Rush Limbaugh has finally jumped the shark - advertisers abandoning him

joeydb · #1 03-09-2012, 05:06 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/i...sEnabled=false

Waaaaahh!! Pay for my stuff!!!

Looks like the truth is coming out about the "poor, struggling law student."

#2 03-09-2012, 05:11 PM

Theme song of the thread...Ridin spinnaz

Riot · #3 03-09-2012, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/i...sEnabled=false

Waaaaahh!! Pay for my stuff!!!

Looks like the truth is coming out about the "poor, struggling law student."

Stop this ridiculous "destroy the witness" nonsense. Enough. The lies of Limbaugh, and others, are appalling and disgusting. Misogyny and degradation of women at it's worse. An embarrassment to this country.

Nobody, especially Ms. Fluke, ever called her a "poor, struggling law student". She was called to testify at Issa's Congressional conference precisely because she's a well-spoken student activist for woman's rights. Yes, she is a law student at Georgetown. Students don't have much money.

Issa wouldn't let her speak, preferring to have old celibate men dispose his committee on the reproductive rights of women. The Dems held their own hearing to let her speak.

Then the lies about her testimony, and the slut-shaming, and the horrible personal attacks and lies, began.

By the way: Marco Rubio, who co-sponsored this bill, this attack on women's rights under the false flag lie of "religious freedom", is considered a viable candidate for VP on the GOP ticket.

Here is her actual testimony:

Quote:

Transcript of testimony by Sandra Fluke

Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University Law student, testifies before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on the importance of contraceptive coverage for students and employees at religious-affiliated institutions.

Last week, Fluke was denied the opportunity to speak before the House Oversight Committee hearing on women's reproductive health. Instead, an all-male panel of religious leaders testified on why they should be allowed to deny women contraceptive coverage. SOURCE: C-Span.org
-----------------------------

Quote:

“Leader [Nancy] Pelosi, members of Congress, good morning. And thank you for calling this hearing on women’s health and for allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation.

“My name is Sandra Fluke, and I’m a third-year student at Georgetown Law School. I’m also a past-president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. And I’d like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them so much for being here today.

(Applause)

“We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today because we’re so grateful that this regulation implements the non-partisan medical advice of the Institute of Medicine.

“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 health care needs of so many women.

“Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential conflict with the religious identity of Catholic or Jesuit institutions.

“When I look around my campus, I see the faces of the women affected by this lack of contraceptive coverage.

“And especially in the last week, I have heard more and more of their stories. On a daily basis, I hear yet from another woman from Georgetown or from another school or who works for a religiously-affiliated employer, and they tell me that they have suffered financially and emotionally and medically because of this lack of coverage.

“And so, I’m here today to share their voices, and I want to thank you for allowing them – not me – to be heard.

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy.

“One told us about how embarrassed and just powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter and learned for the first time that contraception was not covered on her insurance and she had to turn and walk away because she couldn’t afford that prescription. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception.

“Just last week, a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn’t fit it into their budget anymore. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same choice.

“And some might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s just not true.

“Women’s health clinic provide a vital medical service, but as the Guttmacher Institute has definitely documented, these clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing, and women are being forced to go without the medical care they need.

“How can Congress consider the [Rep. Jeff] Fortenberry (R-Neb.), [Sen. Marco] Rubio (R-Fla.) and [Sen. Roy] Blunt (R-Mo.) legislation to allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraception coverage and then respond that the non-profit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis, particularly when so many legislators are attempting to de-fund those very same clinics?

“These denial of contraceptive coverage impact real people.

“In the worst cases, women who need these medications for other medical conditions suffer very dire consequences.

“A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown’s insurance because it’s not intended to prevent pregnancy.

“Unfortunately, under many religious institutions and insurance plans, it wouldn’t be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. And under Sen. Blunt’s amendment, Sen. Rubio’s bill or Rep. Fortenberry’s bill there’s no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.

“When this exception does exist, these exceptions don’t accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let university administrators or other employers rather than women and their doctors dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose are not, women’s health takes a back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body.

“In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their symptoms.

“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay. So clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.

“After months paying over $100 out-of-pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it.

“I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of the night in her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room. She’d been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to me, ‘It was so painful I’d woke up thinking I’ve been shot.’

“Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary as a result.

“On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor’s office, trying to cope with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.

“Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats and weight gain and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She’s 32-years-old.

“As she put it, ‘If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies simply because the insurance policy that I paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school, wouldn’t cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it.’

“Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at such an early age – increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis – she may never be able to conceive a child.

“Some may say that my friend’s tragic story is rare. It’s not. I wish it were

“One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but that can’t be proven without surgery. So the insurance has not been willing to cover her medication – the contraception she needs to treat her endometriosis.

“Recently, another woman told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome and 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 medications since last August.

“I sincerely pray that we don’t have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously.

“Because this is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends: A woman’s reproductive health care isn’t a necessity, isn’t a priority.

“One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered on the insurance and she assumed that that’s how Georgetown’s insurance handle all of women’s reproductive and sexual health care. 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 – something that was related to a woman’s reproductive health.

“As one other student put it: ‘This policy communicates to female students that our school doesn’t understand our needs.’

“These are not feelings that male fellow student experience and they’re not burdens that male students must shoulder.

“In the media lately, some conservative Catholic organizations have been asking what did we expect when we enroll in a Catholic school?

“We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success.

“We expected that our schools would live up to the Jesuit creed of ‘cura personalis‘ – to care for the whole person – by meeting all of our medical needs.

“We expected that when we told our universities of the problem this policy created for us as students, they would help us.

“We expected that when 94% of students oppose the policy the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for – completely unsubsidized by the university.

“We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that we should have gone to school elsewhere.

“And even if that meant going to a less prestigious university, we refuse to pick between a quality education and our health. And we resent that in the 21st century, anyone think it’s acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women.

“Many of the women whose stories I’ve shared today are Catholic women. So ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for the access to the health care we need.

“The President of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and the universities appreciate the modifications to the rule announced recently. Religious concerns are addressed and women get the health care they need. And I sincerely hope that that is something we can all agree upon.

“Thank you very much.”

Danzig · #4 03-11-2012, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/i...sEnabled=false

Waaaaahh!! Pay for my stuff!!!

Looks like the truth is coming out about the "poor, struggling law student."

something occurred to me yesterday about this subject when my husband and i were discussing it.

why is it still considered just a woman's issue anyway? i don't know of a woman yet who got pregnant without sperm involved. so, both sexes have sex, but only the woman is responsible for bc and for the cost? of course the alternative is pregnancy, and men don't like to pay that price either, do they?
still the mindset that only women get pregnant while ignoring the fact that both sides of the equation are involved in pregnancy!

Riot · #5 03-12-2012, 03:35 PM

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...via=siderecent

Quote:

Premiere Radio Networks, distributor of Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing talk radio shows, sent a very interesting memo to its affiliates on Friday.

The emailed memo lists 98 major corporations that have requested their ads appear only on “programs free of content that you know are deemed to be offensive or controversial (for example, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Tom Leykis, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity).”

Those 98 companies, some of which had already publicly announced they wanted their ads off of Limbaugh's show:

Quote:

21st Century Insurance, Ace Hardware, Acura, Advance Auto Parts, Advil (All products), Alacer/Emergen-C, Allegra (all products), Allstate, Ally BankLa Quinta, American Express, Autozone, Boston Beer, British Petroleum, Bullfrog Sunblock, Caltrate, Centrum, Chapstick, Clorox (Pinesol/Homecare), Cortizone, DeVry, Discover Card, Domino's Pizza, Exxon/Exxon Mobil, Farmers Insurance, Ford, Geico, General Motors (All products -GM Certified Service, Chevy, Onstar,Cadillac, etc), Gold Bond (all products), Grainger, Green Mountain Coffee, H&R Block, Hallmark, Honda, Hotels.com , IBM, Icy Hot, Intuit/Small Business, JC Penney, Johnson & Johnson (AllBrands), Kohl's, Lifetime, Little Caesars, Lowe's, Luxottica, Macy's, MasterCard, McDonalds, Midas, Napa Auto Parts, National Realtor, NBC-TV, O'Reilly Auto Parts, Office Depot, Office Max, One Main Financial, Orkin, Outback, Preparation H, Progressive Insurance, ProNutrients (all products), Prudential, Radio Shack, Rent-A-Center, Rite Aid, Robitussin , Sam Adams , Sam's Club, Schiff - Sustenex , Schiff – Digestive Advantage , Schiff – Mega Red , Schiff – Move Free , Scotts Miracle-Gro (all products) , Sears (All products) , Sony, Staples, State Farm , Sterling/Kay Jared Jewelers, Subway, Takeda Uloric, The Home Depot, ThermaCare, Toyota, Turbo Tax, Twinings of London, Tyson/Wright Brand Bacon, U. S. Postal Service, U.S. Army, Unisom, United Healthcare, Visa, Wal-Mart, Walgreens, Wells Fargo, Wrigley, Yahoo!,

Riot · #6 03-13-2012, 12:01 AM

via Thinkprogress.org

Premiere desperately wanting this to all blow over ...

Quote:

Radio-Info.com reports that Premiere Networks, which syndicates the Rush Limbaugh show, told its affiliate radio stations that they are suspending national advertising for two weeks. Rush Limbaugh is normally provided to afflilates for free in return for running several minutes of national advertisements provided by Premiere each hour. These ads called “barter spots.” These spots are how Premiere makes its money off of Rush Limbaugh and other shows it syndicates.

But without explanation, Premiere has supended these national advertisements for two weeks. Radio-Info.com calls the move “unusual.” The development suggests that Rush Limbaugh’s incessant sexist attacks on Sandra Fluke have caused severe damage to the show.

bigrun · #7 03-15-2012, 11:51 AM

bigrun · #8 03-16-2012, 02:00 PM

I promise i won't drag this thread up again...Just had to post the link to Colbert's show last nite....the bit he does on Rush and the usual suspects at Fox defending him and blaming all the furor on the lamestream media...what's new..

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...--2012---pt--2