Morning Links

Wednesday, March 7th, 2012

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

80 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  DarkEFang | 

    The snippet of her testimony that I saw was about birth control pills being: A. covered by insurance; and B. used to regulate periods.

    Did I miss the part where she demanded that taxpayers pay for her birth control? And the part where she discussed screwing her buddies?

    I’m not clear on exactly why everybody is so pissed at this girl for what was essentially pretty vanilla Congressional testimony.

  2. #2 |  Judas Peckerwood | 

    @#44 — “It’s funny how some alleged libertarians get all butt-hurt when one of their political/corporate faves gets financially whacked for being an asshole.”

    “Since when as Rush been a fave of libertarians? What a load of bullshit.”

    Um, Mattocracy, if you had actually bothered to read my comment, you would have noticed that the term I used was “alleged libertarians.”

  3. #3 |  Pinandpuller | 

    There have been commentors over at Reddit wanting to sic the FCC on Rush which does involve the 1st Ammendment. I guess we have to wait and see if he gets audited by the IRS.

  4. #4 |  Michael Chaney | 

    Re: #50 – let me explain it to you in simple terms. Libertarians are for personal responsibility. This is one of the points where we differ strongly from liberals.

  5. #5 |  omar | 

    Libertarians are for personal responsibility. This is one of the points where we differ strongly from liberals.

    No true Scotsman could have anything to add to that!

    Libertarians are against slavery too, but we don’t spend our days calling Thomas Jefferson a shitbag. All this girl did was ask for a handout. A simple “no” would work as well.

  6. #6 |  Judas Peckerwood | 

    @#50 — What the hell are you trying to say? Reason and facts have no part in this debate, pal.

  7. #7 |  Kutani | 

    Seems to me like a lot of people don’t know that female birth control medication is used for a hell of a lot more reasons than just ‘I don’t want to get pregnant.’ Quite a few very legitimate medical reasons.

  8. #8 |  boomshanka | 

    “#53 | Michael Chaney

    “Re: #50 – let me explain it to you in simple terms. Libertarians are for personal responsibility. This is one of the points where we differ strongly from liberals.”

    Oh gimme a break dude, what the hell does that even mean here?

    How is advocating that insurance coverage, which she pays for herself, provide equal care for women’s medical needs not “for personal responsibility?” I thought maintaining individual health insurance was an example of personal responsibility, but it seems that in order to be “for personal responsibility” now you need to pay for medical costs out of pocket, especially when it involves female anatomy.

  9. #9 |  DarkEFang | 

    #53 Michael Chaney –

    “Re: #50 – let me explain it to you in simple terms. Libertarians are for personal responsibility. This is one of the points where we differ strongly from liberals.”

    Agreed. I’m not clear, however, what this has to do with my post.

    #54 Omar –

    “All this girl did was ask for a handout.”

    Did she ask for a handout? Again, in the clip I saw, she was advocating that birth control be covered by her health insurance. Is medical insurance considered a handout?

    #55 Judas Peckerwood –

    “@#50 — What the hell are you trying to say? Reason and facts have no part in this debate, pal.”

    It certainly seems that way.

  10. #10 |  RobZ | 

    Rush grossly insulted Fluke 50+ times over three days. As far as I know, none of the liberal assholes who insulted women have done anything like it.

    Another point: Lots of women are prescribed birth control pills for non-birth control reasons. Depending upon the active ingredient required for the treatment, generics may or may not be available. (Fluke’s friend with the
    polycystic ovarian syndrome who was spending 100/month out of pocket due to being denied insurance coverage, was perhaps prescribed something other than a generic.)

  11. #11 |  Personanongrata | 

    •Last week, the Keene, New Hampshire city council voted 9-4 in favor of purchasing the Lenco, Bearcat.

    Little Red Riding Citizen

    “Dear me, Keene City Police Department (KCPD), what a great big armored personal carrier (APC) you have got!”

    “They are so much the better to keep us (us as in KCPD) safe, citizen,” replied KCPD .

    “But KCPD,” said the citizen, “what big machine gun turret you have got!”

    “They are so much the better to prtoect you, citizen,” replied KCPD.

    “But then, KCPD, what great night vision goggles you have got!” said the citizen.

    “They are so much the better to see you in the dark during no-knock-raids, citizen,” replied KCPD.

    “And KCPD, what a great arsenal you have!” said the citizen, who now began to be rather afraid.

    “They are to eat you up,” said KCPD.

    It’s to bad the grandma from the fairy-tale isn’t going to jump out of a closet and bonk KCPD and the Keene City Council on the head just like she does to the wolf.

  12. #12 |  omar | 

    Did she ask for a handout? Again, in the clip I saw, she was advocating that birth control be covered by her health insurance. Is medical insurance considered a handout?

    I don’t even know. I never watched it, nor will I. I was assuming the worst and found the worst to be nothing worth yelling about. I simply refuse to throw stones at a human being for advocating a very very small change to our system even if I disagree with her desired change on principled grounds.

  13. #13 |  Bob Mc | 

    #46 | Jay |
    yup, wrong link, sorry ’bout that. Correct link is:
    http://blog.simplejustice.us/2012/03/07/making-a-scene.aspx

  14. #14 |  AlgerHiss | 

    If this woman only wished for her insurance company to cover her orgasm pills, then why wasn’t she agitating in front of her insurance company?

    She was agitating in front of Congress because she wishes Congress to use the brutal, violent force of government to force the insurance company to do what she wants done.

    That is far more disgusting and dangerous than whatever Limbaugh did. Hell, she should have been called far worse than a slut.

  15. #15 |  FTP | 

    Since when are birth control pills “orgasm pills”?

  16. #16 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Boyd, Sarah Palin is one example.

    Agreed. By defending Fluke I am not anti-Palin. I love that hot momma and think calling her a whore or a slut was repugnant when it was obviously in response to ONLY her appearance.

    Calling Maher and Limbaugh whores is pretty accurate. Calling Fluke a whore is just repugnant.

    > Fluke was selling her position for as much personal gain as she could get.

    Bullshit. It is ridiculous to compare the Congress testimony of a college student to someone like Anne Coulter (who’s actions help kill people).

    Let me make this perfectly clear to anyone still reading. If you (mostly male) princes continue to call women whores and sluts it does not serve MY GOALS well. Some of you aren’t exactly “ladies men”, so I’ll make it simple: Expand the damn sphere as big as possible that defines great behavior by women.

    The opposite is to jump back 100 years to when I had to marry a girl to get a rub-and-tug…which appears to be the route many of you want to take. Contact me directly if you need additional help navigating women.

    I thought we were ahead in the sex race. We’re even further behind than in all the other races.

  17. #17 |  JSL | 

    So wait Boyd, because you want an easy and/or cheap “rub and tug” (go to Nevada?), we should all pay for birth control? Because one gal and some of her buddies go to a school who’s student insurance plan doesn’t cover birth control? So because she decided to not sacrifice her education for a school who did cover birth control to go to super duper wonderful lawschool Georgetown, all insurance companies should be mandated to cover all birth control for all reasons.

    You do realize that costs will likely go up if this mandate were enforced? Bye bye cheap knock offs, hello cash to pharma.

    Boyd at #35: “Respectfully, one is a girl commenting on a subject…”

    No she’s a 30 year old woman (press got that 23yr co-ed deal wrong or someone lied or exaggerated) who is a law student about to graduate and a long time women’s studies/rights activist. She’s a professional grievance monger.

  18. #18 |  el coronado | 

    “Ann Coulter’s actions help kill people”???

    Good to see the liberal contingent sticking to good, solid facts instead of engaging in hysterical hyperbole like that awful Limbaugh fellow. Any word yet on whether the cops are any closer to catching that fiendish serial killer Rachel Maddow, the Ted Bundy of the left?

  19. #19 |  JOR | 

    “Libertarians are for personal responsibility. This is one of the points where we differ strongly from liberals.”

    Oh please. Libertarianism is no more about “personal responsibility” than liberalism or any other set of ideas. If you doubt this, just look at how often liberals tell libertarians to “Go Galt” or “Go to Somalia”, i.e. vote with their feet, or wallets, instead of whining like little victim-babies.

    And like everyone else, libertarians are reducing personal responsibility in many cases. But the obsession with “personal responsibility” does lead to some really ridiculous displays, like when some libertoids sometimes try to say they’re in favor of ending the war on drugs so drug users will finally have to be responsible for their own lives. Yeah man, ’cause in a free market druggies can like, get fired and stuff! Like that doesn’t happen now. No, the libertarian position on the war on drugs is one of reduced personal responsibility (yes you may still get fired or piss your parents/school off or lose your family, but at least you won’t get kidnapped by hired thugs and sent to a brutal rape camp for years, and without the prison-industrial political pressure all the other anti-drug elements of the culture will probably ease up considerably).

  20. #20 |  JOR | 

    Also note that people chiming in against the boycott of Rush Limbaugh are opposing an application of personal responsibility (that is, forcing someone to respond or suffer in some way as a consequence for an action you don’t like; and yes, this is all “personal responsibility” ever meant, and all it will ever mean).

  21. #21 |  Brandon | 

    JOR, this false equivocation is really weak. Have you ever actually talked to a libertarian?

  22. #22 |  AL | 

    @49

    1) She didn’t whine that she and her buddies couldn’t screw. She never talked about her own personal sex life at all, so any insinuation that she is a promiscuous slut is pure speculative defamatory ad hominem. She did mention a fellow MARRIED student that wanted to put off a kid to finish school, but nothing about wanting women to be free to sleep around, as all too many right leaning bloggers and media personalities are suggesting.

    2) The school doesn’t pay for health care. The students pay tuition to the school, which the school uses to provide some services, including insurance. It’s ultimately the insurance company that pays out for the actual health care treatment, and the student that pays the policy. In this case, the school is just a middleman that enforces its say in the matter.

    6) More empty insinuations that she is sexually promiscuous and just wants sex…

    7) Where did she say or suggest anything like that? Advocating for an issue doesn’t automatically mean you think you’re superior to everyone and everything else. More baseless attacks on her character.

    12) This hasn’t anything to do with taxes. Taxes are not paying for condoms and pills here.

    I’ll grant you 9)-11) as Fluke probably did exaggerate the cost.

    It should be noted that she ended her talk by pointing out that the president of the Jesuit colleges association is OK with the modifications to the rule that allow women to have access to birth control while still respecting the religious issues raised by the colleges themselves. So it seems all parties directly involved are OK with this, why such a vehement public attack on Fluke? Is it still the confusion that it involves the public’s tax dollars somehow paying for other people to have sex?

  23. #23 |  Michael Chaney | 

    Boy, the libtards coming from huffpo sure make a difference around here…

  24. #24 |  Cyto | 

    For all you die-hard constitutionalists out there, Drudge has some red meat on the top line via Breitbart.

    I thought the headline (PANETTA: ‘INTERNATIONAL PERMISSION’ TRUMPS CONGRESSIONAL PERMISSION FOR MILITARY ACTIONS) was typical Drudge hyperbole. Well, maybe not so much. The administration’s position is pretty clearly stated (repeatedly): we need international approval to provide a legal basis for military action, but not congressional approval. He says that if they feel like it they’ll notify congress after they have international permission. But only if they feel like it. They might seek some kind of vote, if they feel like it.

    Forget the war powers act, it seems that the entire role of congress in declarations of war is dead and buried.

  25. #25 |  Judas Peckerwood | 

    @#72 “Boy, the libtards coming from huffpo sure make a difference around here…”

    Hey, Michael Chaney, way to refute the well-reasoned arguments of real libertarians who call you on your partisan bullshit. But you forgot to shriek at them to get off of your lawn. Not a criticism, mind you, just a friendly reminder to do it right next time

  26. #26 |  MassHole | 

    Saying crass things is Rush’s gig, so it’s not really interesting or surprising. What I do find interesting is the amount of invective hurled at Ms. Fluke by regular Joe’s in the blogosphere. The vast majority are deliberately ignorant of the actual content of her statement and the context within which it was given. Even when presented with what she actually said, they all double down and continue to mis-characterize it. It’s quite apparent on this page unfortunately. It’s as if Ms. Fluke has become some sort of blank canvas that these people are projecting their own anger upon. It seems there is some deep undercurrent of misogyny within these people (see Alger Hiss above and “Orgasm Pills”). It’s not hard to disagree with someone without making base ad hominem attacks upon their character. I suppose if anything, Ms. Fluke has unwittingly brought this anger and misogyny to the fore, and allowed many more than just Rush Limbaugh to make fools of themselves.

  27. #27 |  Leah | 

    omar & MassHole – +1

    And when I read “orgasm pills” I actually sat there for a minute trying to figure out what Viagra had to do with the point of the comment. Figured it out, but hmm.

  28. #28 |  Medicine Man | 

    I have to agree with Judas Peckerwood. Other than tribal loyalty to right-wing figures I’m not sure why a libertarian would object to Rush suffering public opprobrium for his antics.

    A little push back to the predictable “both sides do it” being advanced: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/05/opinion/frum-rush-limbaugh-fairness/index.html

    Slightly oily David Frum summarizes pretty well.

  29. #29 |  Goober | 

    I don’t get this whole thing. First – If Ms. Fluke wants her insurance to cover brith control, shouldn’t she negotiate that with her insurance company, or failing that, get another policy? Why is she testifying in front of congress about essentially forcing private companies and private individuals to provide a good and/or service that they choose not to provide? Where does this end – should a vegan restraunt be required to provide halal meat for their Muslim customers? And why can’t everybody see that, while this isn’t about paying taxes, it IS about making everyone else pay for a woman’s birth control? Because the company isn’t goign to pay for it, guys, so who does that leave? The fact is, if Ms. Fluke wants to argue that I should pay for her birth control because it is a “right”, then she should help pay for my new pistol, because the “right” to keep and bear arms is there, too, and it is sad that people should be denied access to their right to keep and bear arms simply because they can’t afford it… Yeah, reductio ad absurdum, I know, but can you tell me why I’m wrong?

    Second – Rush Limbaugh is a big boy, and made a decision to say some things that I disagree with him saying. He should face the consequences for what he said, just like I will face whatever consequences that this comment presents me, and so forth. I have an unalienable right to walk into my bosses office and call him a douche-canoe, but that doesn’t guarantee he won’t fire me for it. Anyone defending what Rush said is merely voicing an opinion. Anyone saying that Rush is being censored or silenced or having his first amendment rights violated should go back to school, because you must have missed it the first time.

  30. #30 |  Colonel Mustard | 

    re: 11 year old girl handcuffed for attitude

    “Yajira now knows what not to do when talking to a teacher. “Not to give them attitude. I am blaming myself,” Yajira said.”

    Sad. A power tripping control freak school administration is to blame, not the kid. And so too is the “juvenile justice” system and the cozy relationship law enforcement has with schools.