Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Georgetown stands by Fluke
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-fluke-vs-limbaugh-for-civilitys-sake/?iref=allsearch&hpt=hp_c2
Monday, March 5, 2012 10:56 AM
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/index.html?hpt=hp_c2 about sums it up, for me, and Point Four sums up Raptor.
Monday, March 5, 2012 11:04 AM
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.
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Monday, March 5, 2012 11:10 AM
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
Monday, March 5, 2012 11:44 AM
Quote:...over 100 professors and staff members at Georgetown University Law Center signed a letter supporting Fluke
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/
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.
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.
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.
Monday, March 5, 2012 12:01 PM
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.
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
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.
Monday, March 5, 2012 12:10 PM
BYTEMITE
Monday, March 5, 2012 12:17 PM
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.
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.)
Monday, March 5, 2012 12:41 PM
Monday, March 5, 2012 1:02 PM
Monday, March 5, 2012 1:38 PM
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.
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.
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.
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)
Monday, March 5, 2012 5:30 PM
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.
Quote: On this point, we both agree.
Monday, March 5, 2012 7:02 PM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:Originally posted by Bytemite: In short, what the HELL, guys?
Monday, March 5, 2012 8:09 PM
RIONAEIRE
Beir bua agus beannacht
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 4:25 AM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:04 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:50 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Bytemite: In the later part of the book. In the early parts it's ape grunting city.
Quote:He also eventually chooses to forsake civilization and go back to a more primitive lifestyle. Including loincloth and raw meat, killed by himself.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:00 AM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:12 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:26 AM
Quote:To paraphrase Niki, I see this has degenerated into the usual Niki-vs-Rappy tit-for-tat nonsense...
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:31 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:47 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:55 AM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:39 AM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:02 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:07 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:25 AM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:57 AM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 10:19 AM
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.”
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 12:41 PM
OONJERAH
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:27 PM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:30 PM
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!"
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:31 PM
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 6:02 PM
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.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:41 PM
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:29 AM
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?
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 2:32 AM
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.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 4:32 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: How about being responsible and stop looking to the federal govt to run your life ? Crazy, I know.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 4:56 AM
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:32 AM
Quote:I knew a girl whose biological clock was ticking
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:35 AM
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.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:41 AM
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.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 5:43 AM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL