Category Archives: National

Should You Ditch a Friend Over Politics?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktJ9MC2rXcY

You can listen to the mom’s of the world who say “If a friendship can be undone, it was never really a friendship.”
You can listen to the hippies of the world who say “Can’t we all just get along?”

But is politics reason enough to drop a friend?

The current situation is very sick and twisted. Long passed are the days of keeping mum on politics and religion. Our country is so divided, so separated, so broken.
I’ve lost a few Facebook friends because of politics (Heaven forbid!) and I’ve seen family members take “time-outs” over disagreements over politics. But I recently lost a really close friend because of political beliefs and it made me question where politics falls in our daily lives.

When you think about it, our political views are based on core beliefs, religion, morals, and ethics (or the lack of all of the above for some). Are these things we can sacrifice for friendship? Or are we sacrificing friendships for politics?

A study was released in March by the Pew Internet & American Life Project that 18% of people have defriended or blocked someone on Facebook because of political postings. Another 28% said they counter with rebuttal or competing post.

As a blogger, I’m certainly not one to stand down from my views or keep my mouth shut on an issue. But throughout my life, I’ve surrounded myself with people who live life like me…my friends have a faith of some type, work hard for their earnings and are good people. Can I spend time with someone who doesn’t believe in working hard for things that they want? Do I want to go shopping with someone who is still living off Mommy & Daddy at 25? Can I discuss relationship issues with someone who thinks my tax dollars should pay for their abortion or birth control? The answer is no.

Let’s not get it twisted. I won’t break off a friendship because someone supports a different primary candidate than me or thinks we should give foreign aid to Israel but not Peru. It’s more about the rhetoric and tone BECAUSE of the great divide. Republicans are called bigots, racists, women-haters while Democrats are labeled system-milking, abortion-getting liberal swine sluts. Whether the names are true or not, the dialogue is no longer respectful-from either side. Our discussion of politics has become immensely PERSONAL. I can hardly stand the sight of someone who supports ObamaCare because of 1) how its going to affect me and 2) because of their lack of understanding of actual issues. So when it comes to a morale-based talking point, where do you draw the line?

You can certainly choose not to discuss politics with your friends, but I would argue that there is a growing trend of politics bleeding into every day life. Political views are now like a fashion accessory. And with the ever-evolving policy changes we are seeing, it may become more and more difficult not to resent someone who supports a policy that will negatively affect your personal and financial freedom.

Furious typing + sweat +boiled blood= raw notes

This is me, in front of the television tonight.

Because I am tired, speechless from stupidity and unable to translate this evenings debate into words, I have decided to publish my notes from the debate ‘in the raw’. We’ll see how this turns out. I have edited down from the 4 original pages to some highlights from our dear leader.

Notes in ‘regular font’ are things the candidate said (indicated by their name)
Notes in ‘bold’ are my own thoughts
Whenever you see lines resembling “jfkdlhflksdhfjksdhf”, you can insert your own expletive.

9:00pm
Gosh I hate how Obama walks. He is so pompous.
O: Michelle, next year we won’t be celebrating our anniversary in front of 40 million people…exactly. Cause you’ll be back in Chicago.
O: The auto industry has come roaring back (lie), the housing market is has begun to rise (lie)
I wish he would keep his hands down. It’s so distracting

R: Romney: 5 basic parts to encourage growth: energy independent, open up more trade, make sure people have skills need to succeed, balance the budget, champion small business . Small businesses are at a 30-year low.(WHY AREN’T YOU MENTIONING OBAMACARE!!!!!)

Obama: Trickledown- Improve education. Made enormous progression drawing ideas. Race to the Top (YOU DIDN’T BUILD THAT!) Hire 100,000 teachers? (WHOS GONNA PAY FOR THAT?) How do we deal with our tax code? How do we have enough revenue to pay for that? How can you call it addition to the deficit when the money is never pulled or supposed to be pulled from the people? Cuts aren’t spending! They are opposites!

Obama: I cut taxes for middle class families by $3,600. We do best when the middle class is doing well
(Uhh What did Joe Biden just say yesterday? Middle class has been Barry’ed?)
They can now buy a computer for their kid going to college, helps business. (LOL!)

khsdakldklsahjdklasjdklasj

9:28 pm– first mention of Blame it on Bush.

hsjdhhdsjkhdjskhkdshjkhsgdjkh

Obama: go back to bill Clinton tax era. Encourage job growth and make investments in education and energy (HOW?) 97% of small business would not see increase. Millionaires and billionaires are not small business (DEFINITION OF SMALL BUSINESS…make sure to look it up …………………)

For the record, folks, the definition of a small business is “A small business is a business that is privately owned and operated, with a small number of employees and relatively low volume of sales”

Obama: Cut those things that aren’t efficient…77 gov programs. aircrafts that the air force order, 18 education programs that weren’t helping kids learn, Medicaid/medicare fraud, cut $1 trillion out of discretionary budget,
$4 trillion deficit proposal: Its on the website…$2.50 for every cut, we ask for an additional $1 (WTF? I don’t know what you are saying. And I thought many of your constituents were at a disadvantage by not having internet. Now you tell us to visit your website so we can “see what’s in it”?)
Quit smirking.

Obama: Governor has ruled out revenue to address the deficit. (DUH! That’s what he just said you ding dong!)

Obama: Social Security is structurally sound. (Sir, get a grip.) The mere concept is ludicrous.
Obama: 4 years when I ran for office, I had same conversations. Small business couldn’t get affordable costs. Biggest driver of federal deficit…THEN WHY THE DSHDKASHDKASHDKSAH WOULD U MAKE IT A GOVERNMENT THING? People cannot get coverage. Insurance companies impose limits. (Aren’t there limits in car insurance too? You have to protect private companies at some point)

UGH!

Obama: This was a Republican idea. When he talks about this unelected board, group of healthcare experts to figure out how we can reduce the cost of care in the system overall. 2 ways to deal 1)leave a whole bunch of people uninsured. 2)how do we make the cost of care more effective. When completely implemented. Healthcare premiums have gone up but slower than 50 years. That’s like already getting a rebate (No words, just sweat and headaches)

Obama Race to the Top: we will give you more money if you initiate reforms. Lets’ hire 100,00 math and science teachers. Hard pressed states can’t do that. 100,000s of teachers laid off over the last few years. Government can’t do it all. We will have a better trained workforce. (Please tell me…if you couldn’t afford to pay them then, and they’re still broke, how can you pay them now? We’re looking for money in all the wrong places. Where’s waldo? Lets put wood on a burning fire when we should be looking for water to solve the problem and then find new, better materials to make for a sturdier system).

obama: significant program. Race to the top…budget reflect choices. Making college affordable…we were sending $60 billion as middle men. So they cut the middle man. Keep low interest rates. (these things are not related! you are off your rocker. Student debt is at an all time high…over $1 trillion!!!! why are you encouraging this!!!!!!)

10:29pm

I’ve had enough. Exhaustion sets in. And it’s over. But never too exhausted to argue with people on Facebook about their own commentary throughout the debate. Thank you and good night.

Liberals Are Ugly

No really, they are. Okay, not ‘ugly’. Less feminine. Last week, UCLA released a study showing that the GOP has a more feminine face. Their findings seemed significant: “Female politicians with stereotypically feminine facial features are more likely to be Republican than Democrat, and the correlation increases the more conservative the lawmaker’s voting record,” said lead author Colleen M. Carpinella, a UCLA graduate student in psychology.

Did we really need a study to tell us that conservatives tend to be a bit more on the feminine side?

So why is this so? Upon my immediate desire to research this further, I was impressed by the plethora of results already on Google regarding this topic. Things like ‘Ugly Comments by Ugly Liberals, LiberalsAreHypocrites.com, and ‘Why are Liberals So Butt- Ugly?’ But I wanted to stick to liberal and conservative politicians and figureheads, not people who mouth off to stir controversy.  Some people said it was because ‘conservatives have more wealth’. I thought that was funny. I had no idea Hilary and Bill were scraping for groceries or that Elena Kagan was receiving WIC benefits. Another ‘reasoner’ stated that liberals look the way they do to appeal to the people they want to vote for them. What? There really isn’t a ‘reason’ except that ‘people think so’. But that’s reason enough for me.
I’m going to go ahead and make my own associations here: class & femininity. I’ll also fully disclose that I am a bit old-fashioned. I like long hair, skirts and dresses and looking like a woman. I don’t know about you, but I haven’t spent any time around men who said “Man, did you see how good that chick looked in her pant suit?” Love ’em or hate ’em, you cannot deny the class that conservative women exude.

But you can’t tell me that you have to have a pixie hair cut, wear a pant suit and a pinkie ring to be powerful and successful. It sometimes seems like liberals get so hell-bent on being pro-choice, pro-equal pay, pro-free-birth-control, anti-objectivity feminists, that they forget to be feminine. They forget that they are actually women.

Would it kill you to put on a skirt or a shift dress? Would using a hair dryer and a curling iron mean you no longer believe in equality? A little blush? I don’t think so.

Student Loans: A Failure by Legislators

Every so often, I have the opportunity to discuss something I’m passionate about in my graduate classes. Below is the PDF file of a policy paper for my Higher Education Seminar class. In it, I discuss the student loan opportunities, implications of “over-receipt”, how it’s effecting our economy and the failure of proposed legislation on the federal level. Personally, I believe in a complete cessation of federal student loan lending, but that extreme measure has a small likelihood of taking effect at this time. The paper is broken down by headers in case you prefer not to read it in its’ entirety. I also included a class handout which briefly details the overview of the paper with graphs, charts and bullets…for people who like pictures!
Note: Just because you are not a student, doesn’t mean the mountain of student loan debt doesn’t affect you. This is an overall economic issue, not one affecting only a single generation of millenials.

StudentLoanDrain

BriefSummaryHandout

 

 

I Pledge Allegiance to Obama…

Dear Texas, You’ve been doing a lot wrong lately. Sincerely, America.
Last week, as our country was outraged by the events and tragedies in the Middle East, here at home we were further denigrating America. A Texas school district removed an American flag [pictured below] with Obama’s face on the right side and the words “Obama 44th President. 56th Inauguration January 20, 2009”. What is this…Cuba?

The flag was displayed in a classroom in southeast Texas for nearly a week before it was removed. After a flood of emails from parents, the principal removed the flag herself. Diane Boyett, communications director for the Victoria Independent School District said “the flag was displayed in a disciplinary classroom reserved or in-school suspensions and used by “very few students“. She also said the teacher meant no disrespect and that it had “no political undertones”. She compared it to placing a picture of George Washington or John F. Kennedy on the wall in a classroom. Seriously? Displaying a photo for learning purposes and posting political memorabilia are two very different things.

Teachers claim day in and day out to be “public servants”. Public servants are not allowed to campaign while in the classroom. And let’s not forget what a terrible example this is setting for children: defacing a flag, honoring a politician, forced political indoctrination…the level of offensiveness is beyond measure.

Our flag is a symbol of our freedom. The epitome of America. Representing vigilance, perseverance, justice, and valor. It used to be disturbing, upsetting and reprehensible to deface a flag with “any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture or drawing of any nature” (US. Flag code).  Now people just smile and flip the TV back to ‘The Voice’ or ‘Honey Boo Boo’. Before you are a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or whatever you’d like to label or not label yourself, you are an American. Never ever ever should someone’s face appear on the American flag.

If you don’t see something wrong with this…you need to take a cold shower and wake up! With the violence overseas where they are removing OUR flag and replacing it with things we don’t believe in and killing fellow Americans, we should, at a very minimum, respect the flag here at home.

Tyranny at the Cobb GOP

Saturday I attended the Cobb GOP Breakfast. It was my first one since primary season, seeing as though I was still weeping and eating birthday cake for the August one. These breakfasts generally have the same schedule every month: some time to mingle, formalized prayer and Pledge of Allegiance, introduction of present elected officials and then on to the main speaker. This time, all was status quo until the elected officials were introduced and you heard several loud, overarching boos. They continued during each briefing by elected officials. When I turned around to see the boo-ers standing in a small group wearing Ron Paul shirts, I was overcome with disappointment.

I proudly supported Ron Paul during the Primary as well. I am a staunch Constitutionalist, I believe in the smallest form of government and vehemently disagree with many of the policies that have been implemented over the last few years- the NDAA, Obamacare, and ARRA to name a few. I sometimes feel misrepresented by parties and my elected officials and more often than not, feel many freedoms are slowly slipping away. But I’ve also accepted that Ron Paul is not the Republican nominee and if I would like to participate in Republican activities, whether it be on a personal level or a professional level, I need to be respectful of their causes, initiatives and goals.

During the booing, you could just see the Republicans in the room seething and becoming more and more irritated with every shout, cackle and disruption. It was truly disrespectful. I was sitting close enough to the gentlemen to overhear Congressman Phil Gingrey stop them on his way out. He said he appreciated their attendance and to please call his office if they would like to set up a meeting to discuss some of their concerns. The gentlemen shook his hand and then snickered and made even more nasty comments as the Congressman walked away. After the meeting as everything was breaking up, I walked up to the group of gentlemen and asked them why they attended the events if they hated Republicans so much. It immediately escalated to one gentleman yelling at me about my beliefs and shouting about my ignorance which drew a “You don’t KNOW me” from me. After explaining my disconcert with his delivery and my thoughts on party rejection of his message because of his delivery, the man admitted that he could be a bit brazen, brash and ‘in your face’ but that if he ‘changed’ one person, he won. I stated again that he is on Republican breeding ground and suggested a few different ways to garner different reactions. I extended my hand for a handshake at the end of our heated discussion and asked them to please consider my points.

But here is the thing: The venue is all wrong. You have to know your audience, man. We were at a REPUBLICAN breakfast to rally for REPUBLICAN ideals and to initiate a REPUBLICAN grassroots effort. I don’t attend Democrat events in an attempt to alter their opinions on gun control (or the lack of need for it), abortion, affirmative action or any other issue. It wouldn’t make any sense. It’s like yelling at a brick wall. My mom always told me you get further with honey than with vinegar and I certainly never received any recognition for throwing a temper tantrum. If you’d like pancakes for dinner, instead of saying “I WANT THE ******* pancakes you *** ** * *****!!!!” maybe try “I’d like to have pancakes for dinner some time this week. Is that something we can discuss?” Compromise. Act like adults.

Republicans shout that a write-in or 3rd party vote is a vote for Obama. Ron Paul extremists shout that Romney=Obama. But the cold hard reality is that both groups need each other if they want to make any progress.

Do I believe that the Republican Party, on a local and state level, should make a more concerted effort to address the issues and concerns of Ron Paul supporters? Yes, I do. Do I believe that many Ron Paul supporters have been acting like children and therefore discrediting the rest of us? Yes, I do.

So let’s recap.
I support their message.
I believe in dissent.
I don’t like boo-ers.
I don’t support their method of delivery.
I don’t condone disrespect or temper tantrums.
I want real change.
I want Obama out of office.

The options are a) incremental change with the Republican party or b) full-on revolution.

Which is going to stabilize things for our country that we so desperately need?

Student Loans: I’m ready to place blame.

Student loans. Two words I escaped in undergrad but responsibly and begrudgingly chose to assume for my graduate degree (currently in progress). I’ve blogged about student loans in the past, but now that I am actively going through the process, my convictions have strengthened.

My decision, after much contemplation and research, to assume student loan debt was not an easy one but necessary if I wanted to make that “investment” into my own future. (Note: I do not plan to “Teach for America” or work for the Feds, so it’s safe to assume that I will pay back every penny with sufficient 6.8 % interest.)

I could NOT believe how easy the application and approval process is. You fill out a few questions about yourself and your financial state (and at my age, both of these are minimal), submit, wait, and APPROVED! You then complete a 15-minute webinar on loans, sign a “digital signature” and your loan is assigned to a master company who you deal with directly.  The money is directly deposited into your account. After doing this, you don’t really hear from your loan host, except for a few ‘holidays’.

This year, I received a “birthday card” (via email)  from my student loan host…on the wrong day. They don’t even have my date of birth correct in their database. Fabulous record keeping. Sure, this is a minor feat, but when you can’t record-keep correctly, it makes me question what else you can’t do correctly.

Then, just this week, I received a “Welcome Back!” email from my loan host as well. Please see the ‘circled’ sections below:

A few things to consider before we move on:
There are subsidized loans, which allow you to hold off on accumulating interest until graduation day; and unsubsidized loans, where interest begins accumulating from the day you accept the loan. With unsubsidized, you can either a) pay the interest during your time in school or, b) have the interest funneled into the final loan amount and end up paying interest on interest. (initially, you can choose subsidized over unsubsidized, but subsidized maxes out earlier than unsubsidized)
Being the stingy, OCD person who would rather spend that money on something else, that I am, decided to take ‘option A’ in regards to my unsubsidized loans to ultimately reduce the amount I have to pay back. You would NOT believe how difficult this process is.

Let’s talk about how unrealistic student loans are.
Where in real life are you expected to make a monthly payment without receiving a bill or some sort of “payment voucher” etc?
Where in real life can you REDUCE THE TERM OF YOUR LOAN because you’ve gone 10 years with on-time payments? (I’ve yet to meet a mortgage lender who says “Thanks for being on-time for the last few years. We’ve wiped your slate clean, the house is yours!”

We saw with the mortgage industry what happens when you assume more debt that your asset is worth. So why are we allowing students to pull out the maximum [graduate] loan amount of $20,500/year when tuition can often only cost $5k-$6k? Imagine how low payments would be or how quickly you could pay off loans if only the bare minimum was accepted?

Another problem: deferment. I fully support our armed servicemen and women and agree with deferment while they are fighting for our freedoms overseas. I do not support deferment for those experiencing “financial hardship”. If you are unemployed, you can defer for up to three years. Really? I guess this is better than allowing unemployment benefits to be put towards loans, but still. How is this even an option? Maybe you should have selected a degree in something other than Art History or Gender Studies through Social Work.

Finally, cancellation. Whose idea was this? I would love to know so I could take them for a long walk on a short plank. Like I mentioned above, loan amounts can be taken out to far exceed the cost of education. Now there is an option to cancel loans for a variety of reasons. If you plan to cancel the loan based on “service”, don’t disperse a loan at all. Simply don’t charge tuition for said person. Allowing them to take out sometimes 4x the loan amount and then canceling the entire thing…???Heaven only knows what we’ve actually paid for in tax dollars.

The last thing I am implying is that students are not responsible for their own loans. They absolutely are. But, back to the email….
Why would you send emails saying “You don’t need to do anything!” when in reality, you do?
Why would you cease correspondence after signing loans until 6 months after graduation when the payments begin?
Why would you omit the fact that you can start making payments on your loan amount starting the day you assume them?
Why would you allow telephone operators to say payments cannot be made over the phone and make online account set up extremely time-consuming in an effort to discourage early payment?

I’ll tell you why: Because student loans are a feeder into the dependency of a nanny state.

With student loan debt at an all-time high, approaching nearly $1trillion dollars, we should be scared. We should be making moves.
We should absolutely encourage people to begin paying money back immediately upon the commencement of the loan. Even if it’s only $10 a month, some sort of effort, some sort of action should be promoted if it won’t be required.
We should ONLY allow tuition costs paid directly to the school + a book allowance to minimize repayments and loan withdrawals.

