Two weeks ago, the House Oversight Committee, led by Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), held a one-sided hearing on contraception access, featuring an opening panel of five conservative men -- and no one else. Democrats on the committee had invited a witness, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, but Issa refused to allow her to participate.
The House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee gave her a platform last week, and though the House GOP tried to limit the reach for Fluke's remarks, the student nevertheless had a chance to tell her story: a classmate of her lost an ovary due to an ailment that could have been treated with birth control.
Rush Limbaugh apparently wasn't impressed.
Getty Images
"What does it say about the college coed Susan [sic] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex.
"She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps.
"The johns, that's right. We would be the johns -- no! We're not the johns. Well -- yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word.
"OK, so, she's not a slut. She's round-heeled. I take it back."
Behold, the most influential voice in Republican politics.
I'm curious whether GOP officials, including Darrell Issa, are comfortable with the language Limbaugh used today. If recent history is any guide, Republican officeholders are loath to disagree with the radio host publicly, and it'll be interesting to see if GOP lawmakers or candidates make any kind of exception here.
Given that they started this War on Women, it seems unlikely, but here's hoping I'm wrong.
Leave a Comment:
Rush.
It takes two to tango.
I'm sure that either all of your "dates" have used contraception. So I guess we are paying for YOU to have sex.
Of course, perhaps you don't have sex, which is probably better for the country.
Sex with Rush Limbaugh? YUCK!! *shudder*
Dogjudge;
About the not having sex part: we can only hope. The idea of this blob re-producing is abhorrent to the average psyche.
@rvgrandpa. lol. that's an Ignatius Reilly comment if I ever heard one. Well done!
Rush Limbaugh's "dates" don't need birth control - young boys in the Dominican Republic can't get pregnant.
Mr. Limbaugh has been thrice married. He has no children. Kudos to his wives for doing the right thing & utilizing contraception.
What the hey, I'll get tacky. Maybe it's not necessary for his women to use contraceptives.
one wonders if its the pill between the knees contraceptive?
Umm can we not make fun of gays while trying to bash Limbaugh? Or women for that matter? It'd be much appreciated- thanks.
"Of course, perhaps you don't have sex, which is probably better for the country."
Can't hurt the gene pool either.
Maybe Mr. Rush (I'm addicted to pain pills) likes men?!?
Maybe Rush doesn't have any bullets in his gun?
He has sex with little boys while on Sex touriem trips to The Dominican Republic.
tourisim*
what a despicable piece of dog doo he is. why anyone would listen to his vitriol is beyond me.
Hope springs eternal, but we're talking the GOP here, so they'll pretend that they didn't even hear him speak.....
I'd like to pretend that I never heard him speak either.
The tealiban is scared to death of Fatso Druggie Rush so they will either agree with him or say nothing. Maybe it's about time that people started boycotting the sponsors of his trash show with women leading the way. I'm still trying to figure out how his is still on the air after all these years when he mocks blacks on a daily basis. He wouldn't know truth or respect if it hit him below the belt. Well, it would have a mile of fat to go through just like his head.
personal attacks on rush...isn't this post about Rush's personal attacks, a GOP staple....sure you aint rupublican.
Yes. A bit ironic isn't it? He lumps all of his listeners as "johns" so a woman can have sex in order to have contraceptives so she can stay cancer free. I think he should thank his listners for being his "enablers" and not doing an "intervention" by boycotting his sponsors.
I'll bet Rush knows alot about paying for sex.
I recall a certain story about a suitcase full of Viagra and a trip to the Dominican Republic. How disgusting.
He went to the Dominican Republic - known for it's young male prostitutes.
Oh blech. I don't think "Limbaugh" and "viagra" should be used in the same sentence. I wonder if we should consider his wife a hooker since she had to have married him for his money?
Ill-gotten Viagra
Puerto Plata capital of child sex rings
Rushes plane is there all the time
This douche is one sick mucker.
rush you are nothing but a big mouth bigot racists scum bag. who has nothing positive to say about any thing!!
If he can throw name calling, I guess it's fair game, I just can't stand hearing the b.s. slinging on these shows… I just have no stomach for it.
It is name calling, lies, slander, false allegations, propaganda, and anything to favor the conservative right. Believe me, many republicans thrive on shows like this. He should be denied the freedom of speech just as women are being deprived of their rights. He is abnoxious, disgusting, and he speaks like there is a lot of mush in his mouth. Probably the drugs he takes.
I think I may have figured out Limbaugh. He's a tr0ll. A pre-Internet tr0ll. He got himself a nationally syndicated radio show and he's been tr0lling the whole country for decades. He's just out to provoke the biggest reaction he can, simply because he loves getting a reaction. That's all that really motivates him. Forget politics, forget ideology. He's just out to stir the pot and watch what bobs up to the surface.
Jabba is also motivated by Viagara, Oxycontin, and little boys in the Dom Rep.
In related news, 46% of people polled in a recent Harris poll dislike Rush Limbaugh - with 24% of Republicans disliking him. Only 13% of Republicans dislike Rachel Maddow!
46% dislike Rush - the other 54% don't understand the question.
The other 54% is too busy having sex with farm animals and close genetic relatives.
Why does anyone listen to this ****** ****** ???
.
I finally figured out why I do not like clowns. Rush is the perfect speaker for the GOP. He is very small-minded. Without much usable brain, the imagination is in charge.
What a jerk - but who cares what he says! Only idiots listen to Limbaugh, and they are a lost cause anyway because they are idiots. None of the intelligent Republicans I know listen to Rush - so I am not so sure that he is the voice of the party these days. Besides, all of the other hate radio guys like Savage, Beck, etc. are also idiots who appeal to idiots and fill idiot heads with trash on an hourly idiot basis. We will never be able to sway a single one of these hate-filled trash-heads with intelligent, reasoned argument - they are immune to that. Give up on the ditto-heads - they are irrelevant.
Well said.
Agreed - but I do think it's important to keep up with how far out he goes - and I sure don't want to have to listen to him to find out, so I'm glad someone is listening.
Now if only those idiots would stay home on voting day, but that's probably too much to ask.
That's the kind of crazy I wanna hear. Thank you, Rush. You just let your freak flag fly! Independents? You don' need no steenking independents! You can do it! You can win the election with just 27% of the population! ....(Shhhh...quiet, don't tell him...) Go on, man! DO IT!
MSNBC and CBS wisely fired Don Imus after his Rutgers fiasco. Can we only hope and pray Premiere Radio Network and their parent company Clear Channel will finally dump this ridiculous blowhard? Meanwhile, I hope Ms. Fluke sues Mr. Limbaugh for defamation. Someone find this woman a high-powered attorney that will take fat boy Rush to the cleaners.
I recommend that someone or everyone start a fund to pay for a good attorney for Sandra Fluke. What Limbaugh said was pure slander and he needs to be sued. This is not protected free speech. He cannot spew slanderous lies like that.
I agree. But is it still slander if he used the wrong name? There is no mistaking who he was talking about, but does the wrong name give him a defense? He's been on so long and there has never been any defense for the lies he spouts, yet he is still on the air. Why, why, why??
Did CBS fire Imus while he was working for ABC? That's quite a feat.
I used to listen to Rush when he was on during morning drive time where I worked and the other programming choices were boring. On the contrary, I found him entertaining in a horrible fascination kind of way, like being unable to resist looking at a traffic accident. ("What outright lie or offensive insult is he going to come up with next?") But even that became too much and I stopped when he called Obama "that little punk." That was right around "You lie!" time, I think.
Nothing surprising in this latest story. Red meat=Outrageous=Conflict=Ratings.
The only reason I would ever listen to Rush would be to find out who advertises on his show so I can avoid doing business with those companies.
I had never heard about his "little punk" comment. I think it's safe to say that we have millions of American Muslims and illegal immigrants who show more respect for our President than this so-called American does. I'd pay to see Obama and Rush in a cage match - Rush is awfully tough behind the microphone, but I'm pretty sure he would wet himself and start crying in the cage.
Sadly the same companies that advertise on Rush also advertise on progressive talk shows too. Sports talk as well.
I have tried a few times to hear his take on things, but I end up changing stations quickly. Just can't bear it.
A Real Honest To God Show Business Lesson: Showbiz is faddish; all acts which depend upon the value of shock or novelty rise in popularity and then decline and you can tell when an act has passed its peak and is in decline because it will become, at first slightly then more and more so as it continues down, extreme. This does not mean they go away. Some stick around for years, even decades, but the halls you book them into get smaller and the audience older until one night a kid comes up to you and says, "Man, I thought she/he/they were dead."
Here's a clue, Wingers: maybe she isn't having any sex, but is also realistic about her chances of being raped -- and about the potential consequences for the rest of her life if that rape results in pregnancy.
And maybe, just maybe, given the choice of contraceptives, abortion, or flushing her career in Law down the tubes (while still being on the hook for student loans), maybe she considers the contraceptives the least-bad alternative.
--
dcs, who knows women who were in that precise situation -- including being very relieved to have been on contraceptives when raped.
But by using contraception, she's denying God the opportunity to give her the "gift" that will help her "make the best of a bad situation," according to Rick Sanctimonious. And, of course, in the world according to Rush, women who are raped probably were raped because they dressed seductively, or breathed in a salacious fashion, or maybe just breathed. Because we all know that's what women are for, right? Heck, never mind the whole contraceptives thing. Women are sluts any way you look at it, in the world according to Rush. (I wonder if he realizes that includes his own mother.)
When life gives you rape, you make rape-ade.
Sandra Fluke's testimony was not about using contraceptives for birth control. Her friend had a cyst on her ovary and needed hormonal treatment to prevent the cyst. It just so happened that the hormonal treatment is also a common form of birth control. The point of Ms. Fluke's testimony was that she could not get coverage for a medical treatment because that treatment is also used for birth control.
Because the young woman could not afford the treatment, she lost her ovary and is now showing symtoms of early menopause. How can any "church" that claims to be Christian and moral, justify denying this young woman medical treatment?
Well, that's the question, isn't it? There is a biblical passage which is worth bearing in mind in this sort of situation, when ostensibly--and ostentatiously--religious people are doing things which seem counter to their alleged beliefs. The passage is Matthew 25:31-46. I won't quote the whole thing, but essentially it presents Jesus speaking of the end of the age and judging the peoples of the world, and dividing them into those deserving reward and those deserving punishment. Among the reasons for putting people in the first group, Jesus includes caring for him when he was sick. When did we care for you when you were sick? the first group asks. The answer is whenever care was taken for other people. It's reversed for the second group. They are told that they didn't care for Jesus when he was sick (among other failures), and that is because they didn't care for other people.
That's a pretty potent image, even if you are not Christian. And it is completely inexplicable that some people who claim to be Christians are, by the logic of this passage, denying needed healthcare to their supposed lord and savior by denying to the women who need it. But, as it says in Matthew 7:21, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven." And if taking care of the health needs of other people is among the things required by that will, what does that say about the people who are so publicly fond of saying "Lord, Lord" but are working so hard to keep women from getting the care their continued health requires?
sandra fluke ought to sue his f**king ass off.
Can some enterprising journalist PLEASE travel down to the Dominican Republic and do an expose on how many child prostitutes have been frequented by this revolting Nazi hog?!?
Don't you think they've suffered enough already?
This is why it doesn't really pay to try to divide up the contraception between the "good girls" who need contraception to treat a medical condition and the "bad girls" who use it to avoid getting pregnant. We're all just sluts in the eyes of a--holes like Rush, so we might as well get up in his grill about it.
Of course Rush is the voice of the Republican party. If you look at their three front runners, they're divvying up the basic animus of the party:
Vote Mitt Romeny if you hate the poor.
Vote Newt Gingrich if you hate minorities.
Vote Rick Santorum if you hate women and gays.
It's all about hate, and this man is the bloated, gibbering vinculum of hatred. He wouldn't have been around for as long as he has been if the Republicans weren't receptive to his bloviating screeds against women, minorities, and the poor.
Michael Moore's operation Hilarity aside, Dems should NOT take for granted that some of these guys are un-electable. The Republican party has spent the last several years re-tooling their voters to operate on sheer, unadulterated hate, and Limbaugh has been their primary cheerleader. As a republican voter, you might not hate black people as much as you hate women, but if Gingrich were to secure the nomination over Santorum, you'd be surprised at just how compatible that animus is. And while we might hear rhetoric that seems beyond the pale even for Right-Wing Radio, but the listeners just hear another "new idea that's tapping into what we're all thinking but are too afraid of the PC Police to say." Jerks like Rush have been prepping the audience to just drop the facade and go full unvarnished hate on women, the poor, and minorities for a long time.
Where does Limbaugh live? I'd like to see a Slut Walk snake by his house some day. Then curl around for another pass.
I think that is the very definition of pearls before swine. :D
Mighty Ponygirl, that was a well said post.
Abraham Lincoln would never have spoken in that manner, and he was a Republican who deserved the respect and leadership role in the GOP. Most Republicans prefer a conservative, but considerate person to represent their interests. That is why the well-mannered, polite and soft-spoken Ronald Reagan was so popular. He was congenial with Democrat Tip O' Neill even when they disagreed. Teddy Roosevelt was very sharp about the problems of capital and labor and protecting the interests of the American people. His opponents admired him for putting the well-being of the people ahead of political corruption, and he had broad support in the nation.
The Republican Party was left-leaning when it was founded. Among those who created the party were abolitionists and anti-slavery people (yes, those were two different positions), proponents of women's rights, proponents of a homestead act and of supporting education through land grants, all of which were progressive ideas back in the 1850s.
It says a lot about today's Republicans that for them the very idea of public lands, never mind just giving them away, is anathema. It says a lot about today's Republicans that they are working so hard against the interests of women, against voting rights, and against workers' rights. Even if you fail to adjust for the differences in precise issues, today's Republicans are far to the right of the founders of the party.
Nice parallel between what Republicans founded themselves to be the party of and what they are now vs. the principles put forth by Christ and everything Christians stand for now.
Never thought of til just this second. Thanks Monk!
Hadn't thought of the Christian angle at all, but you're right.
Among the earliest Republicans was Henry Ward Beecher: clergyman, abolitionist, proponent of women's suffrage, advocate of Darwin, but also an advocate of temperance (not in itself a bad thing, the basic idea, but the temperance movement led ultimately to Prohibition) and opponent of labor rights. A somewhat mixed bag by today's standards, but still far to the left of modern Republicans, especially where science is concerned.
Talk about wanting to hurl. I used to try to listen to this purveyor of hate to see what they were saying, but I just could not listen to it.
I am curious, though… what are the demographics of his listeners… I think I can guess, not many women or minorities.
Yeah, just keep throwing women and minorities under the bus while you keep trying to defy what is real. Spin away, it still doesn't make it TRUE. That's what so many folks ignore truth and try to force something they want reality to be.
Sandycat, I dunno, there are plenty of women willing to throw in with the oppressors because they feel that there is enough distinction between Them and the Bad Girls Who Deserve To Be Stomped Down that they don't need to worry about being stomped themselves. Plus, better to do the stomping than to be stomped!
Yeah, I guess that it is our time to stomp metaphorically. I hope it's true, that women will stand up and voice their disdain for such tactics.
p.s. that is our orange tabby cat who adopted us, came through the doggie door and started talking at 2 am, saying "where's the food?" "can I snuggle with you?" Stole our hearts...
Demo: 45+, white, protestant/evangelical, southern/midwestern, high school/some college
NextMSNBCStar, that describes ME (sort of), but I am from So. Cal., not your typical protestant, and apparently, I am more prepared for University than I was told "in my day", as I was informed by my friends in University professions.
I just really can't stomach the rushbo doctrine. I should try to be more pragmatic, but it just can't be taken seriously, can it? I know it is pretty hard to believe people take his swill seriously. It is sad to think people take these things as "ammo", as I have been told by a nice ex-co-worker he uses such information.
They take his world as gospel! They, by word of mouth, just spout off every lie, every misconception, all the propaganda to whoever will give them an here. And they don't back down when presented with reasonable rhetoric. A political discussion with a republican always ends up with two people mad at each other or the democrat just walking away. Where all this misinformation originates and how all the perverted dogma manages to survive, even through presidential elctions, is way behond my comprhension, or even if I was delusional.
It's that bubble Maher shows us. I try to reach through with a fact, but they just jump to another topic, to prove the saying something like "if you keep talking, you never listen" or however it goes.
If Bill Clinton's old Georgetown U fraternity, Phi Beta Kappa, is not in the process of setting up a Sandra Fluke Fund to supply whatever university splittails want to have sex with them with contraception, then they're not doing their job. Oh Bluto, where hast thou gone!
If this poor, pampered law student is so worried about procreation that she thinks others should provide her with contraception, I've an answer: anal sex. Do it in the pooper Fluke!
One thing's for sure: she better get on something before she starts interming for a democrat congressman.
But of course, Edward - the Democratic congressmen are the ones who like girls. Not so much on the other side of the aisle.
Edward makes Rush proud, and stupid scores!
Really, how classy!!!!
Been a long time since there has been as blatant and disgusting a misogynist at Mr. Richardson in posting his hatred of women multiple times in more and more disgusting detail, in the same discussion, you really must have some serious issues to deal with sir, but a blog really isn't the place to do it. I think perhaps Mr. Richardson should give Ms. Fluke the same opportunity to fantasize about his sexual aberrations as he has fantasized about hers.
I don't think you even bothered, just like Rush, to listen to what Ms. Fluke even said in her 3+ minutes of "testimony". She spoke about women she knew who used birth control for medical conditions that caused them extreme pain and financial hardship when their Catholic University health plans refused them coverage for medicine. So, you see, Mr. Richardson, procreation wasn't the primary focus of Ms. Fluke's speech or for that matter, sex. I guess you weren't one of the compassionate conservatives we used to hear about. But then, I guess you're more interested in saying opinions that have no basis in fact or in polite company - don't think she was poor or pampered, just trying to stand up for other women whose voices have not been heard by you.
Edward we can arange for you to be burried with Rush sounds like you and him are cut from the same mold!
Wow, he's much more adept than Foster's Freeze and his aspirin "joke".
Rush is just mad because they busted him with somebody else's viagra (prescription benefit, no doubt) after having whaled himself all over gawd-knows-what.
Rush = Ultimate G-O-Pig! This is your party's speaker and voice GOP, a child boffing whale who can't even get it up without somebody else's prescription.
Rush barely got out of high school. He is an uneducated idiot and appeals to the same.
Actually he dropped out of high school. He's from vast wealth and knew he'd be able to never worry about where his next meal comes from. He's also close with the Bush family.
Had a hairy boil on his bottom and didn't serve in the military.
I thought the hairy boil was on the top of his neck. My bad.
Just wondering, since Ms Fluke is not a public figure, can she sue the fat junkie for slander? I would certainly look into it if I were her....she testified about a friend who was taking birth control for a medical condition, not that she wanted it so she could have lots of sex. This guy is sub human trash. Sue him!!!
Well, he did call her a slut on public airwaves, and also stated that she was a prostitute. Unless he can prove that she is any of these things, he has just committed defamation. Public figure or not, allegations like that can do material harm to her career. So hopefully she'll sue the sonovabitch. Oh, but wait. He used the wrong name. He called her "Susan" instead of "Sandra" — any bets on whether that was deliberate?
@ Betsy - Having just listened to her testimony you are pretty much totally misrepresenting a lot of her testimony...
I took the time to transcribe some of it so I wouldn't get it wrong...
$1,000 per year for birth control?
Women have no choice but to go without contraception?
Can't fit it into their budget?
Last time I checked condoms are less than a dollar each if you are buying more than 3 at a time. When she says they have no choice but to go without contraception she is flat out laying.
Birth control pills may be purchased with a prescription at a drugstore or clinic. They cost about $15–$50 a month. - Planned Parenthood website
Yes she finally got around to talking about her friend but not before she spoke about how Georgetown's policy was putting financial pressure on them... not like the $45,000 a year they pay to attend the law school.
Yes her friend should be covered but not her, nor anybody else who simply want to have sex and have somebody else pay for it.
Quite frankly she shouldn't worry too much longer as the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Healthcare reform) is going to begin in 2014 and she will be buying her own policy and then she can pick one that covers birth control. She will also be paying much more than $1000 per year for coverage.
I'm not arguing like the last Rush article where people were at each others throats. I just want to say my part in response, Joe. That's just it. If guys can trot on down to the medical building at the university to get them for free she should be afforded that same opportunity. Also, from what I gathered she was talking about her student healthcare plan that they pay for. Since Georgetown is a Catholic school and women having contraception is wrong, why are men allowed to choose? shouldn't condoms be against their views as well? Oh wait they go by archaic ideals where men make all the choices regarding procreation. However, remembering back to when I was in college. When that moment arises the blood flow isn't approaching the brain anymore.Also today's family is a partnership, we don't have the happy housewife days anymore. It takes both parents working to make it. The Planned Parenthood bit is this, they don't carry every form of BC pills and the one or two kinds they do carry don't work on everyone. As far as them "affording" the $45 K annual tuition. Don't you think they lean heavily on student loans and grants to get through school?
Now as far as people saying he should be "taken off the air". Do I agree with him? No. Do I like him? No. Do I this he should be fined? Yes. Should he be taken off the air? No. That's the beauty of this nation of ours. We can express our opinion without fear of prosecution. If we don't like him, we change te station. It's not the only thing on (thank God).
Limbaugh has a right to free speech. He does not have a right to a nationally syndicated radio program. That program is supported by advertising, and already Limbaugh's sponsors are getting pressure and two have already pulled their support. We have more choices than simply not listening or turning the channel. "Conservatives" like to preach about letting the 'market' decide. Well, then the 'market' can decide whether Limbaugh gets to keep his coast-to-coast soapbox.
The point I am waiting to see made, and it saddens me to have to say it myself - is that maybe the sponsors who are fleeing him are ones that are predominantly target men who actually like women.
TCLucas, I wasn't aware Georgetown provided condoms. I looked over their student health insurance and didn't see anything. I also looked into the services provided by the Student Health Center. Didn't find anything.
All forms of birth control (excluding natural birth control) are against Catholic teachings. Fluke did know this when she joined. I think she said her education came before contraception.
I can assure that is does NOT take two people working to raise children. I know single mothers and fathers that do it all by themselves. I also know quite a few women who have taken off work in order to spend time with their children before the begin Pre-K.
I know that PP does not carry all forms of birth control but they do carry a lot and condoms work for everybody.
Also Implanon costs about $500-800 to insert but lasts three years. That is about $170-270 per year.
Flush Rush! What a POS.
Who pays for his oxy? His insurance?
You mean the oxycontin that he had his housekeeper buy for him because he didn't actually have a prescription? I'm guessing insurance doesn't pay for illegal prescription drug purchases.
he is a right winger so don't they think the insurance companies ,should be able to screw their policy holders, Id bet he has to get his followers to take up a collectipon to pay for his drug habit!
Samuel Johnson wrote
For argument's sake, let's say dullness equates to despicable. If despicable=dullness then this: