Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Limbaugh: ‘I am the primary reason’ Mitt Romney lost

Posted by   + Show Post

Republican shock jock Rush Limbaugh covers his face as an ex-Marine calls him a "Nazi" during a radio segment in 2009. Screenshot via YouTube.
 

Republican shock jock Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday that he accepts responsibility for Mitt Romney’s loss in the 2012 presidential election.

“Just as I predicted, ladies and gentlemen,” he said. “This election was lost because of your host, Rush Limbaugh. I am the primary reason.”

While that’s not exactly correct, Limbaugh was in fact the first big target of one of President Barack Obama’s principle reelection strategies: winning with women.


When he called Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” in March, prompting a personal rebuke by Obama, it ignited a rhetorical fuse that burned straight through election day.

It’s a long held addage in American politics that if you cannot win with women, you cannot win at all. And after high profile Republicans made a series of idiotic comments about rape, birth control, abortion and other issues of importance to women, Obama ultimately took 55 percent of the female vote versus Mitt Romney’s 44, even though Romney won among Caucasians and married women. As the Gallup polling firm explained, it was the largest gender gap in U.S. electoral history, and its beneficiary was primarily President Obama.

Of course, that’s not exactly how Rush sees it.

“There are others, but I’m the primary reason the Republican Party lost,” he added. “And I am, by the way, the primary reason the Republican Party will keep losing, until I am denounced by the Republican Party.”

The longtime radio talker explained that the GOP’s “ruling class” now believes their only shot at winning future presidential elections is to appeal to Latino voters as much as possible despite his wishes, which he claimed to be representative of what he called the “country class.”

“Do you really think that the democrat party will ever allow you Republicans to be seen as pro-Latino and pro-immigration?” Limbaugh asked. “If you do, you are incompetent and unqualified.” He added: “The media and the Democrats will always find a way to say that you are anti-immigrant.”


Of course, in order for the media or Democrats to accomplish that, all they’d have to do is play some of Limbaugh’s old clips.

The Obama campaign even previewed this strategy in 2008, cutting a Spanish-language ad tying Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) to some of Limbaugh’s more extreme anti-immigrant quotes, like the time he called undocumented workers “stupid and unskilled.”

As the Republicans eye a drastic policy flip-flop from promoting “self deportation” to potentially backing a pathway to citizenship, the perception of Limbaugh as a liability is only likely to grow. That’s especially true given Obama’s overwhelming victory with Latinos, 72 percent of whom voted Democratic in the last presidential election.

This audio is from “The Rush Limbaugh Show,” broadcast Tuesday, November 13, 2012, as snipped by Mediaite.


Raw Story (http://s.tt/1ti9I)
by on Nov. 14, 2012 at 3:55 PM
Replies (11-20):
mom2twinboyz
by Bronze Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:20 PM
2 moms liked this

 

Becuase we all know the right to kill a baby is SOOO important said no mom ever!!!

I am the one that feel sorry for some of you women. You want abortions at will and some of you call yourselves mothers? And you have the audacity to critique my language. Well shame on you!

Quoting Pema_Jampa:

 

State Abortion Laws Restrict Women's Access To Reproductive Health Care

Reuters  |  Posted: 


* Abortion opponents say laws promote safety, better care

* Mississippi could be first state without abortion facility

* Nearly 40 laws passed this year, 60 in 2011

 

 

romalove
by SenseandSensibility on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:20 PM
2 moms liked this
It is hard for me to converse with someone who speaks as repugnantly as you do. You don't seem to understand who Ms. Fluke is, what she does, or that contraceptive expenses have little or nothing to do with number of sex partners.

You could use an education. And some soap in your mouth.



Quoting mom2twinboyz:

 


I am sorry I make no qualms about using that word when earned. Why should the govt pay for her contraceptives? Tell me ONE good reason I dare you. She is by all means a capable working woman with steady income, right? Go get a perscription for $4 at Wallmart like I said. Why is $4 a month a big deal?


Quoting romalove:

Your language is almost as foul as your thought process. I am sad for you.


Quoting mom2twinboyz:


 



yep what is your point? If she is really spending thousands on contraceptives (which are $4 at Wallmart) then she needs to use better judgement with how many men she is sleeping with. Sorry!



Quoting romalove:

You are a mother???



Quoting mom2twinboyz:



Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.



 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
shimamab
by on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:21 PM
You're prob right about that. Don't listen to him to know his schtick. Thought he was serious.

Quoting mom2twinboyz:

 


I am not a fan of his but I think you are missing his sarcasm.


Quoting shimamab:

No lack of ego on that guy, is there?!?!


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
mom2twinboyz
by Bronze Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:25 PM
1 mom liked this

 

I know enough about her that she thinks the govt needs to pay for her contraceptives. Now sorry its none of my business what she does that is right but you didn't answer the question? Why does the govt. have to pay for her contraceptives?

Quoting romalove:

It is hard for me to converse with someone who speaks as repugnantly as you do. You don't seem to understand who Ms. Fluke is, what she does, or that contraceptive expenses have little or nothing to do with number of sex partners.

You could use an education. And some soap in your mouth.



Quoting mom2twinboyz:

 


I am sorry I make no qualms about using that word when earned. Why should the govt pay for her contraceptives? Tell me ONE good reason I dare you. She is by all means a capable working woman with steady income, right? Go get a perscription for $4 at Wallmart like I said. Why is $4 a month a big deal?


Quoting romalove:

Your language is almost as foul as your thought process. I am sad for you.


Quoting mom2twinboyz:


 



yep what is your point? If she is really spending thousands on contraceptives (which are $4 at Wallmart) then she needs to use better judgement with how many men she is sleeping with. Sorry!



Quoting romalove:

You are a mother???



Quoting mom2twinboyz:



Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.



