Sum It Up
The Sum It Up question from Sunday was: Do you think President Obama started the contraception fight on purpose?
* * * * *
What a crazy notion that Obama started the contraception fight. It was started long ago by the Republicans who want to control all aspects of a woman, up to and including her reproduction abilities. All of their candidates are so hellbent on it that they don't address anything else. Obama only made sure the playing field was equal, that's all. If insurance companies can and do insure Viagra … then they should cover contraception for women. The pill is used for medical reasons as well, whereas Viagra only has one function.
SHARON HAYES
* * * * *
President Obama did not start the contraception fight — he confronted it. The controversy over contraception has been in existence for a long time now, but it's finally getting talked about.
SUZANNE CARROLL
* * * * *
Yes, if it will help people. No, if it is just to criticize him.
ELIZABETH R. ERVIN
* * * * *
No.
CATHERINE W. PITTS
* * * * *
Of course the contraception fight was on purpose. Our "campaigner in chief" has yet another distraction from the real issues at hand: jobs, the economy and deficit. President Obama and his liberal-left cronies will do anything for a vote, especially the female vote, which he is losing in vast numbers. We need a new president to get this country back to the good old days of prosperity and the American dream. He gets a "no" from me in November 2012!
BETH McMULLAN
* * * * *
This question is right up there with "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" President Obama did not start the contraception fight. The health-care plan passed by the Congress in 2010 required insurance companies to cover birth control.
Almost all insurance plans already covered birth control. The only difference was the copay amount. The group that objected was Belmont Abbey, which did not want to pay for birth control for its employees. Birth control is against Belmont Abbey's religious views. This objection was worked out: The insurance company would cover the costs, and Belmont Abbey would pay nothing toward birth control. Some people feel this is not a good solution because Belmont Abbey employees could still get birth control.
President Obama favors insurance's covering birth control. So do many insurance companies, since pregnancy and birth are conditions that can result in high payouts. So do many who are against abortion and many who see the abuse unwanted children receive. So do many married couples who want to give a good start to the children they already have or don't want to live on government assistance or have health issues that make pregnancy unfeasible.
There are also those of us who don't think employers should dictate our personal lives.
President Obama did not start the contraception fight. I hope he wins it.
DOROTHY MATHEWS
* * * * *
Maybe he didn't, but his re-election committee did. His patsy media — MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and the liberal newspapers like the Journal — needed something good to report to help his re-election.
MELVIN LANCE
* * * * *
President Obama was not the one to start the contraception fight, and I am aghast at the bias revealed in the question.
When the economic recovery became apparent, Republicans needed a diversion. They got their talking points together and rolled out this controversial issue. Women of both parties reacted in horror.
Obama had nothing to do with it and has not said much about it yet. He is smart enough to know it is in capable hands. The 52 percent of voters who are women will take care of this issue handily.
MYRA GROZINGER
* * * * *
Certainly. He was just sitting around the Oval Office one day with all the world's problems solved and he needed something to entertain him. No, actually I believe in giving credit where credit is due, and it was certainly Rush Limbaugh who led his sheep, or dittoheads as they like to be called, into this brouhaha.
I think I might be in a time machine. How are we discussing something that was settled over 50 years ago when I was having babies?
CYNTHIA GOUGH NANCE
H-M-M-M-M... a couple of conspiracy theorists in the bunch today.
ReplyDelete"His patsy media — MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and the liberal newspapers like the Journal — needed something good to report to help his re-election."
ReplyDeleteGot to love comments like this one...more ignorant babble about the "liberal" press.
Every study of news coverage, including the most recent Pew report, tells the same story. The only 2012 Presidential candidate to get more negative coverage than the President is Newt Gingrich, who brings it upon himself.
That means that such clowns as Michelle Bachmann, Ricky Perry and Herman Cain have gotten more positive coverage than the POTUS.
Of course, we will continue to hear the same bullshit over and over because some people don't want to read or hear anything from the press except that which conforms to their own biases.
As Harry Truman once said "I don't give them hell. I give them the truth and they think it's hell."
It’s a well-known fact that liberals are more tolerant than conservatives or moderates. Superior liberal tolerance is such a fact that they will scream at you if you dare to disagree or debate them, demand that your advertisers bail on you, and pressure the FCC to get you banned from the airwaves. Does that sound like tolerance to you? A new survey from Pew confirms that liberals are the least tolerant of differing opinions, at least on line.
ReplyDeletePew Report
_____________________
Does this sound familiar? Did a group of liberals try to ban a conservative in this forum. If the shoe fits, wear it.
As always, the parrot parrots stuff he knows nothing about, crazy headlines cut and pasted from fruitcake websites.
ReplyDeleteThe Pew Report cited has nothing to do with forums like this one.
It is about friending and unfriending and other FaceBook ephemera.
Go read it for yourself if you haven't got anything better to do: Pew Report
In the article:
Delete”When it comes to SNS users, the internet users who describe their political ideology as moderate or liberal are more likely than conservatives to use social networking sites . . . “
Do you suppose one reason is that conservatives can’t stand, and actually resent, opposing viewpoints?
Furthermore, while conservatives perceive liberals as the intolerant ones it's my belief that BOTH groups are guilty of intolerance. My experience is that liberals have not been trying to silence the message nor the manner in which it is delivered, but merely insisting on civility in doing so.
DeleteI didn't hear any calls for civility when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a 'C', nor when Letterman called her a 'S ty' airline stewardess.
DeleteLet somebody call Hillary Clinton a 'C', and let's see what happens?
___________
"The bit I did about Palin using the word c--- was one of the biggest laughs in my act, I did it all over the country, not one person ever registered disapproval, and believe me, audiences are not afraid to let you know. Because it was a routine where that word came in at just the right moment. Context is very important”
Bill Maher
. . . and and least the barest knowledge of what they speak of.
Delete"Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact" (Thomas Carlyle).
DeleteSometimes, I feel like I'm playing tennis with people that are armed with badminton rackets. Swissssssh!
ReplyDeleteHere is an interesting development:
ReplyDeleteLast week, in the wake of the Sandra Fluke hubbub, President Obama announced that he would deliver this year's commencement address at Barnard College.
Barnard is an outstanding women's college, one of the original "Seven Sisters" schools. It is located in New York, directly across Broadway from Columbia University, a coed institution, and has long been affiliated with Columbia. Students at either school may attend classes on either campus.
Columbia is the President's undergraduate alma mater. He had previously turned down a request to deliver a commencement speech at Columbia. Apparently, his decision to accept Barnard's invitation triggered something of a civil war between the women of Barnard and Columbia. This is nothing new…there has always been enmity between the two groups, but this time it went public.
Starting on a Columbia blog called "Bwog", Columbia women began sniping at their cross Broadway rivals, referring to Barnard as "Barnyard" and its students as "cumdumpsters", and worse.
"I came here to make myself successful, not try to plead at the knees of a Columbia boy to marry me,” one Columbia student wrote.
Another added “While you guys were perfecting your deepthroating techniques and experimenting with scissoring and anal play, we were learning Calculus…"
Can you spell C-A-T-F-I-G-H-T?
My grandmother's technique for dealing with impolite language was called "washing your mouth out with soap". Had she lived into the 21st century, she would long ago have run out of soap. And she would have died of embarrassment at being a member of the human race.