Obama's Solution To The HHS Mandate Is To Conjure Contraception Out Of Thin Air

On Friday, HHS issued its notice of proposed rulemaking for the contraception/abortifacient mandate. I spent part of the afternoon picking it apart on Twitter, and I'm still amazed at how stupid the Obama Administration thinks we are.

After jawing over the issue for almost a year, the Obama Administration finally figured out a solution. Under the proposed rule (PDF), none of the following folks will have to pay for the contraception and abortifacient coverage that every insured person is required by law to receive:

(1) The insured person.
(2) The insured person's employer.
(3) The insurer.

Quite literally, the Obama Administration's rule contemplates that no one will have to pay for this morally ambiguous healthcare. Let me explain.

Obamacare was clear that individual purchasers of insurance should never have to pay for contraception and abortifacient coverage. That remains the case under the new rule, nominally anyway. The Obama Administration first intended that employers would bear the burden for that portion of insurance coverage. (And yes, that money would obviously have come out of the employee's total compensation, but neither Obama nor liberals in general understand how employment works.)

Naturally, thousands of employers who happen to be religious objected to paying for something to which they have a moral objection. In response, the Obama Administration reluctantly proposed the religious employer exception, which is the focus of the proposed rule. (And no, it doesn't cover such religious employers as, e.g., Hobby Lobby because it is a business instead of a non-profit. Obama apparently believes that you can't be religious if your business is intended to be a business. That's a different problem.)

But the exception left the Obama Administration in a difficult position. If neither the insured person nor the employer was going to pay for this healthcare, who was? Today's notice of rulemaking solves the problem by declaring that no one does.

The Obama Administration accomplished this feat of financial witchery by making two magical claims. First, it declares that for insured group health plans, the cost of contraception and abortifacient coverage with be "cost neutral, and may result in cost savings" once all other benefits are considered. (Pardon me for a minute while I flash back to Obama making the same false claim about Obamacare's own impact on the federal budget.)

The rule cites a study that finds the cost of contraception is cheaper than the cost of unplanned pregnancy, which is idiotically beside the point, since no one, not even the Obama Administration, is suggesting that people who do not get free contraception will necessarily fail to use any contraception at all. This pathetic, financially dubious dodge is the fig leaf that the Obama Administration has hung on the religious employer exception. It gets worse though.

Second, for self-insured health groups, like some corporations, the proposed rule says the cost of contraception and abortifacients will be offset because the ultimate issuer of the objectionable coverage (the rule contemplates a third party) will get to deduct the cost from the federally-mandated exchange fees that all such insurers will have to pay to continue operating under Obamacare. Essentially, Obama is saying to these insurers: "You must pay me a fee to stay in business, but you can deduct the cost of contraception from the fee, so that makes the contraception coverage free."

Like I said: magical thinking.

The Obama Administration will not bend on this. As far as the Democrats are concerned, people will have free contraception and nothing so obvious as morality, economics, or finance will stand in the way of that goal.

I know most commentators are focusing on the businesses that the so-called "religious employer" exception doesn't include. But even for the included groups, it is nothing praiseworthy because despite Obama's claims, somebody is going to have to pay for contraception and abortifacients. He can't just magic that money out of a federal regulation.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 09:51 AM



Comments

1 First??!!

Posted by: Jmel at February 03, 2013 09:53 AM (9tSXa)

2 It's like an economic perpetual motion machine.

Posted by: rickl at February 03, 2013 09:55 AM (sdi6R)

3 Wait, we can get free rubbers? Oh noooo, men don't get contraceptives, only women because republicants are all in their junk. Or something like that.

Posted by: assclownspotter at February 03, 2013 09:56 AM (IqWnX)

4

Thanks Roberts, you pos traitor.

Posted by: beach at February 03, 2013 09:57 AM (LpQbZ)

5
The first amendment doesn't say have an exception for business as opposed to the individual, Nor does it say only churches get freedom of religion. And although Obama called out the Supreme Court on the floor of Congress, Citizens United affirmed that corporations have pretty much the same rights as individuals.

Posted by: Bill R. at February 03, 2013 09:58 AM (QnRSM)

6 He can't just magic that money out of a federal regulation.

"Hold my beer. Watch this."

Posted by: rickl at February 03, 2013 10:00 AM (sdi6R)

7 I saw the story for this shit this morning. I refuse to give it any publicity. It is crap as all OBama stuff is.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2013 10:01 AM (53z96)

8 The DNC should pay for it. They are techno-wizards, they should be able to keep track of Sandra Fluke's (many) contraceptive needs.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at February 03, 2013 10:01 AM (uhAkr)

9 We need BC pills
?????
Free BC pills.

....easy peesy.

Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (bTPOR)

10 I think it is cheaper to give them loose free shit wimmins a quarter to hold between the knees!

It sure would stop babies from being made and be a heck of lot cheaper than me paying for their pills.

Posted by: Judge_Roy_bean at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (L6lPP)

11 As I've mentioned on a few threads, I'm about to get a vasectomy. Will Obama do it?

Posted by: USS Diversity at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (QLJPW)

12 "and I'm still amazed at how stupid the Obama Administration thinks we are."

We provided pretty good evidence on November 6th.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (j7rp0)

13 Ba-Rahn-Ko is not bound by the laws of supply&demand, thermodynamics, accounting, precedent, or gravity!

ELECTROLYTES!

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:03 AM (LRFds)

14 Charles Ponzi would be proud.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:03 AM (XkWWK)

15 The NOW gals will perform free vasectomies.

Posted by: Bigby's Burned Fingers at February 03, 2013 10:03 AM (RLTt1)

16 So, pharma companies will have to provide pills for free. What's the problem?

Hey, free BC is more important than free vaccines, free heart medicines, free cancer drugs...

i am sure they'll throw free boner pills in there to even things out, right?

Posted by: Cranky JAnne at February 03, 2013 10:03 AM (sZk6y)

17 "And although Obama called out the Supreme Court on the floor of
Congress, Citizens United affirmed that corporations have pretty much
the same rights as individuals."

In all fairness, if I knew I was going to be publicly scolded by our great President, I would have ruled against Citizens United. Being loved by our elite is more important then being right. A hard lesson learned.

Posted by: Justice Roberts at February 03, 2013 10:04 AM (Fz2C7)

18 11 As I've mentioned on a few threads, I'm about to get a vasectomy. Will Obama do it?
Posted by: USS Diversity at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (QLJPW)


I know a guy from the last thread who'll rip your balls off for free. Hell, just open the hood and shove 'em in the fan blade.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:04 AM (XkWWK)

19 I'm still amazed at how stupid the Obama Administration thinks we are.

Are you? Really?

Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2013 10:05 AM (xSegX)

20 I will get my free rubbers! MY WHORING WAYS WILL NOT BE DENIED

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at February 03, 2013 10:06 AM (BBWjt)

21 The Federal Empire has been conjuring up shit by magic for decades.

This is nothing new.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:06 AM (j7rp0)

22 Maybe they'll just mandate that water treatment plants incorporate BC meds and abortifacients.

Posted by: Bigby's Burned Fingers at February 03, 2013 10:06 AM (RLTt1)

23 How about letting banks create Contraception-backed Securities. Worked wonders for the housing market, n'est pas?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:07 AM (XkWWK)

24 Mustache is on Fox now.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2013 10:07 AM (53z96)

25 I WILL RIDE MY MAGIC UNICORN TO THE MAGICAL LAND OF FREE CONDOMS

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at February 03, 2013 10:07 AM (BBWjt)

26 19 Amish Dude,

He grasps he can do whatever he wants so long as the media plays along.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:08 AM (LRFds)

27 They shall beat thy AR-15's into sybians. And then beat off...

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:08 AM (XkWWK)

28 Obamacare is collapsing under its own financial weight.

It was untenable from the beginning and Democrats knew it.

The House and the Senate should continue pushing their repeal bills for a vote and get Democrats on the record as supporting this disaster.

People are losing their policies and other can't afford new ones.

The church should continue pushing their lawsuits- all the way to SCOTUS.

And what's with the GOP? It's like they can only push one issue at a time and have completely backed off the public exposure of Obamacare.

Dopes.

Posted by: Marcus at February 03, 2013 10:08 AM (DgeNA)

29 Anyway, so I told the cop, "hey, I wasn't paying for sex! They're running a special, see? If you buy a bottle of whiskey for $100, you get twenty with the girl. Otherwise it's $100 for twenty with the girl. I wasn't paying for sex, I was paying for whiskey, which is legal."

I think I got a pretty good case . . . .

Posted by: RoyalOil at February 03, 2013 10:08 AM (VjL9S)

30 Wow, the Darth Sidious Administration has turned the bullshit dial to 11.

Shocking.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:09 AM (j7rp0)

31 Thanks Roberts, you pos traitor.

Posted by: beach at February 03, 2013 09:57 AM (LpQbZ)
===========That'd be the Piss-Yellow Coward, John Roberts.

Posted by: RoyalOil at February 03, 2013 10:09 AM (VjL9S)

32 I'm still amazed at how stupid the Obama Administration thinks we are.


The "We" they are targeting is their base

Posted by: Dept. of Accuracy Dept. at February 03, 2013 10:09 AM (MhA4j)

33 Nice work Gabe.

What can you say? These people are fucking insane.

Just lie and the MSM will say it's not a lie.

Bingo, problem solved.

You dare question the state media? Who you going to believe NBC or your lying eyes?

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 03, 2013 10:09 AM (wR+pz)

34 28 Posted by: Marcus at February 03, 2013 10:08 AM (DgeNA)


The collapse is intentional. Instant crisis and the government steps in to save the day.

Single Payer.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:10 AM (XkWWK)

35 $20,000 for a "Bronze" Obamacare plan for a family of 5? I don't see how this can be sustained. The marxists plan to ruin this country is about to be realized.

Posted by: Truck Monkey at February 03, 2013 10:11 AM (jucos)

36 Oh, so you have never hears of me?

Posted by: The Abortion Fairy at February 03, 2013 10:11 AM (qYvEa)

37 34 J.J. Sefton

The collapse is intentional. Instant crisis and the government steps in to save the day.

Single Payer.


Agreed, but I expected the collapse to be a bit more gradual. This is more like a controlled building demolition.

Posted by: rickl at February 03, 2013 10:12 AM (sdi6R)

38 Heard... damnit...not hears

Posted by: The Abortion Fairy at February 03, 2013 10:12 AM (qYvEa)

39 36 Oh, so you have never hears of me?
Posted by: The Abortion Fairy at February 03, 2013 10:11 AM (qYvEa)


Leave a zygote under the pillow in exchange for 6 silver dimes?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:12 AM (XkWWK)

40 As always, the "payor of last resort" will be us tax paying schmucks.

This is so effing predictable.

More and more I feel like Gunny Highway: "... but just don't BORE me!"

Posted by: Nighthawk at February 03, 2013 10:13 AM (paPv4)

41 I got it; they confiscate all weapons, sell them to the Syrians and use the proceeds for contraception.

Win!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:14 AM (XkWWK)

42 "... the ultimate issuer of the objectionable coverage (the rule contemplates a third party) will get to deduct the cost from the federally-mandated exchange fees that all such insurers will have to pay to continue operating under Obamacare."

Note, such a deduction really cost-shifts the mandated coverage onto the federal government, meaning We The Taxpayers foot the bill yet again, regardless of the moral objections of many.

Posted by: MSYB at February 03, 2013 10:14 AM (GMxQL)

43 I should have deemed my rent paid instead of writing a check yesterday.

Dammit.

Next month, for sure.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:15 AM (j7rp0)

44 It's not so surprising, actually. Talk to any liberal about regulations, and it soon becomes evident that to them, "regulations" is like some magic incantation that solves all problems.

Dirty water? Regulations!

Dirty air? Regulations!

30-year-old Georgetown sluts being forced to buy her own condoms? Regulations!

They really do think "regulations" are like some magic spell that government casts over the nation in order to bring about some desired result. They have no appreciation for the process or the hassle associated with such things.

So it actually is quite consistent with their general worldview on "regulations" that they would just declare by fiat that *no one* pays for birth control. Why not? It stems from the same source of magical thinking that all of their regulatopia fantasies come from.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:15 AM (BBWjt)

45 No, no, you're missing it. See, I don't have to pay for my BC. And you don't have to pay for yours. But I'll pay for yours and you'll pay for mine.
Problem solved. Letter of the law fulfilled. And we all learn a valuable lesson in helping each other.
Cue music and third term.

Posted by: Zorachus at February 03, 2013 10:16 AM (I+gbU)

46 42 Posted by: MSYB at February 03, 2013 10:14 AM (GMxQL)


Easy solution. Everyone stops paying their income taxes. I'll start the petition...

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:16 AM (XkWWK)

47 Easy solution. Everyone stops paying their income taxes. I'll start the petition...
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:16 AM (XkWWK)

All we have to do is have no income.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:16 AM (j7rp0)

48 If I ever get picked for "make a wish kid!" Prezzy I will demon pass universal kajillionaire purchasing power.

Bam! Instant fucking wealth.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:17 AM (LRFds)

49 47 All we have to do is have no income.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:16 AM (j7rp0)


Patience, my friend...

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:17 AM (XkWWK)

50 All we have to do is have no *taxable* income.

FIFY

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:18 AM (BBWjt)

51 47 eman,

I have an app for that!

//Ogabe

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:18 AM (LRFds)

52 the cost of contraception and abortifacent coverage with be "cost neutral, and may result in cost savings"


This is the same kind of tortured 'thinking' (and I use the term loosely) that gives us "unemployment benefits create jobs".

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 10:19 AM (qqZuQ)

53 >Posted by: J.J. Sefton at February 03, 2013 10:10 AM (XkWWK)
<

I honestly don't believe that will happen.

Democrats can't plug every hole in the dike. There seems to be an ever increasing amount of people against Obamacare as the provisions set in. They are getting more concerned each day. That includes plenty of independents who supported Obama and Democrats.

I really believe this is their Achilles Heel because it is so disastrous.

But we don't do enough to highlight the destruction and fallacies Obama sold it on.

This is the crap that drives me wild about the GOP. They can't execute a multiple issue strategy.

Instead they sit around pulling each others puds or screaming their ideas are best, or people aren't conservative enough or some other nonsense.

They need to get their heads out of their asses or retire before there is nothing left.

/rant.

Posted by: Marcus at February 03, 2013 10:19 AM (DgeNA)

54 Hey Gabe.. is the term "abortifacient instead of "abortifacent"? no biggie though..

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 03, 2013 10:20 AM (UTq/I)

55 OTOH, if they'd offered free abortions to slutty co-eds in the late 50s, think of all the trouble we'd be spared today.

Posted by: epobirs at February 03, 2013 10:20 AM (kcfmt)

56 54 yes

Posted by: Dept. of Accuracy Dept. at February 03, 2013 10:21 AM (MhA4j)

57 This keeps up TFG is going to have to hit the campaign trail again reminding liberals how great this is and demonizing anyone that criticizes it.

Posted by: lowandslow at February 03, 2013 10:22 AM (Fz2C7)

58 My issue with this is still pretty basic - does the fed government have a right to force a private company, or any company, to "give" a product to someone for without charging them. If they can force my insurance company to give me free birth control, can they force a grocery store to give free broccoli, or condoms?

But, also, they keep talking about how much money will be saved by providing free contraceptives. And, how is this money saved. By preventing an illness? No, but by preventing a BIRTH. Seems to me like they're saying that having a child, moreso than high cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, etc., is what is responsible for the high cost of health care. Or else, they'd be giving out free cholesterol and BP meds.

Posted by: sydney jane at February 03, 2013 10:22 AM (3a4vw)

59 43 I should have deemed my rent paid instead of writing a check yesterday. Dammit. Next month, for sure.
Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:15 AM (j7rp0)



Heck yeah! 'Cause it's cost neutral doncha know? The cost of your landlord evicting you would be more than the cost of letting you stay there without paying rent. By Jove, I think you're onto something here.

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 10:23 AM (qqZuQ)

60 I believe Comrade O'Brien was O's philosophy professor, at least based on his epistemology.

"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane."

Posted by: Aaron at February 03, 2013 10:25 AM (Tlix5)

61 I like turtles.

Posted by: Icedog at February 03, 2013 10:26 AM (9ScGj)

62 55 OTOH, if they'd offered free abortions to slutty co-eds in the late 50s, think of all the trouble we'd be spared today.
Posted by: epobirs at February 03, 2013 10:20 AM (kcfmt)


Well, I might not be here in that case. Or maybe I would. Hard to say.

Posted by: rickl at February 03, 2013 10:26 AM (sdi6R)

63 All of these things are bad but the worst part of Obamacare is that it drove home the point that we are living in a post-Constitutional America. There really is nothing left worth salvaging of our government now.

All the Republicans need to do is refuse to reform Obamacare in any way. They should simply offer full repeal or nothing. The thing will fall of its own weight. There is no reason to offer the Dems an out.

Posted by: Voluble at February 03, 2013 10:27 AM (qYvEa)

64
As I've mentioned on a few threads, I'm about to get a vasectomy. Will Obama do it?


Call me.

Posted by: Lorena Bobbitt at February 03, 2013 10:28 AM (6TB1Z)

65 Wait, was it Col Mustard in the study with the candlestick? What do I win?

Posted by: Icedog at February 03, 2013 10:28 AM (9ScGj)

66
I'm still trying to understand how some obscure student became the national face of birth control, literally overnight. She has no credentials that I can find, has done no research and is no expert on anything, yet she is propped up as some sort of authority on all things BC.

WTF?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 10:28 AM (+z4pE)

67 Why can't he make everything free? Budgets and careful money management are unnecessary all the while that deficit spending is the path to recovery. With logic like this I don't understand why Obama has to alienate half the country by taxing them. Why do we need any taxes at all?

Good God, he's the smartest man in the world! Why hasn't he come to this conclusion already?

Posted by: Marquee at February 03, 2013 10:29 AM (6W8+8)

68 I still think the House GOP should just pass a balanced budget and go home. They can then take the opportunity of being in their home districts to hold town hall meetings and lay into the dems and the administration over every failure, foreign and domestic, they have presided over.

Use the budget to start infighting among the dems and the local news to bypass the networks.

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at February 03, 2013 10:29 AM (KAWvv)

69 #58 Free cholesterol and blood pressure meds would SAVE lives, which is a no-no for the Culture of Death. Free birth control PREVENTS lives, which to them is a good thing.

Once you understand that all policies are anti-life, the consistency becomes clear.

Posted by: Miss Marple at February 03, 2013 10:30 AM (GoIUi)

70 Don't worry fellers, my pet unicorn has assured me he shall pay for contraception for all with his rainbow skilttle farts!

Posted by: Judge_Roy_bean at February 03, 2013 10:30 AM (L6lPP)

71 66 backwards boy,

Sandy Fluck is the living embodiment of YouTube nation...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:31 AM (LRFds)

72 Thanks Chi-town Jerry. I thought I had that right. Bah.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at February 03, 2013 10:32 AM (jZUEZ)

73 My issue with this is still pretty basic - does the fed government have a
right to force a private company, or any company, to "give" a product
to someone for without charging them.




As I said yesterday, when the court ruled in 1968 that the government can tell you whether or not you can operate your property they way you want to you have two choices, either bow down and surrender or go bankrupt and let the hobos use your property for an open air toilet.


We did not have to wait for Roberts to call it a GD tax.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (53z96)

74 I'm thinking, Darwinianly, contraception and abortion (any trimester including "4th") might be the one plan we would want to fund and promote, as long as Democrats and other tyrant types choose to not reproduce themselves. Everyone else should have large families. Self-fixing problem.

Um... I denounce myself.

Posted by: Mindfulguy still banned on the desktop at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (u57y4)

75 68 guy who moves pianos for a living,

Yeah pretty much, the media can't control block parties...

Talk to folks.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (LRFds)

76 11 As I've mentioned on a few threads, I'm about to get a vasectomy. Will Obama do it?

Posted by: USS Diversity at February 03, 2013 10:02 AM (QLJPW)

Mighty brave of you, did you see the way miss Barky holds a shotgun? I can't imagine how she would hold a knife.

Posted by: Killerdog at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (hDjxh)

77 Voluble,

That train has already left the station. Remember the GOP helped the dems to fix the retarded 1099 rules in the Bamacare after it passed. Too late to just let them stew in it.

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (KAWvv)

78 It's all a bait and switch. Has been from the beginning.

The Dems and their behind-the-scenes puppet masters are not stupid. Deranged, yes. Anti-capitalistic and anti-American, for sure. But not stupid. And that's the whole point.

Obamacare was designed to fail miserably. An "individual mandate" where the penalty is far less than the cost of insurance? Obviously people will still go uninsured and pay the penalty. Group coverage requirements that don't apply to people working less than 30 hrs. per week? Obviously employers will cut hours and not provide coverage. Shifting money away from Medicare? Obviously the elderly will be pushed towards Medicaid, which covers fewer products and services.

Dems think incrementally. What they do today is designed to set the platform for what they'll attempt tomorrow, or next year, or 10 years from now.

The intent of Obamacare was to enact a tax and spend bill that would not actually wind up improving the ratio of insured vs. uninsured. Then a decade or so later they could return to the "uninsured crisis" and make their final push for single payer, using the images of uninsured twentysomethings and the elderly going without needed medication to set "the narrative."

Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at February 03, 2013 10:35 AM (r2PLg)

79 Marcus and JJ Sefton-
You are on opposite sides of what will be the climactic battle of the next 4 years. I'm on the optimistic side. Most people can fool themselves for only so long. They've kidded themselves that OCare will save money, and that nobody will pay, or at least that they won't. At some point, thought, reality intrudes. I truly believe that. I have to.

I certainly agree that the GOP should be doing a much better job of exposing the rot that the Dems are pushing in multiple areas.

Posted by: pep at February 03, 2013 10:36 AM (6TB1Z)

80 It really is a shame that there is no one in the GOP hierarchy that is good at politics.

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at February 03, 2013 10:36 AM (KAWvv)

81 If Uncle Sam is going to make me pay for BC I expect some return on my investment. Where is the claims office?

Posted by: Icedog at February 03, 2013 10:37 AM (9ScGj)

82
It really is a shame that there is no one in the GOP hierarchy that is good at politics.


It requires an ability to shamelessly lie. We generally lack that.

Posted by: pep at February 03, 2013 10:38 AM (6TB1Z)

83 Then a decade or so later they could return to the "uninsured crisis" and make their final push for single payer, using the images of uninsured twentysomethings and the elderly going without needed medication to set "the narrative."
Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at February 03, 2013 10:35 AM (r2PLg)

Let It Burn.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:38 AM (j7rp0)

84 The rule cites a study that finds the cost of contraception is cheaper
than the cost of unplanned pregnancy, which is idiotically beside the
point, since no one, not even the Obama Administration, is suggesting
that people who do not get free contraception will necessarily fail to
use any contraception at all.



Oh, yes, yes, they are. I've lost track of the number of times I've had people on the Left bluster at me that if there's no free contraception then people won't use it at all and then there will be all these unwanted babies and why do I want children to grow up poor and abused? My response that hey keeping your legs shut is super free is, of course, deemed to prove that I am a prude who hates sex.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at February 03, 2013 10:39 AM (Gk3SS)

85 One of my two daughters is hopelessly NEA liberal.
The other one is liberal, but possibly salvageable (yuppie stay at home mom).

The reason I think she's salvageable is the video link she put on her Facebook page which is apparently the opening sequence of an HBO series called "Newsroom" (I don't get HBO).

Jeff Daniels pretty much nails the problem. http://tinyurl.com/al344ej


Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 03, 2013 10:39 AM (Qxe/p)

86 My pills are more important than your pills.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at February 03, 2013 10:40 AM (ndlFj)

87
It's all a bait and switch. Has been from the beginning.

In the engineering world, it's called, "designed to fail." There should be a genuine push to just repeal this law in its entirety. Quit screwing around and just do it. It doesn't need to be replaced with anything.

If the free market were allowed to operate without government interference, then things would sort themselves out as a natural result. But heaven forfend our elite rulers allow that to happen!

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 10:40 AM (+z4pE)

88 Here's another fallacy in the Obamacare premise. The notion that "preventive medicine" somehow prevents people from needing healthcare. At best, preventive medicine postpones people needing health care. Even if by some miracle (none on the horizon by the way but just for argument's sake) you eliminated all forms of cancer, other forms of degenerative disease (heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, etc) would still be around and life expectancy might increase 1-2 years for the population. Average life expectancy is near its upper boundary limit already. All of their magical projections about preventing "this or that" is largely static.

Oh Lord, don't get me started on this.

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 10:41 AM (qqZuQ)

89 It really is a shame that there is no one in the GOP hierarchy that is good at politics.

It requires an ability to shamelessly lie. We generally lack that.
Posted by: pep at February 03, 2013 10:38 AM (6TB1Z)

No. They lack the courage to tell the truth.

The American People lack the guts to hear the truth.

So the corrupt calliope plays on.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 10:41 AM (j7rp0)

90 When am I going to get free cable? I mean if I'm in front of the TV then I wont be out in the 'hood causing trouble getting arrested etc and the government having to pay for my prison term. Right?Its protection racket money. The mob used to that.
We are being extorted by the vagina. "Hey nice society you got there, be a shame if it were overwhelmed by abandoned children".
Why can't the brains attached to the vagina's be held responsible?
I do not understand the mania for free birthcontrol pills. Do not get it. Its not a medical issue. If there is a disease process being treated other than desire to be not pregnant, its covered.

Posted by: simpleton at February 03, 2013 10:41 AM (NGsLN)

91 I've lost track of the number of times I've had people on the Left
bluster at me that if there's no free contraception then people won't
use it at all and then there will be all these unwanted babies and why
do I want children to grow up poor and abused?


And then they have the gall to accuse US of irrational sloppy thinking.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:41 AM (BBWjt)

92 84 AlexTheChick,

We need an AOSHQ style book on showing how babies are the fuel for Free$hit for Free$hit Army...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:42 AM (LRFds)

93 The collapse is intentional. Instant crisis and the government steps in to save the day.

Single Payer.


Yeah, they got all that Underpants Gnomes thinking from Marx.

1. Revolution
2. ???
3. Worker's paradise!

We have to keep fighting. Common sense says that if government screws it up now, government will screw it up more when they do more.

I think we also need to point out that these people have no interest in doing for the legal profession -- their profession -- what they propose to do to medicine.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2013 10:42 AM (xSegX)

94 The notion that "preventive medicine" somehow prevents people from needing healthcare.

Actually, there was a study - SCIENTIFIC study - from HARVARD! - which showed that preventive medicine actually costs more money in the long run because it leads to people overconsuming health care resources.

Shocking, isn't it?

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:43 AM (BBWjt)

95 But hey, look on the bright side:

Abe Vigoda is
alive







Page loaded Sunday February 3 2013 7:44:42 AM PT

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:44 AM (BBWjt)

96 What this should indicate to any justice willing to actually be a descendent and heir of the Anglo-Saxon legal heritage and not just be a partisan in robes is that the desire to get free contraception in hands of supporters was the first and foremost goal of the government---thus any claims that the government was trying to balance competing desires should be looked at with strongly jaundiced eyes.

It's hard not to see how this entire thing violates at least the spirit of eminent domain--"you will provide this for my supporter or I will run you out of business." Thus, the idea that the government would not also trample on religious liberty is not preposterous. Quite the contrary. In this case, it should be apparent that government simply has a pole star and simply will not allow anything else to get in its way.

If the court does not seriously take a look at this issue, no one else will, because with the media demagoguery of the GOP via the "war on women" meme, the legislature simply may not stop anything that tramples on the freedoms and rights of others.

The question before this court is "can the government act too imperiously on a policy I favor in the abstract?" Yea or nay?

Also-- if the government funds any kind of similiar program to give free or recuced contraception or similiar kind of medical service, and requires a private business to do the same, upon pain of not being able to business at all--then is there any natural law right to do business; has there been a condemnation of property without *just* compensation; and has the 10th amendment been rendered a nullity? (hard to think somehow businesses could have been allowed to exist for hundreds of years and now will reduced to destruction if they do not act as social welfare adjuncts of government. Something new is being claimed, it seems)

And regarding this something possibly new and novel: As far as grant of power by the founding charter, the governing *contract*--upon what idea of regulation of *commerce* does Congress claim the right, or the the Executive Branch the right, to demand such things? Where are the exclusions for in-state-only concerns, if not present?

If instead of grant of power via the regulation of commerce clause, right by the taxing power is claimed, then is it not true that the only direct tax that may be put on an individual by the Federal government without apportionment amongst the states, by popuation (via census enumeration)-is not the only tax that can ve so directly laid is the income tax? And that some businesses are individually-owned, and that this is not a tax, or an income tax?. How do we square this circle? Upon what grant of power can the government make private agencies act in ways exactly akin to social welfare departments, indistinguishable except the private agent is paying for it, not the government?

The federal government may enact taxes for the general welfare, and it may regulate interstate commerce, but it cannot do as it pleases on anything it pleases to do.

Or, it can't if we hold to the original contract. But, if we wish to say that original contact is no longer valid, fine, but then...is it not a principle of contract law that if the contract is not upheld as binding, but is now viewed and null and void, and if the principals do not agree to a new compact, then no further obligations for positive action exist between the parties, and that the court's role in the matter is ended as well?

In contract law, can courts declare old contracts invalid and then say that the parties will submit, whether willing or not, to a new contract whose clauses are written only by the court? Does that power exist? Can courts have a better idea of an arrangement between parties?

Yes.

Can they make the parties hew to that court's idea of what should be a better contract, but one unfortunately not signed nor agreed to by the parties?

No.

Posted by: Hell on the Wabash at February 03, 2013 10:45 AM (C+SsL)

97 94 chemjeff,

Hatefacts!

//$hempf $miff

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 10:45 AM (LRFds)

98 I've lost track of the number of times I've had people on the Left

bluster at me that if there's no free contraception then people won't

use it at all and then there will be all these unwanted babies and why

do I want children to grow up poor and abused?


Shit. The people who were already getting free contraception can't be bothered to use it consistently and correctly.

Ever read a study about teenager motherhood? 95% of them had birth control available to do them, but half of them wanted to be pregnant and the other half didn't want to ask the guy they were fucking to wear a condom because he would stop fucking them and go fuck someone with even less self-esteem.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at February 03, 2013 10:49 AM (hO8IJ)

99 LOLbiden

http://tinyurl.com/b8kehcp

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:50 AM (BBWjt)

100 i think we should send all of our unwanted free birth control to the first daughters..... and remember to ask all pregnant liberals when they are pregnant if they plan on keeping "it" and ask all libs with post natal issue if they feel guilty for bringing these children into this horrible overpopulated evil world.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 03, 2013 10:50 AM (GVxQo)

101 Remember the GOP helped the dems to fix the retarded
1099 rules in the Bamacare after it passed. Too late to just let them
stew in it.


Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at February 03, 2013 10:33 AM (KAWvv)


Must repeat every month.

The Senate passed an amendment to a veteran's housing bill (allowing them to violate the Consitution) after breaking a Republican filibuster aided by Nebraska cornhusker kickback. Recall Repubs only had 39 Senators at that time and Nelson sided with Repubs until Obama gave him money. No Repubs voted for the bill at all in the Senate.
In the House no Repubs voted for it either but Boner made a "deal" to allow the vote on Christmas eve so they could go home.

The next year the "fixes" were passed using "reconciliation", again with zero Republicans voting for it. Reconciliation allowed them to bypass the 60 vote requirement.

NO.REPUBLICANS, VOTED, FOR. THIS.POS
I hate the Republican party but they are not to blame for this POS.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2013 10:52 AM (53z96)

102
Wait.. We greedy insurance companies are supposed to be removing tonsils or cutting of feet for money but we won't give out free birth control even though it'llmake us money in the long term???

We must be doing this greed thing wrong - I'll get our admin assistant to book us a week long stay at a union resort so we learn how to do it right.

Posted by: Greedy Insurance Company at February 03, 2013 10:52 AM (fiBHo)

103 and remember to ask all pregnant liberals when they are pregnant if they plan on keeping "it"

"What's this? A baby shower invite? You want presents for your lump of parasitic cells? You didn't bring the lump on Mutual Acquaintance's breast a present...and why didn't you use birth control instead of having a baby that you expect other people to clothe?!"

Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at February 03, 2013 10:53 AM (hO8IJ)

104 What's the problem? The Government just keeps the stuff in at geographically convenient places (like every small town - maybe in a closet in the Post Office), and people just go get it.

Simple. What's the fuss?

Posted by: Shakin' Like a Man on a Fuzzy Tree at February 03, 2013 10:54 AM (eMtQ2)

105 My response that hey keeping your legs shut is super free is, of course, deemed to prove that I am a prude who hates sex.

But the issue is that contraception -- particularly oral contraception, which is what they are talking about here -- is dirt cheap. It's cheaper than an entire diet of ramen noodles.

It's nothing.

And, of course, oral contraception is a public health hazard. It doesn't stop STDs.

Unless you're in a monogamous relationship. Then get him to pay for it.

It's for the man's benefit anyway.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2013 10:54 AM (xSegX)

106 103 heatherradish

that's the spirit!!!

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 03, 2013 10:54 AM (GVxQo)

107 Shocking, isn't it?
Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 10:43 AM (BBWjt)


chemjeff-
The other thing that becomes evident in that type of study is that the pilot program for a given preventive service is tightly controlled in terms of enrollment, application of the preventive service and administration of whatever intervention, as well as being run by motivated researchers with a vested interest in the project. From this narrow dataset they then produce predictions about cost savings when multiplied by the entire population that just do not hold up in the real world, when the program is run by regular folks.

Pilot programs always misunderestimate (h.t. GWB) the real world effects.

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 10:55 AM (qqZuQ)

108 Who wrote the rule, Gabe, Sibelius, among whose contributors are the late Dr. George Tiller, who's his science adviser, the Dr. Moreau like Holdren, who advocated putting sterilizing agents in drinking water.

Posted by: archie goodwin at February 03, 2013 10:55 AM (Jsiw/)

109 The American People lack the guts to hear the truth.



So the corrupt calliope plays on.


I don't agree, at least for most of them, but I guess we'll find out. In the meantime, "corrupt calliope" is now part of my vocabulary.

Posted by: pep at February 03, 2013 10:55 AM (6TB1Z)

110 65
Wait, was it Col Mustard in the study with the candlestick? What do I win?

Posted by: Icedog at February 03, 2013 10:28 AM (9ScGj)
Pixy will give you the codes to the "new" HQ?
That or ace will extend your Premium membership for six months!

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 03, 2013 10:55 AM (wR+pz)

111 post natals are "survivors"

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at February 03, 2013 10:56 AM (GVxQo)

112
@chemjeff,

I had a long comment yesterday drafted up on the book "Tracking Medicine" which (Despite being written by an Obamacare loving liberal) does a pretty good job of discussing how "more medicine" != "good medicine."
The guy runs the Dartmouth Project which has been studying "unwarranted variance" in medicine for 30 years.
I skimmed the book for something I was working on and it's pretty good, until the end, where he engages in some magical thinking of Obamacare (mainly: "if they read my book, we'll be A-OK.")
(I know the book was written in 2010, but it's more a collection and commentary on the Dartmouth project than new research. Most of it was already published in smaller papers, and he wrote the book as sort of a memoir about it. Plus IIRC he finished writing in 2009, just before Dipshit care passed, so even though he's talking about it as if it's not quite finished yet that's a) a fluke in publishing time and b) I think he figured we could fix this in regulation.)

Posted by: tsrblke at February 03, 2013 10:57 AM (GaqMa)

113
92
84 AlexTheChick,



We need an AOSHQ style book on showing how babies are the fuel for Free$hit for Free$hit Army...


Here is the video!




http://tinyurl.com/3w2d7y9

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 03, 2013 10:58 AM (wR+pz)

114
The federal government may enact taxes for the general welfare, and it may regulate interstate commerce, but it cannot do as it pleases on anything it pleases to do.

This fact is well known, or at least was, to previous generations who were taught the basics of our form of government. However, as the populace has been deprived of the rules established by the Founders and said rules grossly misinterpreted by the courts, we have arrived at the point today where even the best legal minds don't have a good grasp of the concept of limited governent.

In the past, we had at least a few people who understood that their actions were still restrained by the law. But creeping Statism has rendered these folk pretty much ineffective, to the point where the MFM now characterizes anyone who dares speak of the Original Intent of our Founders as "extremists."

Truly, the best way to destroy our Constitution is to simply ignore it and act as you please.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 11:01 AM (+z4pE)

115 And, of course, oral contraception is a public health hazard. It doesn't stop STDs.

It also ends up in the water supply, where it fucks up fish and mammals with a Y chromosome. Protecting wildlife is so much less important to the eco-fascists than killing off the human race that they won't touch the hormones-in-the-water thing.

But if you notice these things, you're a crackpot.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at February 03, 2013 11:01 AM (hO8IJ)

116 So where do I go to get this magical free contraception? I have the feeling that CVS or Walgreens will get kind of mad if I walk behind the pharmacy counter and raid the birth control meds, or help myself to the condom display.

Posted by: Doc at February 03, 2013 11:01 AM (oUDps)

117 90 When am I going to get free cable? I mean if I'm in front of the TV then I wont be out in the 'hood causing trouble getting arrested etc and the government having to pay for my prison term. Right?


It's "cost neutral" right?

Someone on the Twits should start a #costneutral doohickey

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 11:01 AM (qqZuQ)

118 I'm tellin' you fuckers: Ft Sumter was a good idea but a bad plan. Some of this shit has to be swept away; the con has been going on so long that many, many idiots believe it. At what point do our elected representatives get held responsible for their votes? And do NOT stake your future on the "vote them out" nonsense. How well has that worked so far?

Posted by: Dan Patterson at February 03, 2013 11:02 AM (tWWc3)

119
OK,
Let's go ahead and stipulate that Birth control has a net positive cost savings over the long term (I don't actually believe that, I think it's moronic thinking based on the idea that no one ever wants children, which frankly IS NOT TRUE.)
But for the sake of argument, let's just grant it. *Poof* Posited. Absurdum here we come!
The argument still doesn't make sense. It'd be net positive costs savings to kill people the minute they become unhealthy, would it be OK to mandate insurance plans do that even if religious groups objected?
No obviously not, because to those religious groups it's not a morally legitimate way to save money. Full stop, can't do it. Hobby Lobby is saying "we don't care if our actuarial charts cost us more, we don't want to pay for this because it's morally illegitimate."
"But it costs less so technically you didn't *pay* for it." Is not a valid counter argument.

Posted by: tsrblke at February 03, 2013 11:02 AM (GaqMa)

120 "He can't just magic that money out of a federal regulation."

Sure he can. The Congress will pass and the President will sign law that enables Helicopter Ben Bernanke to print all sorts of magic money. It doesn't even come from trees anymore. What makes anyone think he cannot invent all sorts of avenues for magic or that this magic will not be accepted?

Boned we are.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 03, 2013 11:03 AM (eHIJJ)

121 Swallowing it is free and effective birth control. Isn't it time this became the law, ladies?

Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at February 03, 2013 11:04 AM (SzAZ7)

122 People always act surprised that socialism is based on economically magical thinking and is unsustainable.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 03, 2013 11:04 AM (Tt6ky)

123 113 Billy Bob,

While charming I mean it quite literally. Babies ARE the fuel for the Ponzi Schemes and accidentally in many cases the taxes needed to fire the Free$hit cannon. The Moonbat fucktard Muder Religion uses dead fetuses as a holy sacrament, but a growing population is the only thing that can save their stupid fucking fantasies.

This is the reason why they are hot to import 44 million Mexicans they killed 55 million babies.

Someone needs to come up with a way to show with stick figures and simple math how the economy works, how Free$hit "works", and why the SS and Medicare trust funds are time bombs...

maybe sell pot rolling paper with this on them....

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 11:04 AM (LRFds)

124
Posted by: tsrblke at February 03, 2013 10:57 AM (GaqMa)

Very insightful. Of course it makes sense even if you just give the issue a cursory examination.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 03, 2013 11:05 AM (BBWjt)

125 122 JohnJ,

Yup...they never get past ~the 4th grade intellectually on economics...

"but I WANT IT!" in ever increasing volume is probably not the way to get your way in a sane world....

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 11:05 AM (LRFds)

126 "Dopes."


The only dope is the person who thinks this is accidental.

Posted by: nip at February 03, 2013 11:06 AM (11Tdq)

127 Free contraception? Your mouth.

Posted by: Fritz at February 03, 2013 11:06 AM (WM+rJ)

128 I tried to get Barky pregnant on a number of occasions. It did not work. But, I had my bent hanger ready just in case.

Posted by: Barney F. at February 03, 2013 11:07 AM (O6u+F)

129 120 Anonymous Drivel,

Pretty much, and never forget they REALLY hate genuine industry and thrift.

Saying that this downturn is the result of "natural and unregulated capitalism" is one of the greatest card tricks ever played because it is if anything an indictment of socialism and the hyper-regulatory state.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 11:07 AM (LRFds)

130 And one last thing: I've noticed that, all of a sudden, the government is only concerned with spending when it comes to our health. If this was as great a plan as they say, why did the people in Washington who crammed this down our throats exempt themselves from it?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 11:07 AM (+z4pE)

131 Vic,

Quick search finds this;

http://www.lifehealthpro.com/2011/04/15/obama-signs-1099-fix-bill


Relevant part;

>>>Small business groups had argued that the provision would create a
paperwork nightmare, forcing independent contractors to file a Form 1099
whenever they bought a computer or a suite of office furniture from a
large retailer.


The new law created by H.R. 4, the "Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer
Protection and Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayments Act of 2011,"
also repeals a separate Form 1099 information reporting requirement that
would have been imposed on owners of rental real estate.


Analysts have estimated repeal of PPACA Section 9006 will cost $19
billion over 10 years. Drafters of the repeal law have paid for repeal
by adjusting a PPACA health insurance subsidy program that is set to
start up in 2014.


House members voted 314-112 for H.R. 4 March 3.


The bill passed in the Senate by a vote of 87-12 April 5.<<<<
The GOP helped pass this.



Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living... at February 03, 2013 11:09 AM (KAWvv)

132 If this was as great a plan as they say, why did the people in
Washington who crammed this down our throats exempt themselves from it?


Well, it's good enough for YOU. Peasant.

Posted by: Your betters at February 03, 2013 11:10 AM (6TB1Z)

133 Back to the fields with you. That filth won't dig itself.

Posted by: Your betters at February 03, 2013 11:10 AM (6TB1Z)

134 The guy runs the Dartmouth Project which has been studying "unwarranted variance" in medicine for 30 years.Posted by: tsrblke at February 03, 2013 10:57 AM (GaqMa)

Most of the commentary regarding the Dartmouth Atlas that I've seen from the left mis-applies the actual data set and twists it into a means of justifying governmental rationing. (Much of the Dartmouth data relates to Medicare expenditures in the final two years of life, and the variation in that spending by city, town and region.) But they take it a step further, and mis-apply the data to the broader population, the private insurance market and a broader time frame than final two years of life.
The ultimate message implied by the left is "Die sooner, save money for the rest of us."

Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 11:11 AM (qqZuQ)

135
It also ends up in the water supply, where it fucks up fish and
mammals with a Y chromosome. Protecting wildlife is so much less
important to the eco-fascists than killing off the human race that they
won't touch the hormones-in-the-water thing.

But if you notice these things, you're a crackpot.


Don't forget that BC pills have been shown to alter a woman's behavior and preferences when it comes to choosing a mate. And of course there is the issue of precisely what are the physical effects of keeping her hormones out of whack for years at a time.


Posted by: Colorado Alex at February 03, 2013 11:12 AM (hpDVh)

136 I'm tired of being That Couch.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 11:12 AM (+z4pE)

137 This is about eugenics not healthcare. Obamacare is the means. Just ask Cass Sunstein. Population control through low birth rates and higher death rates. The old, weak and sick are the ones who will be the first to go. Smokers, overweight, and anyone doing anything unacceptable to them are next.

Posted by: wattyler1381 at February 03, 2013 11:16 AM (F2Vrz)

138 135 Colorado Alex,

DC is making it very evident there needs to be a split.

They will not stop until they are all powerful and we are powerless and if anything are even less constrained than the Soviets on the magic tricks they are trying....

The Soviets were less harmful to their people because in not having to crush Anglo-Saxon tradition they did not brainwash their populace in so many self-destructive ways.

It would be less harmful to the Republic to kill people outright for not conforming than this Orwellian lockstep the media is in....

people do not grasp how money works anymore, or why they are paid it by the private sector or gifted it by the govt.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 11:17 AM (LRFds)

139 And of course there is the issue of precisely what are the physical
effects of keeping her hormones out of whack for years at a time.


The deadly blood clot thing is why I really hate Jindal's idea of making it all OTC. If that makes me a womyn-hating prude, so be it.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™, Crankypants Extraordinaire at February 03, 2013 11:19 AM (hO8IJ)

140 sven10077: "Saying that this downturn is the result of 'natural and unregulated capitalism'..."

Agreed. Anyone repeating that should die a long, horrible death that would make Satan blush. Our capitalism is a mutant child of natural capitalism. If we could abort anything, it ought to be the current incarnation of American Capitalism which is to say Corruptism if not Fascism.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 03, 2013 11:24 AM (eHIJJ)

141 How about we just print some new money, and then use that money to pay for contraceptives?

Posted by: The Ben Bernanke at February 03, 2013 11:28 AM (2jQGY)

142 I may be crazy, but it seems the Constitutional Scholar Preezy knows absolutely shit regarding the workings of government.

Posted by: RWC at February 03, 2013 11:28 AM (sqp6o)

143 BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit.: "If this was as great a plan as they say, why did the people in
Washington who crammed this down our throats exempt themselves from it?"


I would love to see Ted Cruz come out and repeatedly try to force an Amendment to every Bill (if a Bill cannot be passed outright) that forbids Congress to exempt itself from any legislation it imposes on the voter. Talk about a populist bombshell, I'm pretty sure he could start his presidential campaign right away.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 03, 2013 11:29 AM (eHIJJ)

144 It would be cheaper in the end for the govt to just buy trainloads of condoms and stack pallets of them in every post office.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 03, 2013 11:34 AM (J6hHs)

145 Socialists have a simple
plan: make promises to economically illiterate people while appealing
to their envy and greed by blaming rich people for your failure to
fulfill those promises. 100% guaranteed to destroy elected governments
and the people who vote for them.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 03, 2013 11:36 AM (Tt6ky)

146 142
I may be crazy, but it seems the Constitutional Scholar Preezy knows absolutely shit regarding the workings of government.

Posted by: RWC at February 03, 2013 11:28 AM (sqp6o)

Unfortunately he seems to be an expert on American psychology.

Posted by: JohnJ at February 03, 2013 11:37 AM (Tt6ky)

147 Government.

Cost neutral.

?!?

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....

*inhales*

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.....

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 11:48 AM (zYofe)

148 @123

I don't disagree.


LBJ's war on poverty didn't work and started generations of welfare dependance that will never end.

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 03, 2013 11:49 AM (wR+pz)

149 Unfortunately he seems to be an expert on American psychology.
Posted by: JohnJ at February 03, 2013 11:37 AM (Tt6ky)


Sure. When no one tells you that you are wrong, you can be an expert at anything.

Well,...no one that matters, I guess.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 11:50 AM (zYofe)

150 Where is everyone? In NO? or church?

Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 03, 2013 11:50 AM (wR+pz)

151 'natural and unregulated capitalism'..."

Heh, ......where?

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 11:51 AM (zYofe)

152 I'm still amazed at how stupid the Obama Administration thinks we are.






No Information Voter: Duhh...sounds good to me. Duhh..everything is still free, right?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 03, 2013 12:01 PM (cCGpr)

153 151 98zjusmc,

On the tee vee baby.....

PMSNBC swears....

course I haven't seen it since the 1890s, you know if the judiciary is for sale or intimidation then we need to find markets, resources, workers, bankers, lawyers, and jurors.

This DOOM! shit only applies if we refuse to play the game.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:01 PM (LRFds)

154 152 TQM,

Part of why concentrating in the Red States and creating a seperate culture that can defend itself.

Texas is the game.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:03 PM (LRFds)

155 Is a necessity even....

Damn it this nook sucks for entry dometimes.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:05 PM (LRFds)

156 Justified while well done is depressing this season.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:10 PM (LRFds)

157 104
What's the problem? The Government just keeps the stuff in at
geographically convenient places (like every small town - maybe in a
closet in the Post Office), and people just go get it.

Simple. What's the fuss?
xxxx

Sort of similar to what I was thinking. They will simply fabricate another "tax" and that "tax money" will got paying for all contraceptive services, which will be handled by someone like the Secretary of State office. Or the IRS, which is already up to it's neck in Obamacare.

OT, but not really, the "government" is now "thinking about managing" our private 401K plans... hey, there's a source of cash!

Posted by: shibumi at February 03, 2013 12:12 PM (z63Tr)

158 157 Shibumi,

From the economic geniuses behind solyndra and Ogabecare......led by Corzine...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:17 PM (LRFds)

159 miss you snowflake...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:22 PM (LRFds)

160 Magic contraception is real, wingnuts. As long as you don't believe in something crazy like god, you can still be part of the reality-based community.

Posted by: Vermin at February 03, 2013 12:22 PM (dGYmk)

161 My condoms are at the post office? WTF?! Why aren't they in my mybox? Do I have to do everything? Fuck!

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at February 03, 2013 12:23 PM (k9Wkt)

162 This really is a dumb issue for Republicans to keep pounding on, especially since it's 99% an issue because of a few SoCons from the Santorum wing of the Party still want to make birth control a government issue. It would be the equivalent of a Muslim suing an employer because there was pork at the company cafeteria.

Everyone who pays taxes pays for birth control through a variety of government programs. My religious principles aren't compromised for the bad things government finances. Same with insurance. If you believe birth control is immoral, don't take birth control, even if your insurance covers it. It's pretty simple.

But to make this a political issue is a sure loser to say insurance has to pay for something like Viagra but not birth control. It makes conservatives look like they want all women barefoot and pregnant.


Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 12:27 PM (XDRsa)

163 Jeepers...insurance shouldn't pay for Viagra either. You let this shit go on and you'll be buying cough drops for cough drop addicts....through your insurance. It needs to end.

Posted by: torabora at February 03, 2013 12:32 PM (k9Wkt)

164 BTW...maybe we can pay for registered Democrats abortions and contraception. Encourage it even, like with tax rebates. Perhaps in 40 years the bastards will extinct themselves.

Posted by: torabora at February 03, 2013 12:36 PM (k9Wkt)

165 Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 12:27 PM (XDRsa)

The government should not be involved in this to any degree and the Democrats made this a political issue.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 12:38 PM (j7rp0)

166 163.

The difference is, no one is making a case that insurance shouldn't have to pay for Viagra.

The case is purely being made regarding birth control because "Surprise!" these same people really have a problem with birth control because they think it's a mortal sin.

Can we at least be honest that this birth control mandate is not something made on "libertarian" grounds of government not regulating business?

I personally think insurance companies should be able to cover what they want to cover as long as it's spelled out in advance and contracts are not broken. But to focus like a laser on something inexpensive like birth control (that probably saves money all around rather than paying for an actual birth) stinks of SoCon moralizing. They want to make it as difficult as possible for people to get a hold of birth control. Sort of like "blue laws" that don't allow people to buy alcohol on Sundays.

Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 12:39 PM (XDRsa)

167 162 Jeepers,

Uh "no" my objections to this fucktardery have less to do with God and a lot more to do with Marx, and Smith...

We have the right to not do business with individuals for goods or services we find immoral. You can't "not do business" with the Feds. By making the Feds national pimp for pump pills you are cornering people into violating their 1st amendment rights.

In order to get to their holy grail of not having to be "on the hook" for 9 fucking bucks a month the moonbats decide to undo the laws of supply and demand and accounting.

This has sweet fuck all to do with being "national prudes" and everything to do with the feds running on imaginarium these days.

Bronco is saying,"uh it's free 'cause it costs more to er be punished with a ah ah ah baby!"

Yeah it costs all of 30 cents a day for her Gini pills if they get to play this game for that where does it stop?

The answer is wherever the media and liberal activists want it to and sorry I am not down for that ride.

It also costs a lot less to simply kill capital offenders rather than have to house and feed them....

and on and on....

it costs a lot less to buy me a CCW pistol than it does to let me get robbed which is inevitable on a long enough timeline....when can I expect a gun to appear out of ether?

That you are trying to buy into this whole Fucktard media/DNC spin that 'nation held hostage by Christo-Taliban-Teahadits' spiel is why we lost.....

this pisses off socons and should sure as fuck piss of Fi-Cons but Fi-Cons want to sit at the cool kidz table evidently....

okay no problem, this is a stupid immoral destruction of private insurance on purpose and in no way "fiscally conservative" add in that it also happens to be against SoCons reasons for voting but FiCon would rather point at SoCon and say "I am not with him!"

well congrats...I had a foot in both camps, but the issues destroying this nation's economy are not SoCons fault and if FiCon wants to put hands to rope in the Socialist Malthusian cult's corner they can go over there.

I'll stand with the people whose beliefs helped forge the wealth we take for granted.


Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:39 PM (LRFds)

168 and I do argue, passionately that Viagra should never be covered by any medical plan.

If Viagra is covered why not beer, or videogames, or porn?

Pay for your own orgasms and kicks, and your own Gini pills.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:41 PM (LRFds)

169 Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 12:39 PM (XDRsa)

No. The Democrats did not mention Viagra. Why not?

Does their predilection for free shit stop with birth control?

No. They wanted to divide and conquer.

The government is wrong in collectivizing medical care and wrong by forcing birth control access on those who oppose it through the collectivizing the government instituted in the first place.

You have things exactly backwards. People are not resisting access to birth control, they are resisting forced access to birth control.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 12:44 PM (j7rp0)

170 >>If Viagra is covered why not beer...
---
Oh, if your gonna have beer, may as well include chips.

Posted by: sTevo at February 03, 2013 12:45 PM (VMcEw)

171 Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:22 PM (LRFds)

That would explain it. I divorced broadcast TeeVee when it was telling me what a great guy The Rapist was in the 90's.

Gee,....I would hate to see what regulated Capitalism looks like.

Candyland, I suppose.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 12:45 PM (zYofe)

172 Oh, if your gonna have beer, may as well include chips.
Posted by: sTevo at February 03, 2013 12:45 PM (VMcEw)


Fuckin' A-right.

..and no Doritos, either.

The good stuff.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 12:46 PM (zYofe)

173 170 Stevo,

and come to think on it...why not just eliminate the whole marriage thing and have the feds mandate sex clubs?

where does it stop?

The answer is it never does just keep reelecting donkey that is all he worries about...

"ME I WANT POWER, ME!"

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:47 PM (LRFds)

174 ....and come to think on it...why not just eliminate the whole marriage thing and have the feds mandate sex clubs?

I think they would love that.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 12:50 PM (zYofe)

175 ...and have the feds mandate sex clubs?
---
Only with minor Dominicans!

Posted by: Mr Menendez, the powerful but shy one at February 03, 2013 12:50 PM (VMcEw)

176 of course they would love it and with minor dominicans for the connected but society would implode....

the fact is Capitalism and Religion coupled together to render *this* as we shed more and more morals...

but the wealth needed to be this fucking stupid would never have happened without those two things....

ah well fuck it...

if FiCon uberalles wants to side with the cool kidz because SoCon watched the Baby fuel for Free$hit economics getting devoured as a bad thing I'm ready to retreat....

essentiall;y my son is to be enslaved or at best my grandkids to pay for a bunch of assholes who can't be bothered to be responsible for anything other than the next diversion and the party that wants to be chief enabler of the stupidity is importing aliens to steal his or theor nation from under him because the Fly Party DeeJays understand you need a lot of drone to let the cool kidz dance!

Maybe I can grow cows in Mongolia...

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 12:54 PM (LRFds)

177 Umm, chips are already covered. Different program but 46 million folks are taking advantage of it.

Posted by: RWC at February 03, 2013 12:55 PM (sqp6o)

178 Jeepers: "The case is purely being made regarding birth control because 'Surprise!' these same people really have a problem with birth control
because they think it's a mortal sin."


No, it's a mortal sin that violates their religious convictions and they don't want to subsidize that which so violates their principles. They might prefer others not employ birth control but they insist that they not be forced to pay for it. That's a pretty important distinction.

But beyond that I think we are collectively offended that private enterprise cannot manufacture any policy and sell it in an open market to willing buyers without the heavy hand of a tyrannical government forcing its thumb on the scales such that free people cannot acquire what best meets their needs and morals. A purchaser's reasoning shouldn't matter at all; only that they are willing partners in trade free from intermediaries (and dishonest ones at that) matters.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 03, 2013 12:55 PM (eHIJJ)

179 Maybe I can grow cows in Mongolia...


Posted by: sven10077
---

Nope, not happening.

Posted by: Mr ChiCom at February 03, 2013 12:56 PM (VMcEw)

180
Posted by: The Curious Disappearance of Seamus Muldoon is Free on Kindle through Tuesday at February 03, 2013 11:11 AM (qqZuQ)


Dunno if you're still around, but at least in the case of the book, I don't think that's the take away.
He talks a lot about medicare expenditures, but notes that even when corrected for various factors (illness prevalence, income, etc.) the places that spend the most per capita have the same or lesser outcomes as places that spend relatively less per capita.
The solution is not then "die sooner" but rather "let's figure out what the places spending less are doing and emulate it everywhere!" You find that a lot of those places spending more or doing things that while they may produce a "clinically measurable improvement" they don't actually improve the patient's wellbeing. i.e. "we must do something!." And often they make the patient worse off by many other measures. (i.e. if I have cancer, and you treat it with chemo and the tumor shrinks by 5%, I'm still going to die. Pretty much in the same timeline, but you did something "clinically measurable." Meanwhile I've been vomiting, lost my hair, can't eat etc.)
Where Tracking Medicine fails (in typical liberal fashion) is assuming we can legislate our way out of this, when it's going to require a culture change from the era of "DO SOMETHING." to weighing the total costs and benefits. (Please note, this isn't the same thing as euthanasia, or even Physician assisted suicide nor am I advocating for that. It's a distinction between "clinical improvement" and "Actual improvement." and a return to the notion of "proportionate and disproportionate care.")

Posted by: tsrblke at February 03, 2013 12:57 PM (GaqMa)

181 but society would implode....

Yep ... and thinking, of course, that they will end up on top.

I'm not too sure about that.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 12:58 PM (zYofe)

182 No, it's a mortal sin that violates their religious convictions and they don't want to subsidize that which so violates their principles. They might prefer others not employ birth control but they insist that they not be forced to pay for it. That's a pretty important distinction.

Exactly.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at February 03, 2013 01:00 PM (zYofe)

183 177 RWC,

ah....but foodstamps are not trying to violate laws of supplydemand, accounting, and thermodynamics...

plus you have Lt Work and friends trying to regulate Free$hit Army's consumptive habits....

this train is not leading anywhere worthwhile at all...

the conductor is the flaw not that SoCon objects to a or FiCon B but since FiCon is only concerned with dollars and cents and evidently their "libertarianism" does not include the rights of all to engage in commerce as they see fit when it is time to beat SoCon over the head for Gini pills or something we're probably fucked...

this attack on the 1st Amendment is just as bad as his assault on the 2d and taken together along with kelo it is safe to say the law is whatever justice kennedy decides when he wakes up...

you simply cannot properly valuate risk/reward on that and any serious corporation that decides "oh fuck yeah I want to invest and risk X amount of capital in a nation that has functionally no law anymore!" is too retarded to survive IMHO.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:00 PM (LRFds)

184 179 mr ChiCom,

No it is actually if anything MORE likely to be allowed to happen if I gift them a straight 30% cut...

that really is where we are...

this is insane.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:01 PM (LRFds)

185 Sorry, I don't buy it, for most of the people that are passionate about this debate. It's all about the moral issue of birth control. Nothing to do with the regulation of the insurance industry.

ObamaCare needs to be repealed because it's bad policy, focusing on the part that insurance companies are now forced to cover the prevention of pregnancy to me is sort of like saying you're spitting mad that insurance companies are being forced to cover flu shots. Something tells me there wouldn't be as much energy on the flu shot debate.

For the record, I'm not a fan of government regulation in private industry, and I absolutely believe private organizations should be able to tailor plans however they want or not offer insurance at all, but government regulation of insurance companies is something that's been with us forever. To jump up and down over birth control being now under the pretense of over regulation is a smoke screen and a little late to the party.

Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 01:06 PM (XDRsa)

186 I'm about to do my taxes. Following this logic, I think I'm owed a deduction for the 37 children I didn't have last year. I mean, I could have had them. Just because I wasn't punished with 37 babies doesn't mean I should be punished on my taxes, right?

That and I think I need to write off the loss of my guns in that leaky canoe. The government buys back guns,right? Lost in a canoe, handed in to Big Sis; same difference, right? Amazing how many guns fit in a canoe... It's like a damn fire arms clown car.

Posted by: Damiano at February 03, 2013 01:07 PM (BzT5x)

187 186 Damiano,

You should legally change your name and claim themanyway mi amigo.

Your example by the way is PRECISELY the asshattery in play.

This is fucking retarded lock stock and barrel and "Kool Kidz" FiCon is letting his slip show.....

there is NO free market argument to be made for Gini pills made from hopium.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:09 PM (LRFds)

188 If the free market were allowed to operate without government interference, then things would sort themselves out as a natural result. But heaven forfend our elite rulers allow that to happen!
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 03, 2013 10:40 AM (+z4pE)

But it's not free. Hence repeal and replace. Replace = a bill that rescinds all the anti-market bs.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 74% more DOOM! at February 03, 2013 01:10 PM (FsUAO)

189 Likely advised by the DOJ on the best way to defend the law. When they take it to court, they can argue, in the alternative, that no complainant is paying for it, therefore they do not have standing/there is no injury. And a Supreme Court that contorted a fee into a tax, and which was a tax for one purpose but not one for another, could easily buy into the argument.

Posted by: holmes at February 03, 2013 01:11 PM (HCwvj)

190 185 Jeepers,

yeah I can't grasp how the Ponzi scheme rapidly approaching single digits in payees in to paidees out makes BC topical????

I did argue against Pogo Puffy pills being covered...if flu shots, viagra, and gini pills are covered why not medicinal LSD and Meth?

Pay for your own fucking care and your own fucking kicks

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:11 PM (LRFds)

191 189 Holmes,

precisely and this speaks to why we are FUCKED! economically we are being governed by nursery rhymes....

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:12 PM (LRFds)

192 Screw 'em. If the IRS doesn't like it, I'll claim the Geithner Defense, Rangel Rule, and cite every one of those asshats.

I ain't going to prison. I'm gonna be the next SecTres.

Posted by: Damiano at February 03, 2013 01:14 PM (BzT5x)

193 192 Damiano,

and had you spent time with medicinal heroin, pot, coke, and sucking Frank M Davis' crank you'd be Prezo Fa Shizzle

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 01:15 PM (LRFds)

194 Getting the wrong idea, I AGREE that people should have to pay for their own birth control, but what I detest is conservatives jumping all over this issue because of the moral issue over contraceptives, but saying it's over personal responsibility.

It's just like the open borders crowd saying they're opposed to a fence because of what it costs the taxpayer to build. Bullshit, you're opposed to a fence because it might actually work.

Sorry, the insurance industry has been heavily regulated for a while, and has all sorts of mandates for decades about what they have to cover. I don't think the contraceptive mandate is a problem with many of these people because they're trying to preserve shareholder wealth for the precious insurance companies that backed ObamaCare.

Just be honest about the WHY.

Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 01:52 PM (XDRsa)

195 Just be honest about the WHY.
Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 01:52 PM (XDRsa)

We are being honest about the issue the Democrats created.

The Democrats chose this issue because they knew it would push buttons on the right and the left.

The fact it has brought out the general issue of government interference in markets is no mark against us.

You are being manipulated by the Democrats.

Posted by: eman at February 03, 2013 02:16 PM (j7rp0)

196 Just to point out the obvious here: viagra is not covered by insurance and is prescribed for men with erectile disfunction. That means they don't get hard ons. Without the viagra, they can't have sex (since Clinton told us that blow jobs are not sex).

Birth control prevents pregnancy. It doesn't have anything to do with whether the woman using it can have sex. Clearly she can have sex without taking birth control. She just runs the risk of pregnancy.

I'm never quite sure why the viagra thing gets trotted out in discussions of birth control and it's always said that it's covered by insurance. I keep asking the people that say that to show me any insurance that DOES cover it, but I've had no takers yet.

Posted by: notsothoreau at February 03, 2013 02:38 PM (Lqy/e)

197 Dims are playing this one stupid, they should have waited for the courts to rule on it it, likely granting broad religious exemptions. Then they could go to the hags and say we tried, raise more money, get bj's, etc.

The judge who gets to unravel this will have fun.

Posted by: Jean at February 03, 2013 02:39 PM (3tFLC)

198 195.

I've been manipulated because too many SoCons simply can't help themselves and I don't trust them. They want to jump on this hobby horse issue for the wrong reasons and destroy the conservative movement because they view politics as a Holy War.

Sort of like the "Right to Life" Wing of the Party. I want the issue gone because there's simply too many Akins and Mourdocks that are going to make damn sure the reasonable wing is overshadowed by their idiocy. They have done more to make abortion mainstream than ANY proabortion advocate.

If you equate Obamacare with free birth control, ObamaCare suddenly becomes a lot more popular with the masses, and the people that oppose ObamaCare suddenly look like it's all about their religious fundamentalism creeping into people's lives.

Please, if we're going to destroy ObamaCare, let's focus on how it's going to destroy affordable private health care in this country instead of the morality of contraception.

Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 02:43 PM (XDRsa)

199 Keepers, your being worked over by the left and you don't even realize it. They made this an issue by not granting reasonable religious exemptions, exemption that were written in by their own party. They pumped this issue up, and it isn't going to hurt the 'Pubs in a mid term election.

What we need to see now is an individual tort, demanding that their contribution not go towards this; preferably by an accepted aggrieved party, like a Muslim, or American Indian.

Posted by: Jean at February 03, 2013 02:54 PM (3f/jH)

200 196.

Viagra is covered by numerous health insurance plans, but only if there is an underlying medical issue. It's not supposed to be covered just for kicks. According to ABC, about half the Viagra prescriptions are covered by insurance companies.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91538

Medicare actually covers penis pumps for men suffering from impotence.
http://tinyurl.com/czsbgln

I'm not saying one justifies the other, but it's horrible optics, and I don't see too many people up in arms over this other coverage.

I'm much more outraged that I have to offer health insurance to all my full time employees than I am mandating contraception coverage. Something tells me the SoCons won't get too upset about that part of the law.

Posted by: Jeepers at February 03, 2013 02:55 PM (XDRsa)

201 196 notsothoreau,

yeah really?

Viagra gets covered in lots of health insurance plans including famously the retired teachers' one....

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91538

somehow I managed to pay for my romper room companions birth control....Sandy Fluck can pay for hers.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 03, 2013 03:02 PM (LRFds)

202 I had a feeling when the news came out that these guys weren't really going to cave on this issue, that they'd just gone looking for a different way to tell the other side "But first you will blow me" without using those exact words. And I was right.

These guys are pieces of work. The whole administration.

Posted by: Rich Fader at February 03, 2013 05:06 PM (2Zrwv)






Processing 0.06, elapsed 0.0919 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0465 seconds, 211 records returned.
Page size 133 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat