text:
Rush Limbaugh on Sandra Fluke Comment: 'I Descended to Their Level'
By Matthew Sheffield | March 05, 2012 | 14:22
At the top of his Monday radio show, Rush Limbaugh expanded on his apology to left-wing activist Sandra Fluke saying that he had used "inappropriate words" and in so doing had made a distraction from his point which was to focus on the Obama Administration's unconstitutional attempt to force religious organizations to pay for things they believe to be morally repugnant. In so doing, Limbaugh asserted that he had used overly personal and insulting language, something that has been a hallmark of the left as extensively documented here at NewsBusters.
"You never descend to the level of your opponent or they win, that was my error last week," Limbaugh said. "But the apology was heart-felt. The apology was sincere."
Full text of Limbaugh's statement is below the break.
Audio of Limbaugh's apology segment is below:
Text of Limbaugh's remarks:
I want to explain why I apologized to Sandra Fluke in the statement that was released on Saturday. I've heard all the theories from all sides. And frankly they are all wrong. I don't expect—and I know you don't either—morality and intellectual honesty from the left. They've demonstrated over and over a willingness to say or do anything to advance their agenda. It's what they do. It's what we fight against here every day.
But this is the mistake I made. In fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them. Against my own instincts, against my own knowledge, against everything I know to be right and wrong, I descended to their level when I used those two words to describe Sandra Fluke. That was my error. I became like them. And I feel very badly about that. I've always tried to maintain a very high degree of integrity and independence on this program. Nevertheless, those two words were inappropriate. They were uncalled for. They distracted from the point that I was actually trying to make. And I again sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for using those two words to describe her.
I do not think that she is either of those two words. I did not think last week that she is either of those two words. The apology to her over the weekend was sincere. It was simply for using inappropriate words in a way I never do. And in so doing I became like the people we oppose. I ended up descending to their level. It's important not to be like them, ever, particularly in fighting them. The old saw, you never descend to the level of your opponent or they win, that was my error last week. But the apology was heart-felt. The apology was sincere.
And as you will hear as I go on here, it was not about anything else. No ulterior motive, no speaking in code, no double entendre or intention—pure, simple, heart-felt. That's why I apologized to Sandra Fluke on Saturday because all the theories, all the experts are wrong.
What's gone on since and what really is going on here is what we all know to be true. Our president, Barack Obama, has a socialist agenda when it comes to health care, when it comes to birth control, when it comes to virtually every aspect of his agenda. In this case, Barack Obama wants the government, his government, making moral decisions about what treatments, prescriptions, pills you pay for through your insurance premiums. He isn't willing to let you or the market make that decision for yourself.
Now, the hearing that started all of this, I want to go back and put the timeline here in context, start at the very beginning. The hearing that started all of this was called by Darrell Issa, a California Republican, he's the head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa is on our side. His point in calling this hearing was to get facts into the record that otherwise would not be aired. But his committee is made up of both Republicans and Democrats, and there are rules and procedures that are followed in calling witnesses. What this was all about was the president of the United States acting extra-constitutionally, mandating that Catholic churches and their schools provide contraceptives, abortifacients. He doesn't have that power constitutionally. He cannot mandate these things.
That was the original purpose of the hearing. He was to get facts into the record that otherwise would not be aired, but his committee is made up of Republicans and Democrats and there are rules and procedures that are followed in calling witnesses. So the Democrats tried to play a game with Darrell Issa and his committee, and he rejected it. What they did was, they requested a witness for his hearing, a man named Barry Lynn to make their points for them. Barry Lynn is a guy that remits the Democrat point of view. They asked for him in advance. Issa's committee checked him out, invited him, and prepared for his testimony. Issa agreed he has a degree of expertise about the subject matter of the hearing, which was not contraception. That's what Obama wants to turn this into.
Obama is sorely hurting with women in pre-elect polls. He wanted to turn this into an issue much as they used to use abortion. So the Democrats played the game. What happened next is instructive, and it's very important. At literally the last minute the Democrats decided they want Sandra Fluke. What happened next, at the last minute the Democrats decided that Sandra Fluke would be a better witness for them, not because she had any special knowledge or credentials like Barry Lynn has, but because her optics as a woman and a college student, a 30-year-old college student and an activist on Democrat issues, by the way.
They thought all of that would show better than Barry Lynn. Now, this is at 4:30 p.m., 4:30 in the afternoon, the day before the hearing that the Democrats asked Issa to un-invite Barry Lynn, the guy they had asked for originally, and replace him with Sandra Fluke. Darrell Issa said (paraphrased), "Sorry, it's too late. She hasn't been vetted. We don't know who she is. She doesn't have any real qualifications to appear before this committee. We don't have the time to prepare for her and ask her questions. So the answer is: 'No. You cannot have her testify.'" All of this, by the way, is in a very interesting Washington Examiner article from last week, and I've linked to it at RushLimbaugh.com so you can read it yourself.
Now, the Democrats and the leftists sensed opportunity over this controversy that they created themselves. They publicly turned the situation they created to their own advantage. They invite Barry Lynn. They disinvite him at the last moment and they want him replaced with Sandra Fluke. "Who is this? We don't know who she is." The second panel of witnesses. It was Carolyn Maloney. If you don't recall last week, Carolyn Maloney, Democrat from New York, started shouting, "Where are the women? Where are the women?" They start saying Republicans hate women; they started attacking Issa and Republicans on the committee, saying, "They don't want hear from women! They're misogynist, sexist," or what have you.
Issa's committee invited the Democrat choice again, Barry Lynn, and the Democrats on the committee tried to replace him at the very last minute with this sympathetic woman when it was too late for the committee. So again they said no. So the Democrats played their game of lies, and Issa complained. On February 16th, he said, "The Democrats on his committee have appeared," this is a quote, "outright giddy in attempting to distort the testimony offered and purpose of the hearing." You bet they did. They wanted to turn this from a committee hearing on Obama and his unconstitutional mandate to the issue of contraception so as to bring back to life page 1-A of the Democrat playbook: Republicans Hate Women.
They wanted to change the whole subject. So how did they do it? Well, the Democrats have their own little subcommittee called the steering committee. This subsets inside the larger oversight and reform committee that Issa chairs. And they wanted their sympathetic witness on the record, Sandra Fluke. So they called her to testify before them, not Issa's committee. The subcommittee. They staged what was essentially a conference to look like a committee hearing. She gave the testimony that she was going to give to the full committee. It was taped and released and made to look like a committee hearing. And Darrell Issa had been right all along. Her testimony was not that of an expert.
It was just another non-expert person in this case, in Sandra's case: A 30-year-old, longtime birth control activist who went back to law school after a career of years of championing birth-control issues. In fact, she told stories less about birth control as a social tool (which was, of course, the left's true agenda) and more about birth control as a medication for treating other conditions, such as pregnancy. To the left, pregnancy is a disease. If you're listening to me for the first time, you may say, "Well, that's crazy." It's not. They treat pregnancy as a disease for political purposes. All of this, folks, is political.
Sandra Fluke gave vague examples based on unnamed friends who she says couldn't afford birth control to treat medical conditions they had, since Georgetown University wouldn't pay for them. Georgetown paid for all of their other medical treatment, but it wouldn't pay for the birth control pills that these doctors prescribed should they be necessary -- or so she says. We still don't know who any of these friends of hers are, these other women, and we don't know what happened to them. Her testimony was hearsay, and it was unprovable. And Issa was right not to let her give the testimony, particularly when the Democrats foisted her on the committee at the very last minute for the express purpose of pulling this fast one, this trick.
Now, let's get a few facts on the record here. Georgetown is a Jesuit University. It's Jesuits, run by the Jesuits, which are a Catholic order of priests. Their policy on birth control is not exactly a secret. It's not given to you in a sealed envelope after you sign up. It's out there for everybody to see. It's a Catholic university! Everybody that goes to there knows. Miss Fluke stated on occasion she went there specifically to change the policy. If birth control insurance is important to you as an enrolling student, and you find out that Georgetown doesn't offer it, you might want to attend (or work at) a school that isn't run by Catholics. I mean, just a thought.
But if you know the place doesn't offer contraceptives when you sign up, and that is your big political issue, then why are you really there? Actually, they know what they're doing. They intentionally target schools like Georgetown to advance an agenda of ultimately forcing them to abandon their religious beliefs. All of this is to serve Obama's agenda. The agenda he worked all summer on. He abandoned it only when America stood up, united, and this said they would not tolerate tearing down religion to increase government's control over our lives. You did that. You stood up to him. You made him stop. That was a proud moment for all of us.
This is his second attempt at mandating Catholic churches and other organizations (under the cloak of a so-called committee hearing) be forced to provide contraceptives against their moral conscience, dictates, what have you. So Sandra Fluke, a 30-year-old birth control activist gives unverified and inexpert testimony about how Georgetown's long-standing and public policy has hurt her unnamed friends. And let's be clear on something else. I haven't called Georgetown to see if they pay for birth control pills when being used to treat her medical conditions. I have no idea if they do or don't. If somebody at Georgetown wants to weigh in on that, I'd be interested.
But the point here is that this was an issue that represents a tiny, tiny slice of what the Democrats really want here. They use Sandra Fluke to create a controversy. Sandra Fluke used them to advance her agenda, which is to force a religious institution to abandon their principles in order to meet hers. Now, all of this is what I should have told you last week, 'cause this is what happened. I use satire. I use absurdity to illustrate the absurd. The story at the Cybercast News Service characterized a portion of her testimony as sounding like (based on her own financial figures) she was engaging in sexual activity so often she couldn't afford it. I focused on that because it was simple trying to persuade people, change people's minds.
I am huge on personal responsibility and accountability, people providing for themselves when they're totally able to. The government has no business doing any of this, getting in people's bedrooms and mandating that other citizens pay for other citizens' social activities and so forth. That was the wrong one to focus on. I acted too much like the leftists who despise me. I descended to their level, using names and exaggerations to describe Sandra Fluke. It's what we have come to know and expect of them, but it's way beneath me. And it's way beneath you. It was wrong, and that's why I've apologized, 'cause I succumbed. I descended to their level. Don't be mad at them or mad at her. Everybody here was being true to their nature except me. I'm the one who had the failing on this, and for that I genuinely apologized for using those words to describe Ms. Fluke.
#1 And I'm glad that he did.
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:34pm.
I agreed with the sentiment, but I grew ever more uncomfortable with the specific language he used. I'm glad Rush had the courage to appologize... for all the good it will do with the minions on the left.
I totally agree that we must not lower ourselves to the level of our political opponents. We are not like them. We are so much better than that. If we allow ourselves to take a trip along the gutter with these minions, we lose. We not only lose our credebility, we lose the one thing that gives us moral superiority.
I agree with Rush. No matter how tempting or gratifying it may seem to be on the surface, we cannot afford to devolve and become like them.
Still a dittohead, Rush.
Don't be another Glenn Beck. Hang in there. We can't afford to lose another one.
- Login to post comments
#2 Don't be another Glenn Beck?
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:36pm.
Glenn Beck? What's going on with Beck?
I don't listen to him any more, for my own reasons. What has he done?
- Login to post comments
#3 Sorry, MB.
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:46pm.
Lamenting the loss of Beck's entertaining 5 pm show on Fox. He got beat down by Color of Change, causing him to loose advertisers, which is the real reason why I believe he lost his show.
This is too much like deja-vue. I don't want the same thing to happen to Rush.
- Login to post comments
#5 Thanks, Matt
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:02pm.
I didn't know that.
I tired of Beck's show quite a while before he left....he's much better on the radio IMO (although I only catch him rarely when I'm driving).
I've tired of much of Fox's programming, come to think of it. F&F is insufferable (I only like the weekend crew), and I don't think I've watched during the 7 - 11 time slot in months.
Cavuto & Brett Baier still worth watching, tho.
- Login to post comments
#6 I hope so, Matt.
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:11pm.
When he had his show on Fox, he was driving the libs nuts, which is what I liked about him. ;)
People haven't been talking much about Beck since he left, which is why I say that he gave up a lot of influence when he left FNC.
I hope he's doing at least as well in his other ventures, but I haven't heard much from him since the day he left.
- Login to post comments
#7 Here you go
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 10:39pm.
GBTV, some of it is very good (I did watch some of the promotional stuff), plus he still has the Blaze
- Login to post comments
#9 I was very pleased to hear him say that today
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:34pm.
The first thing I said last week about this was that by saying that he was no better than Ed Schultz!
Apparently someone close pointed that out to him, or he reached the conclusion by himself.
And I'm glad he never stooped to the "if anyone was offended" route that liberals take. He took responsibility like a man.
I think his apology is sincere.
- Login to post comments
#10 You know yourself
Submitted by Iron Tigers Vet on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:50pm.
that regardless of the sincerity of the apology, the left will eat him alive.
The level of the playing field for the left is at the bottom and we on the right are always going to be better than they are. Rush said what he said out of anger and he's usually better than that. They might have won the battle on this one, but they will never win the war.
I'm just sad that the likes of Andrew Breitbart are gone.
- Login to post comments
#11 ⇒ Good apology
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:35pm.
He's right. As a public representative of conservatism, he shouldn't have used the term "prostitute" which has a specific meaning.
The word "slut" fits onto a sliding scale, tripped at different levels, depending on the individual evaluating the assessment of the activity, and as seen in this instance, against whom the charge is laid.
I have my own opinion as to how I feel about a woman who comes to me with a request for money so she can prophylactically enjoy the company of men I haven't even met.
- Login to post comments
#12 Rush should not have
Submitted by MikeB on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:36pm.
Rush should not have apologized. The woman is either a liar or a slut, or both. She claims that it would cost her $3000 for contraception in the 6 years of he college carreer. Besides the fact that every University I know of provides condoms for free through the student health center, every county health department also gives away condoms. Thus the cost to the progressive female for contraception for the duration of time she is in school: ZERO! Now, assume the stupid progressive female decides to purchase her own condoms. Buying them in the 36 pack at walmart costs as little as 38.8 cents each. So, $3000 would purchase 7732 condoms. Assuming 6 years of school, that is 1289 condoms per year, or 3.5 condoms per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year. The girl is a lying slut. But, then, what can you expect from a progressive female?
When I first was aware of this, I thought she was claiming $3000/year. If that is the case, she is porking just over 21 men per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year.
Now, I am not sure if Georgetown University is a Catholic institution or not. If it is, then the student health center probably does not dispense condoms. That still leaves the city/county health department dispensing for free. Or, she can purchase them from any drug store, any supermarket, any walmart store, or order them in bulk online.
And, whether she is doing 3.5 men per day or 21, she is still a slut who needs to pull up her panties and open her textbooks instead of her legs.
- Login to post comments
#14 Matt
Submitted by QueenMum on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:47pm.
I believe she said it cost $3,000 over the course of obtaining a law degree. Of course, Ms. Fluke is not really at Georgetown to get a law degree. She's training to be a community activist, just like our Dear Leader. ;)
Quote from the hearing transcript: ""Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer's salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy."
"If you don't read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed." - Mark Twain
- Login to post comments
#16 ⇒ Of course it's false
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:59pm.
But have you checked the price of MD 20/20 lately? It's higher than arugula.
- Login to post comments
#17 Tastes a hell of a lot better, too!
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:43pm.
Can't say much for the "subtle undertones of kerosene," however; but it does "finish (you) well."
- Login to post comments
#18 Hola QM!
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:16pm.
Long time, no see. Glad to see you back.
Here's a link to Georgetown Law's Public Interest Scholarship page.
Wow, and here is a link to Fluke's CV as a PILS. You're spot on, she's a Community Organizer all right...a professional rabble rouser whose entire career and education has more than likely been paid for by the taxpayers of this nation.
Cornell University awarded her a B. S. in Policy Analysis & Management, as well as Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies in 2003.
That's all I need to know.
- Login to post comments
#19 Just those three words
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:53pm.
You could end that with "Fluke was lying." That's all she was, just a big lie.
As Rush pointed out, she wasn't vetted, and she was about as credible as Stephen Cobert when he made his lame appearance in Congress, which was at the invitation of the same Carolyn Maloney that brought this person in. Which is to say, NOT AT ALL.
Maloney made a mockery of that hearing back in 2010, and she made a mockery of this one with this character.
- Login to post comments
#20 Wow
Submitted by Vandamage2000 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:38pm.
Sheffield gets the story right!
But really, you think that if you disagree with the school policy, you shouldn't try to change it, just go to another school? You don't think people should speak out for whats right?
Why is it that right wing activists are heros and patriots, but left wing activists are just rabble rousers?
- Login to post comments
#21 Van
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:42pm.
This isn't disagreeing with school policy, it's disagreeing with religious beliefs. I notice the left caves to the muslim religion, as the women professors over in Iran are wearing Hijabs. But here, the Catholic church is not supposed to be adhere to it's beliefs?
- Login to post comments
#22 "Whats right" [sic] for whom?
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:53pm.
You Nanny State grifters?
Not on my dime, thank you very much. You liberals want what you want, when you want it, but you want someone else to pay for it. How about what's right for those of us who don't want our tax money used to fund things we find morally repugnant, like abortion?
I got into it one time with one of our notorious liberals here, mamabear, about what government does best. And I asked her for an example. She replied with a story about a road that was built in Colorado.....that no one wanted, but the government did it anyway. Then sold it to some private company that made it a toll road. And she had the unmitigated gall to call it creepy that no one was on the road that SHE HAD TO PAY TO USE to get to her mother's house. I wish I could link it but it was erased in the great archive erase of 2010. Alas.
- Login to post comments
#23 Matthew Sheffield
Submitted by stratman on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 10:14pm.
Fluke stated at the onset of her testimony that the oral birth control pills prescribed were covered for her PCOS suffering friend. Her friend was prescribed the hormones - no prohibition at all from the institution. Fluke then proceeded to talk about hyperbolized hypotheticals as well as high-end costs of certain forms birth control for the sake of birth control as well as actual pathologic medical conditions (of which a normal pregnancy is not).
I believe I posted a lengthy comment on this at the link you quote.
- Login to post comments
#24 Stratman, Exactly!!! This is
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 10:22pm.
Exactly!!! This is what is missing on this whole story about Fluke and the contraceptives.
Georgetown University, as well as all Roman Catholic institutions, including the actual Catholic Church's cover contraceptives when these are needed to safe the life of a woman!!!!!!!
The Church even finds it ok when non-abortive contraceptives are used in order to prevent pregnancy if getting pregnant will kill the woman!!!!!
What the Church and thus by proxy Her institutions will not cover is contraceptives when used for the sole purpose of preventing pregnancy because you want to finish law school, because you want to travel before having children, because you want ot have recreational sex without the consequence of having a child, because having children will stand on the way of you moving up in your job, because you think your family is too large, etc., etc., etc.
AND if you don't want to have children because it will put a real and true financial hardship on your family, the Church says, CONTROL yourself and your animal instincts. Either do not have sex, many other ways to show love between a married couple, or use the Natural Family Planning Method which is incredibly effective!
This is what is completely missing from this conversation!
- Login to post comments
#25 Liberallies
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 1:07am.
We should have invested in smoke machines and mirrors. We could have made a fortune on sales to the Media and other assorted Democrats.
I fear that Fluke will soon be inoculated against all criticism. At that point, discussion of important points such as yours will be very difficult to engage in with the public via the Media.
- Login to post comments
#26 Stratman, Yeap, we should
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 2:40am.
Yeap, we should have. LOL
You know, it is amazing the level of ignorance on Roman Catholic teaching that is out there. A priest told me that instead of getting upset, this is a great time, a great moment to teach people about real Catholic teaching on contraceptives and combat the lies, half-truths and propaganda that is out there.
I already have enganged people on this matter and 10 out of 10 whom I spoken with have said, "Oh wow, i did not know that. I always thought the Roman Catholic Chruch was against contraceptives even if it ment the life of a woman was in danger..." All I could do in my inside voice is say, "REALLY?! Please God give me the patients and charity towards others which I lack! Let me me patient as you are patient with us pathetic sinners!" LOL
There is a huge media and left wing misinformation machinge doing everything tehy can to make the Church looks stupid, moronic, outdated, etc, etc. We must fight this hard with patients, love and the Truth. I fear the most for the younger generations....
Turn lemons into lemonade, sort of speak.
- Login to post comments
#27 Apologies
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:54pm.
An apology is a personal thing. I've been listening to Rush since 1988. He's a classy guy who said something he regretted. He apologized, because he was sorry. It's not up to somebody else to tell him he was wrong.
Even if someone believes that a woman is a slut, or a prostitute, or a skank or whatever, it doesn't mean that you should call them that in public, particularly if you have the podium that Limbaugh does. Rush was sorry he used those words, so he made a public apology.
"You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer's dime." Barack Obama
- Login to post comments
#28 Rush, Next Time Just Call Her a C***
Submitted by Motormouth KOS on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:44pm.
If it's good enough for Bill maher, it should be good enough for you.
Question: Did Barry Obysmal call Gov. Palin to see how she was doing after Maher called her a c*nt?
Did Comrade Downgrade call Gov. Palin after Maher called her a dumb tw*t?
Can I get a witness for the prosecution?
The Obamination... A crisis leading to a catastrophe..(please donate to MRC)
- Login to post comments
#29 While he was calling to console the slut, or whatever she is, ..
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:58pm.
... he can't seem to manager to find the time to pick up the phone and check with any of the many families who suffered loss of families and property to the deadly tornado outbreak in the Midwest.
Oh, wait. They're mostly white, middle class, working families. I sincerely apologize for thinking bad of the RBFSOB.
- Login to post comments
#30 Yeah, bubba, we STILL haven't
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:13pm.
Yeah, bubba, we STILL haven't heard anything from that front, have we??? But...........you know - flyover country, white folks, Republicans...........no need to waste any time on them. But I did notice that Boy Barry had time to make another phone call to a woman's college and invite himself to give the graduation speech, thereby 'bumping' the featured WOMAN speaker!!!
- Login to post comments
#31 Must be one of those fancy women's' colleges.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:47pm.
You know, the kind we used to call "finishing schools?"
That's where you sent your daughter so they would teach her to say "Incredible" instead of "No shit!"
- Login to post comments
#32 Yeah, I've 'finished' a
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:52pm.
Yeah, I've 'finished' a couple of'em myself!!! Well, they pretty much 'finished' me too!!!
Maybe Boy Barry can get some tips on doin' his nails, or his purple lipstick.
- Login to post comments
#33 Barnard College, Bubba.
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:26pm.
He bumped the female editor of the New York Times, of all people. And the White House and WaPo are spinning it thusly, "on the heels of another commencement commitment the president has made: at Barnard College in New York City on May 14". A commitment? That's what it is when you drop a dime, tell them to dump whoever it is that's speaking, because Barry wants to talk? And, any bets on what he's going to talk about?
Oh, and coincidentally, Barry Soetero's sister is an alumna of Barnard. If that has anything to do with the price of birth control today.
He'll get around to calling the families of the latest dead and wounded from the Stan, and those folks in the various tornado alleys, right after he plays another round of golf.
- Login to post comments
#34 Exactly... agree.
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:31pm.
Was she not proud of her situation of needing lots of birth control? Look at the end of this definition:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Slut or slattern is a term applied to an individual who is considered to have loose sexual morals or who is sexually promiscuous. The term is generally pejorative and often applied to women as an insult or offensive term of disparagement, meaning "dirty or slovenly."[1] However some women have demonstrated saying they're proud of being "sluts", and have given it a positive connotation.[2][3]
Rush was describing how she was describing herself, just using a form of this valid English word. The words Maher uses are way over the top worse. No comparison. Rush did not say this out of the blue either, just describing what she had imposed on herself. Palin did nothing to "merit" what Maher does on a regular basis.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
- Login to post comments
#35 "Slattern." I like that!
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:53pm.
From now on, I will raise my level of discourse to a new high, and quit calling slattern's, sluts.
Hell, 90% will think it's a compliment!
"Excuse me, but is that lovely outfit you're wearing tonight a Salttern design? I love the way the neckline plunges so subtly!"
- Login to post comments
#36 Hmm
Submitted by Vandamage2000 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:35pm.
The amount of birth control you use has no correlation to the amount of relations you have. You have revealed yourself as knowing nothing about how birth control works.
- Login to post comments
#37 Yes. Correlations. Hmmm.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:45pm.
The amount of spew a troll like Braindamage2000 has is no correlation to the amount of intelligence of said troll. Nor is the lack of intelligence of said trolls an impediment to posting at all.
In fact, studies have shown the more prolific a troll, the lower the intelligence. You go troll. Keep on a keepin' on.
Can someone read this to the troll and explain the big words please.
- Login to post comments
#38 Braindamage, if the cost was only $1.00 a month
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:54pm.
and Ms Fluke wanted me to pay for it, the answer would still be not only no, but Hell no.
You have revealed yourself as a know-nothing when it comes to government and the Constitution.
- Login to post comments
#39 ... and "the amount of relations" (I'm assuming you mean sexual)
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:06pm.
... you have has no correlation to whether you are a slut, excuse me, slattern or not.
See, Van, it's like being a "little bit pregnant." You either are or you aren't. You can unscrew a lightbulb, but ....
Once you jump in bed with the high school quarterback, you are no longer a virgin, and you never will be again.
It's not a factor of "the amount of relations." You either is, or you ain't, as the old song goes.
Once again, if you say you will sleep with a man for $1 million, then he asks if you will do it for $5.00, and you say, "No, What do you think I am?" He will say, "We already established that. Now we're negotiating price."
- Login to post comments
#40 I have a huge problem with this
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:46pm.
I've got a huge problem with this whole thing. Personally, I could care less what Rush called that fake girl was doing(and as he noted, she wasn't vetted, we already know she's not who she said she was, how do we know she actually fluked all those people that she needs birth control for?) but it points out what he said which that this was a distraction.
My problem is this so-called reaction to what he's said when there were far worse things said and done by the libs/dems(I repeat myself) and they never get called on it. When Rush said what he said, I thought "fair game." If it's not fair game, then the GOP and conservatives(I don't repeat myself here) get beat over the head and castigated and etc for the slightest bit of indiscretion while the libs get away literally with murder.
So honestly, all this outrage against Rush? Phony as a $1000 bill.(for those of you in Rio Linda, there are no $1000 bills in circulation)
So what if he thought he descended to their level, at least he fought fire with fire on that.
- Login to post comments
#41 This is getting pretty serious
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 2:51pm.
AOL has become the 8th company to pull their ads from his show. I wonder what company is going to be courageous enough to advertise on his show. I do not believe the bleeding has stopped and even more people might pull their ads.
- Login to post comments
#42 Which companies will advertise?
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:00pm.
You seem to be extremely concerned about advertisers pulling their support from Rush's show, even more then Limbaugh himself. Which sponsors of Rush's show have you supported in the past? And it takes no courage to advertise on Rush's show. All it takes is a desire to make money.
And....OMG!....I'm listening to Rush's show and while I type, I'm hearing a commercial for Quicken Loans! I guess they weren't so indignant that they insisted on pulling all their ads that were already paid for.
"You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer's dime." Barack Obama
- Login to post comments
#43 I told you before
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:18pm.
I hate it when people try to go after advertisers because they don't like who they support. Just mind your own damn business.
So yes, I am concerned because this sets a very dangerous precedent.
- Login to post comments
#44 Don't worry about it, Shawn
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:18pm.
Rush said he turns down far more advertisers than he accepts, which annoys his sales staff.
In fact, he said he turned down GM. What does that tell you? It tells me a lot.
- Login to post comments
#45 I am hoping you are right Blonde
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:21pm.
You usually are ;-) You know free speech is a huge issue with me and I hate the fact they are trying to shut Rush down.
- Login to post comments
#46 Getting serious,
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:56pm.
Getting serious, Shawn?
LOL....AOL is with who? Huffinton Post. I am not surprised that they are going to stop being a sponsor.
However, as someone pointed out down below, Carbonite and other companies who say they are no longer sponsors of Rush Limbaugh Show had commercials running on his show.
What does that tell me? That Carbonite and the other companies are not doing this out of principle, rather to please the Left. If Carbonite and the otehr companies truly believed what they claim, they would have broken the contract, paid for breaking the contract and immediately stop advertising on his show.
Nope, not getting serious. It is the Left and the wish-wasy, non-principled, hypocritical companies getting ridiculous.
time to return to the point of this whole thing....President Obama forcing his beleifs on the Roman catholic Church and other religions. This is what the debate is all about.
- Login to post comments
#47 Well I don't know if Huffington is accurate today
Submitted by shawn. on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:21am.
But they are now saying the count is now up to 12
- Login to post comments
#48 Good job Dead Zippers.
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:10pm.
Say, remember when your name was Kennedy Death Watch? Well now you can change it to Limbaugh Death Watch since you are delighting in all the gruesome statistics.
Not trollish at all to come in sixteen* times a day and tell us the latest count. Not trollish at all.
*sixteen - that is all the fingers, all the toes on one foot, and the roast beef toe on another.
- Login to post comments
#49 Vet, for once your Cray supercomputer is wrong.
Submitted by mandrake on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:23pm.
No way shawn is 'dead zippers'
Shawn is a fellow Canadian..so no way is he 'Dead Zippers'..or Leon..etc
gotcha ;)
- Login to post comments
#50 And you are wrong, frosty blue troll.
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:31pm.
My name is not hyperbole. I just use it. Your name however, still Crusty Caribou Crap in a Tuque.
Noted - You did not deny he has to take off his shoes and socks to count above 8 or 9. I am sure he thanks you for that.
- Login to post comments
#52 Vet
Submitted by shawn. on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:38pm.
LL says the situation is no big deal. I am saying losing advertisers at a rapid rate is concerning
Listen I know you consider yourself untouchable because you are popular with the NB cool kids, but stop picking fights and making false accusations just because you want to settle a score
Accusing me of being nwahs or ADK is like Where's the beef? Or waaaaaaasup? Its cool at first but gets tiring fast.
- Login to post comments
#53 Awwwww.
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:44pm.
Hyperbole too tough a concept fur ya.
Monkeypeople suck. Ask Mandrake if you can borrow the dictionary and look it up.
- Login to post comments
#54 its because i believe it is relevant
Submitted by shawn. on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 4:59pm.
And I think it is serious. Since time you accused me of being Nwahs this morning, 9 more advertisers have pulled their ads.
That makes it over 20 so it is time to count vet self serving posts, so I will not run out of stuff to count
Are you willing to have a discussion or is it that important to your ego to talk about monkey people?
- Login to post comments
#55 Shawn, 20 advertisers have
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 6:30pm.
20 advertisers have pulled? where are you getting your information from?
You are allowing yourself to be mislead by the media, from my understanding, the official, unbiased count is 9 or 10, not 20.
The Left has been claiming that Autozone, AllState pulled, but the response that I received from these companies as well as others is that they have never in the past advertised on his show.
Stop believing the Left wing media so much.
You should be a lot more concern with the Liberal double standard and hypocrisy than Rush Limbaugh. He will make more money, even without his radio show, than you and I combined will make in our life time. Get over this already. Old news.
- Login to post comments
#56 LiberalLies
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 10:52pm.
I've also noticed some oddities with these advertisers who have dropped Rush, I've never heard them advertise on his show. AOL is one. I've never heard AOL advertise on ANY radio show.
I think their math is very similar to the Obama administration's, you know, the people telling us we really don't have inflation, and we're adding jobs.
- Login to post comments
#57 Radical, I am use GEICO for
Submitted by Liberallies on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 1:47pm.
I am use GEICO for my car insurance. I wrote them a stern email yesterday since I read on ABC news.com that GEICO had dropped Rush Limbaugh. I received an email reply today, they have not advertised with Limbaugh since 2004.
The Left is lying here and ABCnews, the likes of Shawn, etc are falling for it.
Out of the 20 that the Left has listed which have supposedly dropped Limbaugh over this issue, Autozone, AllState, GEICO and others have replied to me saying that they have NEVER advertised on his show or they dropped him years ago. I am still waiting on Carbonite, AOL and others to get back to me.
We need to do our own research instead of taking for granted the lies that are said by abcnews, huff&puff and the other radical Left wing sites.
There is a big push to get Limbaugh off the air by getting sponsors to leave him, but hmmm...from what I am finding out directly from the advertisders it is not that succesful.
Shawn....don't be so easily led by the radical Left my friend.
- Login to post comments
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 1:56pm.
I have actually heard spots for AOL on Rush's show, and have heard those spots relatively recently. Rush explained what's going on with his advertisers during the first twenty minutes of his show today. There is a good chance that AOL was one of the companies that bought blocks of time for one of their services through local affiliates, and I hear the spots from my local radio station and you do not.
From what Rush said, there are couple of his biggest sponsors that publicized that they were going to drop him, who are now begging to get back on his show. My guess is, they overreacted to the initial "astro-turf" outrage, and are now being bombarded by actual customers who have purchased their product because they heard of their product or service via Rush's show.
It was a very interesting 20 minutes, and as I posted in another spot on this thread, I am sure shawn is very relieved.
"You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer's dime." Barack Obama
- Login to post comments
#59 Kingfish, Exactly! I didn't
Submitted by Liberallies on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 1:38am.
Exactly! I didn't listen to him today, but I read a full transcript of what he said.
Rush Limbaugh is going nowhere and I find it very telling that three advertisers want back in. These idiotic companies were overwhelmed by the Left wing radical austroterf, who do not buy their products, and then us on the Right, who actually by their products and use their service, came in after the Left and started to actually harm these companies by cancelling our services and promising never to buy anything from them. HAHAHA!!!
I hope Limbaugh doesn't let them back in and he tells us who they are soon. HA!
Limbaugh wins again and Liberal heads explode!
- Login to post comments
#60 Re to shawn about Rush Sponsors
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 1:22pm.
Since you're such a big fan of Rush Limbaugh's, I'm sure you caught the first 20 minutes of his show today where he discussed what's going on with his sponsors. I bet you're really relieved, and assured. No more sleepless nights for you.
"You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer's dime." Barack Obama
- Login to post comments
#61 I will take that bet.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 10:31pm.
He is a little death watch loving troll that gets his jollies from posting the count of sponsors leaving a show. But don't you dare get sarcastic and compare his goulishness to users that named themselves death watch. That is bullyish and you are a word bully and anyone that agrees how macabre it is keeping death watch count over a show is word bully schooltime kookidz.
Five bucks says he din't hear the show and another five says he is kinda bummed Rush will not be driven from the air.
- Login to post comments
#62 nope
Submitted by shawn. on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 10:48pm.
I was just going to let have the last word because its good for ego
No I did not listen to Rush today because I was at work
I already explained I want Rush to on the air, but obviously you are on roll now. Whatever.
- Login to post comments
#63 Yes. Whatever. You slimy slithering trail of snail snot
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 4:43am.
Some critics, Limbaugh included, believe that the purpose of these reports is to convince audiences that Limbaugh has done irreparable financial damage to his brand...
That is you making those reports, you slimy slithering trail of snail snot troll. You.
"People are reporting things that, A, are not true, and B, I don't even think the people reporting it have the slightest idea what they're talking about, nor do they have the ability to understand it," Limbaugh said...
That is you reporting things without knowing what you are talking about, you slimy slithering trail of snail snot troll. You.
"Well, how can they say it?" Limbaugh asked rhetorically. "Because they lie and because they don't understand how it works, and that's what I want to try and explain."
That is you, you lying slimy slithering trail of snail snot troll. You lie.
- Login to post comments
#64 You are a really angry person
Submitted by shawn. on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 9:27am.
I didn't make those reports, I just thought that it was a serious situation and just wanted to debate that point. You just want to turn his thread into a flaming match and make it about you like always.
Yeah it's not like you are a hateful person and use NB as an outlet or anything like that. NB does not have enough bandwiidth to hold your fragile ego.
- Login to post comments
#65 Wow. How many fingers am I holding up?
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 10:13am.
Please. Please. You must market your magical mystical ESP angriz reading troll powers. Iz get richez, i tellz ya.
Yes trolliz, I iz so angriz. Rush was talking about m.... Oh wait, no, he was talking about you. Angriz deflated. Or, no, you prolly already knew that what with your magical mystical ESP angriz reading troll powers.
- Login to post comments
#66 ~One
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 10:19am.
Just a guess.
- Login to post comments
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 10:33am.
- Login to post comments
#68 Correct.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 12:46pm.
I iz angriz. Hear me roar. Do the letters look shaky because my fingers iz shaky as I type this out. Shakin' wit rage! But I am surprised the magical mystical ESP angriz powers did not alert the troll so he could get in before you. Hmmm. Trollies need to polish the ESP antennas or suntin.
- Login to post comments
#69 ~Don't take too much credit
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 12:54pm.
I'm definitely the angriest person around here, lots and lots of people have told me so.
In CAPS, usually.
- Login to post comments
#70 Shhhhhh.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 1:43pm.
Each trollie thinks he is the only one with the magical mystical ESP angriz power. When in fact, all of them seem to have the magical Mystical ESP angriz power in identifying all the angriz monkeymen. They each think they are gonna get all rich with it when in fact it is common in the troll gene pool. That and Stupid, and failure, and loneliness, and jealouseez for the kool kids monkeymen.
- Login to post comments
#71 I dunno, Shawn,
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 6:51pm.
but I'm getting a mental image of you sitting in a barren tree on the Serengeti waiting for a wildebeest to drop dead next to the waterhole.
Who cares? What's gonna happen is gonna happen.
- Login to post comments
#72 ~We need to get bk on that one
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 7:03pm.
- Login to post comments
#73 Iz trollie got button. Iz dang Veet push button?
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 10:50pm.
Iz not nwahs. Iz not Deddiz. Iz rain man! Yeah. Yeah. Iz rain man nah. Serious. Yeah. Iz 20 nah. Iz 21. Yeah. 21. 21 matches. Yeah.
- Login to post comments
#74 ~"the NB cool kids"
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 1:04pm.
When we were all sitting at our special cafeteria table we decided to have our own T-shirts made up with that slogan. Oh, and stickers to put on our lockers.
The NB Cool Kids
We ♥ The Vet
What do you think?
- Login to post comments
#75 Count me in Bru*
Submitted by cajun2 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 1:37pm.
I'm not really that cool but I do so love THE VET
- Login to post comments
#76 Ok, I'll stay with the group provided The Vet stays with ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 11:08pm.
'The Vet' as his username.
My wife likes "The Vet" tattoo on my right shoulder much more than the "JWF" tattoo on my left shoulder.
Maybe I should have told her that 'JWF' does not stand for Jammie Wearin' Fool. :o)
- Login to post comments
#77 Hey,
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 2:02am.
what happened to the "UpNorth" tat?
- Login to post comments
#78 i heard that it was in demand
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 2:10am.
Almost as much as ShyWear :-)
- Login to post comments
#79 I am still undecided, UpNorth, whether to go with ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 3:04am.
block letters or the Olde English Script. :o)
- Login to post comments
#80 His show opened with a Carbonite spot today.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:25pm.
Now I'm sure they are contractually obligated to pay for booked spots, but I'm pretty sure they also have a right to request it not be aired (but still pay for it.)
So Fluke is not the only slut in this story.
- Login to post comments
#81 I don't hear his ads
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:35pm.
...when I'm home. So I didn't catch that. Thx.
- Login to post comments
#82 SickofLibs, The very first
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:58pm.
The very first commercial for Rush's firsrt break in the Chicago market was Carbonite. I was cracking up since i was listening with my very Liberal friend who had a heartattack and a half since he was told that Carbonite would not be advertising anymore. I had to explain to him contractual responsabilities. hahaha...he was furious. LOL
- Login to post comments
#83 I've never heard some of these advertisers
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:39pm.
when I listen to Rush. AOL? Never heard them during Rush's show, that doesn't mean they advertise, but I don't think all of these sponsors are big ones for Rush.
This explains why Glen Beck started his own network and the whole not beholden to advertisers. I think I might just sign up for GBTV.
- Login to post comments
#84 SoL, Guess which advertiser is begging to come back?
Submitted by upcountrywater on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 2:37pm.
Just guessing, heh heh.
- Login to post comments
#85 Yes. It is getting serious Shawn.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:50pm.
You are up to 8 now. 3 or 4 more and you will have to take off your shoes and socks to continue counting.
- Login to post comments
#86 ~You slay me, darling
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:58pm.
- Login to post comments
#87 It is now 9
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 7:18pm.
Tax Solutions is the 9th. Not sure how reliable Huffington Post is, but they are the first to report it I think.
Its not just the number but the pace he is losing advertisers by is quite rapid. Also take a look at the large number of remaining sponsors
Geico is owned by Warren Buffet and a huge number of liberals watch Netflix. They are under a lot of pressure along with the rest..
- Login to post comments
#88 ~I'm so glad you're on top of this, shawn
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 7:36pm.
I'm sure Rush is relieved, too. Keep up the good work with the counting stuff.
- Login to post comments
#89 Ahhh come on Bru
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 7:43pm.
Thats not fair, I have not said one sarcastic or mean thing to you in at least a month. I remember you made me smile with your Xena post to me :-)
I am not asking for us to be best buddies, but lets not fight okay? this is one thing we agree on. I hate it when people try to stifle free speech.
- Login to post comments
#90 ~C'mon
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 7:51pm.
After all this time you can't tell the difference between when I'm messin' with ya and when I'm annoyed?
- Login to post comments
#91 Actually I can't
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:11pm.
That is what gets me in trouble sometimes :-) Look here is my point of view on this. People are saying this is no big deal and just a drop in bucket. Yes for now it is. However you know how powerful social media is. The woman that wanted to pull funding for Planned Parenthood, caved just a few days later.
Can you imagine being one of the remaining companies? Management has no time to be dealing with thousands of calls demanding they pull their ads or they will boycott their products? The thousands of emails, and regular mail and even worse a bunch of libs picketing in front of your office. "it has not happened yet, but it is only a matter of time"
Liberals make a up a very big chunk of the remaining advertisers revenue, and that hurts a companies bottom line. The Liberals are extremely organized when it comes to these types of things, but like I said, I hope Blonde is right and this will blow over. The most satisfying thing would be if some companies would come forward the next few days.
- Login to post comments
#92 Shawn, Hmmm...9 is a big
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:33pm.
Hmmm...9 is a big deal? When NONE want to advertise in his show, give us a call.
I know the Liberals are already dancing on Rush Limbaugh's emptry grave. Something tells me that Limbaugh's numbers for today's show where the highest in his career.
Huffington Post is a sad joke of a website which was started as a Conservative site by Andrew Breirbart and Arianna Huffinton. Once the lunatic Huffinton switched sides, Breibart walked away. I wouldn't put too much stock on what you are reading there.
I posted a list of advertisers which I found on one of these Liberal sites. I should have known better than to trust the crazy left. Autozone replied to me, so did AllState and others. most of them informed me that they do not and have never advertised on the Rush Limbaugh show. Liberals are, as always, lying.
Move on Shawn, nothing to see with this anymore other than Liberals wet dreams. After tomorrows Super Tuesday battle Fluke will be old and used news. HA!
Oh, by the way, I think Rush Limbaugh made it very clear today when he poked fun at the whole thing of boycotting from advertisers when he said, "I attempted to call "If Two By Sea" Tea products, but I could not reach myself. The signal was busy." My take away from that was, "..all advertisers can leave, I make so much money that I can do this on my own." LOL
Limbaugh will laugh at Liberals and win every single time. LOL
- Login to post comments
#93 ~Nothing to worry about, shawn
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:48pm.
Liberals have been trying to take Limbaugh down for 20+ years. He's still here.
- Login to post comments
#94 Relax shawn 228, Rush has 20,000 advertisers...
Submitted by upcountrywater on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 2:52pm.
Ain't no dead air here on my crappy AM radio KAOI station.... OPPS well when Ed Shouts is on...
- Login to post comments
#95 Carbonite CEO is an Obama contributor
Submitted by mom_rox on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:13pm.
The Right Sphere has an excellent article noting the hypocrisy by Carbonite, whose CEO has contributed to Pres. Barack Obama. Carbonite pulled their ads from Rush, but not from Ed Shultz, although both used similar language.
- Login to post comments
#96 I know that all of you will be shocked by this.
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:31pm.
I have yet to receive a return e-mail from Auto Zone, Carbonite, Sleep Number or ProFlowers, over my concerns about their hypocrisy over their advertising with Rush. I'm shocked, just shocked!! Well, actually not so much. I didn't expect anything better, but I actually spend money in the marketplace, unlike most of those who contacted them to pull their ads. I'd guess they're content to not have my money.
- Login to post comments
#97 UpNorth
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:38pm.
It's kind of what Rush said, these people don't want our money, fine. He can find more advertisers.
I think the next few months will be an eye opener for these companies as their sales drop. Like falling off a cliff.
- Login to post comments
#98 True, Rad, and I just had a thought about Carbonite.
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:47pm.
Who, in their right mind, would want to back up their computer files with a company, owned by a heavy backer of Barack Hussein Soetero? It's bad enough that government wants access to our health records and banking records, but to willingly give up the confidentiality of your computer files to a company whose CEO has close ties to the Regime?
I'll do my own back-up on an external hard drive, but thanks for making up my mind, Carbonite.
- Login to post comments
#99 Ditto on Carbonite
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 5:42pm.
You know, I had thought about going with Carbonite only briefly but had a nagging feeling about it, so I decided not to do it.
I can back my own stuff up as well, but the only reason I thought about doing it is because I know people that are barely decent with computers and could have used a service like that, and would have recommended it(or not). Now I know not doing it was the right decision.
- Login to post comments
#100 The Left's Ultimate Advantage
Submitted by papadon on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:38pm.
The left can always count on the right doing the right thing. That is their ultimate advantage. --by someone.
- Login to post comments
#101 If you are attacked by a ruthless enemy, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:04pm.
... and they engage you in hand-to-hand combat, if you do not "sink to their level," you will die.
There are NO rules in a knife fight.
Read a history book.
- Login to post comments
#102 Bubba, there is ONE rule in a knife fight.
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 2:05am.
Bring a gun....
- Login to post comments
#103 I 'misspoke' the other day on
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:16pm.
I 'misspoke' the other day on a thread, and now I'm going to have to 'recalibrate'.................I said that I doubt if Rush will lose any sponsers over this, but evidently I was wrong, so I want to sincerely apologize, in a heartfelt manner.
But I don't think it will be too long before he either gets those sponsers back, or other ones come in and fill the void - he's too big and too powerful and too well-known, and advertisers get their money's worth with El Rushbo.
- Login to post comments
#104 Levin said sometime back,
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:34pm.
That his air time was booked up for some 6 months in advance. No doubt Rush will find many suiters who would not had otherwise had an opportunity.
What his advertisers dont understand, the libtards aint listening anyway!
- Login to post comments
#105 I think the apology was for...
Submitted by optimist on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:29pm.
Sandra Fluke and his audience only. He could give a damn about the left and their outrage. His audience will accept the apology, but I doubt Fluke will.
- Login to post comments
#106 Fluke
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:43pm.
I heard Fluke on an ABC radio "news" report. She was appearing on The View, and to everyone's shock and surprise, she did the classy thing......Ahhhh....who am I kidding; she refused to accept Rush's apology. Tells you a lot.
"You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer's dime." Barack Obama
- Login to post comments
#107 That's fine
Submitted by optimist on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:54pm.
In the end, she will be the one looking awful in the eyes of the silent majority, and honestly that's good enough for me.
- Login to post comments
#108 Who woulda
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:56pm.
Who woulda thunk..................coming from a 30-year-old liberal Democrat activist who's main agenda at Georgetown was to do what she is doing right now??? It's really ironic that Ms. Botox would invite this so-called student up to Capital Hill to testify about a non-subject that has been concocted and pushed down our throats by the REGIME and the StateRun Media.
Fluke is a kook and a puke, and she IS a slut too!!!
- Login to post comments
#109 These loser advertisers were
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:41pm.
These loser advertisers were already in the tank for the magic negro, they were only waiting for the marching orders. The conservatives rather than rise to the challenge and call out this whore and the media rolled over and groveled as usual. The right wrings their hands and fears that they will be called racist bigots by the very people who want them dead. This nonsense from the consevatives reminds me of a group of people from the thirtes in europe who were also afraid to fight back until it was too late.
- Login to post comments
#110 I heard Rush's advertisers
Submitted by NCfairandbalanced on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:45pm.
I heard Rush's advertisers are starting to abandon him. But I really think he will bounce back from this as his advertisers will re-join him sooner rather than later.
Why? Ironically, because of the liberal left. Yes, those certain few like Kristen Powers and that woman from the Washington Post, pointing out a double standard the way lib commentators and entertainers treat women.
Double standards are the norm for the left to ignore, but on this particular subject, their task to ignore is significantly more difficult.
That is good news for Rush. Is core audience is more behind him than ever, because his whole existence as a powerful radio voice hinges on what is happening here in the first place.
How ironic. By the way, don't anyone be fooled here. The left knows this...but hope no one catches on!
- Login to post comments
#111 I hope he turns them down, or
Submitted by optimist on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:59pm.
I hope he turns them down, or tells them to get to the back of the line. I'll be interested to see the new people he'll have in the next few weeks.
- Login to post comments
#112 Miss Flukes' testimony.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 3:50pm.
Rush: Sandra Fluke gave vague examples based on unnamed friends... ...or so she says. We still don't know who any of these friends of hers are, these other women, and we don't know what happened to them. Her testimony was hearsay, and it was unprovable.
I am reminded of a certain future Senator that went before Congress and told stories he had heard from unnamed friends. This was at a Wintry Time Soldier investigation. Turns out, and the Army investigated them, his unamed friends were all liars if they existed at all..
- Login to post comments
#113 Vet, didn't he spend a holiday in Cambodia?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 2:10am.
Then he wrote himself up for a couple of Purple Hearts, so he could get out of country? Then he returned to testify at something, just like what Fluck, er, Fluke testified at, a non-sworn, non-judicial "hearing", where he "testified" that "crimes" had been committed, but he couldn't substantiate anything? And he married the Ketchup princess?
- Login to post comments
#114 Correct sir.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 10:35am.
You see the similarities too.
- Login to post comments
#115 Sandra Fluke: Rush Limbaugh's apology doesn't change anything
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:00pm.
Fluke told Goldberg that she disagreed with the comparison because Limbaugh's single statement that he regretted his choice of words came after he'd been on the attack for days. "I think you're doing a disservice by comparing yourself, because this was not someone who made one accidental statement," Fluke said.
"This was three days of significant portions of his three-hour show. He insulted me and the women of Georgetown -- who have received no apology – he insulted us over 53 times."
Looking forward to her new book...I'll boycott that..
- Login to post comments
#116 What Fluke? What about the free speech chilling effect!
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:09pm.
I thought they were concerned about chilling effects on free speech?
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
- Login to post comments
#117 Call these sponsors
Submitted by EddieB on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 4:32pm.
I've just called Carbonite and LifeLock and politely gave them my opinion. Both listened and thanked me for my civilty. The lady at LifeLock said that most people weren't as nice. I can only assume the majority came from the left. I plan on speaking to the rest that cancelled and will be calling the ones that stay on also.
Seriously, I don't think this is the time to be the silent majority any longer.
The left is using this faux news to hide/cover for Obama and his failures.
- Login to post comments
#118 She Bop
Submitted by djwolf12 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 6:54pm.
I don't know if anyone picked up on this, but he pronounced her name as "Fluck" and his bumper music at 12:25pm was the song "She Bop" by Cyndi Lauper. believe me, I may be the only person that picked that up and yes, I laughed out loud. No matter what, Rush is still the king of being on the cutting edge of evolution society.
- Login to post comments
#119 I heard the 'She Bop' too - I
Submitted by killa37 on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 8:19pm.
I heard the 'She Bop' too - I thought it was pretty funny...............and I also heard his 'Fluck' pronounciation the whole time, so I just figured that was the way it was supposed to be. I mean - it's a little tough with that name - are you gonna be a 'Fluke', or a 'Fluck'..........I'm not sure how the little slut - whoops - lady pronouces it.
- Login to post comments
#120 Not sure if anyone has mentioned it as yet
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 03/05/2012 - 10:29pm.
but 30 year old Sandra Fluke also believes sex changes should be mandated in coverage as well.
Transgender persons wishing to undergo the gender reassignment process frequently face heterosexist employer health insurance policies that label the surgery as cosmetic or medically unnecessary and therefore uncovered.~ SF
This woman is clear a public activist at this point. She is not merely a private citizen with a particular concern, she's an advocate, and I'll bet a well compensated one. She's fair game.
- Login to post comments
#121 Maybe Boy Barry was behind
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 2:24am.
Maybe Boy Barry was behind that - so to speak - because he feels like he owes something to his childhood nanny, who has been dreaming for years about getting a sex-change operation.
- Login to post comments
#122 I agree with him 100%. Where
Submitted by GrannyGrump42 on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 12:56am.
I agree with him 100%. Where he went wrong is that he stooped to their level and got off-message.
As for calling Fluke a prostitute, that's an insult to prostitutes, who after all only want people who are GETTING the sex to have to pay for it, and who have higher standards. Whoever is banging Fluke, after all, isn't even willing to shell out enough to buy a condom. He doesn't consider her worth it. Not even the cheapest whore on Canal Street will put out for a man THAT cheap.
- Login to post comments
#123 What I have learned from all this is the guys at Georgetown are
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 3:53pm.
...too cheap to pop for their own party hats.
LOL - At least the one's that are willing to get horizontal with Fluke and her "friends" are, anyway.
Vote for the American in November
- Login to post comments
#124 Dave
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 3:27pm.
and some of the girls are so cheap they don't make the guy pop for the party hat.
How cheap a date can a girl be?
- Login to post comments
#125 Good evening Rad
Submitted by cocodrie on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 3:38pm.
I was born way too soon . My wife made me marry her before I was allowed any horizontal refreshment.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
- Login to post comments
#126 ~Some of us still respect ourselves and our husbands
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 4:02pm.
as much as your dear wife did. :-)
- Login to post comments
#127 Good for you Cocodrie*
Submitted by cajun2 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 4:05pm.
Your wife sounds like she was very much a "lady".
- Login to post comments
#128 No Coco
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 4:30pm.
You were born right on time. You never had to worry about HIV or other diseases with a wife such as yours.
- Login to post comments
#129 Something fishy in Denmark with these cancellations...
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 3:30pm.
When I look at the list of sponsors who have cancelled, there are quite a few I don't recognize from listening to Rush. Then when Bru said Geico said they dropped Rush a few years ago, it hit me. Libs are playing with numbers again. They are counting everyone who has ever advertised on Rush's show as a dropped sponsor, even if they dropped him well before Fluke reared her ugly mug.
Carbonite was a biggie, and so is/was Lifelock. But many of these other companies haven't been with Rush for a long time.
- Login to post comments
#130 ~Rad
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 4:04pm.
Here's Rush's breakdown of what's going on; it's not near as dire as the Left is trying to make out.
- Login to post comments
#131 That was good to read. Thank
Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Wed, 03/07/2012 - 4:43pm.
That was good to read. Thank you.
-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.
- Login to post comments
#132 Sluts and Whores Galore
Submitted by iFight on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 10:28am.
Male students around the country simultaneously rejoice having confirmed that all of their female counterparts who receive contraceptive coverage under their tax payer funded university health programs are in fact sluts and whores.
- Login to post comments
#133 Did you practice?
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/08/2012 - 12:39pm.
Maybe hit the dictionary and look up every word?
While you were practicing and rehearsing your post, you missed that Mr. Limbaugh apologized. And since when do taxpayers fund university health programs? Especially Georgetown University? A PRIVATE university. So a whole week planning, reshearsing, practicing, and all for what? To look like a fool. Good job. Fool.
- Login to post comments
#134 You should love sluts
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 1:39am.
Fat ugly f#cks like you wouldn't get laid without them.
(Don't blame me folks, just doin' teh funny like maher).
- Login to post comments
#135 Hmmm Wow
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 12:50am.
People that posted in this thread that are seeing this in their tracking are wondering what kind of a loser is posting on such an old thread?
I always think it is important to stick to topic and this is on topic. Rush sank to their level. He also apologized. Anyways just to warn before I begin. It is a long post and you don't have to read if you don't want to.
So anyone left that is reading can be a judge. I want some honest feedback about me as a poster overall. The ironic thing about the Vet is he is electing to act like a scorned woman liberal. I will back up my point like I always do.Okay so the thing is, I have apologized to the vet both online and offline. I apologized to him again on News Years eve and wished him a happy New Year. He then called me a turd. He is commenting on many of my posts. I don't agree with Nwahs or JasonC, but I know how they feel now. They are constantly harassed so its no fun posting anymore. He is everywhere like a an ex boyfriend and its kind of gay.
Brunette I am also addressing you here, I know you are good friends with the vet but I want you to remember something. I was one of your best friends when you were just the first version of Choselife.. I was also one of your first friends that introduced to many others here. We had lot of Good Chats there and I feel sad about how it ended. I take a lot of responsiblity for that. You thought I was calling you a wh*re. I was not at all, but it does not matter how much I deny it, what really matters is how it is perceived. That is why we had a falling out. If I offended you that day, I am sorry The thing is Bru I feel meeting somebody of that profefession Is not that bad of a thing. Me not saying I would take her word as much as I t ake your word does not mean I am comparing you to her.
Okay back to the vet. have tried to apologize but he keeps following me around. and talking about monkey pibbles and donkey crap. I understand some of it, but it is really really weird and out there.
I have not talked about legalizing pot for over a year. I try to not be vulgar and use similes. I try to be honest and I admit it when I am wrong. .
What else can I do here? Is it me? can I have some feedback?
- Login to post comments
#136 Yes, it's you
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 12:52am.
Move on.
- Login to post comments
#137 Thank you
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 12:58am.
Restless I respect your opinion as much as anyone on. MAY I ASK WHY?
- Login to post comments
#138 I really haven't followed Shawn
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 1:18am.
I honestly couldn't tell ya. Just wanted to yank your chain a little, hoping a funny would diffuse the situation.
- Login to post comments
#139 Restless
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 1:28am.
I'm not going to to you in a tough situation. I just refuse to be run off by this guy. I have apologized and to make nice what more can I do here?
- Login to post comments
#140 Shawn, probably nothing more
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 1:36am.
you can do, other than to ignore.
I don't know what started the crap between you two. I know the Vet is hard headed, and so are you. Hell, I am also.
I respect you as a poster, and really, that is all that matters.
- Login to post comments
#141 Thank you Restless
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 1:49am.
I appreciate it
- Login to post comments
#142 Hey boys and girls. Word Bullies got you down?
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 10:31am.
I just refuse to be run off by this guy.
Does the word bully pull letters here and there from the 25 letters of the alphabet and use them to form words and then further put those words in the long things called sentences and those words and sentences hurt? Do they hurt bad? And you really don't know why the word bullies makes words that hurt?
Why, make a post and tell the world how far and honext you are and how you rilly rilly rilly don't deserve the hurtful words that word bullies put on these pages. Oh, and sprinkle plenty of insults aimed at the word bully when you make your pleading pining post.
Vet is...act like a scorned woman liberal. He is...like a an ex boyfriend and its kind of gay
Yeah, it is the word bully. He puts words on pages for no reason at all and trollies hurt. And trollies rilly rilly rilly don't deserve to be hurt, do they? Because words on a webpage can run you off. That is how it works. Not posting antithetical and frightfully stupid things that word bullies respond to. No. No. No. That can't be it. Nope, they got veendettas and are following you around and saying mean things when you say smart stuff that make people go hmmmm, wowzeewowzers, that was smart.
- Login to post comments
#143 Vet geez
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 11:34am.
I dont get it. Let's resolve this. I admit you are winning and making posting very uncomfortable for me right now. I don't want to see monkey man and monkeypibles and answering questions about being nwahs when I post
- Login to post comments
#144 It's simple shawn
Submitted by cocodrie on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 11:39am.
Just quit posting antagonizing inanity.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
- Login to post comments
#145 Good morning cocodrie
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 11:51am.
I post things that many people disagree with. I totally get it. I try to post as respectfully as I can for the most part, buy at the same time I have to stick up for myself.
- Login to post comments
#146 One simple line.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 03/11/2012 - 12:30pm.
shawnwahs: I dont get it.
cocodrie does. And he explains it in one simple line.
- Login to post comments


text:
Query Details
|Query Subject:
Virus : Plural
|Ninja Looter
|Submitter Email:
|click here to access email
I'm making a Linguistlist query about the plural of the word ''Virus.'' This is a two-fold question.
Do you feel that the word ''Virus,'' in English, is a fully English word, or does it retain some of its Latinate heritage. There are many variants of the plural of ''Virus.''
Viruses (Fully English word)
Virii (Ill formed from Virius, Masculine, second declension Latin)
Viri (Ill formed? from Virus, *Masculine, second declension Latin)
Vira (From Virus, Neuter, second declension Latin)
I've seen treatment of Virus as a 4th declension Noun, rather than
second, also. What are the views of our Latin scholars here?
With regard to the alternation (Virus ~ Viruses) as a completely
Modern English word, it seems odd to me that those who make this
Modern English alternation also make the plurals of (Corpus, Genus,
and others) as (Corpora, Genera, and others). While a line must be
drawn somewhere between faithfully representing the lineage of a word,
and simple practical reasons, it seems odd to me that medical scholars
(and to a lesser extent computer experts) would not make a similar
treatment of the word ''Virus,'' respecting its Latinate roots like
they respect other words.
Faithfully Yours,

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|SitePoint Sponsor
User Tag List
Results 1 to 3 of 3
Feb 18, 2013, 06:32 #1
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 21
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
[AU] Jr. Front-end + PHP developer need some advices~ I'm lost...help
Hello everyone,
I've completed both my master and bachelor degree in multimedia and i've been working 18 months in the industry as a front-end developer | PHP & MySQL in Melbourne, Australia. I am the only developer in the team and i don't have any friends or knew any other developers. So if there is any developers meet up event open to the public i would really love to join if there is an opportunity.
There are a few things that i wasn't so sure about myself and i hope i could get some advices here.
I have the following skills:
- HTML5 / CSS3 / JQuery / PHP / MySQL / ActionScript 3.0 / Photoshop / Flash / Illustrator / HTML Email / Entry Level Responsive Web Development
I'm currently learning:
- GIT / Wordpress websites
Interested with:
- Magento / Zend Framework / Backbone.js / expand my JS skills
I'm familiar with Wordpress and Joomla website and be able to manage content updates and edit Wordpress theme.
My Current Salary:
- $40k package
1. What salary i should be getting based on my experiences and skills sets today?
2. Is there any problems with my skills development plan? What are the skills that i should be focus first? Should i concentrate on JS and put PHP or maybe other stuff behind? I'm more happy to become a front-end developer but i really do like to have some back-end skills that i've mentioned above. What should i do?
3. How can i make myself be better in the market?
Thank you.
Feb 18, 2013, 11:39 #2
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Tauranga, New Zealand
- Posts
- 358
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Hi Kurosagi,
my suggestion for some skills that are a bit deeper and will differentiate yourself from the pack:
Apache Server setup (local and on server)
Basic web server command line administration
MySQL design and optimisation skills: referential integrity, index use, query optimisation, replication
Have you checked out meetup.com? There is at least the Joomla meetup, I think you will find some good peers there.
Hope this helps,
Websites, On-line Software and everything Internet
Follow on Twitter | Connect on LinkedIn | Read on Posterous
Feb 18, 2013, 18:10 #3
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 21
- Mentioned
- 0 Post(s)
- Tagged
- 0 Thread(s)
Dear jdog,
Thank you for your reply, i'm appreciate.
I'll check the list of skills that you've mentioned and put some investment on those. That's helpful, so that i knew what are the elements that i'm missing from part of the skills that i had.
Yes, been start using the app since last year and joined a few wordpress and joomla meetup, love that. But i couldn't found anything with front-end + php discussion was hoping if there is one so that i can develop myself better.


text:
President Barack Obama may be eager to run for re-election against the U.S. Supreme Court over his health care law, but he should at least wait until the court rules.
The nine justices spent three days in late March hearing both sides of a case brought by attorneys general in 26 states, including Maine, challenging the law.
The states challenged the government's position that the Constitution's commerce clause allows Congress to penalize people for not buying insurance.
Opponents say the law doesn't just regulate commerce, it forces people who had no intention of doing so to engage in commerce.
The conservatives on the court grilled the government's lawyer, who mysteriously seemed unprepared for their questions.
The tone of the discussion led many to conclude that a majority of justices would strike down all or part of the law.
But what the public sees in court is only the beginning of a long process as justices research issues and try to persuade their peers on the bench to accept their positions.
Justice Anthony Kennedy is seen as a possible swing, and Chief Justice John Roberts seemed more open-minded than the three more predictable conservatives on the court.
The court has been known to defy expectations.
In the meantime, Obama has been lecturing the court from the campaign trail against taking "an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
The "strong majority" comment is outright fiction. The health care law passed the U.S. House 219- 212, without a single Republican vote, and even 34 Democrats voted against it.
Second, striking down a narrow part of the law would not be unprecedented.
Government lawyers have often tried stretching the commerce clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, and their efforts have been rejected.
Former President Bill Clinton's legal team once argued that possessing a gun in a school constitutes an economic activity. Later, the government argued that violence against women fell under interstate commerce.
The court rejected both arguments.
The question before the court this time is even more legitimate: Can Congress compel people to engage in commerce that it then intends to regulate?
The opposite argument is that nearly all of us will need health care, and engage in commerce, at some point in our lives.
Like Republicans first did in the 1980s, we have supported the health insurance mandate on very practical grounds: The vast majority of people with insurance end up paying the bills of those who do not have it.
Health insurance isn't like fire or flood insurance. Choose not to buy those, and you are homeless when the house burns or floods.
But we have decided as a civil society to treat everyone who shows up at a hospital. The critically ill car crash victim cannot be denied care.
In effect, we are all covered by a form of insurance that guarantees us lifesaving care.
If we are covered, then, to the best of our abilities, we should be required to pay something, if only a nominal amount.
The court, of course, may disagree. But until it does, Obama should let up on the demeaning lectures.
The opinions expressed in this column reflect the views of the ownership and editorial board.


text:
Hearthstone: Naxxramas strategy guide
Beat every Heroic boss and class challenge in the game.
Diablo 3: Ultimate Evil Edition guide
Our complete guide to the new console edition.
Loading... hold tight!
It looks like you haven't filled in all the required fields correctly:
All done!
It looks like you've filled everything in correctly. Ready to roll?


text:
We're SorryClose
Bow-Meow-Ween Pet Costume Contest
On the loose....
- Contest Photo by: bith04
- Plover, WI
- Category: Frightening Felines
Brief Description:
Our giraffe is out of the zoo and looking for halloween treats!!
Contest Photo Tips and Guidelines:
- Avoid clutter. Keep the background simple -- your gingerbread house or holiday cookie is the star!
- Daytime, natural light is best. If your area is bright enough, try taking the photo without the flash.
- Upload a horizontal photo. If you crop the image on your computer, make sure you keep a landscape 4:3 aspect ratio.
- For best results, make your image 1200x900 (or "save for web").
- With a digital camera, you can take as many photos as possible and choose the best one. Have fun!


text:
Your grandma may have always said, "Don't forget your cod liver oil."
She was right!"Cod liver oil is what I call one of the great forgotten foods," says Wellness and Nutrition Expert Peggy Hall. "Years ago, cod liver oil was used as a general health tonic to fortify against colds and illnesses."
And for good reason! Cod liver oil contains high levels of vitamins A and D and essential omega-3 fatty acids. Together, these nutrients help support healthy skin and hair, strong bones and teeth, pain-free, flexible joints; a healthy metabolism and better moods.Cod liver oil also appears to reduce the risks associated with diabetes, heart disease and every type of cancer.To reap these amazing benefits, Peggy recommends that her clients take a daily dose of cod liver oil with breakfast to help the body absorb the vitamins, minerals and nutrients from their first meal."Luckily, these days we don't need to take it by the spoonful," Peggy says. "Capsules work just fine. One a day does the trick!"How is cod liver oil different than regular fish oil capsules?
Peggy explains that they are both good sources of essential fatty acids, but cod liver oil is higher in vitamins A and D than regular fish oil. That's because cod liver oil is made from the liver of the cod, where those vitamins are stored.Caution: Avoid taking cod liver oil if you're pregnant or on blood thinners, as cod liver oil and all fish oils thin the blood. As always, check with your doctor before beginning any new supplements.
Copyright 2012 America Now. All rights reserved.


text:
About the Author
Dan Parr
Associate editor
Recent posts by Dan Parr
Related Stories
Here's a look at a key matchup heading into Sunday's battle between the Falcons and Bears:
Falcons C Joe Hawley and ORG Garrett Reynolds vs. Bears' interior pass rush
The Falcons had consistency on their offensive line for three straight seasons. The same five players started on the O-line for three straight openers, but the streak will come to an end Sunday. The departure of ORG Harvey Dahl in free agency and Todd McClure's knee will give a couple of younger players their first career starts.
Garrett Reynolds, a fifth-round pick in 2009, beat out Mike Johnson to win the job at right guard in camp, and Joe Hawley, a fourth-round pick in 2010, will fill in for McClure, who is recovering from knee surgery, at center. It will snap McClure's franchise record for consecutive starts at 144.
Look for the Bears to get creative to test the young blockers on the interior. Chicago didn't do a lot of stunting with the front four last season, but it's possible D-coordinator Rod Marinelli could roll DE Julius Peppers inside or bring extra pressure from MLB Brian Urlacher on a blitz through the left A gap.
With Peppers and DTs Henry Melton and Amobi Okoye — whom the Bears are comfortable using inside and outside — the Falcons' new blood on the O-line will face some tough looks. The Bears could have more success getting pressure on QB Matt Ryan by trying to expose that potential weakness rather than challenging the good but not great tandem of OLT Sam Baker and ORT Tyson Clabo off the edges.


text:
Department of Fashion Design and Retailing
Do what you love and make it your career.
Welcome to the Fashion Design and Retailing Department. Earn a Bachelor of Science Degree in Fashion Design and Retailing. Choose a concentration in Apparel Design or Merchandising. Prepare for a career as a: Fashion Designer, Retail Buyer, Technical Designer, Retail Merchandising Analyst, Product Developer, Retail Manager, Patternmaker, Visual Merchandiser, Product Manager, Theatrical Costumer, Fashion Merchandiser, Market Researcher, Fashion Coordinator, or Costume Curator.
Why choose Framingham State University?
- Business and industry partnerships
- State-of-the-art computer technology
- Professional curriculum combined with strong Liberal Arts
- Located in suburban Boston
- Dynamic merchandising and design opportunities
- Seven full-time faculty
- Small classes and individual attention
- Individual advising and career counseling
- Diverse student body
News and Announcements
Competitions/Exhibits: * Make It Work, a one day design competition sponsored by the FSU Fashion Club: February 22nd, 2014, 10am-8pm. * Blue Wrap Group II competition: will be displayed in Whittemore Library, April 17th - 24th. * Form to Fashion Exhibit: willd be displayed at Natick Collection, May 5th-22nd,