The student loan program is entirely broken. It is only working for that small percentage that actually pays, or intends to pay, back the full amount + interest. I call for an entire moratorium on the federal student loans industry. Otherwise, cost will only increase as those of us who make every effort to repay them are left with the burden of compensating for those who do not.

Get Back in the Kitchen

In recent days, behind the Walker-Wisconsin victory and behind the Obama-Mitt race lies a continuously divisive issue: The War on Women. In that liberal named “war” is the Paycheck Fairness Act.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is “legislation being considered by the United States Congress to expand the scope of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Fair Labor Standards Act as part of an effort to address male–female income disparity in the United States.” The bill has failed twice before.

Senator Barbara A. Mikulski claims that women make “77 cents for every dollar that a man makes with the same education doing the same job. That’s 23 percent less”. (Thak you for the math, Senator. Maybe you should check your own: According to CNN, Mikulski pays her own female staffers 27% less than male staffers.) And does this account for geographical location, work experience, work experience in the field, hours worked weekly, etc.?? Also, if this were true, if women could be paid only 70-80% of what men are paid, and this was truly a pay-driven issue, don’t you think the greedy, money-hungry business owners would fire all men and replace them with “cheaper” women?

As a provable female, I feel that I can criticize this legislation, unlike a man who would be shamed as “attacking the female population”. When the Senate GOP blocked the bill on Tuesday, it was another War on Women accusation. I say no. This is a War on Freedom of Choices.

So let’s explore a few of the undiscussed and unexplained repercussions of this legislation that lead me to think this way:
1.) Fewer women will be hired. If you regulate so much and make it difficult to hire women, companies just won’t. Same logic as the health care mandate. Companies will pay the fine instead of provide insurance because it will cost less. Also, now you can seek punitive damages. Companies aren’t going to want to take the risk and hire someone who can easily file a lawsuit with simply a suspicion of inequality.

2.) You are in essence creating a minimum wage for positions at companies. This meddles in what is the responsibility of private companies and private firms.

3.) I think maternity leave is a wonderfully generous thing. Motherhood is certainly not easy but you are given 6 weeks and a guaranteed job when you return. No matter how spin it, you are granted special treatment because you are raising children. Men don’t have this luxury. Should we equalize this as well and allow them to work from home during their son’s football season?

4.) I would consider “same education” to be same degree fom the same school during the same time. Not a Bachelors in Business Administration versus a Bachelors in Women’s Studies. Those are not comparable. I would also consider “the same job” to NOT mean one person who is training level and one who holds 10 years experience. I’m not sure we are comparing apples to apples. And finally, would you consider the “same job” to be a lawyer who settles 15 cases in a quarter compared to a lawyer who settles 55 cases in a quarter. I would not.

5.) Who says equal pay will be an increase? What if male salaries were decreased in order to accommodate such legislation? You’re still making ‘less’ and now your husband is, too!

6.) Finally, facts say it ain’t true. Single, childless women between 22 and 30 earn 8% more than men and unmarried college-educated males between 40-64 earn almost 15% less than their femal counterparts.

I was under the impression that women wanted EQUAL treatment, not SPECIAL treatment. Why do you want a pay increase BECAUSE you are a woman? Don’t you want a pay raise because you are qualified, have proven yourself and have earned it? And it’s not equal WORK, but equal PRODUCTION. I don’t follow the logic. How is this any better than Affirmative Action? We see how well THAT worked out. When will people wake up that you cannot just regulate everything you don’t like?

I’ll close with my daily WTF Question to President Obama: Have you looked at wage discrepancies in the White House? 🙂

Go Directly to Jail! Do not Pass Go…

Yesterday, in Stockton, California, a judge denied a tuberculosis patient’s release request after he was jailed for allegedly refusing to take his medication. The judge elaborated saying ‘he was uncomfortable releasing Rodriguez because of his methamphetamine and alcohol use and past behavior.’ The man, Armando Rodriguez, pleaded not guilty Wednesday to misdemeanor charges of refusing to comply with a tuberculosis order.

Shall we discuss the issues with this?
1. What does previous methamphetamine and alcohol use have to do with being a tuberculosis patient?
2. If you don’t know what a tuberculosis order is, you’re not alone. Apparently there is a TB Control Branch that investigates and oversees all tuberculosis cases.
3. It concerns me greatly that a state government can impose any form of healthcare on a citizen of this country in the land of the free and jail them for failing to comply.
4. What if you are opposed to prescription drugs? TB treatment plans as prescribed by physicians can be extremely in-depth and invasive. Treatment plans range from 12 weeks to 9 months! Side effects from the drugs include: flu-like symptoms, musculoskeletal pain, thrombocytopenia, shortness of breath, wheezing, bronchospasm, urticaria, angioedema, and shock, among others. Which is worse? The sickness or the treatment?
5. According to the California Department of Public Health, in 2011, a total of 2,317 cases were reported (which is roughly 20% of all cases reported in the US in 2011). Are you seriously telling me that the state is in charge of medical care decisions for 2,317 people?
6. TB is a fairly serious medical issue. Of the 1,218 people in California that died from TB, only 1/4 of them died because they didn’t receive any treatment. So, 913 people died WHILE receiving treatment.
7. If you’re worried about the disease spreading, why would you place Rodriguez in a jail cell where he could easily infect other people as opposed to house arrest? I don’t like the argument that ‘TB-disease carriers are a threat to the community’. So are robbers, murderers, child molesters, [many of whom were released early because of overcrowding a few years back] people who knowingly spread HIV/AIDS and politicians who don’t tell the truth.
8. There is hardly a true threat. Most people infected with TB do not contract the disease or fall ill from the infection, as their bodies are able to fight off TB.

 

So, what your thoughts? Do YOU think people should be jailed for failing to take prescriptions? What’s next? Vaccinations? I certainly think it makes their state flag all the more comical.

Birth Control, Sandra Fluke, Viagra & Conservatives

20120315-084954.jpg

I’ve about had it with all the birth control talk. Call me old fashioned, but I was talking with a colleague the other day and we were discussing how open people have become about their personal lives. Right, wrong or indifferent…twenty years ago, no woman would stand up in front of the country and discuss her sex life and her birth control needs…with costs.

After months and months of “the war on women”, I’m over it. I’m tired of hearing about what Sandra Fluke said and did and how hurt she was by Rush Limbaugh’s comments. I’m tired of Nancy Pelosi and Gloria Allred. I don’t want to hear anymore about how Republicans are (I do, however, take issue with the fact women were not allowed access to certain hearings pertaining to women’s health) out to confiscate the rights of women. It’s simply not true. Republicans and Libertarians alike simply don’t want it at taxpayers expense. On the counter, I’m tired of all of the regulation. Last week, Nina Turner of Ohio presented a bill that would require a “medical issue” in order for men to be prescribed Viagra. This was an attempt to “strike back” at the men in office who are working to “limit women’s rights”. Enough already!

So here is what I propose: make birth control available over the counter.

People need choices. They should be free to take birth control as they please–at their own expense. If people want to be sexually active and take risks not only with their bodies but with a grotesquely synthetic drug every day, then so be it. If its over the counter, then it can’t be covered by insurance and the burden is immediately off of the the tax payers. You ask about minors? Well they are getting it anyway and will continue to get it anyway, so it’s really a moot point. That’s on the parents, NOT THE GOVERNMENT. Drug companies could still market their product competitively and no liberal could whine and cry that their health insurance company or employer is denying them access to “their constitutional right to birth control”. You want it? You buy it. If you “need it for medical purposes” like endometriosis, then you’ll have access to it at a competitive market price.

This intense argument is nothing but political banter. Rush. Fluke. The War on Women. All of it. Shut up and just eliminate the problem.