Current Article

Unknowns of Trash Talk

By John Batchelor on March 6, 2012 at 1:00 AM in Current Affairs

The Republican party is skittish enough with the muddy primaries so that the Limbaugh flap has quickly turned to a panic. The Democrats hold a large advantage with women voters in the recent polling, and the ad hominem attack on a single woman does not move the needle back toward 50-50.

Am told by Lara Brown, Villanova, that women split evenly between Bush and Kerry, and that was why Bush prevailed. In 2008, Obama enjoyed a huge women vote advantage over McCain. Am told that the women vote in 2010 favored the GOP. Does this scandal promise positive women vote for 2012? Unknown but also unlikely.

Limbaugh has not used fresh information for a long time. Limbaugh is about edgy performance. When Limbaugh uses ad hominem on public officials, it is old-fashioned, off-the-shelf, 20th century trash talk.

Limbaugh has grown lazy as well as sloppy. Fluke is not a celebrity, not a pol, not even known to the public before these days. The early signs are not positive that Limbaugh can survive this contest without damage to his brand.

POTUS phone call to Sandra Fluke was cunning. The indignation by the Democrats does not look determinative.

Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich will establish how Limbaugh fares in the GOP season. Thumbs up or down on Limbaugh vulgarity for Mitt, Rick or Newt?

Just now, the Limbaugh narrative is radioactive. Georgetown President John DeGioia struck hard and cleverly, using the word “misogynistic.” John Boehner used a cut-out to say “inappropriate.” Romney tried a meaningless phrase, “not the language I would have used.” Scott Brown launched on Limbaugh. This is about electioneering.

Does it signify that Limbaugh’s remarks were incoherent about Fluke and the facts of testimony? Nope. This is culture speak, culture trash talking, and the winner is the best one polling. The polls are in the field.

Piers Morgan was quick to capitalize on the perceived Limbaugh weakness. Sunday shows beckon. Cynics, pop your popcorn. Doesn’t add up to much what we figure at this point. Game on for the Independent vote in VA, NC, OH, CO, NM.

– From the blog for The John Batchelor Show.

http://www.theindependentview.com Matthew J. Weaver

Limbaugh was in artful and his other shortcomings I cannot comment on as I do not regularly listen to him. That said, I too can see that Republicans–as portrayed by the media–are the target of venom from Democrats and the media.

I disagree about Romney, in particular, as I think he set a good neutral example in saying “not the language I would have used.” This is not his fight and not one he or other candidates need to get into at this point. Me thinks there is a vast left wing conspiracy at play to shift the abortion debate to contraceptives (recall the early question by George S to Romney, which Romney dismissed as ridiculous.) Now, everyone is making a big play to make this an issue.

How about some fairness to the discussion? No one is saying that Ms. Fluke cannot go and buy contraceptives. They are readily available for $9 a month at Target or Wal-Mart without insurance. In an emotionless debate, someone should ask Ms. Fluke where her $3,000 number comes from.

Now, in my opinion, the real question, if anyone wants to give this more thoughtful consideration is why does Ms. Fluke think someone else should pay for her contraceptives to facilitate her sexually-active lifestyle (if this is even real)? Can she not afford $9 per month? Since she is a 3rd year law student, can you show having spent $3,000 for contraceptives? Besides, if she is indigent, she can always go to Planned Parenthood that advertises giving these out for free.

So, Ms. Fluke gave a dollar value that demands scrutiny in a manner than equally demands she proves any of this is real and not made up. I almost wonder, and pardon me for asking as it is not my concern, if she might not be homosexual, making all of this moot anyway.

Next, media reports suggest Ms. Fluke has an active history in pressing women’s issues and rights. Great, I’m happy that people do this. Did she target Georgetown as suggested? Where is some disclosure about her work and activism? Shouldn’t this be given a little sunshine? I do think her sponsors on Capitol Hill owe everyone a bit of explanation here.

Anyway, how about we set aside Ms. Fluke, who got her 15-seconds, smeared a few people that maybe deserved it but still offered more sensationalism than substance?

About contraceptives. These are not life-threatening needs, they are morally objectionable to the Catholic Church, to Jesuits that run her school, to many lay people, citizens and business owners, etc. Why should we pay, be forced to pay, through insurance birth control pills to facilitate her lifestyle choices, not medical need? Again, no one is saying, no is even remotely suggesting that access to contraceptives should be limited or banned. No one.

This is a false issue to stir up headline hysterics. I do think the media and Democrats have overplayed their hand on this. They are demanding an entitlement, a freebie, be paid by an insurance company, by a school, by a business, by the public. Will Ms. Fluke die without this handout (that she can already get for $9 a month or even free)? Will her health deteriorate without contraceptives?

And finally, maybe S-L-U-T was incorrect about her lifestyle, though I do think fitting. She may score big as victim of this label but at what cost? First, I have to think that her parents and grandparents might be mortified by her public disclosures. Further, as more comes out about her past, about her claims, she is instead fast proving to be a scheming liar.

Can we have a sober discussion on insurance coverage and personal responsibility? Probably not as this episode shows that no matter how this discussion is held, it is messy at best.

