I agree. :) Like Rush:
Posted on 03/06/2012 7:38:35 AM PST by Moseley
Last week, Rush Limbaugh enthusiastically and eagerly did a swan dive from the high board into the liberal trap. If anyone should know better, it is Rush. But Rush was thinking mainly about getting publicity for himself, to garner interest in people listening to his show. So Rush Limbaugh threw restraint to the wind, and started to channel Howard Stern. Rush started on a line of tittilating sexual innuendo, and just failed to stop at the border.
Anyone with Rush Limbaugh's experience knows by now that if you use certain words, phrases, or arguments, people will totally lose track of or forget what you were trying to say. No one experienced in politics fails to understand that if you use words like slut, prostitute, pimp, or the like, or Nazi, etc., or mention Hitler in any context, nobody will listen to anything else you have to say. They will be all wrapped around a tree about the word you used, and completely distract from the point you were trying to make.
The tragedy of Rush Limbaugh's inexcusable 'rookie' blunder is that the Sandra Fluke affair is a fiasco-in-waiting for liberals, Democrat candidates, and the Obama Administration.
This is not about Sandra Fluke.
Sandra Fluke exposed (almost) AN ANTI-CATHOLIC ATTACK BY LIBERALS AND DEMOCRATS.
What is being missed in Fluke's testimony is that she is only the spokesperson for a project to attack Catholic Georgetown University -- for being Catholic. Notice what Fluke actually testified:
“We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today ..."“One told us about how ..."
“In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated .."
“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, ..."
“One woman told us doctors ..."
“One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered ..."
This was unmistakably a PROJECT to attack Catholic Georgetown University -- for being Catholic -- by "Law Students for Reproductive Justice" http://lsrj.org/
Sandra Fluke and "Law Students for Reproductive Justice" deliberately set out to attack and smear Catholics and the Catholic Church. This was a deliberate assualt on the religious beliefs of the Catholic Church.
This was the latest battle in the liberals' war on religion. (However, Limbaugh managed to totally obscure the real issues.)
It was also a complete pack of lies.
Perhaps Sandra Fluke will make a very talented liar, er, sorry LAWYER, one day.
Sandra Fluke may prove skilled at convincing juries of things that just aren't true.
But here, she got caught red-handed.
Because her testimony was perjury -- lying under oath -- her fitness to be admitted to the Bar ought to be questioned. The Bar makes a big distinction between dishonesty NOT under oath (not good) and a lawyer committing an actual crime, such as perjury. A candidate for bar admission faces a much higher burden to get admitted the first time.
FAILED ARGUMENT:
The crucial lynchpin of the argument for attacking Georgetown's Catholic religious beliefs is the hypothesis that birth control is too expensive for a student to afford without health insurance paying for it. YET, THAT IS A FLAT-OUT, TOTAL LIE.
Sandra Fluke committed perjury (lying under oath) by claiming that "AS YOU KNOW" birth control costs a student "OVER $3,000" over the three years of law school.
Note: Some have tried to cover for Fluke by changing this to "UP TO." No. She said "OVER $3,000."
To expose this perjury, we need look no farther than Planned Parenthood's own website.
Of course Sandra Fluke did not identify which type of birth control she had in mind. But it doesn't matter:
COSTS: (1) Birth Control pills, every single day (with placebos often in the plan for 2 or 3 days): $15 per month, says Planned Parenthood. $540 over 3 years. (2) the PATCH: $15 per month says Planned Parenthood. $540 over 3 years. (3) IUD: Good for 12 years, $500 to $1000 up-front, says PP. (4) condoms: 40 cents each in economy packages.
Top name brand, Trojan, condoms cost $13.99 in a 36 count economy pack. That's 40 cents a condom. So the only way that a Georgetown student could be spending $3,000 over three years is to have sex 7,500 times over three years. That's 6.84 times a day, every single day, without any days off, for three years.
Could one spend MORE than $15 per month, which Planned Parenthood says is a likely price? Who cares? The discussion is about a student on a limited budget. So we are talking about how little she might spend, not how much she could go on the up side.
It is Sandra Fluke’s claim that a student *MUST* spend “OVER $3,000″ during 3 years. She is claiming that it is NECESSARY (unavoidable) for a woman at Georgetown Law School to spend “OVER $3,000″ a year for birth control.
So, sure -- you could pay more than $15 per month. But we are talking about students who are short on money. So obviously we are talking about students paying the minimum, because they are on a limited budget. The argument is that these students cannot afford birth control, so we have to look at the minimum price, not the premium price you could pay if you don't care about the cost.
But if Georgetown’s students — who are supposed to be studying some of the time — had sex 3 times a week, taking 2 weeks out being with their families for holidays and taking 2 weeks out for exam weeks, that would be 432 times over three years.
COST FOR CONDOMS: $172.80 plus tax over three years. (432 times 40 cents each.)
With contraceptives, there is NO PROBLEM. They are cheap. Easily available. Nothing to worry about. Anyone who wants contraceptives can get them, often FREE.
To buy condoms 5 days a week, every single week without a break, costs only $104 a year if you buy top-brand quality (Trojans) in 36 count economy packs.
But the liberals have a more fatal problem here:
If you are going to lie, never lie about things that the hearer can SEE to be a LIE.
For the next 8 months, women will be buying their birth control pills every single month, if that is their chosen approach. They can SEE that the liberals are lying.
For the next 8 months, voters will walk through the aisles of grocery stores and then can SEE how little condoms cost. They can see that birth control is all over the place. In every grocery store in America, you can see them right there.
So the lie by the Democrats is obvious for all to see. The looming fiasco for liberals is that anyone can see the facts for themselves that the liberals are lying about.
Democrats and free agent liberals are doubling down on THE LIBERAL WAR ON WOMEN:
LIBERALS ARE PUBLICLY ARGUING THAT (liberals instinctively believe) WOMEN VOTERS ARE DUMB. That is, liberals hope and imagine that women voters aren't smart enough to see through the liberal scams and hogwash.
Republicans are betting that women voters are smart. Liberals are desperately hoping they're not. Obama's re-election strategy is to bet everything on the hope that voters are easily-fooled, gullible, and naive. Republican election hopes rest on believing the best about the American people.
So the only way the liberal scam can work is if women voters are really, really dumb.
Republicans treat women as intelligent. Democrats don't.
Fair enough. That's a good observation.
You’re gonna have a lot more pressing problems, very soon, if zero is re-elected,
like keeping warm & fed & safe from marauding gangs of 0bamazombies.
Even though Republicans started with a valid issue, religious employers being forced to provide drugs that they find morally objectionable, I can fully imagine Republicans losing this war of words and images to Dems. After all, they have lost every battle they tried with Obama since taking the house last year.
After seeing how Pelosi (and her lib women house members) used the Issa hearing by claiming it was a ‘ panel on women's health issues’, they should have known exactly what their line of propaganda would be to Blunt Amendment. It was the same and the MSM picked up on it again.
For example, what if the congressional Republicans went out as a team (as Pelosi manages) and kept repeating that the Blunt amendment and this fight is really about mandating that women, or maybe the Church, pay for Viagra for men? (just an example.) The goal is to neutralize Dems strategies and turn them around on them. Women who see 'free BC' to women as a big plus need to understand why these mandates are bad for them too. Republicans never think of that.
Republican have this bad habit of not seeing that they are losing the war of words and then doubling down on the same strategy, and then caving when total destruction is within an arms reach.
Dems FIGHT TO WIN, Especially Pelosi.
I don’t like Rush. He panders to the cheap seats - and most of us sit in the cheap seats from time to time. He deals in righteous indignation, mockery, easy outrage, provocation, contempt.
Sure he can be informative, bringing up news or viewpoints that the MSM won’t touch. And sure, I agree with most of his politics. I used to listen to him but I found he was not good for my soul. Now I find him irritating - I’m tired of the blusterer and blowhard.
So why does the average non-political woman not like him? The reasons above are valid, even just as a matter of taste: he is certainly not to everyone’s liking. He tries not to be.
He’s not “nice.” Women place a premium on being “nice” and not being “hurtful.” You are allowed not to be nice only if you are politically correct and attack the right targets. Most people don’t question the political indoctrination in which they live. And because he’s anti-feminist - most women pay at least lip service to feminism.
I despise Fluke and her brand of political manipulation, and her deliberate attempt to undermine the tenets of the university she enrolled in. But attack that - not her personal sexual behavior and morality - which was never the issue. Most women have been verbally attacked in sexual terms in disputes - so Rush’s attack on Fluke made them sympathize with her - a tactical blunder on his part.
I informed my OB/GYN that I could not take Birth Control pills for hemorrhaging periods. There are many other hormone pills to take, because that’s what they are, hormone pills.
I even had Progesterone suppositories made at a local pharmacy.
“The pill” is just the easiest to write on a script. If a woman is not given the option to get a little plastic pack, she will be given a script for another pill. It’s in the marketing and not the ingredients.
DON’T let the libs fool you.
With clueless "friends" like you, conservatives don't need any other enemies.
LOL! Come on down and visit. But, be forewarned: you may not want to return home. By the way, if you want to get a good look at what life is really like the “sun-kissed Caribbean,” take a look at my website, caribbeanlifeclub.com. This is not an ad — everything on the site is free!
I’ll check out your site ...but it will only make it worse, I fear! (heavy sigh)
I’m not sure what kind of crowd you socialize in, but you’re making the mistake of thinking that most women are sympathetic to sluts.
And also, let me add this.
I’ve done medical billing when I was a Medical Office manager. Insurance companies pay for meds depending on the ICD (diagnostic) and CPT (treatment) codes. If a woman walks into a GYN office and says that she has irregular periods, she gets a certain diagnostic and a certain treatment code. If she had prescription coverage, she must have the right codes. They WILL pay for “the pill” if she is being treated for a medical condition, just because most other hormone pills have slipped away. They are there, but “the pill” is more available. They are not going to pay for contraception but will pay for hormone treatment.
See the difference?
A lot of women are not sympathetic to sluts. Most women are sympathetic to women who are called sluts.
Fluke did not say she was using contraception. She did not say she was having sex. She did not say she was having a lot of sex. She did not say she had a lot of sexual partners. What she said was that women at Georgetown should have the university insurance pay for their contraception if they want it. (I strongly disagree with her.) She appointed herself an advocate for these women and said NOTHING about her own life.
Fluke may be celibate. She might be engaged and faithful to her fiance. She might be a lesbian. She might be secretly married. She might be unfortunately typical of many young women with several different partners a year. She might be wildly promiscuous. We don’t know. Rush didn’t know.
Calling her a slut is unwarranted. Calling her a prostitute was out of line. It was not just wrong. It was stupid.
>>To: holdonnow<<
I saw what you did there. LOL, good for you! He is so good at what he does.
I appreciate your argument. One thing you might want to correct — since Fluke didn’t actually testify at a real hearing (it was a fake hearing, one of those gatherings where democrats get together and pretend to hold a hearing where only their side talks), she was never under oath, so she wouldn’t commit perjury by lying.
This may be why, when the republicans offered to allow the democrats to call her as a witness at the real hearing, the democrats ended up choosing a different witness, and then cancelling that witness as well.
But, she talked about six select women. One of them was a woman who was raped and, in Fluke's words, didn't seek medical care:
"even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn’t going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman’s reproductive health."
Laughable, right? The woman's problem wasn't that she didn't have contraception paid for by Georgetown; the woman's problem was that she was stupid. Contraception doesn't fix stupid.
Rush could have had a field day with that.
But he didn't. He went on and on about how much sex Fluke claimed she was having - three guys a night, and so on, when Fluke never mentioned her own sex life or use of contraception.
And Fluke said a married coed at Georgetown couldn't afford prescription contraception. We know, and Rush could have told the world, that it's available for $9 to $15 a month, generic. But Rush said that Fluke was buying condoms in the sixth grade, and that she was a prostitute.
And Fluke claimed that a woman had a medical condition and her doctors prescribed a contraceptive to treat it, but the evil insurance company personally interviewed the woman and decided that she wanted to have sex, and that was the reason for the contraceptive, so they denied coverage.
Can you imagine El-Rushmo riffing on that? It would be hilarious. But he didn't. He talking about how Fluke was base and immoral to be telling the world she was having sex with so many men.
Rush completely missed the mark twice. Fluke threw him softballs. He didn't even swing at them. And then he made up all of these things she supposedly said about her own sex life, and called her a slut as a result, when she never mentioned her sex life, the cost of her own contraceptives, or whether she was even on or needed contraception.
Does that make sense?
I appreciate that info.
A few years back I have a divorced neighbor friend that would have the most extreme mood swings (like bi-polar) that I saw personally during PMS/period, and she eventually went on what she said was the ‘birth control pill’ and it effectively softened the swings making her life manageable. At the same time she wanted have unmarried sex (being recently divorced) with different men with the pills protection. And she is a non-practicing Catholic yet. Better yet, she told me she believes that Mothers should put their teenage daughters on the pill.(standard where I live.)
So in her case it was both at least in her view.
I am 100% against Obama-care mandates. Have been. But I think this is an easy battle for Republicans to lose if they are not careful. And they are on a losing streak. If Pelosi becomes Speaker again then 2010 was a waste, and she will try to overturn DOMA.
>>Most women are sympathetic to women who are called sluts.<<
Not if they are sluts.
Please don’t make us all out to be sniveling Twilight moms who sit around waiting for the next “Sex and the City” movie watching “The View”.
Maybe where you live, woman are crying in their lattes for this chick. Where I live, right here in MI, women think she is Nancy’s b!tch who is lying by omission to forward her agenda. And honestly, Rush brought this to a head and it popped. What happens after a pimple pops?
But the debate is whether a woman has access to “contraception” for medical issues. Your story proves that they do.
I agree. :) Like Rush:
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.