Just read Limbaugh's comments in context

#151
#151
so i get to pay for the birth control and if it fails i get to pay for the abortion and if that fails or doesnt happen i get to pay for the kids health insurance.

seems fair.
 
#152
#152
NEOCON said:
so i get to pay for the birth control and if it fails i get to pay for the abortion and if that fails or doesnt happen i get to pay for the kids health insurance.

seems fair.
Click to expand...

Time to institute a restriction on the number of children people can have, I'd say.

As a society we cannot afford to have under-educated or malnurished children, for the sake of the future or monetarily.
 
#153
#153
VOLatile said:
Time to institute a restriction on the number of children people can have, I'd say.

As a society we cannot afford to have under-educated or malnurished children, for the sake of the future or monetarily.
Click to expand...

depends kinda...mom on welfare with eight kids i'd agree.

i have three and am looking to a adopt a chinese girl in the next few years. i have not decided on one or two yet but am leaning towards two.

that would give me five kids total but all would be loved and well taken care of.
 
#154
#154
VOLatile said:
Time to institute a restriction on the number of children people can have, I'd say.

As a society we cannot afford to have under-educated or malnurished children, for the sake of the future or monetarily.
Click to expand...



So, we should tell how many kids people can have for the sake of the children and their future?
 
#155
#155
Regarding the points made above about alleged hypocrisy as between similar comments from left leaning commentators and Rush, I note that some key points wereleft out by posters itt.

For example, someone pointed out that Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "slut." What the poster (Drevol) did NOT tell you was that Schultz was suspended for a week without pay and that Schultz had Ingraham on his show and apologized, personally and directly to her, which she accepted.

Limbaugh ought to call up the student and apologize personally, as Schultz did, imo.
 
#156
#156
lawgator1 said:
Regarding the points made above about alleged hypocrisy as between similar comments from left leaning commentators and Rush, I note that some key points wereleft out by posters itt.

For example, someone pointed out that Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "slut." What the poster (Drevol) did NOT tell you was that Schultz was suspended for a week without pay and that Schultz had Ingraham on his show and apologized, personally and directly to her, which she accepted.

Limbaugh ought to call up the student and apologize personally, as Schultz did, imo.
Click to expand...

my original point was directed at carbonife
 
#157
#157
lawgator1 said:
Regarding the points made above about alleged hypocrisy as between similar comments from left leaning commentators and Rush, I note that some key points wereleft out by posters itt.

For example, someone pointed out that Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "slut." What the poster (Drevol) did NOT tell you was that Schultz was suspended for a week without pay and that Schultz had Ingraham on his show and apologized, personally and directly to her, which she accepted.

Limbaugh ought to call up the student and apologize personally, as Schultz did, imo.
Click to expand...

Again...more politically correct horse ****. Who really cares. Once you do that you have to get into determining how "genuine" the apology is. It is a ridiculous disingenuous action contrived to appease the idiot masses.
 
#164
#164
Walmart and Target both offer BC pills for well under the figures gleaned from the various reportage. Granted, those are generic medications and it's possible that they can't be used to treat other conditions, but let's not pretend that Fluke didn't have access to affordable medication.

This whole Limbaugh story has been a wag the dog exercise for the media and the administration to take the focus away from the economy, specifically high gas prices.
 
#167
#167
VOLatile said:
Add AllState to the list now.
Click to expand...

I'm interested to see what happens. Will Rush supporters pull their support/business for these sponsors? If they do, are there enough of them that loss of support will affect these sponsors? similarly, will these sponsors see a revenue pump from anti-Rush customers?
 
#168
#168
So let me get this straight, when someone like Bill O'Reilly complains about Pepsi using Ludacris (which I didn't see a problem with) for a spokes person due to his lyrics about women, that's wrong and racist.

When Rush is nailed for using the term "slut" about a woman who wants us to foot the bill for birth control, it's ok for the sponsors to drop him... and we have to hear about everyone who does?

Am I the only one that sees a double standard here?

As has been pointed out several times, this is to divert attention away form the actual issue... and it's somehow vindication for those who dislike Rush.
 
#169
#169
dreVol said:
I'm interested to see what happens. Will Rush supporters pull their support/business for these sponsors? If they do, are there enough of them that loss of support will affect these sponsors? similarly, will these sponsors see a revenue pump from anti-Rush customers?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm curious about.
 
#170
#170
volsforever27 said:
So let me get this straight, when someone like Bill O'Reilly complains about Pepsi using Ludacris (which I didn't see a problem with) for a spokes person due to his lyrics about women, that's wrong and racist.

When Rush is nailed for using the term "slut" about a woman who wants us to foot the bill for birth control, it's ok for the sponsors to drop him... and we have to hear about everyone who does?

Am I the only one that sees a double standard here?

As has been pointed out several times, this is to divert attention away form the actual issue... and it's somehow vindication for those who dislike Rush.
Click to expand...

well, duh
 
#171
#171
I've never been a fan of boycotts, pulling advertising etc but in the end a company has to do what they believe is in their best interests. If I thought advertising on Rush was hurting me then I'd pull the ads in a heartbeat (provided the backlash wasn't worse)

I can think of no time I've threatened a company with my business because of who they advertised with or some political position they've taken. I can vote with my pocketbook if necessary but see no need to make a big deal out of it.
 
#172
#172
volinbham said:
I've never been a fan of boycotts, pulling advertising etc but in the end a company has to do what they believe is in their best interests. If I thought advertising on Rush was hurting me then I'd pull the ads in a heartbeat (provided the backlash wasn't worse)

I can think of no time I've threatened a company with my business because of who they advertised with or some political position they've taken. I can vote with my pocketbook if necessary but see no need to make a big deal out of it.
Click to expand...

****, I agree with this...
 
#173
#173
strong woman logic is strong...

in other news obama needs to call and apologize to palin and bachman for being called whores and c**ts among other things by bill maher if he's going to do it to the slut that rush limbaugh called a slut....
 
Last edited:
#174
#174
Found this interesting...

Sandra Fluke Argued for Mandatory Coverage for Sex-Change Surgery : The Other McCain

irth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if “gender reassignment” surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.
The title of the article . . . is “Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons” and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top