ShePAC Ad Destroys Obama with Maher Hypocrisy - powerful - Outstanding video

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 2:31 AM GMT
    http://news.investors.com/article/603789/201203090822/obama-bill-maher-money-slut-rush-limbaugh.htm
    Obama's PAC says, You're kidding, right?
    ...Carney said that the president finds language denigrating women to be without any doubt "inappropriate." Carney added that Obama, who gained fame as a state legislator for decisively voting "Present" scores of times, had come down this time firmly on the side of staying the hell out of this money controversy. Especially, it seems, since it involves such a good-looking chunk of change.
    ------------------------------------

    http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-maher/2012/03/09/shepac-ad-destroys-obamas-pig-maher-hypocrisy

    ShePAC Ad Destroys Obama's Pig Maher Hypocrisy
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 2:49 AM GMT
    Wow. That's really weak.

    Bill Maher is a comedian and those women are all public figures. And Democrats have criticized him for things he's said.

    Rush Limbaugh is a pundit that makes the Republicans shit their pants when he's mad at them and he attacked - without any discernible humor a private citizen.

    So good luck with this silly ad that will sway no one because they don't care what Bill Maher says because he's a comedian not the titular head of the Democratic Party.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 2:58 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidWow. That's really weak.

    Bill Maher is a comedian and those women are all public figures. And Democrats have criticized him for things he's said.

    Rush Limbaugh is a pundit that makes the Republicans shit their pants when he's mad at them and he attacked - without any discernible humor a private citizen.

    So good luck with this silly ad that will sway no one because they don't care what Bill Maher says because he's a comedian not the titular head of the Democratic Party.

    What a totally fucked up comment. Did you enjoy Maher's comedy? How bout the "discernible humor"? Was that comedy, too? You libs can annoint titular heads all you want. Does that give you a thrill up your leg also?

    We know Obama needs the money because the fund raising woes. Times are tough for Billy "Motor Mouth" Burton. But if he keeps the money, and I hope he does, it will cost him more than a million dollars.

    Franklin Graham on Obama and religion, Obama’s fundraising woes and more [AM Briefing]
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/franklin-graham-on-obama-and-religion-obamas-fundraising-woes-and-more-am-briefing/2012/02/22/gIQAPqxBTR_blog.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 3:49 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidWow. That's really weak.

    Bill Maher is a comedian and those women are all public figures. And Democrats have criticized him for things he's said.

    Rush Limbaugh is a pundit that makes the Republicans shit their pants when he's mad at them and he attacked - without any discernible humor a private citizen.

    So good luck with this silly ad that will sway no one because they don't care what Bill Maher says because he's a comedian not the titular head of the Democratic Party.

    What a totally fucked up comment. Did you enjoy Maher's comedy? How bout the "discernible humor"? Was that comedy, too? You libs can annoint titular heads all you want. Does that give you a thrill up your leg also?

    We know Obama needs the money because the fund raising woes. Times are tough for Billy "Motor Mouth" Burton. But if he keeps the money, and I hope he does, it will cost him more than a million dollars.

    Franklin Graham on Obama and religion, Obama’s fundraising woes and more [AM Briefing]
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/franklin-graham-on-obama-and-religion-obamas-fundraising-woes-and-more-am-briefing/2012/02/22/gIQAPqxBTR_blog.html


    Yes. Bill Maher is hilarious and nonpartisan in his contempt for stupidity on both sides of the aisle. He's actually been a vocal critic of Obama on a range of issues and took liberals to ask for not accepting Limbaugh's BS apology.

    You're dissembling so pathetically because you know - deep down - that Romney hasn't got a chance in hell of beating Obama. And that he doesn't deserved to. He's run one of the worst primary campaigns in the history of elections and his contempt for ordinary Americans is painfully obvious.

    And, Franklin Graham is a despicable human being who pretends to be a man of faith but is actually a grifter taking money from people while pretending to save their souls. He wouldn't know Christianity if Jesus himself visited him. Of course, he's also rabidly antigay.

    But because a moderate Democrat won the White House three years ago, you're going through paroxysms of hysteria and hatred that genuinely make me worry for your sanity.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 3:59 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidYes. Bill Maher is hilarious and nonpartisan in his contempt for stupidity on both sides of the aisle. He's actually been a vocal critic of Obama on a range of issues and took liberals to ask for not accepting Limbaugh's BS apology.

    You're dissembling so pathetically because you know - deep down - that Romney hasn't got a chance in hell of beating Obama. And that he doesn't deserved to. He's run one of the worst primary campaigns in the history of elections and his contempt for ordinary Americans is painfully obvious.

    I know you are not alone in finding Maher hilarious. There was quite a bit of laughter at his vile comments, which say a lot for his followers, including yourself.

    I think Romney has an excellent chance of defeating Obama. There are external events we cannot predict that will have an impact, such as in the middle-east. Gas prices will be toxic for him, given his actions and Chu's comments about getting the price to equal that in Europe. I'm quite confident the campaign against him will be quite effective. Rove's comments are quite valid. Can't guarantee anything, but I'm quite certain he will go down as much worse that a fellow single-termer, Jimmy Carter.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Mar 10, 2012 4:02 AM GMT
    *Yawn*

    Don't you have something better to do on a Friday evening John?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 4:31 AM GMT
    John....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 4:32 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 saidJohn....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?
    icon_wink.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Mar 10, 2012 4:48 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 saidJohn....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?


    There is a general hypocrisy and negative characterization of conservative women from Laura Ingram, to Palin. Bachman.

    Then there is Palin's daughter.


    I think the subtle point is that Obama would be given a pass on Mahr if his own whitehouse was not fanning the fire of the Rush/Fluk fiasco. ( Evident by the quick high powered representation and suspicious media tour she is on)

    My experience is that liberals in general shoot from the hip on just about any moral topic and the quick moral tabulation happens before they even open there mouth.
    So yes its ok to call a conservative they despise a C*nt , the explanation of why that is ok always get created later.

    It even crossed over to Hilary Clinton for a time in 2008. Remember
    MSNBC David Shusters "pimping out Cheslea Clinton" comment? probably not. Because nothing happened to him why? because MSNBC was in the Obama camp.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:01 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    conscienti1984 saidJohn....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?


    There is a general hypocrisy and negative characterization of conservative women from Laura Ingram, to Palin. Bachman.

    Then there is Palin's daughter.


    I think the subtle point is that Obama would be given a pass on Mahr if his own whitehouse was not fanning the fire of the Rush/Fluk fiasco. ( Evident by the quick high powered representation and suspicious media tour she is on)

    My experience is that liberals in general shoot from the hip on just about any moral topic and the quick moral tabulation happens before they even open there mouth.
    So yes its ok to call a conservative they despise a C*nt , the explanation of why that is ok always get created later.

    It even crossed over to Hilary Clinton for a time in 2008. Remember
    MSNBC David Shusters "pimping out Cheslea Clinton" comment? probably not. Because nothing happened to him why? because MSNBC was in the Obama camp.




    Do you lie or are you just ignorant?

    Shuster was suspended from MSNBC after his remark about Chelsea (by then a grown adult) following outrage by - you guessed it! - lilberals who watched the network and found it offensive because Chelsea Clinton was a private citizen.

    What sanctions did Rush face when he called Chelsea Clinton the "White House Dog' for 8 solid years? What outrage came from Republicans? None. Zip. Zero. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:03 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 saidI think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?

    First of all, I am not desperate, but very concerned, concerned about the country. As far as hating Obama, that is not the case. My opinion of him is that he is an extremely dishonest person and a malignancy on the country. I am hopeful for the country that he is not reelected. I will bet that many Democrats will come forward after that and distance themselves from him.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Mar 10, 2012 5:14 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    conscienti1984 saidJohn....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?


    There is a general hypocrisy and negative characterization of conservative women from Laura Ingram, to Palin. Bachman.

    Then there is Palin's daughter.


    I think the subtle point is that Obama would be given a pass on Mahr if his own whitehouse was not fanning the fire of the Rush/Fluk fiasco. ( Evident by the quick high powered representation and suspicious media tour she is on)

    My experience is that liberals in general shoot from the hip on just about any moral topic and the quick moral tabulation happens before they even open there mouth.
    So yes its ok to call a conservative they despise a C*nt , the explanation of why that is ok always get created later.

    It even crossed over to Hilary Clinton for a time in 2008. Remember
    MSNBC David Shusters "pimping out Cheslea Clinton" comment? probably not. Because nothing happened to him why? because MSNBC was in the Obama camp.




    Do you lie or are you just ignorant?

    Shuster was suspended from MSNBC after his remark about Chelsea (by then a grown adult) following outrage by - you guessed it! - lilberals who watched the network and found it offensive because Chelsea Clinton was a private citizen.

    What sanctions did Rush face when he called Chelsea Clinton the "White House Dog' for 8 solid years? What outrage came from Republicans? None. Zip. Zero. icon_rolleyes.gif


    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4274500&page=2#.T1rhafV-7_I

    That article downplayed Shuster's comments and the reporter sought a source to say that "pimp" was not as bad as it used to be.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:17 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    conscienti1984 saidJohn....

    I think you have shown your true colors time and time again: You hate Obama, and there is nothing that he could do to change your opinion of him. You believe he is a radical anti-business socialist who wants to fundamentally change America, which in your eyes is a capitalist nation (we're not by the way).

    You also are beginning to look desperate and highly partisan. Are you also upset over Brietbart’s latest non-controversial Obama video?


    There is a general hypocrisy and negative characterization of conservative women from Laura Ingram, to Palin. Bachman.

    Then there is Palin's daughter.


    I think the subtle point is that Obama would be given a pass on Mahr if his own whitehouse was not fanning the fire of the Rush/Fluk fiasco. ( Evident by the quick high powered representation and suspicious media tour she is on)

    My experience is that liberals in general shoot from the hip on just about any moral topic and the quick moral tabulation happens before they even open there mouth.
    So yes its ok to call a conservative they despise a C*nt , the explanation of why that is ok always get created later.

    It even crossed over to Hilary Clinton for a time in 2008. Remember
    MSNBC David Shusters "pimping out Cheslea Clinton" comment? probably not. Because nothing happened to him why? because MSNBC was in the Obama camp.




    Do you lie or are you just ignorant?

    Shuster was suspended from MSNBC after his remark about Chelsea (by then a grown adult) following outrage by - you guessed it! - lilberals who watched the network and found it offensive because Chelsea Clinton was a private citizen.

    What sanctions did Rush face when he called Chelsea Clinton the "White House Dog' for 8 solid years? What outrage came from Republicans? None. Zip. Zero. icon_rolleyes.gif


    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4274500&page=2#.T1rhafV-7_I

    That article downplayed Shuster's comments and the reporter sought a source to say that "pimp" was not as bad as it used to be.




    The relevant quote:

    "MSNBC anchor David Shuster learned this the hard way last week, when he was suspended after he made an on-air remark suggesting that the Clinton campaign had "pimped out" Chelsea Clinton by having her call super delegates to promote her mother's candidacy. " icon_rolleyes.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Mar 10, 2012 5:24 AM GMT
    I have not heard any request to a "linguist" on the word slut or prostitute.
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Mar 10, 2012 5:44 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidYes. Bill Maher is hilarious and nonpartisan in his contempt for stupidity on both sides of the aisle. He's actually been a vocal critic of Obama on a range of issues and took liberals to ask for not accepting Limbaugh's BS apology.

    You're dissembling so pathetically because you know - deep down - that Romney hasn't got a chance in hell of beating Obama. And that he doesn't deserved to. He's run one of the worst primary campaigns in the history of elections and his contempt for ordinary Americans is painfully obvious.

    I know you are not alone in finding Maher hilarious. There was quite a bit of laughter at his vile comments, which say a lot for his followers, including yourself.

    I think Romney has an excellent chance of defeating Obama. There are external events we cannot predict that will have an impact, such as in the middle-east. Gas prices will be toxic for him, given his actions and Chu's comments about getting the price to equal that in Europe. I'm quite confident the campaign against him will be quite effective. Rove's comments are quite valid. Can't guarantee anything, but I'm quite certain he will go down as much worse that a fellow single-termer, Jimmy Carter.


    Yep, when you've got nothing, that's your only hope for a campaign.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Mar 10, 2012 11:36 AM GMT
    That's a Post?

    Like.. I was spectin' something .....

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQR0_eI_HtrtlM6nf1hFWh
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Mar 10, 2012 12:38 PM GMT
    I listened to it again this morning, Saturday morning, and I still yawned.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Mar 10, 2012 3:32 PM GMT
    I do see the hypocrisy. I think Rush was wrong, and so was Bill Maher for things they said. People who like to paint Rush Limbaugh as the defacto leader of the Republican party are being disingenuous and they know it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rush is a radio talk show host -- an entertainer of sorts -- and speaks for himself, NOT anyone else. Yes, Bill Maher is a comedian, but he also pontificates on any number of issues on shows like Piers Morgan (and Larry King before him) as if he is expert on any and all issues. He has an opinion, nothing more nothing less. I do think that Bill Maher, or anyone, calling Sarah Palin, or any woman for that matter, a "cunt" is really crossing a line that should never be crossed. It's just all kinds of offensive. Bill Maher can hide behind his so called "comedy" just so much, but at some point he needs to be held accountable -- just as Rush was.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 4:16 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidI do see the hypocrisy. I think Rush was wrong, and so was Bill Maher for things they said. People who like to paint Rush Limbaugh as the defacto leader of the Republican party are being disingenuous and they know it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rush is a radio talk show host -- an entertainer of sorts -- and speaks for himself, NOT anyone else. Yes, Bill Maher is a comedian, but he also pontificates on any number of issues on shows like Piers Morgan (and Larry King before him) as if he is expert on any and all issues. He has an opinion, nothing more nothing less. I do think that Bill Maher, or anyone, calling Sarah Palin, or any woman for that matter, a "count" is really crossing a line that should never be crossed. It's just all kinds of offensive. Bill Maher can hide behind his so called "comedy" just so much, but at some point he needs to be held accountable -- just as Rush was.

    It's all about politics. There are blind believers, including the RJ Liberal Corps, who think Maher is only a comedian and can say what he wants. He can. We have freedom of speech. Some even find him hilarious, noted earlier in the thread. I'm quite sure some got a big laugh at the Down Syndrome joke.

    The point in the bigger picture is the political positioning. The administration committed a gaffe by using Obamacare to attack the prerogative of religious organizations, especially when birth control pills are readily available. So they turned the debate into an assault on women, but found their poster-woman was a member of an elite class that will earn on average $160K their first year out of law school. Won't resonate with the common folks if the Republicans choose to make ads on this one. As a further attack on Obama supporting women and civility, his refusal to request his PAC to return the million dollars to Maher is fair game. I think the video, along with others like it will have an impact on moderates who see hypocrisy and dishonesty.

    BTW - saying Rush is the leader of the party is the stupidest thing and shows the panic and desperation of the liberals. They can say what they want. Most moderates know they are full of it.

    http://freebeacon.com/former-obama-aide-says-maher-is-rush-like/
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Mar 10, 2012 4:22 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    CuriousJockAZ saidI do see the hypocrisy. I think Rush was wrong, and so was Bill Maher for things they said. People who like to paint Rush Limbaugh as the defacto leader of the Republican party are being disingenuous and they know it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rush is a radio talk show host -- an entertainer of sorts -- and speaks for himself, NOT anyone else. Yes, Bill Maher is a comedian, but he also pontificates on any number of issues on shows like Piers Morgan (and Larry King before him) as if he is expert on any and all issues. He has an opinion, nothing more nothing less. I do think that Bill Maher, or anyone, calling Sarah Palin, or any woman for that matter, a "count" is really crossing a line that should never be crossed. It's just all kinds of offensive. Bill Maher can hide behind his so called "comedy" just so much, but at some point he needs to be held accountable -- just as Rush was.

    It's all about politics. There are blind believers, including the RJ Liberal Corps, who think Maher is only a comedian and can say what he wants. He can. We have freedom of speech. Some even find him hilarious, noted earlier in the thread. I'm quite sure some got a big laugh at the Down Syndrome joke.

    The point in the bigger picture is the political positioning. The administration committed a gaffe by using Obamacare to attack the prerogative of religious organizations, especially when birth control pills are readily available. So they turned the debate into an assault on women, but found their poster-woman was a member of an elite class that will earn on average $160K their first year out of law school. Won't resonate with the common folks if the Republicans choose to make ads on this one. As a further attack on Obama supporting women and civility, his refusal to request his PAC to return the million dollars to Maher is fair game.

    BTW - saying Rush is the leader of the party is the stupidest thing and shows the panic and desperation of the liberals. They can say what they want. Most moderates know they are full of it

    http://freebeacon.com/former-obama-aide-says-maher-is-rush-like/


    Seriously...get it through your head that birth control pills aren't readily available. You know nothing about medicine at all - Tri-Sprintec (the cheap birth control pill that all you conservative assholes keeps quoting) is dangerous for many women, hard to use, contra-indicated in a large portion of the population (because it can be that dangerous with certain risk factors), has multiple drug interactions that can render it ineffective, etc...

    Jesus Christ...If you wanna keep with your argument, keep with the facts.

    If you wanna argue that same argument for HTN therapy, I would agree - we have cheap access to furosemide, HCTZ, metoprolol, lisinopril, amiloride + HCTZ combo, amlodipine, bisoprolol, bisoprolol + HCTZ, hydralazine, spironolactone...and one of the ARBs (Losartan) just became generic a little while back and is rapidly falling in price. With HTN, you can tailor therapy according to your patient.. Also, the list goes on a lot longer...like...really long for what's on the $4 list and $10 list and available for people with HTN.

    Birth control list: Tri-Sprintec and TriNessa (same pill, same active ingredients, diff manufacturers)

    with birth control, there are 2 easily accessible pills that are definitely not a good choice for many patients. Medicine isn't a 1 size fits all thing, especially not in the case of birth control where haphazard usage of it can be incredibly dangerous.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 4:52 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo said
    Seriously...get it through your head that birth control pills aren't readily available.
    ...
    Jesus Christ...If you wanna keep with your argument, keep with the facts.

    OK, fine. So the better options aren't so cheap. And I understand your argument in other threads about contraceptives reducing other health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the pills. So by the same token, my motorcycle helmet and protective leathers should be covered. I enjoy motorcycle riding, and it is much safer if I have appropriate protective gear. Having such gear reduces health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the gear. While we're at it, let's add hearing and eye protectors for shooters. I'm sure we can create a massive amount of entitlements.

    Doesn't get your sympathy as much as Sandra Fluck? Maybe my motorcycle riding is discretionary, whereas Fluck's sex is necessary. But what about the folks who ride motorcycles to work because they cannot afford a car or high gas prices? Aren't they as deserving as an elite Georgetown Law student?
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Mar 10, 2012 4:55 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo said
    Seriously...get it through your head that birth control pills aren't readily available.
    ...
    Jesus Christ...If you wanna keep with your argument, keep with the facts.

    OK, fine. So the better options aren't so cheap. And I understand your argument in other threads about contraceptives reducing other health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the pills. So by the same token, my motorcycle helmet and protective leathers should be covered. I enjoy motorcycle riding, and it is much safer if I have appropriate protective gear. Having such gear reduces health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the gear. While we're at it, let's add hearing and eye protectors for shooters. I'm sure we can create a massive amount of entitlements.

    Doesn't get your sympathy as much as Sandra Fluck? Maybe my motorcycle riding is discretionary, whereas Fluck's sex is necessary. But what about the folks who ride motorcycles to work because they cannot afford a car or high gas prices? Aren't they as deserving as an elite Georgetown Law student?



    Uhhh...This is a medicine... Health insurance covers medicine and some related medical supplies. Pill = medicine. Your motorcycle helmet = medicine???

    Epic fail.

    Stick with health insurance - with what health insurance does and doesn't cover.

    PS - motorcycle helmet laws exist in most states...consider it part of your vehicle - can't drive without one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 4:59 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo said
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo said
    Seriously...get it through your head that birth control pills aren't readily available.
    ...
    Jesus Christ...If you wanna keep with your argument, keep with the facts.

    OK, fine. So the better options aren't so cheap. And I understand your argument in other threads about contraceptives reducing other health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the pills. So by the same token, my motorcycle helmet and protective leathers should be covered. I enjoy motorcycle riding, and it is much safer if I have appropriate protective gear. Having such gear reduces health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the gear. While we're at it, let's add hearing and eye protectors for shooters. I'm sure we can create a massive amount of entitlements.

    Doesn't get your sympathy as much as Sandra Fluck? Maybe my motorcycle riding is discretionary, whereas Fluck's sex is necessary. But what about the folks who ride motorcycles to work because they cannot afford a car or high gas prices? Aren't they as deserving as an elite Georgetown Law student?

    Uhhh...This is a medicine... Health insurance covers medicine. Pill = medicine. Your motorcycle helmet = medicine???

    Epic fail.

    PS - motorcycle helmet laws exist in most states...consider it part of your vehicle - can't drive without one.

    Nope - fundamentally the same issue. Just because one goes in your mouth and the other on your head, they are both about protecting your health.
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Mar 10, 2012 5:00 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo said
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo said
    Seriously...get it through your head that birth control pills aren't readily available.
    ...
    Jesus Christ...If you wanna keep with your argument, keep with the facts.

    OK, fine. So the better options aren't so cheap. And I understand your argument in other threads about contraceptives reducing other health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the pills. So by the same token, my motorcycle helmet and protective leathers should be covered. I enjoy motorcycle riding, and it is much safer if I have appropriate protective gear. Having such gear reduces health and non-health related costs more than the cost of the gear. While we're at it, let's add hearing and eye protectors for shooters. I'm sure we can create a massive amount of entitlements.

    Doesn't get your sympathy as much as Sandra Fluck? Maybe my motorcycle riding is discretionary, whereas Fluck's sex is necessary. But what about the folks who ride motorcycles to work because they cannot afford a car or high gas prices? Aren't they as deserving as an elite Georgetown Law student?

    Uhhh...This is a medicine... Health insurance covers medicine. Pill = medicine. Your motorcycle helmet = medicine???

    Epic fail.

    PS - motorcycle helmet laws exist in most states...consider it part of your vehicle - can't drive without one.

    Nope - fundamentally the same issue. Just because one goes in your mouth and the other on your head, they are both about protecting your health.


    Wrong insurance though - not the same issue at all. Insurances cover different things. If you wanna go create insurance for safety gear, be my guest. There's a reason you have different type of insurances...because they cover different thing. This argument is about health insurance and your attempt is invalid.

    Your complaint belongs in a thread about auto-insurance... not health insurance. You should try Geico - they are all about safe drivers and giving discounts for those sorts of things.

    Now, back to valid health insurance arguments that involve medically related care!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:06 PM GMT
    socalfitness said

    Doesn't get your sympathy as much as Sandra Fluck? Maybe my motorcycle riding is discretionary, whereas Fluck's sex is necessary. But what about the folks who ride motorcycles to work because they cannot afford a car or high gas prices? Aren't they as deserving as an elite Georgetown Law student?


    Did you get rejected by Georgetown law?

    You seem really angry that Fluke is attending a top-tier law school.

    Most Americans see getting into a good law school and having a career in law as a positive thing that allows people to advanced themselves by earning a good living.

    So why do you hate America?