Justice wanted
Limbaugh broadcasts dead air during commercial breaks
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/08/limbaugh-broadcasts-dead-air-during-commercial-breaks/
The exodus of advertisers fleeing from Rush Limbaugh may finally be taking a toll on his radio show.
Liberal watchdog group Media Matters noticed that on at least two occasions on Thursday, Limbaugh’s flagship station in New York, WABC, broadcast several minutes of dead air during commercial breaks.
AdAge determined that nearly half of the 69 commercial spots during Thursday’s show had been replaced with public service announcements.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002402054
Keep telling yourselves that Rush is toast, it will be just like for 8 years how you convinced yourself that Bush was toast.
From the link,
Granted I didn't hear every second of the show or the commercials, but I didn't notice any less actual ads. I'm guessing if what they claim is true, then it has to be a local radio station problem, not a national one.
I love how much pain they receive from one man on the radio. :-)
The liberal leftist have hundreds of on air commentators but it's the few on the right that have to be taken off the air. Something must be wrong with the lefts message.
Justice wanted
Limbaugh broadcasts dead air during commercial breaks
http://www.rawstory.com/r...during-commercial-breaks/
The exodus of advertisers fleeing from Rush Limbaugh may finally be taking a toll on his radio show.
Liberal watchdog group Media Matters noticed that on at least two occasions on Thursday, Limbaugh’s flagship station in New York, WABC, broadcast several minutes of dead air during commercial breaks.
Posted on March 8, 2012 at 5:41pm by Jonathon M. Seidl Jonathon M. Seidl
Rush Limbaugh has rejected an advertiser’s apparent attempt to reunite with his show after the company initially dropped its ads from the program following his remarks about contraception advocate Sandra Fluke.
The company, Sleep Train, calls itself “the No. 1 Bedding Specialist on the West Coast, and most recognized mattress retailer in the region.â€
In an email to Sleep Train President Dale Carlsen (obtained by The Blaze), a representative of the show says that Limbaugh personally considered the company’s request, but denied it considering its public comments following the controversy.
“Thank you for your requests last week and this week to restart your voiced endorsement in local markets of The Rush Limbaugh Show,†the email begins. “Rush received your requests personally.â€
“Unfortunately, your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the future.
“Rush appreciates your long friendship and your past support, and we wish you good luck in the future.â€
Last Friday, Sleep Train was vocal in its rejection of Limbaugh.
“As a diverse company, Sleep Train does not condone such negative comments directed toward any person,†the company said in a statement. “We have currently pulled our ads with Rush Limbaugh.â€
According to the Washington Post, which tells the story of how the advertiser and Limbaugh started their relationship, Sleep Train had been an advertiser with Limbaugh for over 25 years. Last week, the Post noted how the company had only suspended its ads, not fully dropped the conservative commentator as a retail spokesperson. And while that may have left the door open for a reunion, that has now been rejected by Limbaugh.
“It’s a business decision, and it’s theirs alone to make,†Limbaugh said Monday morning regarding companies who had pulled ads. “They‘ve decided that they don’t want you anymore or your business.†On Wednesday, he also noted the media was misleading the public about the number of advertisers who had dropped the show.
“We’ll replace them,†he assured his audience.
The Blaze contacted Sleep Train for comment but did not hear back in time for publication.
This is a breaking story. Updates will be added.
The radio show host continued: the “official†list of businesses that have pulled their advertisements from the Limbaugh program is, simply put, misleading. While Think Progress and Media Matters are claiming 30+ businesses have fled the Limbaugh program, they are silent about the fact that most of the advertisers are small companies picked up by any one of the 600 stations carrying the Rush Limbaugh show.
Which is to say, although there are some national advertisers on “the list,†the majority of companies making a statement about pulling their ads from Limbaugh are small, privately owned business that make up a very small fraction of the total number of businesses advertising on the 600 stations running radio show.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/limbaugh-drops-company-that-suspended-ads-from-show-over-fluke-remarks/
Limbaugh Rejects Company That Suspended Ads From Show Over Fluke Remarks
the No. 1 Bedding Specialist on the West Coast
Oops! They made their beds, now they have to lie in them!When you lay down with dogs, you wake up with flukeworms on your sleep train.
Star Member Fat Che's Little Brother
16. More likely than not this was an automation failure at WABC.
View profile
Last edited Thu Mar 8, 2012, 02:25 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
I used to be a local board-operator for the Limbaugh show on WOND (which dropped the show more than a month ago I'm proud to say) and I know how the show is structured.
An hour of Limbaugh's show ends at :58:50. A station's "Legal ID" (the top of hour identification required by the FCC, including call sign and city of license) plays at :59:50. The one minute gap is there for local stations to play an ad or other local material. (Some stations will do 60 seconds of local headlines and weather leading into the network news at the top of the hour, for example.)
During most local breaks, the network will feed either PSA's or other filler material during that time in case a station forgets to go to their local spots or (as is starting to happen with Limbaugh now) has nothing it can air at that time. This is not the case at :58:50, however. At :58:50 the network goes silent for one minute so if a station doesn't cut away for local material, then there is silence.
The silence is there because from the top of the hour until about :05:00 the network runs "closed circuit" feeds. If a station has paid (!!) to have Limbaugh or his announcer do liners with the station's name or call-sign they'll often be fed in this spot. They also feed produced promotional spots that stations can tag with the time the show airs locally and their name or call letters. If there's any time left they'll fill with "comedy" bits and songs that have featured in the show or with filler music. Then there's another minute of silence until :06:00 when the theme music comes up, with Rush speaking at :06:20.
The minute of silence on each side is to make sure that none of the closed circuit material airs on any station by mistake, and so a station recording the feed for the closed circuit material can easily find the material by fast forwarding a tape or looking for the huge dead spots in the waveform.
As much as I would love to attribute this to a lack of sponsors that's probably not the case. Someone at WABC responsible for programming the automation computer probably forgot to put a spot in that place, or the sound file that should have played there was damaged. Then at :58:50 the trigger tone from ABC Network News for the Legal ID reset the system and put everything back to normal.
I figured it had to be just a local station issue. I've been listening to him on iHeart Radio and there has been no dead air.
Gosh you people are dumb.Occupy a shower, occupy some clean clothes, occupy some respectable footwear, put them to work, then occupy an employers place of business waiting for an interview. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I've heard no dead air since the "slut" comments on Rush. Can't you DUmbasses go get a job and find something else to occupy your time?
The dead air(if there was any to begin with) matches the Dead space between the DUmmies ears.Dats a lot of dead space.
The left does not really want Rush off the air, we want him to keep saying stupid things to alienate even more voters from the Republican party. President Obama is a lock in the election, we let Rush keep saying stupid things and he hands us more races. Every time this fool opens his mouth he creates more votes for Democrats, it's a thing of beauty.
The left does not really want Rush off the air, we want him to keep saying stupid things to alienate even more voters from the Republican party. President Obama is a lock in the election, we let Rush keep saying stupid things and he hands us more races. Every time this fool opens his mouth he creates more votes for Democrats, it's a thing of beauty.
The left does not really want Rush off the air, we want him to keep saying stupid things to alienate even more voters from the Republican party. President Obama is a lock in the election, we let Rush keep saying stupid things and he hands us more races. Every time this fool opens his mouth he creates more votes for Democrats, it's a thing of beauty.
The left does not really want Rush off the air, we want him to keep saying stupid things to alienate even more voters from the Republican party. President Obama is a lock in the election, we let Rush keep saying stupid things and he hands us more races. Every time this fool opens his mouth he creates more votes for Democrats, it's a thing of beauty.Rush has been proven to be right 99 and 45/100ths % of the time. That's better than ivory soap. If the right and proper thing is stupid according to libs, there is some strong liberal logic at work. I think what you might mean to say is, libs wait to pounce on Rush, and stir the pot to try to alienate conservative voters the 55/100ths of the time he says something he needs to apologize for. For the record, a woman who needs $1,000 of birth control in a year is, by definition loose, and therefore a slut. But, sometimes it's just better to apologize for telling the truth.
Then you Libs need to huddle the hell up and stick to one point because that's all I've been reading about from you bats for the past 10 years is how you want Rush, Hannity, Boortz, and anyone else with a dissenting opinion off of "your airwaves". You hate dissent. Case in point, you're here posting as a lib. Now go find me an outspoken conservative on DU. ...waiting...
Of course they want Rush off the air. They've said so plainly, over and over. They want Fox news off the air. They want conservative speakers banned from university campuses. They want churches taxed into silence. They want businesses who support conservatives boycotted into bankruptcy. They're totalitarians. Do you see anything even aproaching that scale on the conservative side? What crack rock have you been hiding under?
YouInvitedMe, I believe you're up to bat.
Then who are the people coming to disrupt and shut down personal appearances by those on the right if not democrats? Who are all the people pushing for sponsor boycotts? Who are trying to get Rush off of the Armed Forces Radio? Democrats.
Then you Libs need to huddle the hell up and stick to one point because that's all I've been reading about from you bats for the past 10 years is how you want Rush, Hannity, Boortz, and anyone else with a dissenting opinion off of "your airwaves". You hate dissent. Case in point, you're here posting as a lib. Now go find me an outspoken conservative on DU. ...waiting...
Comparing apples to oranges. Public airwaves with a private site. Such a surprise getting a dishonest comparison from the right.
Rush has been proven to be right 99 and 45/100ths % of the time. That's better than ivory soap. If the right and proper thing is stupid according to libs, there is some strong liberal logic at work. I think what you might mean to say is, libs wait to pounce on Rush, and stir the pot to try to alienate conservative voters the 55/100ths of the time he says something he needs to apologize for. For the record, a woman who needs $1,000 of birth control in a year is, by definition loose, and therefore a slut. But, sometimes it's just better to apologize for telling the truth.
Welcome to the forum, if you haven't started a introduction thread, you should. I would welcome a good honest lib debater to the forum. I hope your debating skills will keep me sharp.
If you don't like what Rush says, turn the channel. You know, like most of Air America listeners did . . .
Rush lies on a daily basis, all political commentators do, on both the left and the right.
Comparing apples to oranges. Public airwaves with a private site. Such a surprise getting a dishonest comparison from the right.
Protesting does not equal shut down. oh wait, thats only OK if the right does it, when the left protests it's America hating commie stuff.You would be closer to being right if you were to say that the majority want him to die. That's how badly they want him to shut up. Saying that lefties want Rush to keep talking is laughable. As they say at DU: Google is your friend. Go see for yourself.
There are some of the left that would like for Rush to go away but the majority want him to keep on talking.
I would be glad to have an honest debate but don't start it off with a lie. Rush lies on a daily basis, all political commentators do, on both the left and the right.
Depending on the type of BC pill prescribed, it can cost from $750 to $1000 a year. BC must be taken daily regardless of activity, that is how it works. A shame the right is so repressed they know nothing about sex and are instead forced to call people a slut because they actually have any at all.
I knew that was going to happen, and you know Carbonite is going to want back in, and since the owner of Carbonite is affiliated with MoveOn.org? no way will Rush let them advertise again.
And if advertisers don't like what Rush says, they put their money elsewhere. Free market baby.
Can you cite an example of a Rush lie, please? And can you explain the "ban Rush" and "boycott Rush" hash tags on twitter?
Comparing apples to oranges. Public airwaves with a private site. Such a surprise getting a dishonest comparison from the right.
As someone with boobs and a vagina, I am 100% fully aware that you take the pill daily. HOWEVER, you can get a pack of these pills for $5 at Walmart. ::)
$5 x 12 = $60
Only $60 for a year. That's less money than I put in my gas tank every two weeks.
Do tell about your idea of "public airwaves". What, exactly, does that mean to you?
I would be glad to have an honest debate but don't start it off with a lie. Rush lies on a daily basis, all political commentators do, on both the left and the right.
Depending on the type of BC pill prescribed, it can cost from $750 to $1000 a year. BC must be taken daily regardless of activity, that is how it works. A shame the right is so repressed they know nothing about sex and are instead forced to call people a slut because they actually have any at all.
Depending on the type of BC pill prescribed, it can cost from $750 to $1000 a year.
Depending on the type of BC pill prescribed, it can cost from $60 to $1000 a year.
EC pointed out to you that the low end on birth control pills is $60 per year.
Here is where you go wrong -
You ask for an honest debate at the beginning of your post, then slip in a blanket insult at the end, which is in itself a lie. - tell me, how is this supposed to accomplish anything ?
Well, this special little snowflake got caught in a lie, and got all defensive.
EC pointed out to you that the low end on birth control pills is $60 per year.
If you were being honest, you would have said:
But, as you and your clan of intellectually inbred window-lickers continue to prove, DUmmies lie, all the time.
Insults are lies? Does that mean everyone on this site that insulted Sandra Fluke is a liar?
It gets lower than that - walk into any Planned Parenthood, and get condoms for free. If one insists on pills, they vary between $15 and $50 a month.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/birth-control-pill-4228.htm
Now last I checked, $50 a month does not equate to $1000 a year. And thats assuming this person requires the most expensive thing on the shelf.
I find it intriguing that a liberal such as our new poster forgot about Planned Parenthood - or perhaps the poster didn't, and was hoping that we knuckledraggin' republikkons would instead.
Edit: typo : the high price mark for pills from PP is $50 a month, not $60 as originally posted.
Are we being obtuse intentionally?
You made the statement that 'the right' - which is an all inclusive statement, isn't 'getting any action'. This is a lie.
The insult portion doesn't lend itself to the honest debate you asked for. Debating is supposed to be done with verifiable facts, not Ad Hominem statements.
It is true that some women can get the pill that cheap but it is also true that not everyone does. It is not a "one size fits all" type of thing, it is a drug and different people need different dosages. If you really did have boobs and a vagina, you would know this and admit it but either there is some question going on there or maybe you just like having your health care controlled by men. Must suck to be a slave.
Lets throw in some more answers to other here. Carbonite. They asked to come back? Why is it only right wing bloggers are saying this and no news sources? They lost stock? True but what is not mentioned is that "The post didn't note that stocks on Tuesday in general suffered their worst loss in 2012, swooning on bad news overseas. On Wednesday, shares of Carbonite rose 4%." So it seems bloggers found one of the people who dumped Rush and decided to make up lies about it and leave out important bits. What a surprise.
http://news.investors.com/article/603543/201203071744/carbonite-pulls-ads-from-rush-limbaugh.htm
Rush Lies. Where to begin, where to begin. Lets go with one of my favorites "The worst of all of this is the lie that condoms really protect against AIDS. The condom failure rate can be as high as 20 percent. Would you get on a plane — or put your children on a plane — if one of five passengers would be killed on the flight? Well, the statistic holds for condoms, folks.
The Way Things Ought to Be. Pocket Books. October 1992. p. 134. ISBN 978-0671751456. OCLC 26397008."
This kills two birds here, the right knows anything about sex and Rush always tells the truth :rofl: Plenty more Rush lies at link:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh
oh, and it looks like the numbers of people abandoning Rush is not only getting bigger but spreading to the rest of the right wing talk machine:
http://www.radio-info.com/news/when-it-comes-to-advertisers-avoiding-controversial-shows-its-not-just-rush
Yes, yes, the advertisers are just quaking in their boots of the fearsome Rush listeners.
Rush Lies. Where to begin, where to begin. Lets go with one of my favorites "The worst of all of this is the lie that condoms really protect against AIDS. The condom failure rate can be as high as 20 percent. Would you get on a plane — or put your children on a plane — if one of five passengers would be killed on the flight? Well, the statistic holds for condoms, folks.
So I say "it can be" when responding to someone saying Sandra Fluke is a slut for spending so much and am a liar but when EC claims everyone can get them for $60, she is not a liar? What an amazing lack of logic.
That is from one location, not what the standard cost can be. Why is the right only looking at the low end cost and ignoring what many other woman can and do pay. Are you all really that ignorant about birth control or just using lies so you can yell slut?
That is from one location, not what the standard cost can be. Why is the right only looking at the low end cost and ignoring what many other woman can and do pay. Are you all really that ignorant about birth control or just using lies so you can yell slut?
Sorry. I can't consider wiki as a credible source.
I've found other sources that say condom failure rate anywhere from 15 to 21 percent. I won't bring the source over, because it's a pro-life source. It quotes other sources, but still fair is fair.
So I've found sources independent of Rush that concur. not a lie, ie "deliberate untruth,"
Again. Can I get an example of RUSH LYING, please?
Thanks!
That is from one location, not what the standard cost can be. Why is the right only looking at the low end cost and ignoring what many other woman can and do pay. Are you all really that ignorant about birth control or just using lies so you can yell slut?[/quote
So I say "it can be" when responding to someone saying Sandra Fluke is a slut for spending so much and am a liar but when EC claims everyone can get them for $60, she is not a liar? What an amazing lack of logic.
Wrongo - that is from THE MAIN PP site - unless you want to state that PP misleads its clients.
Look again - You'll see. I promise.
Im going to quote myself, and end the debate, because this bores me. Here are all possible responses, followed by my final statement.
'PP doesn't really know the how much BC costs' - I say ' If PP doesn't know costs how do you expect Rush to ?' - I win.
'PP does mislead its clients' - I say ' If PP misleads it's clients, then obviously, you need to fix your own house first before going after Rush' - I win.
'PP doesn't mislead its clients' - I say ' Then Rush is justified at highlighting the over the top cost this woman testified about' - I win.
(no response) - I say ' too bad, and our debate was just shaping up too.' - I win.
It looks like time for Professor Big Dog to take you to school, child.
Evil Conservative spoke the truth. Any woman can go to WalMart with a prescription and get a variety of generic birth control pills for $4 or $5 per month, or $10 for 3 months in some markets. Annual cost, $40-$60 per year. You can confirm it by calling your local WalMart pharmacy and asking which BCPs are covered under their discount plan, or by printing the formulary at walmart.com.
What you are willfully ignoring is your own choice of words. I'll lay it out for you. You wrote "it can cost from $750 to $1000 a year." In your sentence, X=750, and Y=1000. In the English language, "from X to Y" means X would be the lower limit, and Y would be the upper limit. Another way to write it would be, "the annual cost of birth control pills is between X and Y dollars".
We have established that the actual value of X is $40-60, but I'll use Evil Conservative's number because she has boobs and a vagina (which is a good enough reason for me). You used a greatly inflated number for X, which leads us to one simple question:
Which are you, dishonest or stupid?
Im going to quote myself, and end the debate, because this bores me. Here are all possible responses, followed by my final statement.
'PP doesn't really know the how much BC costs' - I say ' If PP doesn't know costs how do you expect Rush to ?' - I win.
'PP does mislead its clients' - I say ' If PP misleads it's clients, then obviously, you need to fix your own house first before going after Rush' - I win.
'PP doesn't mislead its clients' - I say ' Then Rush is justified at highlighting the over the top cost this woman testified about' - I win.
(no response) - I say ' too bad, and our debate was just shaping up too.' - I win.
lol. hi-5.
Sometimes they make it too easy. I at least expected some sort of retort - perhaps our new liberal friend realized she (I'm guessing) boxed herself into a corner with her own words.
YouInvitedMe fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: never argue with miskie without facts.
:whistling: :-)
YouInvitedMe fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: never argue with miskie without facts.
:whistling: :-)
Heh, heh!
Crap! I was just gettin' warmed up!
I thought this troll was going to be more fun. :(
Wimmin's Studies major, clearly.
Heh -
I suspect that YIM believed liberal hype -
-That weeze all a bunch of toofless, racist, wimmin hatin morans wit fiff graid edumacashuns.
RUSH LIMBAUGH LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
Um, never mind! :rofl:
Laugh it up, Big Dog. YOU'RE going to be paying off its student loans when it can't get a job!
:thatsright:
Laugh it up, Big Dog. YOU'RE going to be paying off its student loans when it can't get a job!
:thatsright:
Uh oh! Did we chase our chew toy away?
Heh -
I suspect that YIM believed liberal hype -
-That weeze all a bunch of toofless, racist, wimmin hatin morans wit fiff graid edumacashuns.
And the majority of us with degrees have them in hard sciences that at least have a f'n marketable use like sciences, engineering, business, etc. Their side thinks its wise to rack up a hundred thousand dollars on a degree in ****ing "Womyns Studies", or "we hate men studies", and are pissed when they can't get a f'n 100k job in it because there is no damn market for that BS, save some BS government grant. They can't make it in the real world. ALL of my education after H.S. has cost me less than 30K, combined. I've never not been gainfully employed. Seems there's a market for people in I.T. with a business acumen. Who knew! Hey, lurking DUmbasses, minor in your "hobby"; major in what pays the ****ing bills. You idiots have it completely out of phase. At 39, I've come to HATE I.T., but it puts food on the table.
“Unfortunately, your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the future.
“Rush appreciates your long friendship and your past support, and we wish you good luck in the future.â€
YouInvitedMe fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: never argue with miskie without facts.Inconceivable !
:whistling: :-)
It is true that some women can get the pill that cheap but it is also true that not everyone does. It is not a "one size fits all" type of thing, it is a drug and different people need different dosages. If you really did have boobs and a vagina, you would know this and admit it but either there is some question going on there or maybe you just like having your health care controlled by men. Must suck to be a slave.
Lets throw in some more answers to other here. Carbonite. They asked to come back? Why is it only right wing bloggers are saying this and no news sources? They lost stock? True but what is not mentioned is that "The post didn't note that stocks on Tuesday in general suffered their worst loss in 2012, swooning on bad news overseas. On Wednesday, shares of Carbonite rose 4%." So it seems bloggers found one of the people who dumped Rush and decided to make up lies about it and leave out important bits. What a surprise.
Rush Lies. Where to begin, where to begin. Lets go with one of my favorites "The worst of all of this is the lie that condoms really protect against AIDS. The condom failure rate can be as high as 20 percent. Would you get on a plane — or put your children on a plane — if one of five passengers would be killed on the flight? Well, the statistic holds for condoms, folks.
This kills two birds here, the right knows anything about sex and Rush always tells the truth :rofl: Plenty more Rush lies at link:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh
oh, and it looks like the numbers of people abandoning Rush is not only getting bigger but spreading to the rest of the right wing talk machine:
http://www.radio-info.com/news/when-it-comes-to-advertisers-avoiding-controversial-shows-its-not-just-rush
Yes, yes, the advertisers are just quaking in their boots of the fearsome Rush listeners.
you rawk :-*
Carbonite is an off-site data backup/recovery service. Honestly, that kind of thing is a dime a dozen.
The only thing that makes Carbonite a household name is that they advertised on the Rush Limbaugh show.
:-* *smooch!*
Carbonite is an off-site data backup/recovery service. Honestly, that kind of thing is a dime a dozen.
The only thing that makes Carbonite a household name is that they advertised on the Rush Limbaugh show.
The most expensive thing about services like Carbonite is their internet access. Storage is cheap... you can get a terabyte of local storage for under $100. You don't have to know what that means, but it's cheap. It's like selling gas for 99-cents a gallon. Their biggest expense is internet access. All that stuff can be scheduled ahead of time if you know how many customers you have to keep your costs down. It's damn near free money.
Well damn Ballygrl - I've always respected you but you've just gone up several notches on the respect scale! Good job for telling the way it is! And yes, we do like our big strong republican men, don't we? They take care of their own, and in more ways than one. :naughty:
:yahoo:
What I want to know is - WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL? If you need it, go get it yourself and quit asking other people to pay for it. Have some damn self respect, liberal women.
They went from earning the bacon and frying it up in a pan to wanting the government to pay for their birth control.The shivering fits...
I would be glad to have an honest debate but don't start it off with a lie. Rush lies on a daily basis, all political commentators do, on both the left and the right.
Depending on the type of BC pill prescribed, it can cost from $750 to $1000 a year. BC must be taken daily regardless of activity, that is how it works. A shame the right is so repressed they know nothing about sex and are instead forced to call people a slut because they actually have any at all.
There are several issues the left is completely ignoring about this issue. To begin with Fluke is NOT some poor, put upon student...she's a 30 year old activist who deliberately chose a Catholic university to push this issue. She admitted this herself. She did NOT appear before congress, it was a rigged press conference set up to look like a congressional panel. She didn't get to speak before congress because they have rules that apply to both Democrats & Republicans about how much notification is needed to call an "expert" to testify. She's no expert. And the topic of the hearing wasn't whether she or anyone else "needed" to have birth control paid for by insurance but whether forcing a church that doesn't believe in birth control or abortion to copay for insurance that includes BC & abortion is a violation of their 1st Amendment rights. The state cannot tell a church what to do because that "wall of separation" you guys are always pointing out goes both ways. It's part of that whole "freedom of religion" thing. However, if it has suddenly become meaningless then so do all the Athiests' cries to have "God" removed from the public square since that wall no longer exists.
When I was younger, even when I only had a part time job while going to school, I paid for my own birth control. I was responsible for myself and had no expectations that anyone else should pay for it. I went to Planned Parenthood because they had a sliding scale and I ended up paying a very small amount (though it was a lot for me). I left with a little brown paper bag with birth control pills and condoms. I used a diaphragm for a while because it was what I could afford. But even IF the premise is true that birth control for the women of Georgetown does cost what would be earned during a part time summer job, so be it. BC pills are a choice. Condoms & foam are another choice. There are newer kinds of IUD's and BC injected under your skin, or that Nuva ring that suddenly makes women want to wear yellow swim suits & go swimming while protecting them from pregnancy.
Still, I'd like to know (though I'm late to the party and you may already have run off) why you think "the right" doesn't know anything about sex? In fact you couldn't be more wrong. A textbook on human sexuality (excerpt here) (http://books.google.com/books?id=1NC5R0RozBYC&pg=PA445&lpg=PA445&dq=conservative+women+more+sexually+satisfied+than+liberal+women&source=bl&ots=-dcgg5rKe_&sig=_Utbu21V-TZ_WDY2e11jutJ8YUg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aLpdT4alD8eZiQLVlrHOCw&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=conservative%20women%20more%20sexually%20satisfied%20than%20liberal%20women&f=false) sites a study showing conservative women have more orgasms than liberal women. That means we're not laying back in the missionary position with our eyes closed making out the grocery list. Part of the left's problem is you put everyone in groups instead of seeing them as individuals. All conservatives must think the same (uptight, Evangelical, whatever), all women should be pro choice, all blacks should be Democrats as should all gays, etc. Granted, I don't know any pro abortion conservatives but we don't all think the same thing about God (plenty here don't believe in Him), we have varying opinions about gay marriage (I don't have a problem with it & think the government shouldn't be in the marriage business anyway), etc.
For all the bouncy stories you folks tell over there, when you're really confronted you simply don't do well. You come over here to prove a point (and it's brave of you to come when you know you're going to be hit with both barrels) but quickly start denigrating us. What kind of an argument is it to say "A shame the right is so repressed they know nothing about sex and are instead forced to call people a slut because they actually have any at all." It's simply not true and I think most here could care less if Ms. Fluke has sex 5 times a day every day of her life, but we do expect her to take responsibility for herself.
How about a discussion of the real issue...why should the state think it has the right to force a religion to go against one of it's most sacred tenets by fiat. What gives Obama the right to just wave his hand and decide he can violate the 1st Amendment? And if you don't happen to think it doesn't then make your best argument for why it isn't.
Cindie
Suspended in order to hit the links today.
How's the great contraception mandate battle of 2012 playing out? If you read the Washington Post's news coverage, the issue is supposedly killing Republicans among female voters. But the newest Washington Post/ABC poll tells a different story.
During the first few days of February, about a week before Obama declared a so-called "accommodation" to the contraception/abortifacient mandate, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed Obama's approval rating at 50 percent, with 46 percent of Americans disapproving.
Then, from March 7 to 10--a week into the national media firestorm surrounding Rush Limbaugh's degrading remarks about Georgetown Law student and liberal activist Sandra Fluke--Washington Post/ABC conducted another poll. It found Obama's approval rating at 46 percent, down four points from February, and his disapproval rating at 50 percent, up four points from February.
In February, Obama was leading Mitt Romney, 51 percent to 45 percent among registered voters. In March, Obama was trailing Mitt Romney, 47 percent to 49 percent among registered voters. The Post/ABC pollster finds that Obama "did better among men and women alike last month, and has lost ground slightly among both sexes this month."
While women are 12 points more apt than men to identify themselves as Democrats, that essentially matches the long-term norm. Largely because of that partisan gap, Obama’s approval rating is 9 points higher among women than men, but again this is typical. Compared with last month, disapproval of Obama’s job performance is up slightly among men, and there’s no increase in approval among women. And on vote preference vs. Romney, Obama did better among men and women alike last month, and has lost ground slightly among both sexes this month. In the latest results Romney has a 12-point lead among men who are registered voters; among women, it’s Obama +6.
The Post/ABC poll asked Americans, "Do you think health insurance companies should or should not be required to cover the full cost of birth control for women?" It found that 61 percent of Americans think insurance companies should be required to pay for it. But if "the insurance is provided through a religiously affiliated employer that objects to birth control, however, support for this requirement drops to 49 percent (52 percent of women, 45 percent of men)." (It's worth noting that polls on this issue have varied significantly depending on how the question is asked. When a poll specifies that the "federal government" is the entity requiring employers to pay for birth control coverage, support for the mandate in general is evenly split.)
The bottom line is that it's not clear at all that the fight over the contraception/abortifacient mandate has hurt Republicans. The Post/ABC pollster attributes Obama's dip in the polls to high gas prices. Of course, the biggest story in February was the mandate, so it's possible that the mandate is actually hurting Obama.
But if you read the Washington Post's report by Karen Tumulty this weekend on the GOP's slide among female voters, you'd think the new mandate was a terrible issue for Republicans. The report originally began with this sentence: "The fragile gains Republicans had been making among female voters have been erased by what in recent weeks has become a national shouting match over reproductive issues, potentially handing President Obama and the Democrats an enormous advantage this fall." The Post then backed up the claim that the events of "recent weeks" had caused the GOP to lose female voters: It noted that women favored Democratic control of Congress by 4 points in a Wall Street Journal poll last summer, but now favor Democrats by 15 points in a new WSJ poll.
On Twitter, I pointed out to the Post's reporter that Obama's numbers had improved a lot between last summer and January--before the "shouting match over reproductive issues" had begun. Gallup, for example, showed Obama's net approval rating among all voters improving from -11 in August to -2 in January. So the fight in February over the mandate couldn't have caused Obama's improvement. It seems much more likely that better economic news caused Obama's rebound in the polls over the past several months, but the Post reporter never considers the possibility. (The same reporter once credulously cited a poll claiming that coverage of abortion under Obamacare would be wildly popular. Reliable polls showed abortion coverage was deeply unpopular, and the issue nearly killed Obamacare.)
A better way to measure how the fight over the mandate is playing out would be to compare January polls to late February or early March polls--and then compare movement among female voters to movement among male voters over the same period. Gallup showed Obama's approval rating average unchanged from January to February. And now we have the Post/ABC numbers showing that "there’s no increase in approval [for Obama] among women. And on vote preference vs. Romney, Obama did better among men and women alike last month." The generic Democratic edge among women voters "essentially matches the long-term norm," according to the Post/ABC pollster.
After our Twitter exchange, the Post reporter toned down the piece. The claim that the fight over "reproductive issues" caused the GOP's slide among women voters was deleted. The piece now notes that the GOP's downward trend among women voters "began before the controversy in recent weeks." (See the original report here.)
But even with these tweaks, the story is still one-sided. From its weak polling analysis, the story goes on to quote two Democratic pollsters, the president of a liberal think tank, and a Republican pollster working for a rival of Rick Santorum's--all of whom argue the issue is bad for Republicans.
The story also quotes Maine senator Olympia Snowe, the lone Republican who voted against the conscience exemption to Obamacare. The Post never notes that three Democrats voted for the conscience bill, and it pretends Kelly Ayotte, a Republican senator from New Hampshire who has been an outspoken opponent of the mandate, doesn't exist. Old white guy Orrin Hatch serves as a much more useful foil in the Post's 'GOP v. women' narrative.
The Post notes that Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski did an about-face on the conscience bill after she voted for it, but Murkowski is in a unique situation. She lost the 2010 Republican primary and won a three-way race without the support of conservatives. Murkowski badly needs a good chunk of support from social liberals and Democrats, unlike most Republicans.
Of course, Senator Scott Brown needs lots of moderates and independents to vote for him in liberal Massachusetts. And according to the Boston Globe, "Brown may have benefited from his positions on social issues in the last few weeks, such as the one over whether Catholic institutions should be forced to provide contraception in their health care plans for workers."
Brown's Democratic opponent oriented her entire campaign around "contraception access" for the past month, but Brown tackled the issue head on and now holds a significant lead over Warren in Massachusetts. But this fact doesn't fit with the Washington Post's narrative, so it apparently isn't fit to print.
Update: On Twitter, the Post's Karen Tumulty disagrees with my post. "Obama approval [among] men plummeted in past month, stayed even [with] women," Tumulty tweets. According to the poll's crosstabs (which Tumulty helpfully passed along), Obama's approval rating actually dropped 3 points among women and 6 points among men between February and March (Obama's disapproval rating was up 1 point among women and up 7 points among men):
Obama's approval among women
February: 53-44
March: 50-45.
Obama's approval rating among men
February: 47-48
March: 41-55
I don't see how a 6-point drop among one group amounts to "plummeting" approval rating, but a 3-point drop among another group amounts to "little change."
The left does not really want Rush off the air, we want him to keep saying stupid things to alienate even more voters from the Republican party. President Obama is a lock in the election, we let Rush keep saying stupid things and he hands us more races. Every time this fool opens his mouth he creates more votes for Democrats, it's a thing of beauty.
Can't argue with that, after the beat down the Republican party took in 2010.What did owebuma call it again ? A "shellacking". ?
ALERT ALERT ALERT for those at DURush is suspended for the day Rush is suspended for the day
Rush suspended himself for the day so he could play golf!
Can't argue with that, after the beat down the Republican party took in 2010.
I posted that below my message in 4 inch script LOL, wanted to see if they'd go into a frenzy without copying and pasting the little 4 inch script below my message. :-)
What did owebuma call it again ? A "shellacking". ?
That was my point. I was using sarcasm.Sorry if it seemed like I was dishonoring your sarcasm. I just like the sound of the only true sentence owebuma has ever enunciated.
Sorry if it seemed like I was dishonoring your sarcasm. I just like the sound of the only true sentence owebuma has ever enunciated.
Just wanted to remind everyone how it is that Rush got run off the air and is now toasted legs.
Good job, DUmmies! :tongue:
Just wanted to remind everyone how it is that Rush got run off the air and is now toasted legs.
Good job, DUmmies! :tongue:
Many names in this thread we haven't hear from in quite some time :(Noticed that too. Commonly known as "thread necrophilia". But a good one to bring back.
Noticed that too. Commonly known as "thread necrophilia". But a good one to bring back.
It's salutary to remind D/Lib/Prog onlurkers on the failures of their many predictions of Rush's impending demise. It doesn't take genius-grade intelligence (if I can recognize it ... :rimshot: ) to recognize that only Rush or God will take Rush off the air, but (insert insult to D/Lib/Prog intelligence here).Anyone remember quarantinefoxnews.com? That turned out well. For Doug Bulna as well.
Anyone remember quarantinefoxnews.com? That turned out well. For Doug Bulna as well.
Never heard of it. The left's whole decade-long campaign against Fox has been an abject failure, except in their own fantasy world.http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5768924
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5768924
Additionally, some DUmmy started an actual website dedicated to it. Can't recall if it was captured here or at CU.
Here. It was that loafer "stewart", the guy who lived in Dad's house until Dad died and then started a gofundme to raise money to continue to stay there claiming disability. Don't think it worked. Haven't seen the idiot in a while.