Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Crabtownboy, Sep 6, 2012.
Did Rush help the Democrats? Did he help Obama?
Sandra Fluke is only a star to those people who believe that the government should be using other people's money to ensure that extramarital and promiscuous sex without consequence (supposedly) is available free of charge to everyone who wants it.
Why am I not surprised to see that you are in that group?
Here is a woman that is 31 years old and wants to force someone else to pay for hers (and others) readily available contraceptives so she can engage in a voluntary activity as old as humanity itself without consequences.
It's no wonder Obama gave her a microphone.
Don't forget they want you to pay for any unintended consequences, the slaughter of the unborn child. All these people need to be considered monsters is a different face. It is like the old movies about aliens who adapt human faces but when unveiled you see how they really look; Monsters!
Are you carrying water for this woman whose name is recognized only because of multi-leveled immortality?
If he carries water for the most vicious advocate of the slaughter of the unborn in public life, Barak Obama, he will carry water for anyone with the democrat label. Why should promiscuity at the governments expense deter him?
What kind of world do we live in, where a woman demanding others pay for her birth control is a "star" of the party.
The Feminist Star? Really?
What about the rights of all those unborn little baby girls who are slaughtered in the womb? Where are their rights?
How about their "reproductive rights" they might have some day?
And Flukes "invasive ultrasound" comment gagged me.
What about the "invasive scissors" plunged into the head of a little unborn girl or having her body ripped and torn and the pain she feels as she is sucked out of the womb bit by bit, piece by piece? What about her "rights?"
What about her life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
Looking at this from a moral standpoint is understandable. However, the OP has nothing to do with morality. It has to do with whether Rush helped Obama by making this woman a well known figure and thereby through his insensitive remarks pushed a fair number of votes into the Obama column.
Are you asking how your reprobate heroine got her status ?
She was invited to testify before a democrat panel, after Boehner refused to hear her, about this subject long before Rush even knew who she was.
Ah yes, the infamous decision not to allow women to testify. That did not help persuade women that Republicans have their interest at heart.
But that is not the topic either. The topic is how many votes, if any, did Rush push into the Obama column with his crude statement. After all without Rush's comment no one, even now, would have heard of her.
Rush did Obama and the Dems a lot more harm by showcasing just how low into the slime the Dems have sunk.
Again, not being taken seriously.
True, I never take you seriously as you never say anything rational on a topic. How about trying to respond to the topic?
How many women swore off voting for a Republican candidate because of Rush's comment?
The first comment is off topic, and inane.
The second statement is not true. She was testifying to democrat congressfolk with a full media contingent, how can you say nobody would know who she was ? I cannot answer a challenge that sets up a false, or supposed premise as settled fact.
Do you hope her stance gets more votes for Obama ?
It does not matter what I hope or do not hope. We are not talking about hopes.
I believe Rush gave Obama a huge present by driving women away from whoever was to run on the GOP ticket.
I do not believe Boehner won any votes for the GOP by not allowing any woman to testify. How can you say we are interested in you and be believed when you will not even allow them to talk?
Now, again the topic is, "Did Rush help or harm the GOP with his statement? What do you thnk ... did Rush help or hurt the GOP.
I doubt it. She didn't mention the name of Rush Limbaugh in her speech. Her fans knew who she was referring to, but the general population doesn't much care or follow political goings on as closely as some would hope.
I would have been surprised if she had mentioned Rush. She didn't need to as just about everyone knew about his comment. She, or her speech writers, were smart enough to know not go mention him and give him any publicity.
I support Boehner's decision to not waste taxpayer money on giving the reprobate heroine time to demand we subsidize her debauchery.
Since Rush got this news off of another conservative source, I would say the damage was done before Rush got a hold of it.
And as far as who wins, after years of not listening to him, this got me to tune into Rush for a while. He still calls people like me "kooks", and that's hard to take.but he is a very funny man. I had to agree with him after listening to him, and I'm sure the glee from the left over this is based on fantasy. I think if people were swayed over this it was towards Romney. Especially since Rush got this news off of another conservative source, I would say the damage was done before Rush got a hold of it.