Liberals Exemplify Tolerance and Respect for Women

March 9, 2012 · By Bob Ellis · 24 Comments

Since the self-righteous and ever-tolerant Left went ballistic over the fact that Rush Limbaugh called a woman who publicly testified that she was having so much sex that it costs $1,000 a year to pay for her contraceptives a slut, we’ve shared a montage or two of some of the liberal “tolerance” and “respect for women” that goes on out there. But as time allows for more research, longer and more informative documentaries are being made available.

This is one which features more examples of liberal “tolerance” and “respect for women,” especially from Bill Maher, the man who contributed a million dollars to Barack Obama and whom Obama is quite fond of.

Keep this information in mind when you see the crocodile tears from the Left because Rush Limbaugh called a woman who publicly professed to be having so much sex that it costs $1,000 a year in contraception to rescue her from the natural consequences of sexual relations, and who demanded that the religious freedom of others be sacrificed on the altar of her sexual satisfaction.

Also keep it in mind during this election season, and let it guide you in who to vote for.

And every time they open their lying, hypocritical mouths.

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Bob Ellis has been the owner of Dakota Voice, LLC since 2005. He is a 10-year veteran of the United States Air Force, a public writer for the past decade, and has been involved in numerous election and public policy campaigns for nearly 20 years, including a Tea Party leader and organizer since 2009. He lives in Rapid City, South Dakota with his wife and two children.

Bob Ellis

View all articles by Bob Ellis
Bobs website

If you enjoyed this article, please consider leaving a comment below (subject to the comment guidelines listed at the bottom of the article), sharing it to Facebook or Twitter or another social media site, subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader, or have a daily digest of the latest American Clarion articles delivered to your email inbox each morning..

Common Sense

Bob - just came across your page, and can you please cite where her testimony states that she wanted someone else to pay for birth control for her sexual activities? She said said that one of her friends needed contraceptive pills due to cysts growing on her ovaries. That’s it.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, Rush Limbaugh deliberately lied about what she said and made completely reprehensible comments. It is irrelevant as to what she said it costs, it is irrelevant that she was testifying before congress. It is irrelevant if you actually think she’s part of a grand Obama/Democratic conspiracy. He has the number one radio show by far and given his influence in the political debates of today, I would argue, he has a responsibility to make his arguments without the vitriol of Ahmedinajad

There was no apology. An apology would also include “She did not mention that she wanted to use birth control for sex, she was relating a story that a friend of hers needed contraceptive bills to stop ovarian cysts. It was also classless and unforgivable remark to say she should broadcast her sexual activities on the internet in return for us paying for her birth control.

“I do not agree with paying for contraception as part of insurance or a government plan, but I unreservedly apologize to Miss Flake for my disgraceful comments.”

As for the left, I was quite happy to see Bill Maher lose his network TV show when he said that US soldiers were cowards when bombing Serbs after the advertisers left his show in droves. Free market at its best in action. Glad to see it working again with Rush’s show. Furthermore, I have no interest in subscribing to HBO when he is on the network. If you don’t like Bill Maher, should you reconsider subscribing to HBO? I was also glad to see Ed Schultz, whoever he is, unreservedly apologize to Laura Ingram after his slut comments.

At the end of the day, it is irrelevant to scream hypocrisy because the “left” has done it too. That’s not an argument. It’s something I expect to hear from 3rd graders. He was wrong, he should take the high road, be the bigger man, and admit it with a real apology.

For those of you who are parents, do you have daughters? If they wanted to testify before congress on an issue they found important, do you believe it’s appropriate for someone to misrepresent their position and then charge them as whores and sluts?

It’s just not right.

http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

Fluke demanded that Georgetown University include contraceptives in their health coverage. Simple logic indicates that if she was paying for them herself, she wouldn’t be asking someone else to provide those goods and services to her. Therefore, someone else is paying for them. Who might that be? Could it be other participants in the plan-perhaps participants who consider such goods and services morally objectionable? Could it be that the Catholic university would have to eat part or all of the cost-despite the fact that they object to these goods and services morally? Pretty simple, isn’t it?

Rush Limbaugh did not lie about her in any way, shape form, or fashion. She indicated that she and her fellow law students were having so much sex that it would take $1,000 a year to rescue her from the natural consequences of having sexual intercourse. As multiple investigations have pointed out, a normal person can obtain a year’s worth of contraceptives for far, far less than $1,000 a year. Therefore, it would seem that she and her fellow law students are having a tremendous amount of sex. Now, while the term “slut” is rather crude and not one I would have chosen, I think most adult human beings can easily recognize that such a term is applicable to a promiscuous person. Again, pretty simple.

What is irrelevant was her entire testimony. It is unconstitutional and unconscionable to force other people to violate their conscience to provide things to other people that they should be providing for themselves if they so desire.

Any apologies should be coming from Sandra Fluke and Barack Obama for holding the religious freedom (and freedom in general) of the American people in such complete contempt.

It is also completely relevant and warranted to openly identify the hypocrisy of the Left when, as I have pointed out many times, (a) Limbaugh aptly if crudely described Sandra Fluke’s publicly admitted sexual behavior and was attacked for it, while (b) the Left uses childish and obscene terms that have no relevant applicability to their subjects, other than serving as a convenient vehicle for liberal incoherent hatred.

Finally, if my daughter went before congress and testified that she and her friends were having so much sex that they needed about 10 times as much contraceptives as a normal person, and that other people should be forced to violate their religious freedom in order to provide contraceptives to her, I would be very saddened and shamed indeed…but anyone who called her a slut in response to such behavior would be so on-target that, unless I wanted to play the hypocrite, there would be nothing I could rationally say in opposition.

Common Sense

Again, she did not make any comment about having so much sex that they needed contraception. She made a point that some people take contraception for non-sex related, legitimate medical issues. Rush lied in saying that it was for having sex.

Do you understand how birth control contraception works? It doesn’t matter if you have sex once or 1000 times in a month, you take the same number of pills - once per day over a month.

You could not tell from her testimony if she was having sex with everyone on campus or if she was a virgin. She did not “indicate” that she was having sex one way or the other. Prove me wrong. Prove it from her testimony.

http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

Are you really that dense? Is this an act, or are you just a liberal propaganda artist masquerading as a rational person?

Sandra Fluke testified that it costs $1,000 a year to pay for contraception. Since she was testifying, it is reasonable to assume she has a stake in the issue, therefore it is reasonable to conclude that she is shelling out $1,000 for contraceptives annually; after all, how many people go to congress to testify about something in which they have no stake whatsoever? She also said fellow law school students were also shelling out $1,000 for contraceptives annually, so it is reasonable to conclude that the fellow law students to whom she referred are also having so much sex that they need $1,000 a year worth of contraceptives to escape the natural consequences of sexual intercourse. Keep in mind that multiple investigative reports have found that contraceptives can be obtained by most people for around $100 a year, so anyone who is shelling out $1,000 a year for contraceptives must be having about 10 times the sex as a normal person.

Do you understand math? I realize you are probably a graduate of our pathetic public education system and probably know more about how to put a condom on a banana than most foundational academic subjects, but certainly even you can figure out that quiz.

So once again we are back to the rational conclusion that this woman and her fellow students are having a whole lot of sex, thus Limbaugh’s remark that she may in fact be a “slut.”

Common Sense

What education system left you with a profound lack of understanding of biology? And no, I did not attend a public school. Where did you go?

Just because you are taking birth control does not automatically imply that you are a slut. It doesn’t matter if you have sex once per month or you work in the pornography industry, you take the same number of pills. She did not make one reference to her own sexual practices, and she made reference to a friend who had a legitimate need for contraceptive medicine for a condition (Ovarian cysts) that is not recreational sex related.

Do you understand these points? You actually can have legitimate medical reasons to take birth control pills without having sex with everyone in town. You actually can have legitimate medical reasons to take birth control without having sex AT ALL.

I understand math fine - do you understand that birth control pills are not like condoms or viagra? If you have sex one time or 10x as much as a normal person, you take the same number of pills. Does that make sense to you? If you don’t understand that, I feel sorry for you.
http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

Did I or anyone say that because someone takes contraceptives they are a slut? No, no one did. You really have comprehension problems, don’t you? Go back and read what I said again, and yet another time if you need to. I’ve only made this clear three or four times on this page so far.

Maybe liberals are stupid enough to believe that people should be deprived of their religious freedom because a few people have a legitimate medicinal use for birth control pills (while the vast majority just want someone else to give them a free pass from sexual responsibility), but most of us aren’t that dense.

If you go back and read the transcript of Ms. Fluke’s testimony, you’ll notice that she talked about “contraception.” Are you aware that contraception takes many forms (the pill, condoms, patches, implants, IUD, etc)? She didn’t say what form of contraception is costing her and her fellow students $1,000 a year, but since one can obtain a year’s worth of oral contraceptives for a little more than $100 just 3 miles from Georgetown University, she must be talking about some other form of contraception. Or was she just lying to congress (a criminal offense) in order to convince them that it is right and proper to rob another person of their religious freedom in order to pay for things she wants?

Do you understand these points? Or am I wasting my time talking to a liberal fence post who isn’t interested in truth, freedom or reality?

I suspect I am.
Common Sense

If she is talking about contraceptive medicine to manage medical issues, it is not going to be condoms, patches, IUDs or implants - she was CLEARLY talking about birth control pills to manage medical conditions. How are any of these other method supposed to reduce the risks of cysts on ovaries? In fact, I’m not aware of health insurance that reimburses people for condoms - only contraception that requires a prescriptions.

When you say “Now, while the term “slut” is rather crude and not one I would have chosen, I think most adult human beings can easily recognize that such a term is applicable to a promiscuous person. Again, pretty simple.”

Again, she made no reference to her sexual history You are the one jumping to conclusions that she must be having ten times as much as sex as the normal person. I don’t understand how you get to that conclusion, even if Rush said it.

The point is not whether people are being deprived of their religious freedom - but Rush did a wonderful job changing the argument from whether religious institutions should or should not provide contraceptive coverage to questions as to whether Republicans candidates are brave enough to stand up to Rush Limbaugh

Now Obama has played Rush Limbaugh like a sucker, and it’s going to turn off millions of women who otherwise would have voted for the republican candidate.
http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

As I’ve said several times now, she was attempting to use an exception to forge a new rule..and I have my doubts about this invisible “friend” as well. If this “friend” was real, why wasn’t she there testifying?

Further, obviously, having contraception was important to the single and unafflicted Ms. Fluke. No one just goes to congress to testify on behalf of other people unless they have a pretty deep stake in the issue.

Did you know she deliberately chose to go to Georgetown because she belonged to a feminist organization that has an agenda of forcing others to provide contraception to people whether that violates their religious freedom or not? She went cruising for “trouble,” and, of course, she found it (since she knew ahead of time that Georgetown didn’t provide contraceptive coverage). She’s an activist fascist, nothing more.

I’ve come to the conclusion that you’re nothing but a liberal troll, cruising around trying to make reality fit your distorted and deviant idea of what reality should be. I’ve done my very best to try to educate and inform you, but like the horse that’s led to water, you refuse to drink of the fountain of truth. Your propaganda will no longer be accepted here. Go enjoy your fantasy world while you can, because there will come a day when the piper must be paid, and you’re going to have a Devil of a time paying the bill.
WXRGina

Boy-howdee! You leftists are pretty desperate to do away with our God-given right to freedom of conscience, religion and speech, aren’t you?

You’re out here running yourself crazy trying to “justify” that girl Fluke’s bogus “testimony” before a bogus congressional “hearing.”

You guys should realize that right-thinking Americans see right through your paper-thin bunk.

Common Sense

Here’s a transcript of the testimony if you’d like to parse each word.

http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

Yes, I’ve read and heard her statement many times. In fact, I have reiterated key portions of her statment back to you, but in a fashion reminiscent of the typical liberal mind, you seem to be unwilling or unable to come to terms with the obvious conclusions about what she said. Maybe you need to go back and ponder it much longer. Maybe comprehension is it your strong suit.
bbf

Considering the state of the US..with the unemployment still high, the value of homes..still decreasing by the thousands, the incredible high cost of food, paper products, gasoline…the total messes in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen and Somali…the
deficit and congressional gridlock, where does President Obama have the time on
his schedule to chat with law students about imaginary crises?

As Andy Martin says:

We know Obama has
always fancied himself (in his own imagination) as a tenured law professor when
he was a contract lecturer at the
University of
Chicago. Let’s send him back to his
chosen profession. I for one feel the president should be given an extended
period of time and fuller opportunity to chat with Ms. Fluke, after January,
2013, when the president is out of office and has even more time on his
hands.

retiredday

“Common Sense” is fine quality to have, and I’m glad you identify with it in some way, but that’s a matter of opinion. And you certainly are free to have yours. The difficulty I have with your response is that while you glibly call Limbaugh’s comments “reprehensible” and characterize them as lies, your perspective doesn’t allow you to see the bigger picture, which is that those on the Left are more apt to forgive their own than anyone who can be identified as conservative. So when someone on the right makes an offensive gaff, the Left goes wild, in feigned indignity. That’s because the meaning of words is less important to them than who is speaking. The Left sees itself as noble but considers the Right undeserving of the most basic respect.

Also, there are a lot of younger people now to whom “slut” is actually a complementary word. Some young girls now aspire to be “sluts”. They’re probably scratching their heads, wondering what this big stir is all about. I’m not saying that’s good. But Liberals are more likely to adjust word meanings to suit the circumstances. If one of their own had said the same thing, I doubt if the lame stream media would even had reported it. And if you had more of the common sense you identify with, perhaps you might see that the Left’s concern for civil and dignified discourse is a big pretense. It’s bogus. Phony. It’s the Left who is lying… mainly to themselves.

Common Sense

I’m actually a registered republican.

Sandra Fluke would have been a footnote in unofficial congressional testimony if Rush hadn’t made up crap about how she was having sex with everyone on campus and wanting everyone else to pay for it. He (and by association Republican candidates) look even more out of touch with younger voters when he doesn’t appear to understand how contraception works. Now we have the entire argument over whether there should be a conscience clause for contraceptives turning into a firestorm over whether republican candidates have the guts to stand up to Iran if they can’t point out something that these are clearly disgraceful comments. Perhaps to a lesser extent, the evangelical community is going to be less likely to get behind a republican candidate that can’t stand up for some common decency. They certainly won’t vote for Obama, but they are more likely to stay home on Election Day.

Romney needed to have a ‘Sister Soulja’ moment, like Bill Clinton did when he stood up to Jesse Jackson.

http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

In an age when it looks like Mitt “RomneyCare” Romney may end up being the GOP presidential nominee, calling one’s self “Republican” doesn’t mean squat anymore.

Further, as I already laid out on a silver platter for you, Sandra Fluke testified to the world in public that she was having so much sex that she and her fellow law school students were having so much sex as to need $1,000 a year in contraceptives (when normal people only need to spend a little over $100 a year).

As I am forced to ask myself so often regarding liberals (regardless of what you call yourself), I am once again forced to ask myself, “Are liberals really this stupid, or do they just think the rest of us are?”

I admit that I am never sure, for there is generous evidence for both.

If you’re looking for a Republican candidate who can stand up for some common decency, don’t look to Mitt “RomneyCare” Romney. His RomneyCare scheme tramples the same religious liberties ObamaCare does. Further, it provides for abortion (under no rational definition is the slaughter of innocent human life considered “decent”). He also laid out the red carpet to facilitate the counterfeiting of marriage by homosexual activists in Massachusetts.

If you’re looking for decency, Romney is about as far away as it gets in the GOP presidential field.

Common Sense

Sorry, some girls aspire to be sluts? Where do you get this information? Maybe in rap videos and in the world of pornography, but I’m reasonably sure that 99% of American women don’t want that.
The big problem is that this issue is alienating the middle - not the “left” and the “right” - they both sound like 3rd graders. Believe it or not, there are more of those people out there than the Rush and Bill Mahers of the world.

WXRGina

Perhaps he is talking about the “ladies” who proudly declare themselves to be sluts:
http://slutwalk.net/?p=1

retiredday

“Where do you get this information?”

Perhaps your eyes aren’t open to the new culture all around you. Registered Republicans take note: Just how effective has that political party been in upholding real conservative values? How can anyone call a “lesser evil” a virtue? Mr “Common Sense” may well be a registered Republican. If so, he is part of the problem, not part of the solution. So far, all I see coming from “Common Sense” is spin, spin, spin. All one needs to do to neutralize one’s enemies is keep them confused.

If you don’t want to be confused, just learn the facts. You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. John 8:32

Common Sense

Talk about spin, where did Rush tell the truth here? Was it when:

1) he claimed that she wanted people to pay for her recreational sexual activities by subsidizing birth control - No, she never mentioned that.

2) he claimed that she needed to take birth control pills because she wanted to have sex? No, she said a friend of hers had ovarian cysts.and needed birth control pills to stop the cysts. I’m not a doctor, but that sounds like a medical condition to me - not a “I want to have as much sex as possible.”

What facts are you referencing? What “lesser evil” are you talking about? Just because Rush said it, doesn’t make it true.

http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

You are incredibly dense. I’ve already explained this in details that a child could understand, yet it flies over your head at Mach 3. Perhaps that is because you find the truth inconvenient to your Leftist worldview.

Sandra Fluke did indeed want others to pay for her recreational activities by subsidizing contraception-at the expense of the religious freedom of others, I might add. That was the entire point and purpose of the dog and pony show on Capitol Hill. Again, liberals might be stupid enough to believe otherwise, but the rest of us see right through it.

Yes, she claimed a “friend” needed birth control pills for a legitimate medical ailment. But liberals are very good at two things: (1) lying through their teeth, and (2) using an exception to force an outlandish new rule. One or both of these was at play here.

Did you know any woman could obtain oral contraceptives within 3 miles of Georgetown University without for about $100 a year (that’s about $9 a month, since you seem to be academically challenged) without insurance? If you didn’t know this, you are woefully uninformed and have swallowed yet another liberal lie hook, line and sinker. If you did and pretended not to know, well, you’re just what we’re used to from the Left.

Sorry, there simply are no justifications for (a) forcing another person to pay for what a person should be paying for themselves, and (b) robbing a person of their religious freedom in order to force them to pay for things a person should be paying for themselves. You liberals may love tyranny, but patriotic Americans loathe it. It’s why we started our own country 235 years ago, and we aren’t about to surrender it to a fresh set of tyrants.
http://www.dakotavoice.com dr. theo

CS, I am a doctor and I worked in a Catholic hospital for 16 years (in the ER), treating hundreds of employees for things like ovarian cysts, endometriosis and dysmennorrhea
with what are called birth control pills. In every case their prescriptions were filled (in many cases in the hospital pharmacy) with no insurance problems.

Doctors and insurance companies and faith-based institutions know that combinations of estrogens and progesterones can be used to treat medical conditions, even though contraception vastly these uses.

Ms. Flukes testimony is very suspect to me. That the woman she referenced had a legitimate medical need for these drugs, she would have gotten them-covered by insurance.

Actually, Fluke later says that this person’s medicine was “technically” covered by Georgetown insurance, but objects that the university and insurance authorities have to approve it. A maudlin tale begins when her “friend” is denied coverage and allegedly has an ovary removed. Fluke then tells us of the horrors of early menopause that this woman now suffers. Well, removing one ovary does not induce menopause. The other ca compensate nicely in most cases. In the unusual event that it doesn’t hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is available and would certainly be covered by her insurance.

There are lies of commission and lies of omission; I believe Ms. Flukes committed both in relating this sob story.

She also said another couple had given up using contraception entirely because they “couldn’t fit it in their budget.” Now, who believes that?

But Fluke saved the most amazing story for n ear the end of her “testimony.” She said, “One student told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered, and she assumed that’s how
Georgetown’s insurance handled all of women’s sexual healthcare, so when she
was raped, she didn’t go to the doctor even to be examined or tested for sexually
transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn’t going to cover
something like that.” Come on, Sandra, a Georgetown law student? Can we believe anything this woman said? I don’t think so. She is very fortunate that she was not allowed to testify before Congress under oath.

http://www.dakotavoice.com dr. theo

I quit reading the transcript too soon. After the rape story I thought it couldn’t get any sillier, but I was wrong:
“One woman told us
doctors believe she has endometriosis, but it can’t be proven without surgery, so
the insurance hasn’t been willing to cover her medication. Recently, another friend
of mine told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome. She’s struggling to
pay for her medication and is terrified to not have access to it. Due to the barriers
erected by Georgetown’s policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medication
since last August.

With modern imaging and other diagnostics it is not true that endometriosis can only be established by surgical biopsy. It just is not true.

There are many treatments for polycystic ovarian syndrome of which birth control pills are sometimes included. Instead of BCP some prefer to treat with progesterone during part of the month since it works as well or better with fewer side effects. I’d like to ask Ms. Flukes whether this woman’s aldactone, metformin and eflornithine were paid during this time?

This woman is not to be believed. I don’t know if she is a slut or prostitute, but I do know she is a liar.
http://www.americanclarion.com/ Bob Ellis

Thank you for your expert testimony on this subject, Dr. Theo. Though many of us recognize the smell of “Barbara Streisand” when we encounter it, your trained and experienced “nose” helps you zero in on it with indicting certainty.

thisoldspouse

Just an example from Sandra Fluke’s opening statement:

I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide
contraceptive coverage in its student health plan, and just as we students have
faced financial, emotional and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously
affiliated hospitals and institutions and universities across the country have
suffered similar burdens. We are all
grateful for the new regulation that will meet the critical healthcare needs of
so many women.

Sounds a lot like she is including herself in the “we.”

Deplorable Injustice Continues for Lt. Michael Behenna

Gina Miller

Last Thursday, yet another example of the corrupt attempts at appeasement of our enemies within and without was displayed in the rotten-to-the-core decision by three of a five-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to uphold the insanely unjust conviction of 1st Lt. Michael Behenna for unpremeditated murder of a known al Qaeda operative who was suspected of orchestrating a bombing that injured and killed members of Lt. Behenna’s platoon.

Be the first to comment on this story

I Asked Him What to Do With the Peanut

William J. Federer

Born a slave around JULY 12, 1864, George Washington Carver became a scientist of international renown. On January 21, 1921, Carver addressed the United States House Ways and Means Committee on behalf of the United Peanut Growers Association on the use of peanuts to improve Southern economy. Initially given ten minutes to speak, the committee was so captivated, his time was extended.

Be the first to comment on this story

Where Will Canadians Go for Health Care After ObamaCare?

Bob Ellis

If not for our own sake, at least for the Canadians' sake we must repeal this abomination to liberty known as ObamaCare. After all, if we behave like total morons and follow them down the path of socialism, they will have nowhere to flee to for decent health care.

Be the first to comment on this story

President Obama, giving the State of the Union Address, 2010 (White House Photo)

The Political Intimidation of the Court

Guest Author

We think of the 9 robed Justices of the Supreme Court as beyond intimidation. However, we now know this is false. The bizarre decision of Chief Justice Roberts to uphold Obamacare by making it Obamatax is not the first time that a Supreme court Justice has succumbed to intimidation and voted to usurp the Constitution, believing it was necessary to preserve either the Supreme Court or their own personal legacy.

Be the first to comment on this story

Follow the Money…To Environmental Extremists

Guest Author

Environmentalists are always predictably outraged at the money spent by energy companies in politics, claiming the philistine big oil interest is buying and bullying its way into a political advantage. But if liberals claim that this big oil money is buying political outcomes and muzzling environmentalists with an average of $12.5 million a year, how much political clout do they think $100 million dollars a year from their own coffers will buy?

Be the first to comment on this story

National

Liberals Exemplify Tolerance and Respect for Women

Similar Posts:

Featured Articles

Deplorable Injustice Continues for Lt. Michael Behenna

I Asked Him What to Do With the Peanut

Where Will Canadians Go for Health Care After ObamaCare?

The Political Intimidation of the Court

Follow the Money…To Environmental Extremists

Archives

Other News

Other Commentary

Featured Blogs

Like American Clarion