President Obama calls Sandra Fluke

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Earlier this afternoon, Sandra Fluke received a personal phone call from President Obama, two days after she was called a "slut" on Rush Limbaugh's radio show. Ms Fluke attends the prestigious Georgetown University (a Jesuit school) and its president released earlier today a letter of support for Ms. Fluke, strongly critical of Mr. Limbaugh's comments, calling them "vile and misogynistic." Ms. Fluke broke the news about her call from the President during an interview on Andrea Mitchell's show. Fluke was the woman who was to testify before the Republican House Committee hearing but was denied by Darryl Issa, who instead had an all male panel testify on the subject of birth control and freedom of religion. A week later, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi held a non-binding hearing and asked Ms. Fluke to appear. Rush Limbaugh went on the offensive on his radio show and "...demanded that Fluke release tapes of her having sex in exchange for the contraception that she argued should be covered by employers." Fluke said the President's phone call was completely unexpected and added "What was really personal for me was that he said to tell my parents that they should be proud. And that meant a lot because Rush Limbaugh questioned whether or not my family would be proud of me. So I just appreciated that very much."

Joe Scarborough, a former conservative Republican member of the United States House of Representatives stated in an interview, he's had several conversations with what he described as "fire breathing conservatives" going into panic mode over the recent news cycles painting Republicans as opposed to women's rights and birth control when instead they are allowing President Obama off the hook, and thinks the election will be lost because of the focus on issues that don't matter, and were settled years ago.

It seems that the some in the Republican party are so intent on pushing it more to the right, at the expense of moderate and women voters, the chances of winning the Senate back (Olympia Snowe's retirement all but guarantees that her seat will go to a Democrat), or winning the White House are going to be severely crippled (this has happened already in a key state, Virginia, which has seen a significant movement by independent and women voters from Romney to President Obama because of the forced ultrasound amendment for abortions). While Rush Limbaugh doesn't speak for all conservatives obviously, he is the face for one of the largest audiences in talk radio, and the massive condemnation, he's now receiving should wake him up, or at least give him pause for making such reckless statements

Comments

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Right, which is why his argument is so stupid.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Excellent. And you couldn't have said this long ago instead of saying it effectively was prostitution?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I did in my very first comment on this post (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1368208.html?thread=108810896#t108810896), in fact.

You owe me a few apologies right now.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

What's wrong with that link, specifically? I'm quoting Rush directly, I'm saying Rush was stupid, I'm not endorsing his statement. What are you trying to get away with here?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You originally tried to say his prostitute comments were something misconstrued by the OP

They were. The OP claims Rush was saying it about employers paying for it, when Rush was saying it about taxpayers paying for it. Significant difference.

Then when it's brought to light he actually said it you agree that his comment went to far but you apparently do agree that there is a link between government provided birth control and prostitution.

Incorrect. I never said this. What I said was that, if you wanted to make a slander case out of it, it would become a big problem based on what her true beliefs may be regarding taxpayer funding and such. Not that I myself agree with the argument. Context.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Then that's my error in misinterpreting initially what you had been referring to. A mea culpa on that one.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Well, at least that got sorted out.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Actually you didn't. you said his whole statement was a bit over the top, nothing about the prostitute line in particular. Now, if we all misunderstood your intent in the arguments you were making here then perhaps the problem is not in us but in how you presented your words. The only apology I owe is in somehow not seeing through what you were saying to what you were actually thinking.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Actually you didn't. you said his whole statement was a bit over the top, nothing about the prostitute line in particular

Yes, because the whole thing was over the top. You want me to single out individual lines now, too?

Now, if we all misunderstood your intent in the arguments you were making here then perhaps the problem is not in us but in how you presented your words.

In fact, this is not a misunderstanding of intent but a willful ignoring of what was actually being said. I've linked you to multiple things expressing my point of view clearly which you have, up to this point, ignored. That you continue to do so and continue to misstate my positions knowingly? Yeah, I think I'm right to request an apology for that and your bullshit "rape bias" commentary.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

I'm not knowingly ignoring anything. You did not express your position on this clearly at all. Knowing now what it is I can read back and see that maybe you weren't saying what it appeared to be but that is not at all our fault in not reading in between the lines it is your fault in how you presented it. So no, I am not going to apologize and I'm certainly not going to apologize for feeling you have a rape bias when time and time again in this community you have undermined and diminished the issue of rape concerning women. And no, I do not have time or the inclination to read back through hundreds of posts to find citations. But I will keep any future ones I promise.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'm not knowingly ignoring anything. You did not express your position on this clearly at all. Knowing now what it is I can read back and see that maybe you weren't saying what it appeared to be but that is not at all our fault in not reading in between the lines it is your fault in how you presented it.

It was crystal clear. I'm sorry that you can't/won't see it.

So no, I am not going to apologize and I'm certainly not going to apologize for feeling you have a rape bias when time and time again in this community you have undermined and diminished the issue of rape concerning women. And no, I do not have time or the inclination to read back through hundreds of posts to find citations. But I will keep any future ones I promise.

It's a shame you won't apologize when you were clearly wrong, but I can't push it. It's on you now.

I think you're a good person and all, really, but for the record? That's pretty fucked up what you're saying right there. To make an accusation like that about my supposed "bias" and refuse to back it up is sick and wrong.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

OK. I apologize for minsunderstanding you. But you really were not being crystal clear in your statements no matter what you think. Really.

I am not going to apologize for feeling you have a bias against rape when this is an opinion I formed over many many posts on the subject. I am going to ask that you not make me go back and read through dozens of rape posts at this very moment to show you how I formed that opinion. I just do not have the mental energy or strength to do so at this particular time. Especially today. You have no way of knowing why but please respect and believe me when I say that right now is not a good time for me to be looking at rape posts or even discussing rape. I do promise though to do so eventually and show you exactly what formed this opinion of mine, as well as point out any future incidences where the issue comes up.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here, but you should consider retracting such a terrible thing to say about someone until you're ready and able to support it.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Rush should stick to parody and radio showmanship, his strong suits.

I don't like criticizing him over his drug use, probably one of the few things I wouldn't mind about him if I knew him, but for him to tell that woman to exercise more self control is sheer hypocrisy.

I wonder if he realizes its stupid, but likes the red meat = ratings aspect of it all.

[oslo.livejournal.com]

... but, according to you, good enough to defeat a slander claim. Which is wrong.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Which you believe is wrong, yes. A reasonable disagreement.

[oslo.livejournal.com]

Well, look. Other people have asked you to explain how this argument could be made in any slander case, but you've refused to do so - "It's someone else's argument." But it's not. It's a necessary argument for your own argument, which is, "Limbaugh could defend a slander case by making this argument." That requires the "oral contraceptives financed by the state = prostitution" claim to be sufficiently factual and supported by evidence to survive dismissal and summary judgment and to be sufficiently reasonable that a jury would be legally permitted to reach that conclusion. But it's just not any of these things, and you haven't explained why it is.