Miss Fluke goes to Washington

[BT]

So......you mispoke when you claimed you kept hearing that Ms. Fluke is a slut and that she wants taxpayers to pay for her Birth Control

No, I don't mind

Don't see why you would mind as i did not misspeak.

Look at 4 and 11 if you need other examples.

[sirs]

Yea, you apparently did, when you didn't provide any examples of those you claim you kept hearing talking about Mrs Fluke as some slut, demanding tax dollars pay for her BC.  You supposedly provided 1 example, mine, which wasn't, when you got clarification, yet here you are still talking about it. 

One would have thought this was put to rest by response #15, yet there you are claiming you have some apparent need to rectify the situation, because, according to you "The reason it is brought up is that i keep hearing that Ms. Fluke is a slut and that she wants taxpayers to pay for her Birth Control"

So yea, minus any examples of those giving credence to some apparent ongoing voice you're hearing, apparently you did mispeak. 

[BT]

I'm not sure your walk back in 15 universally eliminates the meme that Fluke wants to have her sex paid for, by taxpayer dollars, and that's just oh so slutty.

Look at the title of the article you chose to post as #1. You chose to post.

"When even casual sex requires a state welfare program, you're pretty much done for"

[sirs]

Yea, I posted....at no time did Steyn claim Fluke was pusing for tax doolars to pay for her BC.  At no time did I.  You impled I did woth your 1 example, which apparently we're to take as those many times you've heard, to which I clarified how that was wrong as well...issue put to rest by reply 15, and here we are in the 30's and you're still pushing it

I remember when you were asking BsB what his intentions were with some of his, shall we say, provocative postings.  I find myself apparently having to ask the same question of you.  I never called Fluke a slut.  I made it clear she wasn't in DC trying to get tax dollars to pay for her BC.  There is no thread of "indirect claims", outside of what you're apparently trying to read into them.  Do you think readers are that stupid??  Or is it the otherway around, where folks blessed with the BT nuance gene, are able to devine what's really being said, vs what is actually said?

[BT]

Yea, I posted....at no time did Steyn claim Fluke was pusing for tax doolars to pay for her BC.

State welfare by default involves tax dollars.

And BTW i simply stated that i did not get where tax payers were paying for Flukes BC.

YOU inserted yourself into that tangent.

Consider that as you gear up to claim victimhood.



 

[sirs]

No victimhood here, I merely asked who were making these claims of Fluke wanting tax dollars for her birth control....YOU were the one who supplied MY one post as some example in your "inquiry", as to all these folks you were hearing calling Fluke a slut and demanding tax dollars to pay for her BC.  Just pointing out where you were wrong, and this apparent need for you to perseverate over it

Issue was closed by response #15, yet here you are still perseverating over it.  One has to wonder why, and perhaps, what your intentions are with this obsession

[BT]

Issue was closed by response #15

So you now speak for Plane, CU and Mark Steyn?

I was not aware of your promotion.

[sirs]

So, now its them who have been calling Fluke a slut, and claiming she wants tax payed BC??  Gads, why didn't you say that the 1st time it was asked?       

[BT]

Well you did too, else why the walkback at 15.

And as i have previously stated i didn't single you out (nor Plane, nor CU, not Mark Steyn) when i questioned as to where exactly fed dollars were in play with the Fluke/Georgetown story.

[sirs]

Not sure who you're trying to fool.  anyone can start reading the thread beginning at your inquiry about "I still don't get where this regulating of insurance policies is happening at taxpayer expense.", and see where your train went off the tracks

Funny how you can't seem to find anywhere where I called her a slut, or claimed she was in it for taxpayed BC...yet here you are, now claiming precisely that.  Simply staggering.  I know you're trying to redefine a clarification as a supposed "walkback".  That's only going to convince you.  Neither have I seen Plane, Steyn, or Cu4 call her a slut and proclaim she's in it for tax payed BC.  But....there in lies the BT gene, that extra power you have that is somehow able to deem what's really been said over what's actually said.  That's why you use the word walkback.  It's why you use the phrase "indirect claims".  It's a way for you to justify how wrong you are, when the questions are thrown right back at you, for which you had no answer

With great power comes great responsibility.  Try to use it wisely

[BT]

Not trying to fool anyone. The thread is here for all to read unaltered.

BTW show me where i said you claimed Fluke was a slut.

Or do you now need to walk that claim back?

[sirs]

Not trying to fool anyone. The thread is here for all to read unaltered.
BTW show me where i said you claimed Fluke was a slut.

You really want to go down that road, eh.  Couldn't leave it at thanks for the clarification...now you have to dig your hole even bigger....ok

Bt: I still don't get where this regulating of insurance policies is happening at taxpayer expense.

You then provided a quote of mine as the apparent prime example to your question.  Noting how you erroneously came to that conclusion, I clarified that quote you used

Sirs: I'm not claiming that Miss Fluke's issue has to do with tax dollars, merely consistent with the fed trying to mandate beyond its Constitutional bounds.  That'd be Obamacare, as it relates to tax dollars

You then concurred, as referencing how Fluke did not equal tax dollars......I erroneously believed that was the end of it, and inquiring why this need to continue to address an issue that supposedly was put to rest.  Bt then starts the digging process

Bt: The reason it is brought up is that i keep hearing that Ms. Fluke is a slut and that she wants taxpayers to pay for her Birth Control.

To which one has to be really scratching their head....WHO does Bt keep "hearing this from".  So, that question is posed.

Sirs: By whom?  I keep hearing she's advocating that Government mandate that her religious insititution provide her, and anyone else employed or enrolled, with free BC, counter to their doctrine

And guess what the immediate response is...you specfically use my reply #10 --> , which doesn't have me calling her by any name, but is definately clarified for those who thought wrong in response #15

Then, if anyone started walking back anything, it was you with the use of terms walking back, I must have mispoke.  Then even started bringing in Cu4 & Plane, in an apparent further effort to dilute the answer....which was NO ONE CALLED HER A SLUT AND NO ONE CLAIMED SHE WAS DOING THIS GET THE FED TO USE TAX DOLLARS TO PAY FOR HER BC

Yet, you kept hearing it, and used me as your prime example

As I referenced, with great power (in devining what a person meant to say vs what they actually said), comes great responsibility.  You need to work on managing that power apparently.  Its digging you larger and larger credibility holes

[BT]

In that mountain of words did you show where i claimed you called Ms. Fluke a slut?

Granted i just skimmed the post.

[sirs]

Oh, I see.....you're going to try and pull the literal card.  Gotcha.  Whatever floats your boat.  I asked who, you provided my post as a direct answer to the who.  Simple as that.  I think we're done here.  At least your deflective efforts

[BT]

Oh, I see.....you're going to try and pull the literal card.  Gotcha.  Whatever floats your boat.  I asked who, you provided my post as a direct answer to the who.  Simple as that.  I think we're done here.  At least your deflective efforts

Gotcha. So you can't show where i said that.

Yeah we are done.