Back in my day, they used Bayer Aspirin for contraceptives. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn’t that costly.Alex Seitz-Wald at ThinkProgress is all:
Given that Aspirin is not a contraceptive, Friess seems to be suggesting that women keep the pill between their knees in order to ensure they legs [sic] stay closed to prevent having sex. Conspicuously, Friess doesn’t put the same burden on men.I love the way he [she?] throws in the cursory feminist analysis to offset his plodding getting of the joke.
Michael Falcone at ABCNews's The Note, is stuck under the embarrassing headline "Santorum's Top Super PAC Donor Suggests Women Should Use Aspirin For Contraception." Falcone soberly delivers the news that it's a joke: "He smiled as he said it, but wasn’t laughing. The remark alludes to an old joke about abstinence."
Aspirin's not a contraceptive, but have you heard about Coca-Cola? Back in my day...
Coke (and Dr Pepper in the southern States) douches have been part of contraceptive lore at least since the 1950s, with the common belief being that the carbonic acid in Coke killed the sperm and "exploded" the sperm cells, while the carbonation of the drink forced the jet of liquid into the vagina....That is, after intercourse, you shake up the bottle, stick it in, and let it shoot up in there! If you think that's stupid, check over the home remedies you think work, all your "holistic" and "alternative" things.
पोस्ट्स
२२६ टिप्पण्या:
226 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Just admit it. It was a bad joke that might leave a bad aspirin-y taste in many women's mouths.
Men can have sex with pills between their knees, you silly lefty.
The fizzy coke bottle was for during sex, not after.
More proof that feminists lack a sense of humor.
Yes but... "Democratic Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) said the incident demonstrated a lack of perspective on the issue of contraception.
Birth control “is not a male issue, it’s a female issue. I’ve never met a man that had the need for birth control.”
http://thehill.com/video/house/211215-dem-congresswoman-says-ive-never-met-a-man-that-had-the-need-for-birth-control-
Conspicuously, Friess doesn’t put the same burden on men.
neither does my representative, Eddie Bernice-Johnson, who's never met a man who needed a rubber.
Andrea Mitchell was stunned. That's the take-away.
I think the aspirin trick is only for missionaries.
This is the essence of PC. We have a leftist President "winning" in DC and all criticism--even humorous-- must be silenced.
Another clueless librul without a funny bone.
I can almost picture this question on the standard application one fills out to become a member of the librul intelligentsia...
1- Have you had your funny bone surgically removed?
Yeah, women don't have to worry about birth control because they can just stop being big slutty sluts and keep their knees together.
GET IT, HAHAH IT'S A JOKE.
Why Bayer? Buy American! Walgreen's has an in-store brand that's perfectly good.
Also, can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are. Do you people even know any women?
Ah ha. Santorum associates with known male chauvinists.
The really good question for "Journalists" to ask Santorum now is whether or not he has quit hating women.
And all of this time I had thought it was the color of the M&Ms that determined whether or not your date got pregnant.
Have a Coke and a smile?
James Taranto on Fear And Feminism.
Do you people even know any women?
define "know".
Unfettered sex is the only liberty remaining, so counseling abstinence is heresy.
You can't smoke, can't pack your own kid's school lunch, can't use Crisco or even choose your own light bulbs.
But screw and screw and screw; whatever, wherever.
It ain't funny because it mocks their religion.
Headlines you will never see:
"Obama's Top Super PAC Donor George Soros Suggests..."
The MSM is so deep in the tank that Obama should list them as his own Super PAC Donors.
Waiting for garage to show with a "Friess and Koch" rich evil funders joke.
Hatman: Also, can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are. Do you people even know any women?
Do you? Maybe you could ask your Mommy. Birth control is cheap.
Between this old whackjob, Santorum's criticism of birth control, the all male Congressional panel, and Virginia's absurd abortion bill, Republicans are now actively trying to lose this election.
I would tell the sane Republicans they need to reel in the crazies, but I don't think there are any sane Republicans left. I think they have all left the party.
So what did you Mommy tell you, little troll? That she wishes abortion was retroactive?
"The fizzy coke bottle was for during sex, not after."
You're wrong. Douche.
" In the case of jokes, a semiotic perspective yields two kinds of analysis. A syntagmatic analysis examines the narrative structure of the joke and shows how the punch line leads to a new meaning being placed on the events that preceded the punch line. ... A paradigmatic analysis examines a joke text in terms of the paired oppositions implicit in the text that give it meaning."
Arthur Asa Berger
culturestudies.pbworks.com/f/Semiotics+of+Humor+AAB.doc
It's an old line and quite crude, but then young men tend to be crude.
This guy was more than old enough to know better than to go on the public airwaves with it.
So over the last 24 hours, polls show that Obama's approval rating is lower than his disapproval rating (again).
And people are aligning against the Birth Control Mandate 50% to 44%.
So all the people who support the Mandate that cited polls showing popular support will now follow the majority and oppose the Contraceptive Mandate, right?
Right?
No?
If not, why not?
Is this why Coke always used women in their early advertisements?
For all that, the asprin held between the knees does work.
What is also interesting is the way a normally good attack on Saint-orum seem to miss the mark when he is confronted by a standard issue Blonde Reporterette demanding a mia culpa.
The Journolist Media may have to resort to their "no more face time for him" tactic that is working on Gingrich.
"I think the aspirin trick is only for missionaries."
I believe it works for any position.
Stupid hatboy:
Would you have been in favor of free contraception and abortion for your parents? I know I would have been.
wv - canonical ginalg
We could use Carol Herman's perspective and humor on this.
Unless she's lost it.
"Also, can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are."
Why should we stop that claim? Is it not available in stores? Are the cheaper pills noticeably less effective? Are women unable to purchase things? Are women not allowed to go into stores alone? Is it too embarrassing to buy cheap medicine for women? What about women who make this claim -- do they not know any women either? What about women who make this claim who buy their own birth control -- do they not know any women either?
Why should we stop this claim? Give me a reason other than asking if I know any women.
ndy R. said...
Also, can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are. Do you people even know any women?
Wake me up when you have sex with a woman.
There is no problem with access to birth control in America.
You're unhinged, please stop.
That joke was considered crude in the 1950s. By today's standards it's almost Reader's Digest worthy.
Anyway, WTF?
Economy's completely in the crapper for 3 years running, and this squirrel topic is what the leftist media fights for?
Unserious buffoonery.
......
That's not funny.
can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are.
I'd like for you to point out anyone who made this claim.
"You're wrong. Douche."
LOL! So we now know what a douchenozzle is...I'll never look at a Coke bottle the same way...
There are a few women that comment around here. Maybe one of them can explain how women can go to Walmart and buy whatever the cheapest pills are.
Women don't have to find which pills work best for their body and try different types of birth control pills and there isn't a whole variety of different types of pills for exactly this reason. Again, do any of you even know any women?
"... Also, can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are. Do you people even know any women?.."
Why stop the claim? I know facts suck but oh well. If a doc prescribes a the pill, you can to any pharmacy including Wal Mart and buy them, pretty cheaply too. This might come as a shock to you but women have been doing that for oh, about half a century.
Also, do panties in a twist work better than an aspirin?
"Women don't have to find which pills work best for their body and try different types of birth control pills and there isn't a whole variety of different types of pills for exactly this reason."
This doesn't make any sense at all, not medically or as an English sentence.
BTW along the same lines as Coke being an effective 'contraceptive' douche, it used to be believed that douches themselves were effective (among the ignorants) as post-sex contraceptives.
Hahahahaha!
Half of all Americans say they oppose the Obama administration's new policy concerning employer-provided health insurance plans and their coverage of contraceptive services for female employees including those at religiously affiliated institutions, according to a new national survey.
It is a CNN poll, no less!
Obama is like king midas, except in reverse.
I'll never look at a Coke bottle the same way...
Now we know why the old bottles had that distinct shape.
You'd think those of us that follow politics as closely as we do would be able to see how this is being manipulated by teh Zero and his media enablers.
That's the real story here. It's amazing to me that nobody, no candidate at all had anything about contraception on their agenda. Yet the Zero campaign and the media (but I repeat myself) have this as the top story every single day.
And even the smartest of people seem to be falling for it.
Come on people, we're supposed to be taking the hysterics over an old joke seriously.
Teh womenz must be protected!!!!!
Obama is like king midas, except in reverse.
King Sadim?
"... Again, do any of you even know any women?.."
Well its pretty evident you don't.
The most expensive I heard is about $40 month. Well I suppose that might be the difference between paying the rent and consequence free recreational sex but life is about choices right Andy?
Andy R. said...
Maybe one of them can explain how women can go to Walmart and buy whatever the cheapest pills are
Your flounding is comical.
Why are you, gay boy who will never need birth control pills commenting on "women's reproductive issues" anyway?
"An old billionaire using his $ to support a (crappy) candidate. "
Don't drag Soros and Obummer into this.
can we stop this claim that any woman can just go down to Walmart and but whatever the cheapest pills are.
I'd like for you to point out anyone who made this claim.-Jay
Jay in a previous thread: "Birth control pills are $9 a month at Walmart. She could go buy some."
WHAT'S GOING ON?
I actually believe Mythbusters tested the Coke as birth control method and it worked.
Jay,
If Andrew Sullivan has taught us anything it's that being a gay man instantly makes you an expert on female reproductive organs.
WHAT'S GOING ON?
you're out of your element Donny
By the way, this is what Santorum said on birth control:
“I was asked if I believed in it, and I said, ‘No, I’m a Catholic, and I don’t.’ I don’t want the government to fund it through Planned Parenthood, but that’s different than wanting to ban it; the idea I’m coming after your birth control is absurd. I was making a statement about my moral beliefs, but I won’t impose them on anyone else in this case. I don’t think the government should be involved in that. People are free to make their own decisions.’’
Notice how "free to make decisions" is a phrase Obama and his HHS commissar never use.
Andy R.,
Except that you can go to Walmart's pharmacy and get birth control pills with a prescription, which pretty much any doctor will fill out*.
Hell, you can just go to your local gas station and buy a condom if you're really that desperate.
*Granted if PP is to be believed the number should actually be $15 a month (Oh what a massive sum!!111!).
Andy R. said...
Jay in a previous thread: "Birth control pills are $9 a month at Walmart. She could go buy some."
WHAT'S GOING ON?
Right. And I think you should take that to mean I don't know you need a prescription for them.
Really, you should.
Idiot.
If Andrew Sullivan has taught us anything it's that being a gay man instantly makes you an expert on female reproductive organs.
And if Andy R has taught us anything it's that he's a devotee of Andrew Sullivan.
We almost have a syllogism here.
Hatboy:
I echo my disbelief over your contraception concern-trolling.
Is this your strategy to get free condoms for your personal 'activities'?
If Andrew Sullivan has taught us anything it's that being a gay man instantly makes you an expert on female reproductive organs...."
Hahahaha!
Zing!!!!
Do I know any women?
Do wives and daughters count? I know them pretty well.
They would tell you that, as practical women, it was always best not to rely on anyone but themselves for birth control.
It's called personal responsibility and self reliance.
And birth control is cheap and available.
Andy R. said...
Jay in a previous thread: "Birth control pills are $9 a month at Walmart. She could go buy some."
WHAT'S GOING ON?
By the way, that was in response to your ridiculous assertion that "women can't afford" birth control pills.
Even if the cost were $30 a month, your assertion is obscene.
Pogo, you've said it all.
Remember a while back when Robert Cook talked about his friend who referred to humans as "shit apes?" At the bottom of all his crocodile tears about abortifacent access, that's all Hat and his ilk think we are. Animals. Mere appetite that must be gratified by any means, at any time.
Why shouldn't prostitution be legal? Men are going to fuck anyway. Why not give schoolkinds condoms? They're going to fuck anyway. So why not force the (sometimes unstated, but more frequently shouted) homophobic, sex-hating, child-molesting, pervert Catholic Church to pay for abortifacents? Women are going to fuck anyway.
The 'freedom' to copulate anywhere with anyone / -thing and the 'freedom' to terminate the consequences of that copulation. That - and as Paul Rahe notes - a demonic hatred of the Church with an eagerness to humiliate believers - is all the left stands for.
My only comfort is that I won't be around when Hat gets the blasted wasteland of a society he's so eager to bring into being.
Heard a new NARAL ad on the rock music station in the car this morning. The gist was "Obama gave us free preventive care in his health care law, and that includes ACCESS to contraception with no copay, but the right-wing extremists in Congress want to take away your ACCESS to birth control with no copay.
The "with no copay" part was barely audible trailing off each sentence, while the idea that access to birth control was being "taken away" was trumpeted.
Who knew free birth control was considered preventive care when the bill was passed? Well, the lefties knew, but it was one more of those things we had to wait until it was passed and regulations issued to find out.
Now that we've found out, there will be no arguments! The "accommodation" has been granted for you loser religious types! No women on the panel!! Republican men hate women! Hey, do they even know any women?
And I think you should take that to mean I don't know you need a prescription for them.
What does this have to do with a prescription? My point is that many women can't use the cheapest pills available because of the side effects for them. Some women have to use much more expensive birth control pills.
Whenever the idea of government subsidizing birth control comes up, people say that women can go buy whatever the cheapest pills at walmart are, when for many women that wouldn't actually work with their body.
That is why I'm asking if any of you know women. Because women can't just go buy whichever pills are cheapest and assume they will work.
"The 'freedom' to copulate anywhere with anyone / -thing and the 'freedom' to terminate the consequences of that copulation. That - and as Paul Rahe notes - a demonic hatred of the Church with an eagerness to humiliate believers - is all the left stands for."
Abortion, their holy sacrament.
Again,
The CDC reported in 2009 that contraception use wasn’t exactly lacking: “Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age: 99 percent of all women who had ever had intercourse had used at least one contraceptive method in their lifetime.” Of all the reasons for non-use of contraception in cases of unwanted pregnancy, lack of access doesn’t even make the CDC’s list
Gee, given that access to birth control is a non-issue, why could the left possibly be pushing this?
Andy R. said...
My point is that many women can't use the cheapest pills available because of the side effects for them. Some women have to use much more expensive birth control pills
"many"
How many, clown?
Put some numbers up, or shut up little boy.
Lori, YES!!!
Pregnancy is a 'disease' to the left!!! They are TERRIFIED of it!!!
Andy R. said...
My point is that many women can't use the cheapest pills available because of the side effects for them. Some women have to use much more expensive birth control pills
Um, so?
According to the CDC: Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age: 99 percent of all women who had ever had intercourse had used at least one contraceptive method in their lifetime.”
It must not be a problem.
I prefer the Greyhound Bus method of birth control. As you know, Greyhound Buses always pull out on time.
The gist was "Obama gave us free preventive care in his health care law, and that includes ACCESS to contraception with no copay,
It is a shame people are so stupid.
Can we run a commercial point out that self-insured institutions will drop insurance plans and your premium is going to go up to cover this "free" access?
So, in short -- sometimes the pill doesn't work as well as the customer wants, so everyone should chip in to get a different one.
That's... not a compelling argument.
Someone please send Andy R's boyfriend a condom so he'll STFU.
And, he's a racist.
"... Because women can't just go buy whichever pills are cheapest and assume they will work..."
Ok so they can buy the more expensive pills. You still need to justify why an individual's recreational sex must be subsidized?
Or don't justify it and simply concede that the Federal government must be there to subsidize any activity no matter how personal or intimate.
"As you know, Greyhound Buses always pull out on time."
OTOH they have been known to leak oil as well. Better known as 'Catholic' birth control.
Althouse should have an "equality bullshit" tag for this post.
Note the default position of outrage that someone else isn't buying contraceptives for women they don't know.
One doesn't need to know who someone is or how much money they have to want them to pay for their own birth control.
Grow up liberal women. Take responsibility for your genitalia.
I happen to be a model of health and fitness due to my rigorous exercise routine. As a result I rarely go to the doctor other than for my annual physical. Why shouldn't the Federal government subsidize my gym membership since I'm actually reducing health care costs?
Ewww... and before breakfast, no less.
I think it would be great if someone in Congress stood up and said, "Wait, you mean we're now all going to pay for free birth control for everyone?" That is the link to the economic catastrophe that this issue could become.
It's true, as Andy says, that women sometimes have to try different pills and some cost more than others. So? Had the same thing happen to me with other medicine. Again, so? So everybody else should give me my blood pressure medicine for free? Or should I pay a co-pay that is higher for a newer, more expensive, better-suited-to-me drug?
Obama is not "giving" anybody "free" anything. We are borrowing from the Chinese and from our future kids, who won't even exist in the future child-free U.S.
"Why shouldn't the Federal government subsidize my gym membership since I'm actually reducing health care costs?"
Point taken, but it doesn't do anything to end this obsession with control over someone else's private property propogated by progressives.
1. "55 percent of women 18–34 have struggled with the cost of prescription birth control."
2. "Secondly, you need to be prepared to try out several different types of birth control before you find one that fits."
I'm sorry, these are simply facts. Birth control pills are expensive and some women struggle to pay for them. They can't just go buy whatever is cheapest at walmart.
Also, Jay, that survey data doesn't mean what you think it means. Just because 99% of women have used contraception with sex at least once does not mean that it isn't financially difficult/impossible for them to pay for it at other times.
Andy R., I know a few women, and I'm married to one.
I'm truly curious about your angle on this. You express concern about women who have to shop around for the right pills, and for the costs associated with making all that happen. Do you really think that's a winning argument?
Your angle seems driven by a desire to re-frame the discussion around availability of birth control, rather than forced payment for it.
Seriously, I wonder: do you understand the distinction?
Also, I just want to get in here first: Hitler. There, now we can all go on commenting.
Why shouldn't the Federal government subsidize my gym membership since I'm actually reducing health care costs?
My health plan does that. It's not the Federal Govt, however.
It's true, as Andy says, that women sometimes have to try different pills and some cost more than others.
My point was that people have been repeatedly claiming that women should just go buy the cheapest $9/month pills at walmart and that therefore cost/affordability isn't an issue which is evidence of a stunning lack of knowledge about how women actually use birth control.
"The CDC reported in 2009 that contraception use wasn’t exactly lacking: “Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age: 99 percent of all women who had ever had intercourse had used at least one contraceptive method in their lifetime.” Of all the reasons for non-use of contraception in cases of unwanted pregnancy, lack of access doesn’t even make the CDC’s list."
-- Who do I believe? The CDC or PP? Questions, questions.
"Struggled with the cost" is a nice euphemism though. Do they define what that means?
Do they mean that they have to choose between paying for it and something else?
That's how money works.
There is no stunning lack of knowledge. The point about Walmart is that they generally sell prescriptions cheaper, as in, shop around for the best deal. Or, don't use the pill. There are other methods and with proper diligence, they work just fine.
BTW I got pregnant with my 4th child while on the pill and using a back-up method. So don't bother telling me that they're not fool-proof, I know that. The only thing that's fool-proof is the aspirin method.
What, did Planned Parenthood shut down overnight? Because thats where the freebees are.
Go get some free, it's available. Quit drama queening around like PP and its myriad clones don't exist. Quit using poor people to raid other peoples money.
"My point was that 'people' have been repeatedly claiming that women should just go buy the cheapest $9/month pills at walmart and that therefore cost/affordability isn't an issue which is evidence of a stunning lack of knowledge about how women actually use birth control."
Its a point WITHOUT a point hatboy.
1. Strawman use of 'people' doesn't rise to the level of being anecdotal
2. Lack of knowledge of how birth control is used? Its a pill, right? A glass of water and you're done. Whats your point?
Your obsessive concern for women here is a sight to behold. Gay chivalry is a concept I am unfamiliar with.
Andy R. said...
1. "55 percent of women 18–34 have struggled with the cost of prescription birth control."
Hysterical.
According to a biased party.
I'm sorry, these are simply facts.
Um, poll results are not "facts"
But of course you're too dumb to understand that.
"... I'm sorry, these are simply facts. Birth control pills are expensive and some women struggle to pay for them...."
Actually, no the facts as you call then don't bear out. From your own link, PP indicates that pills range from $15-$50 per month.
Let's assume even the high end cost, again justify why the Federal government must subsidize recreational sex? If you can't do that than you have no argument. None. Zero.
Andy, who is telling you this stuff? Some women may have to try various pills, but for the majority of women, it's pretty simple. And most birth control pills are available in generic.
And why any of this matters, I have no idea.
What if birth control pills cost $500 a month? Should everyone be required to pay for them for the people who want to use them? Why would being expensive make them a right?
What, did Planned Parenthood shut down overnight? Because thats where the freebees are.
There is not planned parenthood in every city/town. Do you not realize this?
When I was fresh out of college and couldn't afford to pay for something (like... WoW in my case), I gave it up.
It may be harsh to say this, but if you want to do something, but are unwilling or unable to protect yourself from the consequences of doing it -- you either accept those consequences or don't do it.
Again, this is a -want-, not a -need-. If we were talking about life-saving medicine, or cancer treatments, I could see us debating the value. But it is not that.
"... My health plan does that. It's not the Federal Govt, however..."
And that's fine. If that's what a private insurer offers and you want to pay for that in higher premiums than more power to you.
NFP, by the way, is available to anyone for free. And there are no side effects.
Andy said: "There is not planned parenthood in every city/town. Do you not realize this?"
Similarly, there is not a government-subsidized defibrillator in every room in my house. Won't someone think of the children?!
My point was that people have been repeatedly claiming that women should just go buy the cheapest $9/month pills at walmart and that therefore cost/affordability isn't an issue which is evidence of a stunning lack of knowledge about how women actually use birth control.
Your point shows a stunning lack of knowledge that other, cheaper forms of birth control are available, as well as access for the pill available from Planned Parenthood for free. Either that, or you are lying in service to your ideology.
Your argument is no excuse to subsidize Big Pharma or have a welfare program to subsidize what women do with their vaginas.
This isn't the 1950s. Get real.
Freeman, there are side effects.
There is not planned parenthood in every city/town. Do you not realize this?
Oh Noooess! You mighy have to ride a bus! The horror!
Andy R. said...
1. "55 percent of women 18–34 have struggled with the cost of prescription birth control."
And yet, birth control is free at PP.
Hmmmm, could this be a way for PP to ask for more funding?!
Nooooo! Such thoughts can not occure to gay little Andy!
Andy R. said...
My point was that people have been repeatedly claiming that women should just go buy the cheapest $9/month pills at walmart and that therefore cost/affordability isn't an issue which is evidence of a stunning lack of knowledge about how women actually use birth control
Your "point" is silly and incoherent.
Even if birth control were cost prohibitive, that doesn't make it a national issue requiring federal government mandates.
How about this contraception plan?
Quit fucking like rabbits when you have no money
That one is free. It works everytime it's tried.
" It may be harsh to say this, but if you want to do something, but are unwilling or unable to protect yourself from the consequences of doing it -- you either accept those consequences or don't do it.
Again, this is a -want-, not a -need..."
This is an excellent comment and I believe defines todays liberals demand that personal gratification now be guranteed and subsidized by the Government.
"There is not Planned Parenthood in every city / town."
Thank God.
Researchers have found that a method of natural family planning that uses two indicators to identify the fertile phase in a woman's menstrual cycle is as effective as the contraceptive pill for avoiding unplanned pregnancies if used correctly, according to a report published online in Europe's leading reproductive medicine journal Human Reproduction
So if you're dirt poor, but don't get Medicaid (which covers birth control) and don't have insurance that covers birth control and have special medical needs that necessitate expensive birth control, you can still have recreational sex and be protected at the same rate as birth control pills.
One might also point out that condoms are ubiquitous.
The idea that all women must have totally free birth control pills of any type is bizarre.
Your angle seems driven by a desire to re-frame the discussion around availability of birth control, rather than forced payment for it.
They are purposly reframing the issue as that; the inability to force others to buy the pill for women they've never met means NO ACCESS TO BIRTH CONTROL WHATSOEVER BY THE EVIL PATRIARCHY!!11!!eleventy.
As usual with lefties, they can't win arguing truthfully.
"My baby well she fizzes and she fuzzes, her pelvis got the caffeine shakes..."
"if you want to do something, but are unwilling or unable to protect yourself from the consequences of doing it -- you either accept those consequences or don't do it."
That's not going to resonate with a lot of voters.
Too bad. I'm willing to stand behind personal responsibility. And if the voters can't handle it, then America deserves to fall.
that's where a lot of the discussion will go as long as the GOP (or its rank & file, or the Tea Party) wants to keep it an issue.
Nice try. The MSM is making this an issue. Obama's little propaganda mill.
I feel like Steve Martin in "The Man with Two Brains"
"Damn, your word verifications are hard!"
PHX -- If men can't afford condoms, they should skip on it too. It's not patronizing, it is stating things fairly simply, but harshly.
You have options; you can choose options that let you do what you want and minimize risks. If you don't like how much you can minimize your risks, you can elect to not take those risks.
When we reach things, in healthcare, that are legitimate needs, we can get into the nitty-gritty. I do not want healthcare to pay for things that are wants, like, I dunno, anti-baldness remedies for men. Not a need, the government shouldn't be involved.
If we focused on legitimate needs, we'd have more money for cancer research and the like.
phx: I think women voters are going to find this very patronizing
Please explain how that is patronizing?
"... Again, this is a -want-, not a -need..."
Yeah. That's not going to resonate with a lot of voters..."
And you know what, if it doesn't than you can congratulate yourselves on turning the electorate into a mass of dependent children who subordinated self reliance to the state.
Then again self reliance and self respect were never traits leftists possessed.
This is all BS. It never was about either birth control or "women's health." It is just about ginning up the base with a fighting slogan, no matter how senseless.
So they lose some Catholic Democrats. They figure they make up for it with firing up the libber crowd.
It's all about the numbers and getting them to the polls next November.
As a man, I'm insulted if someone implies I need to have sex to be a 'real man.' I wonder if women are insulted when it is implied that that is a need for women.
I like to think the entire post was a set-up for this:
I love the way he [she?] throws in the cursory feminist analysis to offset his plodding getting of the joke.
Althouse at her best.
And you know what, if it doesn't than you can congratulate yourselves on turning the electorate into a mass of dependent children who subordinated self reliance to the state.
Again, I go back to Steyn:
"I’ve been saying in this space for two years that the governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in fundamental ways that make limited government all but impossible.
That’s not an accident, it’s the whole point of it:
Government health care is not about health care, it’s about government. Once you look at it that way, what the Dems are doing makes perfect sense. For them."
Its not about health care. Its about creating slaves to the State.
Thread swerve, perhaps, but men should take responsibility for their own contraception, too.
The courts have demonstrated across multiple states that if a woman gets pregnant, a (any) man can be legally indentured to pay enough to support both mother and child until the child turns 18, or even 21 if they are in college.
And it doesn't even have to be the biological father, if you don't protest in time.
And even if you attempted to prevent pregnancy and the woman used deceptive/dishonest means to get pregnant anyway, or with another man, etc.
It is clear, from the promises to women to the "you don't have to worry about it anymore guarantees to me: "Free" contraception is intended to increase feminist power over men.
phx, you still haven't explained how it is "patronizing". Saying its so doesn't make it so.
If you want a government that provides everything you need, you don't have to speculate what we will look like in the future. Just look at Greece right now.
Freeman, we have some people that give a presentation on NFP at our parish annually. The most interesting revelation for me was the men talking about how it caused them to respect their wives more, and how much that improved their relationships.
I had to think about that a while, and it helped me realize the insidious way 'risk-free' sex had influenced the way I viewed women including my wife.
Once again, the liberal-left Progressives either can't distinguish, or is actively trying to erase, the difference between legality and license.
The aspirin joke is indeed stupid, but I'd like to point out that if it means women shouldn't have sex, men end up not having sex as well.
And isn't it basically what feminists would tell men who don't want to pay child support?
phx: As if you smarter more righteous GOP men know more about accepting responsibility for their reproductive life than they do.
Huh? All you've done is reiterate the fallacy that since you "believe" men don't give a damn about birth control, women shouldn't either.
You'll have to do better than that.
Obama's strategy in pushing the social issues:
He may lose a few votes from Catholics, he may gain a few votes from highlighting Santorum's views to people who vote purely on a single issue.
The easy conclusion is that making social issues the center of discussion keeps discussion/consideration off of how horrible Obama has been on the economy and with corruption.
But another aspect I haven't seen anyone cover yet is that Obama's fundraising totals have been lower than expected. This sort of thing will energize the base...not just to vote, which was a fixed number in the first place, but to contribute lots more money. The extra money is seen by liberal-left Progressives as making up for lack of a persuasive message.
2nd captcha word was "cocklaw"
I kid you not.
"... I think this is an example of how patronizing a lot of you sound to the middle, the undecideds and the leanings..."
I don't think you know what the term patronizing means.
I mean really phx, I handle the birth control instead of my wife because she is a stroke risk from the pill. So your "selfrighteous men who think they know better" comes off as desperately stupid.
I don't think women are that stupid. Or feeble.
For the joke to work, you've gotta say "aspirin," not "pill." Lots of women have sex with pills between their knees. They just know how to look beyond a lousy personality.
When women look at old disgusting men talking about transvaginal probes and restricting birth control, do they think "why yes! this is necessary because otherwise we're going to turn out like Greece!", or do they think "uh, these fucking people are gross"?
Maybe the law of intended consequences is at work here: http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/03/pfizer-recall-could-women-who-get-pregnant-from-recalled-birth-control-pills-sue/. Class action profits anyone?
Amazing how many boymen and girlwomen will invest so much trust in packets of pills, condoms and laissez faire regulation of abortionists--and so little in a sex partner. Especially with the increase in offshore manufacturing of pharmaceuticals...but why bother with the concerns of women like me.
Yeah, they really are that dumb.
And Coke bottles also were used as a handy sex substitute.
As old ER hands may tell you.
PS It starts.
Headline off Yahoo! News:
Rick Santorum’s mysterious manifesto, ‘It Takes a Family’.
Matters on the woman.
Unless, you think all women must think the same Garage.
It's interesting how similar women are when it comes to this topic in some people's view.
It's also interesting that Garage only talks about old, disgusting men -- but nothing about, say, cute, 20-something pro-life women.
It's almost like he's trying to combat a stereotype instead of an idea.
Garage who is talking about restrictng birth control or are you just doing another one of your drive by lies?
When women look at old disgusting men talking about transvaginal probes and restricting birth control, do they think "why yes! this is necessary because otherwise we're going to turn out like Greece!", or do they think "uh, these fucking people are gross"?
I get grossed out seeing ugly Patti Murray talking about how she needs to fuck for free.
And I get grossed out seeing Barack Obama stand up on national tv and allude to how he wants to fuck Michelle and how he wants his daughters to fuck without having to use his millions to pay for their birthcontrol.
It's all gross.
But it brings in the Emily's Listers $$$.
Pragmatism is for voting, not discussing ideas.
Pragmatically, it might be best to soften up the language (or to focus on a legitimate issue, like the economy). But here? I think the approach is ok.
"... And I think you have a tin ear for what many voters are listening for..."
Actually ill wager a lot of voters would like a subsidized clothing, food and gas allowance too. That's because there are a whole lot if people who think government subsidies are free.
"That's the real story here. It's amazing to me that nobody, no candidate at all had anything about contraception on their agenda. Yet the Zero campaign and the media (but I repeat myself) have this as the top story every single day. "
That is one issue, the other is can Obama simply order the insurance companies or the church to do anything? He doesn't have the Constitutional authority to make such a mandate, and the whole brouhaha over contraceptives is a diversion from the REAL issue: Obama made an unconstitutional edict.
Not one single Republican has attacked contaception, yet the Dumbo-crats are screaming bloody murder... much like they did about Susan G Komen and Planned Parenthood.
If we are going to get our country back we need to stop falling for the carrot on the string in front of us and turn around and punch the holder of the stick. They play dirty, it's time we did also. See how long they will last when we call them out for sending a 4 year old's lunch home because it didn't meet the FDA guidelines. The food nazis is a beautiful issue to attack them with, let's exploit it for all its worth.
Not one single Republican has attacked contaception, yet the Dumbo-crats are screaming bloody murder... much like they did about Susan G Komen and Planned Parenthood.
Isn't it interesting that PP informed the world about Komen's decision just days before Sebilious's ruling about church exceptions was due?
It's almost as if the "women's" lobby was showing Obama the power they had to make life miserable for people who don't comply with their desires.
phx said...
Matthew Undecideds/leanings/and moderate women are going to be needed by the GOP in November.
And the more the social conservative wing of the GOP gets their agenda out in front of the public, the more they look to the Dems.
Ah, but, according to Fox News, Sarah Palin brought in most of the undecideds to McCain.
I know where you're going, and that's Santorum's problem - he's a statist on social issues and that's his big schtick.
The First Amendment issue is what will get the Republicans votes, but Santorum doesn't want to address that and he's allowing the Demos and the media (distinction without difference) to cast the issue their way.
What swings the election will be the economy and everybody but Santorum wants to put that center stage.
WV "eyes. largies" Don't we all.
Hoosier, if garage and Andy R admitted that the issue is not access, of which there is no lack, accrding to the CDC, but making other people pay for it, they lose the argument.
Thats why they are trying to change the subject and say that my not buying your wifes birth control is a denial of access to it.
Based on that logic, I am sick and tired of garage and Andy R. denying me access to my 2nd amendment right to have a gun, because I am dead sure that they would oppose using tax dollars to buy me one.
So, why do garage and Andy R. hate the Constutution and want to deny me acccess to my rights?? Fascists.
I wonder why Andy R isn't upset that Obama doesn't care about his health? He doesn't care if Andy gets AIDS or an STD. Obama is willing to deny access to condoms for gay men. That's horrible.
Pogo - "Economy's completely in the crapper for 3 years running, and this squirrel topic is what the leftist media fights for?
Unserious buffoonery."
The problem is the media is reacting to the unserious buffoonery of the "social conservative base" - which rewards the Republican candidates that ignore the present issues and who toss the rubes and yahoos of the Religious Right their red meat cultural issues from 25 years ago. Talk entitlement reform, you bore the rubes. Start talking about abortion and dying daughters with an incurable disease and you get the cretins up whooping and hollerin' sure as black folks react to the "Bull Connor and firehoses live on even today" pitch.
The media isn't fighting to make this the narrative. The narrative came straight from the yaps of Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum.
garage mahal said...
When women look at old disgusting men
Garage, remember when you assured us Obama "placated the Bishops" with his "compromise" last week?
How's that working out for you?
Every single Roman Catholic bishop in the United States has condemned in public the Obamacare HHS mandate — all 181 bishops who lead dioceses in the U.S. have spoken.
Happy Friday, bozo!
Thats why they are trying to change the subject and say that my not buying your wifes birth control is a denial of access to it.
Liberals want social conservatives talking about women's health issues, right up til November. It's a guaranteed loser for them, but they just can't seem to help themselves.
Happy Friday, bozo!
You too, moron! Romney just lost 18% in support from single women, to Obama, in one month. Nice work.
Yes, we can always count on polls 10 months out from an election.
The libs have to lie to get any traction with their attempts at funding other peoples sex lives.
You had to use Coke. Pepsi didn't work. Hence: "The Pepsi Generation".
I can understand that garage. It deflects away from how much worse Obama made the economy.
Then again if liberals like you ever told the truth you'd never win an election.
"We know who supports women voters."
It's embarrassing that you think women voters need to be bought off with goodies paid for by other Americans.
Why isn't it sexist to see women as a special interest group?
phx- The question is directed at you.
@Cedarford & @ Pogo,
My take on it is that this is the GOP primary season.
The independents are barely even paying attention right now. A huge part of the population doesn't care about political issues until September of election year.
Of those that are paying attention, most of made up their mind whether they will vote for or against Obama in November.
This is the time for the GOP candidates to distinguish themselves from each other. This is the time for the GOP to decide which guy they want to make decisions on Cabinet and Supreme Court appointments.
After the GOP convention, when the nominee selects a VP that shores up a weakness, the topic will turn to the economy. Obama and the Dems won't be able to sit back and take sniping shots into a GOP discussion, they'll actually have to defend their actions/decisions/policies of the last 4 years and moving on.
Sure, the press will help cover for them, but they can't stop all discussion.
By September, $5 gas (or close to it) will be fresh in everyone's mind. The economy will have slumped again, and after Obama's 4th budget proposal doubled (well, quadrupled) down on trillion $ deficits and special interest payouts with no appreciable result, people will be disgruntled. Add on top of that all the Senate and House races will be in full swing, with Dem politicians having to make a case for their job...one of their only choices will be to run away from Obama's policies, which will get more criticism of Obama into the news.
The stonewalls on Fast and Furious and Solyndra (and other crony payout corruption) should be near-fully disintegrated.
Let the Dems have their fun right now, we'll learn more about the character of the GOP candidates.
None of the arrows point in the right direction for Obama's re-election. Everything he has said, done, or proposed this year will get really stinky by Sep/Oct of this year.
Speaking of home-grown birth control techniques, a neighbor used to fill gelatine capsules with powdered boric acid and insert them into her vagina before intercourse. I might have worked -- she never seemed to get pregnant.
That's not how I see women. That's how professional political strategists do.
You are advocating that strategy.
I understand how marketing research works, and how different things appeal to different broad groups. But you notice Tide merely uses the information to refine their advertising strategy. They are never so crass as to come out and say, 'We care about white upper class suburbanites more than Whisk does!".
And Gain doesn't say "We are the detergent that best meets the needs of black homemakers"
They are smart enough to know that doesn't sound good. They are smart enough to know that isn't how individuals see themselves.
So why don't politicians realize that grouping people into special interest groups is sexist/racist?
Why isn't that embarrassing?
garage mahal said...
You too, moron! Romney just lost 18% in support from single women, to Obama, in one month.
I think it is funny you think that is analogous to the Bishops being opposed to Obama's mandate.
Further, "single women" are not that big a voting bloc (in terms of who actually votes) and are going for Obama anyway.
You know why its not embarrasing for liberals Maybee? Cause they don't have shame. You would think anyone with any pride and self respect would cringe voting for a political party that believes you're incapable of self dependence and can't survive without state largesse.
People aren't looking for candidates to keep their laundry clean. They are looking for candidates who will represent and protect what they perceive are their interests.
Yes, and politicians and laundry detergents both market themselves. Detergent companies are more sophisticated.
All women don't perceive themselves to have the same interests. Women are vastly different, as vastly different as men. So any politician pretending to support "women voters" is engaging in sexist rhetoric. People who want politicians to say such things are asking women to be marginalized.
Rush makes the very good point that kids can't get an aspirin in school. They can only get condoms.
@phx,
I think this is more about playing the Democratic faithful than the GOP.
At least 2:1
e want a large number of undecideds and maybes and moderates to see them as the most recognizable face of the GOP.
What are you saying?
If you support women, why do you want to force some women to pay for things they don't want? Shouldn't you instead support less government to allow women to make the decision best suited to their lives?
It sounds like "supporting women" is a euphemism for "supporting government."
Ann Althouse said...
"The fizzy coke bottle was for during sex, not after."
You're wrong. Douche
Is Coke good for cleaning a monitor screen?
Conspicuously, Friess doesn’t put the same burden on men.
Alex Seitz-Wald tells a joke:
"In my day, we'll use Aspirin as a contraceptive. A man will shove it into his urethra and then read Betty Friedan essays to his life partner."
a neighbor used to fill gelatine capsules with powdered boric acid
She never had an ant problem, either.
Andy R. said...
And I think you should take that to mean I don't know you need a prescription for them.
What does this have to do with a prescription? My point is that many women can't use the cheapest pills available because of the side effects for them. Some women have to use much more expensive birth control pills.
Whenever the idea of government subsidizing birth control comes up, people say that women can go buy whatever the cheapest pills at walmart are, when for many women that wouldn't actually work with their body.
That is why I'm asking if any of you know women. Because women can't just go buy whichever pills are cheapest and assume they will work.
'cause when ya gotta fuck, ya gotta fuck.
and then it's Abort! Abort! Abort!
I suppose that makes me a bad person.
It makes you a terrible political strategist. You want to tell the Dems to say, "See those mild-mannered, reasonable people? Those are Republicans!"
That in my opinion, and it's only my opinion, your views aren't very attractive to most moderates and undecideds.
My view that women are independent thinkers, and that birth control pills should be treated like any other prescription medicine?
You think that's unappealing to moderates?
To see if you really care about women; would you accept a compromise where contraceptives/birth controls could be itemized and reduce a woman's tax burden?
This:
A) Increases availability
B) Increases choice
C) Removes the need for the mandate
D) Will allow women to get access to things without having to go through an intermediary (insurance), which will lower the cost over all.
E) Preserves religious conscience for employers.
That's a compromise that could conceivably work to allow women to have access, without stomping on the church's rights. It also respects women as individuals instead of a monolithic single entity with no individual identity.
That's a real solution worth looking at that respects women.
PHX,
I can make appealing arguments. My personal one is that market-based insurance, like HSAs, etc., provide women (and men!) more choice, without forcing government to use power to make things happen.
We can literally get a better solution without force, and yet, those possibilities are routinely ignored.
Jay said-
Further, "single women" are not that big a voting bloc (in terms of who actually votes) and are going for Obama anyway.
That would depend on whether or not they are employed.
Won't be fooled again.
PHX,
Today's poll had, what, 50% disapproving of the mandate?
It's shaping up like less of a problem and more of a normal, highly divisive issue that polls well with some groups and not others, but overall, averages out.
All the gyrating aside, the point about the aspirin between the knees is right. It points directly at personal responsibility, and, even, abstinence (horrors!).
The fact that the progressive midgets here are exorcised over it is very telling.
Notice Andrea Mitchell's reaction. That's the progressive mind-set on display right there.
That's why we're pulling for SMOD, PHX.
Strange, my doctor prescibed 2 'baby' aspirin a day for me and I'm still impotent. But as a matter of logic this whole issue has me stumped. HHS classifies pregnancy as a 'disease'. Which led me to think--given the present state of 'womanhood/feminism' perhaps that is correct. However, as a public health concern birth control/morning after pills promote STD's just like Viagra. Buy your own. A logical case can be made for 'free' condoms--disease prevention, a public health concern. If HHS is right--pregnancy is a disease--then abortion is elective 'cosmetic' surgery, a 'tummy tuck'.
I would be happy to engage with them phx. No problem. I would simply ask if they truly felt it was necessary that their purchase of birth control be subsidized by the Federal government?
If that many people said YES!!! Then why not groceries, clothing, or housing because those are actual, you know, necessities for survival whereas birth control is just for recreational sex.
I'm certain a few intelligent ones would see where that leads. Cause I'm certain Support Women is more than providing them free birth control.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा