“I had to make you read Fluke’s craftily written leftist speech so you would see it for yourself.”
Hate to remind you of it, Harry, but I read Fluke’s testimony a while back, and it verified what I said. She was saying SHE (and others) suffered “financial, emotional, and medical burdens” and that the school “create[d] untenable burdens that impede our academic success”.
She was NOT saying that these burdens were borne by others, but said she shared them. “WE STUDENTS”.
Thus, it is appropriate for Rush to say, ‘$1,000/year at $1/condom, that means she is having sex at least 1,000 times a year. And that makes her a slut!’ And if she bought in bulk, she would need to have sex over 2,000 times a year to run up the bill she claims.
Except, of course, darn near NO ONE ANYWHERE has sex 3-6 times a day every day for years. So that makes her a liar, because her claims are absurd. Absurd because no one - including Rush - believes she is having sex that often. Nor that the other coeds are having that much sex. Thus, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity.
And thus Rush could not be sued by her, as you suggested here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2854800/posts
Or more precisely, he could be sued, but she would not have a case, because Rush’s ‘slander’ was never meant to be believable. Instead, it illustrated how stupid her testimony was, and how foolish it was for anyone to take her testimony seriously.
Rush was guilty of laughing at her, but not of defaming her.
Right. You’ve read Smith v. Stewart.
You have yourself a good night. I apologize to everyone for arguing on the internet. I'm embarrassed.