As you well know, so do I. But when you say the gov't should stay out of religion, I do somewhat agree. But then we come to an area where others will use that sentiment to push for pseudo religious practices. That fall well with in the confines of criminal activity, by western standards. Non?
Limbaugh's message to 'feminazis'
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
So, did you read her entire testimony? A couple quotes don't really tell the full story. Perhaps the campus health plan is the same that is offered to employees...
All we can go by is the information that we are presented.
I would be surprised that if the insurance plan for employees was the same plan for the students. In fact, I would be surprised if the student's tuition included a health insurance plan that had any form of depth in its coverage.
Georgetown University :: Office of Student Affairs :: Student Health Insurance
The student plan covers up to $5000 yearly in prescription medication, for example.
Thanks for the link.
2 questions still remain:
- Does Sandra Fluke need/want additional coverage for prescription contraception or does she want some kind of allotment for over-the-counter products.
- Is this the same coverage that the Georgetown employees have?
I haven't listened to Rush Limbaugh in years. He always struck me a shill for the ecomomic agenda of the very rich families and corporations who own America' radio networks.. rather than a true conservative.
But he's got a point here. Even if his prime concern is 'socialized' medicine.. rather than the infringement of moral priviledge of the Catholic Church, and the separation of the Church and State where the real arrogance of the Obama administration lies.
As far as Sandra Fluke is concerned.. i've seen parts of interviews she's been garnering all over the media.. and she strikes me as a very conventional feminist ideologue.. not particulary bright, certainly not profound or original... in fact, a bit of a dingbat. But that's just my personal opinion.
But he's got a point here. Even if his prime concern is 'socialized' medicine.. rather than the infringement of moral priviledge of the Catholic Church, and the separation of the Church and State where the real arrogance of the Obama administration lies.
As far as Sandra Fluke is concerned.. i've seen parts of interviews she's been garnering all over the media.. and she strikes me as a very conventional feminist ideologue.. not particulary bright, certainly not profound or original... in fact, a bit of a dingbat. But that's just my personal opinion.
I suggested that the two policies could be the same, though employees probably have more choice than students when it comes to their plan. However, that doesn't mean that she was looking for students to be covered by the employee plan...her testimony was about the prescription in the Patient Protection and Affordable health Care Act that requires students and employees of all organizations with the exception of Churches to have contraception coverage available in the insurance plan...now this is context that is either being ignored or buried with the kind of rhetoric that Limbaugh launched into Fluke with.
The reason for this mandate in the legislation is simple, it relates to "women's health and well-being" in no less a direct fashion than other medications prescribed and that are covered. Female contraception is prescribed for many reasons, besides preventing pregnancies. They are prescribed for Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, endometriosis, to correct homonal imbalances that can prevent women from getting periods, or that result in painful periods. They are even prescribed to anemic women owing to less blood loss during the period with this medication. Other health benefits include a lowered lifetime risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers, as well as a lowered risk of developing ovarian cysts.
She actually covered some of this in her testimony, and noted that Georgetown's student plan does allow for the prescription of these medications when they are medically necessary, but she also noted that some of the planned bills and amendments related to this topic, there is no medical exception.
You can read all of her testimony here:
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf
I'll read through the transcript as time permits.
That said, I still do not see the issue (as it pertains to Fluke standing before a Senate Committee).
Understanding that students have a $5000 benefit on prescriptions that will include birth control pills as coverage for women's health (as per your explanation) as well as contraception, then what is Fluke's beef?
Brings me back to how Fluke is defining 'contraception'... Is the suggestion that over the counter solutions are covered as well?
Again, I'll have to read through the link you provided, but at this point, what I see is Fluke wanting to be treated as an employee when in fact she isn't.
That said, I still do not see the issue (as it pertains to Fluke standing before a Senate Committee).
Understanding that students have a $5000 benefit on prescriptions that will include birth control pills as coverage for women's health (as per your explanation) as well as contraception, then what is Fluke's beef?
Brings me back to how Fluke is defining 'contraception'... Is the suggestion that over the counter solutions are covered as well?
Again, I'll have to read through the link you provided, but at this point, what I see is Fluke wanting to be treated as an employee when in fact she isn't.
Well, if you're going to comment about her and her testimony, maybe you should start with what she said, rather than what other people are selectively quoting...
It doesn't include contraceptive uses, that's part of her beef. The other reason she is there is to comment on pending legislation that would remove medical conditions like those I listed as exceptions. then there would be no birth control pill coverage whatsoever.
Well then they're not doing them right.
Lol, I'm assuming you meant tubal ligation?
Actually the smart gals buy it themselves. BYOB though.
I don't much care whether birth control pills are covered or not. Condoms aren't, and I do seem to recall many years back that my prescription drug benefits did not cover birth control. So I bought them myself. Well worth the money spent if you ask me. If someone wants to argue otherwise, let them. Rush however, being Rush, was totally crass in his comments. Irrespective if she has a right to argue the issue legitimately or not. Just my opinion.
This could cover any student not necessarly herself. However, it would be unlikely she would be as passionate about an issue unless she was affected herself.
Fair enough, I've since read through her testimony.
That said, I see that Ms Flukes is very careful in selectively incorporating the 2 separate issues into one that suits her agenda. As per her recognition that medically necessary prescriptions, that may overlap as a contraceptive, are covered; she derides the system as being unfair because some of the claims are denied.
As far as I'm concerned, that is an issue with the insurance provider and not the educational institution. If it is medically necessary, then the coverage should stand, however, the onus will be on the user to provide some form of proof that it is medically necessary as defined by the parameters set out by the insurer in the contract
Here's an interesting quote from the transcript:
"In the media lately, conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success."
So let me ask; what did Flukes expect when she knowingly enrolled in a Catholic school?
Is this like me walking into a vegan restaurant and demanding a steak and claiming that it is some kind of right that I should have?
That's a life-style choice that Flukes makes to suit her own needs. It is not the responsibility of an insurance company, school or federal government to coddle her along and help her get laid.
This is an issue with the insurer and has nothing to do with Georgetown University... Where she gets the belief that she should be treated the same as a school employee is nothing but an opportunistic play to get someone else top pay for her life style.
She wouldn't deny she has an agenda, everybody does. If she didn't have an agenda, she wouldn't be testifying on behalf of her like-minded students.
The insurance provider is picked by the school. The policy isn't negotiated by the students.
She chose to let her educational goals over-ride her healthcare.
No, not really. In a vegan restaurant you pay for your food, if they don't offer what you want you don't have to eat it, and you don't pay. She paid to go to a school that requires her to have insurance, so she can legitimately as a paying customer attempt tp get what she needs, if she's going to be paying anyways.
It's healthcare, no matter what euphemism you want to dress it up as.
Again, the university chooses the plan.
She pays for her insurance...is it in your agenda to misrepresent?
Fluke came to Georgetown University interested in contraceptive coverage: She researched the Jesuit college’s health plans for students before enrolling, and found that birth control was not included. “I decided I was absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care,” says Fluke, who has spent the past three years lobbying the administration to change its policy on the issue. The issue got the university president’s office last spring, where Georgetown declined to change its policy.
A professional shyte disturber is all this plant is.
Meet Sandra Fluke: The woman you didn’t hear at Congress’ contraceptives hearing - The Washington Post
Flukes' agenda is disingenuous and dishonest... Leveraging women with legitimate medical needs to advance her own life style desires is a poor excuse.
There's nothing stopping Flukes, her organization and Students Union in negotiating the policy... Mind you, the learning curve is very steep and the consequences are potentially very severe and expensive.
That said, fill yer boots
The comment is a little dramatic, don't ya think?
Oh well, I suppose that is a decision that she made then, isn't it?
Where was Flukes' duty to peruse the 'bill of fare' on the insurance issue. Nothing was hidden from her prior to choosing Georgetown as her school.
Using that logic, I suppose that someone choosing lower quality, discount smokes qualifies as healthcare concern and therefore should get a healthcare subsidy to smoke better quality tobacco with fewer fillers as it is healthier?
In the end, it is a lifestyle issue. If Flukes doesn't get laid, she won't die (despite what her boyfriends might tell her).
She knew what the plan was prior to paying her tuition/fees.
Regardless, any denial of insurance coverage still lies directly with the provider. There is no way around this.
I'm not representing here.... Flukes specifically incorporated the employees of the University as a reference point.
Maybe ole Bill can help out here:
A Statement from Rush
March 03, 2012 For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.
March 03, 2012 For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.
Rush has the mental capacity of a Nat for Gods sake. What does it say about college life
and the amount spent of contraception. Has anyone told him we are living in the twenty
first century? We are critical of the Islamic World for making the same kinds of statements
and attitudes. The fact is Rush lost his credibility when he got involved with drugs and
was less than forthcoming. I have no respect for him what so ever. He is a rude, crude
and an insult even to conservatism. Even Don Cherry would not stoop as low as this guy.
and the amount spent of contraception. Has anyone told him we are living in the twenty
first century? We are critical of the Islamic World for making the same kinds of statements
and attitudes. The fact is Rush lost his credibility when he got involved with drugs and
was less than forthcoming. I have no respect for him what so ever. He is a rude, crude
and an insult even to conservatism. Even Don Cherry would not stoop as low as this guy.
That's unfair to Nats and Don's on Twitter now. Could be a whole new world of Cherry.
That's unfair to Nats and Don's on Twitter now. Could be a whole new world of Cherry.
Limbaugh is playing this perfectly... Think about the basic strategy that you see in garbage like pro wrestling - you have the heel and the hero. Limbaugh is playing the role of heel to a tee and it will translate through in the form of higher ratings for his show and more cashola in his jeans.
Call the guy whatever you like, but he's no fool. This little exercise was choreographed and executed all according to plan.