Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, May 12, 2014

Obamacare saved women in the United States an estimated $483 million on their out-of-pocket costs for birth control pills. Obamacare has "dramatically reduced" women's out-of-pocket costs now that insurers are required to cover preventative care without charging an additional co-pay. Nearly 100 percent of women use birth control pills at some point in their lives and 70 percent of Americans support Obamacare's birth control mandate. The mandatory coverage is now subject to Supreme Court challenge.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

censored

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I have a hard time believing that birth control pills are controversial in this age. I guess it just goes to show you what an organized, ignorant, unintelligent, vocal minority can accomplish, even against the opinion of the overwhelming majority.

#1 | Posted by censored at 2014-05-11 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's not the insurers who are covering the costs, it is all those people paying their insurance policies - you know, We The People.

#2 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-05-11 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Big deal. I personally saved women thousands of dollars on birth control when I got married.

#3 | Posted by squinch at 2014-05-11 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 3

It's not the insurers who are covering the costs, it is all those people paying their insurance policies - you know, We The People.
#2 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-05-11 01:41 PM

Then I guess it's a good thing 70 percent of We The People support it. You'd be hard-pressed to find a 70-30 split in favor of pretty much anything in our society.

#4 | Posted by censored at 2014-05-11 01:51 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

No, obozocare transfers $500,000,000 in women's birth control cost to other people.

#5 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2014-05-11 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

The women are not saving $$, the cost is INCLUDED in their premiums, every time they make an insurance payment the pay for BC pills

#6 | Posted by SammyAZ_RI at 2014-05-11 03:11 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"We have to keep those pesky minorities from breeding!" - the Limousine Left

#7 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2014-05-11 04:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

the pills aren't

FORCING ME to pay for them and EXTORTING it out of my health care payments IS not controversial with me....it's totally out of line and NOT MY JOB.......no controversy at all....

but as long as all the obama supporters can get everything they can for free...well hey,..THATS all that matters to the liberal zealots ...

#8 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-05-11 04:59 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

No, obozocare transfers $500,000,000 in women's birth control cost to other people.

#5 | Posted by Visitor2 at

PRECISELY.......NANNY govt TELLS ME I HAVE to....and that's wrong on every count.....

and the FACE OF THIS issue who whined and complained is now on vacation...............IN ITALY !!!! hope she took enough with her..

#9 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-05-11 05:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

SANDRA"S ON vacation
You know..I may have to be on HER SIDE in this case...there's a lot of men in Italy who would........

scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net

#10 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-05-11 05:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Far better paying for pills than a bunch of illegitimate unwanted children.

#11 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-05-11 06:06 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#11....Why should anyone other than the parents or relatives be paying for illegitimate unwanted children.

#12 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2014-05-11 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#12. Uhhhhhh.... How old are you?

#13 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-05-11 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

#13....Old enough to know that one has to row one's own boat just as I had to, my parents had to, my grandparents had to, all of my ancestors had to and my children have to.

#14 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2014-05-11 06:33 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Yeah. That's a nice story. It's far from reality though. It's more of a fantasy.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-05-11 06:59 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

#15....C'est la vie.

#16 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2014-05-11 07:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Never heard of welfare, food stamps, or Medicaid? We don't let children starve in this nation. On the other hand, they do come at a cost. When they aren't wanted or planned, it's often to parents not financially stable enough for children - and since it's not the kids fault, we all do indeed shoulder the economic burden.

And that's if things go right. Unwanted and under-privileged children are also less likely to be successful, meaning less contribution to society, and possibly a great deal of cost. Worst case, I believe the average is $40,000 per prisoner per year.

All in all, I think ready access to birth control is a great investment.

#17 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-05-11 08:48 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

FORCING ME to pay for them and EXTORTING it out of my health care payments IS not controversial with me....it's totally out of line and NOT MY JOB.......no controversy at all....

#8 | Posted by afkabl2 at

YES I am with you AFK!

Like when I have to pay school teachers out of my property Tax when I do not have any children! extorting money from me to pay for other children.
and what really burns me up is some of that money goes to stupid music teachers! absolutely useless.

#18 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2014-05-11 10:26 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

"Obamacare saved women in the United States an estimated $483 million on their out-of-pocket costs for birth control pills"

What a coincidence! It costs taxpayers exactly the same amount.

#19 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-11 10:41 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

What a coincidence! It costs taxpayers exactly the same amount.
#19 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-11 10:41 PM

It is likely that taxpayers will come out ahead. See Zero's explanation in #17.

#20 | Posted by censored at 2014-05-11 11:04 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Good point, censored.
If only humans did not exist it would save us....money. Money is so much more important than human life.
Hence taking money from me to make sure Sandra Fluke can keep her feet in the air without producing children 'saves' me money.
What cr#p.

#21 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-11 11:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who said "humans should not exist?"

Right wing hyperbole at best. Babies should be planned. We do need future generations, but better they come when people have completed college or some form of career training, moved on into careers, and are ready for the challenge. Not at 18, unprepared mentally or physically, let alone economically, compromising both their future and that of their children.

Not that plenty of people don't rise above. But results tend to be better when people are prepared and children are wanted.

You'd think a righty would understand "investment."

#22 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-05-11 11:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Money is so much more important than human life.
#21 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-11 11:22 PM

Are you trying to be sarcastic? Because, as far as I can tell, that proposition is dogma of the GOP and American conservatives.

#23 | Posted by censored at 2014-05-12 12:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"We do need future generations, but better they come when people have completed college or some form of career training, moved on into careers, and are ready for the challenge"

Then they do not have children. It interferes with their careers.
Money rules....and it is the one case where lefties agree career and money trump human life.
Billie Jean King aborted her child so she could keep playing pro tennis and make money....money...the child means nothing compared to that.

#24 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-12 01:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

As long as ----- pills are included I don't see why not.

#25 | Posted by fresno500 at 2014-05-12 07:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

#24 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-12 01:16 AM |

Hey Diablo, since the lives of the fetuses means so much to you, why don't you lobby your elected representatives to raise taxes a few percentage points to raise funds to care for them and so the parents will be encouraged to birth some of those fetuses?

#26 | Posted by censored at 2014-05-12 10:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

YES I am with you AFK!

Like when I have to pay school teachers out of my property Tax when I do not have any children! extorting money from me to pay for other children.
and what really burns me up is some of that money goes to stupid music teachers! absolutely useless.

#18 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2014

ah funny...before I read a word I somehow knew that your excitement would be somewhat...tempered shall we say.......

those taxes you pay got to provide education to people in your community and help to keep them off the street and outside of your home while you're gone....get good jobs and help with economy and keep that SS fund going at least a little while longer....

as to the music portion of your performance.......well, let's look at a couple of studies........

socyberty.com

www.pbs.org

www.whymusic.org

serendip.brynmawr.edu

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

#27 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-05-12 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hmm. Women are half the population. A large percentage of them buy birth control. So, really, all of our policies just went up that much. It's pretty disingenuous to say it SAVED them so much money.

#28 | Posted by LEgregius at 2014-05-12 02:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama has most likely prevented more abortions then the "right to life" groups have since roe v wade permitted abortion as the law of the land. The best way not to get pregnant when sexually active is to have birth control for every woman that needs it. Oh and if you you think this is only a woman´s issue think of all the dead beat dads that will not be. There is no way this will not save the gov billions in the long run.

#29 | Posted by THomewood at 2014-05-12 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

27 | Posted by afkabl2 a

And those birth control will prevent unwanted children who happen to be a big part of those who end up on the streets, and of course birth control will keep your insurance rates lower because they are a lot cheaper then the cost of delivery of a baby, and they will prevent abortion from happening and will lower crime by children parents who were to poor to take care of them properly.
its a win for everybody

#30 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2014-05-12 05:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

those taxes you pay got to provide education to people in your community and help to keep them off the street and outside of your home while you're gone....get good jobs and help with economy and keep that SS fund going at least a little while longer....

but God forbid we allow them women folk access to family planning and health care on your dime. You do realize that would eventually lower the number of folks on your dime (welfare)? Right?

Repubs...save a dime now...spend a dollar later and make sure you blame it on the next crew.

What a short sighted attitude.

#31 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-05-12 06:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly where in the constitution is it written that it is the job of the federal government to ensure woman have access to free birth control. I must have missed that part. The irony of having a president who is supposedly a constitutional scholar.

#32 | Posted by danv at 2014-05-12 06:57 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Exactly where in the constitution is it written that it is the job of the federal government to ensure woman have access to free birth control.

What makes you think every action taken by Congress must be expressed in the constitution? The constitution is an outline. It is not, and never was, intended to spell out intimate details of what Congress can or cannot do. The provisions are often broad guidelines and leave it up to Congress to fill in the details. I'm pretty confident Obama studied the constitution, at least, as much as I am that you, and others that spout that crap, have not.

#33 | Posted by et_al at 2014-05-12 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

What makes you think every action taken by Congress must be expressed in the constitution? The constitution is an outline. It is not, and never was, intended to spell out intimate details of what Congress can or cannot do. The provisions are often broad guidelines and leave it up to Congress to fill in the details.

I agree and disagree - it's a matter of degree.

Lefties interpret the Commerce Clause and the Welfare Clause as granting limitless powers to the federal government.

When I read Article I, Section 8 in its entirety, I don't see it that way. Not even close (not suggesting that you support these 2 clauses as granting limitless powers). This is particularly true when I read Section 8 and then jump to the 10th Amendment.

When we take this country's governance and jurisprudence, as a whole, through the Wilson administration, VERY clear limitations on federal powers were universally understood.

POTUS has taken over as the dominant controlling force and has been strengthened by unaccountable government bureaucracies. SCOTUS has become increasingly powerful in that a view of a constrained federal government has become increasingly eschewed.

#34 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-05-12 08:32 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Flag:

It's not the insurers who are covering the costs, it is all those people paying their insurance policies - you know, We The People.

#2 | Posted by MSgt

Because it does a great benefit for WE THE PEOPLE.

The fewer undernourished, under cared for, undereducated, polluting, aggressive humans we have in this country the better.

Plus more birth control = fewer abortions. Why are righties suddenly pro-abortion?

#35 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-12 09:15 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Lefties interpret the Commerce Clause and the Welfare Clause as granting limitless powers to the federal government

I don't put expansive Commerce Clause powers on a political arm of the Court. Both sides do it. Either way it has gone way too far and about the only one trying, to no avail, to rein it in is Thomas, such an evil person. When a couple in CA growing pot for personal medical use runs afoul of the Commerce Clause something is wrong, very wrong.

POTUS has taken over as the dominant controlling force...

True but why?

SCOTUS has become increasingly powerful...

Again, true but why?

#36 | Posted by et_al at 2014-05-12 09:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

What makes you think every action taken by Congress must be expressed in the constitution?

Well, although not a constitutional scholar like out great president. The constitution enumerates the powers that the federal government is to hold, the rest to be determined by the STATES.

SO again, under what clause in the constitution gives the federal government power to take tax dollars to be used for contraception? Do you think making free, what is already cheap and easy to obtain by any responsible citizen, is good for the welfare of country or maybe birth control promotes commerce. which is it?

Why not free water, food, transportation, housing, electricity...where does one draw the line? When you take your logic to extremes it becomes absurd, but I am sure that won't stop you.

#37 | Posted by danv at 2014-05-12 10:27 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Meaning what, about $5 per female user?

#38 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-05-12 11:10 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Meaning what, about $5 per female user?

Probably a good guess.

#39 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-13 12:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

The constitution enumerates the powers...
Yep, an outline.

SO again...
The one that lets Congress make law? Try to keep up.

Do you think...
I think you are mistaken.

[W]here does one draw the line?
Question of the day, let me know when you discover the answer. [...]

#40 | Posted by et_al at 2014-05-13 01:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

SANDRA"S ON vacation
You know..I may have to be on HER SIDE in this case...there's a lot of men in Italy who would........
scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net

#10 | POSTED BY AFKABL2 AT 2014-05-11 05:21 PM | FLAG:

I wonder what she thinks of living rent free in your noggin? I bet she thinks it's spacious.

#41 | Posted by 726 at 2014-05-13 08:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

We don't let children starve in this nation.

#17 | POSTED BY ZEROPOINTNRG AT 2014-05-11 08:48 PM | FLAG:

Yet.

The GOP is werking hard on making it a reality.

#42 | Posted by 726 at 2014-05-13 08:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Money is so much more important than human life.

#21 | POSTED BY DIABLO AT 2014-05-11 11:22 PM | REPLY | FLA

See Babbles posts. He agrees.

#43 | Posted by 726 at 2014-05-13 08:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

FORCING ME to pay for them and EXTORTING it out of my health care payments IS not controversial with me....it's totally out of line and NOT MY JOB.......no controversy at all....
#8 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

This from the guy on government health care....

And that means women shouldn't have to pay for prostrate cancer treatments or your little blue pills.

Frankly, it all adds up and evens out. You pay for a lot of things that don't directly benefit you but benefit society as a whole. Get over it.

#44 | Posted by Sycophant at 2014-05-13 10:09 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

FORCING ME to pay for them and EXTORTING it out of my health care payments IS not controversial with me....it's totally out of line and NOT MY JOB.......no controversy at all....
#8 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

But he is perfectly fine with making others pay for HIS health insurance.

#45 | Posted by 726 at 2014-05-13 11:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

it's totally out of line and NOT MY JOB.......no controversy at all....
#8 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

Because apparently it is YOUR job to make sure Cliven Bundy makes a cool million by grazing his cattle on public land.

#46 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-05-13 03:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

When a couple in CA growing pot for personal medical use runs afoul of the Commerce Clause something is wrong, very wrong.

Yep. Wickcard V Filburn.

POTUS has taken over as the dominant controlling force...
True but why?

The 4th branch of government: Bureaucracy. Create an unaccountable agency and give it unconstitutional powers. Then, the will of the people can be violated and congress can throw up their hands as if it isn't their fault. It's a back-end maneuver to a more totalitarian government. POTUS can fill these agencies with partisan hacks and then sit back and let them govern by fiat.

SCOTUS has become increasingly powerful...
Again, true but why?

#36 | POSTED BY ET_AL

Once the concept of a "living and breathing Constitution" (which is a BS philosophy, BTW) came into vogue, the mechanism for circumventing the constitution under this auspice has ultimately been the court.

#47 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-05-13 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

so tax payers wasted $483 million dollars on rubbers women should be buying themselves

#48 | Posted by tmaster at 2014-05-13 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who's posterior did the money come from or do we magically have birth control that is produced for free?

#49 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-05-14 11:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

With a wave of his hand!

#50 | Posted by shirtsbyeric at 2014-05-14 12:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

The irony of having a president who is supposedly a constitutional scholar.

#32 | Posted by danv

Some people study a subject to support it and increase its effect.
Others study something in order to bring it down.

Which do you think is why Obummer studied the constitution?

#51 | Posted by Marty at 2014-05-14 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort