http://news.yahoo.co...jW5fQW5FK94#_=_

Too bad Trayvon didn't crack his damn skull open while he was standing his ground and fighting for his life ... which he lost at the hands of an angry man who pursued him against the direct orders of the police dispatcher.

http://www.winningwordsproject.com/

It's still a work in progress, but I'm pretty proud of how it's coming along.

Check out the contributors I've rounded up so far!

Off to go bury my head some more ...

I hope they keep it up (ummmm, pardon the pun) all the way to November.

Me, too!

You have to be living under a rock to not know by now that Sandra Fluke has been a Women's Right advocate well known enough at Georgetown to catch the eye of a Democratic member of the House.

Or be that lying cunt, Ann Coulter.

You call her a liberal drama queen but all I see in your post is a conservative drama king going off on someone who would still be an obscure college student/advocate if not for your hero, Rush, spending 9 hours spread over 3 days trying to make her into something she isn't.

Technically not his post, although he posted it here. It's an Ann Coulter vomit pile.

And the war on women continues in Arizona..
http://www.huffingto..._n_1344557.html

"I believe we live in America," said Majority Whip Debbie Lesko (R-Glendale), who sponsored the bill. "We don’t live in the Soviet Union. So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom-and-pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs."

You know what that's reminiscent of, right?

Women are the new black.

So they're equating abortion with vasectomies now?

And erectile dysfunction is a medical ailment. Thus, falling under the realm of medical coverage. Because something is wrong with you, you need help. Voluntary birth control however, is taken to alter your normal physical state.

I understand why this issue is important to many people. It should be. But these comparisons are intellectually lazy and really apples and oranges.

Seriously dude, do you get out much? Read much? Or do you live in a cave or something?

Rush Limbaugh and his filthy followers since, have likened the need or desire to take hormonal contraceptives to a desire to fuck like bunnies, with utter disregard for the fact that hormonal contraceptives are prescribed to women for numerous medical issues, many of which have nothing whatsoever to do with preventing pregnancy, some of which can be physically debilitating and have long-term adverse health effects.

So if y'all want to play that stupidass game, fine! We're right there with ya, buddy.

Viagra is prescribed only so men can screw with their penises. There are no medical reasons outside of wanting to fuck and not being able to that viagra is prescribed for. None. Can't get your dick up? Use a vibrator, your fingers or your tongue. Or ... see a proctologist and have your body physically invaded to ensure you have no tumors that could be the direct cause. See a cardiologist and be forced to sit and watch your heart beat while hearing a vivid description of the damage that can be done by using viagra. And have psychological counseling to ensure your dick isn't soft because of mental issues.

And then, since other people have to pay for you to have sex, post your sex videos online so we can all watch, k, dude?

Jill,

I am just passing along stuff that seems on topic in this here thread called "GOP Obsesion with Lady Parts." Just because I post a link to an article doesn't necessarily mean I am in lockstep with everything in it. I get your point about how employees are paying their healthcare costs, but that is only part of the issue.

Consider my posts helpful to know what the other side is saying even if you believe they are totally wrong. I knew Steyn's piece is counter to your position but I thought it might be something to include here. And I think Flagg likes my posts.

If stuff I post is of no value to you then just don't click on my links. I do read some of the links you post. I get further along in some of them more than others. Sometimes they have information I don't know or have not considered. Sometimes my opinion is altered and sometimes reinforced. Anyway, hope you are having a good Monday.

art

I appreciate your level-headed response to my outburst, Art. However, if you bothered to add ... you know ... conversation to the conversation, instead of just slapping random links in without explanation as to what, if anything, you want us to take from them, that would certainly be a better way of communicating. As it is, if you provide a link and say nothing more, I'm going to assume you are doing so because you agree with that link and have nothing more of your own to say on the matter. I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption to make under the circumstances.

Democratic Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner is the third female lawmaker to introduce a bill that would limit men's access to Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs to make a statement about the dozens of anti-abortion bills that have passed statehouses around the country over the last year.

Turner is opposed to a proposed bill that would prohibit abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can happen as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. The Dayton Daily News reports that Turner's bill would mandate that men seeking Viagra be "tested for heart problems, receive counseling about possible side effects and receive information about 'pursuing celibacy as a viable lifestyle choice.'"

Turner said on MSNBC Monday that the bill is about showing "men as much love in the reproductive health arena as they have shown us over the years. My Senate Bill 307 is all about the love and making sure we look out for men's sexual health."

Rep. Lynn Wachtmann, the heartbeat bill's sponsor, told the Dayton Daily News that the comparison between Viagra and abortions isn't valid.

Turner is one of several female Democratic state lawmakers who are wielding the power of sarcasm to protest a wave of anti-abortion legislation.

In January, Virginia state Sen. Janet Howell introduced an amendment to the state's controversial ultrasound bill, which required women seeking abortions to first undergo a vaginal ultrasound. The amendment, which failed, said that all men seeking Viagra would have to first get a rectal exam. The ultrasound bill passed after Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell successfully requested that the vaginal ultrasound requirement be removed. Women seeking abortions will still have to receive an external ultrasound under the new bill.

Earlier this month, Illinois state Rep. Kelly Cassidy introduced an amendment to another bill that would require women to get ultrasounds before being allowed to get abortions. The amendment mandated that men seeking Viagra watch a graphic video about the drug's potential side effects. "If they are serious about us not being able to make our own health care decisions, then I'm just as serious about them not being able to make theirs," she said.

Missouri state Rep. Stacey Newman, a Democrat, introduced legislation that would allow men to get vasectomies only if their life depended upon the procedure, which was similar to Georgia state Rep. Yasmin Neal's bill. "In determining whether a vasectomy is necessary, no regard shall be made to the desire of a man to father children, his economic situation, his age, the number of children he is currently responsible for, or any danger to his wife or partner in the event a child is conceived," the tongue-in-cheek Missouri bill reads.

According to the abortion rights group the Guttmacher Institute, a record-breaking 92 new abortion-restricting laws were passed in 2011. Two of those laws mandated that women have ultrasounds and look at the images before being allowed to get an abortion.

Halle-fuckin-lujah! It's about damn time someone in lawmaking in this country took a strong and vocal stand against the crime that is being perpetrated against women. And if it takes proving to men how much like cavemen they're behaving by turning the tables on them, so be it. Too bad we don't have enough women in state legislatures to actually get any of these bills passed.

I'm dead serious that we have got to bust our asses to destroy the Republican party in every single solitary federal, state and local race we can, everywhere we possibly can, or we're in for some fucked up future.

Hear, hear! I hope it proves to be the death of the GOP for at least the next generation, until we have time to weed out all the women-hating filth from that party.

I'm so glad the Southern Poverty Law Center tracks these groups!

Tracking them does little good when our elected representatives encourage them.

BTW, have you seen this fucktool?
US Marine Being Investigated For Posting "Obama Is The Domestic Enemy Our Oath Speaks About"

They don't have a clue and they have all the power. The fucking GOP is literally destroying women's civil rights all across the country with fucked-up legislation that "legally" gets them around Roe v. Wade in effectively cutting women off from the services they need to maintain their health. It's vile and disgusting and I cannot believe that in the twenty-fucking-first century we have allowed these backasswards pigs to drag us back to the pre-1960s.

As regards women's issues, the modern GOP are the goddamn American Taliban. Fuckers.

Apparently not.

Sorry for my outburst.

But damn. Just, damn. This lying about what this policy is all about is unbelievably infuriating. Especially given the volume of the lies coming from men.

The Fluke Charade
Why should we have to fund a middle-aged schoolgirl’s sex life?


#iThing #word

I am now beyond sick and fucking tired of you blowhard men LYING about a.) what Ms. Fluke said and b.) WHO IS BEING ASKED TO PAY FOR BIRTH CONTROL!

Goddammit, Art, I provided a link to you (probably more than one by now) that proves that Georgetown University students PAY FOR THEIR OWN INSURANCE COVERAGE.

NOFUCKINGBODYELSE is being asked to pay for Sandra Fluke's or anybody else's goddamn sex life.

FUCK. What is the matter with you people?

GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK FUCKING SKULL: BIRTH CONTROL IS NOT ABOUT SEX AND USING IT DOES NOT CORRELATE TO THE FREQUENCY OF THE SEX ACT.

REPUBLICAN RICHARD NIXON'S TITLE X CALLS FOR TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR CONTRACEPTION FOR "OTHER PEOPLE" (AS IN THE POOR) AND I HAVEN'T HEARD YOU, THE RIGHTWING NUTJOB MEDIA, RUSH LIMPBALLS, SEAN HANNITY, THIS JACKASS MARK STEYN YOU'RE LINKING TO, OR ANY OTHER FUCKING REPUBLICAN, GRIPE ABOUT "PAYING FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO HAVE SEX" BECAUSE OF IT IN ALL OF THE FORTY-FUCKING-TWO YEARS IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE.

BARACK OBAMA'S AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IS FOR PEOPLE WHOSE HEALTH INSURANCE IS PAID FOR BY THEMSELVES OR THEIR EMPLOYER AS PART OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

JUST FUCKING STOPY LYING ALREADY!!!!!!!

What an ubelieveably stupid and hateful woman. Fuck John McCain for all eternity.

Has everyone actually watched Sandra Fluke's testimony in front of the house Democratic steering and policy committee on c-span? http://www.c-spanvid...rogram/304550-1 Rush has done a great job of erroneously framing the whole thing to look like she's wants taxpayers to pay for birth control but that is far from the truth.

Yeah I watched it because I knew half the shit people were saying was just that, bullshit. No surprise there.

Spread the truth. Tweet it. FB it. Get it out there!

http://reelectdemocr...-checkstop.html



BRAINS, let's chat about the HC mandate in a new thread?

The worst for me, I posted this on facebook, is Perry turning down $35 million, that's MILLION, in federal funding for women's health programs/clinics in general just so Planned Parenthood wouldn't be a part of it. Could he be more fucking SICK & DEMENTED???? When I read that today, I was so incensed I was literally shaking & kinda crazy for most of the day. I don't even know what to do about it other than give a donation to PP....that just doesn't seem enough. I'm not one of those people to orgagnize protests or events but that pissed me off so much I feel I have to do something. I just don't know what it is.

Work your ass off to get Democrats and women elected to public office all over the country. Advocate, tweet, phone bank. Focus on local elections, because this is where they're infiltrating now, doing exactly the kind of thing outlined in that article.

This brand of republicanism is sick and twisted. It's as far from "Christian" as can be imagined. I also shake with rage when I think about it.

You say there's no war on women, it's something made up by the liberals? Bull fucking shit.
http://www.nytimes.c...t.html?_r=1
This turns my fucking stomach.

That's fucking sickening. And this:

“I don’t think anybody is against providing health care for women. What we’re opposed to are abortions ... Planned Parenthood is the main organization that does abortions. So we kind of blend being anti-abortion with being anti-Planned Parenthood.”

Yeah, that's why it makes total sense to shut down clinics unafilliated with PP, none of whom even provide abortions. Dumb fucking shitstain. But this is exactly the kind of stupid, bassackwards non-logic I've come to expect from the mentally challenged republicans.

Randall, forcing people to purchase something from private enterprise was exactly what Wickard was all about. Wickard was forced to destroy crops he was growing for his own consumption and purchase wheat on the open market.

You're right, though, that the court has become grossly partisan in the last 30+ years and I find it sickening. But you're also right that this is now way off topic.

I just now noticed your new sig line. LOL!

This contraception mandate is included with Obamacare correct? So if the Supreme Court bounces it faster than a fat kid on a trampoline, this has all been a moot argument.

If that happens, it will fly in the face of hundreds of years of precedent. I don't think even Kennedy is warped enough to overturn either Jacobson v. Massachusetts or Wickard v. Filburn. Roberts, Thomas, Scalia & Alito, maybe. But even Roberts and Scalia have conceded Congress' authority in such cases.

From the testimony of former United States Solicitor General to The Supreme Court under Ronald Reagan, Charles Fried, to the Senate Judiciary Committee last year:

[T]o those who may argue that, for some reason not disclosed in any constitutional text or known constitutional doctrine, this is not sufficient, there are these words of Marshall in 1819 in McCulloch v Maryland, often invoked, most recently in United States v Comstock, in an opinion joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and in Gonzales v Raich, in an opinion joined by Justice Scalia:

[T]he powers given to the government imply the ordinary means of execution. . . The government which has a right to do an act, and has imposed on it, the duty of performing that act, must, according to the dictates of reason, be allowed to select the means. . . The subject is the execution of those great powers on which the welfare of a nation essentially depends. It must have been the intention of those who gave these powers, to insure, so far as human prudence could insure, their beneficial execution. . . We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion, with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution, which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it, in the manner most beneficial to the people.

Please accept my thanks
Your Haikus are fantastic
I'm very flattered

Jill,

You make good points. Some questions:

Do you consider "morning after" abortificients part of the required coverage?

In the president's "compromise" with religious institutions, he mandated that the cost of these services be picked up by the insurance companies so the religious institutions would not have to "provide" them. So who is ultimately paying for them if the institution is not?

Do you know if any men get their condoms paid for as part of their healthcare at employers?

I am not familiar enough with the law to know whether or not abortificients are included in the required coverage. If you're asking for my personal opinion, given the potential serious health risks that accompany any pregnancy, I'd say yes, they should be included.

But again, that misses the bigger point: It's Not About Who Writes The Check. When the conversation is about people who have health insurance, said health insurance premiums are 100% paid for by the recipient of the care.

And condoms are available over-the-counter to both genders, free from discrimination.

Make oral contraceptives available over-the-counter to both genders at a similarly reasonable cost, as they are in most other countries, and we won't be having this argument.

Right, they accept a compensation package as presnted by their employer. They don't get to choose all the details of a plan. And what coverage options that may be extended to them, come at an additional cost. So if a Religious institution, who opposes birth control, offers an insurance plan that lacks coverage of that particular service, that is the compensation package offered. If they want additional services, they pay for it out of pocket. I know many employers that don't cover vision or dental as part of their insurance plans. The employee is responsible for those medical services.

My ovaries and uterus are equally important organs as my kidneys, heart, liver, lungs, bowels, etc. Part of general health care for the whole of my internal organs includes access to those medications that will ensure they remain healthy, and that means hormonal birth control for women.

I don't see any employers offering insurance plans that discriminate against men or women as regards vision or dental. But until men grow ovaries and a uterus, denying women coverage in their policies for medications used to treat just those female organs is sexually discriminatory. Period. This is not about sexual activity. This is not about slippery slopes as to what's next. This is about basic health services for women. This new law tells my employer and insurance company that they no longer have a right to discriminate against me based on my gender, and must cover all of my basic health care, including that which revolves around my uterus and any prescribed medications my doctor deems necessary for the health and well-being or those organs.

Same as above. I went to college, and since you told me not to make assumptions about you with regard to military service (c'mon, you never served) I'll assume you don't want me to make any assumptions about you. So I'll not assume you went to college. A student had to either have their own plan, or had to purchase a plan from the university. The university's plan wasn't all inclusive to any medical related desire I had. Sadly I was unable to get my pec implants and have 12 inches added to my penis to have a career in porn. They didn't see that as something they should cover. SHAME!

You are as much of a disgusting pig as Rush Limbaugh. Your fucking dick size has nothing to do with your general physical health, you sick son-of-a-bitch. Fuck you.

But why stop at contraception? That's my question aside from forcing a religious institution to provide it? Let's be honest, as soon as this is covered, a push for some other optional medical care will be deemed important from the entitlement crew. Breast implants, transgender surgery, new hair follicles for bald men? A case can be made for any surgery that is is important because it will make someone feel better about themself.

Bottom line, contraception isn't a necessity. I like it and condone it. Insurance companies like it because its a lot cheaper than babies. But it's not something people need to have provided to them. It is cheap and readily available. I just don't see the need for the political shitstorm and possible 1st amendment infringement to score political points.

Get. It. Through. Your. Thick. Skull. Dumbshit. Hormonal contraception is used for a variety of health reasons, including severe acne, endometriosis, and even protection against certain cancers. To some people, hormonal contraception is a medical necessity. Condoms don't work on endometriosis, you damn fool. But again, you sure do love those strawmen.

Point of clarication to those smarter than me. If someone had a medical condition that called for the use of contraception, such as femal oral contraceptives, to treat that condition, would the "loophole" that allows religious groups to exempt contraception prevent them access? So if a woman had a serious estrogen deficiency and standard oral contraception was a cure, and use as birth control wasn't the primary reason for use, would that be covered? I haven't seen anything that addresses this issue. I think getting it answered one way or the other would assist in the claims in both cost and availability. I also want to know how an employer, secular or not, is given access to a patient's medical records and what treatment and medication they are receiving. HIPA would prevent open access, and any diagnosis and prescribed treatment would be between the patient, their provider and the insurer.

You and my employer don't get to decide if you like my and my doctor's reason for prescribing me hormonal birth control. It's none of your or their goddamn business. The U.S. government has finally made it clear to religious organizations and every other entity in this country that they don't get to continue to discriminate against women in providing for their health care. Get used to it bub. It's the law now.

If this really just excluded women who want the pill solely for contraception and no other purpose, then the church in my opinion, has the right to exclude that from their coverage plans. Not ban use, but from people who are employed by them. If other medical coverage like dental land optical can be optional services, why is contraception worthy of special consideration?

No they don't have a right to exclude coverage for women's health care. When the church starts denying eye or dental care to men, solely because they're men, or tells women they can't get dental care but men can, then you can compare the two. Until then, you're trying to compare apples and oranges.

No organization, religious or not, has a legal right to discriminate against women. Period. And it's about damn time we had a president who started passing laws that enforce that position.

I originally said it cost 20$ a month, so I do agree it on average cost most than 10$ a month. But even at 35$ a month, it's not anywhere clost to the 3k figure every 3 years as Fluke claimed. That's been the origin of my argument since this became about Limbaugh and Fluke. The figure she cited isn't accurate, no study has been given to show that's true. Jill's continual claim that it is and covering everything under the sky to get that number doesn't make it true. One doesn't need to schedule a special appointment to get birth control. As we're solely talking about people covered by insurance, annual checkups are covered so her attempt to calculate doctor's visits into the equation is some Al Gore style fuzzy math. I'm interested in the average cost right now to an insured person. Not the exception or hypothetical scenarios. And no where is it anywhere close to the 3k figure.

Hormonal birth control requires an appointment with a doctor in this country - by law. So not only have you, the church, and the government, been costing me enormous amounts of money to take a medication that is widely available over-the-counter in most other first-world countries, you're trying to tell me it doesn't cost what I know it costs because I'm a woman who's had to pay the bills all her life. You're calling Ms. Fluke a liar, in spite of the fact that she was testifying under oath before congress. And you're dismissing the cites that have been provided that show you how high the costs can be for a woman who needs hormonal contraceptives. That's quite some gall.

The employee/student has the freedom to then find a job/degree program with an employer/institution that thinks and offers the benefits that they desire. They both have choice.

In this country, no school or employer has a legal right to discriminate against women. It took until 2012 for that concept to enjoy the force of law when it comes to our health care. That is shameful.

For Democrats, there's no room for anybody to be personally opposed to paying for someone else's birth control.

Stop this lie. Just fucking knock it the hell off.

At the university Ms. Fluke attends, students pay $1,800 a year for their health insurance policies. It is similar at universities across this nation. Any student who has health insurance is paying for their insurance.

When one is employed, part of their compensation package includes using some of the money they earn through their labor towards a group health care plan. Every employed person who has an insuance polcy through their employer pays for their insurance.

Nobody else is being asked to pay for anyone else's medical care at all, let alone contraceptives.

We are talking about people with paid insurance policies, not government handouts or charity from a church someone doesn't actually, you know, work for.

Work. Paid premiums. These are the two methods by which the people in this discussion are receiving insurance. That means each and every one of them is paying for their own insurance.

No one's employer pays for their insurance. The employee works for their insurance exactly like they work for their 401k. The company may write the check that gets mailed to the insurer or the manager of the 401k, but that money is the employee's money because they have accepted payment for their work in the form of cash, retirement benefits and insurance coverage.

WE are paying for our own insurance. Period.

It's not about who writes the check.

Zimbo, you can't fight w/stupid. These people are fucking stupid, plain & simple. And guess what? THEY BREED!!!!!

And that is the scariest part of this whole thing.

Woman, we are going to have to FIGHT HARD this election cycle to kick as many of these cretins out of office as we can. I hope you're up for the fight of your life. It LITERALLY means life or death, given the direction they've been taking this country in state after state over the past 4 years.

Jill,

I'll agree to never comment on birth control again since I am a man, if you agree that you can never talk about national security and governing our country since you are neither a male or have served in the military. Obviously because no woman has been elected President, all women are unable to participate in the discussion. Granted, I thought truth and reason were seperate from gender, but you have proven me wrong. As I have never has someone stick three fingers inside me and spackel and paint my interior in my yearly checkup, I can't comment on that. As you have never served in uniform and been deployed, you can no loner talk about anything related to national security. If you can agree to these terms as resulted by your own logic, I will oblige your humble request that I remain silent to how matters that may reference females in reproduction. That may be kind of hard as you still need a man to create a child, but I'm sure people like you and the rest of the crooks and liars crew are fast at work developing artificial semen!

So as long as we're on the same page, and gender and personal experience trump all other contributors to knowledge, I will refrain from commenting on birth control. But I have a hunch, and is just a small one so I may be wrong, that you won't accept your own logical reasoning. I think your latest outbursts helps prove that your floating in a sea of bullshit and are about to have your ass flushed. But I am just a stupid male who never had to take oral contraceptives and god forbid, never had to seek medical help for any ailment related to my reproductive organs (I'll pretend this is true to help your argument).

Anyway, I'll leave this to the experts who have vaginas and go back to clubbing baby seals to make sure there is fresh meat and fur for the tribe.

Are you fucking insane as well as stupid. Women serve in the military and you have no clue what my background is. What the ever loving bloody fuck a woman having never been PRESIDENT has to do with a discussion about what women should expect to have covered in their INSURANCE POLICIES is beyond the comprehension of anyone with a goddamn BRAIN.

FUCK YOU, ASSHOLE.

Have you the VAGUEST IDEA what INSURANCE even MEANS?

It means people have PAID FOR IT.

PAID.

As in NOT FREE.

But it is fucking TYPICAL of the right wing to INTENTIONALLY LIE about what's being discussed.

We're talking about what's included as coverage WITHIN A PAID INSURANCE PLAN.


In the case of an EMPLOYEE, they have EARNED those insurance benefits by their LABOR. They accept a compensation package upon hiring that includes cash given directly to them and cash given on their behalf to an INSURANCE company for coverage of their health care needs. In the majority of companies today, the employee themselves must ALSO make a cash contribution to the premium on that insurance policy.

And in the case of a STUDENT, they are THEMSELVES PAYING THE MONTHLY PREMIUMS at whatever discounted rate their university was able to negotiate for them. And if there is ANY portion of the policy that is paid by the school, that is covered by the student's TUITION.

So no, you jackass, no one is expecting anything for FREE.

You really are dumber than a rock, aren't you?