I am really digging the Santorum surge. What sucks about Romney is that he when he says something dumb, the wingers shake their heads and say “that was dumb”. When Santo says something dumb — like that women shouldn’t serve in combat because they’re too emotional — you get stuff like this:
It is not a gaffe at all. He says what he belivies, and anyone who has the guts to say the truth will agree that he has a point regarding women reacting emoitionally different than men. Mature women who are objective enough to see the upside and downsides of both genders will agree too. This “storm” is produced by pundits and journalist who live in a bubble or are just looking for news.
Maybe this is parody, but I can’t tell. And that’s the way I like it.
Baud
I would have gone with “I’m so excited and I just can’t hide it.”
eemom
Ugh. DougJ, you know I luvz you and your lyrics MOST of the time, but must you exhume EVERY slumbering corpse of 70s schlock?
I can’t even remember who the woman was who sang that, just the back up by the BeeGees.
Villago Delenda Est
As I mentioned in a previous thread, it’s hilarious to hear some chickenhawk provide his expert commentary on what goes on in combat.
Trentrunner
On CNN Santorum “clarified” his statement by saying he meant that MEN will get “protective” and emotional when they see women being blown apart.
Cuz we sure as shit can’t have soldiers being “protective” of one another.
I really really hope Santorum is the face of the GOP for a good month or two. He hates gays, women, science, contraception, and loves sweater vests. Win-win.
DougJarvus Green-Ellis
@eemom:
I like the BeeGees. It’s not like busted David Gates on you.
Villago Delenda Est
@Baud:
Pointer Sisters FTW!
Suffern ACE
Mature women agree. Young women only have a surface understanding of these issues.
Trentrunner
@eemom: Samantha Sang, if memory serves. (Not Googled, I swear.)
gwangung
Like that wimpy Israeli army, right Rih?
ETA
Well, that, too…
beltane
@Trentrunner: Does this mean that soldiers are indifferent when they see their male comrades being blown up? I never knew this was the case until now. Thanks Rick, once again you’ve enlightened me.
Polar Bear Squares
Just talked to two military officers and they were absolutely dumbfounded by how fucking stupid this statement was. The idea that someone would even frame an argument like this in the age of asymetrical warfare is just strikingly idiotic. That’s them. Not me.
They also said that the women they served with were some of the most competent they’ve ever served with. So it was them saving THEIR ass most times. They served with women in Special Ops, seen women die under EIDs, Field Artilley. Women are everywhere. So it’s kinda hard to fathom a damsel in distress syndrome.
So here you have women in the military, most with bad muthafucka written all over their wallet, dying, serving, leading, living the stereotype of an American hero the right most time bestows on American soliders… and all lil Ricky wants to do is protect them.
Sigh. It sounded like some bullshit to me. I’m glad they confirmed that for me.
Trentrunner
And BTW, notice that Obama’s soon-to-be-announced “accommodation” will most definitely pacify the media-Catholic-Industrial complex of white pundits (Chris Matthews, E.J. Dionne, Mark Shields, et al.)
But if those fuckers think that I will forget, well, they can just fuckily fuck their fucking fucked selves. Fuckers.
wasabi gasp
But the little girls, they understand.
GregB
I too remember how over-emotional and irrational Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher got in the heat of battle.
They were like Snooki on PMS.
Has Santorum ever seen World War II footage of the Russian women in combat?
What a maroon.
Smiling Mortician
@DougJarvus Green-Ellis:
Dunno. Given the topic, David Gates might be just right.
You sheltered me from harm, kept me warm . . .
Yeah, OK. I apologize ahead of the groans.
Roger Moore
@Trentrunner:
Of course not. Don’t you remember the kerfuffle a couple of years back about how all the Medals of Honor being given out for Iraq and Afghanistan were for soldiers who were trying to protect comrades rather than for ones who went Audy Murphy? If there are women around, the soldiers will spend all their time making sure nobody gets killed and not enough time blowing the other guy up. Or something.
Bulworth
C’mon. He’s seen war movies. And that’s exactly like war. /
Egg Berry
There is no breaker between Santorum’s thought and his mouth. And he doesn’t want one, either.
beltane
@GregB: Going even further back, remember how Elizabeth I like totally caved in the face of the Spanish Armada? Such a sissy.
General Stuck
There is no joy in republican Mudville these days that has given MS Peggy a raging case of the wingnut blues. This keeps up we might have to put her on suicide watch before it’s all over.
And all of it as Obama opens the floodgates to spermicide on an epic scale by hedonistic libtards. And nobody seems to care.
—
Go NOOT!!
Pococurante
@Trentrunner:
He’s dropping the ball by not dragging Teh Gayz into the same argument.
Bulworth
I hope Santorum will take this opportunity, as will the other CPAC speakers, to complain about ending DADT. We can’t have the womenz or teh gay in war because they’re emoticons are all wrong.
Valdivia
Bee gees reference for the win. Love!
Kane
In 2008, Barack Obama won the presidency with a 13 point advantage with women voters. I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that this number is going to increase in 2012.
Martin
It’s not. When they thought they could beat Obama, it was fine to have the focus group tested Romneytron 3000 stump speeches, devoid of content. When he went off script, that was a disaster, because the script is all he is.
But they’re increasingly sure they’re going to lose, so they might as well lose on their principles, which is government mandated chastity belts, and even though Santorum will lose, he’ll at least go down swinging.
Trentrunner
Love Obama’s statement so far.
The Dangerman
I’m starting a Church and it will be against my Faith to have any Medical Coverage for V1agra or C1al1s. If God wanted you to get it up, you’d get it up; artificial means are surely the realm of the Evil One.
Egg Berry
Santorum will be changing the motto of all combat infantry forces to “99 problems but a bitch ain’t one” if elected.
beltane
@General Stuck: Quick, someone fix Miss Peggy a drink. There’s nothing ailing her that a few scotch on rocks can’t fix.
PrairieMan
So I died and woke up in an alternate universe where the anti-Fred Rogers is the everything-hating sweater-wearing Mr. Frothy.
Fred is spinning 6 feet under, I’m sure.
Bulworth
Believe in America! /
Villago Delenda Est
@Bulworth:
Yup.
If Rih had ever undergone basic training (like that would ever happen in a bazillion years, I know…) he’d have been dissuaded by a very loud mouthed, very assertive guy in a Smokey the Bear hat of the notion that what goes on in the movies has anything to do with the vocation he’s being trained in.
Being told that you’re “John Wayneing” something is NOT a compliment from a DI.
beltane
It’s a good think John Boehner will never see battle. That man is so emotional that the mere act of breathing brings him to tears.
Egg Berry
@General Stuck:
WTF does that even mean?
Amir Khalid
The Bee Gees in the post headline, KC & The Sunshine Band in the ending. Cool.
Ed Kilgore at Political Animal sez, Mitt might not be at liberty to hammer Mr Frothy with attack ads in the wake of the stunning triple caucus loss to him, the way he hammered Noot after South Carolina and made up ground in Florida. Mr Frothy has more friends than Noot, and those friends wouldn’t think kindly of Mitt having their man bashed by proxy.
Litlebritdifrnt
Well it might get me thrown out of the tent but personally (having been a female in the military) I am dead set against women on the front lines, as I was when they changed the policy in the RN about women serving on warships. An old crusty CPO told me once about having to slam the hatch shut on an engine room in order to keep the ship from sinking (during the Falklands) he told me “if the face looking up at me had been a woman I know I couldn’t have done it”.
Perhaps it is generational and today’s young men have some how lost the protective instinct that was ingrained in old generations. Or maybe I’m just a dinosaur.
schrodinger's cat
Rick Santorum is an idiot. Even if we are to concede that women are more in touch with their emotions, how does that make them weaker, I would argue it makes them stronger.
Indira Gandhi, who was mocked as the dumb doll by patronizing chauvinistic male politicians would have eaten the likes of Sweater vest Ricky for breakfast, without breaking a sweat.
Samara Morgan
a person that says he will outlaw contraception can never be elected president.
alsotoo a mormon cannot be elected president in contemporary America.
jus’ so im not again accused of anti-mormon bigotry (lookin at you, catsy, suzanne), neither can a scientologist, a muslim, or a jew.
Rawk Chawk
uh huh, uh huh.
Villago Delenda Est
@Litlebritdifrnt:
I think the protective instinct in combat is always there. The genitalia of the protected is irrelevant, though. Somehow, it’s OK to slam the door on a male comrade, but not a female one? I’d feel bad about slamming the door on either, and it would have nothing to do with their private parts.
hitchhiker
@Litlebritdifrnt:
I think that’s an argument for keeping men out, not women.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Egg Berry:
If you look at a map of the US, Florida dangles out into the ocean like a droopy peni$. Hence it is America’s “Little America”.
Martin
Huh. Looks like the Catholic groups are cheering this solution. Either they truly are okay with it, or they know they’re boxed in so they might as well get on board. Donohue will still be outraged – he’s like that old blender you have where the ‘frappe’ button is stuck in.
jibeaux
How can I see the upside and downside of both genders when I’m so “emoitional”? It’s just so haaaaaaard!
#thatswhatshesaid
imonlylurking
Exhibit A: Newt Gingrich, who shut down the federal government because he was told to exit from the back of Air Force One.
But guys are never emotional. That was a completely rational decision, right?
imonlylurking
Exhibit A: Newt Gingrich, who shut down the federal government because he was told to exit from the back of Air Force One.
But guys are never emotional. That was a completely rational decision, right?
KG
So, hypothetically… if Santorum manages to get the nominations (hey, I said “hypothetically”), and gets trounced in the general (I’m talking ’84, ’72, ’36 landslide), does the GOP finally realize that they’ve gone off the deep end?
Or will they have just failed conservatism again?
schrodinger's cat
Some of the things that shrinking violet Indira Gandhi did in her tenure as the Prime Minister of India, in no particular order.
*Stopped giving pensions to the former Princes of the various Princely States in India
*Nationalized 15 largest banks in India
*Won the 1971 war against Pakistan, which lead to the formation of Bangladesh
*Declared a state of emergency, suspended the Parliament after a court ruled against her, that she violated election laws
*Took over the Golden Temple (like Vatican or Mecca for the Sikhs) by force when Sikh militants were using it to stash their arms caches.
I don’t approve of everything she did , but chutzpah, she had it. Weak she was not. Oftentimes she was called the only man in the cabinet.
Frankensteinbeck
@Samara Morgan:
You’re not being accused of anti-Mormon bigotry, MC. You’re accused of reducing every issue to an ethnic conflict and cheering for the White Christians to lose. That’s racism. It’s quite disgusting racism. In the process you stereotype everyone, not just the White Christians you have lumped into one unified mass. You view everything through a lens of race or religion, which you treat as one thing, (you do expand enough to make libertarians their own group) and get your hate on.
different-church-lady
My favorite exchange from that “conversation”:
Bulworth
Now the headline is Obama Compromises On Birth Control. I eagerly await the renewed hangwringing by our network anchors and the bishops, who are supposedly the spokesmen for all those agrieved oppressed and violated by Obama’s original decision.
Mark B.
I can’t see the right wingers being satisfied with Obama’s latest compromise offer. They don’t want religious organizations to be exempt from providing birth control. They don’t want women to be able to get birth control.
Ivan
Yes, it is; it even has a proper name.
It’s a Kinsley gaffe.
Martin
@KG:
I think the correct answer will be “ACORN!”
General Stuck
Stupid wingnuts. Start a food fight over something few people care about, that is a gimme for Obama to play the Magnanimous adult in the room, offering a compromise fig leaf that doesn’t change his original action a bit. Like taking pol candy from babies.
Mark B.
Really, all the latest compromise offer gets is that people who want birth control who work for religious organizations have an additional paperwork burden, and the church gets to wash their hands of it since they won’t have to handle the specific paperwork relating to birth control coverage. It’s a perfectly reasonable compromise, which is why the Catholic Church won’t accept it.
AnotherBruce
You know, Santorum’s doing fairly well in the polls, at least compared to the Mittster. That’s because most people don’t know a thing about him. Is there a way we can hide him long enough for him to get the nomination? Obama would destroy this creep in the general election.
JPL
Someone posted this tweet the other day on balloon juice and it once again is appropriate.
Villago Delenda Est
@KG:
The latter. “Conservatism” never, ever fails.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@KG: More likely they nominate Romney, lose and Li’l Ricky is both the True Scotsman and the one whose turn it is in 2016. Can Hillary Clinton resist the urge to come out of retirement to take on the Republican Party’s Norman Bates?
g
I’d like to learn more about the US Conference of Catholic Bishops – the Bishops that are driving this. They must have women employees. What kind of insurance policy do they provide for their employees? Since the EEOC ruling in 2000 and since 28 states require contraceptive benefits if prescription drugs are included, I would not be surprised at all if some of the USCCB offices already offer it.
http://usccb.org/index.html
Amir Khalid
@Samara Morgan:
Is it Mitt the Mormon who can’t get elected president? Mitt the flip-flopper? Mitt with his foot in his mouth? Mitt the bankster? Or Mitt who couldn’t fake empathy to save his life? You can’t tell from a sample of one.
Sly
White supremacists can’t handle being with blacks in the military, so blacks must be kept out.
Misogynists can’t handle being with women in the military, so women must be kept out.
Homophobes can’t handle being with gays in the military, so gays must be kept out.
WereBear
OT; but this Cracked Article practically made me cry: funny AND true.
The 5 Stupidest Habits You Develop Growing Up Poor
An important lesson for those who don’t really know what it’s like.
imonlylurking
@imonlylurking: Gah, how did that post twice? I only hit enter once, I swear.
FYWP
Zifnab
@Sly: And that’s why we’ve got the best military in the world!
Martin
@g:
Probably not, actually. They just offer policies with no drug benefits. Under PPACA, that will no longer be possible. Because of that intersecting with the EEOC ruling, the default result would have been what you describe, that they all need to provide that coverage in about a year. They were all waiting for a ruling by HHS on exemptions, and they didn’t get what they wanted.
We got to this point in a somewhat convoluted way by two independent mandates converging awaiting a clarifying policy by HHS for something that would go into effect in the future. There’s going to be more of this up through 2014 as these different parts of PPACA trigger all of these unintended or unanticipated effects.
eemom
@DougJarvus Green-Ellis:
oh, I like the BeeGees too. It’s just that song that sucks.
(Truth be told, I also like Bread.)
rikryah
NOW that damn song is looping in my mind..
LOL
beltane
Having lost on the contraception issue, Senate Republicans now want to weaken the Violence Against Women Act http://dailykos.com/story/2012/02/10/1063489/-Senate-Republicans-push-to-weaken-Violence-Against-Women-Act?via=blog_1
I guess if they can’t take away our birth control they’ll have to settle for the right to beat us.
Does the GOP realize that half of all voters are female?
kth
@DougJarvus Green-Ellis:
Bread > BeeGees
Also those teabaggers are the very model of stoicism (or chivalry, if we accept Santorum’s revised and extended version).
eemom
@rikryah:
and if you don’t COME back, come home to me DARLING, know that there’ll be nobody left in this world to hold me tight…..nobody left in this world to kiss goodnight….
God, what stupid lyrics.
Ed Drone
Well, the whingers want to “take the country back.”
I ask, “to what year?”
Obviously, pre Griswold for sure. I think they have a 1950s economy and 1920s society in mind. Though perhaps, through their love of the Masters of the Universe, they have the era of Robber Barons in mind.
So, 1955, 1925, and 1885. What’s the average of those, I wonder?
Mathematically, it’s somewhere around April of 1921.
Looks about right to me.
Ed
Villago Delenda Est
@Ed Drone:
The country they want back was crushed by Union armies some 147 years ago.
That’s the country they want back.
jibeaux
@beltane: Don’t worry, they have a plan. It involves an underdog from Alaska and a dream so crazy it just might work….
Ed Drone
@Sly:
So if blacks, women and gays are all excluded, the remaining cannon fodder is white guys! Now, there’s a demographic whose votes they’ll lose if they keep it up. Tell ’em “You’re the ones we want in harm’s way, ’cause those others aren’t worthy of being shot to hell.” Great election slogan, eh?
They won’t have anyone other’n the 1% to vote for them. Next, they’ll push for a court ruling allowing money to substitute for votes, and wham! the Republican’ts will rule forever (if “ruling” means doing what the 1% tells them to do).
Ed
J.W. Hamner
I’m still not entirely sure what this “compromise” means. If it means lower premiums for religious institutions (so their money doesn’t cover contraceptives) then I don’t really approve… if it’s just semantics and paperwork then das cool.
Seebach
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/10/cpac-2012-rap_n_1268571.html?1328895197
Conservatives rap and say n—– at a black guy
Frankensteinbeck
@J.W. Hamner:
It means that insurance companies can no longer separate birth control as an extra service people have to pay for separately. The Catholic Church was complaining about having to pay for that extra service, so now it has been bundled into regular service. It’s actually an improvement on current contraceptive coverage.
General Stuck
It is hilarious to read the left and right blogs for reaction to this ‘accomodation” or whatever you wanna call it. The wingers are screaming
And the left wing blogs are screaming ‘cave’, or something along those lines. In other words, just a nuther tricky day in paradise lost.
Martin
@WereBear: That is unbearably accurate. I’m 20 years out of that life and I still do 3 of the things on that list.
JPL
@Seebach: When the man walked out of the room, the audience chuckled. Nice group you got there CPAC.. It didn’t sound like knickers to me either.
slag
@Seebach: I’ve been in rooms while a bunch of white dudes were making complete asses out of themselves because they couldn’t see past their privilege. I felt that tech guy’s pain.
When you’re in such an awkward situation that you don’t know which way to look, just pull out your cellphone. Thank Jobs for smart phones!
J.W. Hamner
@Frankensteinbeck:
That’s not my reading. As Sarah Cliff says, while contraceptives are revenue neutral they are not free… and if neither Catholic employers or their employees are paying for them, who is? The insurance companies obviously, but since their money comes from premiums either secular companies are going to subsidize it in higher premiums or there has to be some accounting tricks employed, right?
Some people seem to think it’s just that the insurance company will send you a separate letter saying they cover it, and nothing else changes… but I can’t really see why that would be enough to satisfy Catholic organizations since they’ll still be paying for contraceptives… but maybe it’s enough of a fig leaf?
Villago Delenda Est
@J.W. Hamner:
But they’re not paying for contraceptives.
Health insurance is part of their compensation package for their employees, Catholic and non-Catholic alike.
They could no more insist that out of pocket purchase of contraceptives by their employees was a violation of religious liberty.
They were seeking to enforce their dogma on their employees regardless of whether or not their employees were Catholic.
They’ve lost the battle on contraception…even within their own flock. All they have is their dogma.
handsmile
That Santorum surge might be blocked by a suppository in the form of the Texan gnome.
Reports from Maine suggest that Ron Paul will be declared the victor of that state’s caucus on Saturday night. And while the voting procedures have been changed and his campaign is not participating in this year’s event, Paul was the overwhelming favorite in the last two CPAC straw polls.
With the next round of primaries scheduled for February 28 (AZ, MI), that’s plenty of time for more “Chinese fire drill” among the Klown Kar Kavalcade and feverish prattle among the horse race tipsters.
KG
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I just don’t want to wait another four years for a relatively sane GOP. And no, I don’t think Hillary would come out of retirement for that, only because pretty much any Democrat would crush Santorum in ’16
JWL
“..anyone who has the guts to say the truth will agree that [Santorum] has a point regarding women reacting emoitionally different than men”.
I disagree. If a hand grenade were to suddenly land at the feet of a man and a woman, I’m pretty sure both would react the same (by breaking out in assholes and shitting themselves to death).
Martin
@J.W. Hamner: The insurance companies will raise overall premiums to cover the cost of absorbing the rider. It won’t be much, and HHS will give them permission to do that. So, everyone will pay ever so slightly more. Since there are so few people that the exemption would have affected, it might be so little as to just be a rounding error since the rider was mandatory for everyone else anyway.
It’s either enough of a fig leaf that they’re satisfied, or they know there’s no way out of this proposal without either coming out against birth control for everyone or demanding employers be able to pick and choose anything covered so they’re going to fake it and move on.
I should add, I can see that they’d be happy with this solution because while it doesn’t effectively change anything (which I don’t think most of them really cared about anyway) it at least gives the church leaders the appearance of a political win and the ability to claim (even if you have to squint to see the truth of it) that they don’t believe in contraception and don’t pay for it. So, they can save face here. It sounds stupid, but they actually do care about stuff like that. The GOP will still be pissed because they lost their wedge issue.
different-church-lady
@General Stuck: The man’s talent for doing perfectly sensible things that piss off the extremists on both sides is astonishing, no?
gwangung
@Martin:
This is for something that applies to 51% of the population, hm? Not a special interest, right? Not something that’s irrelevant to a majority of the population, is it?
JCT
If you guys want to enjoy yourselves, be sure to check out Charlie Pierce’s blog — he’s sitting through CPAC so you don’t have to and it is a sight to see. I feel like starting a fund for the psychologist visits he will likely need after post-conference.
Lewis Carrol would be hard-put to come close to this.
Sly
@Ed Drone:
The conservative mythmaking project has revolving periods nostalgia every thirty years. Contemporary conservatives want to go back to the 80s. Conservatives of the 80s wanted to go back to the 50s. Conservatives of the 50s wanted to go back to the 20s. Conservatives of the 20s wanted to go back to the 1890s. The 1860s, for obvious reasons, serve as a breaking point, so conservatives of the 1890s were generally nostalgic for every decade prior to it. Agrarian myth. Frontier thesis. Unbridled white supremacy. Unreconstructed conservatives, otherwise known as “libertarians,” still cling to the absurd fantasy that the United States was a freer society in 1789 than in 2012.
handsmile
@beltane: (#70)
Chuck Butcher
You were just told that you’re going to subsidize the Bishop’s POV.
Abba Elfman
Either the cost is being spread out over all employers or are Catholic employers paying a higher premium for their insurance without contraception benefits.
Steve-O
I am in love with Rick Santorum. I want to bare (bear?) his children. And I am a man.
There is nothing better I can think of than for this man to be the pied piper of right wing crazy, leading all the wingnut mice around the town.
Rick Santorum should live a long, happy life showing people how to make bank from the wealthy and truly dumb wingers. He has been doing it for a long time, even making money off the story of his stillborn baby.
Catholic Jesus loves Santorum, the way the assistant coaches of his college Alma Mater love adolescent boys.
Barry
@Amir Khalid: “Mr Frothy has more friends than Noot, and those friends wouldn’t think kindly of Mitt having their man bashed by proxy.”
OTOH, what does Mitt really have to lose at this point? Even if FMr. Frothy goes down to sound defeat in ’12, Mitt probably isn’t going to do better in ’16. In terms of money, Mitt has his loads, and isn’t dependent on book sales or Fox News/consulting/speaking gigs. And if he hammers Mr. Frothy into the ground, and takes the nomination, who of significance will oppose him in the GOP?
Barry
@KG: “So, hypothetically… if Santorum manages to get the nominations (hey, I said “hypothetically”), and gets trounced in the general (I’m talking ‘84, ‘72, ‘36 landslide), does the GOP finally realize that they’ve gone off the deep end?
Or will they have just failed conservatism again?”
Well, their reaction to getting soundly spanked in ’08 was to move right, obstruct 100%, and to write their former Dear Leader Dubya out of the party. And they did pretty well out of it.
So I’d expect their reaction to a loss in ’12 will be to do as they did.
nitpicker
Not that this makes it any better, but I think he really meant that guys won’t be able to handle seeing gals get shot.
Ziggy
A Santorum surge…that’s disgusting.
Zach
Santorum has Romney painted into a corner. Santorum would be blown out in the general election on social issues, easily, and he’s in a worse position than Romney to attack Obama on the Solyndra-esque nonsense. But these are exactly the issues that Romney can’t attack in the primary, and the coordination between Romney PACs and the Romney campaign has been so transparent that he can’t distance himself from any well-funded, third-party attack.
I can only see one way out of this: an unholy alliance between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Newt could spend now through Super Tuesday repeating that Santorum’s out-of-step with America on gay rights, contraception, etc. Then he drops out and Romney wins easily. My impression is that if you promise Newt to appoint an Ambassador to the moon and give this Adelson guy whatever he wants, they’ll play along.
Edit: The basic calculus here is that Newt is, over everything else, fat-headed and greedy. Let him flap his lips till Super Tuesday and agree to one of his beloved not-really-Lincoln-Douglas debates and satisfy the ego. Promise him an appointment if Romney wins and a sweet gig if Romney loses and satisfy the greed. Santorum’s worth nothing to Newt if Obama wins.
Mnemosyne
@Abba Elfman:
As I understand it, the cost is being spread out across all employers (including these Catholic-affiliated employers) because all employers have to offer free birth control as part of their healthcare plan.
The original plan was to have birth control be a separate “rider” plan. Now it’s all been folded into prescriptions, and the only way for a large employer to ensure his employees can’t use their prescription benefit to get birth control is to not offer insurance at all. At which point he has to pay a penalty of $2,000 per employee to reimburse the government for the government dollars that will be spent subsidizing that employee’s purchase of private insurance through the exchanges.
Michele C
@WereBear: I still constantly check on the money in my bank account and my husband still does that thing of, “Why did you buy two packs of toilet paper? We weren’t running out yet.”