 


 

 

DSamuels
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:25 PM
3 moms liked this
He uses absurdity to point out how absurd some on the left are. That is the biggest reason for outrage among those who aren't regular listeners. They take his sarcasm or absurdity seriously.

Quoting shimamab:

You're prob right about that. Don't listen to him to know his schtick. Thought he was serious.



Quoting mom2twinboyz:

 



I am not a fan of his but I think you are missing his sarcasm.



Quoting shimamab:

No lack of ego on that guy, is there?!?!



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Pema_Jampa
by Celeste on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Excuse me? Exactly! I didn't say that at all. Your sadness should be focused inward. 

Way to deflect!


AGAIN for those who are interested in facts...

 Nearly 40 laws passed this year, 60 in 2011

Quoting mom2twinboyz:


Becuase we all know the right to kill a baby is SOOO important said no mom ever!!!

I am the one that feel sorry for some of you women. You want abortions at will and some of you call yourselves mothers? And you have the audacity to critique my language. Well shame on you!

Quoting Pema_Jampa:


State Abortion Laws Restrict Women's Access To Reproductive Health Care

Reuters  |  Posted: 


* Abortion opponents say laws promote safety, better care

* Mississippi could be first state without abortion facility

* Nearly 40 laws passed this year, 60 in 2011




Momniscient
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:32 PM
2 moms liked this
Well it's rush and people like you that screwed the republicans.



Speaking of pandering to the moronic. Boy they nailed you didn't they?


Quoting mom2twinboyz:

Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Pema_Jampa
by Celeste on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:32 PM
1 mom liked this

I will not pipe down, especially if you tell me to. Let me help you out and give you the facts on what was really said.

The article:

In Context: Sandra Fluke on contraceptives and women's health

By Molly Moorhead
Published on Tuesday, March 6th, 2012 at 5:24 p.m.

In the latest installment of our In Context feature, here are the full remarks of Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke, testifying before a Democratic congressional panel convened by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, on contraception coverage and women's health.

Leader 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.

We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today because we're so grateful that this regulation implements the nonpartisan 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 and 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 from yet 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, 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 -- 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. Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they've struggled financially as a result of this policy.

One told us of 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 any more. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face this same choice.

And some might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that's just not true. Women's health clinics provide a vital medical service, but, as the Guttmacher Institute has definitively 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 Fortenberry, Rubio and Blunt legislation, that would allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraception coverage, and then respond that the nonprofit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis; particularly when so many legislators are attempting to defund those very same clinics?

These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons 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' insurance plans, it wouldn't be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. And under Senator Blunt's amendment, Senator Rubio's bill or Representative 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, a woman's health takes a backseat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body. In 65 percent of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20 percent of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verification 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 of 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 woke up thinking I'd 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 awaking 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 not to have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown's policy, she hasn't been reimbursed for her medication 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 handled 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 students 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 enrolled at 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 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 problems this policy created for us as students, they would help us. We expected that when 94 percent of students opposed 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 thinks 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 access to the health care we need. The president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and universities appreciate the modification 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.

Quoting mom2twinboyz:


Pipe down! It wasn't anything I called any of you so why so sensitive. Look people can do what they want with whom but why make the govt pay for it?

Quoting Pema_Jampa:

You do know she wasn't speaking about herself right? The c word is disgusting.

Quoting mom2twinboyz:


yep what is your point? If she is really spending thousands on contraceptives (which are $4 at Wallmart) then she needs to use better judgement with how many men she is sleeping with. Sorry!

Quoting romalove:

You are a mother???

Quoting mom2twinboyz:

Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.





timeforprogress
by Bronze Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:37 PM
1 mom liked this
insurance companies not the government

Quoting mom2twinboyz:

 


I know enough about her that she thinks the govt needs to pay for her contraceptives. Now sorry its none of my business what she does that is right but you didn't answer the question? Why does the govt. have to pay for her contraceptives?


Quoting romalove:

It is hard for me to converse with someone who speaks as repugnantly as you do. You don't seem to understand who Ms. Fluke is, what she does, or that contraceptive expenses have little or nothing to do with number of sex partners.

You could use an education. And some soap in your mouth.




Quoting mom2twinboyz:


 



I am sorry I make no qualms about using that word when earned. Why should the govt pay for her contraceptives? Tell me ONE good reason I dare you. She is by all means a capable working woman with steady income, right? Go get a perscription for $4 at Wallmart like I said. Why is $4 a month a big deal?



Quoting romalove:

Your language is almost as foul as your thought process. I am sad for you.



Quoting mom2twinboyz:



 




yep what is your point? If she is really spending thousands on contraceptives (which are $4 at Wallmart) then she needs to use better judgement with how many men she is sleeping with. Sorry!




Quoting romalove:

You are a mother???




Quoting mom2twinboyz:




Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.




 



 


 

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:39 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Pema_Jampa:

You do know she wasn't speaking about herself right? The c word is disgusting.

Quoting mom2twinboyz:


yep what is your point? If she is really spending thousands on contraceptives (which are $4 at Wallmart) then she needs to use better judgement with how many men she is sleeping with. Sorry!

Quoting romalove:

You are a mother???

Quoting mom2twinboyz:

Well Sandra Fluke is a cunt! I mean seriously how much screwing is she doing? Sorry this whole war on women thing is riduculous. That is his whole point is what the media is making it out to be. Yep that is it "oh my God there are going to be no more contraceptives!" Holy fing shit now we can't  screw all the guys we want! Nevermind there are things called drugstores and things called hospitals where you can still get your BC and your abortions. So women are ignorant for thinking that would have changed.



You know if I used that word the morality police would be all over it, calling me a man, ignorant, stupid and classless...blah, blah, blah. Wonder where they are today?


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)