Sandra Fluke and Rush

I’m itching to say something about this, but I’m not supposed to know about it, so…

Morahrach, u go girl! You’re 100% right. The liberals can say whatever they want, yet a conservative gets chastised if he says something politically incorrect. Obama is ruining our country! First gay marriage, now churches and religous organizations must cover birth control, what next? Lets use our tax money to support illegals who enter this country, oh wait we already do that! The fact that we let liberals go too far is a big problem, we must.hold them shorter on the leash! Rush limbaugh was right in calling that lawyer a nasty names, he stood up for what’s right in this country!

Mods the language being used here isnt fit for the teens and children that we are told time and again use this site. please mod the comments or delete the thread.

Shalom bBrooklyn- “Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school” Direct quote from Fluke.

Firstly there are pills for 10-20 bucks a month. So either she lied to Congress, or neglected to mention that there are generics for a fraction of the cost.

Rush’s point was that someone that needs to spend that much money a year is exactly what he called her.

Shalom – you are either very naive or terribly misguided.

I try to respond to some parts of your post which made no sense and was all over the place.

1. I don’t think Rush was making the comments he did because of things he felt were morally right or wrong. He’s by far the wrong person to comment on morals. He knows it and doesn’t try to deny it. He’ll stay out of your business and he’d want you to stay out of his.

2. Brissim and the issue at hand are not the same issue. They don’t even come close to comparison. With brissim we exercise our right to freedom of religion. With the issue she is talking about she is exercising her right to liberty and pursuit of happiness. (if that’s what she thinks makes her happy). Nobody is stopping her from doing anything.

3. Nobody wants the government or health insurance companies to pay for brissim. I think that that is a terrible scenario with too many bad implications. (i.e. who is qualified to do procedure, in hospital setting, no wine…)

And I certainly don’t understand why a person in their right mind would want the government or health insurance involved in their private lives. BUT THE REAL ISSUE IS THAT I DON’T WANT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR OTHER PEOPLE’S STUPIDITIES. If you really think this won’t come from taxpayer’s money or lead to a rise in health care costs – you’re seriously deluded. You want to live your life the way you want – fine but don’t make me pay for it.

I don’t know why there are so many people who are willing to keep putting on the blinders.

4. No one ever brought Jews or our political stance into this conversation. To the benefit of everyone here, please lets keep it that way.

5. The classic case of being so open minded that the brain falls out.

Once you have government paying for everything and anything. You have government telling you how they’ll pay, only on what terms, to whom they’ll pay and they’ll make a couple of more stuff illegal on the way to save money.

By government not paying for private lifestyles is not by any means a way of controlling it. It is a way of staying out of it. Keeping you in control. It is the people with a chip on their shoulder that constantly need the government recognition to okay what their doing.

6. “I could go on, but as a Jew, I am always half expecting politicians to throw Jews under the bus in order to advance their own power”

That is the only good and true statement there is from your whole post. It is always important to remember that we are in galus.

Dvorak – you missed the point. I wonder if you were listening to the program, or just read his comments that were taken out of context and put into news columns.

I hate Rush’s program. I find him very bigoted and most of his program is taken up with the word “I”. However, I happened to have been listening then and this whole thing is just so blown over.

He was not putting women down in any way shape or form. He was complaining about having to pay for their social activities and getting nothing back for it. He was talking about personal responsibility. In case you don’t know what that is, it means making choices and being responsible or paying for them yourself.

As a matter of fact one woman called and mentioned that she gets her BC from Walmart for $5 a month. She questioned what the big deal was for someone to fund that themselves instead of putting themselves on other people. He agreed with that. He never made fun of people taking birth control. He hasn’t made any judgemental statements on the what she does with her life. (why would he? He’s just as bad as she is in that respect.)

Your opinions on the appropriateness of the inclusion or exclusion of certain benefits through health insurance is a separate discussion. The issue at hand is a public figure who verbally attacked a young woman personally.

Most people condemn it, some people are taking it a step further and calling for a boycott to punish the offender. I believe that those people have an axe to grind here and would not go so far based on this incident alone, but Rush certainly has to own his mistake.

Does anyone disagree and think that what Rush did was OK?

And I just want to bash her for something else. That is, she is downright dishonest.

She goes and tells congress that it costs 3k over law school, which is almost a summer’s salary on a Public Interest fellowship. Because when you work for a non profit entity over the summer, apparently you can get people to pop you like 5k.

The point of her comparison should be that it is a relevant comparison. Like if she had said it is a large percentage of the money she has to live on for the year.

But it wasn’t a relevant comparison at all. She compared the 3 year cost to a summers earnings. She should have compared a one year cost to the student cost of living budget for the year!

The reason you make irrelevant comparisons is, that you are trying to persuade someone to your side by framing it in an inaccurate way. So why is she doing that to congress? Why doesn’t she just tell congress the actual facts and let congress frame it accurately?

Creep. I hope she gets pregnant with twins.

Squeak, I think what he did was o.k. He called a spade a spade. He called a lowlife a lowlife.

While I was typing my last comment, I was thinking that most people dont understand the background of this issue so I will copy from Rush’s transcript of Monday (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/05/why_i_apologized_to_sandra_fluke) :

What’s gone on since and what really is going on here is what we all know to be true. Our president, Barack Obama, has a socialist agenda when it comes to health care, when it comes to birth control, when it comes to virtually every aspect of his agenda. In this case, Barack Obama wants the government, his government, making moral decisions about what treatments, prescriptions, pills you pay for through your insurance premiums. He isn’t willing to let you or the market make that decision for yourself.

Now, the hearing that started all of this, I want to go back and put the timeline here in context, start at the very beginning. The hearing that started all of this was called by Darrell Issa, a California Republican, he’s the head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa is on our side. His point in calling this hearing was to get facts into the record that otherwise would not be aired. But his committee is made up of both Republicans and Democrats, and there are rules and procedures that are followed in calling witnesses. What this was all about was the president of the United States acting extra-constitutionally, mandating that Catholic churches and their schools provide contraceptives, abortifacients. He doesn’t have that power constitutionally. He cannot mandate these things.

That was the original purpose of the hearing. He was to get facts into the record that otherwise would not be aired, but his committee is made up of Republicans and Democrats and there are rules and procedures that are followed in calling witnesses. So the Democrats tried to play a game with Darrell Issa and his committee, and he rejected it. What they did was, they requested a witness for his hearing, a man named Barry Lynn to make their points for them. Barry Lynn is a guy that remits the Democrat point of view. They asked for him in advance. Issa’s committee checked him out, invited him, and prepared for his testimony. Issa agreed he has a degree of expertise about the subject matter of the hearing, which was not contraception. That’s what Obama wants to turn this into.

Obama is sorely hurting with women in preelect polls. He wanted to turn this into an issue much as they used to use abortion. So the Democrats played the game. What happened next is instructive, and it’s very important. At literally the last minute the Democrats decided they want Sandra Fluke. What happened next, at the last minute the Democrats decided that Sandra Fluke would be a better witness for them, not because she had any special knowledge or credentials like Barry Lynn has, but because her optics as a woman and a college student, a 30-year-old college student and an activist on Democrat issues, by the way.

They thought all of that would show better than Barry Lynn. Now, this is at 4:30 p.m., 4:30 in the afternoon, the day before the hearing that the Democrats asked Issa to un-invite Barry Lynn, the guy they had asked for originally, and replace him with Sandra Fluke. Darrell Issa said (paraphrased), “Sorry, it’s too late. She hasn’t been vetted. We don’t know who she is. She doesn’t have any real qualifications to appear before this committee. We don’t have the time to prepare for her and ask her questions. So the answer is: ‘No. You cannot have her testify.'” All of this, by the way, is in a very interesting Washington Examiner article from last week, and I’ve linked to it at RushLimbaugh.com so you can read it yourself.

Now, the Democrats and the leftists sensed opportunity over this controversy that they created themselves. They publicly turned the situation they created to their own advantage. They invite Barry Lynn. They disinvite him at the last moment and they want him replaced with Sandra Fluke. “Who is this? We don’t know who she is.” The second panel of witnesses. It was Carolyn Maloney. If you don’t recall last week, Carolyn Maloney, Democrat from New York, started shouting, “Where are the women? Where are the women?” They start saying Republicans hate women; they started attacking Issa and Republicans on the committee, saying, “They don’t want hear from women! They’re misogynist, sexist,” or what have you.

Issa’s committee invited the Democrat choice again, Barry Lynn, and the Democrats on the committee tried to replace him at the very last minute with this sympathetic woman when it was too late for the committee. So again they said no. So the Democrats played their game of lies, and Issa complained. On February 16th, he said, “The Democrats on his committee have appeared,” this is a quote, “outright giddy in attempting to distort the testimony offered and purpose of the hearing.” You bet they did. They wanted to turn this from a committee hearing on Obama and his unconstitutional mandate to the issue of contraception so as to bring back to life page 1-A of the Democrat playbook: Republicans Hate Women.

They wanted to change the whole subject. So how did they do it? Well, the Democrats have their own little subcommittee called the steering committee. This subsets inside the larger oversight and reform committee that Issa chairs. And they wanted their sympathetic witness on the record, Sandra Fluke. So they called her to testify before them, not Issa’s committee. The subcommittee. They staged what was essentially a conference to look like a committee hearing. She gave the testimony that she was going to give to the full committee. It was taped and released and made to look like a committee hearing. And Darrell Issa had been right all along. Her testimony was not that of an expert.

It was just another non-expert person in this case, in Sandra’s case: A 30-year-old, longtime birth control activist who went back to law school after a career of years of championing birth-control issues. In fact, she told stories less about birth control as a social tool (which was, of course, the left’s true agenda) and more about birth control as a medication for treating other conditions, such as pregnancy. To the left, pregnancy is a disease. If you’re listening to me for the first time, you may say, “Well, that’s crazy.” It’s not. They treat pregnancy as a disease for political purposes. All of this, folks, is political.

Sandra Fluke gave vague examples based on unnamed friends who she says couldn’t afford birth control to treat medical conditions they had, since Georgetown University wouldn’t pay for them. Georgetown paid for all of their other medical treatment, but it wouldn’t pay for the birth control pills that these doctors prescribed should they be necessary — or so she says. We still don’t know who any of these friends of hers are, these other women, and we don’t know what happened to them. Her testimony was hearsay, and it was unprovable. And Issa was right not to let her give the testimony, particularly when the Democrats foisted her on the committee at the very last minute for the express purpose of pulling this fast one, this trick.

Now, let’s get a few facts on the record here. Georgetown is a Jesuit University. It’s Jesuits, run by the Jesuits, which are a Catholic order of priests. Their policy on birth control is not exactly a secret. It’s not given to you in a sealed envelope after you sign up. It’s out there for everybody to see. It’s a Catholic university! Everybody that goes to there knows. Miss Fluke stated on occasion she went there specifically to change the policy. If birth control insurance is important to you as an enrolling student, and you find out that Georgetown doesn’t offer it, you might want to attend (or work at) a school that isn’t run by Catholics. I mean, just a thought.

But if you know the place doesn’t offer contraceptives when you sign up, and that is your big political issue, then why are you really there? Actually, they know what they’re doing. They intentionally target schools like Georgetown to advance an agenda of ultimately forcing them to abandon their religious beliefs. All of this is to serve Obama’s agenda. The agenda he worked all summer on. He abandoned it only when America stood up, united, and this said they would not tolerate tearing down religion to increase government’s control over our lives. You did that. You stood up to him. You made him stop. That was a proud moment for all of us.

This is his second attempt at mandating Catholic churches and other organizations (under the cloak of a so-called committee hearing) be forced to provide contraceptives against their moral conscience, dictates, what have you. So Sandra Fluke, a 30-year-old birth control activist gives unverified and inexpert testimony about how Georgetown’s long-standing and public policy has hurt her unnamed friends. And let’s be clear on something else. I haven’t called Georgetown to see if they pay for birth control pills when being used to treat her medical conditions. I have no idea if they do or don’t. If somebody at Georgetown wants to weigh in on that, I’d be interested.

But the point here is that this was an issue that represents a tiny, tiny slice of what the Democrats really want here. They use Sandra Fluke to create a controversy. Sandra Fluke used them to advance her agenda, which is to force a religious institution to abandon their principles in order to meet hers. Now, all of this is what I should have told you last week, ’cause this is what happened. I use satire. I use absurdity to illustrate the absurd. The story at the Cybercast News Service characterized a portion of her testimony as sounding like (based on her own financial figures) she was engaging in sexual activity so often she couldn’t afford it. I focused on that because it was simple trying to persuade people, change people’s minds.

popa_bar_abba: Creep. I hope she gets pregnant with twins.

Lol! I hereby nominate this tidbit, as tidbit of the day.

(Sorry popa, the post itself wasn’t good enough for “post of the day”)