Mark Greene has a message for Rush Limbaugh and the men who are beating up on women over birth control: You are cowards.
We are looking at a turning point in the career of Rush Limbaugh. I know its been said before, but his latest tirade against women who are asking for access to birth control in their health plans is stoking a backlash against women that is vastly more hypocritical than any of his previous forays into the toxic realm of wedge-issue politics.
The man has outdone himself. And I think I know why.
The likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and other commenters of their stripe used to have the divisive, binary world of extra crazy single-issue politics to themselves. (I won’t label these guys as right wing because the right/left political divide is just more binary labels designed to set Americans against each other.) But regardless of how you label these guys, things have changed. The GOP Presidential field has raised the anti-government, anti-immigrant, pro-birther, election-by-paranoid-wedge-issue ante so high that folks like Rush Limbaugh need to push even further into crazy land just to be heard above the general din of hyper-religious, hyper-reactionary political rhetoric that has taken over the Republican Presidential primary.
But Rush really did shit the bed this time. Why? Because he has made the point several times that Americans should not have to pay for birth control for “sluts”. Did I get that right? I think I got that right.
But let’s let Rush speak for himself. In the following quote, Limbaugh responds to testimony by Sandra Fluke before an unofficial Congressional panel. Fluke was talking about the challenges of paying for contraception at a Jesuit University which will not provide it as part of student health plans.
“What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps.”
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
First, I will quickly note that Sandra Fluke gets health insurance because she is a student at the university and has opted for that coverage. She is not asking for people to “buy her birth control”. She is asking that it be part of her health plan. A reasonable request.
But forget that. That’s like, a sane argument in an insane world and I’m not gonna get bogged down in talking logic to the crazy squad. I have seen more INSANE posts on the net this week by men who are “not going to pay for sluts to have sex”. These rants are everywhere. And what I note more than anything else about these posts is the rage. I mean these comments boil over with rage; rage that is way out of scale with the issue of birth control. Rage by men against women.
And let me take a moment to say something very clearly here. You guys who are saying this stuff? You are not men at all. You’re cowards. Because real men don’t beat up on women. Ever. You can share your opinions if you like in a civil and gentlemanly way, but this stuff you’re doing is disgusting.
As for Rush destroying his career, he’s unleashed a firestorm of woman haters. And he’s unleashed it on the issue of sexual intercourse between unmarried men and women. And ten thousand raging nut jobs are out there are now insulting every woman on the net.
And this is my favorite part: Its all being linked to the Republican Party. Why? Because the GOP refused to allow Fluke to speak before their house committee on contraception and religious liberty. A panel that created yet another twitter firestorm when the folks who were allowed to address the issue of contraception before this Republican controlled committee turned out to be all men. The photo of those five schmucks circulated ten billion times. And women love that “men telling them what to do with their bodies thing”. They just love it.
So here’s Rush and that big bed of his that he has so thoroughly shat. The problem Rush has unleashed is two fold. One, is the INSANE level of hypocrisy that is landing right at his front door. Rush says women who are requesting birth control as part of their health coverage are sluts. And this begs a very clear and simple question. Has Rush Limbaugh ever had sex out of wedlock? Ever? Did he ever fumble with some girl’s bra strap in the back of his dad’s Ford? Did he ever find his way into some women’s bed in college? Did he ever engage in sexual intercourse with any one of his four wives BEFORE he entered into the blissful state of holy matrimony? It is four, right?
And two, Rush has managed to crystalize the horror of a Republican world for every woman in America. The issue of abortion rights has always been a darker more ambivalent issue for many women. But birth control? These guys want to take away birth control? And thanks to Rush we can see the agenda for what it is. We can see the ugly anti-women mindset that lurks behind the “religious freedom” argument. It ain’t about religious freedom, it’s about sluts, whores and prostitutes.
And having birthed this refreshingly honest display of his ilk’s true attitude toward women, Rush is going to get what’s coming to him. The media elites are going to do their cold cynical math on this one. They’re going to calculate the damage control, look at the numbers and they’re going to cut bait on Rush Limbaugh. Because he just lost them the 2012 Presidential and Congressional elections.
And here’s an added note on the cost of providing “universal free birth control” via private or public insurers.
Maggie Mahar writes the following over at Time.com:
“if an insurer makes birth control totally free for all of its customers, it avoids having to reimburse them for countless unplanned pregnancies and births. Overall, then, it’s cheaper for the insurer to pay a little upfront to save a ton down the line.”
So good luck Rush, and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out to fuck-all-nowhere. Cause it wasn’t nice knowing you. Not at all.
For more on Rush Limbaugh’s sexist tirades, read Matt Crowder’s “A Dad Defends Danica Patrick“
For more on Politics and Birth Control, read Lauren Hale’s “How Did We Get to Where We Are in the Political Birth Control Debate? A Short History.”
Photo: AP/Brian Jones
I think the message that Rush put forward about Ms Fluke was lost in the absurdity he was making. I think any woman that wants birth control should use it whenever they want. The issue I have with Ms Fluke, is why is it societies responsibility to pay for your birth control? If the man your lying down with can’t afford to provide you birth control, you may want to reconsider lying down with him. What if the birth control fails??? He will be the father of your child! Honestly people, taxes are collected from human beings to fund our… Read more »
Sandra Fluke was advocating that birth control should be covered by health insurance (which policies are paid for by the insured and/or their employers) not that the government should GIVE her FREE birth control. It had nothing to do with “government handouts” or “free” anything. Honestly, try getting the facts straight before being so condescending to everyone on the comment board with whom you might disagree.
You seem to miss the cause and effect. The government mandating that all private insurance cover birth control (meaning no organization can “opt out”) is exactly the same as “government should (be/is) GIVE(ing) her FREE birth control”, by proxy. To explain, If the government mandates that something MUST be included then it is making it effectively FREE for the recipient while making someone else have to figure out how to pay for it.
I dunno, maybe they can toss that less important prostrate cancer screening.
Except the government isn’t mandating specific premiums for health insurance policies. So perhaps it’s a difficult regulatory burden forcing insurers to come up with a cost structure that will be competitive enough to keep customers, and still include mandated coverage (even though all insurers will bear the same burden). It is NOT however a handout, and it is not “effectively free:. Insurance companies always have and always will pass on costs to the insured–and contraception costs a hell of a lot less than pregnancy and childbirth anyway. Besides, whatever rhetorical twists you apply, you can not make anything that Sandra… Read more »
Thanks for jumping right to name-calling when you don’t agree. The government forcing all of us to insure ourselves is another form of taxation but, If you insist, I stand corrected. Let me re-phrase my post again ….. I think the message that Rush put forward about Ms Fluke was lost in the absurdity he was making. I think any woman that wants birth control should use it whenever they want. The issue I have with Ms Fluke, is why is it societies responsibility to pay for your birth control? If the man your lying down with can’t afford to… Read more »
Ah, yes, the “anti-Planned Parenthood” movement…they only netted (profited) $18.5 million in 2010. http://www.lifeissues.org/pp/report_09-10.pdf
I can’t take time to read every comment here in case this has been covered… Even though I am generally in favor of Ms. Fluke’s position, it is possible to work for, or study at, an institution that does not have the same feelings as the Catholic Church along these lines.
