Rush Limbaugh has finally jumped the shark - advertisers abandoning him - Page 6

joeydb · #**101** 03-08-2012, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

I forgot that nobody can take a JOKE anymore. Polticial correctness rules all.

Danzig · #**102** 03-08-2012, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

I forgot that nobody can take a JOKE anymore. Polticial correctness rules all.

oh, is that what that was? you might want to include a

when you're joking. hard to get that across, as i well know, on a board.

Riot · #**103** 03-08-2012, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

I forgot that nobody can take a JOKE anymore. Polticial correctness rules all.

You think joking about Fluke's virginity is appropriate? On this thread?

You ARE the problem.

joeydb · #**104** 03-08-2012, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

You think joking about Fluke's virginity is appropriate? On this thread?

You ARE the problem.

I joked in response to someone else bringing that up.

You HAVE no sense of humor.

Riot · #**105** 03-08-2012, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

I joked in response to someone else bringing that up.

You HAVE no sense of humor.

Either does Rush Limbaugh.

#**106** 03-08-2012, 02:32 PM

Riot · #**107** 03-08-2012, 06:22 PM

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203080010

Quote:

Rush Limbaugh's Advertisers, March 8

March 08, 2012 2:19 pm ET by Media Matters staff

At least 50 advertisers have reportedly dropped their ads from Rush Limbaugh's radio show in the wake of his misogynistic attacks on Sandra Fluke.

Here are his March 8 advertisers, in the order they appeared on WABC, the flagship station for Limbaugh's show. Audio clips of the ads have been provided to help make advertisers aware of the placement of their ads on the program. According to our coverage:

* A total of 86 ads aired during WABC's broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show today
* 77 of those ads were public service announcements donated free of charge by the Ad Council
* Of the nine paid spots that ran, seven were from companies that have said they have taken steps to ensure their ads no longer air during the program
* WABC's online feed included about 5:33 of dead air when ads would normally have run.

Advertisers with links on their names have already stated that they have asked to have their ads excluded from Limbaugh's show.

Lists of advertisers below:

joeydb · #**108** 03-08-2012, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203080010

You go right ahead believing everything Media Matters prints. It'll do wonders for you.

Are we going to get equal coverage when the new advertisers join the program?

Riot · #**109** 03-08-2012, 07:51 PM

Quote:

RushLimbaugh.com appears to have removed parts of his radio transcripts from February 29 and March 1 in which he called Sandra Fluke a "slut" and demanded a sex tape as a thank you to taxpayers for subsidizing her birth control.

Those transcripts now show white space where Rush's comments were located.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...x-tapes/49643/

For Joey:

Quote:

"A dating service for people wanting to cheat on their spouses, Ashley Madison, has offered to fill Rush's dead air time."

"This was declined by Limbaugh's show"

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/...184310489.html

Riot · #**110** 03-08-2012, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeydb

You go right ahead believing everything Media Matters prints. It'll do wonders for you.

I "believe" it because on the page I linked, there are actual tapes of the program supporting what Media Matters says.

Duh.

You are aware that there is a difference between "a fact", and "an opinion", right? Hint: Rush Limbaugh lied outright about what Fluke testified, then made comments about what he lied about.

That's why he's currently undergoing major market changes regarding his radio program, and he's about to be successfully sued by a private citizen.

hi_im_god · #**111** 03-08-2012, 10:03 PM

this all started with a policy blunder by the white house in formulating new regulations on birth control. they didn't draw the religious exemption broadly enough.

the republican's correctly saw a wedge issue that could drive their base to the polls. it's government interference in religious freedom.

yet regardless of where you stand on the substance there's just no denying that republicans have lost the pr battle. it's stopped being about about religious liberty and started being about women's access to contraception. romney led obama among white women in polls a few weeks ago. not anymore.

democrats win more and more the longer this debate goes on. which is why you see them continuing to bump the subject.

if i were a republican, i'd look to change the subject the same way democrats did so succesfully with rush's unexpected help.

find a proverbial fat white dude asking for porn video's and beat it to death. hope that the other side is too timid to criticize him .

it's election gold.

hi_im_god · #**112** 03-08-2012, 10:15 PM

btw: if rush limbaugh's program were a stock i'd be buying.

the idea that advertiser's will stay away from a program with 15 million loyal listeners ignores reality.

he'll stick to racism. after all, everyone's a little racist.

it's a lot safer than offending 52% of the electorate.

rpncaine · #**113** 03-09-2012, 11:27 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9CSnlb-ymA

#**114** 03-09-2012, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

btw: if rush limbaugh's program were a stock i'd be buying.

the idea that advertiser's will stay away from a program with 15 million loyal listeners ignores reality.

he'll stick to racism. after all, everyone's a little racist.

it's a lot safer than offending 52% of the electorate.

Like the President's parrot MSNBC? They had an article and commentary on their channel about surging numbers of white militias yesterday. No mention of Black Panthers and over various minority militias.

Spare us the illusion of Rush being the only piece of s.hit on the block. These "militias" know the trump card O is holding if things get dicey towards November. They are conditioning the 200,000 or so PMSNBC viewers for mass riots. They will be the messengers...the ones who shared the Kony video on Facebook and other social media sites. You know...morons.

Riot · #**115** 03-09-2012, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

btw: if rush limbaugh's program were a stock i'd be buying.

the idea that advertiser's will stay away from a program with 15 million loyal listeners ignores reality.

Somebody pointed out yesterday that although the internet stream of his flagship was advertiser empty, the broadcast show still ran a full complement of national ads.

Quote:

he'll stick to racism.

He's still sticking to misogyny and slut-shaming this week: he's attacked two other young women regarding sex.

joeydb · #**116** 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."

#**117** 03-09-2012, 05:11 PM

Theme song of the thread...Ridin spinnaz

Riot · #**118** 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.”

bigrun · #**119** 03-09-2012, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Like the President's parrot MSNBC? They had an article and commentary on their channel about surging numbers of white militias yesterday. No mention of Black Panthers and over various minority militias.

Spare us the illusion of Rush being the only piece of s.hit on the block. These "militias" know the trump card O is holding if things get dicey towards November. They are conditioning the 200,000 or so PMSNBC viewers for mass riots. They will be the messengers...the ones who shared the Kony video on Facebook and other social media sites. You know...morons.

Black Panthers, they still around?...Who watches MSNBC anymore...Haven't watched them since Dumya Bush was ousted..no fun anymore..Besides, Fox morons outnumber MSNBC morons at least 20-1...

Danzig · #**120** 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!