I kind of feel sorry for these people. They really, honestly believe abortion is murdering children. And they can't do anything about it. The rest of us, in that situation, would be just as pathetically desperate to stop the 'murders'.

Unfortunately, they have yet to realize that they're a) in a society where they can't ban abortion, and b) there are ways to help that don't involve actually banning abortion. As long as they keep up the crusade against anything even resembling a woman's choice, they're not going to do any good. Kind of wish they'd figure that part out soon, but there's something to be admired in the fact that they don't. Goes back to the whole baby-killing thing they see abortion as. In the face of an entire society saying no, they're trying to stand up for the defenseless.

It's a lunatic position, but still evokes pity and a bit of admiration.

skullkrusher: Teufelaffe: So, my question stands, how does having a private insurance company pay for birth control for one of their paying customers translate into "she wants us to pay for her birth control"?

that right there. If you advocate for such a mandate, that's "demaning that other people pay for their shiat". The whole beginning to this controversy was that employers would have to offer contraceptive coverage to employees without charge.

That's not to say that Rush's misinformed and intentionally fire-stoking characterization is correct - that we, as taxpayers, are being saddled with the bill but that's not what MFL said.

It's "without charge" only if you ignore the premiums being paid for the insurance coverage to begin with.

Ishkur: This is why they can attack Sandra Fluke so easily without knowing anything about her or even what her position is. She espoused a liberal position for one moment on one issue, so that's enough to condemn her forever for every thought she'll ever have on any topic for the rest of her political career (should she choose one).

The sad thing is, it's not even a liberal position. The purchaser should have more say over what they're purchasing than their employer. Simple as that.

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: It's "without charge" only if you ignore the premiums being paid for the insurance coverage to begin with.

like that time when I bought a hotdog near closing time and the vendor gave me a second free of charge. I really laid into that dude for trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

That's just like you., always expecting all your food to be provided without charge like that. You think you are entitled to walk up to any hotdog vendor and demand free hotdogs paid for by someone else. You should learn to just keep a Bayer aspirin between your lips instead. Whore.

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Teufelaffe: So, my question stands, how does having a private insurance company pay for birth control for one of their paying customers translate into "she wants us to pay for her birth control"?

that right there. If you advocate for such a mandate, that's "demaning that other people pay for their shiat". The whole beginning to this controversy was that employers would have to offer contraceptive coverage to employees without charge.

That's not to say that Rush's misinformed and intentionally fire-stoking characterization is correct - that we, as taxpayers, are being saddled with the bill but that's not what MFL said.

It's "without charge" only if you ignore the premiums being paid for the insurance coverage to begin with.

Of course, you should also note that the costs to insurance companies and those who pay premiums will be more than offset by all the money not being spent on prenatal healthcare, childbirth, and children treatment -- not to mention all the costs associated with raising those now never-conceived unwanted children.

Weaver95: LasersHurt: lilbjorn: Was TFA as muddled as the headline?

Yeah more or less. The basics are "the world is really unfair to white male republicans," and "if you don't believe what I believe, you're intolerant, even if what I believe is intolerance."

I still don't understand what the hell Limbaugh was thinking when he went on a three day rant about Sandra Fluke and what is actually a rather boring testimony regarding the nitty gritty details of her insurance policy.

He was thinking the same shiat he always thinks: "I'm going to spew a bunch of hateful, ignorant garbage and my listeners are going to lap it up." I hadn't even heard the actual clip and was almost ready to give him some benefit of the doubt, but then I saw it played while catching up on some TDS. The way that he pauses before making the connection shows that he did actually give it some thought, that he believed what he said truly was implied by the situation. Above all, it seemed that his tiny little mind was finally cracking after being made so long to function in a cloud of hate and denial.

Best comment from those true believers who responded to this insipid piece of tripe:

Thank you for bringing the E-word, Evil, out of the closet, and using it liberally (no pun) to describe the cloud of gloom and one-way tolerance that has descended upon us. Evil is not some abstract concept that must be suppressed and whispered about in hushed tones. Evil is real. Evil is all around us. It's even in us. Call it what it is. Watch the footage of Ms. Fluke giving her "testimony" as a rapt Saint Nancy looked on approvingly. Feel the chill as Ms. Fluke displayed not one ounce of humanity as she articulated perfectly her well rehearsed self-serving speech. That was Evil. Pelosi could not have been more ecstatic if Mary had aborted Jesus.

I do believe the author of this comment will be nominated to a cabinet post in the new Santorum administration.

R.I.P. Shayera Hall

AuBricker: Best comment from those true believers who responded to this insipid piece of tripe:

Thank you for bringing the E-word, Evil, out of the closet, and using it liberally (no pun) to describe the cloud of gloom and one-way tolerance that has descended upon us. Evil is not some abstract concept that must be suppressed and whispered about in hushed tones. Evil is real. Evil is all around us. It's even in us. Call it what it is. Watch the footage of Ms. Fluke giving her "testimony" as a rapt Saint Nancy looked on approvingly. Feel the chill as Ms. Fluke displayed not one ounce of humanity as she articulated perfectly her well rehearsed self-serving speech. That was Evil. Pelosi could not have been more ecstatic if Mary had aborted Jesus.

I do believe the author of this comment will be nominated to a cabinet post in the new Santorum administration.

Conservatives are silly.

skullkrusher: Teufelaffe: So, by not charging for birth control, they're suddenly not paying for any of their insurance at all? Sweet! If this passes, I'm totally going to get a prescription for birth control so that my employer will stop withholding $300/mo for my health insurance!

if you have homeowners insurance and the insurance company decides to give you flood insurance on top of that without charging you, did you get that additional coverage free of charge?

If the government mandates that the barber give you a shave when you get your hair cut but that he cannot charge you more, is the shave not free of charge?

Are buy one get one free sales a lie?

It's a change in the business model. The services provided for the cost are changed, but that doesn't mean anything is "free".

As for "buy one get one free",

Ms. Fluke believes that it is a good thing to use the full power of government, judicial and political, to force people to go against their moral principles. Like a Roman emperor of old, Ms. Fluke believes that if one will not burn incense before the idols of modern liberalism, that person should be crushed by the state.

When you describe a mandate to provide 100% prescription coverage for contraception in your employer provided health care plan for your employees in this manner, you do not deserve to be listened to.

I think my favorite part was how the independent and sexually liberated law student, Ms. fluke, is going to drag us all into a state governed by Sharia law.

Because if there is one thing that Sharia law holds sacrosanct above all else, it's the sexual liberty of women.

How can one human brain hold onto all of this convoluted, contradictory ignorance without imploding into a singularity of stupidity?

Your first amendment rights have been exercised, citizen. Now STFU.

AuBricker: ftfa: That was Evil. Pelosi could not have been more ecstatic if Mary had aborted Jesus.

skullkrusher: Dr. Whoof: It's a change in the business model. The services provided for the cost are changed, but that doesn't mean anything is "free".

The question is whether you are getting something at someone else's expense. This semantic game of "free" vs "discount" is besides the point.

By your defintion you are getting something at someone else's expense in every business transaction. Name anything you have ever bought, and it's possible for you to have gotten less at the same price. That beer could have been 11 oz rather than 12, so in your mind you are getting that 12th ounce at "someone else's expense".

Sooo...if my GF takes more birth control pills, she'll become the next Roman emperor? That seems to be what I'm to take away from this.

There were so many straw men in that blog posting that I thought my screen would go up in flames.

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: By your defintion you are getting something at someone else's expense in every business transaction. Name anything you have ever bought, and it's possible for you to have gotten less at the same price. That beer could have been 11 oz rather than 12, so in your mind you are getting that 12th ounce at "someone else's expense".

sure, it would cost less to give me less so they are incurring a greater expense by giving me more. Not sure what point you think you made

Just showing the meaninglessness of your "getting something at someone else's expense" standard.

I tried to read it, but the first two paragraphs were "Lying liberals hate America by lying about liberal America because they're liberal lying liberals."

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: By your defintion you are getting something at someone else's expense in every business transaction. Name anything you have ever bought, and it's possible for you to have gotten less at the same price. That beer could have been 11 oz rather than 12, so in your mind you are getting that 12th ounce at "someone else's expense".

sure, it would cost less to give me less so they are incurring a greater expense by giving me more. Not sure what point you think you made

Just showing the meaninglessness of your "getting something at someone else's expense" standard.

trying to miss the point again I see.

Your point doesn't seem to actually exist.

The headline alone made my brain reach out of my left ear and punch my eyeballs.

I'll be damned if I click on the link.

Ms. Fluke's evil is far more than merely advocating that society has an obligation to pay for individuals' recreational sex. Rather, she seems eager to push all who don't adhere to her faith into social ghettos where they can commiserate with their co-religionists, but where they cannot proclaim their beliefs as part of the American political process and operate according to their beliefs, institutionally and personally.


i asploded

FTA: "If all truly tolerant Americans do not speak out against the liberals' claim for a special place for the liberal faith in America and vote against the politicians who support this new America, then America will end up being a sharia state with the tenets defined by people such as Ms. Fluke."

So we'll end up a liberal state under Sharia law that supports pornography, abortion, gay marriage, casual sex, and everything else that liberals happen to like?

What the actual fark?

Sarsin: FTA: "If all truly tolerant Americans do not speak out against the liberals' claim for a special place for the liberal faith in America and vote against the politicians who support this new America, then America will end up being a sharia state with the tenets defined by people such as Ms. Fluke."

So we'll end up a liberal state under Sharia law that supports pornography, abortion, gay marriage, casual sex, and everything else that liberals happen to like?

What the actual fark?

Ya, that would be a nightmarish hell to live in a country that allows women to control the their reproduction, treats gay people as equals and leaves people's sex lives to themselves. That would make baby Jesus cry.

If all truly tolerant Americans do not speak out against the liberals' claim for a special place for the liberal faith in America and vote against the politicians who support this new America, then America will end up being a sharia state

Intolerant liberals will turn America into a fascist Muslim paradise. Got it.

You know, there's nothing in the mandate that says insurance companies can't raise the fees they charge if it turns out that providing the birth control with no copay raises their operating costs. The rules say that at least 80 % (though I might have that number slightly wrong) have to go towards medical expenses. If providing the pill with no copay brings their medical expenses above that percentage, they are allowed to raise rates to cover that increased cost. The women are still not getting anything "for free" as they will be paying insurance rates that take the cost of their medication into consideration.

I would like to point out, however, that providing birth control without copay raising medical expenses is a REALLY BIG "if".

tricycleracer: PC LOAD LETTER: I believe in Shakira Law

[www.moviespad.com image 640x480]

"Read my hips. No new taxes."

I'd rather read her nips.

UnrepentantApostate: You know, there's nothing in the mandate that says insurance companies can't raise the fees they charge if it turns out that providing the birth control with no copay raises their operating costs. The rules say that at least 80 % (though I might have that number slightly wrong) have to go towards medical expenses. If providing the pill with no copay brings their medical expenses above that percentage, they are allowed to raise rates to cover that increased cost. The women are still not getting anything "for free" as they will be paying insurance rates that take the cost of their medication into consideration.

Doesn't matter, this isn't about money, this is about keeping women in their place. I'm sure you could make the argument that covering birth control pills will actually save insurance companies money and thus they would pay higher premiums if they didn't cover them. So even if they could save money by covering the pill it wouldn't matter to these assholes, they would still want to punish women for being sluts.

To remove the issue of contraception from the mix, imagine that Ms. Fluke chose to attend an Orthodox Jewish or Muslim University so that she could force said university to serve pork. While the Jews and Muslims would not be required to eat pork, they would be required to buy it, handle it, prepare it, and serve it. What reasonable American would think that that was a tolerant tactic?


Mr. Fantastic is impressed with the distance of that reach.