It's pretty bad when even his apology is full of lies...

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress

when she was discussing medical treatments that were not covered by insurance.

There's a ton of ignorant people in this thread thinking that BC pills are only used for contraception.

-.-

Your comments about Rush are spot on by the way.

The sad thing is he didn't really lose any that would really affect him - this clown gets over $50M a year! Unbelievable that hate and bigotry pays so well!

He was still right to apologize, though we all know he was basically forced to. And he barely apologized at that. He knew exactly what he was saying and is more sorry for himself. If his sponsors didn't pull, you know he'd never say anything.

The point of the apology, however, is for him to keep on having an excuse to be on the air, and to falsly claim he 'didn't mean it.' The people who listen to his show are cattle, much like the people who listen to his leftist extremist counterparts. None of these people really represent politics, but they are making money off the nut jobs who can't think for themselves. At least Rush can be hit in his pocket book.

Be more concerned about the dead brains who follow him, who still think he shouldn't have apologized. They are the counter-parts of the small group of people who use OWS to cause vandalism. Both little groups of extremists have lied to themselves so much about their point of view, they feel entitled to act like the a-holes they are to other citizens. Its the 'two wrongs don't make a right, except when it comes to this cause,' crowd, and they were born with huge mouths, no ears, and a reptile brain.

There's a ton of ignorant people in this thread thinking that BC pills are only used for contraception.

True, they can be used for regulating periods or hormone swings, but MOSTLY, just for BC.

Rush is a protagonist; he dwells on controversy; however when a person gets carried away with the sound of their own voice, then their mouth overloads their ass.

Since Limbaugh is an employee of Romney, we need to be calling on Willard to fire him. Clean Channel is already in serious financial trouble and it will be nothing except a distraction for Romney in the future. Rush isn't even Mormon.

How about agreeing to disagree without being disagreeable? The problem is that Limbaugh gets his jollies out of trying to be as outrageous as possible. His comments were outrageous and he belongs in some sort of penalty box. His 'apology' was disingenuous and HE KNOWS SO.

Limbaugh...nice apology FAIL. This girl is so much smarter than you, you are totally in every way outclassed. All America now agrees there is no excuse for you and your vile garbage. (even those who doggedly try to defend your worthless cause)

Just curious... Bill Maher makes some awful statements about right wingers and they are considered funny. Rush Limbaugh is brought to task for his. Why is that?

Wow, Sandra, how classy! But then, liberals never apologize for their foul mouths (eg, Bill Maher, the Boor King of Crude), so why did Rush bother to waste his time?

And, oh yes, Rush isn't going to lose a penny, Toasty; I'm listening to him as I write this, and he already has some new sponsors. Too bad, huh?

True, they can be used for regulating periods or hormone swings, but MOSTLY, just for BC.

Ovarian cysts as well.

http://www.youngwomenshealth.org/med-uses-ocp.html

1st of all, and the most important thing here..

You can hate rush, or you can love rush, it does not matter at all. The first amendment protects him to be able to say anything and everything he wants to say. The 1st amendment does not just protect popular speech, or speech you agree with, but ALL speech.

2nd,

Everyone of you are playing right into the hands of rush. he is playing you like a well made violin. His name is in the news more and more because of one comment, and I guarantee you that in less than 6 mths all these people will be back on his show peddling their products BECAUSE he is heard by so many people.

Inmissouri,

There is not about medical treatments not covered by insurance. The pill is covered by most, if not all, insurance plans when it is used for a medical treatment. If you are using it to not get pregnant, then it should be up to you to pay for it. Both my ex wife and my sister were on the pill for extended time frame because of a medical need. The pill cost them 10.00 a mth not a big deal. When the medical need for it was cured, and they wanted to stay on it to regulate their cycle and to prevent getting pregnant, it went back up to full prices. I personally see nothing wrong with this.

Not to mention that married people practice birth control...oh my ...Would that be for "recreation" purposes???? Good grief; how dare they be so frivolous!

I listened to Rush today at lunch and he apologized over and over for his choice of words and the personal nature of the comments. Whether or not she chooses to accept it is up to her. I suspect she wants to keep it alive to keep fanning the flames and try to extend her 15 minutes of fame. And if sponsors pull their ads from Rush, that's fine and it's their right. That's the way capitalism works, and Rush would likely be the first to defend that.

This whole thing is pretty much ado about nothing. When commentators on the left called Sarah Palin names that were as bad (or worse), no one really cared. There is definitely a double standard here. Liberals can say whatever they want about conservatives and the mainstream media cheers them on. But when the shoe is on the other foot, these same MSM types scream foul at the tops of their collective lungs.

It's all a smokescreen to the right on defense and keep from having to discuss the REAL issues of the day... Unemployment, the deficit, eroding freedoms, etc.

In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

No, he didn't use the wrong words, he used the wrong intention. He intended to embarass, demean, and belittle her and her cause. And yes, he did mean it as an attack on Ms. Fluke! How the hell else is anyone supposed to interpret it when he says that she should post sex videos online in return for having medical coverage for contraceptives?! That and calling someone a slut is about as personal as it gets!

This is the begining of the end for Rush Limbaugh. Just like Glenn Beck's mouth got him into trouble and kicked off the air, so shall it be for Rush Limbaugh.

Rush really screwed up bigtime. He created an opportunity for his critics to ignore the imporant underyling point he was trying to make and vilify him because of the words he used. The question he is asking is why should taxpayers fund birth control for medically unnecessary recreational purposes? The answer is: we shouldn't have to. I don't want to pay for your birth control so that you can reduce your risk of pregnancy when you have sex. Plain and simple.

My thought is that if you don't have the money for the pill then you dont get the pill. I dont want to pay for you to have sex!! I want one of those bad ass corvette c6 Zo6 coupes but guess what? I don't have the cash yet so no vette for me. I want a bigger boat but im saving for a vette so no bigger boat for me. I want a bigger house but... You get the idea. Rush's point was she had her hand out to the tax payers for something that was not needed. She wanted something she couldn't afford so the tax payers should buy it for her. I want a corvette damn it and all you people should buy it for me!!! See how ridiculous that sounds? Its no different than what she was saying. I have a friend who needs the pill to "balance out her hormones" and that i understand but holding your hand out to the taxpayers so you can get laid is well... should i say it... slutty. Maybe she didn't say is was to get laid but that's what the underlying motivation is for most people. You only need contraception if your having sex and if you cant afford it then guess what, your in the same boat as me saving your pennys and putting in extra hours of work because thats how you get the things you want, by working hard and saving, not holding your hand out expecting someone else to pay for it. Kids these days... yesh.

Boycott companies owned by Bain Capital

Most of the big sponsors have abandoned Rush Limbaugh, but the company keeping him on the air is Clear Channel Communications which is owned by Bain Capital.

• Aleris
• AMC Theatres
• Bavaria Yachtbau
• Bombardier Recreational Products
• Brake Bros Ltd
• Brookstone
• Burger King
• Burlington Coat Factory
• Clear Channel Communications
• D&M Holdings
• Dollarama
• Domino's Pizza
• DoubleClick
• Edcon Limited
• GOME Electrical Appliances
• Guitar Center
• Gymboree
• HD Supply
• Hospital Corporation of America
• Kansas City Bolt and Nut Company plant
• Michaels
• NXP Semiconductors
• Sealy Corporation
• Staples Inc.
• Toys "R" Us
• Warner Music Group
• The Weather Channel

Boycott new sponsors to the Rush Limbaugh show!

I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

Rush Limbaugh is an a-hole, but I don't mean that as a personal attack on Mr. Limbaugh.

Spider, not once did her sex life come up in her testimony. You are just listening to what Rush said she said.

There is no ovarian cyst involved here, Ruken. The woman admitted to congress members and a national TV audience that she's a sleep-around! And she wants taxpayers to pay for her habit....so Rush's description was spot on.

If you think that, you didn't read her testimony.

Please try again.

When he called her a "slut" and a "prostitute" he called 98% of women in America "sluts" and "prostitutes". And all we hear from Romney and Scrotorum is " I think he used a poor choice of words" Women should remember this come November. Men with any respect (at all) for their wives should remember this come November.

I am a Conservative and I resent being put in the same category as such disrespectful radicals such as Limbaugh. This lady, Ms. Fluke, is entitled to her opinion. And if I disagree with it, I will state why I disagree. But to brand this lady in the disgusting way Limbaugh branded her is inexcusable. I hope his advertisers abandon him 100% and he is forced off the air, for this is not the first time he has been so incredibly insulting to those with whom he disagrees!

I do believe, however, that the current Administration is far more sympathetic to the Muslim community than it is to the Catholic community (and I am neither a Muslim nor a Catholic). All one has to do is burn a discarded and already descecrated Quran and Americans are executed, while the President apologizes. But the beliefs of the Catholic Church can be disrespected and no one needs to fear that Choir boys will murder government officials. Can you imagine what would happen if Government policies forced the Muslim community to violate its beliefs?????

But getting back to the current topic, Limbaugh is pathetic, to say the least.

The comments by Rush Limbaugh just further indicate the need to eliminate the GOP from the political landscape. Whether it is deciding that women in Virginia who wish to have an abortion need to be forcibly raped (again, in some cases) or deciding what medication women should be allowed to have, the Republican party continues to show that it has no regard for women whatsoever.

The GOP war on women, the poor, the disabled and the middle class has to end. The only real choice you have is to vote against these scum.

Ovarian cysts as well.

I believe you. However, I still feel that the pill is used mostly for birth control.

Jeremy-960164

1st of all, and the most important thing here..

You can hate rush, or you can love rush, it does not matter at all. The first amendment protects him to be able to say anything and everything he wants to say. The 1st amendment does not just protect popular speech, or speech you agree with, but ALL speech.

Jeremy, this is not a first amendment issue. Yes, Rush has the right to say it, but he does not have the right to a radio broadcast to say his filth. If sponsors leave, and he gets fired. His first amendment rights have not been abridged. The freedom of speech does not protect against the repercussions of your words either.

Next, birth control should be paid by insurance, just like "hard on pills" are covered. Why should one pay for insurance and have that insurance decide it doesn't want to cover something?

If it so happens that a medication typically used for birth control is used to treat something else, it should be covered with the same co-pays and coverages associated with other prescription drugs, otherwise not just no but hell no. Why should I be forced to pay for other peoples recreational sex?

Linda in Texas, did you see Bill Maher's recent yahoo internet comedy special? He took President Obama to task on many issues. He never said anything about a private citizen only politicians. Calling Newt Gingrich a hypocrite over his impeaching Clinton over sex issues is not the same as calling a woman a slut. Considering Newt's record of extra marital affairs he should have never said anything about Clinton's. Bill Maher is today's Will Rogers.

Limbaugh:

"I'd go into hiding and hope the media didn't find me."

I also wish you'd go into hiding and the media didn't find you.

Ruken, no one is denying that birthcontrol pills are used for other purposes than contraceptives. Did you know that contraceptives can cause cancer & cysts also, not just treat certain symptoms. However, birthcontrol is basically about conviences not necessity as compared to plastic surgery which many see as egotistic unless the surgery is needed because of accident or burns. Why should any employer be made to pay for peoples' conviences or egos? Let them pay for their own or go without sexual contact until they can afford to, OOPs asking for personal responsibilty instead of Big Brother control.

Spider, here is a quote directly from Fluke's testimony:

"A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries."

No cysts involved? Can you come up with even one quote where she mentions that she "sleeps around". Rush Limbaugh was wrong and so are you. Free speech is not required to cover blatant lies.

Additional Bain Capital businesses to boycott. These companies are part of OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC.

• Bonefish Grill
• Carrabba's Italian Grill
• Outback Steakhouse
• Roy's Hawaiian Fusion
• Fleming's Prime Steakhouse & Wine Bar

With any luck for the rest of us this will be Limbaugh's "Jimmy the Greek" moment. For those who don't remember Jimmy the Greek was a sports handicapper and color commentator. He was booted off the airwaves (CBS) after making racist remarks regarding Blacks and basketball (you can search the content on your own) Clearly inappropriate, just as Limbaugh's comments are.

It amazes me that Limbaugh is on the air at all in the first place. He's not entertaining, he's not informative -if anything he misinforms, and he adds nothing of value to the human condition. Perhaps the sponsors of his show will realize that his is not the face to associate with their products.

Linda in Texas-469280........You said.....

Quote......Just curious... Bill Maher makes some awful statements about right wingers and they are considered funny. Rush Limbaugh is brought to task for his. Why is that?......EndQuote

Bill Maher does NOT represent any but a very small minority of democrats. Certainly, he has nothing near the following that Rush Limbaugh enjoys within your GOPeaParty. No democrat goes to Mr. Maher, hat in hand, to apologize for some statement with which Maher disagrees. Neither does Bill Maher aspire to direct democrats in the overt way Rush Limbaugh did with his 2008 "Operation Chaos". Really, there is no comparison between the two.

You folks have anointed Rush Limbaugh as your de facto leader. Further, until yesterday, most of you defended Limbaugh's remarks. Now, as Limbaugh has been so humbled as to issue a public (albeit insincere) apology, you vainly search about for some other spin to put upon his (and your) folly. It will not work. Limbaugh is yours and you are his. You are a match deserving of one another.

We (democrats) hope Mr. Limbaugh survives his self-inflicted wounds. We can ask for no better symbol to define your GOPeaParty.

The comments from right-wingers who support Limbaugh clearly demonstrate why they listen to his blather.

This is not about taxpayers paying for birth control. That is not the issue.

Equating humorous comments by a comedian about a political group with a vulgar personal attack on a private citizen is in my opinion pretty stupid.

The core right-wing nitwits who think Limbaugh is some kind of sage are ignorant, gullible, misinformed and confused. Perfectly qualified voters for the Republican party.

To Linda, Spider and whomever else keeps bring up Bill Maher, Ed Schultz ect.... If they said something along the lines that any women who has their contraception for what ever reason it is prescribed, covered under their insurance policy a prostitute and wants to see the video, I am sure they would be in the same hot water with millions of men and women.

BTW, this is what a sincere apology sounds like: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/26/ed-schultz-apologizes-laura-ingraham_n_867308.html

I want a new tie because the silk will assist my heart not failing one-day. Its called tiedyfibulation condition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

He shouldn't just lose money, he absolutely should lose his job. He doesn't need $22 million per year anyway.

For those screaming Bill Maher, he only has one sponsor and that is HBO. He is on a premium channel. If you want to start a boycott on Maher then cancel your HBO subscription. If you don't have one, then you don't have much leverage to remove him. Best of luck.

Bill Maher lost his job at ABC over his comments, so learn something.

Rush should lose his.

I really consider them the same kind of person. And if you like one, and not the other, you probably aren't thinking straight....

Rush Limbaugh did not apologize for his outrageous comments. He meant every word he said but wished he had worded it differently after he found his advertisers jumping ship.

Saying that his choice of words was not the best is his trying to turn this into a game of semantics. His opinion of the woman in question hasn't change. I wonder how he feels about guys who have sex outside of marriage. Back to the old double standard.

I wonder which words Romney and Santorum would substitute for Slut and Prostitute. They are supporting Limbaugh and his statement saying he used a poor choice of words. I guess Ronmey would use Whore while Santorum would use Jexebel? Please Mitt, Rick, tell us what words would you substitute for Slut and Prostitute. Let's get rid of the GOP noise machine and restore some honor to the Republican party. They have lost all credibility and still there are dipsticks that vote for these people who defend churlish behavior because it suits their agenda.. Let's start by getting rid of Limbaugh. We can take care of Romney and Santorum at election time.

RUSH IS A PIG. That apology was an insincere joke, at best. When are people going to realize that women have rights, too? Nice that guys want to have sex with no strings, but when women want to use birth control they are sluts? Really? Then guys, who ARE you having sex with???? Or, are you prepared to pay child support on the potential kids you are creating??? Guys should be held accountable, as well. Too bad it isn't their belly that swells carrying a child, then everyone would KNOW they had sex.

@Greg in New York

you like your BC pills huh?

And who are you to determine what other people "need"

If you want communism, move to China, Cuba or even Russia. Who are you to say who deserves a job and who doesn't?

Or as they said when I was a kid "who died and made you king"?

Do you have an idea what a self interested, entitled brat you side like.

I don't like the turd Rush, but he did call it right. Tasteless and inappropriate, but true in all counts it would seem.

Except the part where it's not true at all. Her testimony to Congress was on how birth control was needed and not supplied by Georgetown (since they're Catholic) student medical insurance for treatment of ovarian cysts.

Please learn to read before posting.

I caught a bit of the Rush Limbaugh show at Lunchtime. He's essentially telling all of his viewers to boycott the companies that pulled their ads. He didn't actually say that, but he pointed out that the companies had made enormous profits from his radio audience and it was their choice and their loss.

Other than that, he's playing the victim card, and peddling his conspiracy theory that the Obama campaign knew it was having problems with women supporting him for re-election, so they concocted this whole birth control mess just to appeal to women for the election. Yes, the whole thing was a planned exercise according to him. It's so hard for him to take women seriously, that he surely can't imagine anyone else doing so other that just as pawns for some temporary political gain.

So, the White House has been pretty busy according to him and the other talk show hosts by hatching all these conspiracies to improve the economy, take out terrorists, withdraw troops, setting up the GOP on the whole birth control issue so they could somehow have a full frontal attack on religion in the US, and still have time to work in character assassinations against poor old Rush and his friends.

Rush has to know that a lot of people who don't ever listen to his show are listening in right now to find out who is still advertising and what else this nut job will say, and he's spewing more nonsense that ever. I wouldn't be surprised if he started losing his core listeners who don't want to hear how he's the poor victim of a grand conspiracy and that no one is safe with this administration on the loose. Rush was always very pompous and self confident no matter what crap he was selling (product or ideology), but now he just sounds wounded, bitter, and delusional and regardless of your political leanings, that just doesn't make good radio. His liberal listeners may go up for a while just for entertainment and to hear what a nut job he is, but his conservative base that kept his ratings up will surely dwindle.

My prediction is that within a month or two, his show will be cut from three hours to a single hour spot by Clear Channel since that's probably as much as they can absorb as it ceases to be and will never be the revenue producer it was.

TN Rebel: You obviously did not hear or read Ms. Fluke's testimony so anything you have to say on the matter is worthless.

I beg to differ with the notion that because one person, who sought a public forum for her cause and comments was called an undesirable name, whether it was deservedly or not is not for me to assess and judge, but I will concede that it does bring the tone of discussion down rather than elevate and enlighten anyone: however, that being said...just because one woman was called a name does not in any context reflect on 98% of all women. If that were true then the comments made about Sarah Palin or her daughter would also have had that same resonance, and I don't feel that 98% of women felt at all included in the Sarah Palin bashing. I absolutely love the way all the men come crawling out of the woodwork to defend my rights as a woman, but still don't seem to get the concept that the result of sexual activity, at least in a heterosexual form, is the potential conception of children. Men contribute to children equally with their female partners, but while they are getting us all upset that we are somehow being victimized, oppressed, sent back to the dark ages, there is no discussion about what men can do to foster birth control......and guess what, no unwanted pregnancy if men were not engaging in sexual activity with women, and furthermore, the abstinence from sexual activity when pregnancy isn't wanted is acceptable under every single religion....so sex, without the intent or acknowlegement that children could result from the behavior, is recreational. No value judgement on recreational vs procreational sexual activity between consenting adults, but a definition of terms with regard to what is considered medically necessary and medically elective.

And who are you to determine what other people "need"

If you want communism, move to China, Cuba or even Russia. Who are you to say who deserves a job and who doesn't?

Or as they said when I was a kid "who died and made you king"?

Do you have an idea what a self interested, entitled brat you side like.

So it's okay for government money from Medicare to pay for Viagra but not birth control?

Are you serious?

Greg in New York

For those screaming Bill Maher, he only has one sponsor and that is HBO. He is on a premium channel. If you want to start a boycott on Maher then cancel your HBO subscription. If you don't have one, then you don't have much leverage to remove him. Best of luck.

so, is it bliss?

hardtostarboard,

How has this become about YOU paying for anything? Limbaugh made the same statement over and over again. No matter how many times he says it, it isn't true. Since we have a "private" health insurance system, your taxes are not involved. Mr. Fluke, or any other woman, pays insurance premiums and her employer pays premiums. Period. I'm not paying for your medications and you're not paying for mine.

The worst thing about Limbaugh is his vicious ad hominen attacks. The second worst (OK, maybe it's a tie), which this episode has exposed to a larger public, is his utter failure to get even the most obvious facts straight. Or, put another way, his amazing propensity to twist the story until it is unrecognizable. He is a liar, he willfully distorts the truth to suit his own ends, and he has misled millions of Americans. So destructive.

Joseph Welch famously stood up to Joe McCarthy with this sentence, "At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" I wish he were with us today. Nobody else seems to have the political courage to denounce him.

As she stated, she spends about $3,000.00 a year on BC Products. I have to agree with Rush, if she is spending that much on BC products, then she must be a busy woman. That there is a lot of condoms my friend. And I say condoms because it is the recommended way to have sex without contracting a disease

Read her testimony. It's treatment for ovarian cysts.

This was not a congressional hearing panel ! The dems set it up to appear as one but , there was no swearing in !

It was a press conference , pure and simple !

By the way , free birth control of your choice is avaiable to ANYONR at Planned Parenthood so this is a red herring !

when she was discussing medical treatments that were not covered by insurance.

Contraception is a medical treatment?

NHL WHAT?????

The fact is that you Liberals Do Not UNDERSTAND the insurance companies will not pay for this. WE AMERICANS PAY for this! No matter what I AND you WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!

Nothing in life is FREE! Well except liberals. They say its Free to the Dregs then Tax the DOER'S

What you don't understand (besides basic grammar apparently) is that taxpayers won't be giving her a dime for BC. The insurance she already pays for will.

Contraception is a medical treatment?

Yes. In her case it was ovarian cysts. Read her testimony.

" Whether it is deciding that women in Virginia who wish to have an abortion need to be forcibly raped (again, in some cases) or deciding what medication women should be allowed to have, the Republican party continues to show that it has no regard for women whatsoever."

dirp101 - already passed by Republicans in Texas, in bills ready to be voted on in Alabama and Pennsylvania and at least one other state that I can't think of at the moment.

As she stated, she spends about $3,000.00 a year on BC Products. I have to agree with Rush, if she is spending that much on BC products, then she must be a busy woman. That there is a lot of condoms my friend. And I say condoms because it is the recommended way to have sex without contracting a disease.

Because monogamous married women never use birth control and just spend their life popping out babies, right?

so, is it bliss?

What are you talking about? If people don't like Bill Maher and don't want him on TV then they need to boycott HBO. Not a hard concept. Maybe simple logic is a bit beyond you. I don't have HBO and don't watch Bill Maher. People have a lot more leverage over Rush Limbaugh then they do over Bill Maher.

So I guess I can point that question right back at you, "so, is it bliss?" But then again I don't think you are ignorant, I think you are a moron.

Of course the ditto heads equate being on the pill with sleeping around, no one ever sleeps with them twice.....

The fact is that you Liberals Do Not UNDERSTAND the insurance companies will not pay for this. WE AMERICANS WILL PAY for this! No matter what YOU AND I WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!

How is it that you Republicans can be so grossly ignorant about how insurance works?

Isn't there somewhere online that we can sign a petition to have Clear Channel take Limbaugh off the air? I so far haven't seen one but I'll bet there would be hundreds of thousands of signers.

Fluke is nothing but Pelosi's left wing political whore. I doubt she or any of her friends spend 3K on birth control. With all the free BC available from Planned Parenthood and low cost BC from Walmart, if she has to spend 3K she is one stupid f*cking idiot. (Pun intended) You all better hope you don't have to hire her as your lawyer.

Maybe you should go back to taking your Medicare Part-D funded Viagra.

Devil's..."...over his impeaching Clinton over sex issues..."

Clinton's impeachment had nothing to do with sex. He was impeached for lying under oath.

@Sue ZZ

Not to mention that married people practice birth control...oh my ...Would that be for "recreation" purposes???? Good grief; how dare they be so frivolous!

Frivolous or not why do you and I have to pay for someone else's family planning? Maybe if you can't afford some form of BC (like a 5$ box of condoms) and you don't want to have kids you should abstain until you can pay for it yourself. "Women's health" is a red herring used to cover for the fact that the government is once again telling people what they have to do, like it or not. Is anyone really dumb enough not to believe that was one of the things our founding fathers were trying to avoid?

Frivolous or not why do you and I have to pay for someone else's family planning? Maybe if you can't afford some form of BC (like a 5$ box of condoms) and you don't want to have kids you should abstain until you can pay for it yourself. "Women's health" is a red herring used to cover for the fact that the government is once again telling people what they have to do, like it or not. Is anyone really dumb enough not to believe that was one of the things our founding fathers were trying to avoid?

Oh, but it's okay for you to pay into Medicare so old men can get Viagra?

And FYI: BC pills are used to treat other conditions, like in Fluke's case it was ovarian cysts.

I've been on birth control since I was 15, which was WAY before I was sexually active. Indications were for the treatment of ovarian cysts and bad acne. Now I'm on Yaz for the treatment of ovarian cysts, adult onset acne and PMDD.

There is no other preventative treatment for cysts.

I could forgo the pill for acne, but then I would have to go on Accutane. Accutane is a far more expensive drug than Yaz. It also requires MONTHLY blood tests, MONTHLY pregnancy exams, a psychological evaluation and...wait for it...BIRTH CONTROL! That's right kids - you cannot take Accutane if you are not on the pill. So, there is that.

I could forgo the pill for PMDD, but then I might have to take an anxiety/depression med, which is also more expensive than Yaz.

Anyone who says birth control does not qualify as a medical treatment clearly does not understand all of its indications.

Frivolous or not why do you and I have to pay for someone else's family planning? Maybe if you can't afford some form of BC (like a 5$ box of condoms) and you don't want to have kids you should abstain until you can pay for it yourself. "Women's health" is a red herring used to cover for the fact that the government is once again telling people what they have to do, like it or not. Is anyone really dumb enough not to believe that was one of the things our founding fathers were trying to avoid?

If you don't like it, don't buy insurance.

What she is proposing does not involve spending tax payers money. We do spend tax payer money on Viagra though so....there's that.

Ruken Who Cares! Why are her Ovarian Cysts MY PROBLEM?!

They aren't. The private insurance she paid for should be covering them, but since Georgetown is Catholic, they aren't.

Please learn to comprehend the issues before regurgitating an ignorant response.

All of these comments are so bogus. Entertainers and talk show hosts are always creating controversy. Either your offended of your not, it is not politically or socially driven. I could care less about his choice of words, just as I didn't care when Shultz called Laura Ingram a Republican slut, or Letterman said Palin was slutty or Mahr said Palin was a c - - t. Grow up.

Is this the end of Rico?

Yes, contraception is a medical treatment.

You need to go to the doctor to get a prescription for it, which is filled in a pharmacy. It is also used to treat conditions such as ovarian cysts and irregular periods. It costs the same amount no matter how much sex you have.

Is viagra a medical treatment? Isn't that "paying men to have sex?"

LOL!! This whole outcry is so funny. Who cares? This is an entertainer who has an opinion. His opinion is that this girl is trying to get the government to pay for her contraception so she can have "safe" sex on the taxpayers dime. I think his comments were spot on, and his apology is clearly stating that he has not changed his opinion, just regrets that he used offensive words to do so.

It was wrong of him to call her a slut. He should have just stuck to the facts: she wants to be able to have sex and not pay for contraception. I think that speaks for itself, and I think it needs to be put in those terms. Too many people get lost in the hype - the bottom line is, should the government funded healthcare pay for your condoms, morning after pills, birth control, dental dams for oral, diaphrams, etc, and what about vasectomies and hysterectomies? Where is the line drawn?

My health plan covers a vasectomy, but not the tests to make sure it worked. It pays for the Cialis prescription, but not for the Urology appointment to get the prescription. It pays for a birth, but not fertility treatment. It pays for birth control pill prescriptions, but not for condoms. This is a private insurance, just think how messed up it would be if the government were running it...

Back to the subject though, what do you call someone who spends their 15 seconds of fame going before the world to say that the government should pay for her to have safe sex?

@lolfattynerdswhoknew

If you don't like it, don't buy insurance.

Where the hell have you been? Living under a rock? Obama says I HAVE TO BUY INSURANCE! I won't have that option pretty soon. Please try to keep up.

Is viagra a medical treatment? Isn't that "paying men to have sex?"

Shhhhh! People want to remain completely ignorant of that fact.

Falsh 8

So tell me. If you have diabetes and you are getting insulin from your health care provider, then we are all paying for your free medication? You are a true Republican. Don't let facts get in the way of your opinion.

Flash, do you have insurance coverage? Because if you do you are actually part of a pool of people who pay into a system to make sure there is enough money to cover. So, your medical problems are someone else's problem.

How would you feel if your insurance denied you heart medication, asthma treatment, viagra, etc.?

Insurance companies should cover the least expensive form of birth control that has been proven to be effective. That would be condoms. For matters of ovarian cysts or if it's necessary to utilize the other methods of birth control for medical reasons, then they should be covered the same as prescription drugs. If an individual prefers other more expensive contraceptive devices, they should have to pay the difference between condoms and their preferred device. This is the same as when a generic is available and one chooses to go with a name brand prescription.

You're calling OTHER people ignorant? Really? You honestly believe insurance companies are just going to subtract this extra cost from their bottom line? You honestly believe insurance companies aren't just going to pass the cost on to their customers through slightly higher premiums? And you're calling OTHER people ignorant. WOW!

So what if they do?

Insurance companies should cover the least expensive form of birth control that has been proven to be effective. That would be condoms.

Sure.

Then instead of Viagra they should only cover air pumps.

Ruken :

As she stated, she spends about $3,000.00 a year on BC Products. I have to agree with Rush, if she is spending that much on BC products, then she must be a busy woman. That there is a lot of condoms my friend. And I say condoms because it is the recommended way to have sex without contracting a disease

Read her testimony. It's treatment for ovarian cysts.

Then if it's for cysts, then its not BIRTH CONTROL. the issue at hand is BIRTH CONTROL products. Now seeing its for cysts, then it falls under the existing part of the trillion dollar defecate law, Health Insurance.

I don't need you or anyone else spending my money.

To Greg in New York:

I didn't see anything like this when Jon Stewart Called Sarah Palin a "twat" - how do you explain THAT double standard?

Plus, she NEVER stated she (or anybody else) spends $3,000/yr on these products. It was $3,000 over the course of law school, which is about three years. In addition, she did not say SHE spent that. It would be helpful if all the dittoheads did just a LITTLE research and study FACTS before they went shooting their mouths off.

Oh, yeah, and condoms are really poor treatment for ovarian cysts or for endometriosis. But perhaps most of the posters from the right here that defend Limbaugh don't understand this reproductive stuff; it sure looks like their de facto leader doesn't, and they seem to get all their information from him.

@PH-3046605

How would you feel if your insurance denied you heart medication, asthma treatment, viagra, etc.?

Well I can't speak for flash but peronally, I'd get a different insurance company, wow, imagine that, a solution that doesn't involve big brother telling someone what they HAVE to do. Shocking! And if big brother wasn't already telling me I HAVE to buy insurance from someone in my own state it would be even easier for me to do just that and I'd probably get a better deal on top of it.

Then if it's for cysts, then its not BIRTH CONTROL. the issue at hand is BIRTH CONTROL products. Now seeing its for cysts, then it falls under the existing part of the trillion dollar defecate law, Health Insurance.

I don't need you or anyone else spending my money.

Swing and a miss. You were, and remain, completely ignorant.

Well I can't speak for flash but peronally, I'd get a different insurance company, wow, imagine that, a solution that doesn't involve big brother telling someone what they HAVE to do. Shocking!

Well since we have a religion that can deny coverage of BC based on religious beliefs, I think I should start a church that doesn't believe in giving coverage to ignorant people.

Therefore I could deny you coverage.

Cysts or birth control, whatever the reason is, if I have a medical condition or need in general I have to pay for it myself out of pocket or w/ my insurance. BC can also cause blood clots, etc. Will I demand that everyone help me pay for my medical costs resulting from the use of birth control since it had to be provided? That all being said, if it prevents a few idiots from having kids, I am all for donating to this...it is sad people can't/won't be personally responsible for themselves and their sexual/reproductive needs (what's wrong w/ hitting up Planned Parenthood if you cant' afford it?), but kids shouldn't have to suffer. Damned if you do (support this), damned if you don't in my opinion.

Hasn't she already had her 15-minutes of fame? This is the highlight of her life; it'll never get any better!

Her original comment was that a medical students pays $3000 a year for contraception. Anyone needing $3000 a year worth of contraception is indeed a "little loose". A condom costs .75, so that's 4000 condoms in a year. There are 365 days in a year, meaning she could sleep with 10.96 guys a day. How sexually active is this person to necessitate that she would need that amount of contraceptives and why can't she pay for her own contraceptives? I certainly hope that Obama's health care plan will pay the medical expenses incurred by the unfortunate guys who sleep with her!

I'm not a supporter of Rush at all, but it sure appears to me that he called this pretty accurately. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck then it certainly isn't a chicken!

I missed that one, happy - and when was it Stewart said this and in what context? Was it over the public airwaves? Did it actually happen?

Yes, contraception is a medical treatment.

You need to go to the doctor to get a prescription for it, which is filled in a pharmacy. It is also used to treat conditions such as ovarian cysts and irregular periods. It costs the same amount no matter how much sex you have.

Is viagra a medical treatment? Isn't that "paying men to have sex?"

You don't need a prescription for a condom or for a diaphram, and can't you get a "morning after" pill without a prescription? So what should they pay for?

Viagra would be paying for men AND WOMEN to have sex.. kinda helps both sides.. unless she just wants to cuddle. And my medical plan doesnt cover the doctor visit to get the prescription, just the prescription itself. Not sure how Obamacare covers it.

How about surgeries specifically for contraception? Only if it is medically needed? See, where do you draw the line, and why only cover some things and not others.?

Here is a question along the same lines, but not on the same subject: If you have an eye injury, should it be medical insurance, or eyesight coverage that covers it? Does Obamacare have an eyesight plan, or is it just medical? Where is the distinction? I have a cyst inside my eye that causes a blind spot. It is not covered under my medical insurance, and I have no eyesight plan, yet it would require surgery to fix. And why aren't teeth considered medical? If I get an absess tooth, I can die from the infection, but it has to be absess before I can be treated with medical insurance?

So many more things to be concerned about than whether your rubbers will be covered by your medical plan...

BC can also cause blood clots, etc.

Which is why the kind being discussed is prescription only.

Will I demand that everyone help me pay for my medical costs resulting from the use of birth control since it had to be provided?

Except that's not what's being demanded at all. Try to keep up.

Corey, NOPE. Get a some facts before you pass on ignorance. When you get the major points wrong right off the bat, how would you expect anybody to pay attention to anything else you have to say? Although I guess it works for Limbaugh...

@Corey-1980841

Her original comment was that a medical students pays $3000 a year for contraception.

Actually it was 3k for the time she'd spend in law school not just one year. Of course if it were just while she were a student you might find some sympathy for her but the reality is that we'll be paying for her BC for the rest of her life. Even after she becomes a lawyer and starts jacking the rest of us even further with $300/hour legal fees.

spider-737231 . The woman admitted to congress members and a national TV audience that she's a sleep-around!

If you are going to LIE, at least make it believable. Otherwise you will be IGNORED.

I didn't see anything like this when Jon Stewart Called Sarah Palin a "twat" - how do you explain THAT double standard?

Where did I ever mention Jon Stewart? You right wing lunatics need to learn to have a discussion on a topic instead of grasping at random straws. I don't watch Comedy Central or Jon Stewart. Once again people, boycott your cable and satellite if you don't like Jon Stewart. Comedy Central is part of basic packages, so that is the only way you will be able to effectively boycott him.

All the righties getting their panties in a knot because they might lose their God, Rush Limbaugh. Don't hate because people have more leverage over Limbaugh then they do over Bill Maher and Jon Stewart.

Ruken:

You're one Fine Socialist Ruken... Now bow to the Dear Leader!

You honestly believe insurance companies are just going to subtract this extra cost from their bottom line? You honestly believe insurance companies aren't just going to pass the cost on to their customers through slightly higher premiums?

Hey I'll meet you in Candy Land OK? I'll bring the unicorns and fairy dust, you just bring yourself OK? Now take this medication like a good boy and everything will be OK.

You honestly believe insurance companies are just going to subtract this extra cost from their bottom line? You honestly believe insurance companies aren't just going to pass the cost on to their customers through slightly higher premiums?

You already pay for men to screw (i.e. your insurance covers Viagra for other men) but when women want birth control, a medication used for other things in addition to contraception, it's suddenly taboo?

I was wrong about you. You aren't ignorant, you're misogynist.

Ruken, your comment "So it's okay for government money from Medicare to pay for Viagra but not birth control?" is false. Medicare does not pay for Viagra or any birth control unless the provider gets a prior authorization supporting medically necessary. I work for A Medicare agency and I can assure you that no person on Medicare is covered for Viagra, Birth Control, Penile Pumps etc unless the provider submits medical records and gets it authorized for "medically only" purposes. The do not and will not pay for viagra etc just because the girl or guy want to have sex. PLease educate yourself regarding things before you post false information. Just like Rush stated false information about Fluke, you are posting false information about Medicare.

txmom32........you said:

Quote.......As she is a college student shouldn't she still be on her parent's health insurance plan.....She doesn't seem to be screaming that her parents are providing her access to birth control.......EndQuote

This (your statement) is a testament to the ignorance exhibited by the GOPeaParty "faithful" on this (and many other) issues. Sandra Fluke is .....T H I R T Y...... years old. The Affordable Care Act (proudly aka ObamaCare) covers students until they are 26.

Why do you folks presume to debate when you have only slight knowledge?

Regarding why Ms. Fluke does not simply go out and buy additional health care insurance: She is ALREADY purchasing HCI. WHY should she be expected to pay twice ? Furthermore, why should those who are financially unable to afford either additional insurance or out-of-pocket drugs be denied contraception?

It is ironic indeed that the very folks who claim to be so fervently against abortion argue that obstacles be placed before women wishing to obtain the contraceptive drugs that are the MOST IMPORTANT preventative for unwanted pregnancies and, therefore, abortions.

Will I demand that everyone help me pay for my medical costs resulting from the use of birth control since it had to be provided?

Think this one through. With this philosophy we should not cover any medications that have side effects then, should we? That doesn't leave much to choose from....

Yea, and what medical issues does a penile pump have?

Oh that's right, erectile dysfunction. A condition preventing men from getting an erection, which prevents them from screwing.

So basically, we are covering "medical conditions" that prevent men from screwing. Got it.

• AOL suspends ads on Rush Limbaugh show

Thank you AOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Primaries being held all over the nation tomorrow and the biggest stories on the MSN site are about a talk radio host's insult and apology to a young woman...and of course the biggest story of the day to the "average American voter'... the pregnancy of a 'Jersey Shore' numbskull.

For those right wingers trying to say the insurance companies will pass the cost consider this... The VAST majority of insurance policies ALREADY cover birth control. WHY? BECAUSE IT'S WAY CHEAPER THAN BABIES!!!

The issue here isn't whether the insurance companies will eventually charge the people or not. Perhaps their cost benifit analysis will be positive to the benefit. The issue here is whether the Federal Government has the right to DEMAND ALL INSURANCE PROVIDERS to cover this item. When people shop for insurance there are differences, if there weren't there would be no need for multiple providers (Perhaps that is what the current administration wants, single payer health care - go figure).

Well I can't speak for flash but peronally, I'd get a different insurance company, wow, imagine that, a solution that doesn't involve big brother telling someone what they HAVE to do. Shocking! And if big brother wasn't already telling me I HAVE to buy insurance from someone in my own state it would be even easier for me to do just that and I'd probably get a better deal on top of it.

I can get on board with this. I wish we could choose our own insurance but, in many cases, we can't because our employers choose it for us and, in this economy, I don't see many people switching jobs for insurance reasons.

People are all riled up about this but the reality is that birth control is a health effective and cost effective way to treat other ailments (like mine). If you step aside from the controversy of sex for just a moment and looked at it like any other drug, then this would be a total non-issue.

..."Clinton's impeachment had nothing to do with sex. He was impeached for lying under oath"...

Uh, huh. So...why was Clinton under oath to begin with?

Was he under oath because he lied under oath?

Nice line. Fiction, but nice.

He was put inder oath because of sex. Stop lying.

Ms. Fluke.

Please continue your fight against the ignorant right. They are SO woefully behind the social and ethical learning curve, that educating them is futile.

Have a nice day.

The issue here is whether the Federal Government has the right to DEMAND ALL INSURANCE PROVIDERS to cover this item.

Which they should.

Say Georgetown was of the Jehovah's Witness faith. Does that mean their insurance shouldn't cover blood transfusions?

Where does it end?

DKJ-4

Then why do insurance companies pay for your and Limbaugh's viagra? I don't see any life threatening medical reason. Simply your pleasure. Typical double standard!

The lady Ms. Fluke spoke about developed a very large cyst on one of her ovaries which burst. Excruciating pain. Bleeding. This resulted in hospitalization $$, emergency surgery $$ just to mention a few expenses that have resulted from not receiving the proper treatment. The insurance she paid for covered some of that. Ooops. Guess your insurance premiums just increased $$. Her student loan has probably increased as well. But you don't care about anyone elses pain, just yours and your own pleasure.

I can't believe the number of ignorant people on here commenting on Flukes testimony when they never read it! She NEVER said she was having so much sex that she couldn't pay for it! She was talking about a friend who needed BC for he ovarian cysts and couldn't get it covered on her PRIVATE insurance, so she had to spend over $3000 during Law School to pay for it. For all you who don't know about law school, it is a 3 year program, she wasn't talking about one year. Also some versions of the pill; and there are many, with differing hormones, and hormone levels; can cost over $100 per month. And this bill before congress was just the GOP pandering to their right wing nuts. The Catholic church was fine with the compromise offered that they will not be paying for BC. The GOP then decided to introduce a bill that would let ANYONE opt out of insurance coverage they don't like from any perspective. So if your boss is a Jehovahs Witness you could forget about transfusions. If they happen to be a scientologist it would be any form of psychiatric care (they will get rid of your "thetans" themselves for a hefty price). If they were a Christ Scientist it would be all medical trearment since they only believe in prayer. It was ridiculous.

No one is asking you to pay for anyones BC. This is not being paid for by taxes but by premiums for private insurance. If you do want your taxes involved though just make BC for women too expensive so there are lots of children who need to be taken care of with government dolllars.

@Ruken

You already pay for men to screw (i.e. your insurance covers Viagra for other men) but when women want birth control, a medication used for other things in addition to contraception, it's suddenly taboo?

I was wrong about you. You aren't ignorant, you're misogynist.

Fail. Not all insurance compnies pay for viagra. You see they have an OPTION as to whether they want to cover it or not. No one is FORCING them to. Surely you're smart enough to see the difference.

And for the record, I don't want to pay for someone else Viagra either, so your assumtion of me is just more BS spewing from your hole.

Fail. Not all insurance compnies pay for viagra. You see they have an OPTION as to whether they want to cover it or not. No one is FORCING them to. Surely you're smart enough to see the difference.

And for the record, I don't want to pay for someone else Viagra either, so your assumtion of me is just more BS spewing from your hole.

Oh, like the BS assumptions coming from yours? You'd be the expert on that wouldn't you?

What's new about Limbaugh's crass attacks on people he doesn't know but who make easy targets. Have we forgotten the denigrating racist remarks about black quarterbacks? Remember when he viciously ridiculed Chelsea Clinton's physical characteristics, when she just a developing adolescent? How about the way he mocked Anita Hill and her supporters during the hearings--not just for their views, but for their personal mannerisms? How can so many people still listen to him, make him credible? Some of them, of course, are the usual gang of trogs who enjoy snickering and hooting at the distress and pain of the bully's target. This particular bully, and liar, has been tolerated too long. All his sponsors and producers should be ashamed. In fact, they should be doubly ashamed to compensate for the shame that Limbaugh is incapable of feeling. Why can't we be better than this?

And anyone saying that $3,000/year means she's a slut has no concept of cost. My last insurance provider covered part of my medication, but it was still a $50/month copay. Some go up to $100+/month if there is no coverage.

You take one pill every day (or one shot every three months) regardless of sexual activity so equating cost with "sluttiness" is ridiculous.

People keep citing freedom of speech in defense of Limbaugh, but what they are missing is that Limbaugh lied about what she said to congress. No one has the freedom to knowingly and willingly lie about someone with the intention of harming them. Not you, not me, and definately not a talk-show host with millions of listeners. People on here are posting negative comments about this student when they obviously don't know her, and who obviously didn't read the transcript of her congressional testimony. That's the whole point here- Limbaugh lied about what she said, and now millions of people who had never heard of her a week ago are on the internet claiming she sleeps around so much she can't afford the birth control. I can't understand how so many people can be willfully ignorant when the true facts are so easy to find.

txmom32 wrote -

I wish women would stop asking for special favors just because they produces estrogen and have vagina's. I produce estrogen and have a vagina....I've never seen fit to piss and moan that I need special accommodation or the support of others to met my own needs or succeed on my own merits.

Lady, I don't know for sure if you have had children while trying to hold a fulltime job, but if your employer felt the way you do that women don't deserve special accommodation when dealing with female-exclusive health issues, I would love to have seen your face when you asked for 6 weeks off so you could heal from childbirth and take care of your little one, and you were laughed right out of the front office! Put in vacation time, you'd be told. Also, if you don't come back to work after a month, your job will be forfeited. After all, dads can't get that sweet deal.....why should the moms? Is that how you really feel about it??

Over 15,000 posts!!!

Who is winning?

How many people tuned into Rush since this happened even for just a minute that normally would not.

The companies pulling their adds will get an upswing in sales from the liberals, then they will sneak back onto the Limbaugh show. Why not, your not listening "anymore". At least until the next time Rush says something really inappropriate.

Again: Who is winning?

I wouldn't accept his apology either. Once it's out there, as disgusting as his name-calling was, we know his apology means nothing. What did he do, change his mind about the birth control and how he thought of you? Of course he "apologized" for his own benefit, not for yours. I think Limbaugh should lose his job because of his verbal abuse of you, his "APOLOGY", which he did not mean and frankly because he's an idiot.

I think you people are all crazy. Clearly:

(1) women can only use BCP in order to have protected sex, because there is no other cheaper substitute what-so-ever which actually doubles as protection against STDs and that is the reason why we choose to use BCP. Nothing whatsoever about regulating our periods or helping with hormonal imbalances or any other kind of "women issue" aka "crazy talk".

(2) Obviously all women are sluts who only think about sex-sex-sex 24 hours a day, unlike men. That is why there are so many male prostitutes profiting off of women's sexual desires, porn is geared mainly to women, there is millions being made off of "Boys Gone Wild" videos, and the vast majority of males are virgins until after they are married. So of course only women should be responsible for preventing pregnancy and should have to fund that with no support generated from men in any way, shape or form.

(3) Of COURSE Catholics never have sex until after marriage and have no need for any form of birth control!! I have never ever seen Catholic teenage girls wearing skirts pulled up just shy of their whoo-has and have never ever heard of any pregnant Catholic teenagers ever at all. Nor have I ever heard that teens who are taught "abstinence only" have a higher teenage pregnancy rate than those that use birth control. Never. Would be ridiculous for you to say otherwise. Just the same as I have never, ever heard of horomonally driven, teenage boys who's minds are filled with thoughts of sex. Obviously they all wear suits and sip tea with their pinkies out, discussing politics and cars and the weather. Have you never BEEN to high school??

(4) CLEARLY it is waaaaaayyyyy cheaper for taxpayers to pay for (a) abortions (b) the medical emergency care for botched illegal abortions or (3) unplanned pregnancies that end up in either the adoption system, the foster care system, or at home with parents who need to go on government financial assistance due to having kids before they were financially ready (especially when in teens and not yet finished high school or college) than to shell out for birth control pills. I mean really. Do the math.

odd, the same people who say " go to planned parenthood" for BC are the same people who want to defund planned parenthood. Make up yer damn minds

Limbuagh sucks, always has. He's a fascist like all neoconservatives and pretty much all progressives (as you can tell, I'm independent).

But no government has the right to force insurance companies to provide pill coverage (the pill). Then it ceases to be insurance, and the cost difference that isn't profitable gets passed on to everyone else who isn't on the pill...like me.

I'm not against the pill (I'm all for it), but pay for your own stuff or get an insurer that will...you have no right to force me or others to subsidize your medications.

Next thing you know, this will be added to the long list of pseudo-rights (like jobs, healthcare, housing, food, etc.) people keep claiming are REAL rights (life, speech, due process, property, religion, etc.).

So what if she dismisses his apology. He didn't need to do it and she didn't deserve one. Just like when the left was making continuing personal attacks, and still do, about the Palin's.

Have the balls to stand behind what you say. All this damn apologizing that goes on now is meaningless bullsh**! People only apologize because they "have to". They still feel the same way - and that's okay. People have a right to their opinions and a right to state them. You don't like that - move to China or North Korea and enjoy communism at its best!

For those right wingers trying to say the insurance companies will pass the cost consider this... The VAST majority of insurance policies ALREADY cover birth control. WHY? BECAUSE IT'S WAY CHEAPER THAN BABIES!!!

Nevermind that, with all the hyper-ventilation about passing on the cost you'd think insurance companies remained static and never, ever added new products year after year after year. Oh me oh my I wonder how they handle the costs of adding new services each year.

@Ruken

Oh, like the BS assumptions coming from yours? You'd be the expert on that wouldn't you?

And exaclty what assumtions have I made? Sorry but I deal only in fact. For example I didn't call you an idiot even though it seems like a safe assumption.

What a bunch of sheep here.

First I don't think Rush's apology was totally genuine nor do I think it was totally a farce. I think he is more upset about resorting to name-calling to make a point.

1) Ms Fluke was the woman who was denied the opportunity to testify to the whole committee that the democrats were screaming about.

2) She was a late substitute for the Democrats intended witness who's was vetted to be there - she was not vetted by the committee. She was denied the opportunity because, before ANY full congressional meeting, they must verify who you are, what your position is, and do you have valid connection to the case. Offering only inuendo and hearsay is not a valid reason to be a witness in congress, let alone a court of law.

3) She never testified to the Full Committee - THE DEMOCRATS called a sub-committee meeting to air her testimony and the news and the DEMOCRATS are passing her hearing as though it wa the Full committee.

Limbaugh is no angel and is an entertainer that should never be taken totally seriously - but what a sorry lot is the Democratic leadership and the flunky news media!

I don't think a lot of Ms Fluke either. I don't care if someone means or doesn't mean their apology - the person apoligized to should accept it and move on!

She is a long time activist, who goes to campuses and organizes activist groups. This was no inocent child, but a hardened player with the opportuninty to grab here 15 minutes of fame.

"Humorous?" ......NO ..... Slander ...YES!

"LimpBalls" comments could hardly be construed as in jest or humor by his most ardent supporter! They were malicious & slanderous... I took his statement as "serious" as did millions of others .. The statement was not true, Limbaugh did not have permission to use it, the statement wasn't a accident, and he had no privilege to make it .

The interesting part in a court case is whether Ms Fluke would be considered a "public figure" .. under Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 94 S. Ct. 2997, 41 L. Ed. 2d 789 (1974) The Court held that a person who "voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy" becomes a public figure "for a limited range of issues." (wiki) Ms Fluke is a law student and has the best legal minds at her disposal .....

Should she decide to sue ... I believe that she would prevail ..... Sue "LimpBalls" .... money is something he values and understands .... and the court is waiting for just this kind of case ...

If a woman needs others to pay for her birth control, then she's definitely going to need others to help pay for prenatal care, delivery, pediatric visits, and child care. The birth control is several orders of magnitude cheaper.

I'm always surprised by the number of people who would cut off their own noses to spite their faces.

something racist-My thought is that if you don't have the money for the pill then you dont get the pill. I dont want to pay for you to have sex!!

My thought is, the people who can not afford it, need it the most! I don't want to pay for the children they had irresponsibly!

Whats less expensive, contraceptive care, or abortions and births?

I cannot believe this is even an issue!

The righteous indignation of the left is amazing. Where was/is your outcry when self proclaimed liberals utter the same insults to conservatives? Not to mention, the liberals on the vine here continually hurl insults and name calling all the time. I'm not saying conservatives on the vine do not throw insults, but the uproar, is quite hypocritical.

Time and time again, the left spews insults to the right, but it appears to be no big deal. Where was the outdry for boycotting of Ed Shultz when he called Laura Ingram a slut? Must have been ok, because she is conservative.

Where was Obama when the likes of Maxine Waters spews her hatred at the right, or Jimmy Hoffa jr? Oh thats right, it is not his job to police what other people say, yet he gets right in the middle of this fracas.

This hearing was by Democrats to force religious institutions to provide birth control? Is this an attempt to trod on the first amendment, the separation of church and state?

Sandra Fluke has her own agenda, to force private institutions to provide against their beliefs, via the Democrats in Congress. She left herself open to Rush's comments.

Do I agree with Rush, not a chance. So don't lump me into the same category as Rush. I am a self proclaimed conservative, and I believe women should have equal rights as men. If they want to sleep around, thats their business.

Where were all of you people when insurance and employers agreed to pay for Viagra? In line at your local pharmacy?

and stupidity goes on, the personal attack idiots are out in full force.

The argument is very simple, should private insurance companies be FORCED by the government to cover non-medical issues (FOR FREE) and if they are were does the Governments power to FORCE any private company to do whatever it wants end?

For those of you UN-educated, if a doctor prescribes the pill for anything other than birth control it's covered under EVERYBODY'S insurance just as any prescription is, you might have to pay a co-pay, but why would that be free when I have to pay for my prescribed migraine medicine?

as of those of you that don't want to pay for Viagra, well a doctor will prescribe that for a Man with a medical problem, just like if you can't get wet enough for intercourse they will prescribe you with a lubricant.

So feel free to say you don't want to pay for somebody's Viagra but don't seemed surprised when others say they don't want to pay for your hip replacement when break it later life.

Three things,

1-Russia hasn't been communist for over a decade

2-Rush also jumped the gun about the "Lords Army" saying Obama was sending troops to fight "christians". Look up lords army.

3-My insurance covered my vasectomy.

Thank you.

The Left is getting in people's bedrooms and mandating that other citizens pay for other citizens' recreational social sex activities and so forth.

That's is unconscionable. Disgusting.

Unity, you do know the difference between Viagra and birth control don't you?

If not I can find a website that will use pictures to explain it to you.

falconer - they covered it for FREE?

ruken,

the treatment for ovarian cancer that she mentions in the article was for a friend of hers that she knew of. When she mentions $3000.00 for birth control she is taking about herself,

Now go read the article yourself before spouting off to us to read the article, lol

The argument is very simple, should private insurance companies be FORCED by the government to cover non-medical issues (FOR FREE) and if they are were does the Governments power to FORCE any private company to do whatever it wants end?

For those of you UN-educated, if a doctor prescribes the pill for anything other than birth control it's covered under EVERYBODY'S insurance just as any prescription is, you might have to pay a co-pay, but why would that be free when I have to pay for my prescribed migraine medicine?

as of those of you that don't want to pay for Viagra, well a doctor will prescribe that for a Man with a medical problem, just like if you can't get wet enough for intercourse they will prescribe you with a lubricant.

Well, you're right about one thing. The argument is very simple. But it's not the argument you're attacking.

Here is an idea.

She claims not to be able to afford the protection that makes her own behavior less riskey. Why not ask her lover or lovers to step up and help pay for their own play time?

Her way is screw the taxpayer but they aren't getting any lovin back.

At some point people need to be responsible for their own decisions, meaning if you want to have sex and not get pregnant, you should have to purchase your own contraceptive.

I understand there are some people who take it for reasons other than preventing pregnancy; for those situations only, such as ovarian cysts, irregular menstrual cycles, etc., medical insurance should cover it.

It's pathetically obvious that there are many here who have a very limited understanding of birth control measures. Nowhere is it true that the cost of birth control is measured in frequency of sex. That's just stupid hyperbole that get's the ignorant populace's undies in a knot. If a woman has sex once a month or 4 times a day they take the same dosage. And I'm not even going to bring up the non-birth control usages of the medications used for birth control. That information appears to be unable to get past the butt cheek earmuffs of so many on the right.

I understand there are some people who take it for reasons other than preventing pregnancy; for those situations only, such as ovarian cysts, irregular menstrual cycles, etc., medical insurance should cover it.

The problem is that some people want to deny coverage for even this, just because it has uses for birth control as well.

Tom,

No, the coverage is through my employer. The operation was "free" but I still pay monthly.

How does one abstain from polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? I suppose you could undergo surgical sterilization rather than take hormonal birth control. Seems extreme, though, when birth control could control the disease in many cases.

Those of you still supporting Rush need more information than what was provided by Rush. For instance, perhaps you should listen to Ms. Fluke's testimony before you defend RL's comments. It would also be helpful for you to learn about how health insurance works. And how hormonal birth control works. Once you know these things, come back and debate the issue (if you still want to defend RL, otherwise join the boycott because you will understand how heinous his words really were).

Birth control is cheaper than paying for accidental pregnancies. Remember that about 30% of women have an unplanned baby some time in their life. If it is a poor mother, we are the ones who are going to pay for all that prenatal care, frequent pregnancy doctor visits, Prenatal vitamins/meds, and Childbirth. It gets even more expensive if there are complications like Gestational Diabetes, Toxemia, or Caesarean birth.

You also cant forget about fact that accidental babies may not be known to the mother, so that she may not be treating herself right during the pregnancy, and that could lead to a preemie baby (with average $47K hospital stay and complications can lead to over $1 million bill). Then after birth, the child may end up in the welfare system (tax payer money) for many years.... but remember next time you want to complain about women having a bunch of children on welfare, you saved a few bucks by not paying for her birth control.

The idea that others in business should have any choice in inflicting their personal beliefs or religious convictions upon their employees personal choices in health care is a far stretch of what Constitutional religious freedom protection is about!

Actually .... this brings up a interesting point about health care ... Plans that are "a la carte" .. pay by our selection ...

plans that provide features that we want and ones we don't. Why not? ... then there is no complaint ...

Most of the posters here are missing the point. The point here is the federal government has no right to tell a religioius organization that it has to pay for birth control becuase of the fact that it goes agains their religion. Therefore, if the person wants the insurance to cover the birth control, the extra cost for that coverage needs to be paid by the individual, not the religious organization, problem solved!!!

This woman chose to attend a school that is run by a religious organization knowing their stance on birth control and now has the audacity to complain becauses their student insurance plan does not cover birth control, why attend a school that you do not agree with their doctrine/policy.

Dave...

Your post was quite funny...being a dad of a girl around the same age as Ms. Fluke, I would imagine her own dad must have felt some mixed emotions seeing her splattered all over the news, complaining about how she was spending every loose nickel she found between the couch cushions on her neverending need for contracepive services.

Ambrosia, I don't want to pay for their unplanned baby, either.

Falconer, I had to pay around 100 for a close to 400 procedure.

But I really wish Ambrosia, and sadmoron would have paid my $100.

Can we just clear something up that is a lie that Rush began and is now being mindlessly parroted by his fanboys here. The amount of sex you have has NOTHING to do with the number of birth control pills you need or their cost. This idea that she is having so much sex she can no longer afford the contraceptive pills, are you guys really as stupid as Rush who seems to think you pop a pill each time you have sex. You would think Rush would be a little more well versed with contraception given he's on wife number 4 and still has no kids. Once you acknowledge that then the entire premise for the slut comment is debunked.

ks1971 - "The point here is the federal government has no right to tell a religioius organization that it has to pay for birth control becuase of the fact that it goes agains their religion."

Were in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government has a right to tell any private company (let alone religious) what products they HAVE to offer?

Backcountry,

Do you have children?

Why the hell did WE have to PAY for your CHOICE to have kids? Why are your worthless kids our problem?

You don't want to pay for the lifestyle choice of someone else, yet we still had to pay for YOU. You made the LIFESTYLE CHOICE to breed, and YOU FORCED us all to pay for the pregnancy expenses.

So why is YOUR CHOICE to breed more important than the CHOICE not to breed? You don't want to pay for someone else? Guess what, society did NOT want you to have kids. So PAY US BACK for your choice, or shut your mouth.

Also, how much do you weigh? Are you making the lifestyle choice to be obese?

God, they're giving this charlatan more airtime to play out a straw man fallacy. This is delay of game to give lousy player more time to roll around on the ground feigning injuring. Get real! Sandra Fluke is a liar who allowed herself to be portrayed as something she wasn't. She is arguing, as many liberals do, for the right of a behavior based on the premise of a logical fallacy, of course we'll never check.

Is it the mountain out of a molehill that the liberal media wants to make of it? In 1999, when Howard stern made an insensitive comment concerning the female students murdered at columbine, I didn't see any sponsors racing to yank his support. He flat out said the girls were good looking and wondered why the murders hadn't had sex with them.

Let's be clear here, Limbaugh hasn't even explicitly called Fluke any names he posed a rhetorical question. Whether or not Fluke has been insulted can only be determined by whether or not she fits that shoe. The democrats are using an appeal to fear – war on women – to push their agenda, and is in my opinion in the same breath as what Glaad does. It's the intellectual dishonesty I can't stand. The real issue is whether or not a religious organization should have to, by law, include contraceptives. The left wants to play the slippery slope argument that if religious organizations can opt out secular organizations will do the same for religions reasons.

Will people please stop comparing Viagra to contraceptives? Viagra is a male enhancer, not a contraceptive. The two are entirely separate entities with different functions. I wish people would stop foolishly comparing the two. Two wrongs don't make a right. Viagra is taken mainly for sex, so if you're comparing the coverage of Viagra to the coverage of a contraceptive, you're in essence saying contraceptives are going to be used for the same purpose, which validates Limbaugh's rhetorical question and invalidates the argument about the necessity of contraceptives for menstruation. Which is a weak argument anyway.

It is invalid and fails in several cases. First, not all contraceptives reduce cysts or menstruation, oral contraceptives mainly do. Experts disagree on using birth control to reduce cyst. Let's be honest, the language used here is contraceptives, not birth control pill. Birth control covers a wide spectrum of a broad umbrella. While birth control may reduce a woman's menstruation, what's to prevent sexual activity as a result of contraceptives?

Aussie, people are bringing up the amount of sex, because nobody can figure out where she got the $3000 doing law school for birth control came. The Pill, nor-plant(sp?), or the shot doesn't come anywhere near that cost even if you don't have insurance, so most are saying it has to be condoms and to get to $3000 for condoms takes a lot of condoms to get there.

For all of you information, in case you had not heard:

"At AOL one of our core values is that we act with integrity," said Maureen Sullivan, an AOL spokeswoman. "We have monitored the unfolding events and have determined that Mr. Limbaugh's comments are not in line with our values. As a result we have made the decision to suspend advertising on The Rush Limbaugh Radio show."

Hopefully, as more and more advertisers realize what a women hater Rush Limbaugh really is, they will all pull their ads and Clear Channel will have no choice but to remove yet another blowhard GOP from the air.

Most of the posters here are missing the point. The point here is the federal government has no right to tell a religioius organization that it has to pay for birth control becuase of the fact that it goes agains their religion. Therefore, if the person wants the insurance to cover the birth control, the extra cost for that coverage needs to be paid by the individual, not the religious organization, problem solved!!!

Why not? They can tell Mormons they're not allowed to have polygamous marriages.

BC pills are used to treat other conditions, like in Fluke's case it was ovarian cysts.

Ruken, Fluke was talking about one of her friends. Fluke does not have ovarian cysts.

Also, Fluke has insurance through her employer (Catholic) which means she does not have private insurance. In other words, Fluke is saying that the Catholic organization should cover BC.

I say she is wrong. If she wants BC coverage than she should get private insurance. It's very simple.

Private insurance is when you buy your own insurance on the outside. There is no third party. It's between you and the insurance company. You will be paying the insurance premiums yourself.

I also believe Viagra should not be covered by a Catholic organization. If someone wants Viagra then they should go through a private insurance company.

Aussie,

So are you really trying to tell us that birth control pills are costing this woman $3000.00 a year? Wow, wish I was that doctor or phamacist, He is making a killing on birth control!!. I am pretty dog gone sure that birth controrl pills do not cost that much a year. Therefore she must have been talking about using condoms and they do not cost that much either, so the only thing we can assume is that she is having a lot of sex in order to need to pay so much for prevention of a baby!!

Fluke is a professional poltical activist; who has done the same thing as other schools. Not some innocent "student".

That's why she was put on camera. She does this professionally.

We are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities for others!

What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line?

The radical LEFT wants to get inside everyone bedroom to mandate citizens pay for other citizens recreational social sex activities.

The Left also wants pregnancy to be declared a "disease" for insurance purposes.

Sandra Fluke has alot to be ashamed of.

ks...

Your post is accurate...but you are forgetting that more and more every day in this nation, a group of people have their hands out waiting for somebody else to pay the bill for somthing those with their hands out want for themselves.

It seems nobody wants to pay for anything anymore as long as someone else can be made to take care of the bill.

tea1959........

Quote.....This hearing was by Democrats to force religious institutions to provide birth control? Is this an attempt to trod on the first amendment, the separation of church and state?......EndQuote

Are federal laws prohibiting polygamy an infringement upon the first amendment ( separation of church and state ) ?

Our nation is NOT a theocracy. When doctrine of religious organizations come into conflict with the rights of ALL Americans, religion MUST be subordinated. The Catholic church is under NO OBLIGATION to operate businesses within our NATIONAL business environment. But, when and where they choose to do so, they are rightly expected to conform to the laws of our land.

BTW---The STATE of Tennessee no longer allows certain religious sects to handle venomous snakes nor consume poisons even though those sects claim this as a religious right. Is the STATE of Tennessee wrong ? Some "religions" claim the right to use psychotropic drugs (controlled substances). They are prevented from doing so by various state and federal laws. Are these wrong ?

Any righteous indignation here is YOURS. You (and Rush Limbaugh) have lost this debate. It is not and never was about religious freedom. Rather, it is a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the Affordable Care Act. We all know it.

Aussie, people are bringing up the amount of sex, because nobody can figure out where she got the $3000 doing law school for birth control came. The Pill, nor-plant(sp?), or the shot doesn't come anywhere near that cost even if you don't have insurance, so most are saying it has to be condoms and to get to $3000 for condoms takes a lot of condoms to get there.

$50 a month per year over the course of four years. It's been explained elsewhere in this thread but some idiots don't want to read things they don't like.

Tyler/ Sally what is going on with all these collapsed/ who the heck is doing this.

Tom, if you were in my insurance plan, I would have no problem if that plan paid for your vasectomy. No problem at all. That is the analogy that we are talking about here. Georgetown students are forced to participate in Georgetown's health insurance program. That program refuses to pay for hormonal birth control. If a student at Georgetown gets polycystic ovary syndrome, the insurance plan will not cover hormonal birth control which would control the disease. Ms. Fluke's friend lost an ovary as a result of that circumstance.

That is what we are talking about.

Marie Haughey

At some point people need to be responsible for their own decisions, meaning if you want to have sex and not get pregnant, you should have to purchase your own contraceptive.

When will YOU be responsible for YOUR OWN decisions?

You want to have sex and breed, you should pay the FULL COSTS of every single hospital bill. Why should WE pay for YOUR pregnancy expense?

You want to live an obese lifestyle, you should pay the FULL COST of every single medical condition associated with obesity... including heart problems, diabetes, etc.

I am willing to bet that EVERY SINGLE medical bill that YOU have is the result of a CHOICE you made at some point in your life... unless you were born with a genetic defect. So why should WE PAY for your medical expenses that were the result of YOUR choices?

I can only assume you are an honorable person... and you are probably committed to your position. So I will accept a reimbursement payment from you, for all of the medical costs you have forced us to pay.

i dont think you guys get it... its a huge rights violation to force people to break their religious beliefs by law.. this sort of thing ends bad ... real bad like i would start thinking of moving out of the country.

Why are so many great posts being collapsed and who's doing the collapsing ????

Well reading comprehension remains one of the weak points of commenters, she said it would cost the average law student $3000 during the course of their degree, which is 3 years. That works out to $19 weekly, high end but believable for the pill. Either way it is nothing but ludicrous to claim that the price she quoted means she secretly wants condoms paid by insurance when not once did she ever make that claim.

I got a divorce and disconnected my tv in 1993 and do not listen to radio. What I have heard about limbaugh has been from msnbc. He is an entertainer,right? Entertainers, generally work from scripts, right? Not likely that he mis-spoke while reading from a script, right?

That said, I have never heard him say anything; however, I have read, many times, on msnbc that he called her a "slut". Not very nice for him to do but it seems that msnbc is stirring the pot. The girl may have a good reason to reject his apology or she may be trying to prolong her 15 minutes, whatever.

Did I mention that I put no credence in msnbc, it came with the computer!

The original story posted by MSN.com had her stating that it "cost a medical student $3000 a year for contraception". Perhaps they misquoted her; perhaps it was a typo and they've since corrected it. I could care less...she can pay for her own contraception if she desires to have sex! If she can't afford it then she has no business having sex!

That isn't ignorance, it's common sense! Sex isn't a necessity in life; it's a desire. I have a Ford pickup, but would love a Mercedes. Should the taxpayers pay for my Mercedes just because I want it, or should I save up and pay for it myself? That's a little drastic, but the premise is the same. Get real people...if this were insulin necessary for life I'd say by all means, insurance should pay for it. However, we're talking about her desire to be covered during sex, and that isn't a necessity; she can pay for it herself!

There're sure a lot of collapsed comments today on this one. I guess Rush's nutty legions are out in force and madder than hornets that their hero just got his words stuffed back down his throat. One hint, you Rushees, you can't use the same kind of foul mouth language that Rush gets away with on his show and have your comments posted here....

LOL Fatty - 50 *12*4 = $2400, Plus most people don't do law school in 4 years.

Sadmoron - they aren't forced to participate, remember kids get to be on their parents insurance until 26. and before that law went into effect most were covered until they graduated from college if it didn't take you a decade to do.

So just go to your parents and tell them you want to be on the pill and you want condoms.

Sex isn't a necessity in life; it's a desire.

Are you some kind of idiot? Or do you think babies are delivered by the stork?

As Aussie said, $3,000 is high end, but believable. Mine used to cost $50/month and I had coverage. Without that coverage, it would have been close to $100/month, which would exceed $3,000 in a three year period. Add doctor's visits to that to get the script right (most women try several kinds before settling on one) and the money adds up.

tony-268769.....you said:

Quote.....It seems nobody wants to pay for anything anymore as long as someone else can be made to take care of the bill.....EndQuote

How many times must you folks be told that: SANDRA FLUKE IS PAYING FOR HER HEALTH INSURANCE? She expects it to cover appendectomies. She expects it to cover diabetes. She expects it to cover cancer. She expects it to cover contraception.

Employers should NOT be enabled to decide whether they provide a safe work environment. Employers should NOT be enabled to decide whether they prohibit sexual harassment. Employers should NOT be enabled to pick and choose the standard services offered by the health insurance plans they offer which are BENEFITS in lieu of wages.

Why does your side continue to contend something so absurd? But please, by all means, continue to do so.

LOL Fatty - 50 *12*4 = $2400, Plus most people don't do law school in 4 years.

Maybe it cost a little more but you should have enough brains to work out the gist of my point. It was paid for over the course of several years, it was not $3000 for one year's worth.

Now that Rush Limbaugh's sponsors are abandoning him, the poor man's going to starve to death. This might take a few years...

Corey

Get real people...if this were insulin necessary for life I'd say by all means, insurance should pay for it. However, we're talking about her desire to be covered during sex, and that isn't a necessity; she can pay for it herself!

Then why do we pay for pregnancy costs? Those are the result of sex, and that is not a necessity. So why should insurance cover pregnancy costs when that was YOUR CHOICE to have sex and breed?

Can't afford all the hospital expenses associated with a kid... DON'T BREED. How is this any different?

What you are saying is that the lifestyle CHOICE to have kids is more important than the lifestyle CHOICE to not have kids. Why is YOUR CHOICE superior to anyone else's?

Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community, Comment collapsed by the community!!!

Don't you people have better things to do then ruin this forum by not letting other people voice their opinions? Amazing!

Hey indie - if you don't want to pay for kids, DON'T GET INSURANCE, you then can pay for everything you need out of pocket and never pay for a kid again.

But you don't pay for my kids food, housing, or anything else. You pay for preventive medical care and medical issues.

Now if you want birth control go down to the nearest planned parenthood and ask for a case of condoms, I helped pay for those.

If you have a medical issue were you need to the pill, I would love to help you out on that one. But if you want to go out and get drunk and sleep with a couple of men/woman, well you should be on your own then.

@lolfatty

Are you some kind of idiot? Or do you think babies are delivered by the stork?

Are you an idiot arguing that procreation is a reason to cover contraceptives, which by definition prohibit pregnancy? Sex is not a necessity of life, conception is. Without conception sex has no functional purpose as it pertains to the human race.

@Birdwatcher

The lady Ms. Fluke spoke about developed a very large cyst on one of her ovaries which burst. Excruciating pain. Bleeding. This resulted in hospitalization $$, emergency surgery $$ just to mention a few expenses that have resulted from not receiving the proper treatment. The insurance she paid for covered some of that.

Who paid for the rest of it? According to fluke, she was having trouble paying $100 out-of-pocket expense for birth control.

Kids getting to be on insurance until 26 is a benefit of the Affordable Care Act, but it does not cover non-traditional students.

Georgetown students are either required to purchase Georgetown's insurance policy or carry their own coverage. The latter is not financially feasible for most students. But they cannot opt out completely and still attend school at most institutions of higher learning.

It should make students reconsider attending a Catholic institution. When I worked at a Catholic hospital, it was the same situation. The other interns and I were shocked to find out that their birth control would no longer be covered when they moved from med school to internship. Perhaps this media incident will raise awareness among prospective students/employees and allow them to make informed decisions about their education and careers.

However, we're talking about her desire to be covered during sex, and that isn't a necessity; she can pay for it herself!

No, we are talking about the fact that birth control is a medication with multiple indications that have nothing to do with sex. It is an absolute necessity for many women. More importantly, no woman should be called a slut or prostitute because she is on the pill. That's extremely unfair and untrue. I was on the pill WAY before I even kissed a boy.

Hey Tom - if you don't want to pay for birth control, DON'T GET INSURANCE, you then can pay for everything you need out of pocket and never pay for another birth control pill ever again.

Devil's advocate....Actually I stopped working when my first child was born but, even 15 years ago my husband had equal access to family leave ad did the women in his company. The company I worked for ask if I just didn't want to take six months off and come back to work instead of making a decision to stay home. I felt a need to stay home and care for the life and eventually lives I gave birth to. It was a choice. Perhaps you really feel that "parenting" is exclusive to females only...I was raised and have raised my children to understand that parenting is a shared commitment between their father and I. family leave takes care of many issues that have impacted families in the past...Many employers are now women and many of the decision makers in Corporate HR positions are women. We actually won the battle, at least those of us who have worked and accomplished on our own merits.

Ian...here is your remark....

txmom32........you said:

Quote.......As she is a college student shouldn't she still be on her parent's health insurance plan.....She doesn't seem to be screaming that her parents are providing her access to birth control.......EndQuote

This (your statement) is a testament to the ignorance exhibited by the GOPeaParty "faithful" on this (and many other) issues. Sandra Fluke is .....T H I R T Y...... years old. The Affordable Care Act (proudly aka ObamaCare) covers students until they are 26.

Why do you folks presume to debate when you have only slight knowledge?

Regarding why Ms. Fluke does not simply go out and buy additional health care insurance: She is ALREADY purchasing HCI. WHY should she be expected to pay twice ? Furthermore, why should those who are financially unable to afford either additional insurance or out-of-pocket drugs be denied contraception?

It is ironic indeed that the very folks who claim to be so fervently against abortion argue that obstacles be placed before women wishing to obtain the contraceptive drugs that are the MOST IMPORTANT preventative for unwanted pregnancies and, therefore, abortions.

Ian....yes well you seem to neglect the original premise that this chick was presuming to speak to all young co-ed's at faith based private schools in an attempt to impose Government mandates on Faith based institutions...you know blurring that line between church and state. Not just a personal plea for 30 year old unemployable women who can't seem to manage their own affairs.

Personally I think the ignorance is that a 30 year old woman is living in poverty expecting the Jesuits to bend to her will with the insurance policy they offer. She is already leaching off of someone for tuition now she believes that she is in some way entitled to having her every wish and whim met.....If she can't afford to meet her own very basic needs then perhaps she made a bad choice in staying a student instead of earning her own way in this world. Now let's see....if she were average and graduated from high school at 18 she would have graduated from her Undergraduate studies at around 22...as a "serious" full time student. Then another 3 years for Law School as a "serious student" that would put her around 25. Well within the age of her peers. So why is she somehow so special that she is 30 and a full time student. So maybe she did age out of her parents care, why does she feel it necessary to attack the very University that is educating her in hopes that she will go out in the world and be productive...seriously though she is 30 and unemployed...what is the real expectation here. Most people at 30 who decide to further their education do not leave their jobs and expect to coast off of other instead they take classes and work toward their goal of education while employed. At least the smart one do and in many instances their employers will actually support some of the expense of successfully passing course requirements.

She isn't expected to pay twice for insurance, I don't think anyone would expect her to, although she doesn't seem all that bright maybe she would think that she had to pay for two....common sense would suggest that she forego the Jesuit policy and find one that meets her needs instead of paying twice because she ain't too bright.

Your direction to assume that poor women are denied contraception is absurd...rubbers are cheap if you are sexually active as well as a more prudent option if you are promiscuous...reduced chance of pregnancy as well as reduced exposure to STD...condoms are a rather inexpensive multi-purpose alternative.

Are you actually assuming that I argue against abortion? Personally, I will argue for choice all day long...my body my choice....but then if I choose to participate in risky behavior I should be prepared for the array of responsibilities the financial aspect is just one small part of that whole debate. In short... birth control...even if it is $3,000 a year is a damn site cheaper than a child. Abortion performed in a proper hospital and at full rate is still considerably cheaper than supporting a child for 18+ years.

Tom, I do. Birth control pills are the common name for various hormonal therapies that are prescribed to women to address several medical conditions that are caused by hormonal imbalances and fluctuations. They also function as a contraceptive when taken religiously (irony intended). Viagra is just something that helps men who can't get it up anymore have sex (and heart attacks). The insurance company that Ms. Fluke was complaining about probably does cover Viagra prescriptions, it also covered BCP prescriptions for staff. It selectively does not cover BCP prescriptions for students (regardless of the purpose for the prescription), however the students ARE REQUIRED to buy the school insurance plan. And therein lies the basis for the complaining. If they are against contraception on principle then why do they cover it on the staff policy but not the student one?

I love the defenders on here that are repeating Limbaugh's lie in his defense. Thank you for exposing yourselves as the low information, angry bigots that you are. A special thanks to spider for finally pulling off the hood and embracing your leader publicly. I think we all have suspected you of being a thoughtless parrot for Rush and his Klan propaganda - and now we have it in writing.

At what point do we draw the line between the First Amendment and outright slander and lies? If Rush were to go on the air and express the opinion that spider is a child molester, is that his right? What are spider's rights when a bunch of no-nothing parrots start running around repeating Rush's opinion as fact?

Are you an idiot arguing that procreation is a reason to cover contraceptives, which by definition prohibit pregnancy? Sex is not a necessity of life, conception is. Without conception sex has no functional purpose as it pertains to the human race.

Insurance covers a lot of things that arguably aren't necessities. So why are you singling out birth control?

@lolfatty

Why not? They can tell Mormons they're not allowed to have polygamous marriages.

There's only one problem, Polygamy isn't against the Mormon religion, it violates federal law, which defines marriage as between a man and woman.

This (your statement) is a testament to the ignorance exhibited by the GOPeaParty "faithful" on this (and many other) issues. Sandra Fluke is .....T H I R T Y...... years old. The Affordable Care Act (proudly aka ObamaCare) covers students until they are 26.

Why do you folks presume to debate when you have only slight knowledge?

Speaking of morons presuming to have knowledge, Sandra Fluke wasn't testifying about her personal experiences. She was testifying on behalf of someone she knows.

ks1971Most of the posters here are missing the point. The point here is the federal government has no right to tell a religioius organization that it has to pay for birth control becuase of the fact that it goes agains their religion.

Sadly, even YOU missed the point. The REAL point is that is an organization is going to TAKE FEDERAL MONEY (as Georgetown does), then they CAN NOT use religious reasoning to deny aspects of medical care.

They want to refuse to allow contraceptives? THEN DON'T TAKE FEDERAL MONEY!!!

Whatever happened to personal responsibility and accountability? This coming from a man who clearly is neither.

Mr. Limbaugh is correct - he is absurd. Nothing on his show should be considered news or educational. And the only thing keeping his daily hate speech on the radio is advertising dollars and an army of lawyers.

I spent about 5 years listening to Rush, before baseball games and traveling to work - telling myself that it was fun to hear his half truths and spin - but I just got sick of the day in and day out prejudice and hatefulness - just as in this case - he really has no idea what comes out of his mouth.

Hey Jane, I would but in case you haven't heard not having Medical insurance is against the law. Staring shortly.

FYI - even if I don't have Medical insurance I already pay for birth control, it is called planned parenthood!

You know when the Federal Government mandated that I buy a product from a private company.

Enablers...nothing but enablers in our society these days!

The Apology - can we now listen to an apology for the non-apology please?

Come on too easy ole pious one give us a target would you? Another sponsor is rumored to be leaving and I thought I was having a bad week. That trite expression out of fashion today comes to mind: "Have you ever been hoisted by your own petard?" ... means to be harmed by one's own plan to harm someone else. Yes ole chap stop digging now back to the symbolic phallic mic…the cretins await you...man-o-man!!

The radical LEFT wants to get inside everyone bedroom to mandate citizens pay for other citizens recreational social sex activities.

The Left also wants pregnancy to be declared a "disease" for insurance purposes.

Enough...you present that like student's are really stuck.....Students actually have a choice...they can choose to go to another University that holds a different structure of values. Certainly if she had the grades, not forced upon the University by some quota structure, she could have gotten in just about anywhere. Good grief there are certainly more liberal Universities then there are Church sponsored Universities. What she is whining about is so juvenile that it makes her an embarrassment to the very School that accepted her application. All for the 15 minutes of fame to go cry to a special interest panel of progressives who would like nothing more than an opportunity to impose their will on religion.

What the school should do is....go through her testimony line by line to see if what she said was truly accurate or if she actually fudged facts or statements to get make her point. It seems if this chick is unwilling to work to afford what she considers basic necissities then she probably did't have the foresight to actually research her topic for accuracy.

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.

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.

Boils down to this: she said that she was engaging in campus elective recreational sexual activity SO OFTEN she couldn't afford it. She wants "others" to pay for this recreational activity!

Limbaugh was correct.

Too bad, Blowhole, You just lost AOL for a sponser! Ha Ha! Next?

Although I would usually never waste my time listening to the propaganda spewing Faux News I was getting my scheduled maintenance on my car this morning and I sat there for 2 hours while their morning commentator went on this rant about the double standard Rush Limbaugh is being held to. Faux's justification for this point was that Sarah Palin had been referred to as a bimbo by those on the left and that was as bad as what Rush Limbaugh said about Fluke. Anyone that doesn't understand that being called a "bimbo", someone of limited intelligence, is no where near as bad as calling someone a "slut" and a "prostitute"(no explanation needed) has no business being a journalist

Hey Left Wing Nut Job, don't bring facts into this. These people don't care about things like data and facts. Remember the idiot from Arizona who said that 90% of what planned parenthood does is abortions? That's the mentality of who you're dealing with. You can't persuade someone on the right with facts, they like a good story (usually fiction).

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.

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.

Boils down to this: she said that she was engaging in campus elective recreational sexual activity SO OFTEN she couldn't afford it. She wants "others" to pay for this recreational activity!

Limbaugh was correct.

Did you actually read her testimony?

I thought not.

whatthefolly.com/2012/02/23/transcript-sandra-fluke-testifies-on-why-women-should-be-allowed-access-to-contraception-and-reproductive-health-care/

“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.

It's disgusting how many ignorant people think this is about sex. BC pills are hormones. They are comprised mostly or Estrogen and Progestren. They are used to regulate the cycles - that's HOW BC works. It doesn't mysteriously vanquish the eggs or beat the sperm to death. if you look at the people who are on the pill, you will see that the majority use it for some form of medical condition - ovarian cysts, cycles that are out of wack, side effects of too much or too little hormone, replacement for missing hormones, endometriosis treatment, severe cramping, PMS, and in treatment of perimenopause, among other things. It just happens to have a side effect of preventing pregnancy - although it's not 100% effective. This is not the 60's when everyone wanted to be on the pill to prevent pregnancy. Now those that are blathering on about how it's going to cost you a lot more. How come MY insurance that costs the SAME as theirs covers BC and theirs doesn't? It doesn't cost any more! Not to them or to me. These same people are foaming at the mouth to get Planned Parenthood defunded... this tells me that to them, it's not *entirely* abortions. They are using YOU to get them shut down by playing on you anti-abortion sentiments when it's about birth control. They simply want people to go out and have as many babies as they can and keep them all poor and ignorant like they did back in the middle ages, I suppose so they can go back to selling sacrements.

@RUKEN - You told like 10 people they were ignorant and to go read the article but then said fluke had the cysts. Dumb ass lol.

@Jobless Carpenter - I wholeheartedly agree that its better for them to not have the babies in the first place but the problem i have is perpetuating their dependence on my tax dollars. They need to learn that if they cant afford the pill then they need to go get free condoms not just say o well I'm gonna pop out another kid because no one bought me the pill. Its the expectation of free stuff from me at work that gets under my skin.

@the people spouting about viagra - You assume i want to pay for viagra, I don't.

86 up votes and counting !!! Didnt know you had it in you msnbc !!

Legalize it.

@!$%#ty work comp double post.

Yes Spider, I'm sure he'll be laughing all the way tot he bank as he helps cost the Republicans the election in November.

Tom

Hey indie - if you don't want to pay for kids, DON'T GET INSURANCE, you then can pay for everything you need out of pocket and never pay for a kid again.

Then....

Hey Tom - if you don't want to pay for birth control, DON'T GET INSURANCE, you then can pay for everything you need out of pocket and never pay for another birth control pill ever again.

Thanks Jane. Then Tom replies...

Hey Jane, I would but in case you haven't heard not having Medical insurance is against the law. Staring shortly.

FYI - even if I don't have Medical insurance I already pay for birth control, it is called planned parenthood!

Seriously, Tom... you just argued against your own point. You tell me not to get insurance so that I don't have to pay for your offspring. But then say how you have to buy insurance.

Are you mentally challenged? I am not trying to be mean... but you just argued against your own point. It's like you don't even hear what you are saying.

FYI... even if I don't have medical insurance, I still pay for YOUR kids. It's called public education, welfare, and taxes.

But thank you for making my point... YOU want to FORCE everyone on your insurance to PAY for your brats, but you don't want to pay for someone else who does not want brats.

By the way, how much do you weigh? Are we also being FORCED to pay for your medical bills that are the result of an obese lifestyle choice?

Seems you want everyone to PAY FOR YOU, but you don't want to pay for anyone else. How very Republican of you.

txmom32......you said:

Quote.....Ian....yes well you seem to neglect the original premise that this chick was presuming to speak to all young co-ed's at faith based private schools in an attempt to impose Government mandates on Faith based institutions...EndQuote

Do you mean like prohibiting polygamy, or the handling of venomous snakes and ingesting poisons, or the prohibition of the "religious" use of controlled substances? The STATES (i.e. TN, WV, NC, etc.) control religious practices now. Do you think they should not?

Quote.....Now let's see....if she were average and graduated from high school at 18 she would have graduated from her Undergraduate studies at around 22...as a "serious" full time student. Then another 3 years for Law School as a "serious student" that would put her around 25. Well within the age of her peers. So why is she somehow so special that she is 30 and a full time student.....EndQuote

As if Sandra Fluke (or anyone) owes YOU an explanation of why she is a 30 year old law student: Ms. Fluke graduated from Cornell in 2003. She spent five years working for Sanctuary for Families. She has made women's right an important part of her life. You know, like Martin Luther King made civil rights an important part of his life. Just BTW---many, many students pursuing M.D., J.D., and other advanced degrees no longer fit the traditional age profile. So, it is hardly unusual for doctoral candidates to be 30+ years old.

Quote......She isn't expected to pay twice for insurance, I don't think anyone would expect her to, although she doesn't seem all that bright maybe she would think that she had to pay for two....common sense would suggest that she forego the Jesuit policy and find one that meets her needs instead of paying twice because she ain't too bright......EndQuote

Ms. Fluke attends Georgetown University Law School. That alone should provide any reasonable person sufficient evidence of her mental and academic abilities. Should Ms. Fluke seek (non-group) insurance outside that offered by Georgetown, it will (no doubt) be more expensive.

Quote.....Your direction to assume that poor women are denied contraception is absurd...rubbers are cheap if you are sexually active as well as a more prudent option if you are promiscuous...reduced chance of pregnancy as well as reduced exposure to STD...condoms are a rather inexpensive multi-purpose alternative......EndQuote

As many others have pointed out, oral hormonal contraceptives have several benefits aside from birth control. These need not be listed once again. Who here (besides yourself and Limbaugh) is injecting promiscuity into this debate? Is it your contention that anyone using hormonal (or any) contraceptives is promiscuous? Do you now or have you ever used (oral) contraception?

Quote......Are you actually assuming that I argue against abortion? Personally, I will argue for choice all day long...my body my choice....but then if I choose to participate in risky behavior I should be prepared for the array of responsibilities the financial aspect is just one small part of that whole debate......EndQuote

The statement was direct toward "the very folks who claim to be so fervently against abortion". Only you can truly know whether you fit into that category.

Quote......In short... birth control...even if it is $3,000 a year is a damn site cheaper than a child. Abortion performed in a proper hospital and at full rate is still considerably cheaper than supporting a child for 18+ years........EndQuote

Termination of pregnancy (abortion) should not be used as a substitute for contraception. While, abortion can be justified under certain (very limited) circumstances, it should always be a last resort and purposefully avoided. That is the point: contraception is our best means to avoid abortion given that normal people (married or otherwise) will engage in sexual relations when conception is not their goal.

Limbaugh was out-of-line...okay, got it. HOWEVER...this woman knew the Georgetown policies regarding insurance and contraceptives prior to enrolling. She still chose to enroll. And now she is whining about those policies after the fact? If she felt so strongly about these issues, why did she enroll in Georgetown? Why not choose a school more inline with her views? This is BS and it's not about trying to control the chick's body (political incorrectness intended)...it's about where the federal govt is assuming these powers that it has been since Obama came into the WH...I know for most of you libs the Constitution can tend to be a little inconvenient but it says that those powers not specifically granted to the federal govt by the States are reserved for the States (paraphrased). This is a power that King Obama just isn't entitled to....

@IAN

Are federal laws prohibiting polygamy an infringement upon the first amendment ( separation of church and state ) ? Some "religions" claim the right to use psychotropic drugs (controlled substances). They are prevented from doing so by various state and federal laws. Are these wrong ? BTW---The STATE of Tennessee no longer allows certain religious sects to handle venomous snakes nor consume poisons even though those sects claim this as a religious right. Is the STATE of Tennessee wrong ?

Here's what's wrong with your emotionally charged rhetoric.

The Federal government can't regulate religion, but it can regulate behaviors. Furthermore, A person can be a Mormon and not be a polygamist, so I would argue that Polygamy isn't even a central tenant of the Mormon religion, it is an allowed. Arguing that any tenet of any religion prohibited by the federal government is a violation of first amendment, is the same as saying that any behavior backed by a religion should be allowed on the basis of religion. If my religion permits me to murder someone, should I be allowed to practice it? Polygamy is a behavior. Behavior affect everyone else, religious beliefs are subjective to each person. The first amendment covers several rights: Freedom of speech and freedom of the press. A venomous snake poses a threat to society, but you can't argue that exempting a religious organization from covering contraceptives, which have several uses, poses a threat to anyone other than the liberals who want other Americans to pay for it.

P.S Separation of church and state is never even mentioned in the first amendment.

Our nation is NOT a theocracy. When doctrine of religious organizations come into conflict with the rights of ALL Americans, religion MUST be subordinated.

Whether or not any nation subscribes fully or partially to any form of morality doesn't exempt it's citizens from a sense of right or wrong in the presence of law and order. All laws are based on some sense of right or wrong. This argument fails on two parts. First, not all Americans use all forms of contraceptives. This is being held as a women's health issue. American men don't use birth control, develop ovarian cancer, or have that time of the month. This argument is further invalidated by the fact that the main purpose of contraceptives is the prevention of pregnancy. Also, health insurance is a privilege rather than a right as not all American's have insurance and the 40% of student's Fluke surveyed were uninsured.

P.S How religion to be subordinated without making a law which violates first amendment rights?

Saxon and BigAl...

It doesn't have to be offencive or in bad taste or have foul language, all it has to be is contrary to their way of "thinking". No outside opinions allowed and offering facts is punishable by collapse. lol

Ok guys...COLLAPSE!

Ive been on the vine long enough to know that this many postings could only mean one thing..

Rush wants to be a slut..

Dembran - It is an artificial or synthetic hormone processed from a certain animal source. What it acutally does is make the uterus hormonally unable to receive the cytoplast. RU-486 has the same has the same property except in a larger dose, because the necessary build up must be done quickly to be effective. The dose is also enough to dislodge any cytoplast that may attach before or during the time the RU-486 has been taken.

The Cytoplast is like a balloon containing an attachment ready placenta and a strip of cells that have already begun creating the most important an major systems needed for further development. All it needs to continue is to be attached to the uterus for nutrition to continue. If no attachment occurs the begining of a life ceases to exist.

Because Catholics and some protestants hold any life as of value, they hold life as beginning at conception, and scientifically that is correct, but, better stated that a new life (person) begins at conception.

This would be like on person leaving in the lunar modual, picking up a new person to make a team while in space, and returning with the second only to not be able to dock, or even if they did dock tha the command module jetisoned them.

My wife and I are like any other couple - we only concerned ourselves about being "responsible". The only detail we concerned ourselves with was our convenience. Now that we understand the whole story, neither of us would have done it.

@IndieParty

Backcountry,

Do you have children?

Why the hell did WE have to PAY for your CHOICE to have kids? Why are your worthless kids our problem?

Wow, another asinine argument coming from you, what a shock. You didn't have to pay for my kids dumb@ss, you had an option to go with insurance coverage that doesn't cover pregnancies, you had an option not to get any insurance (not an option soon) and of course the biggest reason your argument (lame-@ssed excuse) doesn't hold water is because there aren't low cost alternatives to giving birth. A 50 cent condom will prevent pregnancies. Durrrrrrr

Big Tex, Newsvine tracks those who collapse posts just because they dissagree and do penalize them.

If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Limbaugh requested Ms. Fluke to send him videos of her her sexual escapades for all the world to see.

That's why I reported him to the FCC. I don't believe solicitation of lewd material is allowed on the air.

You can do the same. It will take you about five minutes.

Tom - Plymouth

Hey indie - if you don't want to pay for kids, DON'T GET INSURANCE, you then can pay for everything you need out of pocket and never pay for a kid again.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner! We now know (as if we didn't already know) who the REAL freeloader is. Tom openly admits he stands with his hand out waiting for everyone else to pay for HIS choices in life but he's not willing to pay for anything. The true definition of a freeloader. Congrats Tom! How does it feel to finally admit it?

Backcountry

the biggest reason your argument (lame-@ssed excuse) doesn't hold water is because there aren't low cost alternatives to giving birth.

Yes there is... DON'T HAVE KIDS!

You FORCE everyone else to pay for YOUR kids, but complain about paying for other people.

How much do you weigh? Are you CHOOSING to live an obese lifestyle? THAT is the leading cause of rising medical costs. Your CHOICE to be fat has FORCED us to PAY for your lifestyle.

Do you smoke? Are you CHOOSING to lead that lifestyle? So you want to FORCE people to PAY for your lifestyle.

Do you exercise every day? Do you eat 100% healthy food every day? Do you participate in risky activities, like riding a motorcycle, hiking, driving fast?

EVERYTHING associated with medical payments is the result of a CHOICE. Why did you go to the doctor last? I bet it was the result of a CHOICE you made.

So what you are saying is that WE have to PAY for YOUR CHOICES... but you don't want to pay for the choice of anyone else.

Come on, tell me a medical cost you had to pay that was NOT the result of a CHOICE you made. Go on, I dare you.

Contrary to what many people have stated, I believe it's important for Rush to remain on the air. Here are my reasons:
1- He's a college dropout, so even though he may be smart (which is debatable) he doesn't posses a broad education IMHO.
2- He says things that his listeners think, but don't say aloud.
3- Those who listen to his program both relate, and agree with him.

I've listened to his program in the past, along with Hannity, and Savage. A common thread I found their programs all shared was anger at being victims of the liberal agenda, and a complete lack of consideration of anyone's opinion that differed from theirs.

What I think is important to remember is that there are many people who not simply agree with them, but are also comfortable with how the message is delivered. These are you friends, co-workers, neighbors and even family.
So if someone I know told me they listen to Rush, or any of the others I mentioned, I have a better understanding of not only where their convictions lie, but how they like those convictions expressed. I find this bit of information very important. It helps me decide whether a healthy debate of the merits of their argument are even possible. It also gives me a moment to decide if I would openly agree with their opinion(s). While I may find their opinions hold merit I would not side with someone who's opinion is based on fear, hatred or any other negative emotions and lacked any facts.

So please don't force Rush off the air. I don't like his program, but I want to know who does.

To be fair, I wouldn't mind knowing who the stalwarts of liberalism are so that I could listen to their programs. Are there any on the radio? I've never come across any, so feel free to suggest some.

An indie's 0.02 :)

Fluke is a professional political activist; who has done the same thing as other schools. Not some innocent "student".

That's why she was put on camera. She does this political agitating professionally.

Ms. Fluke is long-time feminist activist who graduated in 2003 from Cornell's "Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies." In the decade since then Ms. Fluke has become a political professional for a huge range of feminist causes.

She has worked for the (Democrat)Manhattan Borough Taskforce on Domestic violence and "numerous other New York City and New York State coalitions... As the 2010 recipient of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles Fran Kandel Public Interest Grant, she researched, wrote, and produced an instructional film on how to apply for a domestic violence restraining order in pro per. ... Through Georgetown's clinic programs, Sandra has proposed legislation ... represented victims of domestic violence ... Sandra is the Development Editor of the Journal of Gender and the Law, and served as the President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, and the Vice President of the Women's Legal Alliance."

Sandra Fluke is a planted political stunt in collusion with the vicious radical left.

Sandra Fluke has all the marks of a reliable political operative. Rush Limbaugh was 100% correct!

@IndieParty

Yes there is... DON'T HAVE KIDS!

As I've already said, and you chose to ignore, you can choose an insurance option that doesn't cover pregnancies and pay a lower premium, thus you are NOT paying for others to have kids. But why don't you just keep blathering on with your nonsense, it suits you.

As for your lifestyle garbage, people who choose a healthty lifestyle pay LESS than people who take "risks" so yet another failed argument on your part.

Sandra Flukes 15 minutes of fame are up. She can back to work. On her back, which is where she apparently spends most of her time, either for sex or transient fame.

White girl, who can't keep her legs closed asking to have her pharmies paid for (after the Left scapegoated seniors for the Bush prescription drug bill) so she can act the freak when she is not busy propagandizing about domestic violence- this may not be great timing by the DNC et al.

Ms. Fluke is long-time feminist activist who graduated in 2003 from Cornell's "Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies." In the decade since then Ms. Fluke has become a political professional for a huge range of feminist causes.

It's one thing to complain if it were a legit, IRS categorized religious organization that didn't want to cover the BCP in their healthcare plans, but if we are talking about insurance companies that have religious organizations amongst their large client base, then they are going to have to fall in line with whatever health care plan Obamacare comes up with..... at least until Obamacare dies.

I don't agree with politics influencing religion. But if you yourself do not belong to a religious organization then your personal beliefs should have nothing to do with gov't decisions. Religion should not influence politics and Vice Versa.

If a healthcare company want to have a special rule ONLY for religious groups, then they should have a case by case opt out package allowed by the gov't. That is the only exception that seems fair here. Because then we could turn to this Lawyer Chick and say "if you don't like it, then don't work for a religious organization". But there are too many uses for the BCP to allow regular companies to force their religious beliefs on their employees.

@Willing.Sniper

White girl, who can't keep her legs closed asking to have her pharmies paid for

Maybe you should do like I did and read the transcript of her testimony. She never talked about her own sexuality, or touched on sex. She did talk about situations where BC, which in some forms is a method of hormonal treatment, addresses certain women's health issues.

so she can act the freak when she is not busy propagandizing about domestic violence

You know I remember watching an episode of Emergency (made in the 70's) where a woman was a victim of domestic violence. The scene basically played out where the EMS and Police resolved it by telling the husband to go and cool off, after he abused his wife. So, my question to you is what part of domestic abuse (past or present) is propaganda? Specifically, what has she said or done that you consider propaganda?

"Dr Strange Rush" or (How I Stopped Worrying And Learned To Love The Pill)

It's cheaper to pay for the pill than all of the unwanted children that will result if it's not made readily available. The pill is cheaper. Repugs should love that, even though for the last 30 yrs Repug administrations have spent like drunk sailors. This could be the chance for their rhetoric to actually match their actions. The GOP has been hypocritical for so long they don't even recognize their own values. if money is the point, BC is a bargain. Oh by the way how many Insurance companies pay for Viagra?

Don't forget Century 21. They are stil a sponsor.

Backcountry

As I've already said, and you chose to ignore, you can choose an insurance option that doesn't cover pregnancies and pay a lower premium, thus you are NOT paying for others to have kids.

Not all policies allow that, and those that do only cover the pregnancy costs for my family... but how am I assured that not a single penny of my money goes to YOUR pregnancy? I don't know that, because all the money goes into a pot and get's used by all participants. So some of my funds indirectly PAYS FOR YOU and your offspring, which I am completely against. I do not want a penny, not a single penny, going towards YOUR family. But I can't stop that... because that is how insurance works.

As for your lifestyle garbage, people who choose a healthty lifestyle pay LESS than people who take "risks"

Our money still goes to YOUR LIFESTYLE CHOICES. Even if I pay less, some of my money still goes to support YOUR unhealthy lifestyle.

The problem is you are not intelligent enough to see the point I am making. YOU complain about "paying" for the lifestyle of someone else, even though YOU expect people to pay for you.

If YOU don't like paying so much, don't have kids... don't be fat... don't smoke... work out every day... eat 100% healthy food. Do all that, and YOU will still pay, but it will be less. But that is not the point, is it? You don't want any money, not even a penny, to go to the lifestyle choice of someone else. But you expect us all to contribute to your lifestyle choices. You are nothing but another freeloader looking for a handout.

What this comes down to is, just like every other Republican, you want everyone to pay for YOU... but you don't want to pay for anyone else.

Still waiting for you to tell me what the last thing you used your medical insurance on. What's wrong? Scared?

@lolFatty.

Insurance covers a lot of things that arguably aren't necessities.

So you're saying contraceptives aren't a necessity as Fluke argued? Good point. But let's look at why. Contraceptives is a blanket term which covers a wide spectrum under a broad umbrella. First, all contraceptives don't control menstruation or ovarian cancer, oral contraceptives mainly do. Second, A majority of experts in this field disagree on the use of oral contraceptives as a means to control Ovarian cancer. Third, even in the case of menstruation, you can't argue that lack of oral contraceptives inhibits a woman's ability to have a period or prohibits it from stopping. Similar things can be said of ovarian Cancer.

Forth, not every woman who benefits from this will use contraceptives solely as a means of reproductive health. The main purpose of contraceptives is prevention of pregnancy. It's naive to think that freer access to contraceptives can't result in more frequent sexual encounters. Two wrongs, don't make a right. You can't argue that because insurance doesn't simply cover necessities that it's right forSandra Fluke to, for the sake of convenience, make Georgetown violate it's beliefs by including contraceptives.

P.S. I didn't single birth control.

• Here is the Bill O'Reilly Boycott List

@lolFatty.

Insurance covers a lot of things that arguably aren't necessities.

So you're saying contraceptives aren't a necessity as Fluke argued? Good point. But let's look at why. Contraceptives is a blanket term which covers a wide spectrum under a broad umbrella. First, all contraceptives don't control menstruation or ovarian cancer, oral contraceptives mainly do. Second, A majority of experts in this field disagree on the use of oral contraceptives as a means to control Ovarian cancer. Third, even in the case of menstruation, you can't argue that lack of oral contraceptives inhibits a woman's ability to have a period or prohibits it from stopping. Similar things can be said of ovarian Cancer.

Forth, not every woman who benefits from this will use contraceptives solely as a means of reproductive health. The main purpose of contraceptives is prevention of pregnancy. It's naive to think that freer access to contraceptives can't result in more frequent sexual encounters. Two wrongs, don't make a right. You can't argue that because insurance doesn't simply cover necessities that it's right forSandra Fluke to, for the sake of convenience, make Georgetown violate it's beliefs by including contraceptives.

P.S. I didn't single birth control.

@IndieParty

Our money still goes to YOUR LIFESTYLE CHOICES. Even if I pay less, some of my money still goes to support YOUR unhealthy lifestyle.

Anther BS argument (do you have any other kind?), people who take risks (smoking for example) pay higher premiums to cover the additional cost of their risk taking.

...but how am I assured that not a single penny of my money goes to YOUR pregnancy? I don't know that, because all the money goes into a pot and get's used by all participants.

ROTFLMAO!!! Oh my God you must have fallen out of your chair reaching for that one. LOL!!! Please accept your failure before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

What this comes down to is, just like every other Republican, you want everyone to pay for YOU... but you don't want to pay for anyone else.

Every OTHER republican? I'm a libertarian, sorry but it's not just republicans who see how ridiculous your arguments are. I'm pretty sure everyone does but we all know a liberal won't call out another liberal when they say something stupid.

Still waiting for you to tell me what the last thing you used your medical insurance on. What's wrong? Scared?

I took my daughter to the doctor for a strep test. Happy? Are you going to berate me now for choosing to take her to the doctor rather than just letting her be sick? Are you going to cry and whine about how YOU paid for me to make that "choice"? God you are good for a laugh!

Rush is right.

This women is a FEMANAZI!

She enrolled at a catholic college to promote femanazism and to parade this crap in the public square.

What is really slutty is the liberals using media propaganda to DIVERT the conversation from gas prices and the oil pipe line and debt to something as stupid as this women wanting free sex pills.

I think we have bigger problems to deal with than using this issue to buy votes from clueless sheeple who are too stupid to vote at all. If this issue is what they base their votes on ; my point is proven.

KEEP THE GOVT OUT OF MY bedroom and if odumbocare continues we will have stupid issues like this taking up congresses time 140 of the 165 days they work.

Think of this stupid i want the govt to PAY for my birth control at TAX PAYERS EXPENSE argument going on 200 days a year.

Look she can buy her own damned pills or she can charge a fee for her services- that would be more appropriate...........PROSTITUTION should be LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ok, just so I am clear here: The issue is that this 30 year old woman is complaining that her University health insurance (a mandatory part of her tuition) does not cover her birth control pills. So she is complaining to the government about it. And when she claims that most of the women she knows cannot afford it, she is called a "slut" by a talk show host.

So, first, why should the government mandate the coverage that an independent organization is offering as a part of their services? My health insurance doesn't cover a lot of things, and although it makes me unhappy, I don't go crying to the government about it. If it means that much to me, I will look into supplemental insurance. I don't have vision on my plan. My vasectomy was covered but not the post-vas tests to make sure it worked. My Cialis was covered, but not the doctor visit to get the prescription. I could go get a different job, get supplemental insurance, drop my work insurance altogether and get my own coverage, or whatever. The thing is, it is what it is. I could also complain that I don't make enough money because my house and my Porsche payment are too high and now I need glasses too and they aren't covered. Again, I am not running to the government to have them make my boss pay me more or give me better coverage. Insurance is just that - to insure that in the case of a major medical issue I don't have to file bankruptcy. I live within my means, and that means setting aside enough money in the case of having to shell out a few thousand dollars for something that isn't covered by my insurance. Her choice is to go to that university. The plan is set by them, and she accepted it.

So, most women at her University take birth control pills for their cysts, or to prevent ovarian cancer, or to stabilize erratic cycles? HA! HAHAHA! Uh huh. Sure. You seriously believe that most college women take BC pills for medical reasons? Seriously? They take them so they can have sex and not get pregnant. While those pills do have other medical uses, they are called "BIRTH CONTROL" pills for a reason. The reason is they are intended for use as BIRTH CONTROL, and most women who use them use them for that purpose.

I am still unclear if her insurance just didn't have a decent co-pay, if she was paying full retail price for the pills, or what the complaint is. My insurance covers zero of any prescription until I reach an out of pocket max. I was prescribed a medication last year that costed $595 for one month. I went back to my doctor, and he changed to a different prescription that had a generic that Wal-Mart sold for $4 per month. There are as many BC pills on the market as there are anti-depressants, and yes, some work better for some people than others, but guess what - you live within your means, and if you want the benefit of BC, then you pay for what you can afford and make do. It is called "self reliance", being responsible for yourself and making decisions that you can live up to without someone else to support you.

Sorry, but the government has no right to tell me what kind of coverage I can offer to my employees. This is the package I offer, and this is the salary. If you don't like it, you don't need to take the job. Simple as that. I won't be offended if you turn me down because of it, and to be honest, if you are really worth it, I will sweeten the deal. I will throw in another benefit for you. I will not offer it to everyone because it costs me money, and I am a business owner, here to make money, not lose money so you can live a better life. You are here to work for your money, not to be handed it on a silver platter. That is what the socialist governments are for - to give you what you didn't earn and convince you that you "deserve it". No, you work for what you get. If you don't like it, I will just scrap the whole program and pay you a little more money. If it costs me $800 per month to give you health insurance that you don't like, I will give you $800 more per month, you can pay taxes on it now, buy your own health insurance, get a back end tax break, and there you go - settled! See how easy that was? Of course, without the benefit of ME taking on some risk to provide my employee pool with a health plan, you are on your own and will have to shell out around $1500-3000 per month for insurance for your family, but not my problem, you didn't like my plan because it didn't cover your sex pills.. TOUGH!

It's all good and well as long as it is someone else's money. Soon as it is yours, the tune changes. I challenge anyone here to run a company that offers health care as a BENEFIT to their employees. Do it with a company that has 20 employees, then you can see for yourself how difficult it is, and how much it is costing YOU to do this. Now have the government step in and tell you that you have to provide free rubbers and sex pills for your employees too.. Yeah, that is really necessary isn't it..

Rush knows exactly what is going on.... The fact that he is getting the rise out of both sides show his prowness and savyy in the media channel. Everyone else are simply chumps or chums.

Funny the liberal msnbc will not allow comments on the articles stating advertisers drop limbaugh propaganda article parade.

Any advertisers that dropped him will pay a big price for that.

I will boycott any idiot advertiser that supports this femanazi liberal peelousy shill that wants free handouts for her sex pills.

And any body that listens to rush will too.........this witch and they abandon common sense b/c he called her a slut???????

Those idiot advertisers will pay...........this is gonna backfire on those idiots. Liberals must be running their marketing depts.......they will pay.....and god help us if odumbo gets to keep the govt in our healthcare...........this is only the beginning, next we will be buying running shoes to promote exercise for all americans

Limpballs is the a$$ spouting chump ..... f his money and his peni$ envy followers.

IMO, no insurance program should be able to decide what is and what is not covered. That should be something the individual should be able to negotiate with the insurer. Since this was (apparently according to the blogosphere, even though I have not looked it up) mandatory health insurance coverage, it should, accordingly, cover everything any other mandatory policy covers, including all legal medication. A man should be able to choose not to have maternity coverage and a woman should be able to choose not to have prostate health coverage.

While the school may be affiliated with the Catholic church, it is not solely a training ground for priests and nuns and therefore any claim of "religious privilege" is self serving at best.

Again, Willing.Sniper, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. You clearly didn't even bother to listen to her testimony, because if you had, you'd know she didn't say anything about herself. Her speech was about her friend losing an organ because she couldn't afford birth control.

I know it's fashionable among the Far Right to attack women these days, but if you can't be bothered to inform yourself on even the most basic facts, you have no business discussing this article with grown-ups.

LOL.... now DaveK is an expert on women and their skin care, their birth control and their bodies. LOL.... Seriously you speak as if it is okay for others to cut your nutz off without your permission. Seriously, you really want to go there?

It should be very clear that everyone should be equally entitled to medical treatment and medicine. If he/her is receiving medical prescription, then they will pay for. You apparently think that it is okay to deny care to people simply because you don't believe it. Only idiots thinks that students don't pay for medicine and medical care. There aren't that many left. Even in state school, medical care are the responsibilities of the students. Obviously DaveK was not speaking from experience. Only idiots bite blindly when Rush chums the water.

• 2nd Radio Station drops Limpball's program

as reported on the Ed Show tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This whole contrived outrage is for political gain for the Democratic Party. Fain outrage over a conservative Republican and their contempt for women. Ignore everything ever said by Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Ed Shultz, Chris Matthews, or Matt Taibbi. The same word has been used by some on the list, and much worse has also been spewed and most notably by Maher. But never any outrage, no calls for boycotts, no demands for any apology, just ignored by the hypocrites on the left.

I think this should be addressed:

' At a comedy show in Dallas this weekend, frequently outspoken comedian and HBO host Bill Maher reportedly called Sarah Palin the c-word '

This is pretty much in line with Rush. So does one cancel out the other? No. Both are guilty of pandering to the lowest common denominator. Two wrongs never make a right, but three lefts do. :)

O.K. it's an old joke, but had to throw that one in.

All jokes aside, Rush was still wrong. Pointing out that Bill was wrong doesn't make Rush right.

$0.02

Look, there are two points people are making that are mutually contradictory: "employers are being forced to pay for contraception" and "taxpayers are being forced to pay for contraception." Okay, now which is it?

Actually, it's neither--but the point is that if you stopped to think about it, you'd realize that taxpayers aren't paying for contraception. If you are unhappy about being on a plan that you think is going to "jack up costs" to pay for contraception, then you might want to think about how a plan "jacks up costs" to pay for childbirth. Contraception, for most women, is actually inexpensive. I do happen to think that Fluke made a mistake in making it sound like most contraception is too expensive--it's actually no more expensive than a basic antibiotic, and I seriously doubt that any health care plan is going to refuse to cover a basic antibiotic.

The issue is that employers want to refuse to cover contraception and childbirth because they only affect women and not men--men don't use hormonal contraception and they don't give birth. By refusing to cover both, an employer is preferring males and discriminating against fertile females. They do the same thing with older workers--refusing to hire them because on average they have higher health care costs. Yes, employers do like to do whatever they can to reduce their costs: only hire young males, fire anyone who gets sick, fire anyone who is about to retire, etc. Unfortunately, we have to step in and make it clear that this kind of machiavellian tactic will not fly--if an employer wants to have a business in the US, then that employer cannot discriminate against those who are perfectly capable of doing the job.

That having been said, employers do not have to provide health insurance at all. If the Catholic church does not want to provide health insurance to the employees of the businesses it is invested in, then it just should not. The reality of this is, however, that only the worst people will apply to work at those businesses because other businesses do offer insurance. It means that their businesses won't be competitive. Well, there you go. If Catholic churches want to not pay for contraception--they will have to deal with the ramifications of that decision.

As a society, we have an investment in making sure that all people--including women--stay healthy. Being able to choose when to have children and when not to have children allows women to stay healthy. When unwanted children aren't born, then we all benefit--and it is better (and cheaper) to pay for the birth control than to sit back and continue to experience the side effects: too many children on welfare and in foster care (and dead), too many abortions, too many unwanted children growing up into adult criminals. This is where we all benefit from women controlling their childbearing.

I am curious, though--since 80% of Catholic women of childbearing age practice birth control, and since the figure is pretty much the same for all women of childbearing age--where is this huge mass of people who are offended by birth control? Making birth control a mandatory part of coverage (you buy the coverage, you don't have to pay extra for birth control) is hardly a moral issue (since virtually everyone already practices birth control), it isn't a financial issue (since birth control is far less expensive than all the social ills caused by the lack of it), and . . . well, I cannot see why it is an issue at all.

How much more is it going to cost the average employer for "matching funds" for their employees, presuming that they actually are paying more for the costs of the young, female employees having contraception? Is it even a substantial enough amount of money that anyone should be worrying about it? Employers aren't required to provide "matching funds" or even to fully cover their employees--why not just quit, negotiate coverage with an insurer but let the employee pay for it? Employees who don't want to pay for birth control because of the costs are better off getting health insurance that doesn't cover childbirth (and childbirth isn't a mandatory benefit and is far more expensive) to save money.

Basically, if men used birth control, then we probably wouldn't have an issue. What everyone is really arguing about is that they don't want young women having sex--within marriage or outside of marriage--unless they are doing it for procreative purposes. That's why Limbaugh called this young woman a "slut." Seriously, given that virtually no young people avoid having non-procreative sex these days--where are you all coming from? Are you still living in the 1950s? Are you quite seriously arguing that non-procreative sex, inside a marriage, is immoral? Do you quite seriously prefer to have 50% of the pregnancies in the US as unplanned? Have you no idea what the costs to society are when people who cannot afford birth control kick out babies that they do not want? (Of course, after they've had two, they just get their tubes tied--which is covered, you know, under virtually all health care plans--but the bad timing of said children cause issues.)

If virtually all women practice birth control, then it makes sense to suggest to health insurers who are charging patrons hundreds of dollars a month that those insurers should provide birth control for free because it winds up saving all of us money in the end.

The parallel here is a restaurant--should restaurants charge you a specific, exhorbitant, extra fee for water? Should restaurants charge you a specific, exhorbitant, extra fee for a bathroom visit? Or, if you are in businesses (and health insurers are in business), should certain facilities be included in the basic cost? Shall we stop having public water fountains in public buildings and charge for those bathrooms, also?

Really--what is the hullabaloo? This will not cost more (it will cost less because there will be fewer births); if an employer objects on moral grounds, the employer can just quit funding health insurance; if you object to "extra costs," you can get on a plan that doesn't cover pregnancy (if it isn't covering pregnancy, then it isn't likely that a lot of young women are on the plan, driving up costs with their birth control); and taxpayers aren't paying for anything.

It just amazes me that we are still having the "birth control promotes immorality" and "birth control is murder" argument in the 21st century. Seriously--in what century are you living?

So you're saying contraceptives aren't a necessity as Fluke argued? Good point. But let's look at why. Contraceptives is a blanket term which covers a wide spectrum under a broad umbrella. First, all contraceptives don't control menstruation or ovarian cancer, oral contraceptives mainly do. Second, A majority of experts in this field disagree on the use of oral contraceptives as a means to control Ovarian cancer. Third, even in the case of menstruation, you can't argue that lack of oral contraceptives inhibits a woman's ability to have a period or prohibits it from stopping. Similar things can be said of ovarian Cancer.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all.

@beanathome

That is the BEST post I've seen on this topic yet! Impressive.

Jac: "you could pay for your BCPs out of pocket yourself. Got news for ya Sandy. The vast majority of them don't cost anywhere near $1000 a year." You're right on the idea that the vast majority of bc pill prescriptions don't cost that much, but that is because they are covered by insurance!

Dave K: Diaphragms are not over the counter like condoms. A woman has to get a specific size according to her cervix. A wrong size diaphragm can be pretty much worthless.

Tom of Plymouth: The pill is often covered by insurance for for non- birth control reasons- but not always.

Good one Toasty. But you forgot that Fatso Limpballs is also a sorry sack of $hit, sorry excuse for a human being and, last but not least, sorry that his supposed identity as an entertainer doesn't even fly any more with regular Republicans anymore.

His base support and apologists are the red meat Repugnicans like Sniper, spider and the other reich wing trolls defending His Royal Sorry Scumbag Limpballs on this thread. And they just as disgusting as their role mode and hero.

Is Clear Channel still in the concert business? If they still are, that would be the best and fattest boycott target for all you rightly aggrieved ladies. Stop listening to or watching any Clear Channel station or channel until they feel the heat. Make Fatso and his enablers at Clear Channel suffer for their outrageous, anti-American and immoral programming.

Willing Sniper - It is abundantly clear that you have not bothered to engage in even the most rudimentary research on this issue before diving in. Your numerous misquotes of Ms. Fluke's testimony amply demonstrate your misinformation. Nowhere in her testimony did she discuss her sexual activity. Nowhere in her testimony did she ask for taxpayer money to pay for her sexual activity. She simply asked that the insurance that she is paying for, provide birth control. I would suggest that before you stick your foot any further in your mouth, that you find and read the actual testimony that you are quoting. I think you will find that most of what you are quoting did not come from her, but rather was fabricated by Rush Limbaugh, such as when he quoted her as saying that she is having so much sex that she is going broke. She never said that she wanted to be paid to have sex. Rush said that. She never said that she wanted taxpayers to pay for her birth control. Rush said that. She never said that she was a prostitute. Rush said that. Try going to her to see what she said, rather than relying on Rush to give you accurate information. He is obviously a dismal failure when it comes to providing accurate, factual information. It took me about 10 seconds to Google her actual testimony. I'll bet if you really applied yourself to the task, you could find it too.

If Rush loses enough advertisement sponser's and Miss Fluke sues him for the rest (she could use the money to start a FREE women's health clinic or give it to planned parenthood or something) perhaps we could finally be done with this guy.......and his vile, corrosive, distasteful, insulting anger and hate filled, out and out lies meant to ignite fury and discontent and divide Americans for nothing more than his sporting pleasure and your money in his pocket.................

it is hard to imagine when the founding fathers guaranteed our freedom of speech people like Rush were what they intended to protect.

Enough already......lets start cleaning up America....sanitizing the airwaves by getting rid of Rush is a pretty good place to start.

Wash, rinse, repeat.....until you get the desired effect.

What I don't understand is why conservatives keep talking about how they don't want to pay for contraception.

That's not even what the issue is about. It's not about money. Georgetown is a Catholic university and the Catholic church believes that contraception is wrong. It's not an economic/taxes/money/whoisgoingtopayforthis!?! issue, for crying out loud.

It is a religious freedom issue. Does a religious institution have the right to refuse to provide medical coverage for procedures it believes are immoral? A very complex issue, for certain. On the one hand, just recently the Supreme Court unanimously decided that religious organizations are not required to follow the same anti-discrimination laws that non-religious organizations are. A very strong ruling in support of seemingly unregulated religious freedom.

On the other hand, neither individuals nor organizations can claim religious freedom if their beliefs cause actual harm. Think about the parents who were imprisoned for allowing their child to die because they would not use modern medicine and instead relied on faith healers. A very complex issue, indeed.

Regardless, I'm sick of hearing this "taxpayers should not pay for her birth control pills" argument. It's not even relevant to the discussion, and I'm forced to agree with those comments that claim such posters are quite ignorant of the facts and are merely parroting what they've heard from their favorite 'news' organizations.

PS: What does it say about the maturity level of Limbaugh's and Maher's audiences if calling people names is considered humor?

beanathome:

I agree with much of what's said in your post. I do disagree with the fact that it is aimed at women. Most of the laws against discrimination dealt (or deal) with truly endemic and systemic issues.

I this case, I feel it is the issue of FREE coverage that bothers many. The cost of that coverage is borne by all plan participants. My plan still charges me a minimal amount for generic antibiotics, and it should split coverage the same way for birth control. There are many fine generic versions that will suffice for prevention of conception, and that minimal amount should be considered part of the budget, just like my kid's insulin and my blood pressure medication.

I think this issue divides truly thinking and logic driven individuals, but men especially who get told "Until you can carry a child to term, you shouldn't have a say." While women have been dealing with the family planning versus promiscuity issue since the pill's been available, men have seen an equally beaten from both ends.

While a bit off topic (as are so many of these posts), the it's the fact that a women wants "control over her reproductive rights" while pinning the the accountability on the sperm donors that drives many of us crazy. Speaking generally, a woman demands that she has access to both birth control and abortion as methods of determining her decisions for herself. The man has no choice in whether a baby is carried to term or not. If the woman decides to keep the baby, the male is correctly responsible for the financial support. But if the woman decides to abort the child, the man has no ability to say, "No, that's 1/2 my chromosomal contribution, I value and want to raise that child, and you can contribute to that while I am accountable for it's upbringing." Similar to the broad attribution of the term "slut" on a sexually active woman (who is obviously active with men, go figure), the man in these situations gets contradictorily told, "You should have kept in it your pants....Or Don't play if you don't want to pay...."

I know several gentlemen, who certainly didn't feel it was the right time to have children and are now paying a period of financial along with the lifetime of worry, concern, hopes and fears that all parents have. Conversely, I know several guys, who loved the women they were with and would have raised the child conceived without any requirement for financial contribution from the women in their lives. In these cases the guys are (believe it or not) emotionally scarred by the fact that their child isn't here with them. It wasn't the right time for the women in question, and they chose not to continue the pregnancy despite knowing how their lover, boyfriend, or in one case, spouse felt. It is a constant pressure for the married couple that has been as hard to overcome as an affair would have been, and in the others the relationships didn't bear the strain (whether the decision led to that breakup can't be said, but it certainly caused friction in the relationship).

I'm Catholic, and me and my wife used contraception and made our own peace with that decision (we also paid for the pills, and later, for the deductible/co-pay for the procedures that made that permanent).

However, I also have 3 boys and a beautiful teenage daughter, and I tell them all the same thing: "Sex is the act required for conception. Since no cotraceptive is foolproof, you better make sure that you're willing to be bound to that person for life, because a child will bind you financially and most of all, emotionally forever. Even more important be ready for the lifetime responsibility that comes with parenthood. Children can be the most awesome thing you'll ever do, but they are also something you worry for and about, for the rest of their lives."

Back to topic though, the fact that women are the only ones that have a 99.9% effective method of easily reversible birth control is a matter of the ability of pharma to address it. Trust me, the day that there is a way for a teenage or young adult male to ensure he won't become a parent, while having consensual sex, young men will line up around the block for it (and won't be called sluts, which, yes, is a double standard).

Access to healthcare in this country now means we want it for free. People want non medically necessary procedures covered, so what is next. This is Pandora's and you just wait to see what comes out. So stick your hand out to the government, demand others pay for it, and watch as the price of healthcare soars.

As for the Limbaugh flap from the left. Nothing but hypocrites. They ignore the same or worse from liberal pundits, and fain outrage over Limbaugh. This is what happens when the left cannot talk about Obama's policies, economy, spending, wars, as he has failed across the board. So lets go after free speech when it is a conservative who is very effective against the incoherent message from the left.

HChris- Georgetown's insurance plan does provide contraceptive coverage for their employees, it's only the students that are not covered.

You need to go to the doctor to get a prescription for it, which is filled in a pharmacy. It is also used to treat conditions such as ovarian cysts and irregular periods.

The notion of 'contraception' is basically a 'preventative measure' with regard to an unwanted pregnancy. Yes, for some methods one must see a doctor - but I'd hardly call the prevention of disease, such as cancer or chicken pox on the same level as preventing a pregnancy. Surely you're not equating a pregnancy with the likes of a disease or an illness.

And for certain, ovarian cysts and irregular periods are Not a pregnancy.

I was in the group that had a good deal of sympathy for this young lady. That's before she went on the view (one of the Fox equivalents for the left) and encouraged everyone to log onto the Media Matters website. It didn't take long to realize that she is nothing more than a pawn in the latest political game, although she seems to know exactly what she's doing. As a long time activist (relatively for someone so young) it's no wonder that she wasn't approved to speak in an official capacity before the Congress. And no, I don't approve of Rush's comments for those of you who want to label me as a sexist.

The entire premise of the arguments from the right is that Georgetown University is a Catholic institution which should not be subject to government regulations which are contrary to Catholic teaching.

First of all, it is not a Catholic institution, it is related to the Catholic church, however Georgetown accepts students of any faith (or no faith). Also, it teaches more than just subjects related to the Catholic faith. If this was an instance of a Catholic Archdiocese refusing to offer coverage to its workers, there may be a better argument.

Further, this is not a matter where a woman who was buying health insurance had a choice. The reason for universal requirements for health insurance is so that health insurance coverage of legal medical procedures and medications are not a deciding factor for whether a person goes to one college or job. You should not have to ask your prospective college or employer to see the insurance policy, and demand that they never change coverage to make a choice about your life.

When a major spokesman for the Republican party and conservatives responds to a heartfelt request to be treated with respect from the college she is attending by that spokesman calling her a slut, it does tend to reinforce the perception that Republicans are overly conservative and really do hate women.

Dirp, I agree with a good portion of your post. I also agree that this young lady was not treated with respect. I do feel that this young ladys past activist experiences and her remarks on 'the view' pretty much suggest that her motivation was not entirely innocent, but perhaps political in nature.

I also feel that many conservatives have denounced Rush's comments and that it would be hard to draw a parallel from a talk radio personality's view to the opinion of an entire party. If that were the case, I guess you could also say that Bill Maher (sp?) speaks for Obama as well as liberals because the President accepted a 1 million dollar donation from him.

dirp101,

First of all, it is not a Catholic institution, it is related to the Catholic church, however Georgetown accepts students of any faith (or no faith). Also, it teaches more than just subjects related to the Catholic faith.

That is exactly what the debate should be about. What constitutes a religious organization? Are only churches religious organizations? What about non-profit organizations like World Vision or the Salvation Army? You say that a Catholic (Jesuit) university is not a religious institution. Possibly - and that is what the debate should be, and ultimately IS, about.

I had friends who went to Christian universities and they were expected to follow a behavioral code of conduct. Co-habitation between unmarried couples was prohibited and I have heard stories (hearsay, I know) of students who have been expelled for not following the rules. These universities accept students from all faiths (or no faith) but regardless, those students are required to abide by the code of conduct.

Dirp101, you make it seem that the argument is cut and dry, but I feel that it is much more complex. First of all, I DO feel that young women should have easy access to birth control, for both its intended use and all the others! However, I am conflicted. Being a Christian I take freedom of religion very seriously. I am not a Catholic, so this issue isn't about my personal faith, but I can understand where they are coming from. Being an American I take the constitution very seriously. I also understand that this is a conflict of rights. Rights of religious organizations (again, possibly) vs the rights of women to have easy access to birth control. I'm not sure which one should take precedence. Liberals are making a case that having birth control covered in their medical insurance is a right - maybe it is, I don't know. Conservatives are making a case that religiously owned universities are protected under freedom of religion - maybe they are, I don't know. What I do know is that the issue is more complicated than either the left or right is making it out to be.

PS: inmissouri, thanks for the post. I was unaware of that circumstance, so it seems that, at least in Georgetown's case, they should allow students access to birth control since they have no religious issue providing it for their employees.

Well anyone else except an ignorant slut would accept the apology and move on!!! no matter whether U lioke the blowhard rush or not... he did say he was sorry and in my book she showed her poor upbringing by not accepting it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!just my two cents

We have so many other things to worry about besides who calls who a slut or who likes rush or not....just do like I do and ignore him!!!!

I have a few questions. First, can anyone explain to me why calling someone a slut and a prostitute on-air is not grounds for a slander suit?

Second, since when is an erection medically necessary? Seems to me like something only used for "recreational" purposes, but health insurance apparently covers Viagra in most cases.

Next, my health insurance isn't given to me for free, I pay premiums, co-pays, and deductibles. Most of the time, I end up paying more into the system per year than I receive. Should my employer trump my doctor if my doctor agrees with me that a treatment is necessary?

Last, why is it that people don't understand that "oral contraceptives" are used to treat acne, androgen-driven hair loss, dysmenorrhea, excessive menstrual bleeding, PMS, polycystic ovarian syndrome, and perimenopause/menopausal symptoms (as well as some other conditions)? It isn't all about sex, people. Though some seem to wish that it was.

Carbonite, Citrix, Go To Meeting, Legal Zoom, ProFlowers, Quicken Loans, Sleep Number and Sleep Train and do not use them.

Most of those on that list have pulled their ads, Mags. Do not punish them for pulling their ads. Punish those that still sponsor.

http://www.businessinsider.com/aol-and-these-7-other-companies-are-still-advertising-on-rush-limbaughs-show-2012-3

Thank you. I needed to know who to boycott. Sponsors listed - take heed. You are sponsoring an idiot.

Those are the advertisers that have pulled their ads...DO USE THEM!

Yea, don't boycott the ones that already pulled.

AOL needs to pull the plug too. Can you imagine how many AOL women customers there are???

How about Bill Maher's advertisers? No one is more vile than he is when talking about people on the right.

Hurray for Rush, just what else would you call her ? The virgin Fluke ?

Forgetting churches, or religion, why should I have to pay for somebody else's contraceptives ? I paid for mine, YOU pay for yours, this is ludicrus- - that I should have to pay for YOUR contraceptives. Either buy your own, or don't engage in sex during the fertile period. I guess YOU want temple prostitutes, and the government to pay for YOUR abortions and contraceptives.

Linda, Bill Mahar's show is on HBO, he has no advertisers.

William S. Fluke and everyone else who has insurance already pays for it. No one is asking YOU to pay for it.

Linda, Give some documented quotes of Maher's that are so offensive that they would merit the same outrage as Rush's fiasco that he caused. You keep using Maher as an example with no proof.

Who said she is sleeping around? She didn't.

This isn't about the government! It's about insurance companies and what THEY cover! I suppose we should put Viagra on the non-covered list too then. And by the way, Rush is still a heartless pig!

LINDA in TEXAS,

Do you have something that itches when it comes to Bill Maher? Scratch it now and get over it!

Nobody comes close to Limbaugh when it comes to combining lies with hatred. He has been profiting from the stupidity of his listeners for years, but maybe not much longer! LOL

Miguel -- neither you nor Rush nor I know anything about Ms. Fluke's personal life. Therefore, none of us should be making allegations about it in a public forum.

Read the transcript of Ms. Fluke's testimony -- she never discusses her own sexual activities nor whether she herself even uses birth control. So, you and Rush should stop making stuff up -- it just makes both of you look stupid.

"STOP the War on Woman"......does this also include the vile and personal attacks and namecalling on Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman??? Because that has been going on for years while the womens groups and their so called supporters have sat quitly by. Or is the supposed support for women not equal to all women but decided on a case by case basis????

William S : I'm pretty sure you are trolling, or simply badly misinformed.

however, I must clear up a misconception started by the idiot Rush Limbaugh. Miss Fluke stated she purchases her own contraceptive medication. She is working her way through law school. Like many students, she utilizes the university's health insurance program. Because the Catholic church hates women, the health insurance policy does not cover contraceptives or many other women's health issues (you can read her testimony by looking it up.)

NOWHERE is there any indication that we, as taxpayers, are paying for her health insurance. That is yet another lie thought up by a blowhard Republican designed to denigrate women, who they hate. Since the GOP is unable to discover a rational reason for denying legal medication to women, they resort to name calling, and further spewing forth of their hatred of women.

It is time for the GOP to be eliminated from the political landscape. VOTE the out the GOP.

Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a dumb twat and a cun^t.

When discussing the woman reporter who was raped in Egypt, he asked can't we send over Elizabeth Hasselbeck instead?

Now I'm sure you'll remind me they are public figures, so it doesn't count. So you would not care if Rush called Michelle Obama a slut, right? She's a public figure.

Maher doesn't have any sponsers to boycot, but Obama accepting a million dollars from him should make you wonder just how much he really cares about women.

Linda in Texas - when Bill Maher speaks, he speaks as a comedian. When Rush Limbaugh speaks, he does not. People realize that Bill Maher is a comedian. While they agree with him, they realize he's trying to be funny. On the other hand, Rush seems to now be the spokesman for the Republican Party on the radio. He is taken seriously.

... and William I don't want to pay for YOUR Viagra or your Cialis or your heart medicine that you don't obviously need.

If your health coverage were determined by what I think - you'd be all dried up.

You are vile , and so is your counterpart Linda in Texas.

I thought you had to be funny to be considered a comedian. Why didn't people just laugh off Michael Richards (Cramer) when he told those funny jokes about lynching? Nice try rationalizing. Hate is hate.

I am listening to his show as I comment, love this man! Just heard a commercial from a top utility company on his show (you'll have to listen to find out which one), are you going to boycott them too? If you don't like him don't listen to him, stop trying to change the world. This argument is old and stale..just like____.

Of course she won't accept the apology, all part of the Liberal hate ethic. No surprise here.

. . . your right wing radio friend, Rush Limpballs, is on the way out? Did you really think that he could continue to spew hate and We The People would never get enough of it and eject him from the airwaves? Now that the methodology is in place we can go down the list of these hate mongering, derisive and divisive miscreants and get rid of them one at a time: Hannity, O'Reilly, Savage, Coulter et al. Goodbye and Good riddance.

Please do not boycott or punish the companies that pulled their ads. They did the right thing.

Since most of the big national accounts pulled their spots, though, the bulk of what's left are local ads and smaller companies. Call your local affiliate station and ask for a listing of all the sponsors currently running in his time slot and make it clear you intend to spread the word and boycott them. Let them know that his time on the radio is poison for any advertisers and all that will be left are public interest spots and ads about the station itself that provide zero revenue.

If the student in question pays for her own contraception, then she has already acknowleged a situation that she created by selecting a university that has a religious basis that precludes the providing of contraception. There are hundreds of law schools, and hundreds that have wonderful ratings in terms of education, and their student health insurance would have no such limitations. She could have easily considered any of them. I can't help but wonder, especially as we are talking about a law student, if her choice of school wasn't by design, as a way to make a broad and public statement that just might enhance her, putting her in the public eye and perhaps a bit ahead of her student contemporaries when time comes for law schools to select from the graduates. And for those of you who say, because she currently pays for this contraception, that means, we as taxpayers do not....it is only true under the present situation. Once the requirement for this becomes part and parcel of all health coverage regardless of who writes the coverage and who the coverage is written to provide for, then the costs will increase for everyone, because the number of beneficiaries of this benefit will increase. In that instance, people who have no use for these types of services will be paying for them due to increased premiums that cover the cost of having this in every policy written. Elderly, who have certainly not use will be paying higher costs, because of course, their policies will have to reflect that. Those who are not married, not sexually active, even homosexuals (who do not experience the pregnancy issue in the course of their sexual activities) would be paying a greater amount to insure that this benefit was universally available to all. In that context, we are all forced to pay greater costs for something that many (and many more than the liberals of these threads would have you to believe) feel is inappropriate behavior from a moral or religious perspective, and still many more who feel that this particular area is up to the individual to pay for as they exercise their freedome to engage in sexual activity.

If the student in question pays for her own contraception, then she has already acknowleged a situation that she created by selecting a university that has a religious basis that precludes the providing of contraception. There are hundreds of law schools, and hundreds that have wonderful ratings in terms of education, and their student health insurance would have no such limitations. She could have easily considered any of them. I can't help but wonder, especially as we are talking about a law student, if her choice of school wasn't by design, as a way to make a broad and public statement that just might enhance her, putting her in the public eye and perhaps a bit ahead of her student contemporaries when time comes for law schools to select from the graduates. And for those of you who say, because she currently pays for this contraception, that means, we as taxpayers do not....it is only true under the present situation. Once the requirement for this becomes part and parcel of all health coverage regardless of who writes the coverage and who the coverage is written to provide for, then the costs will increase for everyone, because the number of beneficiaries of this benefit will increase. In that instance, people who have no use for these types of services will be paying for them due to increased premiums that cover the cost of having this in every policy written. Elderly, who have certainly no use will be paying higher costs, because of course, their policies will have to reflect that. Those who are not married, not sexually active, even homosexuals (who do not experience the pregnancy issue in the course of their sexual activities) would be paying a greater amount to insure that this benefit was universally available to all. In that context, we are all forced to pay greater costs for something that many (and many more than the liberals of these threads would have you to believe) feel is inappropriate behavior from a moral or religious perspective, and still many more who feel that this particular area is up to the individual to pay for as they exercise their freedom to engage in sexual activity.

O'really,

While so far as I know Limbaugh has never called Mrs. Obama a slut, I believe he has called her "uppity." Which as any honest person knows is a racial slur that he should be ashamed of.

Already boycotting the companies that pulled out Mike - not their job to censor free speech.

@ NHlucky - "uppity" is not a racial slur. Uppity has been used far more times to white people than black.

Chuck, show me were Health Care Reform requires coverage for Viagra.

According to the Act, it may or may not be covered. The defined, at this time, Essential Benefits are

• Ambulatory patient services
• Emergency services
• Hospitalization
• Maternity and newborn care
• Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral
  health treatment
• Prescription drugs
• Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
• Laboratory services
• Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
• Pediatric services, including oral and vision care

Does this mean that prescription weight loss drugs or any other prescirption drugs that are most often denied by health plans must now be covered? At this point, the answer is no so why did Kathleen Sebilius, Secretary of HHS, single out contraceptives?

Unquestionably overblown in the media, Rush hit right on. "The give-me, give" me mandates need to stop. And as far as the spineless “R” If taking a stand for commonsense is wrong, it’s not Rush Limbaugh comments that will hurt the GOP in the election but their lack of morals.

Willowbrook, when uppity is applied to a black person it is a racial slur and you darn well know it! And I'll bet you know which word Rush left off (and his listeners filled in) when he applied it to Mrs. Obama, don't you?

• AOL suspends ads on Rush Limbaugh show

Thank you AOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, Willowbrook, it appears that these companies that chose to sponsor Rush for all these years (and that also sponsor several other talk radio people) will get boycotted by the majority of people if they stay on by the minority if they pull out. Either way, their names have been tarnished by being associated with Rush Limbaugh. It was risky for them to put their profits before good sense knowing that this party would eventually end badly for them one day when Limbaugh went too far over the line, so if they lose market share based on their bad judgement, that's the free market system.

OUwhine--

I wanted your screen name, but you got there first!

Rush is still on the air...its on right now if you are curious

I think this entire thing was staged. If this child can afford to go to Georgetown Law School for her LD, with all of the schools in America, she can well afford bus fare to any clinic in D.C. for her free pills or whatever she uses to not become pregnant. Planned indeed, so much so that it gets national coverage for days and this girl gets a telephone call from Mr. Obama thanking her.

There is no excuse for what Limbaugh called the girl. Filth from his mouth, which got him his desired results; more exposure and more money.

@ NHlucky - no it's not a racial slur and never was. I'm guessing you are one of those who call the race card at the drop of a hat, especially when there is no racial word or act involved. Question? If you don't use uppity to describe Mrs. Obama, the only other accurate word left is arrogant, is that racial too?

P.S. I don't even know that your quote is factual, and don't care. I'm only referring to your inaccurate racial connotations applying to the word uppity.

KS jayhawk..... I am a UT fan and worked in OKC for awhile a couple of years ago, and got real tired of the University of Oklahoma whining about everything on the TV. I actually used on on the NBC sports site originally.

Linda in Texas-469280

How about Bill Maher's advertisers? No one is more vile than he is when talking about people on the right.

You obviously have never watched a Maher show in your life. If you had you would have known that he is on HBO - a premium cable channel without advertizing. You should, rightly, feel rather stupid.