If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Senate Republicans respond to the Hobby Lobby decision by introducing a bill to decriminalize the purchase of birth control   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 186
    More: Dumbass, GOP, birth control, Mitch McConnell, for-profit corporations, senate democrats  
•       •       •

5712 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Jul 2014 at 4:07 PM (7 days ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-16 01:56:12 PM
I'm shocked that the Senate GOP is so politically aware. Amazing. Next they'll want to give women the vote!
 
2014-07-16 01:57:17 PM
This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.
 
2014-07-16 01:59:19 PM

EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.


Republicans will block it somehow.
 
2014-07-16 02:08:06 PM

James!: EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.

Republicans will block it somehow.


They'll just attach an amendment with tax cuts for yachts in it
 
2014-07-16 02:09:11 PM
How do-nothing is this Congress? They just wrote a bill that literally does nothing. Even when they're trying to do something, they do nothing.

I hereby dub this bill The Goggles Act.
 
2014-07-16 02:15:21 PM
i159.photobucket.com

That's some fine outreach, there, GOP
 
2014-07-16 02:16:47 PM

James!: EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.

Republicans will block it somehow.


Obama will say he supports it and - BLAM! - filibuster.
 
2014-07-16 02:22:29 PM
Well, I initially thought that maybe they were planning on trying to force it out of prescription-required status, to which I would say "Well, maybe that's slightly better than nothing" but it turns out they're actually offering nothing, which is in fact, not any better than itself.
 
2014-07-16 02:29:34 PM

EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.


Dems may not block it. Remember, this isn't about the employer paying for contraceptive coverage. Its about requiring employers to offer birth control in their plans for free.

IIRC, the ACA provides that insurance companies float the cost of these contraceptives (which insurance companies are happy to do, since birth control is orders of magnitude cheaper than an unplanned pregnancy). McConnell's description of the bill is "no employer can block an employee's right to access FDA approved contraceptives." Well, if the employer isn't paying for the birth control, but they are blocking coverage in her plan because Jesus, it may violate that law.

Depending on how the actual bill is worded, it could effectively undermine the Hobby Lobby case just as effectively as the democratic bill.

Cue Alanis Morrisette.
 
2014-07-16 02:37:56 PM
Senate Republicans plan to offer their own bill requiring employers to allow women to buy their own birth control

The Do-nothing-Congress has inspired some GOPpers in the Senate to write a do-nothing bill?

If Mitch McConnel really wanted to look like he actually cared about providing some form of birth control to women he would simply have to start mailing out naked pictures of himself across the country.

Until he does that I'm not taking him seriously. Won't do it.
 
2014-07-16 02:40:35 PM
The GOP bill would change nothing, because women can already legally access contraceptives approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

The GOP want to start an illegal market for birth control not approved by the FDA!
 
2014-07-16 02:41:12 PM
In response to a proposal by Senate Democrats to require for-profit employers to cover birth control in their health plans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday that Senate Republicans plan to offer their own bill requiring employers to allow women to buy their own birth control.

Well, I for one am TOTALLY AGAINST THIS. I like the current law that requires employers to forbid women from buying their own birth control.

And people will STILL vote for Republicans in a few months. This is farking amazing.
 
2014-07-16 02:47:44 PM

gilgigamesh: EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.

Dems may not block it. Remember, this isn't about the employer paying for contraceptive coverage. Its about requiring employers to offer birth control in their plans for free.

IIRC, the ACA provides that insurance companies float the cost of these contraceptives (which insurance companies are happy to do, since birth control is orders of magnitude cheaper than an unplanned pregnancy). McConnell's description of the bill is "no employer can block an employee's right to access FDA approved contraceptives." Well, if the employer isn't paying for the birth control, but they are blocking coverage in her plan because Jesus, it may violate that law.

Depending on how the actual bill is worded, it could effectively undermine the Hobby Lobby case just as effectively as the democratic bill.

Cue Alanis Morrisette.


Sure, but if they are smart, then they'll just make sure it's worded so that, uh... If they're smart...

I guess there's no sense in even finishing that thought.
 
2014-07-16 02:48:52 PM
Next item on the docket: a bill that says that you can't buy or sell an undocumented person.

Look, minority outreach!
 
2014-07-16 02:56:31 PM
"We just put forth a bill that states your employer must let you buy your slut pills with your own damn money if you like, you filthy whores. Now who says the GOP isn't looking out for women?!"

Yeah...I really don't think that this stunt is going to help.
 
2014-07-16 02:58:19 PM
FTA: Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), joining McConnell at his press conference, said the bill is intended to make the political point that "women have the same rights today to access contraception as they did before Obamacare was passed, and before the Hobby Lobby decision."

Still having the same right doesn't preclude that they no long have the same capacity.

I wonder if this dreck is symptomatic of a general is/ought distinction cognitive failure -- though it could be inherent incapacity, unattending neglect, or willful blurring.
 
2014-07-16 03:27:09 PM
Lionel Mandrake:

Obama will say he supports it and - BLAM! - filibuster.

It'll never happen. 


lh3.ggpht.com
 
2014-07-16 03:58:51 PM

Nabb1: gilgigamesh: EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.

Dems may not block it. Remember, this isn't about the employer paying for contraceptive coverage. Its about requiring employers to offer birth control in their plans for free.

IIRC, the ACA provides that insurance companies float the cost of these contraceptives (which insurance companies are happy to do, since birth control is orders of magnitude cheaper than an unplanned pregnancy). McConnell's description of the bill is "no employer can block an employee's right to access FDA approved contraceptives." Well, if the employer isn't paying for the birth control, but they are blocking coverage in her plan because Jesus, it may violate that law.

Depending on how the actual bill is worded, it could effectively undermine the Hobby Lobby case just as effectively as the democratic bill.

Cue Alanis Morrisette.

Sure, but if they are smart, then they'll just make sure it's worded so that, uh... If they're smart...

I guess there's no sense in even finishing that thought.


I seriously doubt it would work. It was just really just a little wishful thinking.

That said, I am at a complete loss what the point is here. I assume there is something they are trying to accomplish, but what the hell is it? It obviously isn't an honest alternative to proposed dem legislation.

So what then? Red meat for the base? It isn't really effective for that.

All I can think of is "show those broads that want free slut pills how dumb they are, stupid broads". And if that's what this is....

Hm, maybe they ARE that stupid.
 
2014-07-16 04:02:32 PM

gilgigamesh: That said, I am at a complete loss what the point is here. I assume there is something they are trying to accomplish, but what the hell is it? It obviously isn't an honest alternative to proposed dem legislation.


They want to point out that women have the same ability to afford (or not be able to afford) birth control pills as before the ACA / Hobby Lobby ruling took effect.

And as we all know, our health care system before the ACA took effect was awesome.
 
2014-07-16 04:09:30 PM

Lando Lincoln: They want to point out that women have the same ability to afford (or not be able to afford) birth control pills as before the ACA / Hobby Lobby ruling took effect.


OK, that makes sense. I guess.

Except doesn't that simply serve to highlight how the ACA would allow them to access contraceptives paid by their insurer, but for GOP's pointless obstructionism?
 
2014-07-16 04:10:06 PM
The hell are Senate Republicans doing? Don't they know there is still stuff in this country to name after St. Ronald Reagan(hallowed be His name)??
 
2014-07-16 04:10:50 PM
I guess I am just trying to get my head around how this could be interpreted as anything but a big middle finger to women, courtesy of the GOP.
 
2014-07-16 04:10:59 PM
Please stop voting for Republicans. I don't want another oil war, I don't want women being raped by their doctors, I don't want pretty much anything the GOP wants.

Please. Stop. Voting. For. Republicans.
 
2014-07-16 04:12:42 PM
The Democrats' bill, which the Senate will vote on Wednesday, states that no for-profit company can opt out of federal law based on its owners' religious beliefs. The bill would effectively override the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision and require most employers, with the exception of houses of worship and religious nonprofits, to cover all 20 forms of birth control laid out in the president's health care law.

Failed the vote today 56-43. Needed 60 because that's the only majority recognized in the Senate anymore.
 
2014-07-16 04:12:57 PM
So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

/ it's ok when we do it?
 
2014-07-16 04:13:09 PM
Democrats respond with bill decriminalizing Republican stupidity
 
2014-07-16 04:15:25 PM
"We plan to introduce legislation this week that says no employer can block any employee from legal access to her FDA-approved contraceptives," McConnell told reporters. "There's no disagreement on that fundamental point."

*facepalm*

Maybe you should prevent Shariah law from being used in US court cases again while you're at it. Or declare that they sky must be blue on sunny, cloudless days?
 
2014-07-16 04:17:04 PM
Never have so many done so little for so few.
 
2014-07-16 04:18:01 PM

gilgigamesh: I guess I am just trying to get my head around how this could be interpreted as anything but a big middle finger to women, courtesy of the GOP.


There's no getting around that one.

The GOP is saying, "I know you're too stupid to understand this, you stupid broads, so let us mansplain it to you in terms you can understand: you can still buy your slut pills on your own, just like you were able to before, so SHUT UP AND GET BACK IN THE KITCHEN."
 
2014-07-16 04:18:33 PM

iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

/ it's ok when we do it?


The hell are you even talking about?
 
2014-07-16 04:20:06 PM
Women should be able to buy whatever they want with their own money, but their employer should have the right to stipulate that any money from the wages we pay you can NOT be spent on slut pills.
 
2014-07-16 04:20:52 PM

iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?


Please explain how those two situations are similar. I'm not seeing it.
 
2014-07-16 04:21:05 PM

Wyalt Derp: Women should be able to buy whatever they want with their own money, but their employer should have the right to stipulate that any money from the wages we pay you can NOT be spent on slut pills.


-1/10, too obvious
 
2014-07-16 04:22:05 PM
They should have waited until next week to introduce the bill.  This is the wrong week to piss off the Big "O".

img.fark.net
 
2014-07-16 04:22:05 PM

SphericalTime: I'm shocked that the Senate GOP is so politically aware. Amazing. Next they'll want to give women the vote!


I can't even begin to tell you how bad of an idea that is...

...but Ann Coulter can:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2007/10/04/coulter-if-we-took-away-w o mens-right-to-vote-we/140037
 
2014-07-16 04:23:05 PM

grumpfuff: iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

/ it's ok when we do it?

The hell are you even talking about?


From Wikipedia:

On the April 18, 2007, episode of MSNBC's program Tucker, Tucker Carlson interviewed [US Representative Carolyn] McCarthy about the Virginia Tech massacre and her proposed reauthorization of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. He asked her to explain the need to regulate barrel shrouds, one of the many provisions included in her bill. She did not directly respond, instead stating it was more important that the legislation would ban large capacity "clips" (sic) of the type used in the Virginia Tech massacre and that the class of guns chosen prohibited by the law were those used by gangs and killers of police officers. That statement was factually incorrect; Cho's largest magazines held fifteen rounds, thus making them illegal under the AWB.[27] When Carlson pressed her twice more on the question about barrel shrouds, she admitted that she did not know what a barrel shroud was, and incorrectly stated, "I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up." Carlson replied with, "No, No it's not."[
 
2014-07-16 04:23:05 PM
Man, this is like rain on my gay wedding day.
 
2014-07-16 04:24:14 PM
I understand they also have a provision to defund ACORN in the bill.
 
2014-07-16 04:26:04 PM

EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.


Obama should come out and say that this is a great idea and sit back and watch the GOP implode.
 
2014-07-16 04:26:56 PM

grumpfuff: iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

/ it's ok when we do it?

The hell are you even talking about?


Carolyn McCarthy, democratic senator from New York, wanted to ban barrel shrouds. She, incorrectly, described a barrel shroud as "the shoulder part that goes up". My point is; one should not try to legislate things that they obviously don't understand.
 
2014-07-16 04:27:02 PM
so men still have to pay for condoms?
 
2014-07-16 04:27:05 PM

Lando Lincoln: In response to a proposal by Senate Democrats to require for-profit employers to cover birth control in their health plans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday that Senate Republicans plan to offer their own bill requiring employers to allow women to buy their own birth control.

Well, I for one am TOTALLY AGAINST THIS. I like the current law that requires employers to forbid women from buying their own birth control.

And people will STILL vote for Republicans in a few months. This is farking amazing.


Remember:  If Satan was a Republican and Jesus was a Democrat, the derpers would vote for Satan anyway, because he's got an "R" next to his hame.
 
2014-07-16 04:28:54 PM

abb3w: FTA: Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), joining McConnell at his press conference, said the bill is intended to make the political point that "women have the same rights today to access contraception as they did before Obamacare was passed, and before the Hobby Lobby decision."

Still having the same right doesn't preclude that they no long have the same capacity.

I wonder if this dreck is symptomatic of a general is/ought distinction cognitive failure -- though it could be inherent incapacity, unattending neglect, or willful blurring.


I think the Republicans have a fair point because there was a mass of discussion on the apparent power of the employer to deny women the right to birth control, which was not happening. Many of the loudest against the decision of the Supreme Court kind of shot themselves in the foot when there were better ways to say this as being an issue of reducing access to medical care for a woman who holds different religious beliefs on the basis of misunderstanding and/or willful ignorance of the product.
 
2014-07-16 04:29:27 PM

Lando Lincoln: iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

Please explain how those two situations are similar. I'm not seeing it.


Two congress critters trying to legislate things that they don't understand.
 
2014-07-16 04:31:47 PM

iheartscotch: Two congress critters trying to legislate things that they don't understand.


That's not what's going on in the case with McConnell and this new bill. They understand perfectly what they're doing. They're being condescending assholes.
 
2014-07-16 04:32:09 PM

iheartscotch: grumpfuff: iheartscotch: So, it's ok when some democratic senator from New York tries to ban the shoulder part that goes up; but, it isn't ok when a republican tries to make sure women using birth control can't/won't be blocked by an employer?

/ it's ok when we do it?

The hell are you even talking about?

Carolyn McCarthy, democratic senator from New York, wanted to ban barrel shrouds. She, incorrectly, described a barrel shroud as "the shoulder part that goes up". My point is; one should not try to legislate things that they obviously don't understand.


So, you just wanted to get a tu quoque in, with a thread that has nothing to do with gun control. Got it.
 
2014-07-16 04:33:09 PM

James!: EvilEgg: This is a good move.  Now when the Democrats try to block a bill that literally has no effect at all, the GOP can use it against the Democrats, and if it passes they get to claim they introduced major legislation to protect women's health care choices.

Republicans will block it somehow.


pretty much this, I find it hard to believe that the GOP can rally enough of their base to pass a bill giving women the "Right" to access birthcontrol even if they already have said access. Mostly because some will read it to be a vote on protecting abortion and block it on that basis alone
 
2014-07-16 04:33:31 PM

Vangor: I think the Republicans have a fair point because there was a mass of discussion on the apparent power of the employer to deny women the right to birth control, which was not happening.


...provided that one could afford the birth control without insurance paying for part of it.
 
2014-07-16 04:34:07 PM
FTA: Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), joining McConnell at his press conference, said the bill is intended to make the political point that "women have the same rights today to access contraception as they did before Obamacare was passed, and before the Hobby Lobby decision."

Um....I couldn't help nitpicking the grammar, but that's an awfully weird implication.
 
2014-07-16 04:34:46 PM
I heard a United States Senator talking, this morning saying, "Let's be clear: The Supreme Court has not said that your employer can prevent you from using contraception."

That's right up there with "Tell me....when did you stop beating your wife?"
 
Displayed 50 of 186 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report