ext_39051 ([identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics2012-03-02 02:39 pm

President Obama calls Sandra Fluke



Earlier this afternoon, Sandra Fluke received a personal phone call from President Obama, two days after she was called a "slut" on Rush Limbaugh's radio show. Ms Fluke attends the prestigious Georgetown University (a Jesuit school) and its president released earlier today a letter of support for Ms. Fluke, strongly critical of Mr. Limbaugh's comments, calling them "vile and misogynistic." Ms. Fluke broke the news about her call from the President during an interview on Andrea Mitchell's show. Fluke was the woman who was to testify before the Republican House Committee hearing but was denied by Darryl Issa, who instead had an all male panel testify on the subject of birth control and freedom of religion. A week later, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi held a non-binding hearing and asked Ms. Fluke to appear. Rush Limbaugh went on the offensive on his radio show and "...demanded that Fluke release tapes of her having sex in exchange for the contraception that she argued should be covered by employers." Fluke said the President's phone call was completely unexpected and added "What was really personal for me was that he said to tell my parents that they should be proud. And that meant a lot because Rush Limbaugh questioned whether or not my family would be proud of me. So I just appreciated that very much."







Joe Scarborough, a former conservative Republican member of the United States House of Representatives stated in an interview, he's had several conversations with what he described as "fire breathing conservatives" going into panic mode over the recent news cycles painting Republicans as opposed to women's rights and birth control when instead they are allowing President Obama off the hook, and thinks the election will be lost because of the focus on issues that don't matter, and were settled years ago.







It seems that the some in the Republican party are so intent on pushing it more to the right, at the expense of moderate and women voters, the chances of winning the Senate back (Olympia Snowe's retirement all but guarantees that her seat will go to a Democrat), or winning the White House are going to be severely crippled (this has happened already in a key state, Virginia, which has seen a significant movement by independent and women voters from Romney to President Obama because of the forced ultrasound amendment for abortions). While Rush Limbaugh doesn't speak for all conservatives obviously, he is the face for one of the largest audiences in talk radio, and the massive condemnation, he's now receiving should wake him up, or at least give him pause for making such reckless statements

[identity profile] sealwhiskers.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 12:50 am (UTC)(link)
Agreed, but a compromise is usually chiseled out from such debate. I think there needs to be a *heavy* demand on those religious workplaces that get exempts to inform women employees in no uncertain terms that they either pay extra or have extra babies or stop having sex if they work there.

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 01:35 am (UTC)(link)
I'm still at a loss as to why people don't pay for their own contraceptives.
I can understand it as an insurance thing IF it's the pill to regulate for health reasons; however, if it's just to prevent pregnancy (which is implied in your last sentence) and the cost is $3000 for a law school career (2-3 years?) (which she says in part of the testimony I heard) at say, a dollar a condom...
When does one find the time to study?

[identity profile] chron-job.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 02:06 am (UTC)(link)
> I'm still at a loss as to why people don't pay for their own contraceptives.

Why don't people pay for their own blood pressure medication? Why do we cover ANY preventative care as part of insurance?

> at say, a dollar a condom...When does one find the time to study?

Yes, Lets purposefully miss the obvious (insurance covered contraception is typically hormonal, not condoms) so that we can make a funny little comment about the promiscuity of the interviewee, in aid of dismissing their point by dismissing them.

(deleted comment)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 04:06 am (UTC)(link)
Definite leap as to what I actually said or even implied.
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 02:52 pm (UTC)(link)
Except, your comment was to a comment directed 100% to me. It appeared to be in support of that comment, thereby justifying any response I might make. If it was just random sarcasm, possibly better placed somewhere else, thanks.

[identity profile] chron-job.livejournal.com 2012-03-04 06:02 pm (UTC)(link)
Mine was not. Can you reply to me?

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-06 00:12 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 04:05 am (UTC)(link)
Yes let's purposefully pull sentences out of context to be snarky...hey it's your dime.
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 02:55 pm (UTC)(link)
So, what is it, are you talking about me or not? ;)

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:03 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] sealwhiskers.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 02:19 am (UTC)(link)
The thing is, Geezer, that there can be several reasons for contraceptives, but if we just pick a long term relationship, even a marriage, where unlimited pregnancies aren't an option, then contraceptives become quite the sum over the years.

I mean, can you not see my perplexity here, at conservatives who are against abortions, who claim that people shouldn't have children if they can't support them (and get welfare) and then are against even having contraceptives easily available in a health insurance deal? Can you not see how these opinions, should they be prevalent in a real situation, could really corner a woman?

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 04:25 am (UTC)(link)
I acknowledged that.
For contraceptive purposes only, condoms are cheap. (But I understand not liking to use them)

I understand what you are saying, I just don't agree that contraceptives, for the purpose of contraception should be a mandated insurance policy.

An aside, back in the 1970s Planned Parenthood provided contraceptive services for low or no cost. (I think it was PP, it may have been another organization similar....that was a long time ago :D)

[identity profile] sealwhiskers.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 04:53 am (UTC)(link)
I just don't agree that contraceptives, for the purpose of contraception should be a mandated insurance policy.

I'm curious as to why?
I mean, the main reason for the vast improvement of women's health is because they don't carry babies all the time, but have some control on when and how they want to have the kids.

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 03:13 pm (UTC)(link)
The key word is mandate...for the why.

Granting health and life expectancy are not exactly the same thing,

http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/lifeexpectancy.htm
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/15/nation/la-na-womens-health-20110615

The first basically shows world wide life expectancy. The second shows a decrease in the gap between men and women in the U.S. My point: "main reason" doesn't seem to fit. (I'm not disagreeing, this is my (hopefully) polite way of saying, citation needed :D)

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:45 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 23:22 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-04 00:42 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] usekh.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 12:37 pm (UTC)(link)
This would be the same planned parenthood that conservatives are fighting tooth and nail to shut down?
(deleted comment)

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 17:42 (UTC) - Expand
(deleted comment)

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 17:51 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 18:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:32 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:41 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 23:18 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] ofbg.livejournal.com - 2012-03-04 02:43 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] ofbg.livejournal.com - 2012-03-04 02:46 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 19:56 (UTC) - Expand
(deleted comment)

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:12 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:20 (UTC) - Expand
(deleted comment)

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 21:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] ofbg.livejournal.com - 2012-03-04 02:45 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] usekh.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 20:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] usekh.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 22:48 (UTC) - Expand
(deleted comment)

(no subject)

[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com - 2012-03-03 23:07 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] yelena-r0ssini.livejournal.com 2012-03-04 08:28 am (UTC)(link)
But condoms aren't the point of this post. Condoms are not medication and they are not covered by health insurance. The only person who brought up condoms was you, and you only brought them up because you know enough about birth control to realize that the "women's birth control usage is proportional to the amount of sex they have" thing is categorically untrue with HBC and you wanted to repeat Rush's "she's a whore" "joke".

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-06 12:19 am (UTC)(link)
I am totally stunned that you know so much about, not only what I know, but my motavations and thought processes...too bad it's not close to being true.

(no subject)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com - 2012-03-06 15:47 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 10:01 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm still at a loss as to why people don't pay for their own contraceptives

People suck and are lazy and good for nothing piles of dung. Good enough? Less, more? Either way, doesn't matter, because here's the thing:

Unwanted pregnancies suck. Unwanted children suck. Poor uneducated undersupported children suck and most will be on welfare or in jail and that sucks and costs a fuckload of money.

If I can pay a few cents of taxes up front to avoid those pregnancies, hell, I say we pay people extra just to take birth control and I'll bet you dollars to pennies that we save tons of money in the long run.

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 10:25 pm (UTC)(link)
Thank you, those are all decent reasons, now I have something to consider.
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 10:48 pm (UTC)(link)
It was probably both.

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 11:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Or....just needed it mansplained?

*ducks*

Image
Edited 2012-03-03 23:31 (UTC)

(no subject)

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - 2012-03-04 00:10 (UTC) - Expand

[identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com 2012-03-03 10:44 pm (UTC)(link)
LOL!