Velociworld

Well when does it cost $3000.00 a year for birth control pills? That is $250.00 a month. That is $7.40 A day.Hell I paid less than that for hoes, well maybe a little more than that.

Posted by: Don Jr. at March 2, 2012 10:50 PM

Girl was saying 3k for her stint at U. Probably three years, 1k a year. BC pills are half of that, so maybe she's including lube, a few rubbers when a Johnson looks questionable, and a co-pay on STD.

A guy had to put out for dinner or drinks once upon a time; now they're apparently lining up outside her door. A fucking tip jar could keep the taxpayer out of it. Three bucks a pop, I'm in.

Posted by: james wilson at March 3, 2012 1:22 AM

Dammit Wilson, the "tip jar" was my joke!

Posted by: Casca at March 3, 2012 10:45 AM

Careful, mentioning you-know-who might give him the impression that he's getting to you, and attract him back. Not that it's my business to worry about your blog, it's just that I enjoy it. I enjoy it without some retard who seems to really impress himself with a collection of the same five flames, every damn time.

Worse than annoying, it's boring.

Posted by: Mike James at March 5, 2012 3:25 AM

Interestingly enough, I'm going to guess that none of them have ever paid for birth control pills without insurance. But you all seem to have an opinion about it. Without insurance, my wife's birth control costs over $1,000 a year, but I know, I know, that doesn't fit with your narrative that she is trying to bilk you for something. Wait, you mean she wasn't actually asking for the tax payers to cover her birth control? You mean, she was just saying that her insurance that she already pays for should cover it? I'm confused, that doesn't seem to sit with what you and others seem to be complaining about. Ever think it could be worth it to actually read the girl's testimony before you criticize? :)

On the other hand, that was a pretty good joke about the shit stain.

Posted by: Cody at March 5, 2012 12:45 PM

"No public servant should ever be able to threaten a citizen with anything other than a poor shoe shine."

Preach it.

Posted by: Nathan at March 5, 2012 4:14 PM

No comment needed here...you know how I feel.

Posted by: Yabu at March 5, 2012 4:40 PM

Cody
It's this simple, if your insurance company doesn't cover something you want covered change companies. If you want rock bottom coverage for rock bottom prices that is what you get. Don't expect to get a Caddy when you buy a KIA.

Posted by: James Old Guy at March 5, 2012 4:47 PM

Cody, Georgetown Law, where this girl is apparently the intramural boning champion, is a Catholic institution. There are some of us who would rather the government not get into the business of pushing churches around, and we're not all Catholics.

Posted by: Mike James at March 5, 2012 5:30 PM

My Congressho is Marcia Fudge. And I endorse this proposal.

Posted by: Cappy at March 5, 2012 6:47 PM

James, some schools force their students to be on their insurance plans. But at any rate, she is on the school's insurance plan, which as Mike pointed out, is provided by a Catholic Institution. However, the school provides, for its students, an insurance plan modeled after the one they provide for their faculty and staff. Except one, glaring difference. That difference is birth control. They provide it for the faculty, but not for the students. Also, Mike, did anyone besides Rush (and various, assorted idiots) claim that she wanted birth control pills because, as you put it, she is the "intramural boning champion?" I'll ask you, did you even look at her testimony? She was talking about one of her friends, who because she couldn't afford birth control pills, had to have her ovaries removed because of a condition that is easily treatable by one, simple, little pill a day. Guess that goes over your head, considering you seem to think she only wants the pill so she can hop into bed. But even if that were the case, what business is it of yours? Also, interesting little side note, 28 states already require your insurance company to cover birth control pills.

Posted by: Cody at March 6, 2012 8:31 AM

A. There was no testimony, so no transcript. This was a put up press conference on the tail end of a hearing that the evil demofucks foisted on us as congressional testimony.

B. If you don't like what your state does, you can move. If you don't like what the feds do, you can go to jail. How about they stick to constitutionally mandated issues? Oh Yeah, no money or power there.

C. The Catholics who run that "University" ought to boot her fat ass into the street.

Posted by: Casca at March 6, 2012 9:37 AM

Casca - You're right, there is no way to see what she said before Congress. http://www.scribd.com/doc/81978568/Testimony-Sandra-Fluke I mean, wait, yes there is. Crazy.

While I tend to agree that the Federal Government should stick to Constitutionally mandated issues, I just have a problem with people who severely, and deliberately misrepresent things other said simply to make a point. I also have a problem with people who attack others personally for speaking their mind, and presenting an opinion. But hey, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even you, and even if you're wrong.

Not sure exactly why you think they should kick her out of school, but she'll be gone in about two months anyway, so unless they can find a really good reason to do so, they will probably find it prudent to let her graduate. That way, they won't have to deal with the embarrassment of justifying why they kicked her out.

Posted by: Cody at March 6, 2012 9:49 AM

Not to blow a new asshole into the narrative, but since when does "insurance" translate into "tax dollars"? Even under the abomination that is ObamaCare, insurance companies are funded by premiums and still enjoy anti-trust exemptions. I just don't see where tax dollars come into it.

Furthermore, if you've got a plug up your ass about "subsidizing sex lives", I'm sure that we can all agree that any and all pregnancy-related coverage can be cancelled, along with that stupid fucking maternal leave that most employers provide. After all, fuck you and your goddamned uterus. By the way, doesn't federal law in your country mandate maternity leave for even the Church, even if the leave is taken by sluttish Methodist secretaries?

I'd also be fascinated to learn if Georgetown's insurance plan covers pre-natal and child care coverage for the children of unmarried parents, such things also being frowned upon. How about Viagra? If you're old enough that your crank doesn't turn over like it used to, chances are that you're out of the healthy child-rearing age.

Moreover, how many billions of dollars has the Catholic Church been forced to fork over for it's adventures in child-fuckery over the last couple of dozen years? Hasn't the Church itself forced it's donors to unknowingly subsidize their sexual proclivities and the cover-up of same? And given their tax-exempt status, ALL Americans were forced to do so, too.

Having said this, watching the GOP blow themselves up over an issue that was settled in 1965 is the funniest thing on Earth.

God Bless America!

Posted by: skippystalin at March 6, 2012 2:41 PM

Cody - I never heard of a school forcing its students to buy the health insurance they provide. Please provide the name of an institution which does this.

I would think that if that were part of the terms of attending a school, I would exercise my freedom of choice and enroll elsewhere.

Posted by: PeggyU at March 6, 2012 2:49 PM

Well, off the top of my head, I know that Georgia State does for certain groups of students. Actually, I should expand that to all colleges in the University System of Georgia. I'm not saying she was forced to buy into the school's insurance, I'm just saying it does happen.

And, as much as I hate agreeing with someone who has the name "Stalin" in their handle, I would be very curious to know when "insurance" came to mean "tax monies." V-man, care to take that one since you're the one that brought it up?

Posted by: Cody at March 6, 2012 3:20 PM

Cody, you're a tedious manipulative cocksucker.

Posted by: Casca at March 6, 2012 6:54 PM

Cry me a fucking river. The tuition for this place which has 470 full time students if 50% women is $46,865 a year. Median starting salary for graduates in 2010 in the private sector was $160,000 a year. Now tell me it isn't about the money. I did read her tear jerking testament of female issues, very well written, but full of bullshit. The tuition does cover the college insurance and is optional and at a much lower cost, thus lower coverage. Since the school has extremely smart students, one would think they might actually read the coverage before signing on the dotted line. They had options and didn't exercise their rights, it was easier to cry to congress. Oh by the way who do you think covers the tuition? TAX DOLLARS!!!

Posted by: James Old Guy at March 6, 2012 7:24 PM

This was never about tax dollars. It is about the administration forcing a religious institution to provide something they are morally opposed to in violation of the First Amendment. Not sure whether Georgetown forces students to take their insurance, but if Fluke doesn't like what Catholic institutions offer she should slither her cunt down the road to another school. It's called market dynamics. I don't like what gay bath houses offer. So I don't fucking frequent them. And I would be extremely surprised if Georgetown did indeed offer contraceptives to their faculty. That sounds like a straight-out-of-the-ass fabrication.

Posted by: Velociman at March 6, 2012 8:51 PM

By the way, Skippy, in the land of the thought police hate crimes commissions, do you folks even know what the First Amendment is? Even in the abstract? And why it's so important to us nutjobs?

Posted by: Velociman at March 6, 2012 8:58 PM

Being Canadian is punishment enough for anyone, I would think.

Posted by: Randy Rager at March 7, 2012 12:19 AM

Casca - I'll give you tedious and manipulative, but the last part is just rude.

James - I wasn't aware that my tax dollars were going to cover the tuition of kids at a private school. I knew I should have gone to the private school to get a free education courtesy of the tax payers instead of paying my way through state school.

V-Man - Your argument loses steam when you note that the school doesn't have a problem providing contraceptive coverage to its employees. When viewed in that light, it doesn't seem so much a moral issue as a control issue.

Randy - I had no idea he was Canadian. I feel unclean now simply for agreeing with him. He should have put something in the post as a clue, like "a-boot" or something to warn those of us who didn't know.

Posted by: Cody at March 7, 2012 8:25 AM

Wal Mart and Target both sell BCPs for under $10/month. Anyone paying over $1k a year is getting ripped off.

Posted by: B Moe at March 7, 2012 4:20 PM

Didn't Fluke testify that she could see the misery in her fellow students' faces as they worried about their lack of contraception coverage? How the fuck does she know what's on their minds? How does she know they weren't worried about their torts final?

Her statement that a friend lost an ovary because she couldn't afford the pill is false. If it were true, the "friend" would have appeared rather than Fluke. Not both ovaries, Cody. But Fluke could lie to the cameras because, hey, it could be true, right?

This is nothing more than Democratic demagoguery masquerading as fact. No more truth here than in Anita Hill's fantastical, fabricated testimony.

Posted by: Jack Straw at March 7, 2012 4:43 PM

It's called Government Student loans. Unless you believe Unicorns shit money for student loans then the tax payers foot the bill betting on being paid back. Anyone happen to know what the default % is on Government Student loans?

Posted by: James Old Guy at March 7, 2012 5:30 PM

Cody, I specifically called the claim that Georgetown provides contraceptives to their employees bullshit. That was your claim, not mine. Please back it up with something other than statement, which is even less factual than anecdote. Thankee.

Posted by: Velociman at March 7, 2012 8:17 PM

V-Man - Not even difficult. http://benefits.georgetown.edu/health/medical/113716.html

I looked at the first one and it covers contraceptives. Didn't bother to go further, cause that one case already proved my point.

Jack - At the risk of sounding like a jack ass, you obviously know nothing about women's health issues. But trust me when I say, not taking birth control pills, can give cysts, that would otherwise not grow, the opportunity to grow and this can result in the need to remove one or both ovaries.

Moe - Yeah, you might think that, but not all birth control pills work for all women. You are all looking at it like it is a black and white issue, that there is no gray area, that there are no variables. Life doesn't work that way.

Posted by: Cody at March 8, 2012 10:42 AM

Cody, like other condescending liberals, you make excuses and engage in conjecture to justify behavior of someone you have never even met.
Nothing in life is guaranteed. Where do we draw the line? Making her friends and neighbors foot the bills for her needs is un-American, but it is perfectly communistic. Life is hard, and I don't feel like working harder so that some stranger's life will be easier. That is for her FAMILY to provide, not the "gummint".
When the American system implodes because everyone wants things they cannot afford to pay for, I hope you will remember to look in the mirror.

Posted by: Jack Straw at March 8, 2012 2:23 PM

Jack Straw - Like other condescending assholes, you assume that I am a liberal simply because my views do not line up with yours on one issue. I was actually referring to a personal experience (obviously not something that happened to me, but something that happened to a family member), not engaging in conjecture or making excuses. But, well, that's where the condescending asshole part comes in.

Posted by: Cody at March 8, 2012 4:17 PM

Cody,

Are your a kindergartener? Georgetown staff are obviously given a choice of OUTSIDE insurance options, including Aetna, United Healthcare, and Kaiser. Those are options. Georgetown does not endorse, or prohibit, outside insurance options.
Ms. Fuck's argument was that she was forced to take Georgetown's in-house coverage, which does not include contraceptives.

Even if Georgetown does not give students the same options as staff (and, let's be honest, students are NOT employees, they are what is commonly known as FUCKING CUSTOMERS) she has every right to decline, and go seek private insurance from Blue Cross/Blue Shield or anyone else.

Again, if she doesn't like the options, she can vote with her feet, instead of her vagina.

Fuck that bint.

Posted by: Velociman at March 8, 2012 8:44 PM

See - if Rush had just said "bint" instead of "slut" or "prostitute" no one would have known what he was talking about. Problem solved.

Posted by: Cletus Socrates at March 8, 2012 9:50 PM

V-Man - I thought more highly of you than that. You start losing an argument and descend to name calling and changing the rules of the argument?

You asked me to provide proof that Georgetown provided insurance to their employees that included contraceptive care. Yes, their employees have the option of choosing from several different insurance companies. Now, I may be young, not a kindergartner as you implied, but young all the same, but at one time I worked in a company that provided its employees with health insurance benefits. You know, and I know that all employers go through their group policies (which is what they are) and decide which ones to allow their employees. If Georgetown wanted to make sure that none of their employees had access to contraceptive coverage through their employer provided health insurance, they would be able to pick group plans that met that criteria.

Now, we both understand that students aren't employees, and could be considered customers. I'll grant you that. But, I think we could both also agree that without students, colleges would not exist. Probably more so than any other business. All that is beside the point though, because, once again, all that is being argued is that the students receive the same options as their professors when choosing their health insurance plans. As you, and others have pointed out, she could decide to seek private insurance coverage. Neither of us know whether she has. I can only go off my own experiences, and for some people, private insurance isn't an option. If they're able to get anything resembling insurance it won't cover anything. Once again, that is beside the point, as neither of us know if this would apply in her case or not.

But, let's think for a moment, exactly how much does that private insurance cost? As a reasonably healthy 27 year old, my insurance is roughly $90 per month. But I'm a guy, so her insurance, assuming she was healthy like me, would probably cost about $30-$50 per month more than mine. So, we're back up above that $1,000 a year that she was saying is difficult/impossible to afford without even having bought the pills that are the root of this entire discussion yet.

Posted by: Cody at March 8, 2012 10:07 PM

Cletus - Except for the glaring inaccuracies in many people's arguments that I felt needed to be corrected, if for no other reason than to allow people to learn, I didn't care to begin with. I'm arguing with V-Man and the rest for the pure fun of it. The one thing I don't understand is the manufactured rage simply because the federal government has the gall to require something that more than half the country requires. This coverage is required by every insurance plan issued in 28 states currently, and people accept it, and move on without making the slightest bit of noise.

Posted by: Cody at March 8, 2012 10:12 PM

"The one thing I don't understand is the manufactured rage simply because the federal government has the gall to require something that more than half the country requires."

Federal government requires. Admittedly, you don't understand that one, singular thing.

That's the problem, right there.

Posted by: arcs at March 9, 2012 8:47 AM

arcs - No, I understand limiting the federal government's powers, but I don't understand manufacturing rage over something that is already law in more than half the country. If Georgia requires something already, and then the federal government comes in and requires the same thing, exactly how has that affected your life? Maybe someone could explain that to me. Cause that is what you're all getting so bent out of shape about.

Posted by: Cody at March 9, 2012 10:21 AM

Shorter Cody: "That federal government! Is there anything it can´t do?"

Posted by: El Gordo at March 9, 2012 2:28 PM

I do believe that states do have rights that are not granted to the federal government, I read that somewhere in some vague document. I think it also said something vague about people have certain rights also not granted to the Federal or State Government. Then of course old Honest Abe pretty much decided states really don't have rights.

Posted by: James Old Guy at March 9, 2012 5:14 PM

The real point is, we are arguing over who gets to pick the pepper out of the flyshit. At the end of the day, the administration has successfully diverted attention away from the fact they are pissing upon the first amendment right to freedom of religion, and couching the debate in terms of "rights" that don't properly exist in the first place. There is no "right" that forces an entity to provide one contraception. Period.
Ms. Fluke is a strawman, a Potemkin victim concocted by Obama to change the nature of the debate once he realized he was getting his ass handed to him.
Two final points: I still don't see contraception in the Aetna plan, but the Catholic Church is nonetheless allowed to be as hypocritical as any other organization, and moreso due to the First Amendment. Second, Ms. Fluke can go to any clinic and get her birth control at Target. No one is denying her access to contraception. If she can afford Georgetown Law School tuition but not generic birth control she has some seriously fucked up priorities.

And you've always been a good friend, Cody. I'm sorry it degenerated to this.

Posted by: Velociman at March 9, 2012 7:03 PM

lt gets better!

Gloria Allred wants the state of Florida to arrest Rush based on an obscure state statute that prohibits somemone from demeaning a woman based on her sexual proclivities.

Posted by: Cletus Socrates at March 9, 2012 7:33 PM

For the life of me, I am trying to figure out how on earth - on a waitress's salary - I did not go bankrupt paying for my own contraceptive pills. Hell, I couldn't afford to go to Georgetown University, but I managed to buy the pills, help buy groceries and pay rent, and pay off my college loan. For that matter, my insurance didn't cover office visits either, until the deductible was met. Of course, I don't recall spending $1,000 per year. I am going to call bullshit on Cody's claim that some contraceptive pills cost that much. What, are they gold-plated or something?

Posted by: PeggyU at March 10, 2012 2:53 AM

V-Man - She very probably does have some messed up priorities, that's her business. Like I said a couple of posts ago, I stopped caring a while ago, I'm just in it for the fun of arguing now. As far as whether the coverage is there for the employees or not, it's there, but like you said, they have ever right to be hypocritical if they so choose. It isn't like many people are going to Georgetown because they're Catholic, and they're not going to stop if the church side of the school starts being hypocritical, they'll still come.

El Gordo and James - Yeah, it is interesting that the states have certain guaranteed rights, but since that hasn't been followed much in the past, and since somehow, the groups that want that to be followed have been placed on watch lists as "hate" groups, I don't see it improving much in the future.

Peggy - You can call whatever you want, but I could go through my tax box from last year and pull out receipts where I was paying $90 per month for her pills. Since I don't actually have to prove anything to you or care what you think, we'll just have leave it with me telling the truth and you thinking you're right cause "you know" more than me.

Posted by: Cody at March 10, 2012 7:41 AM

I hope this thread is over. Cody is a friend. He hasn't been treated as such here, especially by me. Let me find some naked women to post or something.

Posted by: Velociman at March 10, 2012 1:29 PM

V-Man - It's cool. I'm still having fun. :) On the other hand, everybody likes guns.

Posted by: Cody at March 10, 2012 1:33 PM

Cody - I think you got ripped, because if that was for a medical condition (and not just contraception), most insurance companies I've dealt with would have covered it. I've also got a fair number of family members who work in the healthcare field, and I know that doctors and pharmaceutical companies will work with patients to find ways to make medications affordable. However, I will say you are a gentleman for picking up the cost.

Posted by: PeggyU at March 10, 2012 3:07 PM

Peggy - That would be the problem. She didn't have insurance. One of those no-employer provided situations combined with pre-existing conditions. Well, I guess she did have insurance, but it didn't cover anything, and by anything, I mean $50 towards an ER bill was the max payout. But I paid because it was what was required. I pay in full when I can and stretch it out over time if I can't.

Like I said though, I was still having fun with the argument, but I'll respect V-man's wishes and this will be it for me on this topic.

Posted by: Cody at March 10, 2012 5:08 PM

Cody - I took some time to cool off and reflect on why this whole issue has me so ticked off. I also checked the cost on birth control pills, and stand corrected: some of the newer, brand-name ones are that expensive. I seriously doubt whether the great majority of women taking birth control pills are prescribed these, however, and that is why the cost of $1,000 per year is, on its face, outrageous to many people (and why Sandra Fluke's testimony rings false; she highlighted an exception, rather than the rule). In addition, if cost is an obstacle, I have yet to meet a healthcare provider who wasn't willing to consider alternatives or work out some arrangement to make it accessible (thus her characterization of the heartless system also rings false).

It seems the distraction has been successful. It has caused infighting among people who would normally agree. But there are a few other aspects of this situation/tactic that really alarm me, and - even though you don't care what I think - I would be interested in discussing healthcare issues more with you via email.

As I said before, I have many family members in healthcare related jobs, so I hear their opinions on the state of medicine in the US. As a consumer, I have also noted the changes ... most, not for the better, in my opinion. I have been reading what I can find on the history of US healthcare, health insurance, and government health programs. I would hope you and I at least agree that further government involvement is not the solution.

Posted by: PeggyU at March 10, 2012 5:25 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:

Remember personal info?
YesNo
Comments: