COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
world

Limbaugh apologizes to student he called a 'slut'

176 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

176 Comments
Login to comment

He shouldn't have apologized and she misrepresented herself. It has now come to light she is not a 23 year old student but rather a 30 year old Democrat plant. a professional agitator. Very typical. Why would anybody be responsible for paying for her birth control but her? Americans and most westerners have such a sense of entitlement that it boggles the mind of a normal person with common sense.

-21 ( +9 / -31 )

Why are American right wingers always the most loathesome, odious kind of people? Americans have a huge sense of entitlement in most areas, but when it comes to health care, sadly they've have their human rights revoked, and thousands die every year, because they can't afford this human right. America's privatised health care system (even before Obamacare) was the worst in the developed world. In this respect, I have nothing but sympathy for the average American.

“What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute,” Limbaugh said.

“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.”

Rush Limbaugh - what a disgusting, repellant individual.

Republicans claimed Obama’s provision requiring organizations to offer free contraception on employee health plans was a war on religion.

Ugh. What part of 'separation between church and state' do these deluded bible bashers not understand.

19 ( +26 / -6 )

The student in question is not twenty three years old, as reported, She is thirty. The stupid repubs got played again. Fluke has been an activist for years. Limbaugh walked right into that one. Contraception can be had for as little as 9 bucks a month and can be readily purchased within walking distance of Georgetown.

with this huge flap behind her, and a sympathy telephone call from President Obama himself, you can be sure Ms Fluke will make a great lawyer, and a loyal Democrat.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

This jowled lout never ceases to up himself in terms of being an outright liar and complete fool.

"I'm sorry I called this woman a slut, but it was not meant as a personal insult". So what was it meant as? I hope he gets sued one of these days. It IS telling, though, that Republicans would stand behind such a 'person' as him and even take PRIDE in the man's sexism, racism, and bigotry.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

What shines through though is the right wing attitude to - god forbid - helping people. This time it was about contraception. It take no big leap of the imagination to think of Rush (to the brain) saying why do we need to have brail and white sticks for blind people! Why are local and central governments obliged to make ramps for cripples? How many of them pay taxes???

And what I say is not even extreme. This IS how the far right nutters in the US behave.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

I heard this on Eagle 810 on Friday night in the car - I'm normally tuned in at this time and normally strongly disagree with most things he says, and used to worry deeply that people might actually believe what he says is true (sorry US citizens - I know better now!).

Last Fridy though, I was just amazed at the position he took. He crossed so many lines of decency. Using the price of the cheapest condom, he calculated and announced that the girls in question must be having sex 3 times a day to accumulate $3k in costs over 3 years.

The real issue with what he was saying is that he has just lost sight of how inflated the costs in the US medical system are thanks the system of health care that he is striving to perpetuate.

He should lose his job, but het gets so much attention that he is a big earner for the networks that run his show that he will probably survive.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

President Barack Obama on Friday telephoned the student, Sandra Fluke, in a show of support after Limbaugh’s comments ignited the controversy

I think I remember President Obama telephoning right winger shock jock Laura Ingram, after MSNBC 's Ed Schultz called her a slut on national TV.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception.

Forgive Rush for his lack or carnal knowledge: Vietnam was not the only thing his pilonidal cyst kept him out of during his formulative days. He's salivating over condoms or other one-bang-and-over methods he's heard about.

Pharmaceutical contraception works differently, obviously. Maybe he should interact with women more often; it can be educational.

By the way, one might wonder how he was afforded the cure for his cyst (where "excess tissue and hair may collect and cause discomfort and discharge"). One might wonder whether the cyst has become the man itself. It would, at least, explain things.

10 ( +14 / -4 )

“It’s not about church and state,” Fluke told the hearing. “It’s about women’s health.”

What is really missing is not so much about the contraceptive issue that she is railing against, but the fact that she wants to have unprotected sex with other men should be more of a concern. BIrth control prevents pregnancy not STD's. It is her right to want to use BC, and to have sex all she wants. But if she is going to let men go "bare back" with her, then she is probably a person that I wouldn't want to sleep with.

If you can afford Georgetown Law school, I think you can at least be able to go buy a 12 pack of condoms and give them to her partners.

-14 ( +3 / -17 )

By the way, one might wonder how he was afforded the cure for his cyst (where "excess tissue and hair may collect and cause discomfort and discharge"). One might wonder whether the cyst has become the man itself. It would, at least, explain things.

Why would one lay awake at night wondering such things? (Rhetorical Q, no answer necessary.)

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

@Lieberman,

Give me a break, Obama is not going to stoop so low as to console a professional "right winger shock jock" like Laura Ingram. What she would do is edit the call and claim Obama spoke in tongues and confessed he was born in Tonga, raised in Trinidad, and is now a citizen of Tasmania. And remind everyone to vote for Sheriff Joe for prez-i-dent.

If Laura Ingram's skin is that thin (seriously doubt it), she should find other work.

Now back to Rush, is that curley wire coming out of his ear a hearing aid, or the aftereffect of cyborg surgery? Maybe this whole incident was just Rush getting too close to the microwave to heat a burrito during the commercial break!

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Now back to Rush, is that curley wire coming out of his ear a hearing aid, or the aftereffect of cyborg surgery?

He had a serious issue with his ears (can't remember the name of ailment), but managed to get it fixed. Lets not stoop to his level by insulting him though!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Heh, and the implosion of the screaming right-wing continues. I like to see how our equally Limbaugh effected, foaming at the mouth radical conservatives continue to attack this bright young woman in defence of their hero.

Keep opening your mouth Rush, the damage you do is essential in further pushing US radicals into a hate-filled, bitter and screaming minority, the way it should be.

Oh, and that was a pathetic, self-serving attempt at an apology.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

tuition at Georgetown U runs about 60,000 bucks a year.

How tragic that over her six years there she had to pay 3,000 for contraceptives. The world is such an unfair place.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

RR: "Thinking back to how the Left used then discarded Cindy Sheehan, Fluke is actually a bitch for liberals."

No surprise your handle has had to be changed yet AGAIN, given your type of remarks. But you ARE a Republican, after all. It's funny to see how upset this supposed no-one has got you and yours upset. As to the fat moron Rush, well, no surprise you defend him either.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Fluke described how female students at Georgetown University, located in Washington, had been denied contraception because of the prestigious school’s Catholic affiliations.

Well......Duh

Established in 1789, Georgetown is the nation’s oldest Catholic and Jesuit university.

Did she expected Georgetown to actually promote and provide contraception???

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Lets hope Ms Fluke did not happen to participate in any of those "Slut Walk " demonstrations held on US campuses the last few years. She has a bright career ahead of her if she can play the sympathy card adroitly enough and parlay the attention she got from President Obama. how jealous smithinjapan must be!

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

sailwind: "Did she expected Georgetown to actually promote and provide contraception???"

Maybe she thought Georgetown was only FOUNDED in 1789, not still living there.

Lieberman: " how jealous smithinjapan must be!"

Jealous of what? You must be a Rush fan to think slights that are even sadder than his might offend me.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Maybe Obama will return the 1 million dollars Bill Maher recently donated to his campaign. Maher, like Blimpbaugh, calls women sluts.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

looking at that photo I have a hard time believeing she needs 3000 worth of birth control for the eight months that she attends Georgetown.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

A 30 year old able bodied woman enrolled in a top tier school and receives a scholarship to go there but that isn't enough. She also wants free contraceptives. How can anybody intelligently defend her? She is precisely what is wrong with many people in my age group. But lets not lose sight of the real issue. She chose this school to be an agitator. Why else would she as a "reproductive rights activist" choose to go to a Catholic School over all other options available in the U.S.? If your answer was to agitate then you have the answer right.

Who cares what Rush Limbaugh has to say anyway? To the person calling for him to be fired get real. Wouldn't you want him to be heard? Then you know exactly where he stands. He isn't going anywhere. Are you aware of how much money that man makes per year?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

"looking at that photo I have a hard time believeing she needs 3000 worth of birth control for the eight months that she attends Georgetown."

Wow the personal attack on-slaught from rush's camp just keeps on coming.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

It seems most Americans also are confused about what exactly Separation of Church State actually means. But it is no wonder seeing the quality of education offered in the U.S.. The only thing that Separation of Church and State says is that no government can establish an official religion. During the time this was enacted some states and municipalities had established official religions. It mandates that anybody can practice whatever religion they want. That is it.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Well, I've read the bible and I don't think Jesus H Himself would jave taken too kindly to an individual like Limbaugh.

In fact when I think of those little blue pills Rush apprently needs, perhaps there is a God afterall.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

"If we're going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."

Limbaugh, classy, like his defenders.

The only funny thing in this is that he clearly doesn't understand how contraception works

This woman comes forth with this frankly hilarious claim that she’s having so much sex, and her buddies with her, that she can’t afford it. And not one person says, did you ever think about maybe backing off the amount of sex that you have? yes, he has an opinion.

Vicious blowhard loses sponsors... oh well.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Maybe she thought Georgetown was only FOUNDED in 1789, not still living there.

Maybe she should have took a gander at their homepage before she enrolled.

Established in 1789, Georgetown is the nation’s oldest Catholic and Jesuit university. Drawing upon this legacy, we provide students with a world-class learning experience focused on educating the whole person through exposure to different faiths, cultures and beliefs. With our Jesuit values and location in Washington, D.C., Georgetown offers students a distinct opportunity to learn, experience and understand more about the world.

http://www.georgetown.edu/about/index.html

1 ( +4 / -3 )

And Smith,

Jesuit Values does not include promoting or giving out contraceptives last I heard.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

What's your opinion on Limbaugh's comments, Sail?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Madverts,

Rush is a bag of hot air and I put him on the same level as any other shock jock in America either left or right. He's like the Uncle that everyone has in the Family who just won't shut up at the dinner table about his politics and views after being invited over for a meal.

Too bad though he's distracting from what is really important here. I don't think it is right for the Government to force this mandate on those that really have moral issues regarding contraception and being forced to offer it anyway. Georgetown has a proud Catholic tradition and is steeped in that tradition. I would rather respect that tradition then worry if Ms. Fluke can't get her birth control pills from Georgetown's insurance plan and force them to include it by Government decree.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I think the issue here is really the disgraceful behaviour and lack of intelligent or even reasonable discourse from the American right. Maybe I'm too young to put this into perspective but it seems this acceptance of stupidity came to fruition during the Bush years, and is thankfully on the turn. Rush will shriek himself into oblivion eventually like Mike Savage, I'm just surprised it is taking so long. The thought of the man being popular and even defended by some here beggars belief.

What's more concerning is that you seem to be the only remaining voice of reason from the other camp.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

sailwind: "Maybe she should have took a gander at their homepage before she enrolled."

Maybe the school should get with the times and stop thinking it's some kind of independent state exempt from the laws of the land it resides in. That's what this is about, right? Do they get ANY subsidies from the government? If yes, then why do they have the right to not follow the rules of government and instead seek their own government?

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Either way, sail, it doesn't change the fact that the stone age was long ago. If the university of Georgetown wants to enroll students from this timeline instead of from when it was founded it's up to the SCHOOL to change it's tactics, not the customers.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Rush Limbaugh has had to apologize because many of his paying ad sponsors have suspended their accounts for his talk radio. Just follow the money trail; that's what it's all about.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The school has a tradition. I can understand peoples objections to having things forced upon them.

I just think breeding and healthcare are a lot more important than religion.

It's religion that needs to get with the times, Smith. Man has been editing and modifying them for his own gains since the beginning of history, why change now?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Lostrune, the "apology" on his website reeks of it. They should think about the individual they are associating with. There should be a boycott.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I for one am really enjoying the freak show being put on by the Republicans. Obama is a right shoo-in later this year.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Ms Fluke apparently enrolled at Georgetown intent on forcing a religious institution to change well-known policy.That policy is based on the shared values and the traditions of a given community of people trying to practice their religion, a right guaranteed them in the Constitution. Anyone who reads this knows that like most Obama supporters she wouldnt dream of doing the same to say, a Muslim organization or a Buddhist one. Catholics are easy targets. It is a good laugh watching completely uninformed posters (smithinjapan,nothin new there...) call Georgetown medieval for adhering to traditions followed in most Catholic nations I am sure when American Catholics in the majority supported Barack Obama in 08. I predict this backfires and adds to the perception Obama is waging war on Catholic institutions. There are between 60 and 80 million Catholics in America.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Really Lieberman? I heard it was a miracle gender reasignment operation on Lord Lucan.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The important thing is leftists get to emote and call names.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Whatever your views on the issue, Rush Limbaugh's comments were a disgrace. Absolutely shameful and disgusting, likewise to those defending them here - they're indefensible.

This woman was talking about another student who needed contraceptives for controlling an ovarian cyst - nothing to do with enabling sex at all.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

I'd still like somebody to tell me why it is a colleges responsibility to pay for a woman's birth control. I don't get it. People have gone mad.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Rush Limbaugh's comments were a disgrace. Absolutely shameful and disgusting

read the headline. He apologized.

likewise to those defending them here - they're indefensible.

Who is defending him? If anyone is defending coarse sexist language it is his rivals on the left. Bill Maher calls conservative women sluts. Dave Letterman airs out his rape fantasies about palin's 14 yo daughter.

This woman was talking about another student who needed contraceptives for controlling an ovarian cyst - nothing to do with enabling sex at all.

It's her job. She's an activist. Her yearly tuition at Georgetown is 60,000 dollars. I have a hard time believing paying for contraception is going to stand between her, a degree and a job shaking down the rest of us, as so many ardent young libs now see as the ticket.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

I heard it was a miracle gender reasignment operation on Lord Lucan.

Is this birtish public school "humor" ? I really have no idea what this person is talking about.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

What is really missing is not so much about the contraceptive issue that she is railing against, but the fact that she wants to have unprotected sex with other men should be more of a concern. BIrth control prevents pregnancy not STD's.

Alphaape, what a display of ignorance! For starters, condoms are a form of birth control that also helps prevent disease. Perhaps you were attempting to say "birth control pills"?

Second, you do know who wears the condom yes? Well, in case not, its the men. Do you know how much control a woman has over that condom the man is wearing? Nothing. Nada. Zero. Its quite a leap of faith for a woman to have sex with a man, because she is in his hands in more ways than one. But she has a safety net with regards to pregnancy, and that is the birth control pill. So if the man messes up with the condom (and they do!) at least she can be sure she won't get pregnant. Luck will deal with the disease, and thankfully, most men don't have one and most STDs are curable.

Do you know what the penalty is for doubling up on contraception, such as using condoms in conjunction with the pill? There is none! Thus, to assume women who are using birth control pills are forcing men not to use condoms is, as I said beginning this post, a stunning display of ignorance.

Don't take it too hard though. Its apparent that most of America needs a remedial course in basic sex education. A good start for that course would be lecture, screamed at the students, to never utter the word "slut" ever again. Its stupid in about 100 ways. There are no sluts. There are only angels and ice cubes and a bunch of women in between!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Let's not forget that she is a scholarship student making her financial burden that much less. She can afford contraceptives. Anybody who thinks she isn't there for disruptive purposes is not being honest with themselves.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This whole Republican debacle is really an al-Qaida operation deviously designed to re-elect the Bamster.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

A good start for that course would be lecture, screamed at the students, to never utter the word "slut" ever again

I think you kow zero about politics and gender "issues" on American universities these days. Google "Slut Walk" , or "SlutWalk [ San Franciso / Toronto / New York / Austin etc ] Facebook" and see if your faux indignation still burns as bright ...

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

"This whole Republican debacle is really an al-Qaida operation deviously designed to re-elect the Bamster."

Basically a twisted version of liberman's paranoid activist distribe.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"health insurance plans should cover the cost of contraception"

How about people taking responsibility for preventing conception if they don't want to have a baby when they have sex?

Nah...

1 ( +4 / -3 )

"Basically a twisted version of liberman's paranoid activist distribe."

Har!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

read the headline. He apologized.

I read elsewhere that, at first, Mr. Rush refused to apologize. I wonder if people have actually listened to his show. Rush Limbaugh is not the "I'm sorry" type of person. That's why people listen. After a lot of sponsors decided to withdraw funding, I would wager he was pressured into saying 'sorry'.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Sandra Fluke, past president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.

http://lsrj.org/

She is a 30 y.o. activist, plain and simple, another shakedown socialist. She is not a helpless 23 y.o. prevented by her university from access to affordable birth control. Planned Parenthood sells for 100 bucks an Implanon implant that is good for three years. Walmart charges $9/month for Tri-Sprintec and Sprintec oral contraceptives. My guess is she wants to run for office some day and this was the ticket...

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Serrano: "This whole Republican debacle is really an al-Qaida operation deviously designed to re-elect the Bamster."

A worthy contribution as usual. You take a thread that focuses on Rush's inappropriate remarks and try to not only blame it on Al-Qaida somehow but also blame the elected president of your nation. sarge, are you by chance a little 'challenged' to use such obvious deflection?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

One funny note is that despite Rush's complete back-tracking in his apology, which he only gave at the consumer's demand, is that he would chide Obama for apologizing for something. So not only is he a scumbag and racist, but he's a hypocrite to boot. If he believe Obama shouldn't apologize for anything, then why is he apologizing?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Serrano: "How about people taking responsibility for preventing conception if they don't want to have a baby when they have sex?"

You really are hilarious, my friend. Read what you just wrote.... guess what 'taking responsibility for conception if they don't want to have a baby when they have sex' (a redundancy, sarge, but you never were strong in English!), and you are talking about, what.... BIRTH CONTROL! you are arguing in favour of what you pretend to be against. No surprise, really... you usually don't know what you are talking about.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I'm still overwhelmed by how much I don't care about any of the participants in this article. Rush has always been a dick and all the radio people use offensive language, why is this a surprise?

I still don't think people should be provided with contraception by employers, but that’s because I don't feel that employers should be mandated to provide any kind of services beyond an employee's agreed upon compensation. The fact she was looking to Georgetown of all places to provide it doesn't make any sense. I'm a Catholic that generally supports the use of most birth control but I really can't take a person that thinks that a major Church institution is going to provide birth control seriously.

Term 'slut' was inflammatory and in-poor-taste but when you listen to radio jockeys that's what you get.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

oginome:

" America's privatised health care system (even before Obamacare) was the worst in the developed world. "

Are you joking? Then why are people from countries with nationalized healthcare (e.g. Britain) travelling to the US for the highest level treatment?

You can me a legitimate argument that healthcare should be nationalized for philosophical reasons. But you can not legitimately argue that the examples of natinalized healthcare we see in reality anywhere are either cheap or qualitatively superior. They are neither.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

and argued that contraception could cost a woman as much as $3,000 during her law school studies

So what? Rent's a thousand a month. Should I pay for that too?

Rush: "So if you're not doing anything later..."

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think you kow zero about politics and gender "issues" on American universities these days. Google "Slut Walk" , or "SlutWalk [ San Franciso / Toronto / New York / Austin etc ] Facebook" and see if your faux indignation still burns as bright ...

And next I suppose you are going to tell me the N word is a household word again, because blacks are using it. Conservatives! In case you forgot, Limbaugh apologized. That is because the word is still derogatory when you aim it at someone. Now if you will excuse me, I am going to exit this Archie Bunker rerun and watch an episode that was funny.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Alphaape, what a display of ignorance! For starters, condoms are a form of birth control that also helps prevent disease. Perhaps you were attempting to say "birth control pills"?

@hot_dog_dynasty: Correct. condoms are a form of BC that does help to prevent STD's and contraception. I did mean to say the pill which what she is talking about.

Luck will deal with the disease, and thankfully, most men don't have one and most STDs are curable.

Don't take it too hard though. Its apparent that most of America needs a remedial course in basic sex education.

I think you need the lesson in sex education. AIDS lasts a lifetime, so does genital warts, and there are new strains of gonherra out there. Also,DC has one of the highes AIDS rates in the USA.

Look, if she wants to have sex with as many people as she wants, that's her business. But I imagine if she were to take a walk outside of campus and saw some of the real "working women" she would see that they make their tricks wear a condom.

Do you know what the penalty is for doubling up on contraception, such as using condoms in conjunction with the pill? There is none!

But I do know that if a man wears a condom, in conjunction with the pill a woman will not get pregnant (hopefully not since nothing is fool proof). But I guess you haven't heard about the recall of the "pill" from one manufacuter since they had a mistake in putting them in the package, thus throwing the pill cycle off and raising the potential for a pregnancy to occur.

Thus, to assume women who are using birth control pills are forcing men not to use condoms is, as I said beginning this post, a stunning display of ignorance.

No it't not. So you are saying that you are going to take the word of somebody like this lady who says that she likes to sleep around and can't afford the pill, that she is "clean" and STD free if you meet her for just a one night stand? You are a brave or foolish man. Even when I was out there, I alway carried a condom, and in a few cases, I just happened to meet some women who had some at their place. Yeah it may put a man off knowing that she keeps condoms lying around, but after awhile, when you start to think over your conquest, you will have that relief in your mind (hopefully) that you at least did "wrap it up."

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Are you joking? Then why are people from countries with nationalized healthcare (e.g. Britain) travelling to the US for the highest level treatment?

It treated rich Europeans and Japanese, but left its own people to die in the wayside by the tens of thousands. When the whole health care system is taken into account, it measures appallingly against other developed countries. Look at the WHO and Commonwealth Fund reports.

http://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a889

The United States ranked last across a range of measures of health care in a comparison of 19 industrialised countries, despite spending more than twice as much per person on health as any other of the countries, says a report published last week.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/who_world_health_ranks.html

The U. S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance, the report finds.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I think you need the lesson in sex education. AIDS lasts a lifetime, so does genital warts, and there are new strains of gonherra out there. Also,DC has one of the highes AIDS rates in the USA.

Okay, so you try and turn my statement that most STDs are curable against me by bringing up a handful that aren't, mention one twice, and completely omit hepatitis? You seriously don't know what the word "most" means? Dude, I am so done with you I did not read past what I quoted. Goodbye.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Okay, so you try and turn my statement that most STDs are curable against me by bringing up a handful that aren't, mention one twice, and completely omit hepatitis? You seriously don't know what the word "most" means?

@hot_dog_dynasty: Sure I know what most means, just like I added a few and forgot to add Hep C as you pointedout. So are you saying that you are willing to take the gamble and go at it with the lady "raw" if you had the opportunity, just because she is on the pill? It's people like you with your cavilier attitude about sex and STD's that has screwed it up for the rest of the rest of the world.

Funny things about liberalism, it wants to teach sex education in the schools and wants schools to pass out free condoms to both boys and girls, on the premise that they don't have the money to buy them and to help them get over the stigma of going to the store and buy them. Yet, this adult woman can't buy a condom to give to her partner she chooses, which is much cheaper than a prescription of pills.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There was "joy in Mudville" when SIX sponsors left his program. Two male commentators and one female psychologist on three different programs were removed because less offensive remarks. Limbaugh's program needs to be canceled as a lesson to others who feel they can say senseless and offensive remarks without repercussions.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

She is a 30 y.o. activist, plain and simple, another shakedown socialist. She is not a helpless 23 y.o. prevented by her university from access to affordable birth control. Planned Parenthood sells for 100 bucks an Implanon implant that is good for three years. Walmart charges $9/month for Tri-Sprintec and Sprintec oral contraceptives. My guess is she wants to run for office some day and this was the ticket...

I am not sure which is more hilarious about this conversation, the gross ignorance about how law school works or the gross ignorance about how contraception works.

Here is a few pro-tips: It is not usual to go to law school at the age of 30, to be politically active prior to or during your education there, or to pursue a J.D. with the intent of running for office or affecting social change. Also, the entire concept of insurance has to do with protecting the insured from unusual circumstances. For medical reasons, not everyone can use the cheap birth control options available to most women, not all birth control is taken for reproductive reasons (see Ms. Fluke's testimony), and having "lots of sex" does not increase the cost of many forms of contraceptives.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Never spent that type of money on birth control. Have the man cover his tool with a condem, gee and it helps prevent VD that is a danger with having multiple sex partners.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Limbaugh is a secret operative for the Democratic Party the way he drags the Republicans into the black hole. I hope he talks about immigration policy next .

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Never spent that type of money on birth control. Have the man cover his tool with a condem,

Yeah, because condoms are 100 percent effect, never slip off, tear, or are slyly discarded by sneaky males. Or at least that is what some of you seem to believe.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Limbaugh is a secret operative for the Democratic Party the way he drags the Republicans into the black hole. I hope he talks about immigration policy next .

Let's face facts. Limbaugh has more influence (and thus rakes in more $$$) when the GOP is out of power and the base is mad as hell about being marginalized. There is absolutely no incentive for him to actually help the party gain seats in Congress or retake White House. Verily, the opposite.

