I'm on BC so I can continue to afford food for the babies I already had via heterosexual monogamous married sex. Woo, so slutty!
[edit: I also realized that by Rush Limbaugh's logic, I would need to have a new IUD inserted every time I had sex. Which would be an incredibly strong argument in favor of abstinence.]
I'm just wondering what polling numbers and marketing information the Republican candidates are using which is telling them that this is a winning plank in their platform.
Did they forget that women have the vote?
They're not winning this. They're actually kind of slinking away. They'd have their tails between their legs, but with all the aspirin they're holding, they can't fit it.
I actually kind of punted and said, "look, we all have to pay for shit we find morally objectionable. If I have to pay for you to get your war on, you have to pay for me to get my groove on."
Which, not helpful, but GODDAMN I AM CLEVER.
I actually kind of punted and said, "look, we all have to pay for shit we find morally objectionable. If I have to pay for you to get your war on, you have to pay for me to get my groove on."
Jon Stewart said almost exactly the same thing Monday night.
Did they forget that women have the vote?
But there are women (I assume largely if not entirely right-wing) who do oppose BC, or who have the convenient attitude of "It's okay for ME, because I'm married, but not for unmarried sluts." And they vote.
I mean, I assume that some of the enormous amount of votes Santorum got yesterday came from women.
It's sort of like medicare, though Steph. I think that those who think, "It's okay for ME" still want it covered by their insurance. The ones who don't think it's ever ok are likely a very small minority.
Anyway, this is my oasis and I shall stop in here to agree with you all.
I think that those who think, "It's okay for ME" still want it covered by their insurance.
Yeah, but -- covered for *them,* not for sluts. And I *totally* agree that that's a logically untenable position, but things like this don't seem to embrace the logic.
Sticking my head in the Natter door:
Please continue with the sanity and intelligence. A guy in the next section (who I normally like perfectly fine) just went on a rant about how Rush's 1st Amendment Rights are under attack. I can't engage him because his ridiculous co-worker just attacked me for wanting correct apostrophes in the doc he submitted. Please send chocolate (and maybe tranquilizers).