Robins Commentary --
a few weeks back, I reactivated my Sirius satellite radio subscription so that I have some access to what's going on in the world other than being stuck with some of the lame programming like Redeye Radio which has taken over the airwaves after Cumulus broadcasting bought out a bunch of radio stations including one of my favorite talkshow radio stations KGO which speaking of, I have been fortunate to have one of their employees on my radio program to talk about that.
But I wanted to comment briefly on this affordable health care act that Obama is trying to push through and the recent testimony by the Georgetown law student and activist Sandra Fluke who is claiming that she is spending at least $3000 during their time in college in contraceptives alone.
Under the new law, contraceptives will be available through your insurance company for no co-pay in other words, they will be available basically free
Of course nothing is free but that's not the point here.
Why are they treating this like it is a rare commodity?
And more importantly... why are they mandating insurance companies to provide it to you at no cost?
Do people really not have access to contraceptives...
If you really want to take it to the extreme... why not force insurance companies to provide free shirts and shoes to everybody as they are both a requirement in our society (no shirt, no shoes, no service) and with the extraordinary large amount of homeless people maybe we should make that commodity available beyond the organizations that provide them voluntarily for free.
The point is, with everything going on in the world between rising gas prices, massive unemployment that this is where one of our priorities are?
I don't get it.
Wait a minute... come to think of it... maybe I do get it!
We need contraceptives mandate because we're getting screwed! (Sorry, couldn't resist the opportunity for a pun)
And to top that off the fury against Rush Limbaugh although his words were rooted in kind, by referring to Ms. fluke as a slut and a prostitute which even he apologize for, sofar seven advertisers have pulled their advertising from his program.
Now I'm proud to say that I am a Rush Limbaugh listener although of course I do not agree 100% with him all the time however, he is entertaining and does offer food for thought and so I was not disappointed when I read the comment on the Rush Limbaugh homepage regarding these advertisers who decided to leave the fold.
"Don't Worry, Folks: Advertisers Who Don't Want Your Business Will Be Replaced."
"... It's all for the audience, because if you're not there, all the rest of this is academic. The show is about you. It's not about the advertisers..."
There has been people for a long time that have been trying to shut down the Rush Limbaugh program and so they're looking for any excuse to do it, and they think that this is the golden egg that will accomplish that.
But what's the real story behind all of this?
I guess time will tell.
Update from today's program.
We had a caller today on the program who is a long-haul truck driver informing us that she just got insurance through her company and that the medical part of the insurance was placed on hold because of the Obama's affordable health care act.
So I wonder how many other companies are following suit more than likely because of the unknown costs that they will be forced to bear as a result of this new law.
If you or you know somebody who has similar stories, please feel free to share them.
7 comments:
But I wanted to comment briefly on this affordable health care act that Obama is trying to push through
The affordable health care act became law almost two years ago.
and the recent testimony by the Georgetown law student and activist Sandra Fluke who is claiming that she is spending at least $3000 during their time in college in contraceptives alone.
That's not what she said. Did you listen to her testimony before your wrote this?
Under the new law, contraceptives will be available through your insurance company for no co-pay in other words, they will be available basically free.
Of course nothing is free but that's not the point here.
Why are they treating this like it is a rare commodity?
...
I don't get it.
You're right. It's not a rare commodity and it shouldn't be a big deal. The only reason that this has gotten so much attention recently is that the right wing sees it as an opportunity to trash talk Obama and the media amplifies their trash talk. In the past some of the same politicians who are currently decrying the mandate have supported similar policies.
And to top that off the fury against Rush Limbaugh although his words were rooted in kind, by referring to Ms. fluke as a slut and a prostitute which even he apologize for, sofar seven advertisers have pulled their advertising from his program.
He specifically apologized for those two words while pointedly not apologizing for anything else he said about her. I'm sure you've heard the Limbaugh monologue. If the monologue had been directed against Robin, instead of Sandra, would you consider Rush's apology to be adequate?
If the monologue had been directed against Robin, instead of Sandra, would you consider Rush's apology to be adequate?
actually yes I would especially the way that Rush Limbaugh worded it. But then again, I seriously doubt that given the opportunity that I would be whining before Nancy Pelosi and the media about contraceptives.
As more of the story unfolds, I think there is more going on behind the scenes which will come out in the wash.
"...and the recent testimony by the Georgetown law student and activist Sandra Fluke who is claiming that she is spending at least $3000 during their time in college in contraceptives alone."
That's not what she said. Did you listen to her testimony before your wrote this?
I wrote that a couple weeks ago and was hoping you would answer. I'm still interested in knowing if you actually listened to her testimony and wrote what you did or if you went by what others were saying she said.
At the time I wrote this, I did an internet search for Fluke's testimony. I got about the same number of mis-representations of what she said as accurate representations of what she said.
These days it's common practice when you don't like what someone says to say they said something else and then respond to what you claim they said. It's dishonest and misleading.
If you care about being accurate you should correct your post.
no, I'm standing by my post on this one and yes, I did listen to both the testimony and read the transcripts.
The point of my "commentary" on this one was the whole issue in itself and how ridiculous that it's getting that were talking about contraceptives at this level with everything else that's going on in the world.
Flutes testimony could be read in either direction and unless I missed it, (which is very possible) didn't exactly say that she wanted contraceptives for sex rather than just for medical reasons only.
In my opinion, "the media" and Rush Limbaugh spun this as Flute was a sex whore and "couldn't get enough".
In either case..., I do try to be as accurate as possible which is why I ALWAYS link to the source or original article that I'm talking about in order to get my readers opinions pro or con , and I do appreciate "inaccuracies" being pointed out and more so appreciate readers opinions about the topic which of course is the whole point of having a blog.
Fluke didn't say that she wanted contraceptives at all. What she said was:
“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy."
She didn't even say that she was using contraceptives. The only thing she says about herself there is that she's on a public interest scholarship.
I agree that the amount of time spent talking about the issue itself is a waste. For that we can blame the media but really we have only ourselves to blame - if we switched off Rush and others like him when they waste our time like this, they would eventually find something more relevant to talk about.
Anon 10:16 you're 100% correct. It was the media that spun it about being about sex.
But your post still incorrectly quotes Fluke as saying she is spending $3000 on contraceptives:
"...recent testimony by the Georgetown law student and activist Sandra Fluke who is claiming that she is spending at least $3000 during their time in college in contraceptives alone."
Again, that's not what she said.
If you want to be accurate you could change it to something like:
"...recent testimony by the Georgetown law student and activist Sandra Fluke who is claiming that contraception, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school."
Post a Comment