Get Your Money For Nothing And A New Hoo-ha For Free?

By
March 5, 2012

Gee, I wonder why Republicans might have wanted to vet Sandra Fluke before she was permitted to testify as an expert at the original hearing? Now, if she were a conservative, the media would have dug up everything on her by now. Just as with Obama, they aren't interested in vetting the people of the left. They're like the children of the corn, but they eat babies, from what I've heard.

[B]irth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if “gender reassignment” surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law. The title of the article . . . is “Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons” and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review.

Please consider supporting RiehlWorldView with a small donation
, by shopping at Amazon via our Associate link in the sidebar or by re-distributing our content across the Web with the options below. Thank you.


Comments:
  1. Ragspierre says:

    Her “testimony” (was it under oath? It isn’t clear from any transcript I’ve seen) was a fabric of lies, and should be completely fisked.
    She claimed knowing a young student who lost an ovary because…bla-blah. Truth or lie?
    “40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy.” Truth or lie?
    “…she had to turn and walk away because she couldn’t afford that prescription. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception.” Truth or lie? (That one is easy…contraceptives are readily available…free…all over DC).
    “…a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn’t fit it into their budget anymore. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same choice.” Truth or lie? (Again, easy; it is a bald-faced lie, for the reasons cited above.)
    “In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their symptoms.” Truth or lie? Make her produce her numbers, and from where they were derived. What does “interrogated” mean? Who “interrogated” the puurrr female students?
    Find this liar’s transcript, and start going though it, line-by-line.

  2. ljm says:

    Like yourself Santorum is an attorney. Perhaps he can get Fluke on the witness stand before the polls open in Alaska.
    The damage is done, barrister, and not by Fluke. What you fail to understand is that Fluke’s testimony resonates with women all over the country. Planned Parenthood and other clinics are not necessarily free. It is on a by-income basis. It is not just a matter of picking up your monthly prescription of pills. There are examinations required and very often additional medical tests involved. PP does take insurance – if the woman covered – otherwise she pays for everything based on her income.
    It is also not readily available to all women. For instance in Idaho there are only two PP clinics serving 44 counties.
    Today will give us an idea as to how Republican women are responding to this issue. Until Limbaugh put his foot in his mouth Conservatives had control of the mandate issue now it appears to be lost.

  3. Ragspierre says:

    “Fluke’s testimony resonates with women all over the country.”
    Well, if by “resonates” you mean disgusts, sickens, revolts…
    that kind of resonance.
    Really, ljm, most women are not bitter gender fetishists like you. Even some of those I’ve known who were out-grew it. They are happier now.
    Individual responsibility is a Conservative value. You should consider giving it a test-spin.

  4. tired of the b/s says:

    ljm, sorry, but Fluke’s statements don’t wash. You can Google the number of readily available clinics in the area of both Georgetown Law School AND Cornell where this harpy previously attended. Under Georgetown U’s student health care plan, her OB-GYN visits would be covered, just not her perscription for birth control pills that are not required for a specific medical ailment. Most doctors will write a Rx to cover name-brands, or generics. On the bottom of every Rx given me by my doctor, it states that generics may be substituted unless otherwise directed.
    Considering that Fluke could have gotten a generic Rx for birth control pills @ $9/mo, her testimony of the overall cost requires a willing suspension of disbelief. And no Rx is required for condoms.
    To agree with your premise that women all across the nation agree with Ms. Fluke, it would be necessary to prove that women all across the nation agrees that Catholic, and other religious, institutions should be required to provide contraceptives regardless of the First Amendment. I don’t think you can legitimately make that case.
    And if you want to be financially rewarded for your sexual activities, via “in-kind contributions”, that makes you a prostititute, not a slut.

  5. dinglewoodnorwoodbill says:

    I cannot believe I am defending Ragspierre, but he’s right on the money essentially HERE.
    Sure, damage HAS been done, ljm, but his point is well taken.
    At some point repubs and conservatives have got to learn to attack these goons and their lies head on, point by point, and even when missteps are initially made, nothing in the end is lost by keeping up the fight. Wishing it will go away and moving on to other things will not work anyway since the left will keep it going unchallenged, since now the meek right just wants is all to go away.
    Fact is, her comments are absurd. Why not challenge her directly.
    She is unmarried, and apparently is a a bit loose since she cannot seem to make the man (men??) she’s boinking contribute to her contraception and needs to force others to part with their property (money) or their conscious (religious liberty and freedom of expression-see Constitution).
    Why not make the choice, since she’s not trying to conceive, to have less sex or use self stimulation or otherwise budget the AMOUNT of sex she engages in, being unmarried no less, to the amount of money she can provide or her significant other(s)?
    Why not use condoms with spermicide (similar failure rates to the pill for women) which would be cheaper than her minimum 1K per year claims to a level she can afford without mooching off of the taxpayers?
    Her age seems debatable. Her past activism reeks of a tool for propaganda by artificial test casing. This is not rocket science.
    We should not be afraid of challenging the left’s absurd notion that asking women to pay for their own lunch is equal to a war on women or denial of access.
    If Ms Flake, I mean Fluke wants to have a box of rubbers a week, she can plonk down her OWN greenbacks to score her some Trojans.
    Keep me and the government out of it!

  6. Ragspierre says:

    The President of the United States called me a “tea-bagger”.
    He laughed and jived when his union thug boss buddy called us “sons of bitches”.
    No FLUCKING body on his side has ANY business saying a word about Limbaugh.

  7. dinglewoodnorwoodbill says:

    And, teabagger is a a crude sexual reference as many know.
    Not just the prez, but the entire Daily Kos uses this slang hourly…
    The left knows Limbaugh was using an outrageous perhaps ill considered tactically absurdity to prove a point about rough equivalency.
    And, she does resemble a hooker in her expectation of being paid to have sex, since she needs bc to do it, and expects somebody else to provide it other than herself.
    Where Rush is wrong is at least the “John” paying for sex is getting something directly out of the deal, whereas taxpayers financing Ms. Flake, I mean Fluke, get nothing out of their having to finance her jollies.
    The main issues here is gov role and property rights affected by wealth transfer. The second one is religious liberty/conscious protection and freedom of expression thereby, as given in the US Constitution. The state is not keeping out of the church, so much for church/state separation.
    There is no war on women. There is no denial of access. There is, however, an obligation of a sexually active person, female or male, to fund their own way to use of sold contraceptives.

  8. Ragspierre says:

    From the Georgetown student insurance handbook…
    Exclusions
    No benefits will be paid for: a) loss or expense caused by, contributed to, or resulting from; or b)
    treatment, service or supplies for, at, or related to:
    1. Acupuncture; allergy, including allergy testing; except for Special Benefits provided at SHC
    (See page 11);
    2. Services and supplies for conditions related to learning disabilities, except for: 1) Special
    Benefits provided at the SHC (See page 11); and 2) learning disabilities testing when referred
    by the designated Georgetown Learning Disability Coordinator up to a $750 per lifetime
    maximum;
    3. Biofeedback or services and supplies related to biofeedback;
    4. Circumcision, except for Newborn Infants;
    5. Cosmetic procedures, except cosmetic surgery required to correct an Injury for which benefits
    are otherwise payable under this Policy or for newborn or adopted children;
    6. Dental treatment, except for Injury to Sound, Natural teeth;
    7. Elective Surgery or Elective Treatment or Elective Abortion, except as specifically provided for
    in the Policy;
    8. Vision services and supplies related to eye refractions or eye examinations, eyeglasses,
    contact lenses, prescriptions or fitting of eyeglasses, and radial keratotomy, keratomileusis or
    excimer laser photo refractive keratectomy or similar type procedures or services; except when
    due to disease process or Injury;
    9. Services or supplies for care of corns, bunions (except capsular or bone surgery), or calluses,
    except for Special Benefits provided at the SHC; (See page 11)
    10. Hearing examinations or hearing aids; or other treatment for hearing defects and problems
    except as specifically provided in the Benefits for Child Health Screening Services or except
    when due to an Injury. “Hearing defects” means any physical defect of the ear that can impair
    normal hearing, apart from the disease process;
    11. Hirsutism, alopecia; except for Special Benefits provided at the SHC; (See page 11)
    28
    29
    12. Immunizations/Vaccine services and supplies related to immunizations, except for Dependents
    for the first two years of a covered Dependent’s life, or as specifically provided in the benefits
    for Child Health Screening Services, or when provided by the SHC; preventive medicines or
    vaccines, except where required for treatment of a covered Injury;
    13. Injury or Sickness for which benefits are paid or payable under any Workers’ Compensation or
    Occupational Disease Law or Act, or similar legislation;
    14. Injury sustained while (a) participating in any intercollegiate or professional sport, contest or
    competition; (b) traveling to or from such intercollegiate or professional sport, contest or
    competition as a participant; or (c) while participating in any practice or conditioning program
    for such intercollegiate or professional sport, contest or competition;
    15. Lipectomy services and supplies related to surgical or suction-assisted lipectomy;
    16. Organ transplants;
    17. Outpatient Physiotherapy, except as specifically provided for in the Policy Schedule of Benefits;
    (See page 13, Physiotherapy and Physiotherapy Other);
    18. Patient controlled analgesia (PCA);
    19. Prescription Drugs, services or supplies as follows, except as specifically provided in the policy:
    a) Therapeutic devices or appliances, including: hypodermic needles, syringes, support
    garments and other non-medical substances, regardless of intended use; (except as
    specifically provided under the Benefits for Diabetes;
    b) Birth control and/or contraceptives, oral or other, whether medication or device; except as
    specifically provided in the policy;
    c) Immunization agents, biological sera, blood or blood products administered on an outpatient
    basis;
    d) Drugs labeled, “Caution – limited by federal law to investigational use” or experimental drugs;
    e) Products used for unapproved cosmetic purposes;
    f) Drugs used to treat or cure baldness; anabolic steroids used for body building;
    g) Anorectics – drugs used for the purpose of weight control;
    h) Fertility agents or sexual enhancement drugs, such as Parlodel, Pergonal, Clomid, Profasi,
    Metrodin, Serophene, or Viagra;
    i) Growth hormones; or
    j) Refills in excess of the number specified or dispensed after one (1) year of date of the
    prescription;
    20. Participation in a riot or civil disorder, commission of or attempt to commit a felony;
    21. Reproductive/Infertility services including but not limited to: birth control; family planning;
    fertility tests; infertility (male or female), including any services or supplies rendered for the
    purpose or with the intent of inducing conception (examples of fertilization procedures are:
    ovulation induction procedures, in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer or similar procedures that
    augment or enhance reproductive ability); premarital examination; impotence, organic or
    otherwise; tubal ligation; vasectomy; sexual reassignment surgery;
    22. Screening exams or testing in absence of Injury or Sickness except for routine physical
    examinations, gynecological (GYN) visits, or well baby visits under 2 years old, or as specifically
    provided in the benefits for Child Health Screening Services;
    30
    23. Services provided normally without charge by the SHC or services covered or provided by a
    student health fee;
    24. Nasal and sinus surgery; except surgery made necessary as the result of a covered Injury;
    25. Skydiving, parachuting, hang gliding, glider flying, parasailing, sail planing, or bungee jumping;
    26. Sleep disorders, supplies, treatment, or testing relating to sleep disorders except for services
    provided at the SHC or when a referral obtained from the SHC accompanies a sleep disorder
    claim;
    27. Supplies, except as specifically provided in the policy;
    28. Surgical breast reduction, breast augmentation, breast implants or breast prosthetic devices;
    29. Treatment in a government hospital, unless there is a legal obligation for the Insured Person
    to pay for such treatment;
    30. War or any act of war, declared or undeclared; or while in the active duty of the armed forces
    of any country (a pro-rata premium will be refunded upon request for such period not covered);
    and
    31. Weight management services and supplies related to weight reduction programs, weight
    management programs, related nutritional supplies; treatment for obesity, surgery for removal
    of excess skin or fat, except as specifically provided for in the Policy (See page 11 for special
    SHC referrals).

  9. ljm says:

    “To agree with your premise that women all across the nation agree with Ms. Fluke, it would be necessary to prove that women all across the nation agrees that Catholic, and other religious, institutions should be required to provide contraceptives regardless of the First Amendment. I don’t think you can legitimately make that case.”
    According to recent polls Santorum has been losing the support of women steadily since his statements on birth control surfaced. I consider that as solid evidence that women are sympathetic to Ms. Fluke as the decline has increased in recent days.
    Limbaugh’s misogynistic comments have effectively changed the debate with regard to the birth control mandate. The debate is no longer about the moral rights of Catholic institutions to choose to deny birth control. The discussion has now become about the availability of birth control.
    Rags, if you have evidence that there is a consensus of women across America being disgusted and revolted by Ms. Fluke’s testimony you ought to present it. Video, audio, legitimate quotes – anything.
    Indeed your utter support of Limbaugh’s misogyny as well as your own which is amply evident in your many replies to my posts would suggest that you have little idea as to how women think.

  10. Ragspierre says:

    Let me just say, FLUCK you and your misogyny lies.
    Next, let me call you out on your LIES regarding this controversy.
    Note the EXEMPTION for VIAGRA, which you routinely CHANT is provided under insurance plans.
    LIAR.
    Finally, for this post,
    “SO IF THE CONTRACEPTION ISSUE IS SO BAD FOR REPUBLICANS, why is Scott Brown maintaining such a big lead over Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts? Maybe people understand that it’s not about sexual freedom, but about government control?
    Related: Carbonite’s stock falls below 52-week low and DaTechGuy jokes: “Maybe Carbonite can restore their old business model from a previous backup?”
    –InstaPundit
    You stupid, lying, twisted gender fetishist.

  11. Ragspierre says:

    I want to comment on the commotion over Rush Limbaugh’s use of the word “slut” to describe law student Sandra Fluke. Fluke, as you know, argued before a house congressional committee that women need taking care of. That is, if they should take it into their fluffy little heads to have sex with someone, they can’t be expected to manage the consequences all by their little selves. Someone else has got to pay for their contraception – preferably a big strong man like Barack Obama. Barack Obama has lots and lots of money. Chicks dig that. In fact, he’s so powerful, he just took the money from other people. What a turn on for girly girls like Sandra!
    –Andrew Klavan
    A real Breitbart kinda guy.
    Read the whole thing….
    http://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2012/03/05/the-true-meaning-of-slutgate/

  12. Ragspierre says:

    By Michelle Malkin • March 5, 2012 10:55 AM
    Barack Obama said he was going to go to Washington to change politics as usual.
    But after two decades of left-wing attempts to silence Rush Limbaugh, Barack Obama and his “progressive” tolerance police are still…trying to silence Rush Limbaugh. As usual.
    I weighed in on the Sandra Fluke kerfuffle on Friday before President Obama took time out of his busy fund-raising schedule to aid Democrat fund-raisers with a high-profile phone call to Fluke.
    To which I can only say:
    REALLY?
    When Obama isn’t dialing for dollars, he’s dialing for cheap prog brownie points. This is another beer summit moment illustrating the utter pettiness of a White House willing to insert itself into a sideshow fray manufactured by femme-a-gogues for plain political gain.
    Kirsten Powers recites the very familiar litany of slime against conservative women that goes uncommented on by the Obama administration every single day of the year. Been there, done that.
    Like I always say: Double standards — it’s what’s for breakfast, lunch, and dinner on the Obama 2012 talking points menu.
    But it’s ok. Conservative women don’t need coddling phone calls from Obama. We just need him to get out of the White House and out of our lives.
    Harangue Rush Limbaugh on your own damned dime.
    ***
    Reminder: As I reported in February 2009 — after Obama specifically name-checked and targeted Limbaugh in concert with the umpteenth attempt by the Left to “hush rush” — using Rush as a left-wing bogeyman and failing to bring him down is as old as the hills. From my piece for the NYPost:
    President Obama is throwing a bipartisan Super Bowl party Sunday at the White House. But one leading conservative football fan won’t be in attendance: Rush Limbaugh. The much-heralded new era of outreach and cooperation in Washington does not extend to the Right’s most powerful voice on talk radio. With his explicit attack on Limbaugh during a Capitol Hill meeting last week, Obama has signaled the end of Bush Derangement Syndrome – the defining mental illness of the Democrats for eight years – and ushered in the age of Rush Derangement Syndrome.
    You would think that victories in the presidential race and Congress would be enough for the Left. But no. Like Captain Ahab, Sen. Lindsay Graham still bristles at the “loud folks” in conservative talk radio. Democrats even drafted a petition denouncing Limbaugh last week, showing that trying to save the economy doesn’t wait for petty personal attacks.
    Too bad Obama hasn’t learned the lessons of his predecessors. Limbaugh not only has survived countless protests, boycotts, media smears and political attempts to kick him off the airwaves. He has emerged each time with a higher profile, greater influence, and a strengthened hand.
    In a repeat of anti-Rush history (see “vast right wing conspiracy,” et al), the White House broadside backfired – disseminating his biting critiques of the trillion-dollar omnibus spending bill to a wider audience. Rather than dividing the GOP, it united them. Not a single Republican voted for the Obama plan after unprecedented wooing, courting, and cajoling. The Rush Effect is incontestable.
    ________________________________________________________________________
    Huh. Michelle is a…what’s that termed…WOMAN.
    I can do this ALLLLLL night, you lying…

  13. Jay says:

    Too bad I can’t get a gov’t-subsidized prostitute, because “WHAAA!! I need this stuff and it’s too hard to live and Ima make a doo doo in my jamies..I need gubberment!”

  14. ljm says:

    Michelle Malkin – a consensus of one.
    Perhaps this from the Boston Herald is the reason why Limbaugh’s comments haven’t stuck to him like they are sticking to Santorum:
    “Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown is joining Democrats in calling on radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh to apologize for calling a law student “a slut” for testifying before Congress about the need for birth control coverage.
    A Brown spokesman said that as the father of two daughters, the senator found the remarks offensive and reprehensible and believes Limbaugh should apologize.”
    Compare that to Santorum’s comments to Blitzer:
    “Well, he’s taking — you know, he’s being absurd. But that’s, you know, an entertainer can be absurd. And — and he’s taking the absurd, you know, the asurd — absurd, you know, sort of, you know, point of view here as to how — how far do you go?
    And, look, I’m — he’s — he’s in a very different business than I am.
    I’m — I’m — I’m concerned about the public policy of this president imposing his values on the people — on — on — on — on people of faith who morally object to — to the government telling them they have to do something which they believe is a grave moral wrong. And government should not be in the business of telling — you know, when you talk about the separation of church and state, you hear it all the time.
    Well, the — the real separation of church and state in — that — that our founders believed in was that the state cannot tell people of faith what to do and run over their rights.
    And that’s what this president is doing right now.”

  15. Ragspierre says:

    So…
    I provide you BOTH proof of this issue NOT “resonating”…
    AND a quote (which is what you asked for)…
    and you answer with…
    handwave.
    Lying SOS.
    But, no matter. Like I said, I can do this all night, and destroy whatever creds you still have here.
    Today we are again invited to believe that to deny a taxpayer subsidy is to withhold a right. For no discernible reason, the Obama administration has decreed that all contraceptives must be provided “free” to those who want them (which of course means that everyone else’s insurance rates must rise).
    The administration demands this despite the fact that 1) most Americans can well afford their own contraception (it’s less than the cost of a weekly trip to Starbucks); 2) inexpensive contraceptives are widely available at every supermarket and pharmacy; 3) Medicaid recipients already receive them free; 4) the feds also spend another $300 million annually to provide free contraceptives to those who are low-income, uninsured, or otherwise do not qualify for Medicaid; and 5) Planned Parenthood and state and local public health clinics distribute contraceptives free around the nation.
    –Mona Charen
    You feel the sand shifting out from under your feet, you lying, twisted SOS…???

  16. ljm says:

    Dinglewood,
    Other health care services due to the healthcare reform bill that are now available to people with no copay are colorectal screenings for people ages 50 to 75; cholesterol screenings for men over 35 and women over 45; hepatitis and HIV screenings, and child and adult immunizations.
    Other services that will be covered include cervical cancer screenings for women, mammograms, smoking cessation and counseling services for tobacco users, and newborn genetic screening for conditions such as sickle cell anemia.
    As you can see some of these services, such as smoking cessation and counseling services for tobacco users are required because of the patient’s choice of behavior. I suppose we can expect Mr. Limbaugh to be equally outraged over that. I haven’t heard a peep from him about the free Hepatitis and HIV screenings. Have you?
    Can we expect Mormon institutions to protest insurance coverage of smoking cessation benefits because the use of tobacco is against Mormon beliefs? I doubt it do you think they would be within their rights?
    Again I assert a woman’s reproductive system, pregnancy and childbirth are health issues. Sex is natural part of being a healthy human woman. Birth control is a preventative health measure. Ms Fluke was asking for health insurance coverage with No copay for birth control for women.
    I recently heard Bill O’Reilly compare Ms Fluke’s desire for insurance coverage for birth control to the need for a collegiate football player’s getting their cleats for free. This is absurd – not as vulgarly absurd as Limbaugh’s rants – but as long as conservative men believe in such absurdities such as football is the equivalent of sex and pregnancy we will be at an impasse.

  17. Ragspierre says:

    Ah, so now it is clear.
    ljm is an ObamaCare booster.
    Who can’t think straight.
    “Can we expect Mormon institutions to protest insurance coverage of smoking cessation benefits because the use of tobacco is against Mormon beliefs?”
    If they were FORCED TO BY THREAT OF LAW (i.e., violence), they sure might.
    But, to show how stupid and twisted you are here, LDS people might voluntarily pay to help someone quite smoking.
    THEY WOULD NOT BUY THEIR CIGARETTES, idiot.
    MAYBE good Catholics would pay contribute charitably for counseling to help Sandra FLUCK and her buds to stop screwing like mink, too.
    They seem to have a scruple against buying her contraceptives…
    which are available for free or at nominal cost.
    You lying, twisted, SOS.

  18. Ragspierre says:

    From the Georgetown handbook…
    31. Weight management services and supplies related to weight reduction programs, weight
    management programs, related nutritional supplies; treatment for obesity, surgery for removal of excess skin or fat, except as specifically provided for in the Policy (See page 11 for special SHC referrals).
    “Again I assert a woman’s DIGESTIVE system, and NUTRITION are health issues. EATING is natural part of being a healthy human woman. WEIGHT control is a preventative health measure.”
    Sandra FLUCK and her ObamaCare-supporting gender freak side-kick, ljm, would also tell you that they should eat like pigs, and force you to pay for their gluttony.
    See…???

  19. ljm says:

    Rags your gallantry is overwhelming sometimes. I’m sure you have some kind of insight as to the frequency and morality of the sexual relations of Ms. Fluke and her “buds” or you wouldn’t make such a delightful comparison.
    “But, to show how stupid and twisted you are here, LDS people might voluntarily pay to help someone quite smoking.
    THEY WOULD NOT BUY THEIR CIGARETTES, idiot.”
    First of all I do know that LDS people might voluntarily pay to help someone quit smoking. I am an LDS person and before you determine that you can now accuse me of only supporting Romney because I am a Mormon please try to be rational. If that is not possible and I am becoming increasingly aware that it is not, well then do your worst, I’m ready for it.
    Second – I’m trying to understand your logic in the above statement. What health problems does birth control cause? If I understand the whole nefarious and newfangled system correctly (yes, I am being sarcastic) it actually prevents health problems. We know that cigarettes cause cancer, emphysema, heart disease etc. so why would health insurance cover the cost of your smokes? It doesn’t make sense, Rags. You do know that don’t you…don’t you?

