(Daily Caller)
Madeleine Albright, arguably our most comical Secretary of State, has added her shrill voice to the Democrat-invented "War on Women" that Republicans are supposedly waging. It's all part of the health care debate, you know. Daily Caller has the amusing story.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/27/albright-republicans-engaging-in-vicious-misogyny-and-anti-women-hate-speech/
Yes, folks. It's a War on Women by those evil, misogynist Republicans, who want women to go back to the days when they had to pay for their own contraceptives.
Republican tying Sweet Sue to the railroad tracks
Madeleine Albright hasn't seen a misogynist man since she was chasing Yasser Arafat down the halls trying to get him to come back to the negotiating table or when she was being snookered by Kim Jong Il in North Korea.
6 comments:
I love how these terms morph from specific to the obtuse.
Global warming became climate change.
Government paying for contraception or abortions became misogynistic control of reproductive health care decisions.
It is all a "War On Women" because all liberals know that conservatives hate women.
"Government paying for contraception or abortions became misogynistic control of reproductive health care decisions."
They want their insurance to cover contraception. Many women take the pill for health reasons, not just for birth control.
Unless you think that insurance companies shouldn't have to cover erectile dysfunction pills, then that's hypocritical. Or are you also upset that men want the government to pay for their boners?
I have no use for Republicans, although I plan to vote for Ron Paul on April 3, in the equitable basis that each candidate should win at least one state primary.
Since this is about Madeleine Albright, I used to work with someone who liked to joke about "The Madeleine Albright sex scandal."
Poop,
I think that the use of contraception pills for anything other than contraception is infitesimal. When you say "Many women..." I'd like to see the stats for that or some other source for your assertions.
I should get coverage for what I pay for and nothing else. I want freedom of choice of insurance companies and insurance policies. Competition would enable insurance companies to offer different policies with different coverages. I don't want to be forced to pay for contraception pills for someone else. Soon some group will demand coverage for breast implants. Then it will be sex change operations. There is no built in limit on where this all ends and we will get 50 years or more of fights over what should be covered.
There was a situation in Canada, for example, where the Muslim girls occasionally had "adventures" but when their father sold them to their cousin in Pakistan, the deal would be rescinded as they lost their value when it was found out they were not virgins. So there was a demand for "hymen reconstruction" coverage. You want to pay for that too?
The short answer is that I don't want the government to pay for anything for me. The money comes from US. Can't you see that?
Miggie:
"I'd like to see the stats for that or some other source for your assertions."
Your wish is my command:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/Beyond-Birth-Control.pdf
What about the viagra thing? Are you also against insurance companies paying for that?
Poop,
Thanks for the link. It indicates that use of OCP for anything other than contraception is not infitesimal but rather slight. Only 18% of women take them at all and a small percentage of them use them for some other reason.
I thought I answered the "Viagra thing". In short if I want them, I'll pay for them. Insurance companies dont pay for anything. Insurance companies (or the government) don't create the pills out of nothing. SOMEBODY has to pay for them. You think that if you require insurance companies to provide them that they won't get the money from either the policy holders (or the tax payers in the case of the government)?
I think it is a personal disgrace to take (much less require) dole from anyone if you can avoid it. You think they are dispensed from Obama's stash? He is taking your money and sooner or later he will be require others to pay (with other peoples' money) to pay for something you don't want to pay for either.... that is unless you are at the trough too and don't care that others have to pay for whatever you think should be provided to you.
.
Post a Comment