« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Limbaugh, Fluke, ‘War on Women’ and the Travesty of Cravenly Caving to Lies of the Left

I learned something this weekend. Evidently, using the word slut is far more egregious than peeing on the Constitution and on personal and religious liberty. And being equated to a slut due to demanding that others pay for your personal sexual choices is more egregious than actually being a thirty year old perpetual student leech, spouting outright lies. Because, entitled. I had another teachable moment as well: the GOP has yet to realize what a travesty it is to cravenly cave to lefty false narratives, unbelievably giving them credence. I realized that I am very concerned about the lack of testicles (is there a mandate to cover a pill for that?) in the GOP.  But, hey, us dames will handle it with our huge sets of brass ovaries. I’ll start, as I’m a giver.

Let’s get the absurd slut faux-outrage and the hypocrisy out of the way first, since Leftist hypocrisy and misogyny happens so often that it’s nearly a cliche. For the record, Rush Limbaugh never called her a slut just for being on birth control. Or even for having lots and lots of sex, if she does. I don’t know and I don’t care to know.  That’s yet another media/Lefty (concentric circles on Venn diagram) lie. Stop falling for it. Secondly, maybe Rush should have just called her a K Street whore? N.O.W. would have endorsed him for Congress or Governor of CA. Or called her a c-word or a ‘dumb tw*t? Or called Laura Ingraham a ’slut’ instead? That’s hunky-dory, apparently. It’s totally okay if it’s the wrong kind of woman, the kind whose skirts you have to lift and check to make sure they are actually women before they vote.

But using a provocative way to point out the absolute wrongness of the arguments of a woman who freely inserted herself in the public eye and who willingly publicly discussed her personal choices (if you seek to have others pay for your personal choices, then that opens you up to scrutiny of the same. Hooray, Nanny State!) Well, that’s apparently The Worst Thing Ever. Warranting a phone call from the President, for cripes sake. Will Obama call Andrew Breitbart’s grieving family to “offer support” over truly despicable things being said about him by the Left? Gleeful reveling at the death of a husband and father of four is no big whoop. But use the word slut in reference to a liar-pants slacker who wants others to subsidize her personal choices by mandate at the expense of religious and individual liberty? Presidential phone call!

Clearly, the President did that because he knows a Useful Idiot when he sees one. But shouldn’t Sandra Fluke be all Fem-offended that the President felt the need to call and pat her on her little woman head? Oh, The Patriarchy! See, the real War on Women is being waged by the Left, who seek to keep women victims, dependent on and controlled by the Nanny State. Sandra Fluke is a tool.  

The Left is trotting her out, in collusion with the media, as a way to distract and deflect from the real issue and the real debate. They’ll use her to seek to further exploit women with transparent ploys to try to scare them, in order to help their false narrative and re-elect their Golden Boy. And then toss her aside, like they always do.

She knows no better, as her ‘testimony’ clearly showed. Which testimony, by the way, the members of the alleged Press have not questioned. They are too busy rushing to anoint her a victim-y heroine, who they won’t let be silenced! Hey, you know who won’t ‘be silenced’? Conservative broads. And we procreate (insert maniacal, yet girly, laughter).

Not one has even questioned the veracity of the statements in her ‘testimony’, which were so absurd they were almost comical. Most of it was typical slacker/entitlement mentality nonsense. We are to feel sorry for her, a thirty year old woman at Georgetown Law School, because she can’t afford some things. Paying for one’s own birth control is an ‘untenable burden’. No, really. She said that. If this mandate is supposedly (wink, wink, nudge nudge) to help The Poor ™, why is she asking – nay, demanding – that religious institutions be forced to subsidize self-absorbed 30 year old students at a fancy pants school? Instead of a law degree, she should receive a PhD in mooching; Doctor of Entitlement! Listen, honey, grow up. Get a real job and not some made up ‘reproductive rights activist’ job and, you know, stop buying stuff you can’t afford. Prioritize, baby! It’s easy. We grown-ups do things like that. Get out of your perpetual childhood-ridden Ivory tower. Try for a little less whinies and a little more thinkies. “Your body, your choice?” Your money, toots.

She then upped the absurd by testifying that numerous female students at Georgetown are so stupid that they wander aimlessly about not seeking medical care because they can’t read insurance policies. She publicly announced that women are so stupid that they don’t know how to read. Perhaps they should pick a different field of study than law where reading is, you know, fundamental? And perhaps ‘Reproductive Rights Activist’ isn’t the best job for Sandra Fluke if she can’t explain things to these poor, silly little women so they won’t be shocked – SHOCKED – that a Jesuit school won’t pay for their contraceptives. Further, the cost of contraceptives that she offered in her testimony indicates that the Planned Parenthood just down the road must be price gouging. Shouldn’t this be investigated? For The Women and all. She then grossly stated that a woman who was raped didn’t go to the doctor because she assumed it wasn’t covered as it was a ‘reproductive health’ issue. Beyond despicable. Yet not one question from the Press.

Once again, the Left demagogues rape and re-victimizes rape victims all as an end justifies the means. And this is the woman we are to apologize to? This is the kind of disgusting false narrative, full of exploitation and outright lies that we cravenly cave to? We just did it yet again during the reprehensible ‘an ultrasound is just like rape’ meme that the Left perpetrated in collusion with the Press. Governor McDonnell caved. Joe Scarborough disgustingly adopted not just the narrative, but the terms of the Left. Once you accept their premise in any way and adopt their revolting terms to boot, you are saying their argument is legitimate. And you’ve lost.

Why apologize to our enemies ever? And believe me, that IS what Fluke is. She is an enemy of the First Amendment, enemy of the truth, enemy of individual liberty and is harmful to all especially women. It’s ironic, and not in the slacker-hipster way, that they seek to quash the religious liberty of some while trying to force us all to ascribe to their religion of Leftism.

On the plus side, as constant shake fisty scowling gives me wrinkles, this Fluke circus and the Virginia ultrasound bill jackassery has made it easy to spot who falls for feminist/lefty/media spin and lies. And we’re watching. With our sets of brass ovaries. I know, I know – optics! We don’t want to be meany pants. We want them to like us! Guess what? They don’t and they never will. You aren’t even really human to them. They have no moral compasses; they are gleeful when we die and when four children become fatherless. I always say this is the difficulty we face, as people with moral compasses. We face an opponent who has none and who will use ours against us. And they need the War on Women lie to win. Stop giving it credence!

And  if protecting liberty is bad optics and if calling out lies and giving instead the simple truth is bad optics, then isn’t it far past time for some collective corrective vision? Maybe there is a mandate for that.

———-

Cross-posted from Breitbart’s Big Journalism

COMMENTS

  • Viet71

    That’s why she’ll lose any defamation suit against Limbaugh. New York Times v. Sullivan and its progeny.

    • cynicalindependant

      The court of public opinion matters too.

      • burke

        I see where many of you who defend Rush are coming from. The beating he’s taking seems unfair and disproportionate. The left is milking this for all it is worth — and make no mistake, they were waiting for an opportunity like this.

        But here’s the thing: There’s no winning this one in the court of public opinion. Rush was rude and mean. He took it too far. It doesn’t matter if Fluke could win a court case. It doesn’t matter that she’s 30 and not a co-ed. It doesn’t matter if others on both the left and right have used similar language about other women. These aren’t excuses for degrading the level of debate to offensive name calling and public speculations about another person’s sex life. You have to be VERY political–more political than most voters are— to set aside your notions of basic manners to give Rush a pass. What if a child of yours said what Rush did? What if Rush said what he did about a female relative, or your wife? It’s not right to say sexual things about somebody in public — and at the risk of sounding anti-feminist — especially about a woman. According to PPP, Rush’s favorables are now below 50% among GOP voters in Ohio, TN, and Georgia, after having been above 80% nationally the last time they polled on Rush. (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/03/limbaugh-and-birthers.html)

        It’s better for our stance on the issues if we don’t conflate the issues with Rush’s lapse in professionalism. This is a great way to get women to distrust the Republican party on health care and women’s issues. Rush can ride this one out, but he should do it alone, without support from the Republican establishment. Rush could end up being semi-undesirable to be associated with. It’s unfortunate, and disproportionate. But Rush only has himself to blame. It’s election year, and Obama’s desperate to get reelected, and they’ve been trying to convince everyone Republicans are anti-woman ever since Santorum went up in the polls. C’mon. Rush should have known better.

        • Scope

          and couldn’t read any further. The left is nothing but rude and mean in most everything they say. So someone takes them to task, in their own language, and you have a problem with someone being rude and mean? Get a life. Politics ain’t bean bag as they say. The left couldn’t care less what they say against conservatives. They couldn’t care less. They couldn’t care less. What part of fighting fire with fire do you not understand. The right has been beaten and beaten because they want to be the nice guys. Nice guys finish last, in case you haven’t noticed. Freaking John McCain slammed Rush today. Freaking John McCain also said in 2008 that there wasn’t anything to fear with an Obama presidency. McCain didn’t want the presidency at all. He just wanted to stick it to the right yet again.

          • arthurjake

            Unfortunately we have to be more pure than the people we oppose because they hammer us on every little slip. I know its not easy to be the better person all the time but sometimes you have to be.

            Stick to attacks they cant spin so easy like her being a thirty year old woman at a private university that is expensive as can be who complains she cant afford to by her own bc.

          • adair

            what happened was that Rush took the focus off the real problem: The Republicans were winning the argument that this is a matter of loss of freedom; of trampling on freedom of religion. He probably never should have watched that ridiculous testimony. It was maddening and had me (and maybe him) railing at her.

            But it was just a red herring.

            It makes me gag to say it, but running her in there to “testify” in their phony “hearing” may have been a very smart, calculated move to change the focus..Rush is right, I think, that because the abortion push isn’t working all that well, then the Dems have decided that contraception is a winner.

            Okay, you don’t want to pay for abortions? Then just pay to prevent the need for them. Beautiful. So logical. So reasonable. But NOT what the real problem is. Our Presidential candidates need to get to, and stick to, the stomping on religious freedom aspect of this Sebelius/Obama nightmare and grind them into the ground with it.

        • Filibuster Keaton

          I still haven’t heard a single person deny she’s a slut. Apparently the mean part is not to pretend not to have noticed.

          • godschosen

            Most law students I have heard of are PRACTICING (working, for you P.C. types) by age 30!!!!! (if you could even call what MOST attorneys do WORK!!???) Apparently she hasn’t found Mr. Goodbar yet, but I guess we can’t fault her for trying…….HARD!!!!…;-)

          • hwgood

            Rush should have apologized to the sluts, on this one.

        • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

          I’ve listened to Rush since 1989 and though he retains a few pals in the establishment like Karl Rove, they’d love for him to be gone from the landscape. At best they consider him an impediment. Mitch Daniels said only last year at CPAC that people shouldn’t listen to Limbaugh. Trent Lott said in 2007,

          • godschosen

            Insightful comment…..thanks!!

          • circlegranch

            I Stand With Rush is now a website complete with contact info for Carbonite, ProFlowers, and some others that walked away from Rush’s freedom of speech. Apparently, under pressure from Media Matters and probably people in higher places than that, refused to accept his apology and have seen an opening to try & do big damage to The Big Voice on the Right. Our voices need to be heard in defense of not just Rush’s voice but our own.

            The Left is good at this stuff–boycotting and blacklisting. We usually don’t play those games too well. It’s time to pay close attention to this. Push back time. Super Tuesday is what it is. November is what it is. Rush needs to survive well beyond both and continue to carry the banner of conservatism. For those, as noted above by katesmith, that think its time for him to be less influential, you Republican elitists need him more than ever to help your candidate. You all better gather your wagons around Rush because you’re desperately going to need for that Golden EIB microphone to be speaking in favor of your candidate 3 hours a day, 5 days a week going into November. Without that boost, your outlook for victory is beyond grim.

        • rightland1111

          People that listen to Rush seem to understand politics just fine. This was yet another trap…and yes many fell for it. When Obama came out with this crap wherein Obamacare would force the Catholic Church to provide birth control and perform abortions…it crossed the First Amendment. Obama knew it…after all…he’s supposed to be some Constitutional scholar…don’t ya know. So…he walks the thing back and says that the insurance companies will have to pay for it. Dumb idiot…it’s not about who pays for it…it about performing acts that are contrary to the church’s tenets. Oh my…what is Obama going to do now. The light bulb goes off…you know..his stupid ones we are MANDATED to buy and he decides he needs some shill to change this subject quick. UP POPS FLUKE.

          Here we are with a financial crisis, an energy crisis and Obamacare coming up for review…and what is the Congress talking about????Fluke’s sex life, her inability to purchase contraceptives. Of course she is Obama’s plant…he had nowhere else to go…people were too saavy concerning that darned First Amendment. So, it has now become a women’s rights issue. BS.

          Limbaugh saw the absolute absurdity of this entire fiasco used an analogy…and now we have to feel sorry for the poor women, who decided all by her self to speak of her personal choices, her sex life and her finances…AT OUR EXPENSE!!! Burke…did you force her to disclose her personal finances…her sex life and her use of contraceptives? NO…SHE DID IT OF HER OWN VALITION!

          See….I’m not one of these Affirmative Action women…Everything I have gotten in life, I have earned. Yeah…I was in a profession that was mainly inhabited by men…and guess what I did just fine. I knew when I got into the profession that I would hear language that wasn’t all that nice (a lot worse than SLUT)….but it WAS MY CHOICE.

          Burke…stop treating us as if we are some meek little waifs. We’re not. The women that will be offended by this are the ones that will never vote Republican. Some of those women that belong to the NOW organization haven’t figured out whether they are women YET!

          Rush will have his audience and they will stay with him. What I want to ask is this…coming from a women…and I will not apologize…is this: Why..with our country in this shape, does our Congress have the time to listen to this tripe? Who called that meeting, who was at the forefront? What was the motive? Our Congress better get ready to grow a pair…because sooner rather than later, the public will vote them out.

          If we are going to give away stuff free in Obamacare (we don’t seem to have a choice concerning giving stuff away)…why not heart medicine, cancer medicine, diabetes medicine. NO….NO…we had to make this stupid thing political to get the female vote…and this time…we’re not buying what he is selling.

          • daylightsavings

            while you rant about the first amendment. it’s volition, not valition.

          • rightland1111

            that’s a little more important than picking up my spelling errors. I don’t have spell check on this browser…sorry I got you so upset. Now we see what people focus on what items to come to a sane conclusion :-)

            I take it you didn’t like the post. Too bad

        • drsandykramer

          To Burke, Just One Thought:
          Bill Maher, hypocrite.

        • duanej

          We can’t win in the court of public opinion, it isn’t politically expedient or convenient, so lets be sure to distance ourselves from one of the loudest, most honest, and cetainly friendliest voices we know in Rush Limbaugh. Instead of caving, we should be buttressing and supporting Limbaugh. At least that is my take away from Ziganto.

          She states it plainly. Fluke and those like her hate us. They always have and there is little we can do to make them like us. They will always be ammoral. They will always use our morality against us to seek their ends. They crave one and only one end, control and power and they will sacrifice anything to get it. When Miss Fluke is no longer useful to those ends, she will be discarded by them. The outrage is jinned up and fake.

          If public opinion cannot be swayed, if we cannot shed light on the hipocrisy of the left, if we cannot through this issue and others like it demonstrate the banality of the left, then the public is wrong. Socrates was given a simple choice; be right and die, or be wrong and live. He chose to be right.

          I do not care how many people scream that Rush was wrong. He was right, public opinion be damned.

          • bobbie227

            duanej – Your response could not be better! And I agree 100%. Pelosi is the demon at the bottom of all this. Rush talked about it yesterday. And one thing he was definitely right about was that he as well as all of us FELL to their level! I, personally, never want to be that low, but sometimes, even we fall. Especially when we are pounded with it day after day after day!!

        • jiminga

          But oftentimes the truth hurts. Oh, and I doubt Rush really cares about favorability polling. What matters is Neilson ratings, and he will be #1 for a very long time.

        • rkaley

          self respect. The Fluke person wants us to pay for her contraceptives as she goes merrily along shacking up and doing one night stands. We live in a strange world in which someone with a little money and complete lack of self respect gets national attention. Now you don’t even need money.

          • cbartlett

            (not so terribly long ago) when a female who would admit to the actions Fluke discussed so freely would be labeled as a slut by ALL members of society – liberal OR conservative politics didn’t matter. Morals did.

            It is so obvious that this woman targeted this action to make a name for herself to put on a resume’. She says she knew the health insurance policy for that private school did not cover contraceptives before she applied. If that was so important to her, why didn’t she look elsewhere? Like a less expensive public school, for example? Why on earth would she choose to go to a church-sponsored school with upstanding morals that are very obviously contradictory to her own unless she was PLANNING to make this an issue? And the timing is coincidental? Get real. This was designed by libs to take the spotlight off of Obama for his ridiculous actions against the Catholic Church in an election year. Unfortunately, the sheeple will never understand that. Even the more conservative-leaning ones – because they are uninformed and prefer to remain that way.

      • Viet71

        n/t

        • jakeofalltrades

          I am somewhat doubtful that her Congressional testimony was sufficient. But then, you never said otherwise.

          • cbartlett

            it wasn’t even real “Congressional testimony” – it was just a Democratic press conference set up to LOOK LIKE congressional testimony. I would be so embarrassed to tell people that my child spent all that time and money to get a law degree to become a “Reproductive Rights Activist”. Sounds like she might end up as one of those OWS unemployed hippie-wannabees….

          • Scope

            for a spot on Fox. She can join her sister in LGBT activism Sally Kohn on the network.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    If the “leaders” can’t fight the battle effectively perhaps they shouldn’t be in those positions anymore? In my opinion the people who perpetually fall for Lucy yanking the football should be unselected from office so that others more willing to fight can at least have the opportunity to stop falling for the traps/lies and beat the left at their own game.

    • kady

      You’re exactly correct. The Dims KNOW that if they trot out anybody but a rich white male with a story about welfare, reproduction, abortion, or another rallying point that drives certain, poorly-disciplined conservatives bat crazy, said conservatives will trip all over themselves in front of cameras.

      WE OWNED THIS ISSUE as long as it was about the Constitution. Then, we started to make mistakes. The FIRST mistake was to have a Congressional hearing. When there’s a hearing, BOTH sides have a bat to beat the other with; the majority’s bat is just a little bit bigger.

