We told you...the Fluke story and reality don't mix

Discussion in 'Killingsworth Court, Formerly The General Forum' started by burford, Mar 15, 2012.

  1. Sorry. They just did. What was the big deal? Poor starving G'twon law students having to pay $3000 over three years for contraceptives? Congress needs to step in and force all insurers and employees to offer it for free, even religious institutions when it conflicts with their beliefs?

    Well darn. Let's see: Under Title 10, poor women can get them for free at any health clinic. Now we hear that for the last several years under President Bush no less, you can get them at Walmart, Target, and CVS (yes even the CVS right next to the Georgetown University campus) for a whopping cost of .....are your ready? Drum roll please. $9 a month.
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/03/05/attention-media-walmart-and-target-have-been-offering-9-birth-control

    That's right boys and girls. For free or for the cost of a couple of lattes or or mixed drinks a month, or maybe -gasp- a little cheaper cell phone plane, these young ladies can practice fornication risk free of pregnancy. Even now, Fluke is walking back some of the obviously dishonest things she said before the committee.

    Mysoginy? Conservatives not respecting a woman's body or rights? Not good Christians? You are going to pray for us?

    Yes indeedy. You all were lied to on national television by Pelosi and an avowed feminazi...and you fell for it hook, line, and sinker. An adult will admit when they are wrong and learn from it.

    I am about to leave town for the weekend. You all have fun falling all over yourselves trying to make excuses or deflecting the truth to justify the trashing you tried to give to the good conservatives on this board. :laugh:
     
  2. Boy, you made absolutely no effort to understand what any of us were actually saying, did you?
     
  3. Hear it loud and clear. Contraceptives are available for free or extremely cheap to ALL women. We told you the the real effort was an attack on religion, the Constitution, and a political ploy to get votes. By taking that position, we were mysoginists and poor Christians and we were unsympathetic to the marginalized in society.

    Hey, we are cool. But it is important that we educate some of you all exactly how gullible you are to a good sound bite from the liberal elite.
     
  4. You know... nevermind
     
  5. Some people don't need outside assistance playing the fool....but its fun helping them along nonetheless....
     
  6. It's gotta be schtick. No one can be this willfully obtuse.
     
  7. burford, when Obama is re-elected in November, please know that I am holding you and your buddies personally responsible. Which means I will hold you personally responsible for the ensuing damage that will be done to this country during Obama's second term. You guys are the best thing that has happened to the Democratic party.
     
  8. You made my morning RS. :laugh: We know when we get a response like that we have won. Thanks! My trip out of town will be better now.
     
  9. So if we don't point out his lies and distortions and un-Constitutional mandates and his efforts at a federal take-over of much of our lives, he will get defeated? Well, ok. I guess that makes sense.
     
  10. Focus on the economy, value of the dollar, debt, deficit, unemployment, housing. That's the winning argument.
     
  11. And the whores! Don't forget the whores!
     
  12. I thought that went without saying.
     
  13. Thousands and thousands of whores! I vote for them, I betcha'.
     
  14. I don't understand why this couldn't have been added to the topic that was already started.
     
  15. Setting the tone of burf's message aside -- and recognizing that the messenger has been shot more times than Scarface -- is the consensus on here that there was nothing suspicious at all about Fluke and this whole narrative?

    Please forget about Limbaugh for a moment. He's full of bullet holes, too.
     
  16. There's no question she had an agenda. My response to her would have been, you have the right to want them to cover it, and they have the right not to cover it. Luckily, you also have the right to go to a law school that offers coverage.

    The problem with her statement/testimony was the lack of information. She didn't say she spent $1,000 a year on contraception. She said, "Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school." CAN cost. And that's a true statement, depending on the contraception. And sure Walmart offers some pills for $9 a month, but I know from my wife's experiences that not all pills are created equally. She's had some that she had bad reactions to. Maybe she can't take pills at all and has to have an IUD or something. Was she exaggerating to make a point? Who knows. If I had to guess, I'd say yes.
     
  17. The glaring strawman that burf is thrashing is the reality that most all of us questioned whether government has any business mandating private insurance specifics which may go against a religious institution's belief system (although there were some concerns about slippery slopes and defining religious institutions). As Uni has pointed out, all the Republicans had to do was listen politely to the testimony, say thank you and proceed with their position. Instead several posters on here repeatedly called this girl unbelievably insulting things and repeatedly defended it on the grounds that she takes a particular medicine so they can "infer" her promiscuity level. I have been on birth control most of my adult life, and I don't think I'm a Briles. I don't think Uni's wife is a Briles either. My yearly gyno exams and contraceptive pills are the only regular medical service or medication I get, so I'm damn happy that the insurance we pay over $10,000/year for covers it. Even covered, my pills are $35/month. For women, our OB-GYN services are the most basic medical care we receive, nothing luxurious about it.
     
  18. Frisky has now joined me, Newf and Deep as the only people on this board who have used the term 'strawman" ... it's only a matter of time before she becomes both pompous and verbose ...
     
  19. I think that I am, however, the only one to use "straw armies"!
     

Share This Page