He doesn't care what kind of damage his outburst do to the cause. He only apologized because sponsors started pulling their ads from his radio show.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"If you are not part of the solution, you are part of problem." It is sad when the only motivation is drama and money for someone to continue ranting from the sidelines. However, if he did try to run for the presidency, his history of drug use, marriages and comments such as the most recent one would be "a gold mine" for anyone from any party to use against him. " A big dogs barks once, and a small dog barks for years."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Never spent that type of money on birth control. Have the man cover his tool with a condem, gee and it helps prevent VD that is a danger with having multiple sex partners.

You would think IUD's would be more popular with American women.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Wait until Rush's daughters or granddaughters have an unwanted pregnancy and see how he feels then!!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I stopped listening to Limbaugh years ago. As a matter of fact, I was really pleased when the program were rescheduled putting Limbaugh on later in the evening after the traffic jam and Ed Schultz at around 6 or 7pm??

Limbaugh is a mouthpiece. No doubt about it. He reminds me of a troll poster that comes out of left field with the most asinine twisted comments. An asteroid might be headed towards Earth and somehow Limbaugh would try to blame Obama for it or the Democrats.

Very gentlemanly of Obama to call this lady and offer his support. Nobody deserves to be insulted just because of their political views.

@YuriOtani

Never spent that type of money on birth control. Have the man cover his tool with a condem, gee and it helps prevent VD that is a danger with having multiple sex partners.

That's quite selfish of women and it defeats the purpose. You feel good, he feels nothing.

Personally, I'd like to see men have a birth control pill of our own. I'd love to see the look on women's faces when they scream pregnancy to keep a man who's using the pill. The laws would have to question more paternity cases indeed.

I'm willing to bet money that women would AGAINST a birth control pill for men. Do you want men to have that kind of freedom? Japanese women get married and then want to have children within 3 years. What if men said "No" I'm going to stay on the pill so keep your career and pay half the rent, hahahahaha. They'll be out there protesting against the PILL for men.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Truth shown through absurdity, delivered by a lovable little fuzzball...

Does anyone remember SNL when Chevy Chase called Jane Curtain an "Ignorant Slut"?

It was comedy, then-

Liasons, what's happened to them. Liasons, today... -S Sondheim

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@theQuestion: Agreed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's quite selfish of women and it defeats the purpose. You feel good, he feels nothing.

@ NetNija: You may have some decreased sensation, but I would rather have that than the doctor walk into the room with a long face to tell me a diagnosis that I don't want to hear.

Yeah, because condoms are 100 percent effect, never slip off, tear, or are slyly discarded by sneaky males. Or at least that is what some of you seem to believe.

@ hot_dog_nasty: That is true, and neither is the pill 100% effective against conception. Read again my article about the warning and recall issues for a set of pills because a mix-up in the manufacturing. Also, women have been known to get pregant while on the pill, a very slim amount but it still happens.

Does anyone remember SNL when Chevy Chase called Jane Curtain an "Ignorant Slut"?

Yes I remember, it was Dan Akroyd calling Jane Cutain that when they did a point/counter point on the Weekend Update news. It was funny then. But interestng, SNL was what one would consider a liberal show, and they showed the character of Akroyd as the conservative. So it is ok for liberals to portray those on the right as easily ready to spew offensive behavior and laugh about it, just like with All in the Family, but when it is done in real life, it is not a lauging matter. How about this, if you don't like it in real life, don't portray it like that in make believe.

I am no fan of Rush, I think he is a shill for the GOP and others. Though he may have been over the top, I don't think it is nothing he should be fired for or taken off the air. If you don't like him, don't listen. I too am stuck with limited talk radio choices here in Japan with Eagle 810, so I download podcasts and listen to others while I am in the car. So no one if forced to hear him if you really don't want to.

Never spent that type of money on birth control. Have the man cover his tool with a condem, gee and it helps prevent VD that is a danger with having multiple sex partners.

That is what the argument should really be about. If the woman wants to have sex, then let her do it. But if she is old enough and responsible enough to get into law school, she needs to show some sort of sense on respecting not only her body but those who may have sex with her afterwards, and have theman use a condom.

A question for the women, if you are on the pill, do you still want your partner (in this case non-married partner) to wear a condom? Especially if you are not seeing each other exclusively?

Look, you can't go into most "soapies" or most pink places without the man wrapping it up. So the mere fact that this woman doesn't require her partners to do so, is an indicator that she has a lot more to worry about that conceiving a child when she doesn't want one.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Limbaugh is a cancer festering at the heart of public discourse, and that his unbridled hatred continues to find any commercial sponsorship at all is stunning. He wants to wax philosophically about accepting responsibility? Great. How about he does just that for this little outburth and quits? Now that would show some real conviction in one's beliefs.

Just to get things back on track, the current debate regarding contraceptives and their coverage under Obama's national healthcare plan has nothing to do with condoms. Those can be acquired without a prescription at any drugstore in the United States and for free from a number of sources.

The debate is about female contraceptives, or more specifically, birth control pills, and whether medical facilities affiliated with a specific religion should be required to dispense them.

Limbaugh demonstrated -- yet again -- his abysmal ignorance when he attempted to attribute Ms. Fluke's argument about high costs for birth control to having frequent sexual activity. The Pill doesn%u2019t work that way. You don't take one every time you have sex. They are taken daily, whether one is having sex or not.

Which brings us to three big problems with this so-called "debate" One, the people leading the debate are all men. Two, these men obviously haven't the slightest idea of what they're talking about. And three, their cheering section is equally as clueless, latching on to rumor and innuendo with the rationalizing skills of an 8-year-old. It's the classic parable of the blind leading the blind on a topic that very few, aside from women, are even remotely qualified to address beyond simple financial implications.

It's like men trying to argue against the use of painkillers during childbirth because it goes against tradition for a woman to not scream during delivery.

Ultimately, religion and highly subjective interpretations of morality have no place in this debate, anymore than they do in any o

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Just to get things back on track, the current debate regarding contraceptives and their coverage under Obama's national healthcare plan has nothing to do with condoms. Those can be acquired without a prescription at any drugstore in the United States and for free from a number of sources.

But is is part of the debate. In public school sex education classes, they teach that condoms are birht control as well as helping to prevent STD's. Condoms, like the pill and an IUD are contraceptive measures. If the school doesn't want to give them out as part of their coverage, and she can't afford them, there are other less expensive ways of contraception.

After all, the whole argument for Obamacare was that the cost of health care would go down. $3000 a year versus the price of condoms for a year (a lot less than $3000) would be a cost savings, according to the backers of Obamacare wouldn't it?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The choice of words may have been inappropriate but the bottom line is still valid. Why should we, the U.S. taxpayers, pay for this woman's sexual recreation (or anyone's for that matter). That is what this issue comes down to.

I agree with Rush. Since talking is all he's good at doing -- besides non-stop campaigning and taking taxpayer-funded, multi-million dollar vacations -- perhaps Obama would like to explain why am I expected to finance Fluke's sexual escapades?

RR

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Limbaugh is a cancer festering at the heart of public discourse, and that his unbridled hatred continues to find any commercial sponsorship at all is stunning. He wants to wax philosophically about accepting responsibility? Great. How about he does just that for this little outburst and quits? Now that would show some real conviction in one's beliefs.

Just to get things back on track, the current debate regarding contraceptives and their coverage under Obama's national healthcare plan has nothing to do with condoms. Those can be acquired without a prescription at any drugstore in the United States and for free from a number of sources.

The debate is about female contraceptives, or more specifically, birth control pills, and whether medical facilities affiliated with a specific religion should be required to dispense them.

Limbaugh demonstrated, yet again, his abysmal ignorance when he attempted to attribute Ms. Fluke's argument bout high costs for birth control to having frequent sexual activity. The Pill doesn't work that way. You don't take one every time you have sex. They are taken daily, whether one is having sex or not.

Which brings us to three big problems with this so-called "debate" One, the people leading the debate are all men. Two, these men obviously haven't the slightest idea of what they're talking about. And three, their cheering section is equally as clueless, latching on to rumor and innuendo with the rationalizing skills of an 8-year-old. It's the classic parable of the blind leading the blind on a topic that very few, aside from women, are even remotely qualified to address beyond simple financial implications.

It's like men trying to argue against the use of painkillers during childbirth because it goes against tradition for a woman to not scream during delivery.

Ultimately, religion and highly subjective interpretations of morality have no place in this debate, anymore than they do in any other sector of public infrastructure intended to serve the public good. If religion and morality really did matter, then using the same rationale opponents do in opposition to public funding for prescription of The Pill, Viagra and any other treatment for Erectile Dysfunction Syndrome would be shown the same door.

To draw attention back to those few who continue to bleat on about not wanting the government to intrude in the bedrooms and private lives of ordinary citizens, get back to me about that the next time you start working up another self-righteous lather about a woman's right to choose abortion.

Hypocrisy still means the same thing, no matter which dictionary one uses.

The funny (but tragically sad) thing here is that these self-appointed champions for morality in America seem to genuinely believe they are light years apart from the philosophical asshattery of the Taliban.

Take a long, hard look in the mirror, gentlemen. "We shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us."

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Personally, I'd like to see men have a birth control pill of our own. I'd love to see the look on women's faces when they scream pregnancy to keep a man who's using the pill. The laws would have to question more paternity cases indeed.

Wow, glad I live in a world where this is important! Also not sure of the re;evance to the story.

Back on topic... Oral contarceptives are not bought over the counter, they are prescription based. As such, they need to be treated just like any other drug, and that is why they are covered by healthcare. Condoms are not precription, and you can even get them free. Great for when you just can't wait to decide if that girl is going to sue you for paternity in 9 months time, because waiting for her to go to a doctor to get prescription, to then get the pills, and then start the course to take effect (not sure how long exactly, but it isn't instant) sounds like you may have gone off her already!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir.

Right. Because this_is_the_first_time_ever he was on the Radio. No Way. That's just the guy he is (he probably likes to laugh it off as "stick"). The only reason he's even apologized is because his advertisers seem to be pulling out (pun intended).

She should file a defamation suit against him and the radio company. If she doesn't have the money, someone should pony up for her.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Viagra and any other treatment for Erectile Dysfunction Syndrome would be shown the same door.

These types of drugs are not covered by most private insurance companies. You have to pay for them on your own.

The debate is about female contraceptives, or more specifically, birth control pills, and whether medical facilities affiliated with a specific religion should be required to dispense them.

You may seem to forget that these same facilities will not give out free condoms also.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"These types of drugs are not covered by most private insurance companies. You have to pay for them on your own."

Sure, some insurers won't cover the actual drugs. But the obvious corollary is that others will. Which would make those drugs publicly funded, just like The Pill.

Furthermore, many insurers will cover the treatment of ED up to the point of multiple uses of Viagra-like drugs per month, rationing the number of pill prescribed based on the doctor's recommendation.

Furthermore, with an appropriate diagnosis from a doctor, many insurers will actually willingly pay for penile implant surgery in lieu of costly PDE-5 inhibitors.

Now, if you or anyone can explain to me where the medical necessity for being able to have a hard-on on demand supercedes the medical benefits of The Pill, I'm all ears.

"You may seem to forget that these same facilities will not give out free condoms also."

No, I didn't forget. I chose not

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Elbuda, " Wait until Rush's daughters or granddaughters have an unwanted pregnancy and see how he feels then!! "....................................................

He has no kids but married 4 times, can we say " birth control " ?? According to his definition, they are all sluts and prostitutes.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You would think IUD's would be more popular with American women.

For American women it would be an IOU-D.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

85 posts and no one has yet mentioned that Rush is just mad cause she's out of his league. All this action she's proposing and he's not going to see any of it.

I personally agree with Sandra. She'll make the world a happier place. Give women a little more freedom and away they go. It's a WIN WIN situation. It's not like they are using contraception to protect themselves from other women. That's never going to happen.

0 ( +4 / -3 )

85 posts and no one has yet mentioned that Rush is just mad cause she's out of his league. All this action she's proposing and he's not going to see any of it.

@NetNinja: Not sure how that is pertinent to the discussion, but if you want to go there, have you seen the women that Rush has been associated with? Well above what this woman may look like. He may be a fat slug, but he is a rich fat slug and has had some women that would be well out of his league, if he was still just working the boards at KC Royals games.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I fully expect to hear Fluke's most ardent supporters inform us that "reproductive justice" demands we will also have to pay for the young women's legal costs, should she decide, embittered, single and childless at 45, that she was wronged by the system.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

smithinjapan: "sarge, are you a little 'challenged' to use such an obvious deflection"

Har! smith, looks like the humor went right over yer head! And, no, I'm not in favor of what I'm not pretending to be against by saying "How about if people take responsibility for preventing contraception if they don't want to have a baby when they have sex?" Why should taxpayers pay for other people having sex?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why should we, the U.S. taxpayers, pay for this woman's sexual recreation (or anyone's for that matter).

So you have the ability to ensure that this woman who you obviously don't like, doesn't accidentally breed, and you insist on throwing it away? Here is the part where I resist insulting you for the sake of decorum.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

So you have the ability to ensure that this woman who you obviously don't like, doesn't accidentally breed, and you insist on throwing it away? Here is the part where I resist insulting you for the sake of decorum.

@ hot_dog_dynasty: It has been my observation that those who don't want to pay for someone's contraception are also pretty much opposed to "throwing it away" (if you mean by abortion). So you point is totally moot.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yes I remember, it was Dan Akroyd calling Jane Cutain that when they did a point/counter point on the Weekend Update news. It was funny then. But interestng, SNL was what one would consider a liberal show, and they showed the character of Akroyd as the conservative. So it is ok for liberals to portray those on the right as easily ready to spew offensive behavior and laugh about it, just like with All in the Family, but when it is done in real life, it is not a lauging matter. How about this, if you don't like it in real life, don't portray it like that in make believe.

What a ridiculous statement. So people shouldn't write books or make movies which have stories that involve murder, rape, incest, just because we 'don't like those things in real life'? I think you're forgetting what free speech is. People are completely entitled to create comedy which makes fun of these repulsive right wingers, and STILL be angry when a real life counterpart comes out with the same type of thing.

You may seem to forget that these same facilities will not give out free condoms also.

You seem to forget that the pill is not simply a form of contraception, but can be prescribed by doctors to treat unrelated medical ailments.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It's people like Rush Limbaugh that gives America a bad name. He knew darn well what kind of media response it would cause and apologizing after doesn't negate the fact the damage has already been done. Ms. Fluke should demand some type of monetary compensation for the damage that Mr. Limbaugh has caused. Maybe even have him pay for the all contraception costs at Georgetown.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Rush had to apologize. He was losing sponsors faster than he could snort oxycontin!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"Why should taxpayers pay for other people having sex?"

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to enjoy steak dinners and echew exercise? (heart disease)

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to enjoy tobacco products? (lung disease)

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to play recklessly? (injuries sustained while jogging, cycling, hang gliding, skydiving, the list is endless)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AlphaapeMAR. 05, 2012 - 01:09AM JST

Correct. condoms are a form of BC that does help to prevent STD's and contraception. I did mean to say the pill which what she is talking about.

No, you are still WRONG. BC Pills are not only used as contraception, they are also used as a hormone replacement in medical treatments and even prevent cancer development in some cases.

Look, if she wants to have sex with as many people as she wants, that's her business. But I imagine if she were to take a walk outside of campus and saw some of the real "working women" she would see that they make their tricks wear a condom.

A very gross comparison between a normal jane-doe and a PROSTITUTE. I have never been with a prostitute so I have no clue as for what they use to protect themselves..The question is..have you?

But I do know that if a man wears a condom, in conjunction with the pill a woman will not get pregnant (hopefully not since nothing is fool proof). But I guess you haven't heard about the recall of the "pill" from one manufacuter since they had a mistake in putting them in the package, thus throwing the pill cycle off and raising the potential for a pregnancy to occur.

So you are now a BC Pill Expert, yes? Nothing is 100% "fool proof". But yes, "newsflash"..if you use BC Pills in conjunction with a condom, you'll probably have 99.9% protection against pregnancy and STD's.

No it't not. So you are saying that you are going to take the word of somebody like this lady who says that she likes to sleep around and can't afford the pill, that she is "clean" and STD free if you meet her for just a one night stand? You are a brave or foolish man.

Did she said it herself? that she is a "slut"? or are you just making assumptions out of your rear? Hmm? Even when I was out there, I alway carried a condom, and in a few cases, I just happened to meet some women who had some at their place. Yeah it may put a man off knowing that she keeps condoms lying around, but after awhile, when you start to think over your conquest, you will have that relief in your mind (hopefully) that you at least did "wrap it up."

Back home, only mansluts carried condoms expecting sex from anyone anywhere. You have a hard nerve to degrade women. I carried condoms inside my handbag when I was dating my husband and not once he thought I was a "slut". I always had condoms at home, mostly given by my parents. They don't think I'm a slut. =) And yes, you should indeed wrap it up, you never know what you make give to those poor women. Don't know what is worse. A nasty STD or the "seed" of an ignorant man.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Just sent off a letter to both of my senators detailing exactly how Rush's misogynistic rantings have no place on a tax-payer run radio station whose audience comprises of male and female servicemembers and their families. I also explained that in today's joint male and female military, those kind of comments are detrimental to good order and discipline and erode the Army and Navy core values. Which in turn is bad for the mission readiness. Then I wrapped it up in a bow. The long and short of it being, Rush Limbaugh is bad for mission readiness. Get him off the air.

Hopefully you won't be hearing Rush in Japan much longer. And you're welcome.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"Why should taxpayers pay for other people having sex?"

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to listen to Rush bleating misogynistic crap?

Take Rush off AFN now!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to enjoy steak dinners and echew exercise? (heart disease)

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to enjoy tobacco products? (lung disease)

Why should taxpayers pay for other people to play recklessly? (injuries sustained while jogging, cycling, hang gliding, skydiving, the list is endless)

You're right; taxpayers shouldn't pay for any of it. I'm glad we're on the same page. People should be able to eat and smoke and have sex with whoever they want whenever they want and engage in whatever other activities they choose, but they should take responsibility for their decisions and their health without expecting government to intervene.

On the topic of contraception, most insurers will cover it if the patient’s doctor finds that there is a medical need for it in the case of problematic periods or ovarian related conditions. In the absence of a medical need it frankly should be paid for out of pocket.

I smoke and skydive and sometimes wake up in strange places after a long day in the office. I don't expect anybody to cover the tab of those activities. I also don't expect anybody to cover my arthritis medication, my hormone treatments, or my other medical needs. I sit down with my doctor and discuss what works and how much each alternative costs you know...like an adult.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I sit down with my doctor and discuss what works and how much each alternative costs you know...like an adult.

Or the alternative is, you live in a country with universal health care, and don't have to fork out fortunes or go bankrupt to attain health care or just die instead because you couldn't afford the health care in the first place. A civilised country, where human rights are respected, where people act, you know... like adults.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I totally agree with that. The U.S. does not see healthcare as a human right. Only as a market for profit.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

A very gross comparison between a normal jane-doe and a PROSTITUTE. I have never been with a prostitute so I have no clue as for what they use to protect themselves.

@ Franchesca Miyara Yang: You don't have to have been with one. If a man you may have slept with has been with one, and he decided to not use any protection, what she may have had may have been given to you. That is the whole point of my posts. Not saying that she is immoral for wanting to sleep around, that's her business. But if she does chose to do so, then I would think that her concern should not only be about the pill to prevent pregnantcy, but to also make her parnter "wrap it up."

Back home, only mansluts carried condoms expecting sex from anyone anywhere

Yet you call me a manslut, yet in the next sentence you state that you carried condoms around while you were dating your futre husband. Why is that? To keep count so you know if he has bee out behind your back or because you wanted to have some protection in the event you two decided to do it.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I think you're forgetting what free speech is. People are completely entitled to create comedy which makes fun of these repulsive right wingers, and STILL be angry when a real life counterpart comes out with the same type of thing.

@ oginome: And yet you on the left get upset when a right winger uses that same free speech to identify a person in the way he sees it. Did he say she was a prostitute selling herself, no. He just called her a name based on what his interpretation of the word is in his opinion. Though I don't agree with his choice of words, he is still using his free speech. After all, many on the left seem to think that he is some sort of comedic buffon, so by your own statements he should be entitled to make his comments.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Readers, please focus your comments on the topic and not at each other. Posts in which you do refer to other readers will be removed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Or the alternative is, you live in a country with universal health care, and don't have to fork out fortunes or go bankrupt to attain health care or just die instead because you couldn't afford the health care in the first place.

I currently pay roughly 26% income tax after factoring in my capital gains rate. Last year, I dropped about 10,000 usd in medical expenses out of pocket. Sounds like a lot but if I lived in the UK, for example, my rate would be almost twice what it is now, the result would be me paying nearly more 30,000 for the supposedly free healthcare. Plus my doctor is on call, my medication is approved for use (found out its not even in the databases in France and Germany), and my doctor sends my perscription information and the drugs that react with it to every hospital I go to to avoid sending me into shock. Wish the docs at Saint Joseph in Lyon would have paid more attention, spending a week in a hospital bed going in and out of consiousness was probably the second worst vacation I've ever had.

I've tried the alternative and found it wanting.

A civilised country, where human rights are respected, where people act, you know... like adults.

I hear the riots are a lovely shade of amber this time of year in Greece and the fragrant odor of burning police cars in Italy simply cannot be missed!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

AlphaapeMAR. 06, 2012 - 08:39AM JST

You don't have to have been with one. If a man you may have slept with has been with one, and he decided to not use any protection, what she may have had may have been given to you. That is the whole point of my posts. Not saying that she is immoral for wanting to sleep around, that's her business. But if she does chose to do so, then I would think that her concern should not only be about the pill to prevent pregnantcy, but to also make her parnter "wrap it up."

You made a very good point there, still...I find appalling that most men back in america think they can sleep around and women can not. The world is round and the year is 2012. Everyone is different and thats ok. I personally judge people based on their character and personality not gender. Lots of men and women sleep around. They are equally responsible of their own actions and must deal with the consequences at the end. I say live and let live.

Yet you call me a manslut, yet in the next sentence you state that you carried condoms around while you were dating your futre husband. Why is that? To keep count so you know if he has bee out behind your back or because you wanted to have some protection in the event you two decided to do it.

I didn't mean you specifically, but we both know how this "kind" of woman is regarded in the U.S. media and everywhere for that matter. A man can sleep with a1000 but that's OK, He's a man, but what about a woman? Never. She Must Not. Why is that? Equality in many things but not Sexuality? Hmmm.. A woman is owner of her body. Enough said. I am owner of this body and I will do as I see fit, but sleeping around is not my cup of tea, and it never was.I'm sure there are many men out there that think like me. They are after stability and peace of mind. Why did I carry condoms before? I grew up in a very conservative home. The last thing my parents wanted was an unexpected pregnancy by accident or an STD given by a boyfriend. I never got neither, perhaps because I wasn't interested in guys at that time. The interest started when I met my husband for the first time. =) I'm not a fan of BC Pills but I highly advocate for the use of condoms and IUD if possible. We use IUD and Condoms in conjunction at home, by the way! :)

-2 ( +1 / -2 )

I currently pay roughly 26% income tax after factoring in my capital gains rate. Last year, I dropped about 10,000 usd in medical expenses out of pocket. Sounds like a lot but if I lived in the UK, for example, my rate would be almost twice what it is now, the result would be me paying nearly more 30,000 for the supposedly free healthcare. Plus my doctor is on call, my medication is approved for use (found out its not even in the databases in France and Germany), and my doctor sends my perscription information and the drugs that react with it to every hospital I go to to avoid sending me into shock. Wish the docs at Saint Joseph in Lyon would have paid more attention, spending a week in a hospital bed going in and out of consiousness was probably the second worst vacation I've ever had.

And yet this system whose benefits you extoll leads to the deaths of tens of thousands each year because they can't afford America's 'great' health care. What a disgusting situation for a developed country. You pay more taxes in civlised countries so the whole population can gain access to a human right, not just those that have insurance. So having a job is a prerequisite for having access to a human right? What a mess. In civlised countries, people don't object taxes going toward health care.

I hear the riots are a lovely shade of amber this time of year in Greece and the fragrant odor of burning police cars in Italy simply cannot be missed!

Actually Greece is in the throes of a meltdown partly because its population didn't pay their taxes, kept avoiding and avoiding. The collapse of these economies has nothing to do with universal health care and everything to do with the corporate 'governance' and corruption which is endemic in these countries. Compare yourselves against the Northern European countries, which have universal health care and much, much stronger economies and standards of living than America. Universal health care hasn't destroyed Germany's economy. Universal health care helps in overall public well being and is conducive to a cohesive society. But I suppose broken America has never had a cohesive society right, so why start now?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

And yet you on the left get upset when a right winger uses that same free speech to identify a person in the way he sees it. Did he say she was a prostitute selling herself, no. He just called her a name based on what his interpretation of the word is in his opinion. Though I don't agree with his choice of words, he is still using his free speech. After all, many on the left seem to think that he is some sort of comedic buffon, so by your own statements he should be entitled to make his comments.

I'm only extreme left when it comes to crazy America. Obama would never be called a 'communist' in Europe, only in your insane country. Limbaugh called Fluke a 'slut', this wasn't a comedy skit, but real life. And yes he did imply she was a prostitute because he said the taxpayer were her 'pimps' (disgusting). No one is asking for an apology because a fictional right winger called a fictional lawyer a slut, but because a real life one did. He is using his free speech, but he has to be held accountable for what he said and obviously he knows that because sponsors exercised their OWN free speech and begin to pull from his show, so he apologised out of panic and cowardice. You don't get what free speech is, my original point is that people are perfectly entitled to make fun of right wingers in comedy and yet still be angry when a real life situation happens. Nothing hypocritical about it whatsoever. Him being a comedic buffoon (which he is! Glad you can see it) doesn't exempt him from the standards which we hold all people to.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I totally agree with that. The U.S. does not see healthcare as a human right. Only as a market for profit.

I know, disgusting, right? And it's funny how a large proportion of those who argue to maintain this horrible system are 'Christians'. What hypocrites.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

TheQuestion,

"You're right; taxpayers shouldn't pay for any of it. I'm glad we're on the same page. People should be able to eat and smoke and have sex with whoever they want whenever they want and engage in whatever other activities they choose, but they should take responsibility for their decisions and their health without expecting government to intervene."

And yet, out of all of these things that demonstrably increase the cost of healthcare by several factors above and beyond what oral contraceptives ever will, Conservatives choose to focus their energies on the The Pill. Care to tackle explaining that particular incongruity?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

And yet this system whose benefits you extoll leads to the deaths of tens of thousands each year because they can't afford America's 'great' health care. What a disgusting situation for a developed country. You pay more taxes in civlised countries so the whole population can gain access to a human right, not just those that have insurance. So having a job is a prerequisite for having access to a human right? What a mess. In civlised countries, people don't object taxes going toward health care.

Frankly I don't feel that any person has the right to another person or businesses' goods or services. I donate a fairly sizeable chunk of my money to the Catholic Church (the single largest healthcare provider in the world) because I personally feel the desire to do so. When government uses cohesion to impose the morality of the elites on everybody else I find that completely outside the bounds of proper governance.

Military and the federal justice system are the only two things I believe the federal government should be involved in. Everything else should be delegated to the states and some issues aren't governments business anyway. Government stands in the way of same sex marriage, government protects the racist practices of employers, and government just forced millions of americans to buy a product that they cannot afford and contributed to the skyrocketing costs of healthcare driven by government mandates.

Actually Greece is in the throes of a meltdown partly because its population didn't pay their taxes, kept avoiding and avoiding. The collapse of these economies has nothing to do with universal health care and everything to do with the corporate 'governance' and corruption which is endemic in these countries.

France and the UK aren't exactly having fun either. All of Europe is going into a so called 'double dip recession' although I'm still scratching my head as to why they declared the first recession at an end in the first places. Corruption is endemic to humanity in general; people want as much service for as little cost as possible.The entitlement programs of these nations run at to high a cost for even the cripplingly high taxes to cover. Just about every nation has implemented 'austerity' measures, reducing healthcare and higher education. When the government provides you with everything it can take it away just as easily and you have no alternative because there is no competition.

Universal health care hasn't destroyed Germany's economy. Universal health care helps in overall public well being and is conducive to a cohesive society. But I suppose broken America has never had a cohesive society right, so why start now?

Who’s to say a cohesive society is really the best thing? When everybody agrees on the same solution nobody thinks to check the math. It's Groupthink 101. The Eurozone is case in point, the financial industry and media outlets have been reporting on sovereign debt and how it will eventually cripple Europe for years and years but it just kept plodding forward. Nobody thought to cut back before they hit the wall.

And yet, out of all of these things that demonstrably increase the cost of healthcare by several factors above and beyond what oral contraceptives ever will, Conservatives choose to focus their energies on the The Pill. Care to tackle explaining that particular incongruity?

I can’t speak for anybody else, I'm a libertarian, and if there’s one thing that conservatives and liberals can agree on its that nobody should ever listen to libertarians. If I had my way government wouldn't recognize marriage, only joint unions between two consenting individuals without regard to sexual orientation, healthcare would be deregulated and non-compulsory, virtually all victimless crimes would be legalized, subsidies to anything would be ended, and social programs would have an option to opt out or be privatized. I've got a little for everybody to hate.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Frankly I don't feel that any person has the right to another person or businesses' goods or services. I donate a fairly sizeable chunk of my money to the Catholic Church (the single largest healthcare provider in the world) because I personally feel the desire to do so. When government uses cohesion to impose the morality of the elites on everybody else I find that completely outside the bounds of proper governance.

Military and the federal justice system are the only two things I believe the federal government should be involved in. Everything else should be delegated to the states and some issues aren't governments business anyway. Government stands in the way of same sex marriage, government protects the racist practices of employers, and government just forced millions of americans to buy a product that they cannot afford and contributed to the skyrocketing costs of healthcare driven by government mandates.

Health care is a human right, not simply a 'good or business' even if America turned it into free market enterprise and cultivated this mindset amongst its citizens. You've donated a sizeable chunk of your money to the Catholic (paedophile enabling) Church, but it's not working. USA's health system is still the worst in the developed world and 42,000 died in 2009 because they couldn't afford access to this health care. Even with all your donations (and yes donations are a good thing even if you gave them to the Catholic Church, I'm not knocking you), and that of other people, the world's largest health care provider wasn't able to help overall. America's privatised health care system (before Obama came into power so you can't blame him) was an absolute immoral disaster. You can talk about the military and federal all you like, but America's not the only country with states, Germany has 16 of them and they still managed to implement universal health care.

France and the UK aren't exactly having fun either. All of Europe is going into a so called 'double dip recession' although I'm still scratching my head as to why they declared the first recession at an end in the first places. Corruption is endemic to humanity in general; people want as much service for as little cost as possible.The entitlement programs of these nations run at to high a cost for even the cripplingly high taxes to cover. Just about every nation has implemented 'austerity' measures, reducing healthcare and higher education. When the government provides you with everything it can take it away just as easily and you have no alternative because there is no competition.

France and the UK are not having fun because their own economic practices were awful. The UK in particular, followed America's laissez faire economic path and the result is that it's a broken, divided society today with a massive gap between rich and poor. You can't blame the UK's universal health care or its welfare system, when Germany's welfare system is even more robust than the UK's and they have today an extremely healthy economy, they're a manufacturing powerhouse (second largest exporter after China) which has always been wary of finance and have rules and regulations in place which prevent the formation of bubbles, housing and otherwise. You're right, corruption is endemic to humans everywhere, but a responsible government and the type of education system and the type of society Germany has painstakingly created helps alleviate it. Don't forget what kind of country Germany was 60 years ago, the old argument about 'American culture is more aggressive and forceful and is incompatible with this kind of system' is rubbish.

Who’s to say a cohesive society is really the best thing? When everybody agrees on the same solution nobody thinks to check the math. It's Groupthink 101. The Eurozone is case in point, the financial industry and media outlets have been reporting on sovereign debt and how it will eventually cripple Europe for years and years but it just kept plodding forward. Nobody thought to cut back before they hit the wall.

Of course a cohesive society is the best thing. This isn't 'groupthink' but common sense. Chaotic, broken, divided societies like America have next to no social capital and lower standards of living. A cohesive society is much better than one which has the highest murder rate (70% of which is due to the widely available guns - another anamoly in the First World) and the worst health care system in the developed world. The Eurozone is a mess now not because of its welfare systems, but because of the implementation of a common currency amongst different sovereign nations each of which have their own rules and regulations, it was an absolute disaster and countries should return to their national currencies in my view.

I can’t speak for anybody else, I'm a libertarian, and if there’s one thing that conservatives and liberals can agree on its that nobody should ever listen to libertarians. If I had my way government wouldn't recognize marriage, only joint unions between two consenting individuals without regard to sexual orientation, healthcare would be deregulated and non-compulsory, virtually all victimless crimes would be legalized, subsidies to anything would be ended, and social programs would have an option to opt out or be privatized. I've got a little for everybody to hate.

That you certainly do.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

There is no such thing as a human right. If you claim a human right, that means you are claiming the wealth that somebody else has produced. Any claim for human rights is an implicit claim of theft.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There is no such thing as a human right. If you claim a human right, that means you are claiming the wealth that somebody else has produced. Any claim for human rights is an implicit claim of theft.

How ridiculous. If human rights don't exist, then that goes for the person who also produces the wealth.. ie, they're not entitled to it, since the right to ownership doesn't exist anymore either. Oh dear, is this the next defense Republicans will use to justify their appalling human rights abuses?

'There is no such thing as a human right.'

Yep, what an insane country.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

TheQuestion,

"I can’t speak for anybody else, I'm a libertarian, and if there’s one thing that conservatives and liberals can agree on its that nobody should ever listen to libertarians. If I had my way government wouldn't recognize marriage, only joint unions between two consenting individuals without regard to sexual orientation, healthcare would be deregulated and non-compulsory, virtually all victimless crimes would be legalized, subsidies to anything would be ended, and social programs would have an option to opt out or be privatized. I've got a little for everybody to hate."

I'll be honest with you: Your response made me laugh, but not in an irreverent way. I may not agree with the vast majority of your positions, but I do like the way you present them. Thanks for the honest and polite response.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'll be honest with you: Your response made me laugh, but not in an irreverent way. I may not agree with the vast majority of your positions, but I do like the way you present them. Thanks for the honest and polite response.

I agree, libertarian TheQuestion is politer and more respectful than the Republicans on this site.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Question: Bravo on all accounts. One thing people love to do is throw away their rights and I don't get it. Who cares if someone says something vile (in their opinion) or says something that is offensive - especially if it's an entertainer whose show most people don't listen to anyway. Is Limbaugh the news? No. He's a radio host that fills 3 hours a day. I don't like his show at all, but he is entitled to his opinion. This is why I can never be a liberal, because liberals love to police language and love to censor opinions they don't like. That is dangerous on all accounts. If you don't like his opinion why listen?

Do you know that any of the advertisers really don't care about what he said either. They just care about the money. They'll be back after Limbaugh's ratings come out. This is a left wing witch hunt and that hypocrisy is very sad.

Support free speech, whatever that speech is. Don't blindly complain about things that offend you. Be offended is a wonderful thing. It provokes conversation and debate. It brings things to the forefront. It's our right to speak about anything and to be offended by anything.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Health care is a human right, not simply a 'good or business' even if America turned it into free market enterprise and cultivated this mindset amongst its citizens.

But it is. Doctors provide a service and pharmaceutical companies provide goods. When the government is responsible for the payment it can dictate and set prices. It destroys the competitive nature of the drug companies and sets a lower bar for healthcare professionals. There's also a level of brain drain going on in Europe within the medical profession. Doctors in Europe are paid far less than their US counterparts and US medical institutions put students through hell before letting them practice medicine. When it comes to medical advances the US is virtually undisputed in its aggressive pursuit.

The cost of that comes in the form of a private system which is expensive but totally useable. I've had the same high deductible insurance plan since I worked as a janitor when I was in college that covers me if I have a sudden emergency, but I pay for the vast majority of medical expenses out of pocket and have since the days when I was barely making 5 figures.

France and the UK are not having fun because their own economic practices were awful.

That’s like saying that the flu would be great if I could just stop throwing up. Massive entitlement programs are the terrible economic practices that are dragging them through the mud.

Chaotic, broken, divided societies like America have next to no social capital and lower standards of living.

As opposed to the chaotic, broken, divided societies of Europe? Nobody smells of rose petals these days, I merely point out that the systems we currently have don't work and suggest another one. One with more responsibility and competition as opposed to the stagnation of European systems and the chronyism of the current US model.

That you certainly do.

Oh you don't know the half of it. I'm a riot at parties and my old union LOVED me.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yet, the US was ranked 37th out of affordability and efficiency of providing good health care to all citizens. and we have 40,000 and 50,000 Americans die per year that could have been avoidable had they not got the healthcare we need.

That ranking and the fact that US lets that happens shows that there is something really wrong with our healthcare.

We have the best technology, but that is only accesible if you got the money.....

Honestly, do you not understand how heartless for a hospital to ask a dying person from cancer "How are you going to pay this?" instead of what other countries say: "How can we help you?"

This is human life we are talking about! This is why access to basic healthcare should be a right and that is why most European countries healthcare systems outranked the US: because they assure that every citizen gets the right to healthcare.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Scandanivian countries entitlement programs are much more generous than France and the UK, and yet they are hardly suffering the recession.

Remember! The US first got into the recession when Bush was still president and our "entitlement programs" are way less generous than Europe. It is not the entitlement programs that are the main problems, it was the banks and how the EU refuses to help one another despite being part of the agreement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@FruitsBasketFan I'll go ahead and assume your last two comments were directed at me.

Some people focus on access, others focus on quality. I benefit from high quality, expensive medical treatments so I guess I'm a little biased towards a system that provides me with my needs. I've taken an active role in my health and routinely meet with my doctor to talk about alternative medications to find the most cost effective treatment plans.

As stated in previous posts I've been able to streamline my medical expenses without impacting my professional or social life which involves traveling between 3 continents and keeping track of compliance with financial regulations in 4 countries. If everybody took an hour out of schedule once a week to meet with their doctor to discuss their prescriptions, treatments, diets, and weigh the pro's and con's of alternatives they'd pay even less than I do.

If its a question of poor people getting coverage I've got 4 free clinics open 7 days a week within a mile of my house. Medicaid takes care of most prescriptions. And most hospitals have funds and grants specifically for charity treatments, you just need to fill out some paperwork. Care isn't hard to find in the US, many people just don't put forward the effort or simply don't know where to look.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This is not true for every doctor......come on, now.

There is a reason why 40,000 and 50,000 Americans that die are because they cannot afford to see the doctor and do not have insurance!

Not all doctors will negotiate. They want to make a profit and thus: they could careless that you will face a very expensive bill that could bankrupt you or refuse treatment unless you cough up more money (which most people do not have).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are hardly any clinics that offer free services, this is another ignorant statement.

Occasionally, they may offer a free treatment for once a year......but a clinic do not actually do surgerys and pay for your medications from the pharmacy.

Come on, now. Read the news.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why stop at free health care ?

Millions of Americans do not have access to quality legal assistance. Lawyers are expensive ! Somehow i doubt though that the Democrat Party is going to look at that "crisis" anytime soon...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If you are convicted of a crime, you are entitled to receive a lawyer for your defense. The government will even provide you one if you cannot afford one.

But yes, in other cases.....It is sad, but at the very least their lives are not in danger in those situations (while healthcare involves your overall health and LIFE).

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If you are convicted of a crime, you are entitled to receive a lawyer for your defense. The government will even provide you one if you cannot afford one.

Not good enough. I should have the right to sue anyone anytime and have you pay for it.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I loved how you ignored when I mentioned the main differences.....Sueing is either for selfish reasons or to just get money. While the right to healthcare insures that you live.

If you do not understand the main differences and why one of them should be the right and not the other (suing).....then, that is just sad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I loved how you ignored when I mentioned the main differences.....Sueing is either for selfish reasons or to just get money. While the right to healthcare insures that you live.

free food would help me live. i want free food. you pay for it.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

And the government gives food stamps to those who make less than the federal poverty level (at least, most of the times).

0 ( +1 / -1 )

My taxes pay for your roads that your car drives on, postal service, and a child's education at a public school.....and this is despite the fact that I do not have a car, hardly use the postal service, and I have no child....and you do not see me complaining because those things are worth it as we are society that needs those things.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Free health care. Free legal help. Free food.

Why should work , or even educate myself ?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The government only gives enough to help assist some of the cost, it does not cover everything....so you are going to have to work (which most poor people do).

If you really feel that way about the government, then do not drive your car on public roads nor use the postal service (services paid for with taxes and provided by the government).

Honestly, this is getting stupid.....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If you really feel that way about the government, then do not drive your car on public roads nor use the postal service (services paid for with taxes and provided by the government).

The govt does not provide. The govt takes from private citizens.

Honestly, this is getting stupid.....

now you understand how most folks feel when they see a 30 y.o activist at a $60thou/yr Ivy League school demanding we also pay for her contraception. Fluke, btw, is on record saying sex change operations should be covered by the taxpayer.

Where does it end?????

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Then, do not use the public roads, postal service, and ask for the government to provide you a lawyer if you are convicted of a crime and do not have the funds yourself to do it, then.

And I see you insulting a woman who only believes that insurance provide contraceptives much like how most provide viagra for men......just to be fair and not have unplanned pregnancies and go toward abortions (which costs more).

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Sex change would be "considered" elective....because your life is not endangered.....your comparisons are not well thought up.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms Fluke for the insulting word choices,” Rush Limbaugh said on his website.

It's a stretch to say that's an apology.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Then, do not use the public roads, postal service, and ask for the government to provide you a lawyer if you are convicted of a crime and do not have the funds yourself to do it, then.

By the same token i might say you need to get off the net, It is superfluous,We were all doing fine before it came along. Stick to reading the NY Times and registering your opinions by snail mail. We dont need fedEx either. The post office was doing just fine.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Back on topic please. No more comparisons or analogies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not all doctors will negotiate. They want to make a profit and thus: they could careless that you will face a very expensive bill that could bankrupt you or refuse treatment unless you cough up more money (which most people do not have).

Then find another doctor. My old family doctor had me on a very expensive drug that aggravated my arthritis and acted personally offended when I asked about a few alternatives I had read up on. I changed doctors. With the internet I can find reviews on doctors which makes it even easier.

Take a day out at some point, google doctors in your area, and make some appointments. I've got three doctors in case I want a second opinion and my primary doctor thinks that's a good thing because if I become dissatisfied he knows I'll drop him like a stone.

There are hardly any clinics that offer free services, this is another ignorant statement.

What are you talking about? Every Catholic hospital I've been to has at least some form of income based walk-in clinc, the Easter Seals free clinic a few blocks away from me offers free examinations and can write perscriptions, and in my area just about every town has at least one. Ferndale, Livonia, Highland Park, and Southfield all have free clinics that I have been to myself when I was younger.

There are websites with whole regional lists of free clinics available on the internet. Before you go around instulting people try doing a cursory search.

Occasionally, they may offer a free treatment for once a year......but a clinic do not actually do surgerys and pay for your medications from the pharmacy.

Its called Walmart, and even I use it. Because of how pharma laws work in the US there's a cheap generic version of just about everything and there is virtually no difference between generic and name brand drugs. My doctor wanted me on an expensive name brand arthritis pill, I asked if the generic brand would do the same thing and he eventually agreed. I pay $4 a month for a pill that would have run me $200.

As for surgerys I suggest you contact your doctor about the numerous foundations that currently operate. When I needed a spine operation when I was young my family actually got a virtually interest loan (about 1% as I recall) from the Ford Foundation.

Come on, now. Read the news.

The news once told me that the world was going to turn into an ice ball, then it told me I would die of some kind of flu, then it told me not to eat spinich, then it told me that Obama would turn the country around, then it told me that because I'm a hispanic Catholic I should be pandering to the democratic party because they really care about me and my plight . I read the news but I take the time to verify what I hear in person. "Read the news" is a cop out, I take responcibility for finding the facts on my own through research and talking to professionals on the subject, but that takes time, responcibility, and discipline so I guess it's not for everyone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But it is. Doctors provide a service and pharmaceutical companies provide goods. When the government is responsible for the payment it can dictate and set prices. It destroys the competitive nature of the drug companies and sets a lower bar for healthcare professionals. There's also a level of brain drain going on in Europe within the medical profession. Doctors in Europe are paid far less than their US counterparts and US medical institutions put students through hell before letting them practice medicine. When it comes to medical advances the US is virtually undisputed in its aggressive pursuit.

The cost of that comes in the form of a private system which is expensive but totally useable. I've had the same high deductible insurance plan since I worked as a janitor when I was in college that covers me if I have a sudden emergency, but I pay for the vast majority of medical expenses out of pocket and have since the days when I was barely making 5 figures.

What's the point if citizens are denied access to the fruits of America's 'aggressive pursuit' and as a result, tens of thousands die every year? This is just what I'm talking about, capitalism and the 'free market' has been allowed to triumph over and trample on human rights. It is perfectly possible to make health care universal as we can see from European countries, which even if they have lower paid doctors, deliver an overall health care system which is far superior to America's and twice as cheap. America's health care system can't be defended, it's privatised and is the most expensive and the overall worst in delivering care in the developed world. These are the facts.

That’s like saying that the flu would be great if I could just stop throwing up. Massive entitlement programs are the terrible economic practices that are dragging them through the mud.

No, that's not the case at all, there are economic practices which exist outside welfare spending and creation. In the UK's case, their de-regulated financial sector helped in the creation of bubbles, which all grew to horrific proportions and eventually burst. This is a legacy of Thatcher's worship of Friedmann's economic 'principles', her party decided to privatise and privatise in the 80s, and dismantle what was left of Britain's industrial sector. Laissez faire capitalism is what led to the UK's economic ruin. And I already stated that Germany's welfare programs are even more generous than the UK's, yet today they manage to have one of the most powerful, successful economies in the world, because they adhered to regulation and kept their social capitalist economy. They understand manufacturing is vitally important, and that's why Germany, like Japan, now dominates in advanced manufacturing and capital goods production. No, you can't blame welfare. Germany and the Nordic countries have the strongest welfare states in the world and yet also have the strongest economies and highest standards of living.

As opposed to the chaotic, broken, divided societies of Europe? Nobody smells of rose petals these days, I merely point out that the systems we currently have don't work and suggest another one. One with more responsibility and competition as opposed to the stagnation of European systems and the chronyism of the current US model.

Yes, no country is perfect, but the countries of Northern Europe are positively utopian compared to America. America leads the way in crime, (mainly due to the guns which they own), in having the worst health care system in the developed world and in the massive divide between rich and poor. Germany has definitely not stagnated either.

Oh you don't know the half of it. I'm a riot at parties and my old union LOVED me.

lol, even though I don't agree with Ron Paul, I feel sorry for him because he seems so alone with no supporters. Thankfully, he won't come close to winning.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

As I write this two separate articles about Limbaugh have made JAPAN Today's top 5 popularity list. This obviously reflects the disdain most people hold toward this shock jock who fills the airwaves at most hours of the day.

Glad to see this guy take a fall. I hope sponsors keep pulling ads and radio stations pull the plug.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It is perfectly possible to make health care universal as we can see from European countries, which even if they have lower paid doctors, deliver an overall health care system which is far superior to America's and twice as cheap.

As stated in a previous post, under a european system using the UK tax rates as an example I would end up paying roughly 30,000 more in taxes for treatments that I recieved in the US for 10,000. Under the UK system I would actually pay three times as much for medical services.

Even if those systems were'nt bogged down with innumerable flaws and even if they worked perfectly in deliviering a comperable quality good I'd still be against it. Just as I'm against most social programs because I don't feel the government has a right to set prices or mandate the purchase of a product or service. I don't want to live in a place where a small group of people get to dictate what drugs I can take, when I can get a treatment, or how I go about my attaining my medical needs. I find it to be morally and ethically corrupt. I've stated my positions on why I disagree with the policy on an economic basis, so its come down to a philisophical level.

lol, even though I don't agree with Ron Paul, I feel sorry for him because he seems so alone with no supporters. Thankfully, he won't come close to winning.

Why is that thankful? Nobody else in the race, president included, are putting forward ideas that will change the broken dynamic of american governance. None of them would be willing to reduce the powers of the federal government back to their intended purpose.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As stated in a previous post, under a european system using the UK tax rates as an example I would end up paying roughly 30,000 more in taxes for treatments that I recieved in the US for 10,000. Under the UK system I would actually pay three times as much for medical services.

Even if those systems were'nt bogged down with innumerable flaws and even if they worked perfectly in deliviering a comperable quality good I'd still be against it. Just as I'm against most social programs because I don't feel the government has a right to set prices or mandate the purchase of a product or service. I don't want to live in a place where a small group of people get to dictate what drugs I can take, when I can get a treatment, or how I go about my attaining my medical needs. I find it to be morally and ethically corrupt. I've stated my positions on why I disagree with the policy on an economic basis, so its come down to a philisophical level.

Why do you say 'even if they worked perfectly in delivering comparable quality'? Universal health care systems don't deliver comparable, but better quality services and care than America's privatised system as we can see from the facts. Yes, in the UK system, you would pay more in taxes than you personally do now in the good 'ol USA, but you're given an overall level of health care which is FAR superior overall to America's system and which is available to all citizens, even those who don't have jobs, because you know, a human right isn't dependant on whether you have insurance or not. If you lost your job in America tomorrow and ended up going bankrupt paying for some medical operation that would have costed nothing in a civilised country, then you would be in big trouble. Americs's health care system is the one 'bogged down with innumerable flaws'. I find it to be morally and ethically corrupt that a nation, which happens to be the richest in the world, turns a human right into a free market enterprise with the result that tens of thousands die every year because they cannot get access to this human right. That's absolutely disgusting.

Why is that thankful? Nobody else in the race, president included, are putting forward ideas that will change the broken dynamic of american governance. None of them would be willing to reduce the powers of the federal government back to their intended purpose.

Ron Paul is no better, pushing for more laissez faire economics and de-regulation when that is what led to America's economic collapse in the first place. Once again, welfare is NOT the reason the economies in Europe in America and Europe are suffering considering America had one of the weakest welfare systems in the developed world anyway and the European countries which have the strongest welfare systems also continue to have the strongest economies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why do you say 'even if they worked perfectly in delivering comparable quality'? Universal health care systems don't deliver comparable, but better quality services and care than America's privatised system as we can see from the facts.

Of all the countries in Europe only Denmark has approved my hormone treatment, the only comperable treatment any of them offer on public plans is one that fell out of favor in the US because it was known to cause seizures. Additionally the US has the highest cancer and surgery survival rates of any industrialized nation. So yes, US does offer the highest quality health services.

If you lost your job in America tomorrow and ended up going bankrupt paying for some medical operation that would have costed nothing in a civilised country, then you would be in big trouble.

Already planned for. My investment income is substantial enough to sustain my home, living, and medical expenses in the event I lost my job. As I've mentioned I DO have insurance for exactly that kind of operation, I merely have a high deductible so I pay out of pocket for most of my routine procedures. Insurance was ment to act as protection against catostrophic events and thats what I use it for.

I find it to be morally and ethically corrupt that a nation, which happens to be the richest in the world, turns a human right into a free market enterprise with the result that tens of thousands die every year because they cannot get access to this human right. That's absolutely disgusting.

You don't have a right to another person's skills or goods. Healthcare is not a human right. Anything beyond the protection of body and property against other parties is not a right. Anything that restricts or places demands upon the body or property should be considered unlawful.

Ron Paul is no better, pushing for more laissez faire economics and de-regulation when that is what led to America's economic collapse in the first place.

Causes of the economic collapse: *Housing Bubble - Caused by government owned corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac giving out untenable loans in a practice started by the Clinton administration and continued in the Bush administration. Financial Collapse - Caused by an excessive willingness to engage in risky investing practices made possible by artificially low interest rates set by the FED Increase in Medical Costs - Directly attributed to the increased use of government funded healthcare plans due to Federal mismanagment of funds and the eas at which people commit medicare fraud. Increase in Fuel Costs - Bush and Obama administrations blocking key developments of domestic natural gas and fracking operations while allocating funds to failed fuel sources like E-85 (which is proven to reduce fuel economy rendering its decreased cost useless) and green energy companies (many of which have gone bankrupt or are simply not capapble of making cost competitive energy producing products) Banking Collapse** - Caused by similar factors as the financial collapse but banks made even riskier investments because the FED insures all of the banks accounts, basically allowing to play with other people's money for free.

How does any of this sound like capitalism? This looks like government intervention run amok. I've got government picking winners in the business world and businesses picking winers in the political world and I don't like any of it. I'd sooner have the two completely seperated and left to do what they ought to be doing. Businesses should make money and government should protect its people from outside threats. It's not that complicated.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Of all the countries in Europe only Denmark has approved my hormone treatment, the only comperable treatment any of them offer on public plans is one that fell out of favor in the US because it was known to cause seizures. Additionally the US has the highest cancer and surgery survival rates of any industrialized nation. So yes, US does offer the highest quality health services.

No, the overall level of health care in America's health care is the worst in the developed world, as we can see from the the WHO and Commonwealth Fund Reports and the tens of thousands who die every year because they can't get access to this human right. Zoning in on specifics like cancer and surgery survival is misleading. There are other areas and sectors which other countries lead in. OVERALL, America's is the worst.

Already planned for. My investment income is substantial enough to sustain my home, living, and medical expenses in the event I lost my job. As I've mentioned I DO have insurance for exactly that kind of operation, I merely have a high deductible so I pay out of pocket for most of my routine procedures. Insurance was ment to act as protection against catostrophic events and thats what I use it for.

Good for you, but countless will die today and tomorrow. The mentally ill, the people who don't have the foresight to save and invest, those who have fallen through the cracks, will die because they are denied a human right which has been turned into a free market enterprise.

You don't have a right to another person's skills or goods. Healthcare is not a human right. Anything beyond the protection of body and property against other parties is not a right. Anything that restricts or places demands upon the body or property should be considered unlawful.

Of course health care is a human right. Human rights transcend capitalism. The right to gun ownership is shouted from the roof tops. It's beyond hypocritical for America to promote some human rights and ignore another ones. If the right to ownership remains a human right, then so does health care since they come from the same place. You can't disregard the rights you hate until you're left with the rights that are convenient to you. Pick'n'Mix human rights.

Causes of the economic collapse: *Housing Bubble** - Caused by government owned corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac giving out untenable loans in a practice started by the Clinton administration and continued in the Bush administration. Financial Collapse - Caused by an excessive willingness to engage in risky investing practices made possible by artificially low interest rates set by the FED Increase in Medical Costs - Directly attributed to the increased use of government funded healthcare plans due to Federal mismanagment of funds and the eas at which people commit medicare fraud. Increase in Fuel Costs - Bush and Obama administrations blocking key developments of domestic natural gas and fracking operations while allocating funds to failed fuel sources like E-85 (which is proven to reduce fuel economy rendering its decreased cost useless) and green energy companies (many of which have gone bankrupt or are simply not capapble of making cost competitive energy producing products) Banking Collapse - Caused by similar factors as the financial collapse but banks made even riskier investments because the FED insures all of the banks accounts, basically allowing to play with other people's money for free.

How does any of this sound like capitalism? This looks like government intervention run amok. I've got government picking winners in the business world and businesses picking winers in the political world and I don't like any of it. I'd sooner have the two completely seperated and left to do what they ought to be doing. Businesses should make money and government should protect its people from outside threats. It's not that complicated.>

Oh dear, everything you described was in fact the government setting policies in place and creating conditions that led to the unfettered, completely unchecked and unregulated capitalism which destroyed your country. The government ITSELF pursued and encouraged laissez faire capitalism and is the reason why America's economy has collapsed while Germany's heavily regulated, socialist capitalist economy remains so successful today. Just because the deregulated policies came from the government doesn't mean it wasn't deregulation.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The mentally ill, the people who don't have the foresight to save and invest, those who have fallen through the cracks, will die because they are denied a human right which has been turned into a free market enterprise.

To an extent I can sympathize with the mentally ill but there are facilities available to them, a number of them actually and especially in high population areas. The ones who lack the foresight I have no sympathy for.

If the right to ownership remains a human right, then so does health care since they come from the same place.

The government should not be in the business of establishing new and creative ways to influence it's population. The right to protection from harm and theft are the only two rights a government should be in the business of protecting. When the government decides you have the right to someone elses property and services you've given them the authority to take what they feel is necessary. That is not right. You don't have a right to a house, you don't have a right to a car, you don't have a right to the internet. All of these things are needed to operate in America but you don't have a right to them because we recognize that when the government gets involved in these matters everybody is the worse for it.

Oh dear, everything you described was in fact the government setting policies in place and creating conditions that led to the unfettered, completely unchecked and unregulated capitalism which destroyed your country.

How was any of that capitalism? If a government agency makes a housing loan that's not capitalism, if a goverment entity disrupts interest rates that's not capitalism, if government prevents a company from developing the resources it has bought the rights to that is not capitalism, and when a government bails out a failing business it most certainly isn't capitalsim. You keep saying laissez faire but I don't think you know what it means, it translates to 'let it be'. So please tell me how any of these cases could even be remotely described as capitalism?

If Fannie and Freddie hadn't made those aweful loan and began speculating we wouldn't have the housing bubble. If the FED hadn't messed with interest rates financial institutions would have been more risk averse because debt would have been more expensive. If government would leave the energy market alone we could be on the way to self-sufficiency again. If government hadn't promised to insure a banks money they wouldn't have been so eager to play with it. All of this highlights exactly why the government has no place in the economy.

Germany's heavily regulated, socialist capitalist economy remains so successful today.

Germany is a homogenous, low growth nation. On the best of years its economy only grows at 2-3% and it relies heavily on its service based economic model. On a bad year the US expands by 3% and China must maintain at least a 4% growth rate just to sustain their population. What we've seen is Europe slide further to the point of obsolesence in global politics. Some day it will have a perfectly population perfectly content in their surroundings, but they will have been left behind and have little or no say in the greater worlds development.

The US cannot, will not, and should not operate like a European nation. The greatest periods of economic expansion occured during the lowest periods of government intervention. The counter is also true. The great depression was exacerbated and extended by the practices of Hoover and FDR and only ended because the US got into WWII. The current recession is also believed to have been extended by the actions of the Bush and Obama administrations and the loss of our credit rating will have a nasty effect on our finances for decades to come.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

To an extent I can sympathize with the mentally ill but there are facilities available to them, a number of them actually and especially in high population areas. The ones who lack the foresight I have no sympathy for.

So you're ok with the 40,000 who die every year because they are denied access to a human right? Great. Thank God your line of thinking is rare in the rest of the developed world.

The government should not be in the business of establishing new and creative ways to influence it's population. The right to protection from harm and theft are the only two rights a government should be in the business of protecting. When the government decides you have the right to someone elses property and services you've given them the authority to take what they feel is necessary. That is not right. You don't have a right to a house, you don't have a right to a car, you don't have a right to the internet. All of these things are needed to operate in America but you don't have a right to them because we recognize that when the government gets involved in these matters everybody is the worse for it.

No, there aren't 'new and creative' ways, but the government simply protecting human rights. In a democracy, a government is elected to represent the interests of the voters, and the voters elect said government so their human rights will be upheld and protected. You libertarians pick and choose whichever human rights are convenient for you and ignore the rest. America's system of capitalism delivers the worst standard of living in the developed world, those crime statistics, disastrous health care system, crumbling infrastructure, gaping divide between rich and poor, and widespread poverty say everything.

How was any of that capitalism? If a government agency makes a housing loan that's not capitalism, if a goverment entity disrupts interest rates that's not capitalism, if government prevents a company from developing the resources it has bought the rights to that is not capitalism, and when a government bails out a failing business it most certainly isn't capitalsim. You keep saying laissez faire but I don't think you know what it means, it translates to 'let it be'. So please tell me how any of these cases could even be remotely described as capitalism?

If Fannie and Freddie hadn't made those aweful loan and began speculating we wouldn't have the housing bubble. If the FED hadn't messed with interest rates financial institutions would have been more risk averse because debt would have been more expensive. If government would leave the energy market alone we could be on the way to self-sufficiency again. If government hadn't promised to insure a banks money they wouldn't have been so eager to play with it. All of this highlights exactly why the government has no place in the economy.

Of course it is capitalism. Just because it came from the government doesn't make it any less so. Your government created policies which allowed for the unregulated flow of capitalism. It was very much 'let it be' in how unregulated it was and in the massive bubbles which eventually formed. You're using the example of your corrupt government meddling in things like as a negative - which it was, since the US government pursued it's laissez faire death dance. A responsible government would have regulated matters much more strongly, like Germany. Germany's social capitalist model is a perfect example of how a government can have a 'place in the economy' and it not be a disaster.

Germany is a homogenous, low growth nation. On the best of years its economy only grows at 2-3% and it relies heavily on its service based economic model. On a bad year the US expands by 3% and China must maintain at least a 4% growth rate just to sustain their population. What we've seen is Europe slide further to the point of obsolesence in global politics. Some day it will have a perfectly population perfectly content in their surroundings, but they will have been left behind and have little or no say in the greater worlds development.

Germany is not a homogenous nation, 10% of its population is made up of immigrants. The reason why the US 'expands' is because of the huge number of immigrants who come into the country every year. Germany is sinking into obsolesence? Germany, the world's largest capital exporting nation after China? Where growth has been much more healthy and sustainable than America's bubble based 'growth' which was proved to be a farce. Manufacturing makes up 20% of Germany's economy, compared to 11% in America. Don't forget it had to absord a broken down communist state in the early 90s and STILL managed to rise to the top again.

The US cannot, will not, and should not operate like a European nation. The greatest periods of economic expansion occured during the lowest periods of government intervention. The counter is also true. The great depression was exacerbated and extended by the practices of Hoover and FDR and only ended because the US got into WWII. The current recession is also believed to have been extended by the actions of the Bush and Obama administrations and the loss of our credit rating will have a nasty effect on our finances for decades to come.

The US will not operate like a European nation due to greed ('why the hell should I pay taxes?') to claims of exceptionalism ('we're a country made up of immigrants, we're not homogenous like Europe!'), discounting Canada, which is also made up of immigrants and still manages to deliver universal health care and which also ignores that Europe is no longer 'homogenous' either. Yet again, the government can pursue its own deregulation policies and destroy the economy but this doesn't provide an argument against government intervention on the whole, when responsible governments can intervene in the economy, set sensible policies and manage to create healthy, successful economies like Germany.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Wow a liberal abortionist that have never heard of planned parenthood. She is a professional advocate that more than likely have sought funding for planned parenthood or received services or funding from planned parenthood. AT the age of twenty seven she claim to be dumber than the inner city drop outs that planned parenthood feast off of. So maybe she is proving the fact that planned parenthood is racist because contraception is not given to college students not even law school abortion advocates because they are white like her. Over 38% of abortions in United States are by black women though they make up less than 9% of the population of women in the United States.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You libertarians pick and choose whichever human rights are convenient for you and ignore the rest. America's system of capitalism delivers the worst standard of living in the developed world, those crime statistics, disastrous health care system, crumbling infrastructure, gaping divide between rich and poor, and widespread poverty say everything.

What other rights beyond protection of body and property have I avdocated here? None, thats all, thats all there ever has been. What people do with their own lives is none of my concern and nor do I feel it should be the concern of the government.

Of course it is capitalism. Just because it came from the government doesn't make it any less so.

I just realized this has all been a horrible misunderstanding. We're not arguing about capitalism here, we're arguing because you don't know what capitalism is. By its very definition capitalism cannot come from the government, as defined by websters: "an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth."

You don't dislke capitalism, you just dont know what it is. This is quite a relief.

You're using the example of your corrupt government meddling in things like as a negative - which it was, since the US government pursued it's laissez faire death dance.

Under laissez faire the government would do nothing. Not help companies it likes, not inhibit ones it dislikes, merely nothing. The very basis of your arguement is flawed in that every flaw you find with capitalism is a result of government intervention. I don't know how I can make that point any more clear.

Yet again, the government can pursue its own deregulation policies and destroy the economy but this doesn't provide an argument against government intervention on the whole, when responsible governments can intervene in the economy, set sensible policies and manage to create healthy, successful economies like Germany.

I don't believe there is a such thing as responcible government intervention as I've never seen it in practice. A government should not be able to tell you how to live your life, what you may own, what you may not own, or how to prioritize your finances. If a person or business fails it should fail. If a person or business is successful it should be entitled to enjoy its success. Beyond that there should be nothing.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What other rights beyond protection of body and property have I avdocated here? None, thats all, thats all there ever has been. What people do with their own lives is none of my concern and nor do I feel it should be the concern of the government.

No, that's not all the rights that has ever been, thank God. Human rights encompass more than the protection of body and property.

I just realized this has all been a horrible misunderstanding. We're not arguing about capitalism here, we're arguing because you don't know what capitalism is. By its very definition capitalism cannot come from the government, as defined by websters: "an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth."

You don't dislke capitalism, you just dont know what it is. This is quite a relief.

Nice try, but no. The government implemented its own disastrous economic policies and also encouraged the growth of the private sector and implemented little regulation there compared to the Northern European economies. The government intervened, but only in the end. Regulation is NOT what led to the economic downfall of your country, considering even more heavily regulated economies are so much more successful than America's broken economy today.

Under laissez faire the government would do nothing. Not help companies it likes, not inhibit ones it dislikes, merely nothing. The very basis of your arguement is flawed in that every flaw you find with capitalism is a result of government intervention. I don't know how I can make that point any more clear.

Laissez faire economics led to America's economic disaster, but when the financial and housing bubbles burst, the government only THEN decided to bail out these businesses and banks to forestall what they felt was an even deeper economic cataclysmic disaster.

I don't believe there is a such thing as responcible government intervention as I've never seen it in practice. A government should not be able to tell you how to live your life, what you may own, what you may not own, or how to prioritize your finances. If a person or business fails it should fail. If a person or business is successful it should be entitled to enjoy its success. Beyond that there should be nothing.

Germany's socialist capitalist economy is the perfect example of responsible government intervention, along with its Nordic neighbours. The facts are glaringly evident.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Human rights encompass more than the protection of body and property.

Why? Everything beyond those two items opens the floodgates of corruption. Frankly people in the developed world have all the tools to take care of themselves any problem can be solved through perserverance, government is an easy solution that will be regretted in time. Because if you give government the authority to provide for you, you also give them the authority to take it away or put whatever restrictions they desire on it.

I like to smoke, drink, skydive, and box. All of these increase my risk of being injured, now if the government has control over my health what's to stop them from demanding that I cease these activities? Whats to stop them from making these illegal as they've already tried with smoking and as several countries over the course of history have tried to do to alcohol? If history has taught us anything it's that you can justify a lot of things in the name of public health.

The government implemented its own disastrous economic policies and also encouraged the growth of the private sector and implemented little regulation there compared to the Northern European economies.

There you go again. In capitalism government doesnt encourage growth. It doesn't encourage anything except ensuring the protection of its citizens against outside force.

Laissez faire economics led to America's economic disaster, but when the financial and housing bubbles burst, the government only THEN decided to bail out these businesses and banks to forestall what they felt was an even deeper economic cataclysmic disaster.

I don't know how many times I can say this. The bubbles were caused by the government. By Fannie Mae and Feddie Mac (directly responcible for making bad loans) which are owned and operated by the federal government, and by the FED (indirectly) by adjusting interest rates below market rate making credit dangerously easy to get. You keep saying laissez faire is cause of the problem when it was never here in the first place.

You keep saying how successful other nations are, I don't know what you measure success by. US GDP is 5 times that of Germany and growth per year exceeds it also. I don't care about wealth distribution, or public education, or healthcare access. I feel that government intervention in all those matters is a gross breach of the two rights that I support and keep bringing up.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I think it's amazing that viagra is covered. Not sure why that gets covered.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I hate the word slut.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

All readers back on topic please. Posts that do not focus on Rush Limbaugh will be removed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Limbaugh is a disgrace to do what he did.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It is interesting to watch the mainstream media explosion about the use of rude words, about the speaker apologized quickly afterwards.

Jog my memory: Did Obama demand Ed Schultz apologize to Laura Ingraham for calling her a "right wing slut"? And Barbara Walters laughed it off when Schultz called Ingraham a slut. What about Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a cnt and saying she should suck his dck and calling her a dumb tw*t?

Did President Obama ever call up to express sympathy to any of the great many Americans who were called "teabaggers" by Democrat politicians and MSNBC TV hosts?

....I don´t recall either big media interest nor any apology, or what?

Afaic, this is typical hypocrisy by partisan media once again.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I love the comments that state Americans are all stupid; funny, I was always taught to paint a whole group of people in a negative manner because of the actions of a few was ignorant. I will stipulate that there are a number of ignorant people here, for example, directly above my post....why would the President call any of the teabaggers (their name, until the meaning was pointed out to them)? Many of the people who are in the Tea Party, don't even want to acknowledge that he's an American citizen...Personally, I don't think any of the women should called these names, regardless of their party affiliation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I love the comments that state Americans are all stupid; funny, I was always taught to paint a whole group of people in a negative manner because of the actions of a few was ignorant. I will stipulate that there are a number of ignorant people here, for example, directly above my post....why would the President call any of the teabaggers (their name, until the meaning was pointed out to them)? Many of the people who are in the Tea Party, don't even want to acknowledge that he's an American citizen...Personally, I don't think any of the women should called these names, regardless of their party affiliation.

No one said all Americans are stupid. But your culture celebrates and encourages ignorance, arrogance and entitlement... and all the while your government denies its citizens the basic right to health care. And the people who defend this atrocious human rights abuse tend to be (look, 'tend to be', not ALL) stupid and idiotic specimens. Sorry, but the right wingers on this site seem slightly unhinged to me.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

And the people who defend this atrocious human rights abuse tend to be (look, 'tend to be', not ALL) stupid and idiotic specimens. Sorry, but the right wingers on this site seem slightly unhinged to me.

Atrocious human rights abuse? Unhinged?

Maybe you ought to dial it back a notch.

Rush has apologized, the woman has gone back to being a Liberal activist, and the news today is tinfoil hats...

Polly want an alka-seltzer?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Been bitting my tongue till its bleeding....

So the PUBLIC is paying for her to attend a TOP 14 law school with an average starting salary of $160,000 (STARTING) and she cant pay for her sexual activities, we have to? Seems like the TAXPAYERS are the one getting screwed here. And if someone is paying for her sexual exploits then she is, as Rush said, a person of the oldest profession (debateable between prostitute or lawyer but in this case both apply and are equally distainful!!).

And BTW, she claims her BC pill are $3,000 for 3 years and yet you can buy the same less thn two blocks from Georgetown at the local pharmacy for $9 a month or $360 for 3 years. Whos fooling who?

Those that get on the Liberal bandwagon saying its an attack on women and INSANE!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Why don't people understand that the Pill is not simply a contraceptive? So she's a prostitute because she believes in universal health care? Riiight. Going by your assertion, than every women in the civilised countries which have universal health care are prostitutes as well? What backward, crazy thinking. You've bitten your tongue until its bled olimike67, well I hope you can afford the treatment for it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Fluke is no prostitute, she's just a perpetual student who wants subsidized birth control.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Atrocious human rights abuse? Unhinged?

Maybe you ought to dial it back a notch.

Maybe you ought to examine the facts. 40,000 die every year in your country because they're denied access to a human right. 'Atrocious' is pretty much the word that fits here. Keep the alka-seltzer for yourself.

Fluke is no prostitute, she's just a perpetual student who wants subsidized birth control.

Which is available to citizens in civilised countries, yet they don't get branded 'sluts' or 'whores' because it is 'subsidized'.

I'm glad you can see she's not a prostitute, Serrano.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Which is available to citizens in civilised countries, yet they don't get branded 'sluts' or 'whores' because it is 'subsidized'.

Free and low-cost birth control is readily available in the US.

This woman's proposal of non-Constitutional government interference in a private institution's policy is what is offensive... Rush used offensive terms to illustrate it, and has since apologized.

Move on.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Free and low-cost birth control is readily available in the US.

This woman's proposal of non-Constitutional government interference in a private institution's policy is what is offensive... Rush used offensive terms to illustrate it, and has since apologized.

Move on.

Um, no. Georgetown is an employer and is not exempt from following the law. Separation of church and state ring a bell? The situation she's advocating for is a reality in civilised countries outside of America, civilised countries which have better health care systems than the US. And once again, the pill is not simply a form of birth control. When someone is in the throes of poverty, even 'low-cost' becomes much too expensive. Rush is an idiot, another moron in the grips of hubris. The fact that 15 million Americans continually tune in to listen to his bigoted hateful, moronic tripe, paints a terrible picture of your country. This is the most popular radio show in America?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"This is the most popular radio show in America?"

Yes. Deal with it.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Yes. Deal with it.

Well I don't live in crazy America, so thankfully I don't have to deal with this bigot's tripe. 15 million, so that's 15 million backward people.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

50 advertisers have pulled out from the drugs limbaugh show now. They are running mostly public service ads now on the show. Limbaugh went over the line this time, asking for a college student to make porn movies for him. Maybe some of his listeners will wise up now and know what a fool he is. Many of course will not.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Wow. What a huge reaction from JT Commenters! Is this a victory for Rush?

I'd give anything for Eagle 810/FEN AM radio to stop shilling this idiot. With all the radio stations to pick from, why can't they get something that does not show the absolute worst of American talk radio? Can't listen to it. Utterly embarrassing.

Lately, they replaced NPR (oatmeal radio) with a sophisticated and listenable interview show from NYC (forget name at the moment). Why not more of this? Something that HELPS instead of destroys?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Limbaugh aint going anywhere. And he will obviously be coming through louder and clearer in the heads of the loony left.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Limbaugh aint going anywhere. And he will obviously be coming through louder and clearer in the heads of the loony left.

The 'loony' left are the picture of sanity compared to the unhinged right. How so many people can support this repulsive bigot is shocking.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How so many people can support this repulsive bigot is shocking.

There are only two types: those who are blind to his repulsive bigotry and those who are repulsive bigots themselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are only two types: those who are blind to his repulsive bigotry and those who are repulsive bigots themselves.

The blind are even more annoying in a way, because at least the active bigots are aware they're bigots - the blind need to educate themselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bill Maher supports Rush Limbaugh.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bill Maher supports Rush Limbaugh.

Good for him.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites