Limbaugh and the “slut” remark
You may notice I haven’t yet written anything about Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke’s sex life and the issue of compensation to pay for contraception, and the furor they’ve caused.
Why? Because I don’t write much about Rush Limbaugh, ever. Why not? Well, he’s a talk show host, and I rarely listen to talk shows; I don’t much like them. But it is my firm belief that Limbaugh—like most such hosts—is first and foremost an entertainer who’s in the business to make money. Duh! As such, he likes to say controversial things that stir people up and increase his traffic. This is no different.
Rush said, “Well, what would you call someone who wants us to pay for her to have sex? What would you call that woman? You’d call ’em a slut, a prostitute or whatever.” But when last I checked, prostitutes were paid by their clients to have sex, not by the general public to use contraception. What’s more, birth control pills have no connection with frequency of sex, because they must be taken regularly and are not act-dependent, whereas act-dependent condoms and diaphragms/cream cost the same whether the sexual acts are with one partner many times or different partners many times (the latter being the definition of “slut”).
This time, Limbaugh certainly got the attention he craves, and then some. But he doesn’t speak for me, nor for all conservatives—any more than Keith Olbermann speaks for all liberals.
But now every candidate has to weigh in on the hugely important subject of what Limbaugh said and what it means and all the rest. And the MSM gets to opine on what a big doodoo-head Rush Limbaugh is.
If I pay a prostitute, at least I get to have sex with her.
Ms. Fluke wants me to pay so she can have sex with others.
I suppose it’s selfish of me to be rather lukewarm to that idea.
Re the “slut” epithet:
I saw a comment elsewhere that said, “What else would you call a woman who is so sexually active that she can’t afford all the contraception she needs?”
rickl: a woman without much money who likes to have sex, or is with a man who likes to have sex? She might even be married.
Slutgate is misdirection. Availability of contraception, as a supposed issue, is misdirection in service of a true agenda of bigger government creating utopia on earth. Contraception is widely available and dirt cheap. Dems cannot win the real argument on the real merits, therefore create misdirection in order to shift the ground upon which the conflict will be contested. Fluke is a straw man. Availability of contraception is a straw man issue.
I think one of the things that prompted Limbaugh’s comments was the dollar figure she cited: I first heard it reported that she said it cost her something like $3,000 a year to pay for birth control, though later I heard it reported that she said it would cost her $3,000 for the three years of law school, or $1,000 a year. Either way you look at it, though, that’s A LOT of money for birth control.
But the other thing is that here she chose to go to a Catholic law school, and there are interviews where she said she considered the policy about contraception coverage when deciding on a law school, so it’s pretty clear she is, as Michelle Malkin labeled her, “a femme-agogue tool” who has always been intent on pushing an agenda.
So given those facts and given that she is portraying herself as a “victim” of the policies of the Catholic church despite her own lifestyle choices, I say that, by her testimony, she’s certainly turned herself into quite a target for mockery and satire, and that’s the sort of thing that Limbaugh specializes in. Is it “nice”? No, it’s definitely not, but the joke about her being a “prostitute” because she wants other people to pay for her decision to have sex is funny because it turns her attempt to make herself into a victim upside down. And any effective work of satire is bound to offend not just its target but those who think and act like that target does.
Slutgate is Alinsky Rule 12: pick the target, personalize it, polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Direct personalized criticism and ridicule works.
What about: LIMBAUGH CALLED HER A SLUT! HUH? WHAT ABOUT THAT?!
So? Fluke is a 30 year old feminist activist. She is not looking for a fainting couch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we9_CdNPuJg She will, during her career of activism, be called a lot worse. And probably by me.
Rush, if you want to know, is a special type of entertainer: a comedian.
And one of the best ever. To merely stand in front of an audience with nothing but your speech?
Now he finds himself as something more than he is and fights the bit in his mouth. No wonder he occasionally spits it out?
He is not the voice of conservatism nor the voice or morality merely because that is no one person’s voice alone. The fact that his comedic observations are so devastating should not make him the end all and be all.
Still, he, in this instance, points to absurdity. And if you can’t see the absurdity that we should all pay for everyone’s sexual appetites to be satiated, then, like Obama, you will want to call Flake’s (what a special coincidence on that name) parents and congratulate them on what a good job the government did on raising their child.
Also: whatever happened to the “Slut Pride” movement which was going to reclaim “slut” as a badge of honor? Those slut pride marches were sooo August of 2011.
gcotharn talks about the language of “availability of contraception.” Actually, I think the language being employed most systematically by the left these days is that of “access”: “access to birth control,” “access to abortion,” “access to health care.” Recently I even saw a piece which talked about “access to high-quality, organic food.”
The fact is that the language of “access” or “availability” is only the newest ploy by the left to justify its socialist schemes. It’s not enough that birth control is available in the marketplace; it needs to be “affordable” or better yet subsidized and “free.” The same logic applies to more and more elements of life. Tom Maguire elaborates on a point made by Glenn Reynolds in mocking the implications of this sort of reasoning here.
Access is the proper word. Thank you. Access to coffee! Its in the Constitution: Article 6AM. Print the t-shirts.
The government of the United States of Minority Interests pleasantly announces the required access to the Temple of Obama Worship. All citizens will be pleased to know that they and all others will be provided free refreshments upon their required attendance. Kind and benovolent Obama will be attending via a media representation at every meeting five times a day.
Please do not forget to attend and let the love flow.
OT, but following up on my earlier point–does it strike anyone as a coincidence that this particular article about “Access to Healthy Food” was published by Reuters on January 21, 2009, the DAY AFTER Obama was inaugurated?
If we gain our God given right of access to
mannacoffee, we will not need access to other healthy food.I could more accurately call the woman a liar. She said birth control would cost her $3000 over three years. I checked this morning and generic birth control pills at Walmart are $9 a month. That would be a tad over $100 a year. Someone should have called her on that. The idea that a $9 price is denying “access” to women’s health care is a preposterous claim.
Someone calculated the cost of various contraceptives and came up with $9/month for pills at Target, about $500 for an IUD that works for 10 years, and 3 condoms/per day for 3 years at the $3000 price Fluke cited. Limbaugh would have been better off to say that the last method is apparently the one preferred by Fluke. It fits that she was too distracted to pay attention to her courses in constitutional law, which is the issue here. It also says something about her choice of partners that none bothered to chip in to buy the condoms. This is not a lawyer I would want to represent me.
People like Fluke don’t really mind being attacked for their sexual activity, but to say she is dumb as a hog (sorry, piggy) would upset her mightily.
Kurt,
I doubt that the people who live in these food deserts would know what to do with fresh vegies and fruits. I bet many can’t even peel a potato.
Granny has to die so that twenty-something can get her contraceptives so that she doesn’t have to raise a kid that will end up demanding contraceptives to not raise a kid.
Granny, would you want to stay around, anyway?
Am I correct in assuming that condoms would not be covered by standard health insurance?
I am in no way in favor of Obama Care, and coming from England I know just how bad a single payer system can be. However to comments on this site regarding Miss Fluke are a little unfair.
I read her testimony and she is clearly talking about contraception as a treatment for a medical condition and not for the purposes of sex. She talks about a friend who suffers from Polycystic Ovaries and how this friend had to have her Ovaries removed because she didn’t receive the pill which is the accepted treatment for the condition. The $3,000 cost is for her entire college career and is because she needs a more expensive contraceptive (although I don’t know why) than the one available at Walmart.
She does undermine her position by saying that contraception is available for this condition, but somehow hard to get.
So the ovaries are removed and the need for contraception is what?
None. So, it doesn’t belong in the reasons for Obams anti-Catholic everyone must have contraception argument, does it?
Again, a complete straw man agrument. Her friend, who needs help, well, who doesn’t need help? Right now I have hemmorhoids, and I demand others to pay for them.
The entire testimony was complete political BS with the typical liberal appeal to emotion and the requisite sad case — a sample size of one. Various types of contraception are readily available at affordable prices. Again, socialism seeks to spend someone else’s money. There is also an attempt to attack the Catholic church. People do not do without contraception because of cost.
To the notion of Rush as entertainment: same as Beck, or O’Reilly. But I suggest Bill Bennett if you can listen that early. It’s like auditing a college class in politics (and culture).
To understand Rush one does have to grow accustomed to his methods, one of which is: to illustrate the absurd by being absurd. He has had in common with Andrew Breitbart the joy of outrageously provoking the Left to helpless fury. Believe me, he knew what he was doing in his comments on Ms. Fluke.
*Shrug*. I don’t listen to talk radio either. I expect Limbaugh let his mouth run a little to freely, talk show hosts do that. But the idea that a thirty year old woman needs insurance to cover her birth control costs is ridiculous. At age thirty one should be grown up and self sufficient enough to be able to afford their chosen lifestyle. And really, insurance? What next, toothpaste?
We should all strive to be more like Breitbart. Don’t defend Rush. Attack, attack, attack, using mockery and ridicule as much as possible.
But now every candidate has to weigh in
No.
They.
Don’t.
They can respond with “Talk to Rush about what Rush says. The real issue here is liberty” and then move on.
And if they persist, as they always do, go full-on Chris Christie and ask why educated native English-speakers can’t understand a simple English statement.
Curtis, I think you missed my point. I do not believe in other people paying for anything.
My point is that she didn’t ask for contraception for sexual purposes and therefore Rush’s comments are ridiculous.
Your point a about not needing contraception because of the removed ovaries is also beside the point. Contraception is the treatment for polycystic ovaries (my wife has this condition) and if she had taken contraception she would not have lost her ovaries. As her insurance paid for the removal of her ovaries, surely it would have been cheaper for them to have provided contraception instead. Also this person can no longer have children and will experience very early menopause.
However as I also pointed out she did undermine her case by saying that contraception is available as a medical treatment.
Speaking of Breitbart, his penultimate Tweet:
“Apologize for WHAT?”
Needs to go on the next printing of the Gadsen flag.
Contraception is the treatment for polycystic ovaries
No, HORMONES are the treatment for polycystic ovaries. Contraception is what you use to stop conception.
The fact that you can use hormones both to treat problems with the female reproductive system AND to prevent conception is beside the fact.
Were the Jesuits at Georgetown unwilling to cover the HORMONE THERAPY for polycystic ovaries? Are you sure that Sandra Fluke–who enrolled at Georgetown for the express purpose of challenging their policy of not covering contraception–is telling the truth?
OK, I just looked at her testimony, transcribed here:
Two paragraphs later, she says:
Emphasis mine. Anyone else’s irony meter spin wildly? Then she says
That’s a problem with the insurance company, not with the university’s policies.
I’d like to repeat that taking hormones for reproductive-system issues is NOT “contraception,” it’s THERAPY. If there are problems with getting coverage for hormone therapy, it’s because of problems with the insurance system, which always fights against paying out and also fights against people LYING about their conditions.
I imagine that if Georgetown has a policy that covers hormones for actual health issues but not for contraception, they’ve had to deal with a lot of dishonest attempts to secure the hormones for contraception only.
It may not make Fluke a slut, but it certainly makes her a lying liar who lies for the purpose of undermining liberty.
As Joshua Trevié±o Tweeted today, “I don’t wish to live in an America where it is impolite to insult the enemies of the First Amendment.”
Rush has now issued an apology.
To label Limbaugh as merely an entertainer is to underestimate and undervalue him. He entertains, certainly, but always with another goal in mind. And that goal isn’t money. Wealth is the byproduct of his excellence in his field, combined with business sense.
When he says he will be on the radio until everyone in America agrees with him, he hints at his primary motive.
The slut comment, when heard live in the context of his entire monologue, just isn’t a big deal. It only matters to those looking for a wedge.
London Trader, she did ask for free contraception and greatly inflated its cost.
“Without insurance coverage, contraception 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. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy.”
@Frank
Also note the statistics, “forty percent”, “twenty percent”. Where did those numbers come from? I’d lay good money that they are just made up, or urban legends among progressives. Most such statistics turn out to be bogus. But they sure sound impressive.
chuck:
88% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
So Rush apologized. I wouldn’t have, but then again I didn’t call her a slut in the first place. Rush can say what he wants, and then he can apologize if he wants.
No matter. Rush isn’t the issue. Sex isn’t the issue. Contraception isn’t the issue.
The real issue is individual liberty vs. collectivism.
Dicentra, good comment. I’d go even further: I’d ask Fluke to prove that her “friend” with PCOS actually exists. Anecdotal “evidence” be damned when the fact is that estrogen in the form of the Pill IS covered when treating Stein-Levanthal syndrome. I should know; I received treatment for it while teaching at a Catholic school and it was covered through the insurance supplied by my employer, the Archdiocese of Detroit.
As for Fluke herself, she’s lying about her situation in hopes that most of her audience, although aware of Georgetown’s location, aren’t familiar with their friendly neighborhood Planned Parenthood. Let me offer a clue as to how “inaccessible” contraceptives are at Georgetown: Planned Parenthood has an office right on Connecticut Ave. It’s less than a 2-mile walk from the law library. For those of you not familiar with Georgetown geography, it’s like walking from the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Memorial and back again, which my elderly relatives had no problem doing. Even if Fluke found it impossible to get to regularly visit PP – it’s open Christmas Day, btw – she surely could have asked the student group H*yas for Choice for some free condoms to tide her over. But we’re to believe that Fluke can’t make it there to get a supply of free condoms and reduced-cost Pill?
For London Trader: You may not be aware, but American taxpayers already fund free and reduced contraceptives not only through Planned Parenthood, but also through local health departments. Even if one lives in a rural area (as I currently do), several agencies and health centers make everything from condoms to implants affordable – if not free – and with great care for privacy.
The only reason I can think of that Ms. Fluke wouldn’t use such resources is that she doesn’t want to. I went to my local health clinic several times when I was un-insured, and the clientele tended toward poor and ignorant. If Fluke is the type who’s embarrassed to have her lover pay for his own contraception, maybe she’d feel shame by association in the waiting room. But I suspect that she’s just cheap (at least as in “stingy”) and doesn’t want to shell out money for her own entertainment.
I don’t disagree with anything anyone has said. My only issue was that if I had only listened to what Rush said then I would have believed that she had testified that she couldn’t afford contraception and this was a sexual issue. There was plenty of stuff in her testimony to criticize without making something up. The primary problem with her comments (in addition to the made up stats) is that she goes on to say that contraception (or hormone therapy) is covered.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: This is what I love about blogs. No matter what the topic, and with everyone with a keyboard spouting off an opinion, sooner or later someone with actual, personal knowledge is bound to chime in.
88% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
;^)
The real gag factor, for me, is the unprincipled opportunist (otherwise known as the president of the United States) who quickly sought to capitalize on Limbaugh’s gaffe by calling Fluke to praise her courage blah blah blah and tell her that her parents should be proud.
I think the 30 year old gender issues gadfly has been out of the house for awhile now, Mr. president.
No Chuck, 89%
Why does contraception cost more in law school?
Lawyers drive up the price of everything.
Ed Bonderenka: Great answer!!!
Of late Limbaugh — and I have listened to him on and off since around 1990 — has become a crushing bore.
Just checked out the WaPo report on the Washington caucuses. In the middle of the story, they brought up Rush. Pelosi and Fluke got what they wanted.
“Teabagger”? “Slut”? What’s the difference?
No reason to get all “weweed” up.
as a feminist, this whole issue of contraception is a joke. Why? Because if you are in a relationship, aren’t you supposed to work as a team? which to me means that women AND men are to share in burdens like buying contraception. Fluke and her supporters make it sound like they need government intervention because they cannot communicate such needs with the people they are having sex with, therefore making women seem helpless around men.
As far as the health issue, I’ve yet to hear of any insurance denying contraception/hormones to women because of some sexist bias, and I’ve had the gambit of insurances. If anything, insurance companies have done what WILL happen with Obamacare and restrict what pills can be dispensed because of COSTS not Morals. If Fluke’s friend does exist she was most likely denied because the hormones were not in the dispensary because of cost.
But overall, the Reps took the bait the Dems set up for them. Now that Limbaugh has apologized and Santorum-mania may be dwindling, perhaps the Reps can slap the O-team for their elitist policies hurting everyday Americans.
“”“Teabagger”? “Slut”? What’s the difference?””
CZ
The difference is one is in a self appointed victim class which somehow disallows others 1st amendment rights to criticize. Rush should have just called her a statist crutch baby who wants other people to pull her weight in the world.
This, like all the other fluff and synthetic outrage that the MSM fixates on and devotes endless coverage to is simply cynical misdirection.
We are watching–mesmerized– the waving, very visible hand while, meanwhile, the other, the hand we can’t see, is at work.
The economy is in the toilet, we have massive unemployment, hundreds of thousands if not millions of foreclosures, close to 50 million people on food stamps,the dollar is rapidly losing value and inflation is far higher than admitted, crippling gas prices rising ever higher, Iran about to acquire a nuclear weapon, and we are told that “Slutgate” is what we should pay attention to, and nothing else matters.
Meanwhile, just for instance, yesterday Arizona Sheriff Arpaio–in a one and a half hour press conference-laid out–in great detail–the evidence his professional investigators have found pretty conclusively proving that not only was the supposed Obama long form birth certificate released by the White House a forgery, but so was his selective service card; both felonies.
Along the way, Arpaio’s investigators disclosing that someone had gone through the files at the National Archives and removed the one week’s worth of INS passenger cards that could have showed whether Obama and his mother might have returned to the U.S. by aircraft the week after Obama was possibly born in Kenya.
This gets no coverage by the MSM or, if covered, is treated as a joke, and all of the questions from the MSM at the apparently well attended press conference were both hostile and mocking, with not one that I heard actually directed at the content of the briefing, and the authenticity of the documents in question.
P.S.–If anyone is interested in viewing this pres conference, it can be found here (http://www.westernjournalism.com/sheriff-joe-arpaio-exposes-forgery-of-obamas-selective-service-registration/)
A needed perspective here from Kirsten Powers:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html
Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist
Kirsten Powers
The Daily Beast
Mar 4, 2012 10:00 AM EST
Rush Limbaugh apologized on Saturday for calling a Georgetown Law student a slut for testifying about contraception and starting a firestorm of outrage. Kirsten Powers says the liberals who led the charge need to start holding their own side accountable.
[ snip ]
.
In the FWIW department, my wife has ovarian fibroids, and – other than surgery, which she refuses – the treatment for her condition is, actually, to take birth control pills.
…the cost of which are so minimal and inconsequential (and automatic) that they don’t even come up in the household budget. And haven’t, in a dozen plus years since she was diagnosed.
Fluke outright lied. The president pandered. Limbaugh used her lie to make a joke.
…and the Left only affected outrage at the latter. Par for the course.
Gasp. Limbaugh apologizes.
He had no choice.
A pretty (boyish) face, and young, and earnest, almost like a baby. (Pick the right target, Rush.)
Rush couldn’t resist the connection and he was absolutely right as a comedian.
But he was wrong in a larger sense in that the only women who aren’t sluts today are those married or those given to chastity. But because all these women are sluts they no longer are sluts because the word slut carries a derogatory application. Do we all consider our sexually active women who are not married as “sluts.” Obviously, no.
But it should open a larger question as to whether or not the “freedom” has any meaning anymore and whether or not women, in general, could profit by a little self-control. That’s where the discussion should tend. And it’s not like women aren’t given natural advantages in controlling their sex drive. Any college boy knows this when he tries to get his date drunk. Hello. How are you. Brought some wine. Have some?
That women would give what ought to be earned and secured is probably the greatest con job of the progessive world. I am reminded of an article by Robin of Berekely who excoritated the “pony tail” men of progressivism.
In any tyranny or in any totalitarian government, how do the women compare to the men? How many Soviet premiers have we seen?
I too thought Rush’s comedic point apropo, Curtis.
…and this was also a case where I thought ace’s argument “it was a joke for gawd’s sake” (to paraphrase) was a brilliant defence (of someone he doesn’t much admire).
It was Jeff at PW though, who (as usual) nailed the whole thing.
…umm, pun, such as it was, completely intentional.
…I don’t think Rush should have apologized.
Fun article at PW, and yes, she is dragon brood.
There’s another point, though, and that is Rush’es limitation. We love comedians because they make us laugh. They also appeal to our deeper held beliefs which we don’t often share with others. Comedians give us that relief of agreeing with our privately held animosities and greivances.
Usually, everyone recognizes that there is a circle of influence for a comedian and that everyone attending is there for the private joke. But Rush has become something quite more, even if that becoming was unintentional. It is what it is.
I don’t think he really likes it at all, being denied his private audience, and he has done an extraordianry job, an absolutely extraordinary job, in restraining himself. Think of it: For three hours a day, five days a week, and he has learned how to walk that line. Remarkable. This is not a selfish man.
Realizing his role, he apologized. Maher and all the other truly misognyst progressives would never have. So, that shows a difference.
Wolla Dolbo, I have, for some time, ignored the birth cert issue, as I do not see what will ever come of the issue. Even if it is proven that Pres. Obama is not a natural born citizen, I do not see that Congress would have the stomach to oust Pres. Obama from office. I suspect Congress would simply make a new law which retroactively allows Pres. Obama to be POTUS.
However, out of curiosity, and on your recommendation, I watched Sheriff Arpaio’s news conference. For what its worth: imo, the investigators displayed professionalism, modesty, careful discretion, and the investigators made a devastating case that the documents are forgeries (definitely including the Selective Service Card). The investigators’ case appears formulated to hold up in a court of law, and appears, to me, that it would hold up in a court of law.
What it will ever lead to, I do not know. But, they did a professional job. Their evidence is damning.
London Trader, she did ask for free contraception and greatly inflated its cost.
“Without insurance coverage, contraception 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. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy.”
See though, yall missed that it makes sense if you factor an abortion in as contraception!
@curtis
Point well made …I bow to your deeper – and wiser – analysis.
@honeyimhome
Earlier this morning I read the funniest cultural side-comment on the whole abortion thing I’ve ever read.
…maybe to the point of expressing my own sentiment as to this slubbo from Georgetown, even.
The Public House (an Australian blog …a “publican” in that part of the Anglosphere might be called a bartender-owner here, if I get the nuance correct): Abortion
I think that Rush did the right thing by apologizing, but…, to make it up to her he should have asked his listeners to send her free condoms so that she wouldn’t have to worry about the cost of contraception. As a bonus, he could have asked the audience to also send Nancy Pelosi pink condoms for her loyal constituents.
gcotharn–This issue is the about to erupt Mt. Vesuvius of our political system, and we are Pompeii. An “unthinkable” and unprecedented situation that people have dealt with by just denying it exists and just not “thinking” about it.
Analyses by several different document/computer experts very similar to that which was laid out by Arpaoi’s “Posse” have been out there on the Internet and on Youtube for many months now, and all have been just as much ignored and/or ridiculed by the MSM as Arpaio’s analysis was, and will be. The fact of the matter is that the only way Obama & Co, their supporters, and the MSM can deal with this issue is either by raining a shit storm of withering ridicule on it i.e. the “birther” meme, designed to shame, denigrate, and delegitimize those raising this issue, and to stop any further focus on it or discussion and analysis—and/or by averting their eyes and just not covering/discussing the issue because, when you pay attention and start to look at the evidence, it very quickly becomes apparent that these key documents are fraudulent, and the question then becomes, if these key documents are fraudulent what else is fraudulent in Obama’s “legend” (i.e. in spy craft a false background, history, and cover identity that is created for an agent); doubt begins, and things start to unravel.
As was noted by the Posse’s chief investigator, virtually all of the documents that are the signposts marking Obama’s paper trail through life have been sealed from public view, and my guess is that these two particular documents were put out there because it was believed that these were the absolute minimum in the way of documentation that could be released, so that the fact of no documents being available would not raise even more suspicions.
As I view it, the creation and maintenance of Obama’s legend is indeed a long in the making, a grand conspiracy–both of commission–the people who actively crafted that elements of the legend–lied, faked, removed, substituted, kept secret, and sealed documents and records–and of omission–the many more people who have furthered the legend’s spread and effect by not doing their duty to our Republic and the Constitution that they have sworn to protect and defend, who have stayed their hands and looked the other way when they spotted something phony and/or have not come forward to contradict information that they know to be false; we are now talking many dozens, probably hundreds, or even thousands of people. Thus, the longer the conspiracy goes on, and the larger the conspiracy grows in terms of participants, the higher the stakes for all involved, and the harder they will fight to keep the conspiracy going and themselves undiscovered and uncharged.
Just think of the enormous and unprecedented “Constitutional Crisis”–the first of its kind, and a grave danger to our Republic and the Presidency–if it were found to be and acknowledged that Obama was not a “natural born citizen” and, thus, not eligible to be President and was, in fact, a usurper. There would likely be riots in the streets, enormous uncertainty, unprecedented confusion, and the almost impossible task of undoing the damage to the political system, to Congress, the Judiciary, to the Presidency and its legitimacy, and to our Republic and, meanwhile, everyone connected with the presentation and maintenance of this “legend “—many of the very people charged with reporting the news, governing and decision making–would be tainted and under suspicion.
Their realization of just how bad things would get is the reason I believe that no judge or court in the land., U.S. Supreme Court included, wants to get to the point of an actual trial and an analysis of the documents and facts involved but, instead, fends off all suits by ruling that the plaintiff’s —American citizens all–are somehow unable to pass the initial threshold requirement of “standing” that has to be passed to go to the next step of an actual examination of the evidence, unable to prove that they are likely to be harmed in a major way if it turns out the Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent, Obama is not a “natural born citizen” and is, thus, a usurper.
As I am sure Obama & Co. realized very early on, if they could just get him elected and in the White House, the incentives for all concerned would be to just keep quiet and let Obama–no matter how bad, hostile to our ideals, or injurious a President he might be–fill out his term.
However, if the facts do come out in the future, as I believe they will, they will taint our entire political system and our democratic process, and the Congress, the Judiciary, the Presidency (and, let me add, destroy any hope for our MSM of regaining any trust), and introduce uncertainly, doubt, an element of instability and precariousness, and grave concern about the legitimacy of the whole election process, our elected officials, and the Presidency that have never been there before; we will have become a “Banana Republic.”
I think the bigger story here is that the Enemy Media had a perfect setup to kneecap Limbaugh.
Like him or not, he’s a hugely important voice in the media wilderness, with 18 million listeners every weekday. Without him, the electorate would be a hell of a lot more in the dark than they already are. Regardless of what you think of the man. (When I first listened to him, a couple of years ago, I was amazed at how genial he generally is: he’s not a screamer like Savage or Mark Levin.)
So, yeah, it’s a distraction, but a distraction with a deadly serious purpose: they’re telling us all that you can be famous and wealthy beyond belief, and some lefty feminist agitator can be used as the excuse for the Enemy Media to take you out of the game. So all of you had better stow it.
Re Fluke: The Blaze.com has a story on her. She’s 30 and a rad fem who enrolled in Georgetown after finding out they didn’t pay for birth control — specifically to challenge that policy. Hardly a sweet little coed victim, as she’s been painted by the Fifth Column.
Here’s another chilling development for free speech: Pro Flowers and the other major advertisers have pulled their ads from the Limbaugh show:
“The six other advertisers that have pulled ads from his show are mortgage lender Quicken Loans, mattress retailers Sleep Train and Sleep Number, software maker Citrix Systems, online data backup service provider Carbonite and online legal document services company LegalZoom.”
If you’ve ever listened to him, that’s almost ALL OF HIS SPONSORS, all for calling this woman a name.
They have us, as Wodehouse would say, “where the hair is crisp.”
Wolla is entirely correct, except about the ‘almost impossible task’ of repairing the results of a great, compounded negligence.
In response to gcotharn’s earlier post, I must suggest the Congress cannot simply pass a law making Obama retroactively eligible to be Prez, and be Constitutional. But who gives a damn?
Failure to address the issue, and failure to repair simply mean we are already, today, a banana republic, the late, great USA that once was. If the facts are not addressed now, they will never be addressed. They that control history control the future. Boehner and Cantor stand always ready to bend over and grab their ankles.
Arpaio et al. have done truth a great service.
And, Wolla Dalbo, you are so right.
They’ve long been (the Left) operating on a far different, and more sinister, level than most of us citizens are willing to believe. It’s almost incredible.
Yet the evidence is there.
My fear is that, having found out that they can do ANYthing without repercussions, they’ve become emboldened to continue and to double-down, even; we’re in for a Very Rough Ride.
Anyone remember Sandy “Burglar” stealing documents from the NATIONAL ARCHIVES to protect Clinton? Stuffing them in his PANTS? I mean, for cryin’ out loud. . . . and what happened to him?
NOTHING.
So the Left now know there’s no stopping them; the institutional Repubs will at best put up a token resistance. I’m afraid we’re in for the whole toboggan ride.
(Without getting into their flaws/virtues! still… Beck off CNN; Imus whipped; Breitbart dead; Limbaugh’s sponsors bailing; none of our more “charismatic” Repubs running for office this time: what picture do these pieces form?)
wrt Obama’s eligibiltiy:
Those who sneered, raged, snickered, ranted at the birthers implied that there is something importan about eligibility.
If it turns out that the eligilibility issue is valid, which is to say that Obama isn’t, what’s the fallback position?
Obama’s lies are more like a sliver which pusses up and comes out on its own if not removed than it is a scar or some other useless but benign tissue. It we lack the will to expose those lies and pursue an accounting, we will not remove from the future a catastrophe because we will become the catastrophe. Some things are greater than peace and prosperity.
I point out a few other items of note concerning what appear to be preventative steps taken to make it harder to study/get legal information on the natural born citizen issue, or to remove Obama from office, demonstrating that this conspiracy has been in place and functioning for many years, and that Obama & Co. have been thinking far, far ahead, and preparing the battle space.
First, several years ago–long before Obama ran for the President–it was reported that a law firm with ties to Obama had been doing some unusual research on the issue of the Constitutional requirement that anyone running for President had to be a “natural born citizen,” and that a law review article resulted, which called for the repeal of this requirement as being archaic, discriminatory, and unnecessary. Now, why would anybody with ties to Obama be interested in this issue so far back?
Then, there is the apparently rarely reported on and almost entirely forgotten fact that Senator Obama–notoriously reluctant to introduce bills (Obama introduced few bills during his abbreviated two year stay in the Senate, and only one routine, minor bill he introduced, dealing with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, ever became law) and to attend to routine Senatorial business–came back off of his continuous “campaigning” on the road to be one of cosponsors and to closely monitor and shepherd along –along with far left Democrat Senators Leahy, McCaskill, Hillary Clinton, and Web, and Republican Senator Coburn–fast-tracked, non-binding Senate Resolution, S. Res. 511, in the 110th Congress–passed by acclamation and therefore without recorded votes– expressing the “sense of the Senate “ that Senator McCain, although born overseas on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to two parents who were U.S. citizens, was indeed a “natural born citizen.” The cp-sponsor’s brief discussion of this bill allowing paragraph long legal opinions on the term “natural born citizen” by prominent Liberal attorney Lawrence Tribe–Obama’s advisor at Harvard and his ardent supporter, and conservative jurist and former U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olsen to be entered into the Congressional Record–there in case the Senate ever seriously took up the issue of Obama’s eligibility, and likely helpful to him.
Recently, too, it was discovered that a major, widely used legal database had, for some unknown reason, stripped out hundreds of links in its database to an important older case that dealt directly with the ”natural born citizen” issue, and when more and more people on the Web pointed this out, these links just magically re-appeared, with no explanation. Coincidences? I don’t think so.
Another “crazy” claim against Obama is his use of hypnosis techniques in his stump speeches. However, unlike the birther dispute, this one needs only that honest and willing hypnosis professionals examine and provide an expert opinion. The data is all there.
It would seem to me that a candidate for President would have to prove that he is indeed eligible for the office. I’d think that that would be a no-brainer.
But no. We should all just take his word for it, and anyone who is skeptical is branded as a “birther” which is no different from a “truther”, i.e. a conspiracy kook who believes that 9/11 was an inside job.
Yep, we’re fully into Bizarro World now.
The science is settled.
Sum it up: Rush made a mistake. Did the wrong thing to make his point, IMHO. Gave the Enemies of Decency an opening and they used it.
Fluke lied and lied and lied. OR, she is so incredibly stupid that she should be summarily discharged from the Law School for overpaying by an infinite percentage when she could find contraception for free. But she is an “activist” and simply LIED to make her points.
Obama never says anything that IS truth (except he’d raise gas prices!). He is disgusting. Calling Fluke when he doesn’t call real victims, when he couldn’t support those in Iran in 2009 being murdered by the regime, when he raises the cost of med benefits to vets and tries (for the 5th time) to make charitable donations subject to higher taxation (which will kill many charitable institutions outright)….and it goes on and on, the list of things that this heinous, amoral man says and does.
Carbonite’s CEO donated to the Obama campaign. There’s a shock. Hypocrisy runs deep, and though boycotts may not work most of the time, I will herein refuse to have any business dealings with any of the companies that quit Rush’s show. Ed Schultz, another horrible individual, lies every broadcast, but Carbonite has no problem with him. So goodbye Carbonite,I’ll look at the competition.
I believe Fluke’s dog-and-pony show is just another bit of Potemkin theater aimed at bringing down America. That is the goal of this administration and the Left. The Long March through the Institutions and the ending of Western Civ. We’re circling the drain. Am I being hyperbolic? Nope. We have a woman who can give testimony that is nothing but lies and stupidity, the media lies about her, O calls her…and Rush falls into the trap. And we’re totally distracted from the real issues, though I think that the issue of being pushed towards single payer is a HUGE loss of liberty coming on the horizon.
And we lose Breitbart. Can we pick up the slack? I dont know. But we watch as we’re being dismantled.
“”Pro Flowers and the other major advertisers have pulled their ads from the Limbaugh show:””
Well at least we know better who not to patronize with our money. I’m about sick and tired of thin skinned wussy capitalist who don’t know who their real enemy is at this late stage in America’s “transformation”.
And ditto (pun intended) for conservatives who don’t understand Rush is Andrew Brietbart a hundred times over in the battle for a decent free market society and deserves our unwavering support.
The woman is question is a 30 year old feminist activist who is only agitating for the requirement that a Catholic university provide birth control contrary to its belief.
A slut is someone who gives away sex for free to anyone who wants it. A whore is someone who gives away sex to anyone who pays for it.
Ms. Fluke appears to be a whore, not a slut. She wants everyone to pay for her ability to have sex.
I cannot afford to buy a Rolls Royce, therefore I do not do so and neither do I ask others to pay for one for me.
If I were a broad and did not want to become pregnant, I would not have sex.
This country is becoming entirely insane.
Don Janousek Says:
This country is becoming entirely insane.
———
I feel like I’m living in a Monty Python skit — with no laughtrack.
It’s not about Ms. Fluke, it’s about freedom of religion and conscience. Obama picked this fight and Sandra Fluke is now the lefts “blood flag”. They decalred war on the Church and here is the return volley.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/priest-warns-obama-better-knock-the-catholic-church-out-now-youve-awakened
TY, Trebuchet, for the link. I passed that video on to several family members.