I don't think Rush Limbaugh cares about her, nor does he have any insight into her sex life. If he disagreed with her he should've explained his view eloquently like you just did. The fact that he chose calling her a slut only shows that he doesn't have a good argument against her case, and that civil communication is not his thing, which is a pitty really.

Thank you, Solaire. But he's Rush Limbaugh - he does have an argument and he BLARES it.

CocoPeaches,

I am sorry but your information is wrong.  Sandra Fluke was testifying about the need for health insurance PAID for by employers and employees to cover contraception.   The inquiry was solely about that.  There was no inquiry into whether government provided health care would cover such costs.  I do not know where people are getting this from!

This stemmed from the rucus raised by the Catholic Church in providing its EMPLOYEES with insurance coverage that included contraception - which is against it beliefs.  

I am not knocking you exclusively CocoPeaches, but based upon the posts/comments I've read/heard here and elsewhere, at least 90% of the people commenting on this issue do not understand the facts/story behind it and are assuming a whole lot of information.

Thank you HadesMoon, there's no need to apologize :) I thought Flukes testimony was about health insurance provided by her university... Anyway, my point is, birth control is available for people who can't afford it (and therefore cannot afford to support a child - a condition in which a pregnancy would result in an even greater financial burden on society). So why should private institutions be required to provide it for their beneficiaries if it's not a basic need and it may contradict their moral doctrine? I surely think it would be a kind and wise decision for employers to provide that level of health insurance by their own jurisdiction, but making it an obligatory free-for-all will likely do more harm than good because it detracts accountability from the citizen. And I don't think the Catholic church was trying to pay for it, but they could be forced to do so by a government mandate.

I was just reading about this, and talking about it with friends yesterday. I have little that could be called nice, or supportive to say about Rush Limbaugh. And stating that she should have sex on line publicly makes me question if he's still on drugs.

Regarding birth control being covered by my insurance which I pay the premiums for, I don't see why not, as it's my money that's paying the insurer to provide me with a service, and my body I'm caring for responsibly. If I could not pay for the contraception, then yes, I do think I should have access to free, healthy, safe options. If it comes down to cost, an unwanted child is much more expensive over time imo. My 6th house Pluto, and 8th house Sag also sees a dark side to religion being involved in healthcare that covers everyone, not just people of religious backrounds.

I read that he did publicly apologize once his sponsors started backing out with their money in hand. The comments I'm finding online are questioning who is the slut in this scenario, with some dark humor.

He can say what he likes, as can Sandra Fluke, but when it's said publicly, the public will likely give just an honest reply in return.

I have one Aries ruling my chart, and it opposes part of my own stellium in Libra. ; )

Planned Parenthood is another program bean counters are going after.  I just think, WHY?  If they don't want to provide entitlement programs, it makes sense to provide birth control. It's not practical to limit it even more..

Investors flee Carbonite after Limbaugh announcement

I am very interested in the business end of this. As I understand it, conservatives outnumber liberals 2-1 so when you placate one group, you piss off another that is twice as large.

Very tricky doing business with people so polarized.

I'm not sure this will piss them off though Elsa.  My area is really conservative and 98% republican.

In the lunchroom yesterday everyone was disgusted by his comments.  I was kind of surprised by their opinions, to be honest.

And he is very disliked, even by the advertisers conservative demographic.  I think keeping him around for possible revenue from the people who tune in to hear his provocation just got unprofitable.

I am not sure either. I am going to watch this because this stuff is interesting me.   It's a story now, I'm going to track it like various other things that catch my attention.

The CO senator that killed the pregnant woman. The sheriff busted and sent to the jail that bears his name. Fallout from this to all parties. 

This is a story to me, like when Coke changed their formula to taste more like Pepsi and people went crazy. I studied that too.

I dunno. Some things just catch my attention. I am not invested in the outcome. I just want to witness the story because I think there will be things that can be gleaned.

Regarding the double standard, I often read Ms. Magazine, and there are plenty of women who continually protest the degradation of women by entertainers, advertisers, etc. It's just that it doesn't always get attention, or people don't think it's newsworthy, so it doesn't get in the news.

I think this was a breaking point for many because of the incidents of the past month. In early February was the Susan G Komen/Planned Parenthood issue, which, whether or not you agree with what happened, got people's attention. Then, the "women should just put an aspirin between their knees" comment by Rick Santorum's friend. Then, the transvaginal ultrasound law in Virginia. And now, this. Reproductive issues have been on our radar, so people who were offended by what Rush said were ready to attack.

Also, Rush has been on the radio for over 20 years and has said many incendiary things, pissing off a lot of people. When the perfect storm came, not many were willing to come to his defense. Patricia Heaton tried to defend him on Twitter, then wound up apologizing. Even the president of Georgetown--one you would think agrees with Rush's point of view--issued a statement denouncing the attacks as over the line.

I live in California, so the "there are 2 conservatives for every liberal" stat is new to me. Perhaps what we are finding is that not everyone who identifies as a conservative feels the same way about reproductive issues. There are such things as pro-choice Republicans. And, having grown up Catholic, I can tell you that the majority of practicing Catholics do not follow humana vitae to the letter (ie, they have used some form of birth control, for medical or contraceptive purposes).

And another thing about the Rush Limbaugh comments...it wasn't that he just called Sandra Fluke a slut and then turned to another topic. If you've heard the audio, he went at length about it over several days. He also called her a prostitute, he said she should make a porn tape, he said her parents should be ashamed and embarrassed. But here's my favorite: "She's having so much sex that the government has to pay for her birth control!" This demonstrates that he has absolutely no clue as to how oral contraceptives even work! You take one pill every day, regardless of whether you have sex once a day or once a week or not at all. He has a right to express his opinion, but in doing so, he continually reveals how little he even understands about the subject. Perhaps that plays well for a segment of his audience, but for those of us who have grown up around powerful, educated women, people like Rush Limbaugh are getting closer and closer to being relics from the past.

http://www.astrodispatch.com/2012/03/07/sandra-fluke%E2%80%99s-polarizing-aspects-in-cardinal-opposition/

I agree with Robert. She's not going to be able to cope. Never mind, Uranus and Pluto are coming.

Since I was seeing conflicting accounts of her testimony, I located it to read for myself:

http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/02/23/transcript-sandra-fluke-testifies-on-why-women-should-be-allowed-access-to-contraception-and-reproductive-health-care/

It has three main points:

1. The first part discusses how women need contraception and how expensive it is for female students. It's clear she's discussing contraception as contraception, and not contraception as hormone medication for other ailments.

2. The second part discusses the need for contraception as hormone medication for other ailments. She relates stories of people she knows who were not able to get it, and the results. The stories are truly sad.

3. The final section discusses her expectations as a female student at a prestigious university.

My thoughts:

A. It would be helpful for everybody to use different terms when discussing the different uses of "contraception" aks birth control pills. Birth control pills have two main uses: to prevent pregnancy, and as hormonal medication for other ailments. Sometimes these points are not distinguished properly and this confuses people. For example, if she was refering to birth control for other ailments in the first part of her testimony, she did not make this clear at all. It definitely gives the impression that she's refering to it as contraception to prevent pregnancy. Given that she's a third year law student, I must assume that her writing skills in preparing this speech are excellent. Therefore, she intented this section to communicate exactly what it communicates.

B. She states that the Georgetown policy does cover birth control for other ailments but that female students are "interrogated" by non doctors in order to determine if the students are lying about their symptoms. This is a administration problem and not a policy problem. Frankly imo this part of the problem did not deserve airtime in front of members of Congress. It's certainly a problem, just one one that should have taken the time of our legislators. Given that this served as the "capstone" of her testimony, I am of the opinion that her entire testimony is basically worthless as congressional testimony and a waste of taxpayer time. It's a point that needs to be communicated and addressed, just not on the government dime.

Not directly related, but still important:

There seems to be a misconception regarding the Catholic position regarding birth control pills used as hormone medication for other ailments. The Catholic stance supports such use. The fact that it also prevents pregnancy is not relevant. If hormone medication is needed for other ailments, then the Catholic stance is that it should be given, regardless of what it's called.

Sarah Palin of all people just defended Limbaugh for exercising his First Ammendment Rights.  She even added that the apology was unecessary.  I never thought I'd live to see the day Palin would defend someone for making sexist comments.

This is not going away at all.

@Cecile

That's only surprising if you think Sarah Palin  operates from feminist principles  rather than  IOKIYAR or "He's not insulting me and my family by name."

Yay, Astrodispatch is up again!

Also, Robert's article hinted that Fluke might lead a double life. I wonder if it'll be revealed that she does have an active sex life and the public will be upset about that, changing the focus from being pissed off at Rush Limbaugh to asking questions about promiscuity and social responsibility.

Also, reading conversations about this event in various places, I'm surprised at how few people seem to know that birth control pills are also used for hormone therapy.

The thing that pissed me off about Rush is that he spent a large portion of time denigrating her and calling her a slut.  That is offensive to me as a woman.  It is as if he was telling her, that she was a slut because as a woman, in college, she was a slut if she had sex.  You had to listen to the show to hear how he said it.  It was disgusting.  It was just went to a personal level that it should have never gone to because here he is calling a perfect stranger a slut.  He does not know what she does in the privacy of her own home and even if she was having "so much sex" as he put it, over and over, that is her business.  He never should have stooped to that level. 

As Elsa said, apparently there are some women who try to "take back" the word "slut". There is freedom of speech, after all and all of the political spectrum often stoop to personal attacks.  (This one weirds me out, though because birth control pills do not necessarily= sex and even so they're pretty important). I'm wondering why this attack is so attention-grabbing. The radio host calls people names. It's what he does.

what I don't understand is...so what if she IS found a slut?  Suddenly her testimony is worthless?  Why?  What does her crotch activity have to do with her mental acuity?

This is similar to the "she deserved it" mindset when someone gets raped. *eyeroll*

Birth control should be available and insured for everyone, regardless of sexual activity.  (IMO especially sexually active youngsters)  Do you want these people to be parents?  Sheesh!

"I'm surprised at how few people seem to know that birth control pills are also used for hormone therapy."

Beth--that is also true. Almost no one is aware that my first reason for taking them up until I hit menopause is not to prevent pregnancy, it's to regulate my whacked out, and suicidal thought inducing so called 'periods'. The second reason would of-course be to prevent unwanted pregnancies if I had a partner.

Ironically, PP has special funding to only give out free pills to women that are taking it specifically *for* birth control. Not to women that take it to normalize, or even out their hormones, and live without extremely painful cramps or severe dysmennorhea.

It's slightly funny to me that the conservatives want me to only take them for hormonal reasons, and the liberals only for birth control, and nothing else. Hmm....what is the world coming to in terms of duality and polarizations?

And as for Ms. Fluke's sex life, and the fact that the double standard is alive and well,  I agree that her sex life is a part of her private life. And so long as no one is hurt, is none of the public's business to judge. Men aren't, especially politicians so....I don't see why the activities below her waistline should be any different. I don't think Viagra should be covered but it is.

Politically Incorrect - Obama adviser slams Romney for Limbaugh while planning to go on Maher

::chuckles::

"what I don't understand is...so what if she IS found a slut?  Suddenly her testimony is worthless?  Why?  What does her crotch activity have to do with her mental acuity?

This is similar to the "she deserved it" mindset when someone gets raped. *eyeroll*

Birth control should be available and insured for everyone, regardless of sexual activity.  (IMO especially sexually active youngsters)  Do you want these people to be parents?  Sheesh!"

Thank you for that brizo - succinctly put and well done!!!!!! 

I also would note that Mr. Limbaugh in his prescription fraud case, was found to be in possession of Viagra.  Apparently he has no qualms about the other people in his health care plan paying for his "sex".  (As I was writing this, another thought crossed my mind - how does an individual who committed prescription drug fraud have any credibility regarding what should or shouldn't be covered by health insurance plans - especially a prescription?). 

"how does an individual who committed prescription drug fraud have any credibility regarding what should or shouldn't be covered by health insurance plans - especially a prescription?"

Umm, I would guess it's because he's a man (among other privileged socio-economic things). *innocent grin*

I'll duck now. ; )

And that (#58) was very well said, brizo. : )

Regarding Robert Hand's analysis, I mostly agree with what he says. I don't know what makes him so sure that she was born before 8:00 am and therefore has no earth (Venus changes signs at 8:00 am to Taurus). It doesn't change the giant yod pointing at the end of her Aries (possibly part Taurean) stellium though.  Given the amount of energy pointed at her public image (midheaven) it seems very likely that she has either late Aries/Libra or early Taurus/Scorpio on her MC/IC axis.

Anyways, here's a more likely place for her chart. (noon chart, unknown time)

In the unlikely event she sues Rush Limbaugh, you'll hear all sorts of things about her private life because the only defense he would have is that she actually has sex for money or is actually promiscuous.  That would mean Rush and Clear Channel's lawyers digging through her trash and attempting to interview everyone she ever flirted with.  Hence his "I apologize for those two words" non apology.   I'm sure people are already furiously trying to find dirt right now.

This is just so interesting to read and thanks for the link! I know nothing about Ms Fluke but she was born just 3 days before me, so her chart is so similar to mine. Except I have the Sun-Venus in Taurus, with the giant Yod pointing to it. And the Moon has of course changed signs too. So a lot more Water and Earth than she does.

Update on the advertising

http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/07/10602739-limbaugh-calls-totals-of-fleeing-advertisers-misinformation?ocid=ansmsnbc11

I think it's interesting. Note this is a liberal news site reporting.

"“ABC News, who understands how this works and are purposely misrepresenting it, is out there ballyhooing that we have lost 28 sponsors,” Limbaugh said. “Twenty-eight sponsors out of 18,000! That’s like losing a couple of french fries in the container when it’s delivered to you at the drive-thru. You don’t even notice it.”

I don't think Rush Limbaugh is a remotely credible source, just an offensive person who blows hot air, but this sums it up nicely:

Hades Moon "I also would note that Mr. Limbaugh in his prescription fraud case, was found to be in possession of Viagra.  Apparently he has no qualms about the other people in his health care plan paying for his "sex". "

If Viagra is covered, then birth control should be too. I've paid out of pocket for my own individual health insurance (currently $300+/month) for over 20 years and I've NEVER had any birth control covered.

In fairness, I should say very very few health insurance plans cover Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs. 

Wait, did that article say AshleyMadison.com was going to take care of his advertising loss for 3 months?

If so, does anyone else see the irony here?

On AshleyMadison, via WikiPedia:

"On March 3, 2012, the Washington Post published a piece by Alexandra Petri in which she reported that Rush Limbaugh has picked up Ashley Madison after losing other advertisers. In his program on the same day Limbaugh denied that he ever has, or ever will accept advertisement from Ashley Madison, or any other similar company, and that if any ever finds out that such a company is advertising on any local affiliate station during the Rush Limbaugh show, he asks the affiliate to move that advertiser away from his show."

Makes me wonder who planted the story.

Ashley Madison, of course.

In the article Elsa posted where Rush Limbaugh says the totals of advertisers fleeing are misleading, it also says:
Rush Limbaugh says the totals of advertisers fleeing are misleading

AshleyMadison.com’s CEO said in a letter to Limbaugh’s ad manager they would buy up that time for the next three months.
“We do not believe Mr. Limbaugh should be penalized for expressing his opinion, especially in America. We are writing to offer to step up and fill the void left by the corporations who have pulled their advertising,” Noel Biderman wrote.
Advertise | AdChoices

In a subsequent interview, Biderman said he was surprised by the e-mail support he's recieved over the offer, which he called "100 percent legitimate."

Here's a link to Ashley Madison's page where he's on CNN discussing his offer, Soledad O'Brien notes he's been turned down before, she doesn't say Rush has accepted:

http://media.ashleymadison.com/in_the_news

I listened to the interview. It definitely sounded like the CEO of Ashley Madison was being opportunistic.  He offered to buy up airspace for Limbaugh's show to latch onto this train-wreck of a controversy.  His interview on CNN was unpaid advertising for his company.  Think of how many other news sources have mentioned his company? 

They've done stuff like this before and definitely don't shy away from controversy.  He mentioned that they advertised on Howard Stern even though people were saying that it would offend women.

Wow, an interesting, new (to me) dating site just in time for spring break! I just signed up. LOL Once a slut, always a slut I guess :) Seriously though, I got tired of OkCupid because I found so many interesting people on there, but nobody was actually trying to partner and everyone puts up a front. I haven't tried match.com....cause it doesn't seem fun to me, yet. I'm interested in this Ashleymadison site because people are free to go after what they really want. I'll definitely put up more of a guard because of the nature of the site, which is good for me because my boundaries are usually too low. And I am trying to be as ethical as possible by saying in my profile that men probably should not contact me if they're already "attached" (that's the vocabulary of Ashleymadison FYI). Some people say they are single. Who knows, I will just play it safe. This will be quite an experiment... I usually go on OkCupid when I have time off from school, over the past two years. I've only gone on two dates with one guy in real life and it was fine. I wasn't planning on doing more online dating yet, but this is something else. I wonder if Rush will take the $ for their advertisements. I hope he does...

Carbonite now Kryptonite for investors

"...Prior to the Limbaugh flap, CARB had already retreated this year to slightly below its IPO offering price. Since then, it’s continued its downward cascade, closing today at $8.05 per share, roughly a 20% drop pre-Limbaugh/Fluke and a nearly 60% drop from its 2011 peak."

Basically, Carbonite had quite a few customers who are Rush listeners, who are now expected to ditch them.

Also

Limbaugh Will Not Forgive Or Negotiate With Companies That Pulled Advertising

"...Sleep Train reevaluated its departure after a few days.

The Blaze obtained the email that a Limbaugh representative sent to Sleep Train President Dale Carlsen:

Thank you for your requests last week and this week to restart your voiced endorsement in local markets of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Rush received your requests personally.

Unfortunately, your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the future.

Rush appreciates your long friendship and your past support, and we wish you good luck in the future.

It looks like Limbaugh meant it when he told listeners, "Those advertisers who no longer want your business, fine, we'll replace them."

The West Coast mattress supplier had been advertising on Rush's show for a quarter decade and maintained a close relationship..."

Other related fallout-  Axelrod canceled his scheduled appearance on Bill Maher and there are calls for Obama to return Maher's million dollar donation to his campaign because he's a misogynist.