Sandra Fluke Officially Working With Obama

[gallantwarrior]

Apparently conservadipppshit thinks humans simply cannot control themselves. Well, we know for a fact that the OWS parasites cannot control themselves. They really are no better than any beast of the field. And because they are that stupid and helpless in the face of their urges and the overwhelming, debilitating costs of birth control, it must be provided for them. It must suck to be one of you
OWS parasites. So helpless....

The answer to libs' argument about overpopulation is simple, too. We just stop subsidizing people who breed offspring they cannot afford to support. Harsh? Certainly. But natural selection does tend to weed out those who are unwilling of incapable of supporting themselves and their spawn.

 

[Care4all]

Excellent questions, bimbo. And you do get a say in what services are covered under the insurance policy THAT YOU PURCHASE. Why should you not be allowed to buy a policy that does not cover vasectomies? My wife and I have no need for birth control. Why should we not be permitted to purchase coverage that does not include birth control?

Insurance doesn't work that way and it never has....we all individuals don't get to pick and choose willy nilly...

we contribute over $500...closer to $600 a month towards our health care, plus all the deductibles....for insurance for Matt and me, the employer picks up the rest.

for an individual policy for matt and me....
in Maine it costs over $24000 a year and that was 3 years ago when we priced it, who knows what it is now?

Ok, so your point is that, as a consumer, you should have some say in what your insurance covers. Does that only apply to you? Shouldn't I get the same say? Because I have absolutely no need for contraceptive coverage. Shouldn't I have the right to purchase coverage that does not cover it? Because that is exactly the right that obammy and his followers would like to remove.

I have no need for it either, but I have no need for 99% of the things that are on the policy, nor does matt........... that is....until we do need it, for something not foreseen....

I pay year after year after year for car insurance as well, and we've never collected a dime from them for an accident.

And even though I am barren and we can't have kids, I can understand TOTALLY how coverage for women's reproductive services are a necessity in this day and age....near every married woman, with and without kids, is having to work for a living, family units need both parents working to survive, and the woman needs to plan her pregnancies wisely. IT SHOULD BE part of her insurance plan....she can choose to not use birth control or to use it...it should be part of any group plan in my book....

And yes, that's just my female opinion of it...

 

[gallantwarrior]

Sandra Fluke Officially Working With Obama

One question:

Does it involve contraceptives?

It most certainly involves blowjobs...

 

[gallantwarrior]

Big difference between needing a surgery to survive, and needing a pill to lay on your back like a dead cockroach. See, one is necessary, the other is simply wanted.

You're gross. And I wish there was a way to make you tattoo that gross shit on your forehead so you never get laid again.

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME: Women don't just take the pill for **** action. They take it for many, many things. And if they do take it just to ****, it's still something we should pay for. Unless you like rampant crime and poverty, of course.

Yes.. there are more uses for the pill.. complexion, etc...

No.. it is not something WE should all pay for... it is something the INDIVIDUAL should pay for if their employer does not offer BC coverage or if the individual does not have health insurance....

You ain't owed jack shit for a personal want or even a personal need.. whichever one you think it is...

I'm with you here. It doesn't matter why they take the pill, they should pay for their own treatment. Whatever did women do when they couldn't regulate their period or fight pizza-face disease without whoremoans?

 

[Stephanie]

Obama's only use for women is to USE THEM..

what ever happened to OPRAH?

poor thing, tossed her for the flukie...

 

[Pho_King]

Insurance doesn't work that way and it never has....we all individuals don't get to pick and choose willy nilly...

we contribute over $500...closer to $600 a month towards our health care, plus all the deductibles....for insurance for Matt and me, the employer picks up the rest.

for an individual policy for matt and me....
in Maine it costs over $24000 a year and that was 3 years ago when we priced it, who knows what it is now?

Ok, so your point is that, as a consumer, you should have some say in what your insurance covers. Does that only apply to you? Shouldn't I get the same say? Because I have absolutely no need for contraceptive coverage. Shouldn't I have the right to purchase coverage that does not cover it? Because that is exactly the right that obammy and his followers would like to remove.

I have no need for it either, but I have no need for 99% of the things that are on the policy, nor does matt........... that is....until we do need it, for something not foreseen....

I pay year after year after year for car insurance as well, and we've never collected a dime from them for an accident.

And even though I am barren and we can't have kids, I can understand TOTALLY how coverage for women's reproductive services are a necessity in this day and age....near every married woman, with and without kids, is having to work for a living, family units need both parents working to survive, and the woman needs to plan her pregnancies wisely. IT SHOULD BE part of her insurance plan....she can choose to not use birth control or to use it...it should be part of any group plan in my book....

And yes, that's just my female opinion of it...

Should be.......even if someone does not want or need it? We are talking about a mandate, and it is one that very heavily intrudes upon deeply help beliefs of many. Why does your belief that all policies should cover birth control ( for women only), trump the desires of others to have different coverage? If my insurance does not cover birth control ( for women), you are in no way impacted. So why the mandate? Of course, I am assuming that you are in favor of all Americans being forced to purchase birth control coverage or pay a tax.

 

[Pho_King]

Is it your assertion that, prior to 4 years ago, there was no mandated coverage of anything?

Nope. That is not my assertion. My assertion is quite simple. So simple I would expect even you to understand it. Prior to obammy's rule, one was able to purchase insurance that did not cover birth control. Americans had that freedom. Obammy and his minions have stripped that freedom. And why, given that, as pointed out, birth control is readily accessible and affordable, would you seek to remove that liberty?

All he did, was follow the advice of a panel of medical experts and add birth control to the list of other services that it's mandated insurance cover. I don't use all those services either, and yet I dont throw a hissy fit that I help pay for them.

Neither do I. But I understand why millions of people do. Because it offends their beliefs. And, the thought of forcing, upon penalty of an extra tax, every American to purchase birth control coverage, is very offensive to me.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I see the attacks on Fluke as a sign that the right is worried about her.

It is ironic that they cry foul if anyone says anything at all about Palin but they attack Fluke's sexual habits and call her a slut and she is fair game.

Pathetic but it's working in Obama's favor so keep it up.

Attacks? Not really, more like having a good laugh. She's a freakin' joke and it's nothing less than pitiful that a) the obama campaign thinks she makes some kind of cogent point, and b) women are so repulsively stupid that they would actually fall for such tripe. Fluke is nothing more than a whining asshole parasite poster child for the liberal gimme agenda. Me, me, me...**** everyone else...that's how liberals present themselves. Thanks, if I wanted to **** something that ridiculous, I'd buy my own rubber. Not to fear, I have far higher standards.

 

[Care4all]

You're gross. And I wish there was a way to make you tattoo that gross shit on your forehead so you never get laid again.

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME: Women don't just take the pill for **** action. They take it for many, many things. And if they do take it just to ****, it's still something we should pay for. Unless you like rampant crime and poverty, of course.

Yes.. there are more uses for the pill.. complexion, etc...

No.. it is not something WE should all pay for... it is something the INDIVIDUAL should pay for if their employer does not offer BC coverage or if the individual does not have health insurance....

You ain't owed jack shit for a personal want or even a personal need.. whichever one you think it is...

I'm with you here. It doesn't matter why they take the pill, they should pay for their own treatment. Whatever did women do when they couldn't regulate their period or fight pizza-face disease without whoremoans?

They ARE paying for it, via their monthly insurance premium.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

She is an activist and was already a commiecrat. Nothing new except sh is not the innocent"student" we were told she was

PROVE she's a Communist.

Do ALL rw's have BIG MOUTHS but no brains?

Do ALL rw's believe that we should not get the insurance coverage we pay for?

 

[Lakhota]

I see the attacks on Fluke as a sign that the right is worried about her.

It is ironic that they cry foul if anyone says anything at all about Palin but they attack Fluke's sexual habits and call her a slut and she is fair game.

Pathetic but it's working in Obama's favor so keep it up.

Amen! I had no idea that wingnuts were so afraid of Sandra Fluke.

 

[gallantwarrior]

You're gross. And I wish there was a way to make you tattoo that gross shit on your forehead so you never get laid again.

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME: Women don't just take the pill for **** action. They take it for many, many things. And if they do take it just to ****, it's still something we should pay for. Unless you like rampant crime and poverty, of course.

Yes.. there are more uses for the pill.. complexion, etc...

No.. it is not something WE should all pay for... it is something the INDIVIDUAL should pay for if their employer does not offer BC coverage or if the individual does not have health insurance....

You ain't owed jack shit for a personal want or even a personal need.. whichever one you think it is...

It's not about being owed anything. This is the primary failing of Conservative thought. Nobody thinks women are OWED free birth control, but then again you could argue that since they're the only ones on the planet equipped with the right parts to be saddled with the task of populating the Earth, that maybe we do OWE it to them to let them decide when to be saddled with that burden.

But it's not about being owed. It's about what's right for the country as a whole. And again, you want to see what lack of contraceptives does to a populace, go to Africa. Or go to the Philippines before their MASSIVE contraceptive campaign.

You prove a key point about Conservatives: head in the sand, completely dismissive of valid, vital social science that proves a need for something.

We're supposed to be above third-world countries, remember. And what women are owed, they already own. They have the choice not to be "saddled" with children they don't want. It's called "NO!" It's called, pay your own way. It's called, choose decent guys who don't insist on getting laid whenever their little head declares it's time. Women have that kind of control. No one owes them free anything, you know why? 'Cause it ISN'T free. Someone has to pay for it.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

They ARE paying for it, via their monthly insurance premium.

Serious question:

Do rw's really not understand that those who buy health insurance expect to get the benefits they pay for?

Maybe if more rw's actually PAID for their own health insurance, they would finally GET IT.

Naw, probably not. Instead, they just keep sucking on the welfare teat of those who DO pay for their own health insurance.

Damn rw freeloaders who don't want to lose the SOCIALIST system we have now because they would have to pay for their own insurance.

 

[Lakhota]

The Republican war on women is definitely working in Obama's favor.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Fluke will find herself on the same rubbish heap as Sheehan.

 

[AmyNation]

Nope. That is not my assertion. My assertion is quite simple. So simple I would expect even you to understand it. Prior to obammy's rule, one was able to purchase insurance that did not cover birth control. Americans had that freedom. Obammy and his minions have stripped that freedom. And why, given that, as pointed out, birth control is readily accessible and affordable, would you seek to remove that liberty?

All he did, was follow the advice of a panel of medical experts and add birth control to the list of other services that it's mandated insurance cover. I don't use all those services either, and yet I dont throw a hissy fit that I help pay for them.

Neither do I. But I understand why millions of people do. Because it offends their beliefs. And, the thought of forcing, upon penalty of an extra tax, every American to purchase birth control coverage, is very offensive to me.

Ok, that is a diffrent argument, and one I can understand.

I am for employers being able to opt out of controceptive coverage because of religious reasons.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Considering this has been a national issue for awhile now, I have to assume you are choosing to ignore the list of medical reasons physicians prescribe birth control for. Some of them are mundane, some of them serious, all of them are issues best left between the patient and her doctor. Its my personal opinion that it you're going to allow employers to deny coverage based on religious beliefs then you can't complain when other religions start choosing to opt out of coverage.

No, I am not ignoring that. Rhinoplasty has legitimate medical reasons. Should we also pay to have Sandra flukes hideous beak fixed? Fuckin parasites.

I would have no issue with any business opting out of coverage.

If someone is having trouble breathing and the doctor says they need rhinoplasty, then I don't think the employeer should have a say in if the insurance that the employee pays into, covers it.

I can tell that the notion of women having sex upsets you, and the notion of women asking that the insurance that they pay into cover a basic medical need, that the insurance company would love to cover, upset you. I'm sure you were also really upset that women decided to leave the kitchen and enter the work force too. It's just too bad we won't shut up and make you a sammich.

You really do have a reading comprehension problem. It has been repeated that none object to insurance companies paying to cover birth control, or clients requesting and receiving such benefits. Frankly, I don't give a hoot where women are or what they are doing, as long as they don't think I should foot the bill for their pimple cures or birth control (so they can **** their way into a job, like Fluke apparently has done.)

 

[gallantwarrior]

In a world of limited resources, in order to pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control pills, decisions are going to have to be made as to who else DOESN'T get necessary medical attention.

This may be why we will need death panels.

Who must die so that Fluke may ****?

You think she cares?

 

[Lakhota]

Why do so many wingnuts hate women?

 

[Pho_King]

All he did, was follow the advice of a panel of medical experts and add birth control to the list of other services that it's mandated insurance cover. I don't use all those services either, and yet I dont throw a hissy fit that I help pay for them.

Neither do I. But I understand why millions of people do. Because it offends their beliefs. And, the thought of forcing, upon penalty of an extra tax, every American to purchase birth control coverage, is very offensive to me.

Ok, that is a diffrent argument, and one I can understand.

I am for employers being able to opt out of controceptive coverage because of religious reasons.

Actually, that is exactly what this thread has been about. Disrupting a previously enjoyed liberty interest. I do not believe I have read a single post arguing that birth control should not be covered. The argument is over removing the choice from the citizenry. That is exactly what Sandra flukes "testimony" before congress was about.