      Since the Dims couldn’t get their stealth activist into the hearing (the right move, since she had nothing to share regarding the Constitutional issue) they had their OWN hearing. The plant tossed out a bunch of statistics obviously designed to be a red cape in front of the GOP so-con bulls; they reeked of “taxpayers paying for sex”. The Dims had their hearing, and all they had to do was to sit back and wait for some undisciplined pundit or backbencher to make a fool of themselves.

      That didn’t take long, but then….JACKPOT. Not only did they snare the usual suspects, but then they got SANTORUM talking about contraception, and LIMBAUGH talking about SEX.

      Game, set, match. Slam Dunk. All because the GOP hasn’t yet learned (1) that there is NO POLITICAL WIN in going on the attack in that fashion, and (2) that in SOME cases, the best offense is a good defense; ignore Fluke and the Dims, let them spout out their nonsense, and in the mean time play the game out in the courts and by passing measures like the Blount Amendment designed to put the losers on the record. (Every one of the Dems who voted against the Amendment is now on the record as being AGAINST the Catholic Church and AGAINST religious freedom. That’s not where they want to be, but they are confident that the GOP doesn’t have the wit to spin the issue in that fashion.

      And so am I. The GOP needs to learn to SHUT UP and LET THEIR OPPONENTS HANG THEMSELVES.

      • jimmyg

        Cardinal Dolan was doing fine on his own and is a better politician than most, either democrat or republican. Obama was on the ropes, even Chris Matthews was against Obama’s decision. Santorum opened the door and fools rushed in leaving us where we are today.

        The Blunt Amendment was too broadly written. It should have been narrowly tailored as a conscience exception for religious organizations.

        Let Cardinal Dolan take the lead on this, he knows what he is doing and I believe will be successful in obtaining the conscience exception.

        http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cardinal-tweaks-limbaugh-urges-fight-birth-control-policy-stay-civil-article-1.1032874?localLinksEnabled=false

        • godschosen

          WHY should ONLY “religious” ORGANIZATIONS be exemt from being forced to violate their conscience???? Please give me an answer that makes sense…….if possible!!!

          • acat

            Second, and more importantly, there’s this thing called the Constitution, and it has this group of amendment things called the Bill of Rights attached to it, and one of them allows for religious freedom.

            Mew

          • godschosen

            ….the aforementioned Constitution, the limitations are only on the government!!!!

          • rightland1111

            I’m not allowed to mention it here…but all you have to look up is gambling and the healthcare law and you will see who is exempt.

      • godschosen

        Rush’s network is Excellence In Broadcasting, accuracy is important, (including, sometimes, accurate slang), but excellence sets the bar far above mere accuracy!!!! We need to expose the nonsense and the EVIL, but it is not necessary, or desirable, to step DOWN to their level to expose, and hopefully, ultimately defeat those that insist on deception to achieve their tyrannical (whether they realize it or not) agenda.

        • Ausonius

          “…they must go to the nearest national monument to pick up their birth control devices.”

          Dan Aykroyd and Steve Martin (speaking of whom) predicted this nonsense decades ago with the Czechoslovakian “Wild and Crazy Guys” skit.

          America has become a living satire…except it isn’t funny!

  • petespa

    Every time Fluke’s name enters the discussion, it’s no longer about religious liberty or whether employers should have to cover medical procedures that violate their beliefs. It turns into whether it’s ok to call women who want birth control included in their health insurance policies sluts and prostitutes. How do we possibly win an argument framed that way? Heck, if someone calls my sister a slut for using birth control, not only am I not voting for that person, I’m punching them to see if their health coverage covers blunt force trauma

    • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

      A lefty inclined friend was ranting about it the other day and when I was pointed out how many condoms 3k buys for a year and how many times a day that would be she found it difficult to defend the woman in question, even considering other birth control options.

      When I further pointed out that the woman in question had targeted the school because she knew ahead of time that birth control was not part of the school’s insurance setup for religious reasons the defense of the woman in question pretty much ceased.

      Not everyone will adhere to reason, but after people calm down and think it through some there is a tendency for people who realize they’ve been duped to sometimes switch there point of view.

      Basically do the same thing the left does, mock them without pity and shift the argument to a frame you can win the argument in.

      • ww2nd95

        .. to point things like the truth out. It’s about perception and we have allowed the left to frame this debate how they want. It’s not about whether or not Rush was on the right side of things (and even still he used a very poor choice of words to frame his argument) or not, it’s about how people in general perceive things. And right now, we’re losing this argument. People see a college student, doesn’t matter if she’s 30 or not, her age won’t be played up in the press, that was attacked by a nationally syndicated radio host for “using her first amendment rights and speaking up about something she cares about” and called a “slut” and that she could provide video coverage of her sexual encounters. I’m sorry, Rush has a valid point, but he screwed up. He went the wrong direction with this argument and now rather then focusing on the actual truth of the matter, we’re focusing on what Rush said about the “poor college student”.

        So yes, this is a losing argument and to keep bringing it up will not help us. As Petespa said, if someone called my sister a slut, I don’t care if they had a valid point, I’m going to be very ticked off at them and probably would knock their lights out if given the chance. So again, Rush screwed up, and we just add fuel to the fire every time we bring this up, rather then letting it die.

      • trutexan

        A black guy came up to me at work yesterday and said, “Did you hear that Rush called Michelle Obama a ‘monkey’?” It’s like the game we played in school where the sentence at the beginning of the circle gets changed to something completely different by the time it gets back around to the originator. No matter that every word Rush ever utters is on record.

    • BlueLandRed

      Yes, Rush was just stirring the pot, hopping to pump up his ratings, but he turned it into a three day rant against someone (who if you don’t know her past) comes across on TV as a nice girl just trying to get through school.

      And yes, this whole episode was a complete set up by Pelosi. But Rush took the bait (and how) and now I have my sister calling me up and screaming that the Republicans are going to take her birth control away (not that she can still have kids). \/\/hatever.

      The Dimmes have been absolutely masterfully in turning this from a case about religious freedoms into an attack on birth control. And I don’t see that changing any time soon.

    • kady

      IGNORE FLUKE.

      The DIMS have gone on record in the Senate, ON A VOTE, as being anti-Catholic and anti-religious freedom, and people are still hyperventilating because she got one over on us. FORGET HER. SHE WON THE BATTLE. But Blount gave us the material needed to win the WAR, we just have to be smart enough to use it.

  • circlegranch

    The Republican Party, with everything from a publicized statement from the National Federation of Republican Women to pundits and commenters all across the spectrum, the weak-kneed Republican Party took the bait and threw in with the radical feminists/Media Matters crowd. Thinking they were standing up for core values, they instead made fools of themselves because the Left cares nothing about civility or decency. This was not about shutting down vulgarity, its about shutting down Rush. But, get ready, this is what we can look forward to with a soon-to-be nominee that thinks our president is just naive and doesn’t understand what’s going on in the country. No need to be blunt.

    Rush has been maligned and called every evil, filthy, insulting name in the book and never once did Republican women come to his defense and put forth press releases.

    As for the Leftist advertisers, good riddance. They make room for truly conservative organizations. Note to ProFlowers: women actually don’t like to receive a do-it-yourself flower arranging assembly kit. They much prefer to have the smiling FTD guy ring the bell and hand over the perfect arrangement ready to go on the dining room table rather than having to cut off stems, add water and try to make a decent looking arrangement themselves. The whole idea is to be gifted with beauty, not to have to try and create it with a kit left at the door. You won’t be missed on Rush’s show.

  • Scope

    Gloria Borger showed a poll just a little while ago. Of course it showed that women are more in favor of the Democrats than the Republicans. A babe earlier on CNN said that the conservatives are waging war on women. Obama was losing support from women at a pretty big clip, and they have to do and say anything to get them back.

    Fluke wasn’t even participating in any credible Congressional Testimony. Issa wasn’t there. She was not invited by the “men” in the actual hearing a few days before, so Pelosi pulled her stunt that was nothing more than a press conference with a few Democrats, and a whole lot of press. As has been widely reported, Fluke has been a long time liberal women’s feminazi activist. I’m sure she has stood on a lot of soapboxes with a bullhorn, shouting for her “cause” plenty of times. Pelosi just gave her a bigger microphone, to say really nothing at all. Oh, and The View gave her another microphone this morning where she said Rush’s apology changes nothing. Unlike the CNN babes crying because Rush went after a private citizen, she put herself out there in the public with no modesty in the slightest, and she told the nation about her sexual activities, and what it was costing her. I suspect the sex toys were included in that inflated number. I’d wager that every time most here the name with Sandra Fluke, the word “slut” will cross there mind. And this is a Georgetown Law School student?

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    Love the diary and love you for being a conservative woman unafraid to speak your mind can call ‘em as you see ‘em. Which happens to be the same way I see it. God bless you for being on our side instead of theirs.

    Too many favorite lines to choose from, but this is a gem: “Sandra Fluke is a tool.” Oh, in so many ways, Lori. In so many ways.

  • Ender

    Right saddens me.

    • cynicalindependant

      Nobody is going to defend Rush for this. It’s clearly over the line.

      • Ender

        But defending Rush in general against the Leftist horde? Now that is a different story. So because Rush made a mistake in using so called “offensive” words in a media that can and will twist anything you say, we are supposed to let him twist in the wind and be destroyed by the left? What happened to defending our allies?

        Actually on the issue of what he said, I’ll defend him. It was funny and well in the context of what he was saying, it was true. I have no desire trying to spell it out to you, but the oversensitized disgusting libs have used this incident to attack Rush in an extremely effective fashion.

        Apparently what Rush has done for the conservative movement, influencing people through one of the few conservative dominated medias, becomes completely annulled to some of you as soon as you hear the word “slut”. Pathetic.

        • cynicalindependant

          I don’t think you’re being very politically savvy but I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said.

          • Ender

            not sure what would be politically savvy here. I guess that’s why most people are sitting it quietly out. I am just annoyed, didn’t mean to take it out on ya :)

          • godschosen

            Is “Politically Savvy” a euphemism for “Politically Correct”? Or just an excuse to be P.C.?

          • acat

            it won’t help you win friends and influence people.

            Mew

          • godschosen

            ……..I…….I wasn’t aware you could hear me. I must be getting really loud…….I usually only get loud when I’m having an allergic reaction to that which is found under the south end of a northbound bull!!!! This whole thing (the fact that MS. Flake, …Fluke receives an audience of any size) stinks like the aforementioned substance!!!!!!!

      • Kyle-MI

        He has apologized about the words he used, but it will not be acceptable unless he apologized about his position. He is not going to do that and he shouldn’t.

        From now on the left will continue to play bait and switch with him and his defenders. If anyone defends him, they will smear them with the words and ignore the position.

        I hope more people see through the left’s insincerity and this stunt backfires on them.

  • shaneper

    Seriously. The GOP better wake up before the country is overtaken by once again by the Dems in 2012, taxes are raised, and fiscal conservatism dies.

    The lack of logic in this article is astounding. Most people think calling a woman a slut on a popular national radio talk show because she spoke before congress on contraception fails to move forward the argument about whether government should pay for certain healthcare produce. Yet, this author somehow wants to equate this name-bashing with “peeing on the Constitution”. Seriously? This is just another pander to the GOP base by listing something that the right-wingers will gladly agree with. And really, piling on to abuse by equating this victim to “a thirty year old perpetual student leech” is beyond the pale. But, I guess when you can’t win the argument name-calling is all you’ve got.

    Good luck in 2012, guys. YOU’RE GONNA NEED IT.

    • Bill S

      You must have a reading comprehension problem if you think she equated the two. Or maybe it’s just a lack of intelligence on your behalf. Or maybe I should embrace the power of “and”.

      • ww2nd95

        Rush went over the line, no politician is going to stand up for him on this matter. We’re not winning. Sooner or later the press is going to let this die, but the more we bring it up ourselves, the longer it lingers, and the worse off we are for it.

        • jakeofalltrades

          Sluts generally aren’t smart enough to demand taxpayer reimbursement of expenses incurred committing their sluttery. That takes a certain, satanic, sense of entitlement coupled with an utter lack of critical thinking.

          The only principle that would justify reimbursement – or payment – of contraceptive expenses by the government is that the “deed” was committed at the behest or on behalf of the government. Perhaps intelligence, law enforcement, and foreign service officers occasionally warrant such reimbursement, but I have a hard time seeing any other case in which the government should pay for birth control.

          • shaneper

            gotta love those right-wingers. Such Christians. And so knowledgeable about how the healthcare system works.

      • shaneper
        you’ve taken to name-calling. Like I said, sometimes, that’s all you’ve got.

        The fact that people are supporting such slanderous comments is awful and gets the GOP nowhere. You guys are really digging your own grave with this one. Which, I’ll be honest, I’m enjoying. :)

    • indieinvirginnie

      But I am saying that the most in incredible thing about her story is that she needs contraception. Who’s the lucky guy? “Put your helmet on, son. You’re going in.”

      And where’s the victim, shaneper? The middle-aged woman… sorry ….”student”… who wants me to chip on the expenses occasioned by her need to have sex?

      • Robert_Leffingwell

        concept.

        You see, what happens is a group of people gets together and all contribute a specified amount of money to an insurance company with the expectation that when a member of the group has a medical need the insurance company will cover those agreed upon costs.

        The thing that makes it work is people like me. I have given my insurance company over $30,000.00 over the last 10 years, and I have had them cover the total cost of 3 visits to the Dr’s office (not entirely. There is a co-pay, and yes, I very much appreciate the blessings of my good health). But I’m fully aware the odds are against me. At some point a catastrophe could happen and they may end up paying way more than I’ve kicked in. Or I could drop dead tomorrow and the insurance company will be 30k to the good.

        Or perhaps you have the same insurance company as me and you have a heart condition from all your years of being sedentary and eating Big Macs and my 30 k is going to keep you in prescriptions and help pay for your hospital stays recovering from heart attacks. Would I begrudge you that? Of course not. That’s the deal I made with my insurance company.

        So you see, unless you have the same insurance carrier as Georgetown University, you aren’t contributing anything. And if you do have the same insurance carrier, the premiums this “student” is paying will help cover your heart attacks.

        • jakeofalltrades

          Rhetorical

        • indieinvirginnie

          At the Fluckster’s expense. You take yourself pretty seriously, but then I guess someone has to, eh Robert? By the way, I pay your $30k in premiums in less than two years. Yes, I understand insurance pretty well. So, “you see…?”

          Geez.

        • arthurjake

          Georgetown is a private Catholic university. The church says things like premarital sex and birth control are against there beliefs. That is making them pay for something that goes against there beliefs. If she did not like the insurance plan she had the choice not to go to Georgetown. Last I heard being a 30 year old law student at Georgetown was not a requirement but a choice.

      • shaneper

        being called a slut 53 times for testifying before congress and likened to a prostitute is everyone’s dream. If anything, Rush if the victim here, right?

        Finally, first show me where any tax dollars are spent for contraception. then show me how that doesn’t help a woman. do some research – there’s plenty of medical reasons for the pill beyond simply preventing pregnancy.

        Or, try this argument on for size: I paid for the Iraq War. I didn’t want to and it’s against my religion as a pacifist. So, repay me for that 2st amendment breach and I’ll repay you for all the gov. issued contraception.

        • godschosen

          …the medical (psychological, really) effect of a false sense of security one may get towards a promiscuous lifestyle which can (easily) result in yet another medical problem (AIDS is only the worst of these) which we will no doubt also be paying for even if we aren’t promiscuous (by FREE choice, also known by those who still have one, as CONSCIENCE)

    • rightland1111

      The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

      • shaneper

        Look it up. It’s there.

        Can we stop wrapping ourselves in the 1st amendment every time someone says something awful? You realize you’re arguing for calling women – daughters, mothers, sisters, wives, sluts and prostitutes, right? C’mon, man, there’s better battles for you guys than this one.

        • rightland1111

          You are the one that needs to learn that you have been “had” by Obama. This is not…I repeat…not about contraception….It is about the above. The contraception issue is just a means to an end. Do you not understand that.

          As far as we poor waifs are concerned….you need to come in drag someday and listen to a bunch of women talk…you’re hair would be curled.

        • Jack_Savage

          You first.

        • indieinvirginnie

          She has been told — by people that will toss her out like a used condom (sorry) after she has oulived her usefulness — that is she is making an important point for women. She’s not. She making an in-kind campaign contribution, no more and no less. And throwing any dignity she might have had onto the trash-heap in the process.

          Obama says that her parents should be proud of her. I doubt it seriously. If they have any sense at all, they have their tails tucked so far between their legs in shame that they have difficulty swallowing. Not only is she trotting her sexlife out there on national TV, but she is obviously a wee bit on the gullible side.

          • kopen

            I would be ashamed to have raised this Kritter ..Fluke isn’t listening to herself or she would shut up .. no thinking person could possibly agree with her ..
            What she does with her body is her business but I will not pay for her Choices ..

        • Joshua Persons

          No one is “arguing for calling women … sluts and prostitutes”. Most here agree it’s _wrong_ to do so, but if you think wrong and illegal should be equivalent I just can’t take your political opinion seriously.

  • SteveM

    He knows he needs to appeal to fear to win.

    Guys, this is only going to get worse from here. Our problem is that we fall into their trap of jumping on idiots like Fluke personally. We can’t do that.

    Fluke was sent up there for a reason: to become the face of the last victimhood group the libs have. We bought into it (effectively) when Rush called her out. Now it looks like we’re picking on this hapless, broke law student. We all know that she’s a dedicated activist hell-bent on electing Obama, but the average woman voter (whom her victimhood is designed to appeal to) doesn’t.

    Newt hit it out of the park on Sunday – keep a razor-sharp focus on Obama’s war on the First Amendment. Let’s not get personal with whatever retard the lefties trot out there, no matter how tempting the target or how juicy of a pinata he or she may seem to be. Channel our inner Admiral Ackbar’s and remember that “It’s a trap!”.

    Because again, it’s only going to get worse from here. The next one up will be a gay guy that we won’t let get married or a black guy who can’t vote because he can’t find any ID. Shame on us Jim Crow supporters for that last one.

    Beating Obama is going to take A LOT OF DISCIPLINE, message-wise, from all of us.

    • petespa

      When the left takes a swing, they have already calculated the knee-jerk reaction and know how they’ll respond to that. They know that there are going to be some people who give them the next opening. We need to think about this more strategically and focus on building conservatism and attracting those millions of uncommitted voters who would be part of our movement if they weren’t turned off by some of the more caustic reactions. There are parts of liberalism that I would listen to a bit more if the people spouting them didn’t make me want to shower in bleach.

      • SteveM

        Thanks. You nailed it: they don’t do this stuff in a vacuum. Pelosi knew what kind of response Fluke was going to get ahead of time.

        The whole thing was choreographed to draw out somebody they could get to help them make Fluke into their victim du jour. I doubt they targeted Rush directly; they knew they’d get SOMEBODY to jump in.

        But having Rush do it? That’s like hitting the jackpot for them.

        We need to be ready for these kinds of coordinated attacks and be sure to look for the hidden hand with the knife.

    • godschosen

      True Wisdom!!!!!

      • godschosen

        …….above……this forum can be confusing too!

  • veritaseequitas

    NEVER, EVER, EVER apologize to the Left for anything you have said or done. Here are the reasons why:
    A) The Left expects the Right to apologize and they know the Right will apologize because the Right is more afraid of public opinion than the Left is. All the Left has to do is sit back and wait for it.
    B) The Left has never apologized and never will apologize FOR ANYTHING. They will just spin it until it disappears. It does not matter how much the Right brings it up later on – it is already gone.
    C) The Left will use anything, no matter how small, useless and inconsequential (such as a college whore and her birth control problems), to distract the Right from the bigger issues.
    Turn around is fair play:
    1) Do not do what is expected. Do not, under any circumstances, apologize. Do not take the high road. It leaves a bigger cliff for you to have to jump off of. And, bonus to the Left, you will look like an ass doing it.
    2) Whatever embarrassing or stupid thing the Right says or does – ignore it or spin it. Ignore it until it just goes away. Do not address it, under any circumstances. Or, alternatively, spin it until it makes absolutely no sense and is quickly forgotten.
    3) Whatever the Left says or does, no matter how horrible, ignorant or inconsequential, hammer them with it. Pound them until they are dust.
    Instead of complaining about Saul Alinsky and his Rules for Radicals, we need to use and abuse them until we get what we want. Which is, ANYBODY BUT OBAMA.

    • BlueLandRed

      If one is going to claim the moral high ground – one must own up to one’s mistakes.

      I do think Rush went over the line, but then again I’m prude and typically disgusted by most of the swill in the media and that’s the major reason I watch/listen to very little of it.

      Certainly, and more importantly, his advertisers also think he cross a line with their consumers. Now Rush is now forced to do damage control.

      As a side note, I don’t see Rush as great moral leader for conservatives in this country and I wish he would just fade away and entertain his audience without dragging the whole side down with him.

      • veritaseequitas

        Not taking the moral high ground. That is the whole problem with the Right, they get up on those white chargers of theirs and proceed to fall all over themselves trying to prove they are morally superior when they are not. It gets them absolutely nowhere. My advice is don’t try so hard.
        Lighten up. The girl is the one that put her sex life out over the airwaves, why isn’t she brought to task over it? This is America and we do have free speech – for now. Did you know that the Left is calling for the FCC to ban Rush from the air. Now how is that for stupid?
        Rush probably has people waiting in line to advertise. Advertising is about money, not morality.
        And, who do you see as a great moral leader? Even Ghandi put a naked female relative in his bed to try to prove that he could remain celibate. Now how is that for stupid and tempting the devil?
        There are no moral leaders, not a one. We have to do the best with what we have got. This is nothing more than an exercise in bullsh!t for the Left. They are playing with us.

        • godschosen

          Jesus Christ was and IS a Moral Leader, AND HE IS IN A CLASS (literally) BY HIMSELF!!!!!!!

      • adair

        made their decisions to leave him without having even one little bitty bit of pressure from some friendly Democrats?

        Do you suppose that they all dropped off strictly on their own, rolling their eyes and shaking their heads in disbelief while standing in an empty room with no phone or e-mail?

        Surely you have seen what Democrats do to companies who might support someone they’re mad at.

    • godschosen

      ……..That’s MONEY Dude!!!!!! @ veritaseequitas, American Hero!

  • renl57

    That was a valid and winning argument–until some on the Right irrationally chose to generalize it into some bizarre “No one should have to pay for other people’s lifestyles.” Coupled with attacks on those other people’s lifestyles. (Note: In 2008, more women voted than men.)

    Except for this religious exemption for religious institutions on issues directly related to faith, we’ve ALWAYS paid insurance premiums for each other’s lifestyle choices.

    Via your health insurance premiums, you pay:

    – To treat the lung cancer of those who chose to smoke cigarettes

    – To treat the liver disease of those who chose to drink alcoholic beverages to excess

    – To treat the sports injuries of those who chose to engage in high-risk extreme sports like hang-gliding and bungee jumping

    – To perform the open-heart surgery on someone who chose to stuff his face with fatty cholesterol-raising hamburgers all his sedentary life

    All of which are a lot more expensive to treat than birth control pills cost.

    But Limbaugh moved the argument away from the freedom of the Church, toward his own personal disgust over paying for birth control for sexually active single women (Ms. Fluke wasn’t really speaking for herself but women generally). And so did others in the right-wing blogosphere. With that, they undercut the entire valid argument the GOP had been making.

    Limbaugh is not a priest or a rabbi or a minister. He can’t claim a religious exemption. RedState is not a religious institution and it can’t claim any religious exemptions either.

    And so the personal feelings that one might have about paying for the consequences of someone else’s lifestyle are irrelevant.

    We still have private insurance in this country. See if you can find a policy from Blue Cross or Aetna that refuses to pay to treat medical conditions resulting from lifestyle choices–smoking, drinking, poor diet.

    I don’t like the fact that my health insurance premiums are higher due to so many Americans getting sick by abusing their bodies with booze, cigarettes, fatty foods, lack of exercise, etc.

    But I don’t want to change that.

    Because what goes around, comes around.

    If you don’t want to pay for some impoverished (not Ms. Fluke) woman’s birth control and you say she should just stay celibate, what happens if the Left decides that they don’t want to pay for cholesterol-lowering statin drugs and we should all just become vegetarians instead?

    • renl57

      …would have exempted virtually every employer with a personal gripe against birth control from having to pay for it.

      With that amendment, the GOP lost the moral argument about the freedom of the Church. It became an argument about the personal moral distaste any boss might have about birth control.

      That argument is unsupportable. As I said, we all have personal moral disapproval of each other’s lifestyles. I morally disapprove of someone who chooses to drink alcoholic beverages to excess. But I’m not running to my Congressman to demand a “moral exemption” from my having to pay high health insurance premiums to treat cirrhosis of the liver, injuries caused by accidents caused by DUI, etc.

      • GregInFla

        does contraception for otherwise healthy girls and women treat?

        • arthurjake

          Sometimes prescribed for other things to be fair. In the end though you choose your employer if you dont like the coverage they offer then go somewhere with a better plan.

          • godschosen

            …….that with Obamanomics we would all be fools to turn down ANYONE who is willing to pay us to do anything anymore. I have a friend who put out litterally 850 applications before he got a job!!!!

    • vnov5

      A couple of points here:
      1. Many prescriptions for contraceptive pills are prescribed by physicians for non-contraception reasons. Ms. Fluke’s testimony did touch on one, but there are many more. Neither a church nor a government should interfere with the relationship between a woman and her doctor (unless the doctor is doing something illegal);
      2. As Justice Scalia noted and as is true constitutionally, the freedom to practice religion does not exempt a party from adhering to generally applicable laws unrelated to religion (like insurance). Many churches have many things they don’t like, but that does not give them the constitutional right to go into a non-religion business and claim special privileges – sorry;
      3. Nevertheless, the administration did allow religious objectors to avoid directly offering contraceptive coverage – a compromise made in at least 28 states and heretofore not causing anyone a problem;
      4. There is equally compelling reasons to accuse the Right of attempting to turn this into an issue about freedom of religion when it is really about freedom of insurance. Please consider the possibility that it you who is being manipulated.

      • runner12

        The Catholic Church is being forced to subsidize something they view as morally wrong. How is that not a freedom of religion issue? People are alllowed to be exempt from many things due to religious objections or at least they used to be.

        Additionally, hospitals and charitable institutions are not businesses. Hence the word, charitable organizations (as in non-profit).

        The adminstration’s “compromise” is no compromise at all. It is all smoke and mirrors. The Church is still footing the bill in the end.

        The only reasons contraceptives are prescribed for non-birth control purposes are to control acne, irregular periods, and/or for hormonal imbalances. This makes up a very small population of women and is not without serious side effects. I am not sure why you brought this up, as it really has no bearing on anything whatsoever.

        Birth control pills are not that expensive, even without insurance. Many women are looking for more natural alternatives to balance hormones these days due to the bad side effects of birth control pills.

        Think about the consequences of this action. Do not blindly defend it because Obama’s your guy. If this was an attack on another religious group, would you hold the same position? I know that my views would be consistent.

        If they come after Jews or Muslims, they will come after Christians. That is why the Left is causing quite a coalition of various religions that otherwise my never have come together. Keep defending this position if you want to, but you are wrong and will lose the argument.

        • ww2nd95

          The Blunt amendment was a terrible mistake that did not forward the conservative cause at all. It was very much govt overreach that could give employers any reason not to cover someone, then claim they have a moral issue. It’s a slippery slope. As a conservative, the Blunt amendment really annoys me for the fact that it makes us look bad and again takes the focus off of the economy and many other problems that we should be focusing on.

          The Left has played this whole contraception thing beautifully and not only did we take the bate, we’re going back for seconds. If we’re not careful, Obama and Axelrod are going to wear us out with adds portraying us as the party that doesn’t care about women’s rights and is nothing more then old white men. It doesn’t matter at all if this is about religious freedom, it’s about perception and we’re losing the battle on that, especially with distractions like the Blunt amendment.

          • runner12

            Constitution is a big deal.

            It is why ObamaCare is a big deal.

            It is why all of the overreach of the Obama Aministration is a big deal.

            The economy is important, but equally important is the defense of the Republic and our Constitution. If we lose that, the economy will not matter one iota and will have no hope of improving.

            Oh, and vnov5 is a Leftist. I would not be singing his/her praises.

          • runner12

            I challenge you to actually argue the merits of what I posted and to explain to me why religious freedom does not matter.

            Please eleborate on why our Founders were so foolish as to make it a central tenet of our Constitution.

          • ww2nd95

            For one, it doesn’t matter if vnov5 is to the left of me, he/she has a point about the Blunt amendment. I’m not praising him/her, I’m reading what he said. Also, we shouldn’t simply dismiss everyone who is to the left of us because that completely limits us.

            And two, I never said the Constitution wasn’t important and I never said that religious freedom isn’t important. I’m not sure where you got that from? I said that the Blunt amendment was a mistake. To say that any company management can decide not to cover someone due to having a moral issue opens up all kinds of possible discrimination and creates a slippery slope.

          • vnov5

            Because I suggest that all parties are being played in this game, I have been called a leftist (with a capital L for some reason). I consider myself dead center on a political spectrum, but have not seen anything out of the Republicans that made much sense in over a decade. For the record, I am a Christian, a member of the NRA, have given money to both parties and am a registered “unaffiliated.” My political “party” outnumbers both Dems and Repubs, so you should listen to my opinion. I am fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. The Republican party, in my opinion, has moved WAY too right to be legitimate. Presidents Reagan and Eisenhower wouldn’t recognize the current party.

            I am also a lawyer who knows a good bit about the Constitution. If folks think this is a violation of the First Amendment, they need to do some homework. If a religion gets into non-religion activities (including running hospitals or providing insurance), then their First Amendment rights are irrelevant to laws of general application. If you don’t want to be among the rest of the population of people “forced” by a law of general application to do something becasue you think it is morally or spiritually wrong – then don’t go into that line of business.

            The point I was trying to make is this: The Dems want to make political hay out of this as an issue of Republicans crawling into womens’ lives/wombs (again) – which it never was, and Repubs want to make this about Obama being out on a war against religion – which this never was either. They are both playing this non-issue to the hilt to work their folks up into a lather (rather well I would note). Please consider the possibility.

          • runner12

            Please explain that to me. Because Obama’s position would force Catholic charities to provide something that they are morally opposed to.

            Additionally, the notion that religious organization’s First Amendment rights go out the window when they engage in what their faith calls them to do (clothe the poor, feed the hungry, care for those who are ill) is ludicrous and is a Leftist position, no matter how you describe yourself politically.

            Your elitist “you should listen to me because I am so wise” attitude is also common place among liberals, not conservatives. You do not have a corner on reason or insight. Many people (myself being one of them) who do not share your views are both well-educated and intelligent. Please cease acting in such a condescending manner.

            A second question you need to answer is why can’t the people who work for Catholic hospitals and charities work somewhere else? No one is forcing them to work there. Why can’t they change jobs if they do not like the policy.

            Lastly, there is no such guarantee in the Constitution for freedom of insurance. As a lawyer, you of all people should know this. Yet there is a provision for freedom of religion.

          • vnov5

            I am sorry you took my comments as elitist or condescending – my point was you should not dismiss a rational comment as “Leftist” because it does not jibe with your opinion. I also took some offence to that label. I am commenting because I think I have something valuable to contribute. Name calling instead of discussion is childish. These ideologically puritan blogs are (in my opinion) one of the reasons politics have become so polarized. It isn’t just the right side – it is the left as well. Nobody listens to an alternative opinion because it is dismissed as coming from “them” – the demonization of everyone ideologically impure is ubiquitous on this blog (as it is on the left side as well – although I’d say less so than on here).

            On your point: Charities are normally registered as a business. The fact that a charity is either a non-profit business or is doing something nice doesn’t change the fact that it is a business. Religious institutions are exempt from the topic of this debate, so I am assuming you mean religiously affilitated general businesses like hospitals (if they predominately are employing the same religion, those are exempted as well).

            There are plenty of close calls we could theoretically discuss along the lines you suggest – were the practice of religion and the conduct of non-religious activities is drawn (or should be drawn) when it comes to the law or the religious practice trumping the other (ritual sacrifice of animals, use of drugs, chopping off hands, etc.), but insurance ain’t a close call. Providing insurance is a non-religious business. Can an insurance provider say “no thanks” and pay the $2,000 per employee – yes. Can employees move to other employers – yes. Should profolactic contraceptives be required – that is a legitimate question (you can throw in a number of prescription medicines in that question). If the contraceptive is being provided for non-birth control reasons (an actual medical condition), should they be available under general insurance policies – I think so.

          • runner12

            can apologize in your first sentence and then go on to insinuate that we are all “idealogical puritans” in the next. Additionally, the idea that we are less tolerant then say, the Daily Kos or HuffPo, means either you never visit those sites or you agree with the hateful rhetoric spewed on those sites. Example A would be the reaction of those people to the passing of Breitbart. Please do not lecture me on the tone of civility and childish name-calling. No one is more intolerant or hateful than those on the Left.

            Your claim that a charity is a business is puzzling. A business is a for-profit entity, charities are non-profit. How is the local Catholic Charity that cares for and helps educate political refugees in my state a business? It creates no products nor does it sell them. It’s rewards are not tangible, they are religious in nature. Therefore, it is not a business.

            You failed to point out to me in the Constitution where we are guaranteed the freedom of insurance or where the federal government is given the right to mandate what employers will or will not cover. I will be more than happy to show you where it guarantees the freedom to practice your religion.

            Oh, and the correct spelling is prophylactic. The dictionary is your friend.

          • funwithknives

            The Constitution…” please point, chapter and verse, to where O-Care’s Mandates fits into this. Or where Federal Gov’t has any right to dictate requirements for a privately purchased item like health insurance.
            The short answer is: It’s not in there at all. Period, Finis.
            It’s in there by Skullduggery and Citizens’ Inattention to their responsiblity to participate and know their rights. They collectively, to our sorrow, Have Not.
            This was always about control, in Dialectical Form. What The People would bear or what Progressives could get away with & likely both.
            Will this be The Milepost,that America decides it cannot drive by without action ? If 11/2010 is any guide, let us pray,and join the fight.

          • vnov5

            Article I, Section 8: “The Congress shall have the Power to . . . provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States . . .” That provision over the course of time has been extended by the Supreme Court (via the Commerce Clause) to an almost unlimited ability to act for the “general Welfare” as long as there is some nexus to interstate commerce. The Supreme Court will be ruling on the limitations of its prior precedent – on the specific topic of the individual mandate shortly.

            There is no – I mean no – serious debate about Congress’ right under the Constitution to pass laws regulating the business of insurance. Whether Congress can require individuals to purchase items in the private market or face penalties is another matter. That is what the Supreme Court will face this year.

          • funwithknives

            have been stretched to include almost any ” item of the moment” {Remember the wheat farmer, way back when?}
            To use them in this manner, with little outrage or objection,shows clearly that the American People have been dozing. There was not a large enough group of same affected, to get concensus.
            But no more. The curtain rises, the number is stupifying, and the evidence is undeniable.
            Thank you ever so much for displaying a Lawyer’s Perspective on this. Simply abrogating responsibility by “distilling’ these ill-used clauses,does not make it correct law, only what is cited. You (of all commentors) well know that case law can be overturned {See recent C. U. Ruling} and will be again.
            Will this be accomplished in my lifetime? 80 plus years of historical inertia says no. Will the Wave Commence?? If YES is not the answer, there is little positive future as envisioned by The Framers.

          • runner12

            I misread your comment on freedom of religion.

            But may I point out that it was ren157 who made the point about the Blunt amendment. All wnov5 did was repeat liberal talking points and point out the evils of “the Right.”

  • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

    oops,,, the genius he is. Think about it. I have absolutely NO doubt his audience at the beginning of the show today was HUUUUGE just waiting and wanting to see what he was going to do.

    Rush then proceeded to explain the genesis of Ms. Fluke’s ‘testimony’, etc. I, and I pay attention to a lot, didn’t know the Democrats tried to sandbag the House Committee, that the testimony was to a Democrat ‘steering committee’, etc.

    I did know sometime after the fact that Ms. Fluke was a 30-yo prior ‘reproduction rights activist’ who is now a 3rd-yr law student, not the 23-yo ‘college student’ originally portrayed.

    Question – Just what the heck is a ‘reproduction rights activist’? Does one need special training or certification? What does the job pay?

    To use one of Rush’s favorite shticks.. “Mommy, Mommy. I want to be a reproduction rights activist when I grow up.” Boy, I bet Dad is proud.

    Finally, just think about this – Ms. Fluke will most likely go on sucking off the government teat, some liberal law firm or some other non-for-profit and really not further any meaningful contribution to society.

    • septembergurl

      Byron York wrote about the Oversight Committee and how they blew Fluke’s testimony last week.

      I guess, since you follow things closely, you read Byron’s piece and then forgot it, and then remembered it when Rush pointed it out.

      Rush is a day late and a dollar short on this. He did not expose Fluke, rather he fell for her shtick, hook line and sinker.

      As did you, apparently.

  • kowalski

    He’s smart enough to have done the background research on someone from Georgetown and he let his mouth fly because he thought he was on the winning side of an invulnerable fight.

    He’s dead wrong.

    This is what people on the Right do not understand about places like Georgetown and everywhere else that is the *real* Establishment in this country. Rush Limbaugh just lost millions of dollars because he decided not to think a little before he opened his mouth.

    He can think what he wants of the real “Establishment” in this country but he’s going to get sued because of what he said, and he’s already lost millions of dollars in advertising because of it. He could have avoided it by changing a couple of sentences with no difference in the impact of his words: but he got low-down. He got slimy and he got scummy and he reached into the gutter to find his words. And as a result he’s getting creamed for it.

    There’s a reason the Directors of this blog have a warning at the bottom of every post: “Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity.” Limbaugh knows better but he had a brain fart and now he’s paying for it, Lori.

    I admire your defense of him but frankly you’re a very small minority. It’s not a matter of censoring himself, either: it’s just something he should never have said. Particularly since he could have seen it coming from a million miles away that it was a trap. {BANG} The trap went off on his mouth.

    • kowalski

      And worked for a feminist, activist Law School dean and lived for 7 years with a feminist psychology student, I can tell you the Rules:

      1) Never, ever – EVER – yell or raise your voice or act in a manner that could be construed as “masculine.”
      2) Never use the word “slut” or “hooker” or “prostitute” except when they want you to.
      3) Never think you have the prerogative to use any word in the English language that insults their identity politics or…

      YOU WILL DIE.

      And that’s what’s happening to Rush. And he could see it coming a billion miles away and he did it anyway.

      • kowalski

        Of the rules and each one of them is 1,000 pages long, and there are twelve others.

        Rush needs to listen to some Tori Amos, take some Xanax, and just calm down before he does anyone any more damage.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8ljHOSqc4A

        • acat

          of books in the set, new books are added to ensure there’s always some rule that you’ve violated.

          It also doesn’t matter if they’re internally consistent or not.

          The main rule of the game is .. there’s no way to win.

          Mew

          • kowalski

            And it’s still not far enough. People have been warned. Get smart, or get out.

          • acat

            Or “I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit. Only way to be sure.”

            Mew

          • kowalski

            I’m more concerned about protecting Americans’ right to own defensive weapons here on Earth. I have all my own views about the landscape on LV-426 and one day I’ll write a book about it.

          • kowalski

            If men didn’t want contracteption being paid for by universities or by the government, they’d step up more often and pay for it themselves. Or they’d insist on having sex in ways that didn’t require contraception. Or not have sex. But that’s not the way things really work among those Christian boys at Georgetown University, either.

            They exist and they’re inexpensive. There’s a calendar, too. And you can chart your lover’s menstural cycle on a calendar. Usually it’s pretty regular unless your girlfriend is an anorexic/bulimic. Fact is, they want the sex but they don’t want the problemos or the hassles *much more* than half the time. And then they don’t want anything to do with the consequences.

          • kowalski

            People are surrounded – suffused, even – with a variety of contraceptive options that are available to them from the moment they start getting it on. And anyone who goes to Georgetown University is aware of them during Freshman Orientation (not to speak of the law school). But my guess is that the status quo ante there is still pretty much the same as it was back in ’93-’94, when I was in Baltimore: the guys basically think it’s the woman’s problem.

            Young bucks and all that.

          • kowalski

            I have *all* of Tori Amos’ early albums and I know not just the words but most of the themes and the score and I do a halfway decent job of playing it on the piano. And I can tell you that having been on that side of the Ditch, you’re not going to win those people over as Rush Limbaugh with words like: “slut” and “prostitute” – like I said, unless they want you to say those words. Then they’re OK.

            What you’re going to do as Rush Limbaugh is get picked up by the President of the United States and lose all your advertising if you don’t know how not to step on the MINES.

          • godschosen

            …….I don’t usually agree much with you, but you nailed it this time!!!!!

          • godschosen

            ….and most of the laws passed recently, are all about usurping The Constitution, and limiting our choices and rights (freedoms) until we finally succumb to tyranny ……..by default. …….wake up and smell the coffee………it reeks!!!!!!!!

    • kowalski

      I just thought:

      “Why Rush? Why now? Usually you’re so good at working in the minefield of our popular culture. What happened that made you step on the Georgetown Feminist Mine?” [BOOM]

      • kowalski

        ,,,ad infinitum Rushtibus….

        He made a BIG mistake saying what he said and he apologized for it but the last thing in the world I want to see is for him to forget it. Because it’s a FATAL mistake in this culture.

    • 10ab

      And an ” entertainer” that makes piles of money spewing anger and bile. He laughs himself all the way to the bank. I have no doubt that he has done more harm than good for the GOP. I have said it before but I will say it again….as a woman and a conservative…he does NOT speak for me!

      • Ender

        based on your previous comments. No offense.

        • 10ab

          I am a fiscal conservative…but I realize I am a tad too zealous against right wing ideology. I see no good end coming from extreme contraception issues and it is frustrating. Sorry if I offended!

          • Ender

            fiscal conservatism is right wing. What extreme contraception issues? I am fairly liberal socially and I don’t see it. Rush used unfortunate language but 99% of the time he is right and we need people like him spreading our message.

      • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

        Of what you consider Rush Limbaugh’s “anger” on the air? Thanks.

  • runner12

    Keep preaching it.

    I cannot stand the hypocrisy on the Left on this incident. Not one of them has come out and condemned the hideous things said when Breitbart passed away. The Left will say all manner of vile, hateful things against Conservative women and they get a pass by the propagandist media. Where was the outrage when Palin was getting raked over the coals or when Ingraham was called a slut?

    But Rush chooses a poor choice of words in satire and all of the sudden he hates women and so do Conservatives. Give me a break. As a young woman, I find the Left’s overblown reaction downright insulting. Women are not stupid. We cannot be herded or cowed by the fear tactics by the Left.

    • Ender

      nt

    • runner12

      I may also add that the ridiculous drivel from some male politicians “defending” us women from that “mean old Rush” as if we were some poor, helpless, wimpish human beings makes me ill as well.

      News flash: I can defend myself, thank you very much. If I need backup, I will let you know. Until then, do not treat us as if we are a two year-old who is going to cry because someone said an “ugly word” to us. Believe me, some women call other women worse names than that.

      Poor choice of words by Rush? Yes. Did it warrant this public outcry by the Left? Not even a little bit.

  • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

    with the Left? Sure, we’ve fought against them in the past, but the next 8 months are going to be particularly nasty? We’re not fighting the Left, we’re fighting Evil.

    Rush is powerful and must be supported. He must remain strong. I shudder to think what will happen if Rush is silenced in any way, shape or form and/or Obama wins in November.. The combination of those 2 things really frightens me.

    And, we’re about to nominate Romney. Or Santorum. Or Gingrich. I’m gonna hurl. Be right back.

    • SteveM

      Obama wants to be the next Woodrow Wilson: “War Socialism” with virtually unlimited powers. He knows best, so the rest of us can just shut up and get into line.

      This election is going to be the ugliest in any of our lifetimes. Just accept a couple of realities now:

      1. If you ID yourself as a Republican voter or a conservative, you WILL be called a racist, sexist homophobic Nazi.
      2. One or more of the people you think are your friends are going to lose it over #1, and you’ll likely cost yourself a relationship.

      The key for #2 is to say, “Good riddance”. Anybody who falls for that likely isn’t your friend anyway.

      Obama and the left are going to pull out all the stops. They have to. They can’t run on his record, they can’t run on his accomplishments, they can’t run on his promises. All they can run on is their ability to generate hate, and we all know that Nobody Hates Like A liberal. Nobody.

      • scrapiron

        I haven’t spoken to some of my family members since Obozo was elected.
        I was told by one “family” member that Obozo was a better Christian than I am.
        See how I brought many family member to Christ and have been ordained in the Ministry, that one really hurt. The damage inflicted by this current occupant of the WH has ruined many families. I will never speak to that person again, even if the Republicans win the election.There is a lot of backround to it, this particular person was always slacker and a government assistance patron.
        It is a shame that friendships and families are divided because of this WH occupant.

    • ww2nd95

      We missed the boat with Jon Huntsman, he would have beaten Obama. I have liberal friends who say that Romney, if he wins, would not be that bad because he sees a lot of things their way.. I mean really? That’s who the Republicans want? I will vote for the nominee, but I do not think any of the clowns on our side will beat Obama and Axelrod. Romney is so out of touch with everyone, he’s already given Obama at least 5 or 6 different ads to run against him with his own words. Santorum will be painted as a zealot, even though he really isn’t. Gingrich isn’t going to win, because he can’t capture independent women, who we very much need to win this race. And RP, unless he runs as 3rd party, isn’t going to get the nomination.

      So yeah, I hate to be pessimistic, but it’s going to be dang tough to get the WH this election with these candidates. We truly need to concentrate on the House and Senate, that way if we win the WH, we’re in excellent shape to get some things going our direction, and if we lose, we can at the very lease limit the damage.

      • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

        that Obama will remain in 1st gear and Romney will settle for 2nd gear… same effect, we still go over the cliff like Thelma and Louise.

      • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

        will not help, IMHO. Obama will do end-arounds in a more blatant manner (non-Constitutional recess appointments sound familar?) and the weenies in Congress (Boehner? McConnell?) will not act. Bank on it.

        You say, “So yeah, I hate to be pessimistic, but it

  • ragstoriches

    Bravo! Bravo, a hundred times, bravo.

    Well said.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Serioslaw, Lori, that was awesome.

  • rhampton

    I really hate arguments and/or defensive responses that amount to, “well they did it too!” Being the better person means living by principles and leading by example — and that requires more effort and personal integrity then doing whatever is necessary to “win”. And this is where Rush Limbaugh’s politics conflicts with his job.

    I really don’t expect ANY radio/TV talk show host to be the better person when it comes to politics (the William F Buckley approach to reasoned discourse is not the way to generate ratings). These very same people continuously advocate – often with very strong language – a particular political ideology, yet rarely do they miss an opportunity to take great offense at the slights of others. Perhaps it is ego that blinds them to the absurdity of their task: they need tell their audience that they are the better people, and ask of them to demand the same from their leaders, yet they themselves do not live by the same high standards.

    Regardless, I fully expect Rush Limbaugh and his radio empire to easily survive this tempest in a teapot.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …that Rush was notably subdued during the entire 3-hours?

    • westcoastpatriette

      Can’t answer since I don’t listen to radio. I did hear the first half hour of his show courtesy of the Blaze — Glenn Beck’s online news — and he insisted that his apology to Fluke was sincere and that he truly regretted his choice of words. Never mentioned pressure from advertisers as incentive for the apology. Not sure what to think as I am not a close follower of his.

    • jakeofalltrades

      And his boss is no doubt furious. A lesser man would have been fired.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    Go Romney?

  • septembergurl

    First of all, I’m heartened to see far fewer people blatting that she (Fluke) testified about her sex life so she deserves to be called a slut. QED.

    Of course, this is the heart of Limbaugh’s defense. It’s the only defense.

    Lori Zigante, you claim that Fluke “publicly discussed her personal choices” and therefore, she made herself vulnerable to public obloquy of the Limbaugh type. (why do you use this peculiar locution?)

    Others on this thread have more forthrightly claimed that she discussed her sex life. OK.

    I have read her prepared testimony and the testimony she gave to the Democrap study group. In neither does she discuss her own sex life in any way. She does not mention her own relationships, experiences, etc.She discusses other women’s sex lives.

    In fact, I am starting to believe, because of the way she frames the statement, that she may not have suffered even financial problems from having to buy her own contraceptives.

    I think she might not have bought contraceptives at all. Check out the one sentence in which she mentions herself:

    “For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that($30000) is practically an entire summer’s salary.”

    This is an interesting sentence, no? That’s all she says about herself. But look at it. it’s a syllogism::

    1. Students on public scholarships have limited funds

    2. $3000 is a large amount and represents a sacrifice for these students

    3. I have a public scholarship

    Therefore, paying this $3000 is a big sacrifice for me.

    This of course is fallacious. It doesn’t follow. And it’s the only mention she makes of her “sex life”.

    So back to you Lori. Like Limbaugh, you can only think in one dimension, apparently. It literally never enters your mind that in addition to being an activist and an advocate for normalizing some very strange sexual persuasions, Fluke herself is not in need of contraception.

    Yes, I had her pegged days ago. My gaydar is pretty infallible, as yours and Limbaugh’s is apparently not, since you’re still accusing poor Fluke of having sex with lots of men and wanting you to pay for it. I’d advise you to stick to what you know. Sex obviously isn’t it.

    I’d also advise you to drop the butch lingo when lecturing us about men and wimmin. You don’t do it very well and it’s kind of embarrassing.

  • trutexan

    She will be tossed aside after the election and her career & life in ruins. She may as well go for one of those employer-paid sex changes herself because no self-respecting man would want to date or marry that shrew.

  • circlegranch

    1) $3000 for birth control while in law school. She’s made a boatload of money in a matter of days with appearances on a number of MSNBC shows, The View, Today show, etc., and those are just her warm up acts. So, not only does she have her prescriptions covered, she’s probably got her student loans wiped clean as well.

    2.) She fulfilled her career ambition of a moment in front of national cameras to espouse her reproductive rights agenda, or her right to not reproduce, as it turns out. In viewing a snipet of her testimony to Congress on a news show last night, she lost whatever serious credibility she was so desperately vying to achieve by turning around and grinning at the cheers she had gotten from the peanut gallery behind her at one point. As a bonus for her efforts, her resume is now enhanced by being able to claim that she received a apology phone call from Obama, and she’s assured an appointment in the next Democrat administration, especially if that occurs this November.

    Ms. Fluke will not be the demise of conservative talk radio and its King.

    • Ann_W

      I don’t think they pay people to do those shows. Someone can correct me if they want to. She was an activist from the start and she got huge publicity for her issue. The Dem Congressmen have been setting up this conclusion from day 1.

  • ariyosef

    hOO Yah
    LORI ZIGANTO FOR WOMAN OF THE YEAR.

    BRASS CUDOS.

  • tnguy

    The truth often is.

    This woman threw herself into a public arena, saying that I should pay for birth control so she can have recreational sex. Perhaps Rush went a bit over the top in calling her a slut (I didn’t hear, if he used that term in referencing her, or called her one directly), but the woman – her nonsense about rape victim fear aside – is advocating that I pay for birth control pills so she and her law school companions can live their debauched lifestyle, free of consequence.Whether or not she’s a whore, she’s adovating that lifestyle.

    Which speaks nothing to the insanity of asking taxpayers to fund yet another lifestyle choice.

    If our side isn’t willing to call a spade a spade, we might as well throw in the towel now. Those of you acting like Rush did a terrible thing or made a serious misstep need to grow a pair. Or a spine.

    The left is in an all-out cultural war against Christian values. Conservatives need to quit walking on media eggshells and acknowledge that the culture war isn’t an urban legend.

    When I see this sort of thing going on in my country, I can’t help but feel like I’m a passenger on the Titanic. Except we can see the icebergs, and have warning systems going off everywhere, yet still ignore them.

  • countryroad2012

    He should never have made this the story. This gal should have been ignored. This is a First Amendment issue and that is what conservatives should be concentrating on. Unfortunately, this gal has been made the central issue not religious rights. The woman was insignificant and must be ignored totally. I also do not support using the language Rush used. Name calling is what Libs do. Women take offense to the name calling. You can speak on the issue without that kind of talk.

    • rightland1111

      nt

  • jc230

    We’re pawns on the chess board and we lost to an adept strategist of the liberal army. I got Rush’a analogy immediately, I knew he was using satire to illustrate, and maybe shock, the absurdity of a thirty something attending an affluent school promoting her desire for free contraception.

    Rush provided the fuel to ignite the circus clowns of the left media, Obama apology, to launch a full show of antics that cause Republicans to react as the liberals intended. Get these boys to media training pronto.

    Bottom line, a Republican or media conservative when asked to comment about Rush’s comments, could have said, “Rush is a radio personality, and according to the first amenent he has the freedom to share his thoughts on the matter, I’m not commenting on Rush, but I will comment on the worse time in out recent
    history when our government is encroaching on religious freedom.

  • rightland1111

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjJrmWbHM2I&sns=fb

    This thing with Fluke has to be turned into what the real subject is about…the First Amendment. Has Obama given up on this…look at the above video. This wasn’t some guy making a You-Tube in his basement…CBS LA! We have got to get our lawmakers to get this subject back on track before it is lost in the world of IUD’s, diaphrams and condoms.

    This woman, Fluke…wants to have sex changes paid for. Please…let’s call on Congressmen and tell them…they swore an oath to the Constitution…does it mean anything anymore!!!

  • cacharlie

    all coming down to the same old thing:

    Individual courage always prevails over fear mongering.

  • myron_j_poltroonian

    I was just about to use ProFlowers and now, despite their recent, excellent service, I shall inform them of their loss of my business. I have a question: if this ultimate “Wet Dream” of the left drives Rush from the airwaves (and I’ve been listening to him since his return from his “Rush to Italy” tour on KFBK AM 1530 in Sacramento, California in, I believe, March of 1986, and his “Progressive”, “Tolerant” detractors were rampant and vociferous even back then); will their efforts become known as being, or getting: “F’lucked”? Much as the treatment of judge Robert Borked became known as being, or getting, “Borked”?

    • myron_j_poltroonian

      A “Fluke” is also known as a “Summer Flounder”. Ask any New England salt water fisherman. However, I don’t get the impression that Miss Fluke is a tasty flatfish.

  • Rapunzel46

    Krystal Ball (yes the one who ran for congress in 2010 and lost) is one of the people leading the band to get rid of all Rush’s advertisers. She is evidently listening to his show and then calling each advertiser and posting the contact info for her Twitter-followers to spread. Some complaints of her blocking people who don’t like her tactics. The left is very good at this sort of activism, most conservatives are too busy working to be effective activists.

  • fromusa

    was that this woman (S. Fluke) was actually sending a message to, for the most part, the college boys to approach every girl on a date for sex. She sets up the perception that many, many girls are promiscuous on a date. So that the guys can interpret that they should approach each date with the perception that sex is ok. Guys just be sure to have a condom handy.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    So much for framing this as a fight over religious freedom.. Sigh.

  • joeyjojoshabadoo79

    nt

  • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

    . .