  20. Huey says:

    I can’t get over the leftists who constantly play the victim card.
    Are women simply beasts who can’t control their sexual desires? See a guy and are compelled to hike up their skirts?
    Because that’s what this issue (and the “aspirin between the legs” controversy) boils down to.
    Women can’t control themselves and must have sex. Doesn’t matter if their partner didn’t bring a condom, they must have sex. Doesn’t matter if they can’t afford birth control ($10.00 a month or less – $3.00 for some generics in some places), they must have sex. Can’t control themselves. Can’t demand that their partner pony up for a condom before they give in to their bodily demands.
    THEREFORE, the government must mandate that insurance companies cover birth control pills with no out of pocket costs.
    But, can women even be trusted with even this much responsibility? I mean, if the need hits them and they have to choose between going to the doctor to get a prescription or the drugstore to fill it, can they possibly be responsible enough to do even that much when the call to engage in sexual relations is so strongly upon them?
    Not if you believe the progressives who clearly believe that women are so ruled by their sexual imperatives that they can’t even demand that their sexual partner bring a condom or three before consenting to intercourse.
    Morons.

  21. Ragspierre says:

    “You do know that don’t you…don’t you?”
    Why, of course, dear.
    I’ve known for some time you were…
    1. female,
    2. LDS, and
    3. hysterical
    What? You don’t know what problems various forms of birth control cause? Really?
    I certainly do, and they are manifold and depend on the form.
    Very, very few things are all good or all bad, you poor stupid, crazed woman.
    I claim no definitive knowledge of Ms. FLUCK’s sex life, or that of those she PRETENDS to speak for, beyond what appears obvious from her testimony. Indeed, I would not be surprised if she has NO risk of pregnancy…or attraction to men. NTTATWWT

  22. Huey says:

    ljm: If you really want to inform yourself about the potential health risks of oral contraceptives, instead of asking Rags, why don’t you simply type in your question: “What health problems does birth control cause?” in the Google Box.
    You might learn something.

  23. ljm says:

    Huey,
    The question posed in my post was hypothetical. The idea that I would ask rags about the potential health risks of oral contraception…please don’t interpret my posts through Rag’s obtuse reactions.
    Ask any gynecologist male or female, ask Ron Paul if the benefits of oral contraception outweigh the very small risks. As if that was the concern. Give me a break.
    The attempts by Limbaugh and others to paint Ms. Fluke as a nymphomaniac and whore cost Santorum Ohio.
    On Tuesday, only 21 percent of Ohio’s voters were identified as women who work. But of those, Romney bested Santorum by a 8-point margin. And unmarried women of all ages favored Romney by 17 points, 45 percent to 28 percent.
    That is tragic for Santorum who although I believe he resides somewhere in the dark ages as far as female reproduction is concerned – does not subscribe and is too much of a gentleman to ever use the kind of misogynistic vitriol that Limbaugh did.
    The damage that it will do the Republican nom in the general election remains to be seen. Axelrod is out in full force today attempting to attach Romney to Rush.

  24. Ragspierre says:

    How do birth control pills affect your risk of cancer?
    Scientific evidence suggests using birth control pills for longer periods of time increases your risk of some cancers, such as cervical cancer and liver cancer, but it also decreases your risk of other types of cancer, including ovarian cancer and endometrial cancer.
    The effect of birth control pills on breast cancer risk isn’t quite clear. However, some studies do show a link between pill use and breast cancer. Key factors seem to be how many years you take the pill and how recently you last used the pill. In one study, use of birth control pills led to a higher risk of premenopausal breast cancer in women who took the pill for four or more years before having a baby. Other evidence suggests that 10 or more years after you stop taking the pill, your breast cancer risk returns to the same level as if you had never taken birth control pills.
    Do birth control pills affect cholesterol levels?
    Birth control pills can affect cholesterol levels. How much of an effect depends on the type of pill you’re taking and what concentration of estrogen or progestin it contains. Birth control pills with more estrogen can have a slightly beneficial overall effect on your blood lipid levels. In general, though, the changes aren’t significant and don’t affect your overall health.
    Do birth control pills affect blood pressure?
    Birth control pills may slightly increase blood pressure. If you take birth control pills, have your blood pressure checked regularly. If you already have high blood pressure, talk with your doctor about whether you should consider an alternative form of birth control.
    Can women over age 35 continue taking birth control pills?
    Although women over age 35 used to be told to stop taking birth control pills, these limits no longer apply to healthy, nonsmoking women. However, birth control pills aren’t recommended for women over age 35 who smoke because of the risk of cardiovascular disease. If you’re 35 or older and you smoke, you need to quit smoking before you can safely continue using birth control pills.
    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/birth-control-pill/WO00098/NSECTIONGROUP=2

  25. Huey says:

    ljm:
    You understand that every single risk presented by the use of oral contraceptives – which include death, generally through stroke but frequently through breast cancer as a result of the extreme amount of hormones taken over the years – are risks which are entirely preventable?
    Every one?
    So, for you to tell me that the possibility of death is a risk outweighed by its benefits when that possibility could be entirely eliminated by not taking the pill smacks of an inability to reason.
    Now. When the pill is used FOR its other (side) effects, then the risk/benefit analysis can be used to determine whether the scales are tipped in favor of taking the pill or dealing with the ailment(s) which it addresses. (Especially those ailments which can be dealt with without taking extreme amounts of hormones.)
    But, if the purpose of taking the pill is to PREVENT PREGNANCY, then, since pregnancy can be prevented with equal or greater success without flooding the body with the chemicals existing in the pill – then any rational person would realize that ANY risk created by taking the pill is TOO GREAT. (See, not taking the pill results in ZERO risk – which renders any “risk/benefit analysis” moot.)
    Ah. But, we all know that the main reason the pill is used rather than the other methods of birth control is that is is both cheap and easy to use. There is very little “risk/benefit analysis” going on even for those few who actually BELIEVE that there’s a risk inherent in taking the pill.
    And, for your information, there is no such thing as “female reproduction.” There’s a man involved.
    Every time.
    Half of one. Half of another.
    And, the life which is created at the moment of conception doesn’t belong to either of them. It is an INDEPENDENT human life.

  26. Ragspierre says:

    As safety questions grew regarding drospirenone-containing drugs, regulatory bodies in both North America and Europe became concerned. Bayer had to change its adverts that were allegedly exaggerating Yaz’ benefits. Since then, sales have dropped.
    The Agency is also assessing clot risk from recent research on the Johnson & Johnson’s weekly Ortho Evra patch, which uses a different version of progestin. The patch has been on the market for a decade; recent studies suggest there is a greater risk of blood clots in the lungs and legs.
    All hormone-based medications raise blood-clotting risk, making it especially difficult to tell them apart risk-wise. There are also several other confounding factors which influence blood-clotting risk, such as genetics (family history), obesity and smoking status.
    According to Bayer Healthcare, the difference in blood clot risk between its own medications and older birth control ones is not significant. However, several studies have shown that there is a slight increase in risk for drugs like Yaz, compared to older oral contraceptives – perhaps a 1.5 times higher risk.
    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/238726.php
    I bet any doctor would tell you he/she would never tell you the BS you claim without knowing your risk-factors.
    To do so would be to violate the standard of care. Malpractice.
    But this really has nothing to do with reality, does it?
    This is about you approving the state MANDATING that I pay for your ‘druthers, because…

  27. ljm says:

    Yes Huey a male is involved passively or actively but the health risks of pregnancy are exclusively female. Is it yours and Rush’s position that women stop using the pill because of the health risks and the cost?
    Are you trying to tell me that this was all about the worries men have about the side effects of oral contraception? In Rush’s profound concern for women’s health he felt compelled and entitled to call Sandra Fluke a slut, prositute ect. ect.
    If so then hopefully he will next address these male health risks with the use of viagra:
    Diarrhea; dizziness; flushing; headache; heartburn; stuffy nose; upset stomach.
    Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips, or tongue); chest pain; fainting; fast or irregular heartbeat; memory loss; numbness of an arm or leg; one-sided weakness; painful or prolonged erection; ringing in the ears; seizure; severe or persistent dizziness; severe or persistent vision changes; sudden decrease or loss of hearing; sudden decrease or loss of vision in one or both eyes.
    or Lipitor:
    Diarrhea; joint pain; mild sore throat; nausea; runny or stuffy nose; stomach upset.
    Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty breathing or swallowing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips, throat, or tongue); change in the amount of urine produced; dark urine; muscle pain, tenderness, or weakness (with or without fever or fatigue); painful, difficult, or frequent urination; pale stools; persistent loss of appetite; persistent pain, soreness, redness, or swelling of a tendon or joint; red, swollen, blistered, or peeling skin; severe or persistent nausea, vomiting, or stomach pain; unusual tiredness; yellowing of the eyes or skin. Liver failure. Kidney Failure.
    AND THANK YOU for making my point that the use of oral contraceptions is not simply filling a prescription at Target once a month. Pregnancy prevention is a health issue that requires doctor’s consultation, visits and testing much like the above prescribed prescriptions.
    OH AND BTW here is very resent information involving the health BENEFITS of the pill:
    The Royal College of General Practitioners has produced (2010) an important report, which revealed the fact that Pill-users have a 12 per cent reduction in their risk of developing cancer.
    The researchers studied 46,000 women over a period of 40 years and found that those who had taken the Pill were less likely to die of cancer, heart disease or stroke.
    The report also found that breast cancer rates appeared to be the same in women who have used the Pill, and women who haven’t. This finding goes some way towards diminishing previous fears about the Pill and breast carcinoma.
    http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/sex_relationships/facts/contraceptivepills.htm
    SO THERE YOU GO – but please tell me how any of this misogyny and male know-what-is-best-for-women will get a Republican in the White House? Your presumptive assertions and arguments should go over great at Vassar, Mills, Wellesley, Smith, Spellman, Barnard or even any junior college in the blue and purple states of America.

  28. Ragspierre says:

    But this really has nothing to do with reality, does it?
    This is about you approving the state MANDATING that I pay for your ‘druthers, because…
    All that crap about the good/bad of any medication is just that.
    Crap.
    Having NOTHING to do with the issue.
    Which is, your support for ObamaCare, for mandates of which you approve, and solely in your case because of your gender kink(s).
    There is nothing “conservative” I’ve ever seen you advocate.

  29. Huey says:

    ljm: You said: “Yes Huey a male is involved passively or actively but the health risks of pregnancy are exclusively female. Is it yours and Rush’s position that women stop using the pill because of the health risks and the cost?”
    What does that have to do with your statement that “That is tragic for Santorum who although I believe he resides somewhere in the dark ages as far as female reproduction is concerned…”? This statement had nothing to do with the issue of the HEALTH RISKS of oral contraceptives.
    You asked: “Are you trying to tell me that this was all about the worries men have about the side effects of oral contraception? In Rush’s profound concern for women’s health he felt compelled and entitled to call Sandra Fluke a slut, prositute ect. ect.”
    No. I was responding to your allegation that the “benefits outweigh the risks.” I stated an unassailable FACT that EVERY risk associated with oral contraceptives could be avoided BY NOT TAKING THEM and that every single BIRTH CONTROL benefit can be obtained equally as well VIA OTHER MEANS.
    Further, I was simply responding to your smoke screen. The typical feminist “keep out of our business” line of bs which is thrown up towards any (*gasp*) MALE who has issues with the SOCIETAL EFFECTS of the use of the pill and the “sexual revolution” which followed in the wake of its creation. This is one of the things (moreso than the medical side-effects) to which Santorum spoke when he mentioned the ill effects of the pill.
    Viagra. Is this some kind of joke? Do you really think that Viagra has anything whatsoever to do with BIRTH CONTROL? Sheesh.
    Why do you think that this issue has ANYTHING to do with a “misogyny and male know-what-is-best-for-women”? Is truth less than truth because a MAN speaks it? Are lies less than lies because a WOMAN speaks them?
    Certainly there are studies which go both ways on this issue. Who is it that funded the studies? Who conducted them? Etc.
    There’s a reason why you have to go to the doctor to get the pill – because it’s dangerous and you have to be advised of the potential side effects. I guess it’s only the MEN who are lying about the potential side effects when the prescription is written?
    I could give a tinker’s damn how you go about preventing pregnancy – if you do. I could give a tinker’s damn if an insurance company offers to pay for the pill as part of your premium. What I DO have a problem with is the GOVERNMENT FORCING people who, for reasons of conscience believe that use of the pill is IMMORAL, to PAY FOR IT.
    Further, I have problems with the mindset of the ever-increasing number of people in this country who believe that they are ENTITLED to MY MONEY to do with at THEY WILL – regardless of MY WILL.

  30. Ragspierre says:

    Yep, Huey.

  31. ljm says:

    You can have your problem with women using birth control for whatever reason. I can tell you that most women don’t care whether you approve or not.
    Some take the position that the use of Viagra contributes to societal effects and the perpetuation of the decline of morality. I won’t because I think it is nonsense to blame advances in science for the consequences of the choices that free thinking human beings make.
    It might be useful if you could provide some kind of analysis as to how many incidents of dangerous HEALTH side effects (including death) that have been caused by oral contraception compared to dangerous HEALTH side effects (including death) that have been caused by pregnancy and childbirth since the introduction of the pill.
    I’ve had my own experience and I couldn’t begin to count the experiences of my friends and family that include diabetes, eclampsia, pre eclampsia, hemmorage resulting in transfusion that ultimately lead to death from HIV, and another from Hep. C., mitral valve stenosis, stroke. There are dozens more – some less dangerous, some more. The reality of these side effects of pregnancy is not dependent on studies of dubious or reputable groups they have the support of thousands of years of observation by doctors, women and the people who care about them.
    SO NOW after creating a real political liability, the Obama administration is mandating that insurance companies pay for birth control. Because some religious institutions are self insured they may feel that this still puts them in a position that violates their conscience.
    States have been mandating employer provided birth control insurance coverage for years and church’s (including the Catholic church) have been complying. In those states the church and the state appear to have found a way to assuage their conscience.
    Again I say none of this is the issue as I see it. I’ve always paid for birth control. Paid for four births without the help of insurance coverage. I don’t care if it is free or not or if their is a co-pay or not. I care that it is afforable and available to ALL women.
    THE problem IS that Rush Limbaugh effectively changed the issue from the government mandate to the need for and use of birth control making a woman a slut. He lied about Ms Fluke’s testimony claiming that she wanted the AMERICAN PEOPLE to pay for her birth control and strongly suggested that she and her “buds were going at it like minks.” No..that is actually rags colorful take on Limbaugh’s misogyny.
    Rush was so effective with his outrageous comments that he has changed the national debate.
    He actually made people forget that what Republicans are trying to accomplish is to put one of their own back in the White House. Now some of those same people are defending Rush’s misogyny to the point of playing into the Democratic narrative of the “Republican war on women.”
    If you want to get the discussion back on track stop defending misogyny. Stop defending Rush’s providing sound bites that suggest that Republicans think sex is icky and unnatural for women and that they (women)are too amoral to be in charge of their own reproductive systems.
    Really Huey, let’s stop. We both want the same thing. We both want America to change directions. We both want people to become more responsible, less entitled. We may not see eye to eye on this issue but I am sure that there are many more that we do. It appears that I am less conservative than you are on some issues. Let’s agree to disagree on this one. We aren’t going to solve the lack of morality in America today or anytime soon but we can work to help make things better. What da ya say?

  32. Ragspierre says:

    Speaking for myself, you poor, hate-twisted, gender-freak…
    we are not going to agree.
    You are a poseur here, and obviously DO support RomneyCare and ObamaCare, along with whatever mandate you deem “good”.
    You can cram you “misogyny” lies right up where you sit. (We all have one of those, BTW.)

  33. Ragspierre says:

    “He lied about Ms Fluke’s testimony claiming that she wanted the AMERICAN PEOPLE to pay for her birth control…”
    That is a lie, and you are a liar.
    Who do you think pays insurance premiums, stupid…??? Moon ponies…???
    But the issue is that Ms. FLUCK…and her mink-FLUCKING buds…need to be paying for their own conduct.
    Just as I pay for mine. Liar.

  34. Huey says:

    ljm: Sigh
    You said: “You can have your problem with women using birth control for whatever reason. I can tell you that most women don’t care whether you approve or not.”
    Are you being intentionally obtuse? I specifically stated that I didn’t give a tinker’s damn whether or if you used birth control. What galls me is people like you – people who tell me that I, because I’m a man, I have no say in the debate – but, have no problem reaching into my pocket against my will and FORCING me to pay for that to which they believe themselves entitled.
    Leeches, each and every one.
    “Some have taken the position that Viagra…” And, “Some have taken the position that the Earth is flat.” Yada Yada. Making an argument out of whole cloth.
    What the HELL does the “health effects” of PREGNANCY have to do with ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES? The ISSUE is whether or not I HAVE TO PAY FOR YOUR ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES AS MANDATED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
    If you don’t want to get pregnant, then, by all means, do whatever you think will prevent that. BUT, DON’T MAKE ME PAY FOR IT.
    Birth control is available to every single person in this country. For the vast bulk, if they somehow can’t afford it (but CAN afford a cell phone, computer, internet, plasma television, etc.) then they should engage in behavior which doesn’t result in their getting pregnant unless they wish to do so, rather than FORCING those who can and DO take responsibility for their sexual relations – to pay for that of the irresponsible.
    Yes. I want America to change directions. I just don’t want it to change in the direction YOU wish.

  35. Ragspierre says:

    She’s just not going to get it, Huey.
    There is another facet we’ve not touched on much, and that is tubal ligation and vasectomy.
    When Mrs. Rags and I decided we had had our family, I opted for the latter, as it was much cheaper and less risky.
    More and more reversible, as I hear, with advances in micro-surgery.

  36. ljm says:

    Huey, who is being obtuse? You said “line of bs which is thrown up towards any (*gasp*) MALE who has issues with the SOCIETAL EFFECTS of the use of the pill and the “sexual revolution” which followed in the wake of its creation. This is one of the things (moreso than the medical side-effects) to which Santorum spoke when he mentioned the ill effects of the pill.”
    Correct me if I am wrong but I don’t believe you are using SOCIETAL EFFECTS and the sexual revolution as a positive thing for America and you blame it on the pill.
    My response: “You can have your problem with women using birth control for whatever reason. I can tell you that most women don’t care whether you approve or not.
    Some take the position that the use of Viagra contributes to societal effects and the perpetuation of the decline of morality. I won’t because I think it is nonsense to blame advances in science for the consequences of the choices that free thinking human beings make.”
    I reject your assertion about the pill and immorality. I suggest that irresponsible behavior brought about a decline in sexual morality. Blaming the pill is not supported by any serious analysis. If any type of birth control contributed to the beginning of the sexual revolution most historians would assert that it was Griswold v. Connecticut and, of course, that wasn’t about the pill. It was about condoms but in reality it goes back further than that. To WW II, in fact. You can research it if you choose or you can continue to believe what you want.
    NO ONE is asking for you to pay for Ms Fluke’s birth control. She is asking for INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR BIRTH CONTROL. Read the transcript for goodness sake.
    As long as Republicans keep loudly confusing this issue they will keep losing. It is as simple as that. So good luck with your efforts. You are going to need it.
    and
    I certainly hope that vasectomy wasn’t covered by insurance, rags. Because I’m not sure I can justify the advantage of your piece of mind with the damage to society and the cost to the consumer for your particular choice of insurance funded birth control.

  37. Ragspierre says:

    I’ve never had insurance, stupid. I raised a large family, too, paying as we needed services.
    But if I had had insurance, I would have been paying for the procedure if it was covered.
    You really are too stupid to understand what we’ve been discussing, I see.

  38. Ragspierre says:

    “She is asking for INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR BIRTH CONTROL.”
    No. You poor, hysterical moonbat.
    She could readily find insurance to cover birth control.
    Just not within the plan offered by her Catholic university.
    She was asking for the Catholic university to be forced to make birth control available to her and her mink-FLUCKING buds for “free”. (Which, of course, means “paid for by others” in Collectivist-speak.)
    What a moron.

  39. ljm says:

    “She was asking for the Catholic university to be forced to make birth control available to her and her mink-FLUCKING buds for “free”. (Which, of course, means “paid for by others” in Collectivist-speak.)”
    And somehow in your mind that entitles you to righteous misogyny.Please show me where in MS Flukes’s testimony she is asking for FREE birth control.
    35 states have birth control coverage mandates. Somehow the Jesuit/Catholic schools and institutions insure and function within these states.
    However, since I support Romney and as of yet this Limbaugh stink hasn’t rubbed off on him, I encourage you to continue indefinitely with this campaign. Just tone it down a bit during the general election mm K?
    Vasectomy is covered by almost all insurance companies, so if you had insurance would you just pay for it yourself out of some kind of benevolent act or do you work for a Catholic institution? Perhaps you would just want to spare the rest of us the guilt of contributing to such a form of birth control that undoubtedly has caused serious damage to the moral fiber of the country. Maybe that could be Limbaugh’s next talking point. Why don’t you send him an email.
    Again I say keep it up guys. Pick up the flag that Limbaugh dropped and carry it to the Romney nomination in Tampa.
    Goodnight and happy Romney/Rubio ticket dreams.

  40. Ragspierre says:

    “Vasectomy is covered by almost all insurance companies”
    Not the one at Georgetown, you stupid gender-freaking moonbat…

  41. backup file says:

    Yes! Finally someone writes about USB sync.

  42. Ragspierre says:

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/07/self-described-austin-sluts-protest-use-of-the-word-slut/
    and
    Women are strong! Except they wilt when they are called names!
    Tough and enduring, save for when harsh words fly.
    Steadfast and unyielding, until they wilt or shatter from the mean things people say.
    Feminists are Greek columns made of styrofoam; a Potemkin village of bicycled fish.
    –InstaPundit

  43. Huey says:

    Heh. Beat me to it…

  44. ljm says:

    Hence the word “almost” dear reading comprehension deficient pettifogger.
    –LJM

  45. Ragspierre says:

    I can only laugh at you in pity, ljm. I hope you can be healed somehow.

  46. ljm says:

    So glad I could give you a chuckle. Now I really need you to get back to work on the Romney campaign. The evils of birth control managed to turn Ohio around within 1 week from Romney trailing Santorum by 10 points to Romney winning by 1.
    Now we have Alabama and Mississippi coming up and Romney is behind in both states. So do you think you could continue this rapid support for Limbaugh’s misogyny a lee-tle bit longer? All though the math is in Romney’s favor now – thanks to Ohio – two more wins in Dixie would most certainly seal the deal.
    Romney/Rubio in 2012!
    I’m counting on you, counselor!