Skip to main content

View Diary: I support Rush Limbaugh's right to freedom of speech (199 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't where I read it (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nancat357

    and haven't taken the time to try and chase it down. If she sues Limbaugh it will be litigated and all the facts will be known. If she doesn't sue him it does not really matter. If she is a "public person" only matters if there is a lawsuit.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Wed Mar 07, 2012 at 05:32:57 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Actually (0+ / 0-)

      perception is everything owning up to motivation. It certainly matters if the perception is that she was not a public person until she went to speak out on some matter of great import on Capitol Hill.

      And it's clear, if one is paying attention, that she was not a public person before Limbaugh started his disgusting, from sea-to-shining-sea, lie-based tirade. So perhaps you can appreciate why someone seeing unsubstantiated statements of such definitive detail might question it further.  

      It is time to #Occupy Media.

      by lunachickie on Wed Mar 07, 2012 at 05:50:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  lunachickie - why did the Dems pick her? (0+ / 0-)

        I certainly understand why people would want to gather more information. Her background came up in an answer to the question of why the Dems picked her?

        The Dems on Issa's committee had proposed a witness who was a constitutional law expert to testify on the issue of whether President Obama has the constitutional authority to require religiously affiliated institutions to offer no cost contraceptive services. It was only the day before the hearing that the Dems pulled their witness, who had been approved to testify by Issa, and tried to substitute Ms. Fluke. Why was she specifically chosen? What was so unique in her background that the Dems wanted her to be their panel member? The information I read could certainly be wrong. Do you have any information?

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Wed Mar 07, 2012 at 06:16:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right (0+ / 0-)
          The Dems on Issa's committee had proposed a witness who was a constitutional law expert to testify on the issue of whether President Obama has the constitutional authority to require religiously affiliated institutions to offer no cost contraceptive services.
          And that's what she talked about. She didn't talk about her sex life.
           

          That is the point here. This is not a free speech issue for him, it's about him making shit up and slandering someone--anyone--in public with his very giant, not-available-to-just-anyone, microphone. It doesn't matter one damned bit what "her status" was or "why she was there" and/or "who asked her to appear".

          Jesus. Enough with the innuendo that you're not backing up yet.

          It is time to #Occupy Media.

          by lunachickie on Wed Mar 07, 2012 at 06:33:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site