dhr05b

So you think an organization should abandon their deeply held convictions (that they've been working on for 2,000+ years) instead of the minority getting their education or working elsewhere if they disagree with the policies up front? Similarly, her testimony regarding a married female and her husband left 'you' with thoughts of contraceptives for uses other than sex, but you can't be sure that she DOES have a health issue. Also, I don't ascribe to the belief that Viagra should be paid for by someone else. You must be confusing me for someone else, as I have yet to even imply that's appropriate. I'll follow my beliefs and leave you alone as long as you don't continue to try to cram your beliefs down my throat and the Constitution's.

I'll reserve comments, except for to say that I would expect nothing less from the preachers of tolerance.

Do you not understand the context in which this press conference occurred? Isn't it funny how it came just a few short days after Obama's contraception mandate for Catholic institutions failed so miserably? Catholics believe that contraceptives are in violation of God's law. Agree with it or not, but that's how it is. For someone to go to ANY religious institute and request/demand birth control (for whatever purpose) be provided, shows disrespect and disregard for the First Amendment. You cannot escape that. As Georgetown is a Catholic and Jesuit university, for them to provide contracteption in their health care plans would be against their moral values.

No, there's actually plenty more to say on it. I believe you're missing the entire point of her testimony in the first place. This is about religous freedom and the government's attempt to trample that through a mandate that forces religions to abandon their moral values. By the way, in her testimony she alluded to sex when she mentioned the married female student and her husband who had to give it up because they couldn't fit it in their budget. I could provide a link to prove this point, but I'll assume you're aware of this since you said you listened to her testimony.

One would assume. I know that there are other uses for birth control, but I also considered the fact that she was the former president of Georgetown Law Students for REPRODUCTIVE Justice. It seems likely that while there are other uses - and she made sure to include a story about a woman with ovarian cysts in her testimony - this was posturing for contraceptives for sex.

The poor law student claimed that birth control is too expensive, as several 'friends' simply cannot afford birth control. She then pressed the issue, saying she believed the institution should pay for it. Rush simply drew the parallel: so if you want OTHERS to pay for YOUR birth control, essentially other people are paying for you to have s**. Seems like the definition of a prostitute to me.

Fair enough

I'm being serious, I think it's a fair question. There's nothing racially charged to it, I'm asking for your response.

Read more closely, 6 paragraphs down: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/high-school-students-usa-usa-victory-chant-deemed-racial-insult/ "Alamo Heights Independent School District Kevin Brown apologized to SAISD officials for the incident, and said some of the students who participated in the chant were Hispanic themselves." Right there for you. and this: "Sure you probably have your handful of racist nit wits in every school and I believe you that the term "alamo whites" is used, but according to the evidence displayed it clearly wasn't being bellowed from the majority of the schools spectators" is what I meant when I said even you admit the possibility of a double standard. You state that you believe 'alamo whites' was said, but that the evidence doesn't show it. Read more: Hey, I have no hard feelings. I think it's important to provide an alternate opinion to the matter, that's all. I say as long as it's not personal, it's fair game. I don't think there's anything wrong with a healthy debate.

Tell me. If there existed a neighborhood called 'Ponderosa Bluffs' and, because of the demographics of the area, people started calling it 'Ponderosa Blacks,' would you then deem it a compliment? The media has a certain imbalance in the picture they paint of this country.

deeply

That's my point. The mainstream doesn't talk about it. It takes extra research to find the truth. Although, this time, it only took diving into the local news outlets to get a more complete picture: 'Now, numerous reports have surfaced that Edison fans were referring to Alamo Heights as "Alamo Whites." Those people say that is racist as well.' http://www.ksat.com/news/Racism-complaint-generates-nationwide-controversy/-/478452/9242816/-/12b0mpbz/-/index.html

Actually, I never implied - or stated - that a majority, or certain percentage of Edison students 'bellowed' out the term "Alamo whites." I'm simply presenting both sides of the story here - something you will rarely get from the mainstream media. You even admit the possibility that the double standard exists. Also, if you took the time to read the link I posted from San Antonio's local arena original link, you would see that Hispanics that go to Alamo Heights were chanting 'USA! USA!' as well. This puts to bed your theory that Alamo Heights is all white and that the chant 'USA! USA!' is racist, as Alamo Heights spectators of both races were chanting it. Furthermore, I would LOVE to see the media's reaction to this statement: "plus making reference to a school being white when they ARE all white in reality is simply the truth" - when the word "white" was interchanged with Hispanic or black. Lastly, aren't racial epithets used to be disparaging? Isn't that the whole point? Of course being white is not a negative. Neither is being Hispanic, or black, or Asian, or what have you. Are we to believe that because YOU don't deem something offensive it's not? Are we also to assume that if you find something to be offensive, then it most certainly is? You see the logic used here? Drop the double standard. It's sickening. Believe me, I agree with what you're saying here. And I believe that's why the AHISD Super Intendent apologized on behalf of Alamo Heights High. I'm not trying to persuade anyone to believe that a 'USA!' chant in this venue was appropriate and not an attempt to slight a predominantly Hispanic school. I'm merely trying to point out that the opposition is getting a pass in the media because their 'Alamo Whites' chant doesn't fall in line with what the media is attempting to portray. It's the double standard typical of the American media today.

I have family in San Antonio - cousins went to Reagan High. Alamo Heights has been referred to as Alamo Whites for awhile. It's fairly common knowledge for those in the San Antonio area. Also, here's the local KSAT link: http://www.ksat.com/news/Racism-complaint-generates-nationwide-controversy/-/478452/9242816/-/12b0mpbz/-/index.html

Funny how the 'USA! USA!' chant is demonized by the media as being racist, yet we completely disregard the part of the story where Edison High students/players/etc. were referring to the opposing team as the 'Alamo Whites.' You won't find that on MSLSD or CNBC though. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Alamo%20Whites

Your logic is off in assuming that your -s came from people who only negged you for being black.

Come on. Is your logic so off that you have to resort to implying that anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot or racist? Maybe you were negged because people disagree with your statement(s). Don't cry racism where there is none.

Would love to take a picture for you, but they're all locked up. If you will, please badge me.

I wish we could travel back to the 8 years of the Bush era and have this discussion about respect for the Office of the President. Also, try living here under this regime - I think your opinion would change rather quickly. PS. Sorry we couldn't do business on that oil pipeline. Maybe if we elect someone who loves this country in November, we can take over for the ChiComms.

but don't you dare call him the food stamp president.. inserting truth is racist.

This is an obvious knock at the tea party - the 'terrorists' of America; yet, somehow, the occu-poopers (as Michael Berry would say) are American heroes...

Just more filth from the Washington Compost. Evidence of a fearful opposition.

To echo TexasGranny's sentiments... it's a primary. Surely nobody has forgotten the Democrats' 2008 primary season (during which Hillarious dug up all the dirt on our current president). Hillarious was the one to uncover Obama's relationships with radicals such as Ayers and Wright, and it was her campaign that even released a picture of him wearing a turban - yet somehow, after Obama won the nomination, Hillarious and the rest of the Democrats rallied behind him and got him into office. This is how these things work. It's supposed to be nasty, so the eventual nominee will be properly vetted. After the dust settles, the republicans (and even the true conservatives) will get behind the republican nominee to ensure we don't have another 4 years of Obama. In the meantime, please quit taking the media seriously.

maybe a little foul, but DEAD on. it's nice to hear a grounded celebrity.

What I'm saying is that the money used to invest has already been taxed. I make $1,000 and I'm taxed at 35%. I pay $350, so now I have $650 to invest. Let's say I put this money to use and make a profit of $50. Yes, I'm only taxed for the profit ($50), but the money used to make this money was already taxed.