I don’t understand why this particular incident is the one where Limbaugh “jumps the shark.” Out of all the things he’s said over the years, THIS is the one that’s gone too far? Is it like the straw that broke the camel’s back kind of thing, or is there actually something distinct about this particular brouhaha? The public has a goldfish memory about things like this. I expect this will blow over and he’ll just keep right on talking. For years he has constantly crossed the line, generated controversy, took some flak, and then makes even more money the next… Read more »
I think we should treat Rush Limbaugh’s speech and behavior the same way we’ve treated Charlie Sheen’s speech and behavior. Mr. Limbaugh has admitted to being addicted to prescription drugs. He’s clearly been struggling with the effects of substance abuse, just like Mr. Sheen has. He is of course responsible for his own actions, but what we’re watching may be an individual tragedy played out publicly, someone falling apart in front of the whole country. I feel a bit of compassion for him as a human being. Whether he deserves it beyond being a human being is another question. Anyway,… Read more »
Exactly. Rush Limbaugh is an admitted drug addict and a Vietnam draft dodger…Which is to say he’s an inveterate liar and a coward. No wonder so many people who voted for Bush II support him so vociferously.
Technically, everyone’s a liar and a coward, so I can’t quite see the usefulness in saying he is. I was too young to be drafted for Viet Nam. I’m pretty sure I would’ve tried everything I could to get out of going to Viet Nam if I were in that position. I’m not in a position to judge that part.
(I happen to know a man who dodged the draft, got caught, and got sent ot VN anyway. He’s a draft dodger AND a Viet Nam vet. The ethics of conscription can get pretty complicated.)
I concur with wellokaythen. I was about to post the same thing. This is really just another version of the Lindsay Lohan/Charlie Sheen story. An entertainment celebrity with substance abuse problems acts out in public without much accountability, and we watch the continuing self-destruction of someone who’s emotionally disturbed. Mr. Limbaugh has admitted to being addicted to prescription drugs, so perhaps this story will generate a discussion about drug abuse, though I’m not holding my breath. I’m also guessing that any mention of the birth control pill might trigger Limbaugh’s complicated love/hate feelings about pharmaceuticals. If you think of Rush… Read more »
Drip. Drip. Drip.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/rush-limbaugh-advertisers-leave-show-fluke_n_1323358.html
Cindy.
Your comments are spot-on.
In addition, normal human beings think it’s kind of odd that Greene and his symps won’t post their contemporary records of their outrage at Maher, Schultz and Letterman.
You’d think, if they had principles….
What, am I crazy?
I definitely agree that Rush Limbaugh stepped way over the line of civil discourse by calling Ms. Fluke a “slut” and the degrading tirade that ensued thereafter. However, now that this issue of inflammatory and degrading comments directed towards women by those in the media has caught ALL of our national attention, I am curious as to why you wouldn’t take this opportunity here in your column to call out ALL degrading comments by other men in the national media who use the same kind of language…..Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin the C-word several times on his show, and Ed… Read more »
Well, we now know what the most powerful lobby and voting block is in America today, and it’s not men.
Funny how the powers that the powers that be have convinced us that we actually have soooo much power, yeah the power to do our duty to be a real man and work till we die of a heart attack…
Mark. So did Ed Schultz, about Laura Ingraham. Maher said Palin was a “cunt”. Your outrage then is on record where? Post it up here. Also, should Obama return Maher’s million bucks? And what happened to slut pride, anyway? Several years ago, Limbaugh was fixing to buy into something about the NFL. Some folks, including sportwriters, faked up a story that he’d said something like blacks might have been better off in slavery. Not true, but by the time the story ran out of gas, his attempt to become affiliated with whatever NFL thing he was looking at was done… Read more »
“And what happened to slut pride, anyway?” Yeah, you’re not getting that idea. I am not allowed to call people the n-word, I am not allowed to call them c*nts, b*tches, or sl*uts. I can’t call anyone a slur at all without being a horrible human being. People are allowed to call themselves whatever they want and take pride in it. So I can call myself a slut and I can refer to my birth control pills as my slut pills and take pride in it. You don’t get to call me a slut unless I say you can. So… Read more »
Mark. It is about contraceptives. See Fluke’s words. It’s about the other stuff only in your own mind.
Who do you think you’re fooling? Jeez.
The question remains, should Obama return Maher’s million dollars?
Richard. Rush said “slut”.
Who do you think you’re distracting/diverting? Jeez.
LOL
Yes, Rush Limbaugh has made yet another idiotic statement. I don’t know why we think this is a “shit the bed” moment, though. It seems much lower on the totem pole than his call for the death penalty for drug abusers, subsequent to which he himself was able to buy his way out of conviction and punishment for prescription drug abuse. If his career of assholery and idiocy can go on in spite of that, I suspect this won’t do much to harm him either. In fact, this article and all of our comments are probably little more than free… Read more »
Well, Kirsten. We’ll see. Attacking drug addicts is easy. No one really cares about them. (Sad but true.) Rush’s latest trick is about attacking women. I see it as having a MUCH bigger downside politically for Rush and by extension, for the GOP.
Oh, and you get the AWARD for posting a comment on that actual subject of my article. Most of these guys posting here are trying to divert the thread to a discussion of contraceptives.
Federal funding for recreational sex? Selective condemnation in the of Bill Mayer? Done Here!!!!
Federal funding for recreational sex would not be new if birth control were to be covered. I refer to you, for example, to Medicare coverage of Viagra for men, mostly who are not using it for reproductive purposes: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-204_162-670833.html
Now that I think about it, Maher called Palin a c&*t. Should Obama return Maher’s million bucks?
Clear point is, when libs do it to conservative women, the ostentatiously sensitive are otherwise engaged. Thing is, they think nobody notices.
BTW, if public health is an issue that the feds, or at least employer-sponsored health plans must address by providing it free, where’s my red wine allowance?
As I said before, I think it got posted, Bill Maher called Palin a “c^&t, and Eddie schultz called Laura Ingraham a slut.
Keith Olberman has been a cornucopia of abuse.
Nice to see your sensitivities finally woke up.
Melissa. Medical conditions are a different matter. See Julie and Mark and others talking about contraception. You need to get them to knock it off before the cat’s out of the bag.
First of all, in her testimony she does not mention the word sex once. The closest she came to that was mentioning a married student who was worried about not being able to afford birth control .. so you would have to have a problem with a married person having sex and then you would refer to a married person who used birth control a slut. Obviously Rush after 4 marriages with no offspring must me either married sluts that use birth control or he is sterile. There are quite a few married students in the world .. both my… Read more »
Can’t help noticing that no one really cared about this post even though it hit the nail RIGHT on the head. In addition, one of the stories she told in her testimony was about a *gay* friend who certainly wasn’t using contraceptives in order to prevent pregnancy (I hope I do not have to explain what that is…). In all of the debates I’ve been watching on this, everyone is hyper-focused on the “sex” part and couldn’t care less about the many, many medical uses that women need. How shocking really…wanting your health insurance to cover a *medical* cost. Soon… Read more »
Marianne.
Regardless of Limbaugh’s take on the pill, the point was that Fluke wants somebody else to pay for her contraception.
The people in question–Catholics apparently chosen as a target here–don’t like the idea.
There are several issues: Why shouldl somebody else pay for her contraception? Why should a religious institution be forced to do something against its doctrine when things have been going along pretty well without it?
Is there anybody who actually believes this is about women’s rights? (ed. No.)
Aubrey. Ms. Fluke does not want “somebody else to pay for her contraception” any more than I want “somebody else to pay for my allergy pills”. What we want is for the services we value to be part of our health coverage as we are paying into a risk pool and we would like for our preventative care to be covered. By speaking out, Ms. Fluke wants to encourage all of us to arrive at a public consensus that says birth control is considered of value to enough people (NOT 100%) but enough people that it is included in the… Read more »
Like.
Mark. The money can’t come out unless the money goes in. Hence the absolute, real-world fact that somebody is going to be paying for this, and if it’s the employer, that’s somebody else. Not the employee. I don’t have a religious issue about this. Nice try at obfuscation, though. I’m a Presbyterian. For us, even pedophilia is to be understood. Not like voting republican, though. Now that I think about it, I may have to repeat this. The money can’t come out unless the money goes in. You’re talking about additional money coming out so that means additional money going… Read more »
The money is going in to be spent. Spend a little on birth control. Spend a lot on unwanted pregnancies and abortions. We report. You decide.
Mark. You need to figure out a better way to explain this. BC hasn’t been covered. The birth rate has been whatever it has been. Now that BC may not be covered at catholic institutions, the birth rate is going to explode?
Richard. There is no rational reason for birth control to not be covered under health insurance. Religious institutions have no rational reason. Who cares what religious insitutions have to say on any topic? Their irrational, prescientific bronze age goat hearding supersitious morality provides no insight into women’s health and health insurance policy. Your bizarre statement that women have been getting along fine without coverage is equally beyond reason. Government intrusion? Government intrusion into government policy? What? How about religious and mysogynistic intrusion into women’s ovaries?
Actually birth control is covered by approx 36% of the current insurance programs. Which isn’t enough, considering the cost of birth, abortion, etc in comparison. However, it’s a $$ game to the ins. co’s. They know that individuals and/or the social welfare system will pick up what they decide they don’t have to cover.
Richard,
I don’t understand your post. The birth rate has been what it has been? Yes. And how many unwanted pregnancies have occurred? And worse, how many abortions? Do you want to reduce the number of abortions or not? Because people are having sex. Right now. All over the place. And your belief that its wrong isn’t going to change that. And what’s worse, is by denying them simple, easy access to birth control, THROUGH EVERY POSSIBLE MEANS, you are triggering a higher occurrence of marginalized children and worse, abortion.
“What we want is for the services we value to be part of our health coverage as we are paying into a risk pool and we would like for our preventative care to be covered.” You’re basically advancing Aubrey’s argument for him. Why should anyone else care about helping to provide services you value other than people who share those same values? Catholics don’t value those services because they have other, insurmountable, values that contradict them. You ARE asking him to pay for women’s birth control, but, as you’ve just pointed out, you’re asking him to do way more than… Read more »
I didn’t make Aubrey’s argument for him. You just read it that way. And no matter what I say you will continue to argue it as a weaker position than yours. And guess what? I’m gonna do the same thing. So, shall we just keep doing that or maybe, wise up and call it a day? Like, you know, not go on yet another rhetorical date, so to speak.
This is a really bizarre response. If we all should agree to disagree, then why on earth would you write an article concerning controversial topics on a website that ostensibly is supposed to encourage discussion on its comments section?
You did make his argument. His point all along was that this was never about providing birth control to those who need it and cannot afford it; it’s about forcing a segment of the population into supporting an ideology which is an anathema to their beliefs. That is what this is about. You said so yourself.
She and her friends should have checked out what their Jesuit university covered and didn’t cover and “shopped around” accordingly, but then I’m an old fogey who was still on parental-insurance while off at college and did the pay-as-you-go at the Infirmary there. As I said in a YT video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrmj4440t7M] Fluke & Company could schlepp-on-down to the local Planned Parenthood (less than 2 miles away) and get their pills on ye-old sliding scale of “$15-50 per month”. Come on. That Capitol Hill appearance was nothing but Political Theater at its finest.
Combined w/ the anti-Planned Parenthood, anti-Abortion movement- yes- the entire anti-Reproductive Rights movement definitely is aimed more at women than men. Because biologically- this is the way it works, and these are the primary “clients”. But men should be concerned about it too; because they will be ultimately footing the bill under current legal systems that are pretty good at finding dead-beat dads that don’t want to support the kids they’ve helped create. And every tax payer foots the bill for CPS, CWS & all other public systems that pay for the medical costs & care of unwanted, neglected children.… Read more »
There is this funny thing about the Catholic Church. They aren’t a company. They don’t do new products with features and benefits. They don’t tweak the Eucharist to make it more tasty. They are what they are. Matters of faith and morals (from the point of view of the Church) are immutable. This is why you don’t see women as priests. (by the way, celibacy of priests is a discipline not dogma and differs from rite to rite within the RCC) This is why the Church is against abortion. This is why the Church is against birth control. It doesn’t… Read more »
“Must make so little money that they cannot afford something that is the equivalent of a freaking cable bill. Not all Birth control pills cost $100 per month- that’s the most expensive version but for some reason its the only price point quoted by advocates. (want birth control? cancel your cable. I cut mine way back to help pay for my son’s new preschool. ) ” Not all birth control pills work equally well for women. I was on a birth control pill that was cheaper than my current pill, but it made me severely depressed. So I switched to… Read more »
This. Yes.
Can you believe the audacity of old people? Wanting someone else to pay for their medications and replacement joints? Bastards. They don’t even work anymore.
Not only do the not work, they walk around the mall like they own the joint. I’m starting to feel all outragey-ish.
Jake. I believe the old folks you are talking about have insurance, such as Medicare.
Which is different from Medicaid. You forgot to condemn Medicaid.
I believe they also used to work. Except those who lived their lives on welfare. You forgot to condemn those who lived their lives on welfare.
Think this stuff through before you get snarky.
The last word artist. (I am the…)
Richard Aubrey: The catholics object to putting the money in for something they think is sinful. Catholics have been paying WAY more for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which they think are sinful than this latest thing would cost them. Yet I haven’t heard nearly the outcry from Catholics about these sins that involve killing actual human beings as I have about merely the sin of prevention of human life from beginning which has a much sketchier Biblical foundation. Is there anybody who actually believes this is about conscience? I don’t. Until I get a refund back for all… Read more »
Agreed!
Actually the Church (as an entity) didn’t pay a damn thing for the war. You know that whole render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s thing?
The birth control question is entirely different. This is about forcing the Church as an entity to directly pay for something it finds morally objectionable.
I hope you can see the difference.
But every Catholic in the country (myself included) has had to pay for these things via our taxes. And I am far more oppose to killing living populations than I am to preventing unwanted pregnancy. A lot of moot points are being argued here, because the Catholic Church offers insurance to its employees- although it is not paid for 100%. But neither is the majority of any insurance offered by any other business, institution, etc. I”m sure the circular arguments will continue, however…..
Well, as a Catholic surely you remember that the Pharisee’s tested Jesus directly when they asked him about paying the Roman taxes…
You think this point is moot because of a shared contribution? huh?
Yes- Bravo!
Kirsten.
WRT catholics and war. See the Just War Doctrine, regularized by two biggies in the RC pantheon, Augustine and Aquinas. The RCs are not a pacifist church. That said, the American biships generally oppose any war not fronted by outrised, upraged peasants brandishing AKs.
As to your money, the issue here is catholic institutions, to which I presume you do not belong.
“She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception.” Does… does Rush actually know how the pill works? He does know it’s not like a condom right? You can’t just pop one before you have sex and BAM! no baby for you! If you’re having sex twice a day or once every three months, you need to take ONE pill every day for it to work. It’s going to cost the same amount per year for every woman who uses it, whether she’s participating in daily orgies or she’s the Virgin Mary and just happens to suffer from particularly… Read more »
Yes- thank you for this. And for women who are peri-menopausal & going through extremely painful periods as well as extreme hormonal fluctuations, various forms of the pill are also often prescribed. The problem w/ people like Rush is that they have no concern over factual information; it’s all about creating shock value to get more attention & make more money. One of the best things that happened w/ Sarah Palin’s drama was when people stopped paying attention to it. So I’m signing the petitions to the advertisers asking them to stop supporting Rush’s show. The $$$- or lack therof-… Read more »
Julie. I drink Folgers because I learned coffee in the Army and besides, other things are more important to me for the money. You make your choice and others are entitled to speculate about it. But not necessarily required to pay for it. BTW. I almost forgot, mostly because the self-celebrated SPIW (semi professionally incredibly wonderful) didn’t see the problem and so we didn’t hear much about it: Fast Eddie Schultz called Laura Ingraham a slut and Bill Maher referred to Palin as a c&*t. All depends, doesn’t it? No biggie. But, for those who are reminded of it, as… Read more »
Julie. I didn’t see a reply box on your comment, so I had to scroll down to the end “So are you saying a month of BC costs as much as a jar of folgers? Maybe with copay it does. Mine’s 10 per month. But without it would be 90. Ok, you say, so don’t have sex. Who does that? Honestly? We’d have about 6 billion less people on the planet if people thought rationally about sex. Personally I think the most rational thing possible would be to teach people how not to get pregnant (sex ed) and provide men… Read more »
I drink folgers but it sucks
artemis
Difference is that this particular issue offends certain religious communities. The cost is insignificant, see PP, and the supposed results–pregnancies–are a fiction. Women have been managing without coverage for this for some time. All of a sudden it’s going to change because we keep not paying like we’ve been not paying all along?
It’s about the intrusion of the state.
“Difference is that this particular issue offends certain religious communities.” Then they don’t have to pay, as Obama has already advanced a compromise for this saying insurance will cover the difference if religious institutions object to covering birth control. What is the argument now? “It’s about the intrusion of the state.” Really? Because to me it looks like intrusion of religion into the doctor-patient relationship of their employees. “The cost is insignificant, see PP, and the supposed results–pregnancies–are a fiction.” Please continue to explain to me how $90/month is insignificant. That is what I would pay for my birth control… Read more »
All the people who say it’s a cost issue, it’s not. There are many costs involved in health insurance, a lot of coverage for other people’s needs that you will never use. To say it’s about money is a distraction.
What other parts of insurance would you like to get rid of or never require? Or is it only the coverage that deals with non-reproductive sex?
Because Obama’s health care act mandates coverage of MANY preventative care measures. And yet I see little protest in covering immunizations, cholesterol screening, diabetes screening, or colorectal cancer screening.
Mark I think you posting did it. Rush Limbaugh I hear has apologized for his offensive remarks. Now can we debate the issue and leave the lunk head behind. I promise I won’t listen Rush anymore, even though I didn’t listen to him much before.
Limbaugh thrives on “creating a national stir.” Even the extra attention to losing advertisers and his apologies gets him off.
Newt Gringrich is articulating quite well my view on this contraception mandate issue on Meet the Press this morning.
The phrase “Shit the bed” actually is used to describe someone dying a rather quiet death. You see, when something dies, the muscles relax and anything that was in comes out.
I think the proper pop culture phrase for the headline should be “Rush Limbaugh Steps on His Dick.”
Thanks, Ron, when Glenn Beck steps on his, I’ll definitely use that. (And you know he will.) As for now, I’m committed to the don’t poop where you sleep metaphor. I feel it would indicate a lack of literary resolve, not to mention moral fiber to abandon bed shitting for dick stomping at this point. Maybe stepping on his own dick and falling down in his own shit? No…..no. Alas. I’d better stick with what I’ve got.
I’ll let it slide for now.
Please note and laugh (quietly) at the intended double entendre.
The Obamacare bill contains 142 special programs, offices, privileges, comissions, and services ONLY for women. It contains ZERO (0, none, nada, zilch) for men, boys, or fathers. Here are just a few of these 142 sexist, bigoted provisions of Obamacare: 1) Free birth control for women, but not for men (for example, tubal ligation is paid for, but vasectomy is not) 2) Free breast health for women, but no prostate health for men 3) Free smoking cessation for women, but no smoking cessation for men 4) Free cancer vacination for girls, but not for boys 5) Dozens of health comissions,… Read more »
Actually, if all this is true I agree with you. But I wouldn’t take away services for women, just add them for me. Please note, I said “if”. So, we’re in agreement.