Anonymous

I disagree about Romney, in particular, as I think he set a good neutral example in saying “not the language I would have used.” This is not his fight and not one he or other candidates need to get into at this point. Me thinks there is a vast left wing conspiracy at play to shift the abortion debate to contraceptives (recall the early question by George S to Romney, which Romney dismissed as ridiculous.) Now, everyone is making a big play to make this an issue.

I couldn’t agree more. This is neither the time, place or manner in which to have this discussion.
Anonymous

I don’t think Viagra should be payed for my insurance companies. (It should be used only for instances of procreation.)

Anonymous

By the time they need Viagra, they are past the normal age of procreation, that is why Nature sidelines them. And besides, now they can get extra testosterone, like men need more. I wish the amount of money spent on developing Viagra had been spent on some other necessary venture, like a cure for cancer. But, given that men run the world(into the ground), having a boner when you are old and past it is more important than saving lives.

Anonymous

Let’s not group ED into a neat little category of “men beyond their prime.” That is a simplistic view unsupported by scientific fact.

AND… as you may be unaware of: There are women “beyond their prime” that enjoy having sex with men their own age.

Anonymous

I am 60 and am aware of the interest in men of my age. However, I do not think that Viagra should be covered by insurance, and that it is a drug that was developed for all the wrong reasons. Men being able to get boners into old age is not a medical priority in my opinion.

Anonymous

I think that Viagra should be an option available. I don’t think it should be free. ED is caused by many things besides old(er) age.

Anonymous

Let’s not group ED into a neat little category of “men beyond their prime.” That is a simplistic view unsupported by scientific fact.

AND… as you may be unaware of: There are women “beyond their prime” that enjoy having sex with men their own age.

Anonymous

“Now, in my opinion, the real question, if anyone wants to give this more thoughtful consideration is why does Ms. Fluke think someone else should pay for her contraceptives to facilitate her sexually-active lifestyle (if this is even real)?”

This is an enormous misconception — that any of this is requiring “other” people to pay for birth control. Here are the facts:

1. Providing birth control coverage in a health insurance policy saves money. It does not cost money. It SAVES money. Got it? If there’s no extra money being spent to provide the thing, how does it make sense to say that the thing is costing money?

2. The great majority of insurance in this country is private, and provided by employers. Employer-provided insurance is part of an employee’s compensation package. Thus, the employee EARNS the insurance, and everything it covers. Just as it’s none of the employer’s business what the employee does with their paychecks, it should be none of the employer’s business what the employee does with their insurance coverage. Simple concept.

3. Not that it matters, given the above, but the “$9 a month” alternatives are (a) not available everywhere, and (b) not effective for everyone.

4. There is a range of significant health benefits to birth control beyond contraception. That’s why many women take it even during periods when they are not sexually active. It’s a basic component of women’s healthcare today.

Moral of the story, go talk to women’s health professionals before you start offering a bunch of unfounded bullshit. There is enough misinformation on this issue already.
Anonymous

“Now, in my opinion, the real question, if anyone wants to give this more thoughtful consideration is why does Ms. Fluke think someone else should pay for her contraceptives to facilitate her sexually-active lifestyle (if this is even real)?”

This is an enormous misconception — that any of this is requiring “other” people to pay for birth control. Here are the facts:

1. Providing birth control coverage in a health insurance policy saves money. It does not cost money. It SAVES money. Got it? If there’s no extra money being spent to provide the thing, how does it make sense to say that the thing is costing money?

2. The great majority of insurance in this country is private, and provided by employers. Employer-provided insurance is part of an employee’s compensation package. Thus, the employee EARNS the insurance, and everything it covers. Just as it’s none of the employer’s business what the employee does with their paychecks, it should be none of the employer’s business what the employee does with their insurance coverage. Simple concept.

3. Not that it matters, given the above, but the “$9 a month” alternatives are (a) not available everywhere, and (b) not effective for everyone.

4. There is a range of significant health benefits to birth control beyond contraception. That’s why many women take it even during periods when they are not sexually active. It’s a basic component of women’s healthcare today.

Moral of the story, go talk to women’s health professionals before you start offering a bunch of unfounded bullshit. There is enough misinformation on this issue already.

Anonymous

Birth control is already widely available and cheap. Just because I give Johnny a free condom doesn’t mean he’ll use it, so it doesn’t automatically guarantee a savings. Not fucking or usuing BC will.

Not all insurance covers the same things at the same cost. Some insurance provides coverages for certain things, but not others like erectile disfunction medicine. That doesn’t mean you can’t visit your doctor and get a prescription, you just can’t fill it with your plan and you’ll have to pay full price. Get over it.

Here’s one for the Flukeys out there. I’ve never had a plan EVER that covered hearing aids, and they are HELLA expensive. We’re talking thousands of dollars for good ones Yet, you would think being able to hear properly is a major quality of life issue, but it’s not. And I’m supposed to cry for some yenta who can’t come up with $50/month while going to a university that costs $65,000/year? Give me a fucking break!

Anonymous

Re: your first paragraph — First, women who are provided with birth control pills DO take them, so your condom analogy is pointless. Second, the cost savings created by providing hormonal birth control to women go beyond reducing pregnancies. So it’s not just a question of not having sex.

But, third, the saying that “there are two things in this world that are certain: death and taxes,” is incorrect. There are three certain things: death, taxes, and people having sex with each other. You want to live in a fantasy world of abstinence, fine. But that’s not reality, and we shouldn’t base our laws on it.

Anonymous

Nobody is saying abstinence only. That’s ridiculous, considering how cheap and available it is.

Here’s the bottom line issues:

Healthcare is a benefit, not a right. Your employer can provide coverage
that meets their budget and needs. Since most business aren’t a
religious organization all the basics like contraception are probably
covered. If contraception coverage is important then look for a non
religious organization job. I’ve changed jobs for better benefits. It
can be done!

Since healthcare isn’t a right, a religious organization should have the
right to not provide a coverage just as any other employer might entail
it’s coverage. There is no right that says your employer MUST insure
this particular coverage. There is the free exercise thereof within the
first amendment for religion. That is what the Dems want to make null
and void.

Anonymous

Oh, we’re talking about religious organizations now? Well that’s a much easier discussion because, fortunately for you and your constitutional concerns:

Religious groups are NOT subject to a mandate to provide anything — don’t you remember? The workaround was that insurers are now required to provide birth control DIRECTLY to women who want it and are employed by religious organizations. So those religious orgs DON’T HAVE TO HAVE ANY ASSOCIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE PROVISION OF BIRTH CONTROL, ANYMORE. So your objection actually has no basis in fact, which must make you just delighted. Right? Because you sincerely care about the issue, rather than just twisting it for political points. Right??

Glad we cleared this up. The Obama administration’s rules are well within existing First Amendment case law, so you can rest easy.

(And if you want to argue constitutional case law with me, great — I actually do that for a living. Just please make another thread, and I’ll meet you there. Cheers.)

Anonymous

Perhaps you should wait to see if the SC rules Obamacare as legit before exclaiming the awesomeness of your constitutionality, lol.

Anonymous

Entirely separate issue. That the government can set minimum standards of coverage is not, and never has been, in doubt. Nice try though.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

Are you serious with the “We’re talking about religious organizations now” question? WTF don’t you even pay the slightest attention? Fluke was talking ABOUT a religious institution, you fool — that is what Georgetown Law is; it is run by the Jesuits. This ENTIRE thing is about religious organizations, like Georgetown, having to provide coverage for contraceptives in their health care plans. I guess TPM & Media Matters didn’t make that clear.
And don’t pull your “I’m a Constitutional lawyer” crap with me because I actually am an attorney & if you are what passes for someone who makes his living “arguing constitutional case law” then this country is seriously effed up because you don’t even know that this conversation is preciously about a religious institution needing to provide coverage for contraceptives in their health care plans.

Anonymous

So you’re of the opinion that the accommodation they landed on runs afoul of the free exercise jurisprudence? Would love to hear why, since you’re an actual lawyer and all. So please, give me the arguments.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

See my response above^^^ No room here.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

@win43 — I’m not arguing ANYTHING with you because you already proved yourself a fool for not even knowing the Fluke issue was about religious organizations in the first place. “Wise men never argue with
fools, because people from a distance can’t tell who is who.”
But keep your chin up, & continue Googling legalize — you can probably pass yourself off as someone who “argues constitutional law for a living” at HuffPo or MediaMatters, ’cause most of them are fools who believe what anyone tells them over there anyway.

Anonymous

“Google legalize?”

You mean”legalese?”You are REALLY bad at pretending to be a lawyer on the internet.

Anonymous

Oh, we’re talking about religious organizations now? Well that’s a much easier discussion because, fortunately for you and your constitutional concerns:

Religious groups are NOT subject to a mandate to provide anything — don’t you remember? The workaround was that insurers are now required to provide birth control DIRECTLY to women who want it and are employed by religious organizations. So those religious orgs DON’T HAVE TO HAVE ANY ASSOCIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE PROVISION OF BIRTH CONTROL, ANYMORE. So your objection actually has no basis in fact, which must make you just delighted. Right? Because you sincerely care about the issue, rather than just twisting it for political points. Right??

Glad we cleared this up. The Obama administration’s rules are well within existing First Amendment case law, so you can rest easy.

(And if you want to argue constitutional case law with me, great — I actually do that for a living. Just please make another thread, and I’ll meet you there. Cheers.)

Anonymous

How about this? Did you know that Medicare no longer covers foot care? Unless you have diabetes? That means that if your foot problems are sufficiently serious to warrant a doctor’s care, you have to pay a podiatrist the full bill. Think that, because of this problem, your primary care doctor will even look at your feet? No way. All he’ll do is refer you to a podiatrist.

Ever try to get your toenails trimmed if you cannot do it yourself any longer? Well, you are SOOL (sh-t out of luck).

One of the least appealing parts of aging is that your toenails get thicker and thicker, and ordinary nail clippers no longer work. Thankfully, Amazon sells high-quality toe nail clippers — they are not cheap, but they do work. But, that’s just part of the battle. One has to be able to reach one’s toes… if that’s not possible, you’d better pray that you have a relative or friend who will cut your toenails (a very embarrassing thing to have to request).

Think that your doctor will trim your toenails? No way. His nurse? You’ve got to be joking. A nurse if you’re in the hospital? Forget about it. A beauty shop? They really don’t want to touch old feet. And, besides, beauty shops are not very good about sterilizing their tools — and make it an easy way to pick up some nasty conditions like fungus or, worse, hepatitis.

BTW, a podiatrist I know told me that the change in the Medicare coverage may put him out of business. He is depressed and discouraged. Not just for himself and his business, and the people he employs. He’s depressed because he KNOWS that there are millions of older Americans who NEED HIM, but who cannot afford to see him.

Can I testify before Congress about toenails? That’ll be the day …

Anonymous

You are absolutely correct. My father has diabetes and has to have his toenails cut and feet checked out to keep tabs on his diabetes.

I guess by the Fluke standard that makes me a qualified expert on diabetes.

Congress here I come! /s

Anonymous

Birth control is already widely available and cheap. Just because I give Johnny a free condom doesn’t mean he’ll use it, so it doesn’t automatically guarantee a savings. Not fucking or usuing BC will.

Not all insurance covers the same things at the same cost. Some insurance provides coverages for certain things, but not others like erectile disfunction medicine. That doesn’t mean you can’t visit your doctor and get a prescription, you just can’t fill it with your plan and you’ll have to pay full price. Get over it.

Here’s one for the Flukeys out there. I’ve never had a plan EVER that covered hearing aids, and they are HELLA expensive. We’re talking thousands of dollars for good ones Yet, you would think being able to hear properly is a major quality of life issue, but it’s not. And I’m supposed to cry for some yenta who can’t come up with $50/month while going to a university that costs $65,000/year? Give me a fucking break!

Anonymous

Matthew, drop me a line, would you?
jeteramy30 at ymail dot com (I forget to check that e-mail account every day, but will make an effort to see if I hear from you.)

http://www.theindependentview.com Matthew J. Weaver

I just sent you an email.

Anonymous

Does anyone know whether educational institutions have to provide health care to students under Obamacare? I thought that schools didn’t have to provide any health insurance coverage to students but did so for the students benefit, at the students expense.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

I don’t know about Obamacare and I was in college a long time ago (1987 -1991) but I remember buying the student health plan through my university — it provided services at the campus health center because my parent’s insurance, which I was still covered by, was out-of-state & could only be used for ER visits, not the “I have a cold & need some antibiotics” or annual OBGYN visits (all of which you could get at the student health center).

Anonymous

I think you can opt out of student health insurance if you already have insurance.

Anonymous

The last time I was in college I was required to provide proof of insurance or purchase it through the school. Not sure about Obama(doesn’t)care.

Anonymous

Whatever happened to students are covered on their parents plan until age 26 ?
With a deal like that the insurance companies should be throwing in a bottle of wine and a tube of KY Jelly?
Anonymous

But what is that agenda? For that matter, how is “reproductive justice”
defined? A quick look at the Law Students for Reproductive Justice’s website provides the answer:

There is no mention of treatments for ovarian cancer, or cysts, or any
other disorder that would involve contraceptive medicine being used for
non-contraceptive purposes. The inclusion of abortion is also a
recurring theme.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/revealed-abortion-agenda-of-campus-group-headed-by-sandra-fluke/

Anonymous

That a woman should have control over whether or not she bears a child as the result of sexual intercourse is fundamentally just. That’s your definition of “reproductive justice.”

The reason that it is just: men do not have to confront the issue at all. Men do not bear the physical burdens of reproduction (which is the major point) and, sadly, men overall do not share their proportion of the financial burden either. This is a basic issue of equality.If you disagree with those principles, fine. People disagree. But let’s not pretend that reproductive justice is some ill-defined, hard-to-understand concept. It’s actually very simple.

Anonymous

I agree with your first sentence.

Anonymous

Heh, good enough for me. Unless you’re implying that it’s reasonable to expect abstinence, in which case…

And assuming that’s not your contention, I’m genuinely interested to hear how and why you disagree with the rest.

Anonymous

I think abstinence has it’s benefits but is generally used as a religious intervention for natural biological urges. People have sex because we are built to have sex for our survival. Many other reasons too, but just genetically speaking that’s why we have the urge to begin with.

I do agree with you that some men do not take their financial and parental responsibilities for children seriously. I have problems grouping all men into that category. And I do have some issue with abortions being only the choice of women. Not that I am opposed to a woman’s right to choose, I’m not. And I certainly don’t believe any government should stick it’s filthy nose in the middle of it either. It’s just that, in a relationship, these things should be discussed and agreed upon between both partners. Not that a man should have veto power, just that he should at least be informed and prepared. I’ve been in this situation before and can tell you that it isn’t pleasant. Of course that isn’t always possible and I’ve known married women that were raped by their husbands and had abortions without their knowledge, which is fine with me. Rape isn’t love.

You asked.

Anonymous

Heh, good enough for me. Unless you’re implying that it’s reasonable to expect abstinence, in which case…

And assuming that’s not your contention, I’m genuinely interested to hear how and why you disagree with the rest.
Anonymous

posted in wrong place

Anonymous

This only becomes more ridiculous by the moment. The more this is discussed, the more the Dem’s game plan is energized. Let’s stop feeding this beast. And not let Fluke become a fluke.

Anonymous

How do you stop a media/political feeding frenzy?

Anonymous

If the Republicans would shut up about it that would be a good start. Then when the Dems pounce on them state in no uncertain terms that they find Limbaugh’s comments reprehensible, as equally reprehensible as they find comments by Maher and Schultz.

Why hasn’t Palin spoken up, and that loudly, about the misogyny on both sides? Why hasn’t Hillary?

In my mind, this is a perfect time for Palin to demonstrate that she really is a leader by condemning Limbaugh as well as anyone else that uses this type of abusive, disrespectful and denigrating language. I don’t think Hillary really cares as long as it isn’t hurting Dems.

Anonymous

It’s a perfect time for all of them to show some spine. Every time the left goes off on one of their fauxrages the Right cowers in the corner as if they’d done something wrong.
Screw that! Rush Limbaugh said it and the last time I looked he wasn’t in any leadship position of the GOP.

Anonymous

Right on! I keep listening but even the crickets are sleeping.

Anonymous

was and still is.

Anonymous

Limbaugh is a horse’s ass. Big deal. He’s always been a horse’s ass IMO. So why does the entire Republican Party have to cower because he is what he is? Why does the entire Republican Party have to answer for what one horse’s ass says?

Do the Dems have to answer for the misogynist remarks coming from the likes of Bill Maher and Ed Schultz? Do these cretinous scumbags damage the Democrat brand?

The whole Fluke kerfuffle is ridiculous. Limbaugh attacked a poor little woman who is not a celebrity or a pol and that is wrong. But so were, and are, the attacks by the left on the people of the Tea Party. They weren’t celebrities or pols either but were insulted and demeaned numerous times by leaders of the Democrat Party. But that just them and it doesn’t matter because…

There were also numerous attacks on “Joe the Plumber” for his daring to speak out. The media didn’t seem to mind that a bit.

The fact is these fauxrage incidents by the professional fauxragers are just a part of the double-standard we must endure.

I wish that Limbaugh had not called Ms. Fluke names. He might better have spent his time pointing out that while she may be a very bright “student”, I don’t know, is she, she is without a doubt one of the dumbest consumers on the planet if she’s talking about paying $1000.00 a year for contraception. Try Wal~Mart sweetie, the price is $9/month.

Anonymous

This might take it off the headlines.

Leaked: Bin Laden not buried at sea, body moved on CIA plane to US

http://rt.com/news/osama-body-wikileaks-stratfor-949/

Anonymous

read the article but it seemed to me that there is no inside knowledge. just speculation.

Anonymous

They claim to have e-mails. Time will tell.

Anonymous

Is Obama planning on carting out his embalmed body when the election isn’t going his way? The OBL/Obama bus tour?
Anonymous

Harp, this is about the third comment in this one thread in which you have posted speculative material from dubious sites. I don’t mean to sound snotty, but so be it: Just because it’s written on a Web page doesn’t make it true … that’d be a great vantage point to start from before you post more of this kind of stuff.
Anonymous

Harp, this is about the third comment in this one thread in which you have posted speculative material from dubious sites. I don’t mean to sound snotty, but so be it: Just because it’s written on a Web page doesn’t make it true … that’d be a great vantage point to start from before you post more of this kind of stuff.

Anonymous

Did you read the transcript? If not go read here:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/boxofficebuz/transcript-of-testimony-by-sandra-fluke-48z2

She’s talking about Loestrin and her friend that needs the meds for polycystic ovarian syndrome. Yes, Loestrin can be used a s a contraceptive and is generally labeled as such, but in this case wasn’t. And yes, it costs that much.

So your Walmart comment was uncalled for and uninformed. Please, read the transcript before you dump on Ms. Fluke. Rush deserves to be excoriated and more.

Anonymous

And for that Catholic churches are supposed to provide and/or perform abortions? How about the makers of Loestrin provide a cheaper generic? Ooops, that might infringe on pharmaceutical company profits! Much easier to make the free exercise thereof of religious freedom to be null and void. Pesky constitution!

Uh-oh, I invoked the Constitution…that must be code for racist…

Anonymous

“And for that Catholic churches are supposed to provide and/or perform abortions?”

Show me any regulation, existing or proposed, that would require that. And when you can’t, please remember not to make shit up.

Anonymous

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/01/20120120a.html

Today the department is announcing that the final rule on preventive
health services will ensure that women with health insurance coverage
will have access to the full range of the Institute of Medicine’s
recommended preventive services, including all FDA -approved forms of
contraception.

http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/byaudience/forwomen/ucm118465.htm

Emergency Contraception
(Plan B, Plan B One-Step, Next Choice, Ella)
“The Morning After Pill”

You might also include the IUD in that too.

Personally, I think for non-religion exempted employers should provide this coverage. I see nothing wrong with that. What I see wrong is the trashing of the first ammendment free exercise thereof of religious freedom clause.

Anonymous

Lord, but you’re bad at facts.

Plan B is not an abortion pill. It does not work, at all, if fertilization of an egg has occurred. It suppresses ovulation and that’s it. In plain English, Plan B can prevent a woman from getting pregnant, but it cannot end a pregnancy. Any assertion to the contrary is a fiction, with zero science behind it.

In addition, as I mentioned above, religious employers do NOT have to provide any form of birth control coverage anyway under this rule. Anything to the contrary is a fiction.

The rules that you are opposing are a figment of your imagination.

Anonymous

“And for that Catholic churches are supposed to provide and/or perform abortions?”

Show me any regulation, existing or proposed, that would require that. And when you can’t, please remember not to make shit up.
Anonymous

“And for that Catholic churches are supposed to provide and/or perform abortions?”

Show me any regulation, existing or proposed, that would require that. And when you can’t, please remember not to make shit up.
Anonymous

the false whining and crying by dems over there set piece fluke getting an insult is insulting to anyone wanting a real discussion about important national issues. i paid for my contraception and so can she. let me add that men can pay for viagra too. that’s fair! i set kick obamacare to the curb along with obama and let’s get real about the problems in this country. geez

Anonymous

http://std.emedtv.com/loestrin/generic-loestrin.html

Ooops, Loestrin does have a generic equivalent…
Anonymous

Ms Fluke is an activist and I don’t care or believe what she says. Dump on her? I wouldn’t waste the fertilizer!

I am sick and damn tired of these entitled women who insist on equality on one hand while insisting that their wants and needs be paid for by others on the other. Their constant playing of victim is getting a bit old too. Woman are stronger and better than this.

If a young woman needed contraceptive medication for a genuine medical condition, then most insurance plans will cover it. Even Catholic ones.

As for the other young women who simply want contraception, Wal~Mart is still their best option. Because nothing is free and the rest of us know it.

Anonymous

Dem women have long played the victim card. It’s a well poll tested meme. A woman is either liberated or she is not. What ever happened to self respect?

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

I can’t believe she was allowed to testify about “her friend” — that is the biggest BS out of all of it — If “her friend” has the problems Fluke says she does, then “her friend” should have been the one to testify. It was all rank heresy & here we have noobs like you buying it hook, line & sinker — “she was talking about her friend” as if you are quoting fact. SMH.

Of course, Rush & his dumbass, misogynistic remark has taken the whole focus on the heresay aspect of her testimony. I’m telling you: re-electing Obama is better for him & his ratings -I’m really starting to believe it.

Nonetheless, I don’t think this will be the issue it is now once gas hits $5 a gallon.

And, of course, the Left had no problem with the “Palin is a c*nt” t-shirts — I’m sure they will forget about this soon enough.

Anonymous

Republicans should demand that her friend testify before them so as to separate the truth from the spin. If this woman needs hormone therapy and it has been denied to her that is a valid subject and I doubt a single Republican would object. It would go a long way toward taking the stinky hot air out of the Dem talking points balloon.

Sabinal

aw heck naw!!! they already have problems with Rush…they directly will be accused of harrassing anohter “innocent” woman student.

Let it rest. I’m the only one in my fam that cares about political issues and they’re more worried about gas and groceries.

Anonymous

Republicans should demand that her friend testify before them so as to separate the truth from the spin. If this woman needs hormone therapy and it has been denied to her that is a valid subject and I doubt a single Republican would object. It would go a long way toward taking the stinky hot air out of the Dem talking points balloon.
Anonymous

Hey wait a minute… if you’re a lawyer, as you claim above, why can’t you spell “hearsay?” And why don’t you know the difference between what’s admissible in a court of law (i.e. testimony subject to the rules of evidence, including hearsay) and what you’re allowed to say to a Senate subcommittee (i.e. anything you want, if truthful)?

LOL, internet “lawyers” are hilarious. Nice try pal.

Anonymous

Then we are talking about something different than contraception, and yet that is what the left keeps talking about-free access to contraception.

Anonymous

“dumbest consumer”. That is perfectly put.
It’s also come out that the ‘lady’ has been pushing for Georgetown to pay for gender change operations.
This ‘lady’ has a problem that is larger than what first appears. She is an agitator of the rankist sort.

Anonymous

Fortunately one of your posters yesterday told “the rest of the story” about Fluke. I clicked on the link the poster provided..and was I ever surprised and disgusted. It’s disgusting to think how stupid Obama and the Dems think the American public are…like we wouldn’t find out this person was a phony and the whole thing was a setup???

http://www.facebook.com/people/Hank-DeCat/100001190387982 Hank DeCat

Of course it was a set up — she was testifying not about herself, but “her friend” — and she wasn’t some expert who had done research, etc. relating the results — this was anecdotal hearsay about “her friend.” Yet, people fell for it.

Anonymous

And that is why they are coming down so hard on Romney now. He didn’t take the bait.

Anonymous

Is Sandra Fluke Coordinating with the White House?

However,
Ms. Fluke pulled back the curtain midway through her interview on “The
View” when she suggested that viewers head over to the website of Media
Matters for America. As The Daily Caller recently exposed,
there’s been a high level of coordination between the White House and
Media Matters for America, so of course it’s no shock that Ms. Fluke
chose MMFA as her leftist propaganda arm of choice.

One
of Media Matters’s main jobs has been shutting down right wing media
voices were ever possible. They want a world with no Breitbart.com, Fox
News, Rush Limbaugh or any dissenting voices in the run-up to the 2012
election. The level of coordination should concern anyone because it’s
the president using his position and bully pulpit as a way to quell
criticism by utilizing the Institutional Left’s infrastructure.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/05/Fluke%20Shows%20MMfA%20White%20House%20Coordination

Anonymous

Fan the flames. Make it a big conspiracy against the right. Oh lord.
Anonymous

Sandra left out some of her testimony

Anonymous

“Does it signify that Limbaugh’s remarks were incoherent about Fluke and the facts of testimony? Nope”

Not only did Limbaugh call her a slut and prostitute among other things, but was on a three day bender trashing Fluke and the college women of Georgetown. He also said many things that simply did not make any sense and did not even reflect what Fluke actually said.

So despite what Batchelor says above, Yes, Limbaugh’s rant did not even reflect the facts of her testimony. He was so completely off-base.

Romney himself missed an opportunity to take a tough stand against Limbaugh, but his “not the language I would use” response will not cut it. What language would he have used instead?

The GOP war on women continues. They continue to further lose the women’s vote.

2008 Election:
Women voters made up 53% of all voters (8 milliom more women than men voted)
Obama 56%; McCain 43%
Unmarried Women: Obama 70%; McCain 29%
Married Women: Obama McCain 50%; Obama 47%

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/11/05/behind-obamas-victory-women-open-up-a-record-marriage-gap

The Republicans Presidential candidate cannot beat Obama without getting at least 40% of the women’s vote.

An AP-GfK poll conducted Feb. 16-20 (before much of the recent contraception and Limbaugh talk) shows overall approval for Obama among women at 53 percent.

Women also favor Obama over Romney 54% to 41% and over Santorum 56% to 40%.

A question for any of you: can you name just one women who is in a position of power in the GOP on a national level?

Anonymous

Yeah, we get it. You are required to post talking points over and over even though they have been widely refuted over and over again. Nice bot. Go fetch!

Anonymous

What exactly is the talking point I am posting and what has been refuted?

Anonymous

Funny how you didn’t post talking points, but that is just about all flipper does.
Astounding how much the right wing trash is squirming with anger that their hero Rush is going down in flames. Just never forget the folks like flipper make up that always delusional 20-25% of the far right and their not the sharpest knife in the drawer, they’re as dull as any butter knife.

Anonymous

Me, far right? Hilarious.

I see you are off your meds again.

Anonymous

Michelle Bachmann?
Pretty sad for the gop that that Thorazine zombie Bachmann is all they’ve got.

Anonymous

Pretty sad for the Obamabots that all they’ve got is you, who can’t even spell. Which word? Oh … I’ll just let you figure that one out all on your lonesome. – Bronwyn

Anonymous

Pretty sad for the delusional right wingnuts that all they’ve got is calling people that disagree with their insanity Obamabots.
I’m not even a dem, didn’t vote for him in 2008, and will never vote for him!

Anonymous

“Ms Fluke is an activist and I don’t care or believe what she says. Dump on her? I wouldn’t waste the fertilizer!”So you comment on and criticize Fluke without even having a clue what she said? That is funny. No one is playing a vicitim. You are way off base. You admit you have no idea what Fluke even said and then you say she was playing the vicitim. You have no clue what you are talking about. This was about whether health insurance should cover contraception and women’s healthcare, just like it covers all other healthcare.
Anonymous

“Ms Fluke is an activist and I don’t care or believe what she says. Dump on her? I wouldn’t waste the fertilizer!”So you comment on and criticize Fluke without even having a clue what she said? That is funny. No one is playing a vicitim. You are way off base. You admit you have no idea what Fluke even said and then you say she was playing the vicitim. You have no clue what you are talking about. This was about whether health insurance should cover contraception and women’s healthcare, just like it covers all other healthcare.
Anonymous

Barack Obama Accused By Two Men of Inappropriate Gay Behavior at Havard

The men complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Obama that made
them angry and uncomfortable…and they signed agreements with the
university that gave them financial payouts to leave the journal. The
agreements also included language that bars the men from talking about
their departures.

…Obama and his administration repeatedly declined to
respond…They have also declined to address questions about specific
reporting confirming that there were financial settlements in two cases
in which men leveled complaints.

Sounds just like Herman Cain.

UPDATE: Third man comes forward to AP.

A third former editor says he considered filing a workplace
complaint over what he considered aggressive and unwanted behavior by
Barack Obama….

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2855250/posts

Anonymous

Someone yanked the thread.

Anonymous

They sure did yank the thread…
AND!
All those who oppose him are dropping from “natural causes.”

I suspect those trolls who are monitoring websites like NQ are also tampering with threads.

Anonymous

Your theory is that agents of the Democratic party are now hacking conservative blogs? Wow, that would be a bombshell.

Don’t you think the FIRST thing the people who run freerepublic.com would do, if they got hacked, would be run to the media to report it? That kind of media censorship would be a HUGE story. One of the benefits of having a free press is that stories always come out.

So where’s the story?

Anonymous

It wouldn’t be the first time obots haven’t tried to distort the truth and spin information (or disappear it)

Anonymous

Far out. Even Free Republic has standards. Now that is news. And it goes to show just how much garbage gets posted there. Please, please, please do not post uncorroborated junk from Free Republic. It is never worth it.

Anonymous

Once I got there I felt the need to wash off immediately. Don’t like the place and never did.

Anonymous

So this is what it comes down to. You cannot argue policy or actual political, economic or foreign affairs philosophical differences, so you promote an Internet gay sliming?

You are ridiculous. Larry Johson would be so proud. NQ commentators continue to lower whatever integrity this website ever had.
Anonymous

I’d be very, very cautious about EVER posting anything from Free Republic.

The last time I went to that site was @Flop_Flipper:disqus
2002, when I saw two conversation threads about promoting legislation to take away the right of women to vote. That told me all I needed to know about the kind of people who hang out there. It also scared the hell out of me.

A recommendation: Find verification from legitimate news sources before ever, ever posting anything from Free Republic.
http://www.theindependentview.com Matthew J. Weaver

Too many people believe what they read or want to read, rather than critically thinking about the content and its veracity. Before this post was pulled, it was already getting attention as a parody that was discrediting Free Republic, as if they need any more bad news beyond their normal extremist commentary.

Anonymous

The majority of my circle of friends have seen this as the smoke screen that it is. We had our eyes opened in May, 2008 and see things a lot differently now.
Anonymous

Yes, this is all about the women’s vote. And it all started with the question about birth control — a topic not even on the radar – during one of the GOP debates. This wedge issue is soooo transparent; it’s exactly what Obama needs to rally a certain demographic for the GE. Unfortunately, Rush fell for the ploy big time. I thought he was smarter than that. His comments were also disgusting.

Nevertheless, I wasn’t as outraged as I was when the Dems attacked/ still attack Hillary and Sarah with their vicious misogyny. I’ve never had illusions about Rush being a sensitive type to women or about their issues. But 2008 changed everything. I used to think the Left had the moral high-ground when it came to women’s rights, etc., but no more. Women have always been used in one form or another by the Left. The Dems disgust me and will not get my vote. (BTW, K Powers article on the Left’s misogyny is a must read.)

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html)

Anonymous

The Dems have made a fine art out of using all kinds of folks for political purposes and those purposes alone. I used to be a believer too. A blind partisan bot. I’ve wished that what happened never did but at the same time I’m very happy that I had enough sense to finally see that they are liars and hypocrites.

Anonymous

what the candidates should be talking about

http://usamericanfreedom.com/2012/03/06/the-unprecedented-president/#more-8058

Anonymous

Barack Obama’s 32 Month Report Card

Mr. Hope and Change wants to create a
nation humbled; humiliated, casting-aside capitalism and individual
freedoms
for one where ‘We the People’ are government controlled. This
would be a system that genuflects mediocrity, steals personal aspiration
and opportunity, and punishes those who strive to succeed
‘it lists just what backtrack’s 32 months has done

.

Anonymous

LOOK at this excerpt from the daily Think Progress newsletter (which I continue to receive out of curiosity). Now, I am NO FAN of Rush Limbaugh, but even I find this going a bit too far. I shake my head that millions of people love listening to his show, but they have THE RIGHT TO LISTEN. The issues in this brouhaha don’t begin to warrant a death sentence for a show that so many people love. Anyway, here’s the ThinkProgress excerpt:

Undeterred by Fleeing Advertisers, Limbaugh Continues Sexist Attacks TodayAs we wrapped yesterday’s Progress Report, the number of advertisers bailing on Rush Limbaugh’s show in the wake of the growing furor around his vitriolic, sexist attacks on Sandra Fluke totaled 12. As of right now, nearly triple that number of advertisers have announced plans to drop advertising on the show.Those leaving today range from majors brands like Capital One and J.C. Penney to a local energy company in Maine, Downeast Energy. Another major brand, Netflix, also dropped its advertising today after receiving more than 160,000 petitions gathered by UltraViolet.The current number of advertisers telling Rush Limbaugh enough is enough stands at 34.Check out our Pinterest board for a look at those who have stood up to Limbaugh’s outrageous views on women.Limbaugh Bemoans Uppity Overeducated White WomenOn today’s show, Limbaugh did not back off his sexist attacks. As noted by ThinkProgress’ Alex Seitz-Wald, during a lengthy screed against a new book on the American food system by author Tracie McMillan, Limbaugh asked, “What is it with all of these young, single, white women, overeducated — doesn’t mean intelligent.”

Anonymous

All the formatting got lost when I pasted the excerpt, but I trust you will get the gist of it.

Anonymous

Interesting thread. I learned a few things. That Medicare won’t pay for footcare when I get older was definitely news to me. How do you keep seniors from protesting? Leave them too crippled to walk.

Logan’s Run? Fooey! It will be more like Logan’s Crawl.
Anonymous

What about Sandra Fluke does not say “bait”?