Women need birth control because "they can't control their libido"

[Uncensored2008]

Imo, the gop is being absurd in asserting in requiring contraception to be covered in total, the Dems are saying women can't control their libidos. And that the maj of women would find the gop's absurdity, and misunderstanding of basic human sexuality, offensive.

Perhaps so. Yet the party clearly did not believe this to be the case, and instead engaged in demagoguery - openly lying about what Huchabee said.

Maybe deconstructing Huckabees statement on the democrats is warranted;

"If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it," he said. "Let us take this discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be."

But that isn't what the democrats did - instead a campaign of demagoguery and blatant lies was launched.

If Rachel Maddow said "It is insulting of Huckabee to accuse democrats of demeaning women" and RW mindlessly aped this here, then this would be a far different debate.

But that isn't what the democrats did, instead they lied, they said that HUCKABEE said " Women need birth control because "they can't control their libido"

That's not at all what Huckabee said.

Does no one left of center ever tire of the constant parade of lies from the democratic party?

I'm disgusted with the filthy democrats BECAUSE they are lying scum.

 

[bendog]

Imo, the gop is being absurd in asserting in requiring contraception to be covered in total, the Dems are saying women can't control their libidos. And that the maj of women would find the gop's absurdity, and misunderstanding of basic human sexuality, offensive.

Perhaps so. Yet the party clearly did not believe this to be the case, and instead engaged in demagoguery - openly lying about what Huchabee said.

Maybe deconstructing Huckabees statement on the democrats is warranted;

"If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it," he said. "Let us take this discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be."

But that isn't what the democrats did - instead a campaign of demagoguery and blatant lies was launched.

If Rachel Maddow said "It is insulting of Huckabee to accuse democrats of demeaning women" and RW mindlessly aped this here, then this would be a far different debate.

But that isn't what the democrats did, instead they lied, they said that HUCKABEE said " Women need birth control because "they can't control their libido"

That's not at all what Huckabee said.

Does no one left of center ever tire of the constant parade of lies from the democratic party?

I'm disgusted with the filthy democrats BECAUSE they are lying scum.

Well, that's the point. Huck's comments were insulting to women in that only a rube would buy that sugar daddy dems believe women can't control their libidos, because his statement logically infered ONE OR BOTH: that controling the libido equates to not having sex; OR all women can access contraceptives without econ burden. Thus, Huck not only played women for rubes but also views female sexuality with misconceptions. (pun intended)

 

[Rocko]

This thread is typical of the left. Straw man OP, redd herring, lib talking points, more straw mans.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Uncensored's argument is quite rational. He sourced using vile leftist sources, and he made his point quite concisely.

Let's just take a good look at his "rational" and "concise" rantings.

So, when all you filthy Obamunists claim Huckabee said { Women need birth control because "they can't control their libido"} you are blatantly lying

Granted, that's what you do. You lie, you smear, and you slander - these are the ONLY contributions the democrat make to the nation.

The fact is that Huckabee did not say it of women, and all the scumbag leftists who claim he did are shamelessly lying - which is what demagogues do.

Huckabee lambasted the filthy democrats. Regardless of the veracity of his claims against the gutter scum demagogues, the fact is that he said nothing disparaging about women. Right Winger and the rest of you demagogues are blatantly lying - which is what you do.

And you little Goebbels are the distorters of the message, openly lying about what he said in hopes of fooling the public.

Demagoguery is the only contribution the filthy democrats make to the nation.

You're lying again.

Huckabee is guilty of hyperbole, similar to the filthy democrats claim of a Republican war on women.

BUT the attack by the party on Huckabee is direct lies. RW didn't say "the impression from Huckabee is;" No, he shamelessly and blatantly lied about Huckabee, as did a cadre of other party scum.

The issue I have with your shameful party is that you are utterly and completely without honor.

What DT means is that SHE can't make a rational argument. Which we already knew.

Please provide links and actual quotes where I have used spurious insults instead of rational and concise arguments.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, that's the point. Huck's comments were insulting to women in that only a rube would buy that sugar daddy dems believe women can't control their libidos,

That might be insulting to dims, but I don't see it as insulting to women. Huck said the dims insulted women by thinking they are so easily bought off.

because his statement logically infered ONE OR BOTH: that controling the libido equates to not having sex; OR all women can access contraceptives without econ burden. Thus, Huck not only played women for rubes but also views female sexuality with misconceptions. (pun intended)

So, is that NOT the message of the dims?

Regardless of the merit of Hucks comments, the fact remains that the democrats openly lied, and continue to do so. Instead of explaining why Huck is wrong, the dims engaged in demagoguery - the politics of personal destruction - which is literally the only play in the democrat playbook.

 

[bendog]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Logically it is a waste of time even trying in my opinion.

True - you were and are blatantly lying - there is nothing to discuss or debate.

For starters those posting this tripe are not going to change their minds when presented with the facts. They are emotionally vested in their positions and therefore unable to admit that they are wrong.

Again, you blatantly lied about Huckabee - which is what you do.



Demagoguery is not rational debate. Slander is not a logical analysis of facts.

You are a demagogue - you slander and libel enemies of the party. You are without honor, reason, or logic.

Huckabee is an enemy, so you lie - simple as that.

What Huckabee said is;

{"If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it," he said. "Let us take this discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be."}

(Again, from the democratic party website.)

Huckabee: Dems say women need government to 'control their libido' - NBC Politics

Now, that bears ZERO resemblance to the claims of RW or you. Why is that? Well, because you both are complete liars who seek to slander enemies of the party. BECAUSE you are without honor, you never even considered whether what you claimed was true - you don't care - he is an enemy, you want to smear him.

Your only satisfaction will be to have set the record straight. But they will immediately deny everything and post even more tripe.

What do you mean, "record straight?"

You're lying about Huckabee - that's the point. Maybe you mean "distort the record?"

Sometimes the smart thing to do is just walk away shaking your head!

And then lie about another enemy of the party, until you are called on the carpet for it - then lie again.

After all, you have no honor, no integrity, and no class - you're a democrat.

Thank you for proving my prediction to be 100% accurate. Have a nice day.

 

[kaz]

Imo, the gop is being absurd in asserting in requiring contraception to be covered in total, the Dems are saying women can't control their libidos. And that the maj of women would find the gop's absurdity, and misunderstanding of basic human sexuality, offensive.

But it's not "offensive" to suggest that government has to force other people to pay for women's birth control because they are unable or unwilling to take care of it on their own either by paying for it or choosing their own policy that covers it. Government has to take care of them. That's not offensive. Seriously?

 

[kaz]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

Your answer is in your question.

I like the "at no cost." Wow, it all just appears out of the sky. No one pays anything.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is not about what anyone else said.

It is about what Mike. It is up to Mike to make it very clear what he is saying, not that the audience has to interpret it him.

Women heard "sluts" and "contraception" and "libido."

Let's be very clear that Mike fucked himself without contraception.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

It isn't inconsistent at all!

In fact as a fiscal conservative I can make a compelling case as to why it is a cost effective in reducing government spending. I can even make a compelling case that it will reduce abortion even though I am not a social conservative.

It makes good conservative sense to all except those with an agenda.

 

[bendog]

Well, that's the point. Huck's comments were insulting to women in that only a rube would buy that sugar daddy dems believe women can't control their libidos,

That might be insulting to dims, but I don't see it as insulting to women. Huck said the dims insulted women by thinking they are so easily bought off.

because his statement logically infered ONE OR BOTH: that controling the libido equates to not having sex; OR all women can access contraceptives without econ burden. Thus, Huck not only played women for rubes but also views female sexuality with misconceptions. (pun intended)

So, is that NOT the message of the dims?

Regardless of the merit of Hucks comments, the fact remains that the democrats openly lied, and continue to do so. Instead of explaining why Huck is wrong, the dims engaged in demagoguery - the politics of personal destruction - which is literally the only play in the democrat playbook.

huck's comments were demogoguery in that he put up a strawman that is not based on fact. Women have sex because sex is a driving force, and some do not have easy access to female contraception, and many have partners that don't want to wear condoms. So, given those facts, the logical conclusion is to subsidize contraception, which until the gop became a wing of the nutter bible thumpers was pretty much a non-issue.

 

[bendog]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

It isn't inconsistent at all!

In fact as a fiscal conservative I can make a compelling case as to why it is a cost effective in reducing government spending. I can even make a compelling case that it will reduce abortion even though I am not a social conservative.

It makes good conservative sense to all except those with an agenda.

EXACLTY. and for Huck to make an issue of it made him a joke.

edit: well he was a banjo plucking joke before that too.

 

[kaz]

This is not about what anyone else said.

It is about what Mike. It is up to Mike to make it very clear what he is saying, not that the audience has to interpret it him.

Women heard "sluts" and "contraception" and "libido."

Let's be very clear that Mike fucked himself without contraception.

Funny how none of the conservative women on the site are saying this, only liberal men are saying it...

 

[whitehall]

It's easy to understand what Huckabee was talking about if you read the transcript or listened to the sound bite. There are three types of people who buy into the attempted smearing of Huckabee's statements, the borderline retarded, the truly ignorant and the little nazis who would rather believe propaganda than the truth.

You are asking female voters to interpret what Huck said when the words included 'libido' and 'women' and 'sluts' and 'contraception.'

You are an idiot if you think women who could possibly vote GOP are going to give Huck a break on the unfortunate framing of this language.

There is no interpretation involved. He said what he said about the democrat party. It's unfortunate that little nazis would rather believe left wing propaganda instead of the truth.

 

[kaz]

Well, that's the point. Huck's comments were insulting to women in that only a rube would buy that sugar daddy dems believe women can't control their libidos,

That might be insulting to dims, but I don't see it as insulting to women. Huck said the dims insulted women by thinking they are so easily bought off.

because his statement logically infered ONE OR BOTH: that controling the libido equates to not having sex; OR all women can access contraceptives without econ burden. Thus, Huck not only played women for rubes but also views female sexuality with misconceptions. (pun intended)

So, is that NOT the message of the dims?

Regardless of the merit of Hucks comments, the fact remains that the democrats openly lied, and continue to do so. Instead of explaining why Huck is wrong, the dims engaged in demagoguery - the politics of personal destruction - which is literally the only play in the democrat playbook.

huck's comments were demogoguery in that he put up a strawman that is not based on fact. Women have sex because sex is a driving force, and some do not have easy access to female contraception, and many have partners that don't want to wear condoms. So, given those facts, the logical conclusion is to subsidize contraception, which until the gop became a wing of the nutter bible thumpers was pretty much a non-issue.

I agree it was a strawman. Huck said Democrats are calling women sex whores. Democrats are actually calling women welfare whores.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Please provide links and actual quotes where I have used spurious insults instead of rational and concise arguments.

So Derideo, are you not blatantly lying?

Since the answer is yes, how is my claim anything other than factual and rational?

Dude, you're a demagogue, openly lying to smear the enemies of the party. You have to expect to be viewed as sleazy by decent people.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is not about what anyone else said.

It is about what Mike. It is up to Mike to make it very clear what he is saying, not that the audience has to interpret it him.

Women heard "sluts" and "contraception" and "libido."

Let's be very clear that Mike fucked himself without contraception.

Funny how none of the conservative women on the site are saying this, only liberal men are saying it...

Because conservative women will give him the pass that women in the middle, who can be convinced without his stupid talk, will not.

 

[kaz]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

It isn't inconsistent at all!

In fact as a fiscal conservative I can make a compelling case as to why it is a cost effective in reducing government spending. I can even make a compelling case that it will reduce abortion even though I am not a social conservative.

It makes good conservative sense to all except those with an agenda.

EXACLTY. and for Huck to make an issue of it made him a joke.

edit: well he was a banjo plucking joke before that too.

Well you see, if government doesn't force insurance companies to pay for contraceptives, then those lazy, cheap women won't get it and then government will have to pay for raising their children, so we're saving money. Because if government does force insurance to pay for it, then the lazy, cheap women I just told you about will in fact buy insurance, go to the doctor, get it prescribed and then use it reliably.

Every liberal makes that stupid argument that welfare is fiscally conservative. It's a stupid argument.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm still left wondering why it is inconsistent with conservatism to require health insurance to provide female contraceptives at no cost to the patient/consumer.

The issue is a mandate which violates the 1st Amendment to the constitution.

99% of healthcare plans do provide contraception. The few who don't, have the exclusion due to religious beliefs. The attacks by democrats on Georgetown University and on the Hospital in Colorado are both seeking to crush the civil rights of Catholics.

If you feel strongly that your employer should offer birth control, don't go to work for the Catholic church.