified to what would be more accurately described as a club sport or performing art, than as a health care necessity.
The analogy should not be considered facetious, but should awaken people to the limits of targeted, low cost insurance programs.
It is not a vulgar word we can’t say in mixed company. We are not provincial. It’s not a swear. It is an accurate term. Would you rather he say “harlot”? Or “a woman who gives it away for free”? Or a woman who needs to put an aspirin between her legs?
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.