Republican Presidential Candidates/US Elections

[VladimirIlyich]

 

Oh hi, Im an American person, its pretty fucking different.

 

For better or worse?

[llego]

For better or worse?

 

Far better man. No comparison. Try living through the Bush years, then come and complain about Obama.

[JER]

Rush Limbaugh's Sandra Fluke slander

 

Limbaugh is unapologetic for calling a female student 'a slut'. But he may change his tune if his radio show sheds advertisers

 

Share 65

reddit this

Comments (468)

 

Sadhbh Walshe

Sadhbh Walshe

guardian.co.uk, Friday 2 March 2012 22.19 GMT

Article history

 

House Democratic Steering Committee Holds Hearing On Women's Health

Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown University, giving testimony on contraception and health insurance during a House hearing on 23 February – for which she was later branded 'a slut' by talk radio shockjock Rush Limbaugh. Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images

 

Rush Limbaugh is finding himself being vilified yet again by the liberal media, and elites in general, over remarks he made about a young college student named Sandra Fluke, who testified before the mock congressional hearing on the White house contraception rule.

 

Fluke, who had been turned away from the official, men-only hearing on the issue of female contraception earlier in the month, spoke mostly about the high cost of contraceptives and their importance to women's health.

Rush Limbaugh byline

 

Limbaugh understood her remarks to mean that not only did she think she could have as much sex as she wanted, with whomever she wanted, without compromising her health or producing a baby, but that she expected honest-to-goodness, God-fearing Americans like him to pick up the tab for it.

 

What does it say about the college coed Susan [sic] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex, she can't afford the contraception; she wants you and me – the taxpayers – to pay her. What does that make us? We're the pimps! The johns! That's right. We would be the John's. No, well, pimp's not the right word. OK, so she's not a slut, she's round-heeled.

 

After hearing Limbaugh's remarks, Fluke clarified that she was not advocating for free contraceptive care coverage for women because she herself was "having so much sex", but was simply making the larger point that contraception is a "vital medical service". Limbaugh's concerns on this issue seemed to be mostly about money – and how much of his money he was going to have to fork out so that young women could have sex with other men. Perhaps, if someone explained to him that once a woman is taking a contraceptive pill, the monthly cost remains the same whether or not they are having sex five times a day or five times a year, he would feel less resentful. One would think that as Limbaugh has had four wives and no children, he would be au fait with these issues.

 

It should be noted, however, that even by current standards of the rich, white, middle-aged men-with-power demographic, Limbaugh has had an unusually challenged relationship with the female community. In fact, he has often come to metaphorical blows in the past with liberals and other alleged elites who think that women should not be called sluts or prostitutes simply because they would like to enjoy a healthy sex life. So far, this challenged relationship has not affected his bottom line: he is still, by some margin, the most listened-to radio host in the country. There is, however, some speculation that he may have gone too far, this time.

 

Already, at least one advertiser, Sleep Train has issued a statement saying it is pulling all its ads from Limbaugh's show. According to Angelo Carusone, who launched the successful StopBeck campaign, which was widely credited with hastening Glenn Beck's departure from Fox, when the network was no longer able to sell ads around his show, several other companies, including Sears and Loews, may also be about to pull their advertising.

 

If this happens on a grand scale, it could spell trouble for Limbaugh, particularly, in the hundred of smaller stations around the country who may be forced to stop carrying his show if they are unable to sell ads during his three-hour broadcast.

 

Limbaugh does not seem bothered by any prospects of future penury, however, nor was he at all contrite after being slapped on the wrist by the country's leading Republican. He came out guns blazing on Friday – not to apologize to Sandra Fluke for calling her "a slut" – but to defend his own battered reputation. That said, on hearing that President Obama has put in a call to Sandra Fluke to offer his support, Limbaugh commented:

 

I'm gonna button my lip on that one.

 

That might be a first.

[VladimirIlyich]

 

Far better man. No comparison. Try living through the Bush years, then come and complain about Obama.

 

In what ways?

 

Ive got no agenda either way here im just looking for opinions from somebody who is experiencing obamas presidency.

 

Thing is that we outsiders are seeing the US involved in the same foreign policy and conflicts that others were involved in.

The tented cities would be there under republican presidents too so thats not just obamas fault but things like universal health care should be a must for a place like the US,especially if many others have it,even the likes of cuba and venezuela have it so america cannot take the high moral ground on that topic,IMO.

[llego]

We're out of Iraq, we're in peace talks with the Taliban, we played a largely supporting role behind a full international coalition in Libya.

 

I don't believe that is the foreign policy of the neocons. That is a far more intelligent application of American power.

 

Notice the right is already calling for airstrikes in Syria and Iran. Obama won't do that.

[VladimirIlyich]

We're out of Iraq, we're in peace talks with the Taliban, we played a largely supporting role behind a full international coalition in Libya.

 

I don't believe that is the foreign policy of the neocons. That is a far more intelligent application of American power.

 

Notice the right is already calling for airstrikes in Syria and Iran. Obama won't do that.

 

I really hope you are right about that.

[Stu Monty]

I don't think that's fair Stu. The fact he's a black man in the white house was a monumental achievement by any standards, I doubt any of these people you talk about 'wanted' him there.

 

Well the people I'm talking about from the banking outfits ran his campaign for him, so I'm certain they wanted him there. The rest, the BP and Halliburton crew, probably didn't care that much as they know he isn't going to change much, he hasn't got the power. The way the gulf spill was dealt with has shown that.

 

We're out of Iraq, we're in peace talks with the Taliban, we played a largely supporting role behind a full international coalition in Libya.

 

I don't believe that is the foreign policy of the neocons. That is a far more intelligent application of American power.

 

Notice the right is already calling for airstrikes in Syria and Iran. Obama won't do that.

 

And Somalia? Pakistan? Yemen?

 

The US are only out of Iraq to the extent that they aren't paying for their own boots on the ground. If you dig out the expenditure then you'll realise that they are still paying billions to private mercanaries over there. The US have done more than anyone to privatise war and this is their legacy. They will pay for the boots on the ground, they'll just be shooting the shit out of everything whilst wearing ray-banns and holding a Blackwater (now Xe) company card, instead of army issue.

 

The change is really not that meaningful.

[Jhinge Machha]

[llego]

Well the people I'm talking about from the banking outfits ran his campaign for him, so I'm certain they wanted him there. The rest, the BP and Halliburton crew, probably didn't care that much as they know he isn't going to change much, he hasn't got the power. The way the gulf spill was dealt with has shown that.

 

 

 

And Somalia? Pakistan? Yemen?

 

The US are only out of Iraq to the extent that they aren't paying for their own boots on the ground. If you dig out the expenditure then you'll realise that they are still paying billions to private mercanaries over there. The US have done more than anyone to privatise war and this is their legacy. They will pay for the boots on the ground, they'll just be shooting the shit out of everything whilst wearing ray-banns and holding a Blackwater (now Xe) company card, instead of army issue.

 

The change is really not that meaningful.

 

Patently untrue. If you think nothing's changed in Iraq I can't help you.

 

As for Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen...

 

I support the drone/special forces policy. It's the most efficient way to keep Al Qaeda in check. Generally it does not cause much civilian death. Far better than the old missile strikes/ air strikes of the 90s. I think it's a smart move.

[Guest ShoePiss]

When Obama took office in Janauary 2009 the U.S lost over 800,000 jobs, last month over 200,000 were created. There has been small incremental improvements domestically. There are signs that the economy has turned a corner, I hope enough to keep him in the Whitehouse because this country needs him there rather than the opposition.

[VladimirIlyich]

Patently untrue. If you think nothing's changed in Iraq I can't help you.

 

As for Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen...

 

I support the drone/special forces policy. It's the most efficient way to keep Al Qaeda in check. Generally it does not cause much civilian death. Far better than the old missile strikes/ air strikes of the 90s. I think it's a smart move.

 

Despite them taking out civillians instead of soldiers?

 

Not much of a choice really is it?

 

[YOUTUBE]9Ah20IAyYxg[/YOUTUBE]

 

I wouldnt trust these goons to operate a drone or any other weapon.

[llego]

If you think there aren't going to be any military efforts against Al Qaeda then you aren't living in reality. There's going to be something. Foreign policy notwithstanding, it's an absolute political necessity domestically in the United States.

 

Drones are by far the least destructive and, in my opinion, most effective tool for this job. For example, I think the Cold War era strategy of heavily arming local proxies to fight against your enemy is far more destructive, especially in the long term. You can trace half the problems in africa to this kind of thing. I'd love to see more surgical tactics like drone strikes eventually replace it.

[G Richards]

Just a small thing, but I want to offer an opinion on the health insurance system over here, as an Englishman. The place where I work has just decided to 'shop the market' for new health insurance, as our current provider, United Healthcare (UHC) has put its prices up 25% since last year.

 

For just my family to have health insurance it will cost just over $20K per annum. I will pay 20% of that and my employer 80% as a benefit to me. I will also pay more on top when I see a doctor, fill a prescription and so on. The medical care itself, when accessed, is fantastic. But it is a fact that the cost for insurance is ridiculous. It makes me miss the NHS. In an ideal world you would have an NHS type system, though more of the GDP would be allocated to it, so it wouldn't be too underfunded and overstretched.

 

Obama's 'signature' policy - trying to sort out the healthcare in this country - has been seriously compromised and watered down. The system here seems set up for gridlock.

 

As for the US Presidential election, I expect Romney to win the Republican nomination and then lose to Obama as the economy continues to turn a corner and more people get back into work.

 

But I don't see things changing a whole lot, as the country is deeply divided between the haves and have nots, and big business buys politicians in a way that would end careers in England, though it is quite acceptable here.

[dennis tooth]

If you think there aren't going to be any military efforts against Al Qaeda then you aren't living in reality. There's going to be something. Foreign policy notwithstanding, it's an absolute political necessity domestically in the United States.

 

Drones are by far the least destructive and, in my opinion, most effective tool for this job. For example, I think the Cold War era strategy of heavily arming local proxies to fight against your enemy is far more destructive, especially in the long term. You can trace half the problems in africa to this kind of thing. I'd love to see more surgical tactics like drone strikes eventually replace it.

 

You are entitled to your opinion but factually incorrect to hold it.

Surgical? Are you insane?

[VladimirIlyich]

Somebody stated that,true or not,(al qaeeda) a name that seems to be given to anybody that disagrees with western policy in the middle east and asia,never committed a single act in the uk or usa,maybe even europe,until the west entered iraq in the early 2000's.

 

Stay away from us and we have no problem with you.

[llego]

 

You are entitled to your opinion but factually incorrect to hold it.

Surgical? Are you insane?

 

Dennis, compare it to the alternatives. My premise is some military action is unavoidable. Arming local militias and strongmen inevitably causes years of war and countless humanitarian crises. Theres no need to discuss the obvious costs of full scale ground invasions. Airstrikes are destructive and not very accurate.

 

Obama is pragmatic and intelligent. In drones and special forces raids he's found the most efficient and least harmful solution.

[llego]

Somebody stated that,true or not,(al qaeeda) a name that seems to be given to anybody that disagrees with western policy in the middle east and asia,never committed a single act in the uk or usa,maybe even europe,until the west entered iraq in the early 2000's.

 

Stay away from us and we have no problem with you.

 

Sorry youre way off my spectrum, theres little point debating if you believe that

[Section_31]

The health system in the states seriously freaks me out. Can the route from the top to the bottom be any steeper than it is in the USA? You could be a high flier living in a Manhattan loft apartment, one diagnosis later and you're living in a caravan.

[VladimirIlyich]

Sorry youre way off my spectrum, theres little point debating if you believe that

 

So because you refuse to see the connection between getting actively involved in the Middle East had no connection to the 2001 bombing,the one and only terrorist attack on US soil by anybody but its own citizens,its not worth debating?

 

And you wonder why the US has problems with its image to the rest of the planet?

[Guest ShoePiss]

The health system in the states seriously freaks me out. Can the route from the top to the bottom be any steeper than it is in the USA? You could be a high flier living in a Manhattan loft apartment, one diagnosis later and you're living in a caravan.

 

And still, after 500 weeks at the top, number 1 in the reasons for bankruptcy chart: "Health Care costs" yeeeeeeeaaaaah!

[llego]

So because you refuse to see the connection between getting actively involved in the Middle East had no connection to the 2001 bombing,the one and only terrorist attack on US soil by anybody but its own citizens,its not worth debating?

 

And you wonder why the US has problems with its image to the rest of the planet?

 

If you're suggesting we had 9/11 coming, then no, I dont want to debate with you.

[Stu Monty]

You know that not debating won't make that fact any less true though, right?

 

There's only so many times you can hit a dog before it bites you. If you're hitting numerous dogs, worldwide, for years, then the odds on the bite shorten dramatically.

[VladimirIlyich]

If you're suggesting we had 9/11 coming, then no, I dont want to debate with you.

 

If you think I mean you deserve it then no,of course you dont deserve it. Same as Iraqi,Afghan,UK citizens dont deserve to be killed because of the sins of their politicians.

 

But because of the US,UK and others meddling in the middle east and especially the unquestioned support of Israel then something was going to happen.

 

You cannot expect to just keep bombing the crap out of a country while killing thousands of its citizens and not expect some kind of response and thats what the US,UK and even Spain have had to deal with in recent years.

 

Drones still kill citizens,700 citizens killed with drones in Pakistan up to 2009,including 168 children makes them a bigger WMD than anything the allies have ever discovered.

[llego]

Right, weve left the realm of meaningful

discussion in my opinion. Of course every event has a myriad causes, etc etc. Thats great. Dont think it has anything to do with what I posted about drones. Also think some of you have serious anti US blinkers on, youre a bit dogmatic at times. Anyway Ill withdraw now.

[Duncan Clench]

And still, after 500 weeks at the top, number 1 in the reasons for bankruptcy chart: "Health Care costs" yeeeeeeeaaaaah!

 

Is that due to people not having insurance and then needing treatment though? I' not saying it's right, but you'd be fucking mental not to have healthcare insurance in any country.

 

In the example given by Mr Richards up there, the cost to him is 4k per year for his family (not including excess of course)... that doesn't strike me as being vastly expensive for good healthcare. Obviously, if you can't afford that then it's incredibly expensive! Fuck knows how much of UK tax goes to the NHS though so difficult to compare. Anyone?

 

Tough one. I honestly think they've got it half right out there... and we've got the other half here. Both are half wrong.

 

Obama FTW.