I really thought Sunday’s post regarding Rush’s apology would be the last (and only) post on the topic, as, really this whole thing is cheap theater designed to deflect from Obama’s horrible record. I’m surprised Team Obama didn’t wait till closer to the actual election to trot the issue out. And, let’s face it, Rush stepped in it with both feet. But, now we’re getting stories such as this diary at the Daily Kos: I’ve spent the past 2 days trying to convince my 16 y/o she is not a “slut”
I can hardly type, can hardly put this into words! I have been writing and rewriting this because if I don’t break down in tears, I get so angry that I can’t think straight! I know that so much has already been written about this whole issue, but I am writing this diary from a very personal point of view; forgive me if I find no humor in any of this, excuse me if I take no part in celebrating the loss of sponsorship for that pig’s radio program. You see, my 16 year old daughter came home from school on Friday in tears and has been in a state of utter despair since. She was told, in no uncertain terms, that she is a slut, a prostitute, a horny piece of trash that is out to sleep with every guy in school! The horrid little monsters who started harassing my daughter had the audacity to tell her their mothers were the ones who labeled her with these despicable opinions- they were just “telling it like it is, you know, like that guy on the radio! The one who isn’t afraid to tell the truth!” Who does this?! How does Rush Limbaugh or anyone else have the right to do this, to say these things about anyone?
Look, if true, I feel for beantown mom, but, let’s face it, children are cruel. It matters little if her snowflake is taking birth control pills for menorrhagia and secondary dysmenorrhea, kids are cruel. And, really, the timing of the post is rather coincidental, eh? Especially since it revolves around “that pig”, Rush Limbaugh.
(Final Update) 4. Someone just noted that this diary is being questioned as “too coincidental”. I have no response to this. I won’t try to dignify this with a response.
Interesting. Let’s jump to update #2
Update #2 I have been asked to update my post with this link to the petition to remove Rush Limbaugh from the Armed Forces Radio Network. Please, if you haven’t done so, go sign this petition! We need to fight back- we need this idiot removed from the airways.
So, censorship. Shutting down and shutting up voices the Left doesn’t like. Said petition was created on March 4th, 2012.
Over at the ever unhinged Balloon Juice, Dennis G calls Rush “anti-American”, and
Every bully goes too far one day. For Joe McCarthy it was the Army-McCarthy Hearings. For Bobby Knight it was choking a player.. Perhaps—if our Nation is lucky—this is the end of the line for Rush Limbaugh. He knows he stepped in it. You can hear the fear in his voice. There is no justification for his bullshit any longer and anybody who defends him is a coward, a fool or both.
Interesting. When it’s a show we do not like, we’re told to “change the channel.”
This is the consequence of the hate being peddled by Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. It’s not just “entertainment” or “humor” as he and his defenders like to claim. The bullying these folks do on the airwaves trickles down to bullying in the workplace and in the schoolyard. It has very real, very negative consequences to people’s lives–including to these “mean girls” bullies themselves, who are at significantly higher risk of teen pregnancy and doomed shotgun weddings due to a learned prejudice against basic birth control.
That’s weird, I though bullying was caused by globull warming, er, climate change.
Rush Limbaugh thinks a flimsy apology on his website is enough to make women forget about his shameful attacks and insults. We must not let him get away with making such statements on the air.
But, hey, it’s cool when Liberals make disparaging remarks about Conservative women, eh?
The Last Tradition makes a good point
In a society that glories girls behaving badly like Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan, all of a sudden “slutty behavior†is an issue for this mother of this 16 year old? Let’s put all the blame on Rush and not the genuine culprits that attend parties without wearing their panties.
Liberals aren’t going to let this tempest in a tea pot go, it’s an easy issue, much easier than defending the failure that is Obama. When will liberals demand that Obama apologize for referring to Tea Party members as “tea baggers,” an obnoxious, disparaging, sexually charged reference? How does Rush Limbaugh Barack H. Obama or anyone else have the right to do this, to say these things about anyone?
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
I will put money on the fact that his 16 year old is a slut.
“I will put money on the fact that his 16 year old is a slut.”
This remark exemplifies the problem. I don’t know if the story is true or not, but it is true that even virgins take birth control pills to correct various menstrual malfunctions, which can be painful. This is one more reason why contraception needs to be covered by health insurance, and not doing so is discriminatory to women.
Also, there is data showing that “not providing contraceptive coverage in employee health plans winds up costing employers 15% to 17% more than providing such coverage,” which means that excluding contraception coverage costs all of us, including you, money. The religious discrimination argument is bogus, since objecting religious institutions do not have to pay for the coverage.
Read more: http://moneyland.time.com/2012/02/14/why-free-birth-control-will-not-hike-the-cost-of-your-insurance/#ixzz1oGHjbKmK
Now, you may have an argument against the insurance mandate, and if so it would be great if someone on the Right were capable of engaging in a sober, adult discussion on this issue. Instead, we get OMG SHE WANTS BIRTH CONTROL SHE MUST BE A SLUT. It’s like your emotional development arrested in the 5th grade.
mahabarbara,
No, it is not a reason at all. You are confusing covering contraception for all women (something that covers a choice) with the medical issues of some women (a non-choice.) Also, in the cases you mention, the appropriate medication is covered under medical plans.
I responded to this before but apparently you either did not see it or chose not to answer. Your statement is incorrect. Institutions will be required to pay for the increase in coverage directly or indirectly. Religious institutions, like many companies and other institutions, handle insurance in two ways. The first is for smaller (relative to the larger) institutions that pay an insurance company for the coverage. In that case, the institutions are joining other companies to form a larger insured pool. In that coverage will increase, premiums will most certainly rise. In cases of larger institutions, the institution itself is the insurance company, having only an outside company to manage the program. For example, Notre Dame does not have an insurance company in the traditional sense. At Notre Dame, Notre Dame IS the insurance company.
Either way the end result is the institutions will have to pay for what they believe is an immoral or pay someone else to perform the same act. That is akin to either killing someone or paying someone to kill someone.
Somehow you believe the money for added costs will somehow appear by magic, faery dust or maybe finding a leprechaun’s pot o’ gold. In the real world we know that isn’t going to happen.
Your argument simply falls flat on facts and logic.
…… employee health plans winds up costing employers 15% to 17% more than providing such coverage,….
This is the second time that you have tried this argument and it fails as well. I don’t believe that the rights of people are for sale. That is basically what you are advocating. You believe that because something may be cheaper, that gives you the ability to step on the rights of others.
Let’s be clear here, the right to religious freedom is well recognized and codified in the organic founding documents of this country. There is no “right to health care” in those same documents. Even if there were, a person does not have the right to compel another to act against their rights. In short, your rights end at my nose.
What your position entails is that someone will pay for your choices and it is better if the cheaper options are financed. What you miss and don’t understand is that for years, people advocating feminism and equality fought (and rightfully so) for the ability to make the choices you want to make. However, what you are missing and won’t accept is that choices come with responsibility. You want to choose what you want, but then walk away from the consequences relying on the idea that others should pay for your choice.
Instead if addressing the choice and believing women are capable of accepting the consequences of their choices, you want the government, insurance companies, and the American people to step into your bedroom. Are you that weak and dependent on government to not make good choices?
We can, but it is not our side that is raising the emotional part of this. It is people like you that are. You are perfectly willing to make all sorts of claims that are based on emotions rather than facts and law.
Ronald Reagan captured the very essence of your position in 1961 when he said: “One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.”
We’ve been here fighting against government intervention and interference in the lives of people for decades.
I for one find this totally believable. If there’s one thing I know about 16 year old boys, it’s that they love listening to daytime political talk radio during school hours.
hey mayhab. Try watching the news sometime. Well, ok. Don’t. You are being fed lies from the media.
No conservative wants to take away contraceptives? No republican wants to legislate when people have sex.
What this whole argument is about, and please note the GLARING distinction, is the federal government telling either a religious institution or a private industry what they MUST cover in their insurance.
First, the feds said that religious institutions MUST provide contraceptives and abortives in their insurance plan despite their religious beliefs.
The so-called “compromise” that was also voted down, was to force that mandate upon the insurance company that the religious institution has hired.
“Money for nothing and the pills are free”
Nothing is free. The darling of the media had the audacity to get up in front of America and proclaim, I and my friends have sex so much, that we need the feds to provide it to us for free.
Hey, how about you go get it yourself honey. Condoms are free and pills are 25-30 cents each.
When do you have enough socialism? When the country is bankrupt and no one is left that can pay for what ever you dream of WANTING?!?!?!
Just because you want something does not mean you have the right to tell others to pay for it.
Don’t forget, this lil darling is an attention wh***. She has been an activist for a long time and signed up with Georgetown KNOWING that they did not offer contraceptive coverage – KNOWING that she would be fighting it.
Mahab, please explain why I should have to pay for her condoms and pills in my federal tax dollars?