Sandra Fluke Testimony

[Abrupt]

Did anyone watch her testimony before congress?  You can check it out on youtube if you haven't.  This had me shaking my head and displaying a baffled look.  I mean is this really what we have come to?  Begging for condoms (I use that word because it puts it in plainer light than to say begging for contraceptives).  Old perverts already begged for *bleep* and got it, and I can only imagine sex dolls and sex toys and free passes to The Bunny Ranch will be next.  People cannot say they want to keep the Government out of their bedrooms and then go and beg them to participate.  I can only guess the intention of her testimony was to make people feel guilty but all I feel is outrage and shame for American society.

There is no point that could be made to sway me to see her point of view -- I am set in this matter, but I am curious as to what others think about it. 

[falcon9]

Did anyone watch her testimony before congress?  You can check it out on youtube if you haven't. 

I haven't seen that yet but, will check it out later.

This had me shaking my head and displaying a baffled look.  I mean is this really what we have come to?  Begging for condoms (I use that word because it puts it in plainer light than to say begging for contraceptives).  Old perverts already begged for *bleep* and got it, and I can only imagine sex dolls and sex toys and free passes to The Bunny Ranch will be next.  People cannot say they want to keep the Government out of their bedrooms and then go and beg them to participate.  I can only guess the intention of her testimony was to make people feel guilty but all I feel is outrage and shame for American society.

There is no point that could be made to sway me to see her point of view -- I am set in this matter, but I am curious as to what others think about it. 

I'm wondering what effect such testimony had.

[Falconer02]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlRC0nsjtKQ

Here's a link. I'm too tired to discuss this this heavily, but just remember that us taxpayers are not being asked to pay anything. She wants her insurance --something she pays for-- to cover contraceptives (something that can heavily effect a woman's health and, according to her, can add up to thousands of dollars for students if not covered by their insurers). And when you listen at 4:05 or 5:12, I can understand her concern and why she's fighting. Also when you hear stories like where congress held a committee on women's reproductive rights w/o inviting any women, Fluke just seems like a smaller peice to a larger controversy.

[Abrupt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlRC0nsjtKQ

Here's a link. I'm too tired to discuss this this heavily, but just remember that us taxpayers are not being asked to pay anything. She wants her insurance --something she pays for-- to cover contraceptives (something that can heavily effect a woman's health and, according to her, can add up to thousands of dollars for students if not covered by their insurers). And when you listen at 4:05 or 5:12, I can understand her concern and why she's fighting. Also when you hear stories like where congress held a committee on women's reproductive rights w/o inviting any women, Fluke just seems like a smaller peice to a larger controversy.

Taxpayers are being asked to pay for this, or do you not remember the new health care act.  Also, the way insurance works and to be capable of sustaining the costs for treatment under insurance will have to be more than without (anyone who tells you different is likely trying to sell you something -- like insurance).  The use of her rhetoric of unusual situations at the points you indicated should not make her statement more viable, but instead should make it more dubious.  People don't have to have sex.  They have the right to choose not to.  Here we have a woman who proudly and publicly displays her apparent excessive promiscuity before one of the highest offices in America.  She is demanding that we the taxpayers (don't forget that we have to pay our insurance costs and the costs of people who don't have insurance too -- which by liberal descriptions is a very large portion of America) cover the cost of her sexual activities (which must be rather frequent to equal 1000 dollars per year).  She still seems to me to be nothing more than a rather loose woman with no sense of  decency that is begging for contraceptives from me while trying to make me feel guilty about her promiscuity.  I will make a deal with her though, if she is willing to pay for the cost of hookers for me I will pay for condoms for her because I have this personality condition that makes me an *bleep* and rude son of a *bleep* at times that many women find less than charming...

[rghvac69]

If she's having trouble buying her contraceptives, then join FC and make some extra money. There, problem solved.

[GramPolly3]

Though this has turned into a brewhahah by the likes of politicians and Limbaugh's diatribe the bottom line is should women's contraceptives be any less available through insurance than *bleep*? After all with all the old farts out there on *bleep* women need contraceptives.

[Abrupt]

Though this has turned into a brewhahah by the likes of politicians and Limbaugh's diatribe the bottom line is should women's contraceptives be any less available through insurance than *bleep*? After all with all the old farts out there on *bleep* women need contraceptives.

Tell me again why I should be forced to work in the fields to subsidize her sex life or bail out his *bleep*?

[Falconer02]

Taxpayers are being asked to pay for this, or do you not remember the new health care act.

Ah yes. Like I said earlier, I was too tired and therefore didn't want to discuss far into it due to sleep deprivation.

People don't have to have sex.  They have the right to choose not to.

It's harder than it seems (Wait...did I just make a pun? HIYOOOO!). Though people should be responsible, the vast amount of kids in the US foster care system and families on welfare is ridiculous. I only add that aspect to weigh in on contraception (for sexual practices) vs. no contraception. I'm not on either side of the sexuality issue at the moment, though she tends to avoid that area in her speech and concentrate on the health issues.

Here we have a woman who proudly and publicly displays her apparent excessive promiscuity before one of the highest offices in America.

She still seems to me to be nothing more than a rather loose woman with no sense of  decency that is begging for contraceptives from me while trying to make me feel guilty about her promiscuity.

The problem with this argument is that women use birth control for all kinds of health issues, including cystic acne (like you stated that it's unusual, it's really not. It's very very common) and excessive bleeding. Contraception is a hormone stabilizer. Just imagine if your testicles swelled up to the size of tennis *bleep*, causing a ridiculous amount of agonizing pain, you're pissing blood, and then your insurance provider said they wouldn't cover the cost of medication because the medication that could help is labelled as a contraceptive. That was the majority of her argument in her whole speech. These problems should be covered by health insurance for those reasons. I can easily see the point of all of the flak with the sexual activity issues, but not for the health issues.

I will make a deal with her though, if she is willing to pay for the cost of hookers for me I will pay for condoms for her because I have this personality condition that makes me an *bleep* and rude son of a *bleep* at times that many women find less than charmi

Arrrrharharhar!

[jaymz462]

She still seems to me to be nothing more than a rather loose woman with no sense of  decency that is begging for contraceptives from me while trying to make me feel guilty about her promiscuity. 

Where exactly does she say anything at all about her sex life?  Why don't you just call her a *bleep* and a prostitute like the Oxycontin addict (with a fondness for underage Dominican prostitutes) did?

Here's a transcript of her testimony.  http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf

[Abrupt]

She still seems to me to be nothing more than a rather loose woman with no sense of  decency that is begging for contraceptives from me while trying to make me feel guilty about her promiscuity. 

Where exactly does she say anything at all about her sex life?  Why don't you just call her a *bleep* and a prostitute like the Oxycontin addict (with a fondness for underage Dominican prostitutes) did?

Here's a transcript of her testimony.  http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf

You know, in all honesty, if I were present during her speech I would have probably yelled out a muffled (under a cough) '*bleep*' remark.  I would have done this more for humor effect as certain gems cannot be passed on.  I don't really have anything against sluts though and rather enjoy their company.  I didn't call her a *bleep* and I don't have to either as she said enough in her speech to let people decide if she is or isn't.  I can say, though, when a total stranger begs me for money because of the costs she suffers for her sexual activity that I find my choices of describing her rather limited.

[Abrupt]

Ah yes. Like I said earlier, I was too tired and therefore didn't want to discuss far into it due to sleep deprivation.

I entirely understand and find myself in similar situations far too often of late.

It's harder than it seems (Wait...did I just make a pun? HIYOOOO!). Though people should be responsible, the vast amount of kids in the US foster care system and families on welfare is ridiculous. I only add that aspect to weigh in on contraception (for sexual practices) vs. no contraception. I'm not on either side of the sexuality issue at the moment, though she tends to avoid that area in her speech and concentrate on the health issues.

I entirely agree about people needing to be more responsible.  I think most of the modern problems in the US are due to lack of responsibility.  That is the single biggest issue facing us in every area of our lives and the economy.  Honestly I think her speech was written for her by democratic representatives (I have no proof of this except for traditional politics and the theater that both sides put on so well (or not) at times).  If you compare her speech to the subject matter and what it was put in challenge of and how it was presented it becomes almost entirely obvious.  A brilliant tactic, but it would not work on those paying attention. 

The problem with this argument is that women use birth control for all kinds of health issues, including cystic acne (like you stated that it's unusual, it's really not. It's very very common) and excessive bleeding. Contraception is a hormone stabilizer. Just imagine if your testicles swelled up to the size of tennis *bleep*, causing a ridiculous amount of agonizing pain, you're pissing blood, and then your insurance provider said they wouldn't cover the cost of medication because the medication that could help is labelled as a contraceptive. That was the majority of her argument in her whole speech. These problems should be covered by health insurance for those reasons. I can easily see the point of all of the flak with the sexual activity issues, but not for the health issues.

There are alternate treatments for these conditions that are not only handled by birth control.  If we think about the original argument (an incursion on religious belief) we can see why the speech was crafted in this manner and why the bulk of its subject was switched from the main point of contraceptives and religious beliefs to an alternate addition that some of them offer.  This was a very clever approach but it was so clever that it makes it blatantly obvious.  It is easily countered by remembering what the subject was and why the show was presented to us.  They couldn't argue these other issues by themselves as that would be entirely useless so they had to make it seem as if they were exclusively dependent upon contraceptives.  This is probably the main reason I have a problem with this woman (and anyone that gleefully lets their cause or voice be hijacked by another for another purpose).

Arrrrharharhar!

I was kidding on this bit but glad it was at least enough to warrant a laugh (whether at or for or even just).

[jaymz462]

She still seems to me to be nothing more than a rather loose woman with no sense of  decency that is begging for contraceptives from me while trying to make me feel guilty about her promiscuity. 

Where exactly does she say anything at all about her sex life?  Why don't you just call her a *bleep* and a prostitute like the Oxycontin addict (with a fondness for underage Dominican prostitutes) did?

Here's a transcript of her testimony.  http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf

You know, in all honesty, if I were present during her speech I would have probably yelled out a muffled (under a cough) '*bleep*' remark.  I would have done this more for humor effect as certain gems cannot be passed on.  I don't really have anything against sluts though and rather enjoy their company.  I didn't call her a *bleep* and I don't have to either as she said enough in her speech to let people decide if she is or isn't.  I can say, though, when a total stranger begs me for money because of the costs she suffers for her sexual activity that I find my choices of describing her rather limited.

Again, where does she say anything about her sex life?  I linked to the transcript, surely you can just copy and paste it here?

[jaymz462]

Oh, and I'm also confused how your taxes are paying for a private insurance plan.  Care to elaborate?

[Abrupt]

Again, where does she say anything about her sex life?  I linked to the transcript, surely you can just copy and paste it here?

When she mentions the cost of contraceptives.  One thousand dollars a year for contraceptives sounds more like what I would imagine from a *bleep* star than a college student.

Oh, and I'm also confused how your taxes are paying for a private insurance plan.  Care to elaborate?

There are a few ways to answer this.  First what is the reason for the testimony?  Is it for private insurance plans?  No it isn't.  Regardless of what is mentioned it is a challenge to the freedom of religion issue with the health care act.  Understanding that we can see that it is false for anyone to assume this has anything to do with private insurance plans and that is simply a traditional tactic used in politics to fool those simple minded who are not paying attention.

Secondly, many private plans have already gone up in cost due to the launch of the health care bill to offset the additional costs that is bringing to the overall coverage.  I don't know the average that they have gone up but I have heard from 20 percent to 30 percent from people I know that have private insurance.  Adding an additional $1000 a year in coverage for all women (forget that 'free' word you hear as it isn't free and never could be free (even though it is already provided free of cost to the user in approximately 70% of US cities/counties and is already paid for via taxes at least one time by us taxpayers)) will result in the cost of insurance being increased by at least enough to cover this cost and proportioned out to those paying the amount with likely a little more in cost to cover the handling of it all.  The health care costs will increase also because this will be forced upon them in just the same manor (you cannot force it legally in one area to a private industry and not apply it to the public side of it in this case).

Forget the smoke and mirrors of the presentation.  This was simply a very well played democratic execution of the classic "change the subject".  Democrats are extremely skilled at this and took a losing issue and turned it into a winning issue in public opinion -- if they can keep people focused on the direct point and not the truth of what the point is about.

[falcon9]

One thousand dollars a year for contraceptives sounds more like what I would imagine from a *bleep* star than a college student.

Maybe it's been awhile since college, (or longer if one hasn't attended), but that estimate may be a low average for some college students.  Some say that it's related to being away from home for the first time and pushing the limits of exploration.  Others say, "promiscious".