I don't listen to Rush but I did see the testimony. Has anybody done the math? This woman says she spends roughly 3k per year on birth control. Fine How many condoms is that? You can buy a 36 pack at Walgreen's for $27, so that works out to about 4000 condoms. In case you're wondering, accounting for no sex during that time of month, that means an average of 14 romps per day, every day. Assuming four hours per day sleeping, two hours to eat and wash, and four hours actually doing college work at college, that means a romp every hour, not including breaks for entertainment, like movies, texting, parties, visiting family, etc. College sure has changed since I was there. Granted it isn't the pill or any of the other more convenient forms of birth control. But a condom has the extra benefit of helping prevent STD transmission. Since this is a government mandate they should be looking at the most cost effective option. That means a condom.

 

Ah... The oldest form of birth control.

 

I apoligize that I think that's a load of crap!



Oh... BTW... I'm just kidding around... I didn't mean it.... I'm sorry and I sincerely apologize.

I luv you Frank S.

 

Just be glad that I'm not in charge.

I'm just kidding and I apologize if I caused you stress.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/06/in...-announcement/

 

I just finished a bike ride, looks like a good time to CARB up!

Thanks for the tip Frank. (Watch me lose my a.. on this one!!!!!!)

 

Here is just another example of the MSM hypocrisy. Kennedy Jr called a Senator a prostitute and call girl but since he is a liberal, we get nothing but crickets. He also hosts a radio show and writes in the Huffington Post.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...-call-girl-wil

 

I believe if you are a Public figure, you are fair game.

When you do a Google search on Fluke, date range prior to February this year, nothing comes up.
Not a public figure.

Democratic pawn, yes.
Punching bag for Limbaugh, no.

 

yet the least effective...

 

IMO she became a public figure as soon as she testified in front of Congress.

 

Maybe that was Rushs' take too. His advertisers disagree.

 

Not defending Limbaugh because frankly, I think he's a nut, and could not care less if he loses advertising support. However, I don't see that he should get in trouble for calling her what she is. Looks to me that the shoe fits, and she should wear it.

Edit: I wonder if he had called her a sexually active, promiscuous woman, would there have been the same reaction?

 

Thanks, that's exactly why she has a good libel case.
It's comical that Rush apologized for "those two words".

The truth is he railed on this woman for three straight days and none of it was true.
"She's having so much sex she can't afford birth control..."
"Men are lining up, down the block..."
"She has a date tonight with three men..."

I listened to local Talk radio. An elderly woman caller was convinced the Luke woman was having sex three times a day because she heard Rush talk about three men.

We only have two sources of information about this woman.
a) Her testimony before the sub-committee.
b) Limbaugh broadcasts Feb 29- Mar 2.

Read her testimony. It's on the net and it's short.
Then re-read your post and think about how you were able to reach your conclusion.
Then decide if she has a case.

 

Or she could kick them off and resume doing what got her into this fix in the first place!!!

I know Jim, if I can't be productive, butt out!, but I couldn't help myself..... dang, similar to Fluke!!!!

Let's leave ole' Rush alone, he isn't my favorite person. But, after all, what he said isn't, or shouldn't be, a hanging offense!

 

I have no interest in reading it. I should never have posted. I apologize.