REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Georgetown stands by Fluke

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Thursday, March 8, 2012 04:27
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2386
PAGE 1 of 2

Monday, March 5, 2012 10:49 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Friday, President John J. DeGioia of Georgetown University, in a public message called "On Civility and Public Discourse," praised Fluke for providing “a model of civil discourse.”

DeGioia took no position on the question that started this latest skirmish in our ongoing culture wars: contraceptive coverage in health care. But he did not mince words when it came to Limbaugh, who doubled down on Thursday by saying, “I will buy all of the women at Georgetown University as much aspirin to put between their knees as they want.”

DeGioia wrote that Limbaugh’s behavior was “misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”

Meanwhile, over 100 professors and staff members at Georgetown University Law Center signed a letter supporting Fluke. "As scholars and teachers who aim to train public-spirited lawyers, no matter what their politics, to engage intelligently and meaningfully with the world, we abhor these attacks on Ms. Fluke and applaud her strength and grace in the face of them," the letter says. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/04/my-take-georgetown-backs-fluk
e-vs-limbaugh-for-civilitys-sake/?iref=allsearch&hpt=hp_c2

Hah! Take that, you vitriolic mysogynist!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 10:56 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


And secondly, in response to Raptor's inevitable "Yeah, but liberals do worse and nobody says a word", I offer this:
Quote:

As advertisers quit the Rush Limbaugh radio program -- and as Republican politicians squirm uncomfortably -- the broadcaster's fans are complaining about double standards.

Yes, they'll concede, maybe Limbaugh went too far in denouncing a female law student as a "slut" and a "prostitute" and then demanding that she post a sex tape online for him to view.

But look (they continue) at all the liberal/lefty broadcasters who have also said obnoxious things! No one calls Democratic politicians to account for them. Why us?

It's a question that will be aired often in the week ahead. Here's the answer, in four points.

Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.

Point 2: The cases that conservatives cite as somehow equivalent to Limbaugh's tirade against Fluke by and large did bring consequences for their authors.

After David Letterman for example made an ugly joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, he delivered an abject seven-minute apology on air. (To which Palin responded by refusing the apology and insinuating that David Letterman was a child molester.)

When liberal talker Ed Schultz nastily called my dear friend Laura Ingraham a "slut" on his radio show, MSNBC responded by suspending Schultz for a week without pay from his TV show. Schultz likewise apologized in person on air. (Ingraham accepted the apology with grace and humor.)

The exception to the general rule is Bill Maher, who never apologized for calling Palin by a demeaning sexual epithet. But now see point 3:

Point 3: Limbaugh's place in American public life is in no way comparable to that of David Letterman, Bill Maher or Ed Schultz.

Letterman is not a political figure at all; and while Maher and Schultz strongly identify as liberals, neither qualifies as anything like a powerbroker in the Democratic Party. I'm sure the Barack Obama re-election effort is happy to have Maher's million-dollar gift, but I sincerely doubt there is a Democratic congressman who worries much whether Maher criticizes him. A word of criticism from Limbaugh, by contrast, will reduce almost any member of the Republican caucus to abject groveling. See, for example: GINGREY, PHIL.

Among TV and radio talkers and entertainers, there is none who commands anything like the deference that Limbaugh commands from Republicans: not Rachel Maddow, not Jon Stewart, not Michael Moore, not Keith Olbermann at his zenith. Democratic politicians may wish for favorable comment from their talkers, but they are not terrified of negative comment from them in the way that Republican politicians live in fear of a negative word from Limbaugh.

Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. It is the bottom of the barrel of shock talk. http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/05/opinion/frum-rush-limbaugh-fairness/inde
x.html?hpt=hp_c2
about sums it up, for me, and Point Four sums up Raptor.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 11:04 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


And there's this, too:
Quote:

Rush Limbaugh‘s repeated, ugly insults last week against Sandra Fluke — a Georgetown law student who testified in favor of insurance coverage of contraception — were terrible on plenty of levels. They were sick: the idea of an old man sitting in a radio studio, calling a young woman a “slut” for advocating birth control, accusing her of having “so much sex, it’s amazing she can even walk” and asking that she post sex videos online as restitution is not just rude, it’s straight up pervy. They were ill timed — or perfectly timed — coming in the midst of a frenzy of extremist anti-contraception rhetoric and legislation from the right wing. And they were ignorant: Limbaugh repeatedly riffed on the idea that Fluke must be “having so much sex, she can’t afford the contraception,” making it seem like he honestly believes that the more sex you have, the more birth control pills you have to take. (I’ll let you provide the requisite Limbaugh-and-pills joke.)

But they may also turn out to be damaging in a more material, if not ultimately fatal, way than the aftereffects of various other stupid things Limbaugh has said in the past — because they were personal, and because of who they were personally directed against.


The way the Limbaugh controversy has unfolded since last week has reminded me of another radio host famous for saying outrageous things, who suddenly crossed a line and self-immolated: Don Imus, who lost his radio and TV gigs in 2007 after referring to the Rutgers women’s basketball team as “nappy-headed hos.” Pushing the envelope was just something Imus did, and generally got a pass for from his media peers and politicians. But the Rutgers incident changed that and put much of what he’d said in the past in a new light.

Why? The insult and racially charged language weren’t anything new on Imus’ show. The issue with his Rutgers slam was power. Imus said something egregiously hurtful, not about a politician or a massively popular celebrity or even a pro athlete but about high-achieving college students who did nothing more to deserve the remarks than get attention for doing something that would make most parents proud. On top of every other reason to reject Imus’ remarks, it was a classic jerk move, with a high-profile man elevating some women far less famous and established than him just to insult them. You might not have liked Imus’ calling anyone a nappy-headed ho, but the blatant status asymmetry of the situation — a big shot picking on college women — offended a basic sense of decency even among people who didn’t object to him before.

Limbaugh’s situation may not be exactly parallel, because all analogies break down at some point, but there’s a lot of basic similarity. Again, you have an old man with a tremendously successful radio show attacking a well-spoken young woman in college for the beliefs she volunteered to argue in a very personal and directly sexual way. At this point, it becomes not just outrageousness and hyperbole; it’s unfair bullying that will resonate beyond the people who already couldn’t stand Rush.

[Update: As for Imus, on Monday he blasted Limbaugh as a "gutless loser" for his remarks, and for apologizing for them via his website and not in person.]

Say obnoxious things about the President and you can call yourself a political entertainer; say sexually insulting things about a young woman getting an education and speaking her mind and you are, in a way that goes far beyond FCC standards, indecent. You could disagree with Fluke on contraception and insurance policy but still — hearing a sneering rich guy call her a whore to millions of listeners — imagine her as your student, your daughter or your friend.

No way will I predict that the controversy is going to drive Limbaugh off the air. The reaction against him has not been as fast, strong and wide-reaching as it was with the Imus conflagration.
Some sponsors have left his show, and there may be more. But there is still money to be made off a Rush Limbaugh show, and he maintains enough influence that conservative politicians are afraid to criticize him too strongly. (Mitt Romney said Limbaugh’s remarks were “not the language I would have used.” Not the language? Does he have a nicer way in mind of calling a political critic promiscuous?) Still, it’s telling that this is one incident that has driven Limbaugh — the king of blustering past controversy and letting his detractors stew — to apologize. (Kind of: “I chose the wrong words in my analogy”? No, at the very least, he chose the wrong analogy, i.e., user of insurance-covered birth control = whore.)

I don’t believe that Rush Limbaugh suddenly has a sense of decency. But he may have, for once, finally realized that other people do — and that even he can hurt himself by offending it. http://entertainment.time.com/2012/03/05/limbaugh-and-the-imus-effect-
has-rushs-mouth-written-a-check-his-sponsors-wont-cash/
Limbaugh off the air? We should be so lucky!

Not that any of his apologists will recognize it, but I think these two articles pretty much sum up the ACTUAL issue.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 11:04 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Point 3. Limbaugh may not be on Letterman's level, though he far outshines Schultz or Maher. Limbaugh is the undisputed king of his medium, not just now, but in the HISTORY of talk radio. Maher has some cred, I suppose, but Ed Schultz? THAT'S FUNNY! Even Keith Olbermann has more , or HAD more, of a profile than Schultz.

But I gotta love the overly wordy spin and explanation of why what is good for the goose, is NOT good for the gander.

All animals are equal,but some are more equal than others, is that right ?

So unbelievably transparent and petty are you.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 11:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

I’m a proud Georgetown woman upset about another Georgetown woman who may have no pride at all.

How else do you explain - Ms. Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown Law student, now famous for testimony she never gave – jumping up to talk about her sex life (with the House Minority Leader and with the liberal media) and ask for the cost of her sex life to be subsidized by other students at a Jesuit School?

Sandra Fluke was declined the privilege (a privilege, not a right) of testifying in front of a Senate Committee on the proposed contraceptive mandate.

Her name was submitted too late to be admitted to testify. She’s not a lawyer. She’s not a member of the clergy – crucial for a hearing on religious freedom, wouldn’t you say? That’s what Representative Issa said. Her one claim to fame in the reproductive health care debate is…drumroll, please…being a student club leader! You go, Sandra! Hang those posters girl. Wear out those Sharpies.

Me? I love me some extracurricular involvement. The difference between Sandra and me is that I don’t think it qualifies me to speak in front of Congress. ”The Chair calls to the stand the captains of the intramural ultimate frisbee team!”
Having been told by Congress to more or less shut up and go home, Sandra found a sympathetic ear in Nancy Pelosi. She is not going to find one on the Georgetown Campus. She is wildly out of step.

Senate Democrats needed a show pony for this circus – and they knew they could find a liberal woman on a college campus who would willingly trot around the ring. That’s why Nancy & Pals created a photo op with all the props – the microphones, the podium, an air of pretense, and the all-important liberal media – for Sandra to tell her “story.” And it is just that – a story, told on a stage.

But Nancy Pelosi and the Liberal Media should know that they can no longer rely on college campuses as an endless source of liberal support. My colleagues and I at TheCollegeConservative are creating a new wave on campuses across the country. Every day we make it a little safer to be conservative – out in public – without fear of bad grades as a result of our views. Sandra should know we have no fear in calling out a classmate for thoughtless liberal ideology.
Sandra Fluke doesn’t speak for me. Or for Georgetown.

She doesn’t speak for those of us who worked hard to be able to choose to come to a great institution with a great tradition of faith and scholarship. She certainly can’t speak for the Jesuits who dedicated their lives to God and Education with a long established set of rules. There are only ten of them, and Ms. Fluke would do well to give them a quick read.

If she wants a more liberal sex life, she can go to Syracuse. (Syracuse, I must apologize – but we are in March and basketball matters – sorry you got caught up in this.)

Sandra doesn’t even speak for all skanks! She only speaks for the skanks who don’t want to take responsibility for their choices. That’s a tiny group of people. Hey Sandra! How about next Saturday night, you come hang out with me and my gay boyfriends! Your hair will look fabulous and you’ll get to see great musical theatre! Oh, and odds of you getting pregnant? Zero percent.
Even the oh-so-left HuffPo called Sandra out on her media sluttery: ”Fluke got the stage all to herself and was hailed as a hero by the crowd and Democratic lawmakers on the panel, all of whom rushed to appear on camera with her at the end.

“Excuse me. I’d love to get a picture with our star,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said as she pushed her way through the packed room to Fluke.” Star of what? Star of the bedroom sex tape? When did Georgetown Law start admitting Kardashians?
Sandra, we might be on the same campus, but we are not on the same planet.

Sandra told some sob stories about how contraception isn’t covered by the Jesuit institution we attend. (Maybe they don’t cover it because, you know, they’re a Jesuit institution. Religious freedom? Anyone? Bueller?)

A student group called Plan A H*yas for Choice staged a demonstration against the university health plan last year, duct taping their mouths and chaining themselves to the statue of Georgetown’s founder on the university’s front lawn. Then, a funny thing happened – nothing. We left them there. Now Sandra has chained herself to the sinking ship of Pelosi Liberalism. She will always be remembered as a Welfare Condom Queen.
Let’s talk priorities here. It costs over $23,000 for a year at Georgetown Law. Sandra, are you telling us that you can afford that but cannot afford your own contraception? Really? Math was never my strong suit, but something about Sandra’s accounting just doesn’t seem right.

No one forced Sandra to come to Georgetown. And now that she has, Sandra does not have to depend on the university health plan. She could walk down the street to CVS and get some contraception herself. Or, go to an off-campus, non-university doctor and pay for it out of pocket. (Or, you know…maybe not have so much sex that it puts her in financial peril?)

Funny how the same side that cries “Get your rosaries off my ovaries” is the same side saying, “on second thought…please pay for me to have all the sex I want!” The people who espouse “pro-choice” “values” are the same people who say religious institutions have no right to choose.

Imagine if someone else had asked the government to cover a different activity. Let’s say I want to go rock climbing. It’s my body and my choice and I want to climb all the cliffs I can! Imagine if I went to the government and asked it to pay for helmets and ropes and band-aids I’ll need to safely climb rocks every day of my life. What would everyone say?

“It’s your choice to do that- no one’s forcing you to scale cliffs. So, either quit it or pay for it yourself!”
This is the reaction we should have had to Sandra Fluke.

Sandra, I hope you take to heart our school’s motto of “Cura Personalis” – care of the whole person. You are so much more than your reproductive organs. Please, have some self-respect and take responsibility for your choices instead of having to beg the government for help.

The government should not be able to force a religious institution – like the one we attend – to pay for the things they don’t believe in. That is pretty clear in the first amendment. But since you missed the ten commandments I can’t expect you to read the Bill of Rights either.

I believe in Georgetown. I love this school. And I know that we are so, so much better than what Sandra Fluke would make us out to be.

Hoya Saxa.

Angela Morabito

:: Georgetown University :: Washington, DC :: @_AngelaMorabito




http://thecollegeconservative.com/2012/03/02/sandra-fluke-does-not-spe
ak-for-me
/


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 11:44 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Not a word of EITHER of the last two posts having to do with the issue: what Limbaugh said. The idiocy of ONE student blathering about how she disagrees with what Fluke did on a TEA PARTY WEBSITE, versus
Quote:

...over 100 professors and staff members at Georgetown University Law Center signed a letter supporting Fluke
speaks for itself.

Oh, what the hell, it only takes a minute. I'll see your "student" with, from the Wall Street Journal, the following
Quote:

The Georgetown University Law Center is getting behind its student Sandra Fluke, the 3L who testified before Congress on the need for access to birth control — and was subsequently called a “slut” by radio host Rush Limbaugh.
Quote:

The undersigned faculty members, administrators and students of Georgetown University Law Center and other law schools strongly condemn the recent personal attacks on our student, Sandra Fluke. Ms. Fluke has had the courage to publicly defend and advocate for her beliefs about an important issue of widespread concern. She has done so with passion and intelligence. And she has been rewarded with the basest sort of name-calling and vilification, words that aim only to belittle and intimidate.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/03/02/georgetown-law-gets-behind-sandra-
fluke
/

That's faculty members, administrators AND students. Also this, from ABC:
Quote:

The day after Rush Limbaugh made comments about a Georgetown University law student that sent shockwaves across America, students on campus are reacting angrily to the talk show host's opinion.

Those words are causing outrage across Georgetown's campus. "Having someone put you down for making a decision is upsetting," Georgetown student Alyssia Lanfranchi said. "It’s going against empowering women."

Nursing student Lisa Rattner cautioned Limbaugh to choose his words carefully when commenting on the subject matter. "Make a valid argument and we can talk, but don’t shame me," Rattner said. "How does that make you a slut? "If you want people to take you seriously, use language that’s appropriate.”

"His opinions on women are at least slightly misogynistic," Georgetown student Zainab Ibrahim said. http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/03/rush-limbaugh-georgetown-comments
-students-react-angrily-to-host-s-opinion-73298.html
put those studentS up against your Tea Partier any day.

When you're wrong, REACH FOR IT, eh! We get it. Talk about "the overly wordy spin and explanation"!
Quote:

Last Thursday the Republican-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee rejected Democrats' request that Fluke testify on the Obama administration's policy requiring that employees of religion-affiliated institutions have access to health insurance that covers birth control.

Prominently displayed was a photo of five religious leaders, all men and all appearing at the invitation of the Republican majority, testifying last week with Fluke visible in the background, sitting in the visitors' section.

So if invited by Republicans, no problem. If invited by Democrats, no way.

And that's as much time and energy as I'm willing to waste on showing what a prejudiced idjit you are.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 12:01 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Niki, you're wrong. Again.

Quote:

Last Thursday the Republican-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee rejected Democrats' request that Fluke testify on the Obama administration's policy requiring that employees of religion-affiliated institutions have access to health insurance that covers birth control.


Fluke was not initially invited by the Democrats. You MUST know this by now. They initially invited a MAN to testify. They then tried to un-invite their witness, and substitute Fluke , at the very last minute, w/ out her having been vetted, as per the RULES of the committee, which were agreed to by BOTH parties, and KNOWN by both parties. Yet only the Republicans thought enough of proper procedure to abide by those rules.

Quote:

Prominently displayed was a photo of five religious leaders, all men and all appearing at the invitation of the Republican majority, testifying last week with Fluke visible in the background, sitting in the visitors' section


Religious leaders, all vetted before hand, and called because the very mandate , which Obama himself has forced this ENTIRE ISSUE, is of direct importance to those very religious institutions of which they represent.


You want to dispense with hard, cold facts, and instead, rely on what a misleading photograph shows, as how this entire issue should be seen. Fluke very well could have been properly invited and spoke at this hearing, yet Pelosi chose to ignore the rules. She did this because she KNEW the GOP would not break the rules which ALL had agreed to before hand, and then she could use Ms Fluke as a show pony, for her post hearing political propaganda press conference, masquerader as a 'make up' call, because the mean old GOP males wouldn't let the little girl speak.

The Democrats are lying. And you're the useful idiot who is playing along.




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 12:07 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Hmmm Niki - little Rappy wants equal treatment for all.

I wonder if he's got a gf?

Perhaps the gf should be subjected to an at length verbal personal assault by - oh just to make up the numbers - Schultz, Maher and Letterman - all weighing in for three days each? Maybe they should call her a slut whose only interest in little Rappy MUST be money b/c god knows he's got nothing else. Perhaps they should speculate on the sexual practices she has to perform to make up for his deficiencies. Maybe they should wonder out loud about her parents, about whether they should be proud she's a good little bitch to little Rappy.

And as the natural part of the entire scenario, her name and where she lives should be broadcast to all as part of this non-event.

Yep, it'd be just another humdrum week full of non-events in the life of little Rappy.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 12:10 PM

BYTEMITE


...

AURaptor. I don't normally find myself offended by you, because normally I understand what you really mean, or I can usually glean some sort of relevant point out from your comments. Most of the time, the worst thing I can say about you is that you are unclear.

But you are very clear this time. And not in a good way.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 12:17 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
...

AURaptor. I don't normally find myself offended by you, because normally I understand what you really mean, or I can usually glean some sort of relevant point out from your comments. Most of the time, the worst thing I can say about you is that you are unclear.

But you are very clear this time. And not in a good way.



Well, if it's unclear, then maybe you should look deeper.

Quote:

"The Democrats played games with us the day before [the hearing]," says a Republican committee source. "After days of asking for a witness, they waited until the last minute, the afternoon before the hearing. They asked us to invite Rev. Barry Lynn [head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State] and Ms. Fluke. We said we'll invite one, per standard procedure. We formally invited Rev. Lynn, and the Democrats, at 4:30 pm, changed their mind and said they wanted Fluke. We said too late. They told Rev. Lynn not to show up the next day."

When the hearing took place, Democrats proceeded to clobber Republicans. "Where are the women?" asked New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney as she looked at the all-male first panel for the hearing. (Two women testified in the hearing's second panel, but Maloney and her fellow Democrats ignored that.)



As so often has been the case before, those on the Left are doing nothing but demagoging the issue, and refusing to deal with the actual events.



" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 12:41 PM

BYTEMITE


You posted something which called Fluke a skank several times, and managed to somehow be even more inflammatory than Limbaugh's language.

You may very well have a point about there having been women on the committee's second panel (though perhaps there should have been some women on the first panel anyway?), but there are better ways to say it than THIS. These continuing attacks on this girl, the awful rhetoric that as a women myself makes me flinch, especially if that isn't even your main objection.

If you object to the democrats demogoguing then SAY so, if you object to a double standard then SAY so, but don't sink to the level of these insults, if that is the level you think your opposition all engage at, or you lose your credibility.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 1:02 PM

BYTEMITE


Honestly, I don't care what any of these people say. I don't listen to the republican candidates, I don't listen to any of the pundits or tv opinions/editorial talking heads. I generally skip over the threads when they come up.

But this is board members quoting someone using the word skank, like it's NOTHING. Obviously agreeing with it, dropping it oh so casually. Like calling Sarah Palin a soccer mom or worse. You want to have a talk about double standards? I'm calling on both sides, but this is the spark that prompted me. All this language is incredibly disrespectful to women EVERYWHERE.

In short, what the HELL, guys?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 1:38 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
You posted something which called Fluke a skank several times, and managed to somehow be even more inflammatory than Limbaugh's language.



Really? Where. I don't recall calling her a 'skank'. That's a word I rarely use.

What Rush said, specifically pertaining to Ms Fluke's sex life, was inappropriate, by ALL accounts. And going on the comments I had head, not JUST from Rush, but elsewhere, I echoed those remarks, partly in jest, by making reference to Inara's line in TRASH. " It applies ". The info I had seems to be false, so the statement was inaccurate.

Quote:

You may very well have a point about there having been women on the committee's second panel (though perhaps there should have been some women on the first panel anyway?), but there are better ways to say it than THIS. These continuing attacks on this girl, the awful rhetoric that as a women myself makes me flinch, especially if that isn't even your main objection.


Point of fact, *I* haven't been continually attacking her, save for her views on free contraception. For that, she deserves unrelenting, unapologetic attention on the merits of that discussion.

Quote:


If you object to the democrats demogoguing then SAY so, if you object to a double standard then SAY so, but don't sink to the level of these insults, if that is the level you think your opposition all engage at, or you lose your credibility.



On this point, we both agree.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 1:49 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


To paraphrase Niki, I see this has degenerated into the usual Niki-vs-Rappy tit-for-tat nonsense...

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 5:30 PM

BYTEMITE


Then, you didn't read what you were quoting?

Quote:


Sandra doesn’t even speak for all skanks! She only speaks for the skanks who don’t want to take responsibility for their choices. That’s a tiny group of people. Hey Sandra! How about next Saturday night, you come hang out with me and my gay boyfriends! Your hair will look fabulous and you’ll get to see great musical theatre! Oh, and odds of you getting pregnant? Zero percent.



I am excising this particular passage because I find it particularly mean spirited and horrifying of the original author. If you simply didn't read it, I would actually be glad to know so.

Quote:


On this point, we both agree.



Okay. There's just been some horrible personal attacks I've seen lately with some very unflattering terms applied to the women in question.

It'd be like if I walked around calling male figures I don't like "machismo emotionally stunted hunks of meat." Or made tarzan or loincloth and cod piece jokes or something. Unfair derogatory generalized and sexualized male stereotypes. It's bad.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 7:02 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
In short, what the HELL, guys?


Oh indeed, I'm kinda pissed off at the lot of em for this, and gratified I ain't the only one who noticed.

Oh and here Rappy, would you like to borrow my shovel ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 5, 2012 8:09 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Tarzan's cool, maybe he isn't the best example of insults.
:))

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 4:25 AM

BYTEMITE


Tarzan also spends a lot of his time half-naked, grunting, and unfamiliar with even the rudimentary basics of education.

But, if you would prefer, I can change the insult to "cavemen." Both would get across the message I'm trying to convey.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 4:50 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Tarzan also spends a lot of his time half-naked, grunting, and unfamiliar with even the rudimentary basics of education.



Nope. Tarzan is an English Lord (Lord Greystoke), well-educated, multi-lingual, rich, and immortal.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:04 AM

BYTEMITE


In the later part of the book. In the early parts it's ape grunting city.

He also eventually chooses to forsake civilization and go back to a more primitive lifestyle. Including loincloth and raw meat, killed by himself.

But fine, whatever. Aspire to be Tarzan. I'm sure that's not a negative male stereotype in any way.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:50 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
In the later part of the book. In the early parts it's ape grunting city.



Well, being raised by apes might cause one to speak their language (and it is a language, not just grunts).

Learning how to read and write English by yourself from books is pretty impressive, as is learning French and spoken English as an adult.

Quote:

He also eventually chooses to forsake civilization and go back to a more primitive lifestyle. Including loincloth and raw meat, killed by himself.


Actually, he moves back and forth between civilization and wilderness quite easily. Has an estate in England as well as several homes in Africa. He can entertain royalty or kill and eat game with his ape clan with equal ease.

You really should read the books.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:00 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Too bad that, although Georgetown supports Ms. Fluke's First Amendment rights and defends her against Mr. Limbaugh's insults, they still won't provide her with student health insurance that includes contraception.

Quote:

Fluke, the former president of the Georgetown chapter of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, planned to affirm her support for the new mandate and recount her experience with one of her friends at Georgetown Law. According to Fluke’s written testimony, her classmate was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and required oral contraceptives to prevent development of ovarian cysts. Contraceptives are not covered by the University’s student health policy with UnitedHealthcare Insurance unless they are being used to treat another condition.

In this case, Fluke’s friend, despite confirmation of her illness from her doctor, was never able to get her medication. “Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy,” Fluke said. “She’s gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy.”

According to Fluke, her friend could not keep up with $100 per month out-of-pocket payments for her medication, so she had to forgo treatment until a cyst developed on her ovary, requiring its removal altogether. Such a procedure caused early menopause and likely infertility in the law student, said Fluke.

According to a survey by LSRJ, 40 percent of female Georgetown Law students reported struggling financially as a result of the lack of birth control coverage. Additionally, according to the same body, 20 percent could never get the insurance company to cover birth control for legitimate medical reasons.



http://georgetownvoice.com/2012/02/23/gu-law-student-denied-testimony-
on-contraception
/

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:12 AM

FREMDFIRMA


*makes grunting noises and waves a club around before getting distracted by a butterfly and wandering off*

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:26 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

To paraphrase Niki, I see this has degenerated into the usual Niki-vs-Rappy tit-for-tat nonsense...
Nope, Mike. I responded once and left; that's all he's worth because I know virtually everything he's got to say on the subject. And only that to point out that his supposed "proof" comes from a Tea Party website, while virtually all the rest of Georgetown Univ. stands behind Fluke. Anything more would have been a waste of time.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:31 AM

BYTEMITE


In retrospect, trying to illustrate a point by attempting to offend people with stereotypes I don't understand may not have been the best idea.

But suffice to say, no one is "just" a caveman, or "just" a soccer mom, or "just" a skank. Even if they're proud of any of those, it's belittling to reduce anyone to a charicature. And personal attacks like that really have no place in any discourse about policy.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:47 AM

FREMDFIRMA


No, but they sure do make policy discussions more entertaining, sometimes.

I get your point, mind - it's just that the whole bloody thing has become essentially... silly.
I don't mean that in a dismissive way, so much as reductio ad absurdium, which is where it all seems to have gone, you know ?

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:55 AM

BYTEMITE


Oh, I know. I'm the frizzled-hair and ash-covered perpetrator of an analogy backfire beyond belief.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 7:08 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
As so often has been the case before, those on the Left are doing nothing but demagoging the issue, and refusing to deal with the actual events.



I'm a little surprised that with the way Reps look down on single parents and how they are all for Family, they wouldn't me more in favor of paying for contraception - it seems a contradiction. Do they want/expect people to not have sex outside of marriage?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:39 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
You posted something which called Fluke a skank several times, and managed to somehow be even more inflammatory than Limbaugh's language.

You may very well have a point about there having been women on the committee's second panel (though perhaps there should have been some women on the first panel anyway?), but there are better ways to say it than THIS. These continuing attacks on this girl, the awful rhetoric that as a women myself makes me flinch, especially if that isn't even your main objection.




Byte, this IS their main objection: They feel that women are useful only for breeding. Period. If any woman steps out of line and tries to speak up, it is their goal to ridicule, belittle, and berate that woman until she "learns her proper place" and keeps her mouth shut and does what she's told.

And they aren't even trying to deny or hide that agenda and objective anymore.

Pay women less than men for doing the exact same job the exact same way.

Take away all access to reproductive services, abortion services, and contraception.

De-fund any entity that might think about trying to help women with reproductive issues.

Redefine "rape" so that women are fair game for more predatory behavior, and when they ARE raped, they aren't "victims", but "accusers", further shaming and shunning them.

And if you ever DO let them think about an abortion after all that, shame them further by forcing them to have things inserted into them against their consent (but it's not "rape", because you've already redefined that word!)

So anyone who thinks any of this is coincidental, and NOT an intentional part of a much deeper and much darker agenda, is fooling themselves. And anyone who ever thinks about voting for a Republican is giving their tacit approval to exactly this agenda.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:02 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Byte - Those aren't my words. You said *I* called Sandra a "skank". I don't recall saying any such thing. Then you post this quote, w/ out citation, an attribute it to me.

Is that something Rush said ? Because it sure as hell doesn't sound like him. I haven't seen that quote before.

Lash me for what I did say, not for what others say, please.

ETA - Found the source of confusion. Those words were from a Georgetown student, Angela Morabito. She posted a letter stating that Ms Fluke does not speak for her. I copy / pasted the letter, in full, w/ out comment, adding her name and link down at the bottom. I did this to show that not ALL of Georgetown University shares in Ms Flukes views, or sides with her on the issue of free contraception for students.

I should have put the entire letter in quotes. That is now corrected.

Again, those were the words of a G-town student, not mine.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:07 AM

BYTEMITE


I said you quoted it like you agreed with it.

You posted a big long thing from some other girl at Georgetown, and it seemed like you agreed with it, and ONE of the paragraphs was the one I excerpted for you.

So, if indeed you did NOT notice, and do not agree with someone tossing around insults like skank, slut, soccermom, caveman, etc., then take this as a reminder to read more carefully in the future.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:25 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Byte... point taken, but to be fair, you're pickin' nits here, I believe.

The author of that letter is a fellow G-town student. She makes many valid points in that letter, most of which with I fully agree. However, the term 'skank' being used by a fellow female, while it does cross MY line of civility , still doesn't dismiss the entirety of her message.

You may feel that it does for you. I get that.

And if I am to take Angela at her word, she seems to have several male friends who are gay. Does that fit the classic stereotype of an uptight , prudish conservative female ?

I think folks need to lighten the hell up a bit.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:29 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
I said you quoted it like you agreed with it.

You posted a big long thing from some other girl at Georgetown, and it seemed like you agreed with it, and ONE of the paragraphs was the one I excerpted for you.

So, if indeed you did NOT notice, and do not agree with someone tossing around insults like skank, slut, soccermom, caveman, etc., then take this as a reminder to read more carefully in the future.



Funny, Kwick quoting Breitbart was seen by Rappy as him saying those words himself.

But when the shoe is on the other foot, why, he can't be held responsible for the words he posted!

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:57 AM

BYTEMITE


I never said otherwise, though the way this girl brought her gay friends into this discussion I also find highly offensive for THEM. Assuming that isn't a reference to Fluke's lesbian friend with polyovarian cyst syndrome and Fluke's comments that she wouldn't have been using contraceptives to get pregnant, which would also be offensive considering the girl lost one of her ovaries.

But, to be fair to you, in the future I will give you the benefit of the doubt if you post something I think is questionable, I'll assume you didn't notice it and bring it to your attention accordingly.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 10:19 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Thanks Byte.



" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 10:56 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
DeGioia wrote that Limbaugh’s behavior was “misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.”


That is true. Limbaugh called her a slut, which is not true...all she's asking is that other people be forced to pay for her lifestyle choices.

For example, I bought Mass Effect 3 today...you should all be forced to pay me back and pay for me to take time off work to play it. I should also get a new TV so as to avoid unnecessary eye strain and a home aid worker to cook and clean for me. And someone to walk my dog. Some of you may be opposed to video game violence, but you should still have to pay.

I thank you all in advance.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 12:41 PM

OONJERAH



Quote Bytemite: no one is "just" a caveman, or "just" a soccer mom, or "just" a skank.

What's a soccer mom? I had to look it up. I don't keep up on trends or stereotypes.

Wiki:
The phrase soccer mom generally refers to a married middle-class woman who lives in the suburbs and has school
age children. She is sometimes portrayed in the media as busy or overburdened and driving a minivan. She is
also portrayed as putting the interests of her family, and most importantly her children, ahead of her own.

The Wall Street Journal: "She's the key swing consumer in the marketplace, and the key swing voter who
will decide the election." ('96)

Soccer moms received so much attention during the election that the American Dialect Society voted "soccer mom"
Word of the Year for 1996. The columnist Ellen Goodman of The Boston Globe called 1996 "the Year of the Soccer Mom."

The phrase has taken on a negative aspect. Soccer moms are sometimes accused of forcing their children to go to too
many after-school activities; overparenting them in concerted cultivation rather than letting them enjoy their childhood.
In 2003, the car manufacturer Nissan, who had for several years courted the "soccer-mom" image, repositioned its Quest
minivan as "stylish, sexy and desirable".

Canada has Hockey moms instead.

Skank has several meanings. But in the present context: "a slang term for a promiscuous person." (? incomplete)

Caveman: an unsophisticated & physically strong man. In movies, will be handsome, hunky with an animal magnetism.
Desirability of same depends on predominant personality traits. (this description, courtesy of Oonjerah)




       

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:27 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


"Hero", did you support TARP?

Do you support farm subsidies?

Do you support the troops?

If you answered "Yes" to any of those questions, then you have no problem at all taking my money to support the lifestyle choices of others.

I mean, really - why should I be forced to pay for lifetime care for some poor slob who made the mistake of joining the military and then got his legs blown off? Why should MY money go to pay for his bad choices? It was his choice, and he doesn't have any real, legitimate *need* for state-of-the-art prosthetics, does he? I mean, pirates did just fine with peg legs, right?

(Oh, and you can't get mad about that, because you support the right to be absurd for absurdity's sake.)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:30 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
I said you quoted it like you agreed with it.

You posted a big long thing from some other girl at Georgetown, and it seemed like you agreed with it, and ONE of the paragraphs was the one I excerpted for you.

So, if indeed you did NOT notice, and do not agree with someone tossing around insults like skank, slut, soccermom, caveman, etc., then take this as a reminder to read more carefully in the future.



Funny, Kwick quoting Breitbart was seen by Rappy as him saying those words himself.

But when the shoe is on the other foot, why, he can't be held responsible for the words he posted!

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"




Yup, and this is, as Rappy will no doubt agree, a coward's way of saying he agrees with this woman. Why else post the entire article without comment, without saying that he disagrees with some of her language, but agrees with her point? And bear in mind that he didn't even give that caveat when it came to Rush and his comments; Rappy said he "fully supported" Rush's comments. Well, he did until Rush caved and apologized, at which point Rap... well, he caved, anyway. ;)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:31 PM

BYTEMITE


Since I've had my say in this discussion already, how's Mass Effect 3?

It's one I want to play, but with all my other obligations it's not gonna happen. ._. So I engage the tried and true method of living vicariously through others.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:02 PM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Since I've had my say in this discussion already, how's Mass Effect 3?

It's one I want to play, but with all my other obligations it's not gonna happen. ._. So I engage the tried and true method of living vicariously through others.


So far so good. I'd tell you more but I'm still waiting for my govt funding.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I agree with Hero." Niki2, 2011.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:41 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Obviously feral children can't/don't teach themselves to read without knowledge of spoken language of the human variety, duh, that is the biggest problem with the Tarzan book. We read it in college and I enjoyed it inspite of this glaring stupidity moment, the rest of it was so cool that I was, surprisingly, able to suspend my disbelief enough to enjoy myself. I didn't think I'd be able to because I was warned of this particular rediculosity before commensing.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:29 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
As so often has been the case before, those on the Left are doing nothing but demagoging the issue, and refusing to deal with the actual events.



I'm a little surprised that with the way Reps look down on single parents and how they are all for Family, they wouldn't me more in favor of paying for contraception - it seems a contradiction. Do they want/expect people to not have sex outside of marriage?




How about being responsible and stop looking to the federal govt to run your life ?

Crazy, I know.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:32 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Since I've had my say in this discussion already, how's Mass Effect 3?

It's one I want to play, but with all my other obligations it's not gonna happen. ._. So I engage the tried and true method of living vicariously through others.


So far so good. I'd tell you more but I'm still waiting for my govt funding.




You mean you want MORE government funding? You're already a leech on the system!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 4:32 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

How about being responsible and stop looking to the federal govt to run your life ?

Crazy, I know.



It's not easy to know where to draw the line on what the gov should reasonably be asked to provide at everyone's cost. In this case, when you consider that the US has reached a new high (or low) in out of wedlock births:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-oc
cur-outside-marriage.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=out%20of%20wedlock%20births&st=cse


For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage

It used to be called illegitimacy. Now it is the new normal. After steadily rising for five decades, the share of children born to unmarried women has crossed a threshold: more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage.

Once largely limited to poor women and minorities, motherhood without marriage has settled deeply into middle America. The fastest growth in the last two decades has occurred among white women in their 20s who have some college education but no four-year degree, according to Child Trends, a Washington research group that analyzed government data." - nytimes

I'd think most pro family people would be tripping over themselves to help.

Or, you can do 1 of 3 things:

1. complain away the situation (Rush = Fail)
2. hope the trends change and people get responsible in the way you want them be (probably not ever going to happen = Fail)
3. require insurance companies to cover female contraception = has a chance

When a women tries to get contraception, isn't she being responsible?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 4:56 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


pizmo...

The view that a 2 parent family is more preferable to a single parent household gets distorted, imo. The statistics bear out, that having a committed 2 parent household is more likely to produce children who stay in school and stay out of trouble. Sure, there are exceptions , but by in large, it's best for the kids to have 2 parents. But saying one is statistically 'better' than another, isn't the same as condemning those who choose to or find themselves in a 1 parent status. Things happen, that's life. But the trend needs to be reversed, and simply stating the facts, regardless as of whose feelings get hurt, doesn't change anything.

I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking, was unmarried, and wanted to have kids. She actually got to the stage of thinking about going it alone, and getting knocked up via in vitro. Glad she didn't. A short while later, she got married, and now has an great family.

And I also know of another girl, who DID go that route. She was financially independent, so going ' Murphy Brown ' wasn't such a bad choice for her. But most women in a similar situation aren't in a position to pull that off, and that's where things become even more stressful.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:32 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking


I can't be sure if that phrase is accurate and I'm an exception, or if it's a bothersome and outdated assessment of female psychology.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:35 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:

I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking


I can't be sure if that phrase is accurate and I'm an exception, or if it's a bothersome and outdated assessment of female psychology.



Oh PLEASE ! You mean you don't think of this scene when that phrase is used ?



Man, that scene is a classic ! Cracks me up, every time.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:41 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
pizmo...

The view that a 2 parent family is more preferable to a single parent household gets distorted, imo. The statistics bear out, that having a committed 2 parent household is more likely to produce children who stay in school and stay out of trouble. Sure, there are exceptions , but by in large, it's best for the kids to have 2 parents.

I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking, was unmarried, and wanted to have kids. She actually got to the stage of thinking about going it alone, and getting knocked up via in vitro. Glad she didn't. A short while later, she got married, and now has an great family.

And I also know of another girl, who DID go that route. She was financially independent, so going ' Murphy Brown ' wasn't such a bad choice for her. But most women in a similar situation aren't in a position to pull that off, and that's where things become even more stressful.




So, yes, that's where I'm coming from - that providing women with contraception will make a bigger dent in the unwanted births and single parent families than not doing it. Agreed, in a high% it's better for the majority to have 2 parent families and not, "oops!" families. We could provide free condoms but you and I both know "not gonna happen." I don't really give a hockey puck who comes up with the best answer, just let's quit flocking around and try the best one we have now.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:43 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:

I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking


I can't be sure if that phrase is accurate and I'm an exception, or if it's a bothersome and outdated assessment of female psychology.



I've always thought of you as exceptional.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:56 - 2076 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:20 - 6156 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Fri, March 29, 2024 06:18 - 57 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Fri, March 29, 2024 02:54 - 3414 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Fri, March 29, 2024 02:49 - 11 posts
Long List of Celebrities that are Still Here
Fri, March 29, 2024 00:00 - 1 posts
China
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:10 - 447 posts
Biden
Thu, March 28, 2024 22:03 - 853 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL