The Art of Redundancy

If it is one thing the Democrats are very good at, and one thing that their legions of progressive sycophants depend on – it’s redundancy. The Democrats bleat on endlessly over contrived issues and the repetition thereof results in an allegiance amongst their base that rivals that of the most famous Tyrants. It’s at a level now that I have never seen before and the most recent Paul Krugman article is a great example. You may remember Paul Krugman – the Nobel prize winning progressive economist who decries the inequities of a capitalist society and whom recently accepted a six figure position with an institution of higher progressive learning for offering his valued opinion on matters of import, yet not required to lower himself to the masses and actually teaching in the classroom. This latest Krugman article perpetuates the infrastructure redundancy that progressives seemingly fall back on every time they need an economic issue to distract voters with. You may remember the Obama proclamation of 2008 wherein the great orator decreed:

“We will create millions of jobs by making the single largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s. We’ll invest your precious tax dollars in new and smarter ways, and we’ll set a simple rule – use it or lose it. If a state doesn’t act quickly to invest in roads and bridges in their communities, they’ll lose the money.”

Subsequently, in March of 2009, the single greatest stimulus package was passed and funds were given to the administration to use where they sought fit. Strangely, the infrastructure still seems to be a problem, and an issue of which progressive elites like Krugman feel that they can foam up the base with one more time:

“In prosperous times, public spending on roads, bridges and so on competes with the private sector for resources. Since 2008, however, our economy has been awash in unemployed workers (especially construction workers) and capital with no place to go (which is why government borrowing costs are at historic lows). Putting those idle resources to work building useful stuff should have been a no-brainer.”

Now, did Krugman forget his Messiah’s 2008 proclamation and subsequent spending spree, or is he being purposely deceitful? I will leave that to your own imagination, but you can all easily imagine is what Krugman’s answer is to this on-going infrastructure problem – more taxes of course:

“It’s hard to think of any good reason why taxes on gasoline should be so low, and it’s easy to think of reasons, ranging from climate concerns to reducing dependence on the Middle East, why gas should cost more. So there’s a very strong case for raising the gas tax “

The progressive Democrats have yet to find a problem, real or contrived, that can’t be resolved by raising taxes. The problem for them is that these issuess are never resolved despite how many taxes they raise, and fortunately for those of us in “realville”, the majority of voters are starting to come to that realization. One thing is for certain though, you can expect this issue, , and the other redundant issues of climate change, and the patently absurd “war on women” to be part and parcel to the Democrats 2014 and 2016 agenda.

78 thoughts on “The Art of Redundancy

  1. Amazona July 6, 2014 / 5:21 pm

    Your observations on redundancy, while apt, are also tied in with my own on Identity Politics. That is, a message is chosen by the Left, identified as coming from the Left with the Right named as villains, and then repeated over and over again. Once the sheeple have been given their instructions—-“Anything said by this side is good, anything said by that side is bad” and they are used to using that single criterion instead of analyzing what is actually said, then it just comes down to the insertion of the lie into their consciousness, which is achieved by repetition.

    A perfect example: The beloved WAAAAAR ON WOMENNNNNNN !!! chant of the RRL. You have probably noticed that there is no actual discussion of acts against women purported to come from the Right—–but, given their audience, lined up to eagerly slurp the swill fed to them by their minders, there is no reason to have any facts. All they need is something very very simple—-three words, four syllables, and in this case a little catchy alliteration—–that demands nothing in the way of intellect or analysis, and then the incessant repetition, and they have their zombie followers relying on the slogan when they have to make what should be reasoned, educated, political decisions.

    How many of these mindless robots do you think read an article claiming that the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision “denied access to contraception” and took a moment to wonder just how stating that a company did not have to pay for something equals DENYING ACCESS to that ‘something’? I’d say none. This is not the kind of question asked by the sheeple. No, they simply gobble down the concept that these poor women were DENIED ACCESS to something, and that became part of their body of knowledge. My company does not buy me beer, but I am not DENIED ACCESS to beer—–I just have to pay for it myself. Anyone can think of hundreds if not thousands of things that they have to buy for themselves, instead of having their bosses pay for them, and they realize that they still have those things—-they just had to go out and buy them for themselves. Cable TV, mag wheels, baseball tickets, the list is endless. Do we encounter breathless articles about these poor put-upon people are DENIED ACCESS to these things? Of course not.

    But let their minders tell them that being expected to pay for their own baby-killing drugs means these people are DENIED ACCESS to them, and they shovel it in and expel it in bursts of intellectual flatulence. (That is not even getting into the simple fact that a “contraceptive” is something that PREVENTS conception, not something that acts to end the life created by conception—that would be waaaayyyyy over the heads of the average Lib zombie.)

  2. Retired Spook July 6, 2014 / 7:22 pm

    I don’t always agree with Peggy Noonan, but her WSJ oped on the 4th nails it, especially this line:

    This is a president with 2½ years to go who shows every sign of running out the clock. Normally in a game you run out the clock when you’re winning. He’s running it out when he’s losing.

  3. Cluster July 7, 2014 / 11:36 am

    The mindless progressive’s are again in full bloom today, hoping repetition of their manufactured issues will gain traction. The Agnostic Athiest is still bleating on about denying women access to contraception, and as Amazona so succinctly pointed out – not having someone else pay for it is not denying them access. But let’s not let that little fact get in the way of their hysteria. And then there is this latest musing from Watson:

    Since November 4, 2008, the Republican party and the conservative movement have been dominated by exactly one thought: Opposition to anything President Obama proposes or does.

    Now you would think that opposition to anything that Obama proposes and does would be considered a good thing in this 6th year of his administration considering the abysmal results of his thoughts and actions, but this meme does play into a broader repetitive view progressives have of conservatives. I am just surprised Watson didn’t play the race card – but based on history, it is just a matter of when that card is played, not if.

    • tiredoflibbs July 7, 2014 / 12:15 pm

      “The Agnostic Athiest is still bleating on about denying women access to contraception”

      These drones believe that if you repeat something often enough it becomes true. The proof is in their repetition of their dumbed-down talking points. The Atheist Agnostic kept repeating time and again that contraception was the means to reducing abortion. If government provided contraception to women, the number of abortions would simply be reduced so conservatives should support it. We had that discussion here many times.

      However, I showed him the error of his simple-minded logic. I showed him a study performed by one of his sources. The study showed that to be untrue and go into great detail as to why it is factually untrue. Predictably, the Atheist Agnostic simply denied the study’s results. His other cherry picked statistic trying to show that contraception reduces abortions – he compared a state (New Hampshire) who provides contraception to women and another state (Alabama I believe) who relies on abstinence. His cherry picked data said that it reduced the pregnancy rate of teens. However, if you look at the entire population of women of birthing age, one sees that the pregnancy rate per capita (and abortion rate) goes up. New Hampshire had a higher abortion rate than Alabama! The study I provided him with CONFIRMS the result. The Atheist Agnostic simply dismissed the statistic as an anomaly.

      He still mindlessly regurgitates the same debunked crap.

      With that in mind, these fools still believe we are in a recovery, unemployment is lower than before (regardless of the fudged numbers), obamacare insures more people than before (even though the administration admits they can verify it), obame did not lie with regard to the “if you like your insurance you can keep it (I read recently that a couple had to get a divorce in order to keep their coverage), etc. etc. the list goes on and on.

      It is really pathetic that these mindless drones can continue to spout such nonsense in spite of evidence that says otherwise.

      “I am just surprised Watson didn’t play the race card – but based on history, it is just a matter of when that card is played, not if.”

      He is holding that in his back pocket once all the other excuses have worn out. It is amazing that they ignore the obstruction done by Reid. As an example, if Reid lets legislation to be debated/amended his amendment approval rate (for Republicans) is dismal. He practically will not allow amendments to be made. In the House however, the amendment rate give to Democrats is much higher. The number of amendments that Carol Mosely-Braun (sp) and approved by Baehner (sp) alone outnumber those given by Reid to the ENTIRE Republican party. And yet, the Democrats can lie with a straight face that it is the Republicans who are obstructionist. Of course, the Democrats do consider “cooperation” and “bipartisanship” to mean “giving them what they want with no compromise”.

      Again, pathetic.

      • tiredoflibbs July 7, 2014 / 5:31 pm

        The data from the abortion/contraceptive study in case anyone is interested. We know the Agnositic Atheist will go running as before, put on a brave face and begin his delusions all over again. Here is a recap:

        Submitted on 2013/05/18 at 11:07 am
        crusty: “The women were merely given effective birth control and told how to use it and that reduced abortions – very easy to do in the real world”

        And yet, I have shown studies proving this to be false. Your study of comparing sex-ed and contraception in New Hampshire and Alabama where New Hampshire has higher abortion rates also shows your “conclusions” (really regurgitated dumbed down talking points) to be false. We deal in the real world.

        Now for some real objective science with dozens of links:

        some of the highlights:
        “According to the Guttmacher Institute, 40% of unintended pregnancies are aborted.10 Do we say then that Planned Parenthood is preventing 244,800 abortions each year? No. Those are hypothetical saves. They pale in comparison to the 332,278 actual lives who were violently destroyed by Planned Parenthood.

        In a 2010 CDC report examining contraceptive use in the United Sates over the last 30 years, they reach this rather shocking conclusion:

        Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age… But that does not mean that contraceptive use in the United States is completely consistent or effective. One-half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, and the average probability of an unintended pregnancy in 12 months of contraceptive use in the United States is 12%, unchanged from 1995.1″

        Oh and the REAL CLENCHER!

        “Planned Parenthood concedes on their website that, “Being continuously abstinent is the only way to be absolutely sure that you won’t have an unintended pregnancy or get a sexually transmitted disease (STD)… abstinence is 100 percent effective in preventing pregnancy. It also prevents STDs.”15

        On their chart comparing the effectiveness of different birth control methods, Planned Parenthood estimates that 2-9% of pill users will get pregnant in any given year and 15-24% of condom users will still wind up with an unplanned pregnancy.16

        Abby Johnson makes a revealing observation concerning her own birth control history. “There’s an incredible irony,” she writes, “in the fact that I had a career in educating women about contraception and yet, for the third time, conceived while using contraceptives.”17 If you scoff at the CDC assertion that 12% of the women using birth control still wind up pregnant, consider that even a professional, sex-educator – the director of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic wound up with three unplanned pregnancies – all while using contraceptives.””

        As I said(along with all the studies I presented), women become falsely reliant on birth control and would be having sex as an alternative to being abstinent during their fertile period. That increased sexual activity increases the risk of pregnancy even though on contraceptives because of their failure rates. HIGHLY EFFECTIVE birth control is only under ideal controlled conditions as your study shows. Your comparison of sex-ed and birth control in New Hampshire and Alabama proves what the studies, that I have been posting, have been saying all along.

        I don’t need “mommy” I have TRUE objective science behind my words. You have carefully controlled studies and dumbed down talking points on yours.

        Submitted on 2013/04/24 at 9:20 pm
        Uh oh, this is really going to send crusty over the edge:
        According to the Guttmacher Institute increased use of contraception actually increases the number of abortions. GASP!

        “The reason for the confusion stems from the observation that, within particular populations, contraceptive prevalence and the incidence of induced abortion can and, indeed, often do rise in parallel, contrary to what one would expect. The explanation for these counterintuitive trends is clear.2 In societies that have not yet entered the fertility transition, both actual fertility and desired family sizes are high (or, to put it another way, childbearing is not yet considered to be “within the calculus of conscious choice”3). In such societies, couples are at little (or no) risk of unwanted pregnancies. The advent of modern contraception is associated with a destabilization of high (or “fatalistic”) fertility preferences. Thus, as contraceptive prevalence rises and fertility starts to fall, an increasing proportion of couples want no more children (or want an appreciable delay before the next child), and exposure to the risk of unintended pregnancy also increases as a result. In the early and middle phases of fertility transition, adoption and sustained use of effective methods of contraception by couples who wish to postpone or limit childbearing is still far from universal. Hence, the growing need for contraception may outstrip use itself;4 thus, the incidence of unintended and unwanted pregnancies rises, fueling increases in unwanted live births and induced abortion. In this scenario, contraceptive use and induced abortion may rise simultaneously.”

        “In many populations, rising levels of contraceptive prevalence are not associated over time with falling levels of abortion.”

        I think crusty has suffered enough.

        At the other blog, Agnostic Atheist presents a “study” that does exactly what the study above warns against “hypothetical saves” – IF contraceptives were used then a percentage of abortions could be avoided. It is nothing more than a WAG disguised as “science”.

        Then he puffs his chest out and repeats to himself and his fellow mindless drone-trolls, ” I have never lost a debate to these cretins…” Talk about the “Art of Redundancy”

    • M. Noonan July 7, 2014 / 1:24 pm

      It is actually funny, that attitude of theirs. It goes like this – Obama is the first black President and so must be supported because lack of support can only be the result of racism thus all conservative Republicans should have transformed themselves into liberal Democrats upon Obama’s election and started supporting him and thus our continued opposition to Obama is based entirely upon racist hatred of the fact that he’s black.

      • Amazona July 7, 2014 / 7:52 pm

        “Obama is the first black President and so must be supported because lack of support can only be the result of racism thus all conservative Republicans should have transformed themselves into liberal Democrats upon Obama’s election”

        Of course. If your “politics” are unrelated to objective analyses of the best method of governing the nation, and instead rely on identity, this makes complete sense.

        This is precisely why the Left not only carries on about all this alleged “racism” but also explains its indignation about opposition to Obama’s policies. Lacking, as they are, of any real understanding that politics is not about personality or identity but about how to govern a country, their only frame of reference is that any opposition is personal. To them, wanting to stop Obama’s policies is not because we believe they are harmful to the country, it is because we just hate him and want him to fail. Because they had a visceral hatred for George Bush and wanted him to fail so they could celebrate his failure, they assume we base our objections to the political model of Barack Obama on the same superficial, emotional, criteria that govern their own lives.

        No matter how often we try to explain, no matter how often we say that because we believe a massive, bloated, powerful Central Authority is not only a violation of our Constitution but bad for the country, and that our opposition is based on unemotional objective beliefs, they find it impossible to believe that we could be motivated by anything other than what drives them. That is, spite and malice on one side and fawning adoration on the other.

        If they had even a clue that millions of people base their political allegiance on objective analysis of political models and the decision that one model is better than the other, they might start to understand why this decision doesn’t just change according to who is in office. They are truly baffled, and as a result enraged, that people don’t just fall in love with the objects of their blind adoration, because they base their political identity on personality and the whole concept of evaluating the pros and cons of different governing models is simply beyond them.

        I think this is one of the biggest differences between Left and Right——-on the one side is the wholly emotion-based Left, feeling this and feeling that and reacting this way and reacting that way, without the slightest comprehension of the fact that the Opposition is not basing its positions on the same mishmash of emotions. Being wholly egocentric, they just cannot comprehend that they, and their turbulent emotions, are not the standard of political decision-making.

        I have described political allegiance as a pyramid. For conservatives, the large stable base, or foundation, is an objective analysis of political models and a choice of which they think is more likely to succeed. Only after the base is established do they move upward toward the peak, which is the candidate most likely to represent the political philosophy and chosen political model.

        For the Left, however, the pyramid is upside down. They start with an emotional connection to a personality or identity, which is their base, and then kind of feebly try to build a political philosophy upon it, but the end result is a pyramid trying to balance on its point, teetering because it all depends on the person chosen to meet the emotional needs of the followers. And the tiers or layers they build upon this precarious point are not actual philosophies of how to govern, but are more emotions, usually just variations on how much they hate the Other Side.

        I have only seen one Lib on this blog try to state a political conviction, and that was just the belief that government should be really really big and meet all the needs of everyone, but after that he just fell back into the usual insults and exhibitions of blind loathing of anyone who does not agree.

        So they thrash about in various stages of rage, hatred, anger, hostility, loathing, frustration, blind adoration of their Chosen Ones, mindless allegiances based on superficial characteristics such as race or gender or political identity, and live in a froth of emotions,many of them quite toxic.

        In this kind of mental and emotional chaos, where nothing is definite but everything is subject to the whim or definition of the moment, where the meaning of words is infinitely flexible, where nothing is stable, of course one of them could define his inability to mount a coherent argument as some kind of victory.

      • tiredoflibbs July 8, 2014 / 5:28 am

        This from the Agnostic Atheist, explains a lot……
        “I am the Prince of the Powers of the air, the spirit who works in the sons of disobedience and can only exist at one place at one time. I presently preside to deny the evil broth which pours forth from the mouths of those who were born with congenital defects and/or never paid attention in school. Though their meager powers of obfuscation flow readily from their cheeto-stained fingers, I shall not be removed from my divine ordinance to illuminate the dark recesses of their souls. ”

        Whoa. Talk about willful ignorance… He hangs with those who never paid attention in school, obfuscate and have cogenital mental defects. Anyone who expects people can be forced willingly to give up their productivity and support those who are willingly non-productive (not those who are incapable of fending for themselves) and finance the power hungry elite, who determine who wins and who loses, have mental defects.

        As I said, explains a lot.

      • Cluster July 8, 2014 / 8:25 am

        Tha Agnostic Atheist is on record saying that he is “right about everything”, so his sense of self grandeur knows no end. Ironically, he can’t seem to make his mind up when it comes to a belief in a Higher Power, however after his many derisive posts towards Faith, and his penchant to mockingly refer to that Higher Power as “sky daddy”, I am curious as to why he hangs on to the Agnostic” label. His comments certainly suggest a formed opinion.

    • Retired Spook July 7, 2014 / 1:26 pm


      Wouldn’t you repeatedly lie about something if you thought it would adversely affect your political adversaries? No, of course you wouldn’t because that’s not who you are — that’s not who most Conservatives are. But the moral high ground and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks and nothing more. As we all seem to keep agreeing — it all comes back to education. You educate a couple generations of women that recreational sex is one of the most important of human rights and shouldn’t come with any consequences, then it’s a pretty simple step to get them to believe that anyone who suggests that the avoidance of consequences shouldn’t have to be paid for by someone else is simply evil and must be defeated and/or marginalized. Conservatives have sat back and watched it happen, convincing ourselves that millions of women just couldn’t be that stupid. The 2012 election proved just how wrong we were.

      • Cluster July 7, 2014 / 3:12 pm

        The willful dishonesty amongst the administration AND the media has accelerated the divide and the decline in this country, and it is shameful. Obama evidently has no compunction whatsoever in misleading the population, and sadly too many members of the media, and too many loyalists to the administration are more than willing to never hold him to account, much less call him out for his untruths.

  4. Cluster July 8, 2014 / 8:47 am

    I could go on all day mocking progressive positions, and actually find a lot of enjoyment in pointing out their superficial analysis and beating them about the head with their abysmal results. A quick glance this morning at Watson’s “in depth” contraceptive analysis, which was highly praised by the agnostic atheist, doesn’t disappoint. Here’s an excerpt:

    “Unintended pregnancies, especially among teenagers, carry health risks for mother and baby,” said Dr. Larry Wolk, department executive director and chief medical officer. “Our Colorado Family Planning Initiative has helped thousands of young women who weren’t ready to have children avoid pregnancy with affordable, safe and effective contraceptives.”………………This initiative has saved Colorado millions of dollars,” said Gov. Hickenlooper. “But more importantly, it has helped thousands of young Colorado women continue their education, pursue their professional goals and postpone pregnancy until they are ready to start a family.”..

    Well first of all, doesn’t this dispel the hysteria that women are being “denied access to healthcare”? It seems that many women are availed to a wide range of contraceptives courtesy of the state and local governments – imagine that.

    Secondly, progressives must believe that pregnancy is a random condition that sneaks up on women, and catches them by surprise. Thankfully, many of those women are able to “postpone” their pregnancy only because of the generosity of big hearted progressives though. If conservatives had their way, “random pregnancies” would rampant.

    And as usual, progressives are still not sure as to the involvement of men in these unwanted pregnancies. Progressives never mention mans culpability on this issue – do progressives think that women just wake up one day and BAM – their pregnant? Because if they would consider the other party to this “horrific condition”, they could identify another subset of victims. After all, no one pays for my contraception.

  5. tiredoflibbs July 8, 2014 / 12:20 pm

    Watty (I am suprised you had the guts to show up, considering you won’t allow opposing opinion at your blog, unlike here you can stay as long as you behave – hypocrite as usual), why are you being so obtuse on the issue? It has always been conservatives’ position – where is it in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power and authorization to …. (fill in favorite lefty cause).

    Where is it in the Constitution that the federal government can mandate (force) businesses to provide contraception?

    Why does the left continue to LIE that the Hobby Lobby decision denies women access to contraception? You can query your favorite progressive site, blog for quotes from politicians, political groups etc. etc. for confirmation.

    Only until the government gets involved there is a problem worse than before. Medical costs were mostly affordable until the government created HMOs (thanks Ted Kennedy) and mandated their use – and we all see the problems HMOs created. Here comes the government with another solution…. now we see people losing their policies and medical costs for services, deductibles, premiums are skyrocketing more than before.

    You can sneer all you want, but my discussion with crusty on the whole contraception/pregnancy rates were valid and I showed a study where increased use of contraceptives increases pregnancies and why. All crusty could do was deny it, dismiss it – even when I used his sources against him. But of course, that is not something you, crusty or the left wants to hear.

    Just remember, behave or you will be gone.

  6. tiredoflibbs July 8, 2014 / 6:25 pm

    “Mine was not.”

    Watty, you are just as delusional as crusty. I repeated what you both said and was called immature and child-like. Are you plagued with the same pathetic reading comprehension as you fellow proggies? Based on your claims and off base interpretatations of what is said here by other bloggers, then the answer would be “yes”. Either that or you are willfully ignorant like your fellow proggies.

    You can’t even be honest with yourself.

    • watsonthethird July 8, 2014 / 8:36 pm

      You know as well as I do that your last comment that wasn’t allowed to be posted included expletives that the moderators here certainly wouldn’t tolerate.

      • tiredoflibbs July 8, 2014 / 8:56 pm

        and yet watty, your expletive riddled comment, crusty expletive comment, everyone else’s comments riddled with expletives were allowed to remain.

        Again, you can’t be honest with yourself or are you just naturally willfully ignorant? You are caught and there is no way you can squirm and whine your way out of it.


  7. tiredoflibbs July 8, 2014 / 9:01 pm

    “….they have discovered that contraception prevent pregnancies? Tired doesn’t seem to be able to grasp that. Maybe you should explain it to him.”

    Uh, no. That is not what I said. So you already have a strike against you for lying, now for the reality.

    If you read my post and your dismal reading comprehension did not prevent you from understanding the simple written word, you would have seen that a Guttenmacher study came to the accurate conclusion. But for you to understand the study’s conclusion, that would require you to go against leftist dumbed down talking points.

  8. tiredoflibbs July 9, 2014 / 5:42 am

    MeurASSalt, there were four types of birth control at the center of Hobby Lobby’s contentions: Plan B, which is also known as the “morning after pill (it serves two purposes- prevents fertilization or if fertilization has already taken place then abortion)” Ella, another emergency contraceptive, Copper Intrauterine Device and IUD with progestin — forms of birth control that prevents fertilized eggs from attaching to the uterine wall, the egg dies, another form of abortion.

    Yes, please educate yourself. Your ignorance or willful dishonesty is blatantly obvious. Just because government “doesn’t believe” these contraceptives are abortifacients doesn’t make it so. It just fools useful idiots such as yourself.

  9. meursault1942 July 9, 2014 / 10:50 am

    You’re moving in the wrong direction, Cluster; you’re getting more hysterical, not less. Maybe you just need to take a breather? Hell, your inability to summon any facts and your desperation to change the subject indicate that you know how poorly you’ve done in this discussion, but like I said, you should get on the right side of the facts. You’ll be a lot better off that way.

    • Cluster July 9, 2014 / 11:17 am

      Getting more hysterical? So you’re not only content with demanding what employers pay and offer in benefits, but now your self superiority issues have taken you to a level that you are able to discern the temperament of others and make judgements?

      What a repugnant little twit you are. The facts and the law are on my side on this issue, not yours. If you don’t like the law, maybe you can summon your imperial POS POTUS to “work around” the law as that ass hat, agnostic athiest who frequents a common sewer with you mused the other day.

  10. Retired Spook July 9, 2014 / 2:11 pm

    This article at The Blaze” dovetails perfectly with the conversation in this thread. Hopefully more and more people on the Right will use the in-your-face-confrontation page from the Left’s playbook against them as this lady is doing. What poetic irony that the new watch words from Conservatives are “civil disobedience”, “nullification”, “non-compliance” and “non-conformity”. And the fact that we’re getting such an apoplectic response from the Left is just sweet beyond words.

  11. Amazona July 10, 2014 / 6:48 pm

    I spent some time yesterday with a cousin I have mentioned here as a poster child for the unthinking Left, and she brought up the Hobby Lobby ruling as an example of how conservatives are hostile toward women. She was stunned to hear that the company had been providing insurance coverage that included up to 16 kinds of contraception—-that, is for you Libs, drugs that PREVENT conception—-and only balk at those which end it.

    But she was very confused when I said that the Hobby Lobby employees still have access to these drugs. She was genuinely convinced that they do not. So I said well, they can go to their doctors, an expense covered by their insurance. And if the doctor has a diagnosis of pregnancy and the female wants to kill the baby, he can still write her a prescription for the drug to do that.

    Here I stopped talking for a moment, to let her digest this, because she had simply never thought it through to realize the truth of this. She had swallowed the lie that because the insurance does not PAY for the drug, it is not available. When I saw that this had sunk in, I went on—-“And then she can take the prescription to a drugstore and get the drug, with absolutely no interference at all. The only thing is, she would have to give up a couple, or maybe a few, Starbucks lattes to pay for it herself.”

    She is not a stupid woman, but she is gullible, and when she was fed this crap by someone she trusts—-Lefty talking heads—–she simply accepted it.

    I went on to say what I had said here—-that throughout my life I have had things that were not provided by any employer, but never felt that this meant any boss was trying to DENY MY ACCESS to any of them. I asked “Did you ever have a boss who provided you with beer? No? Did you still have access to beer? Did your boss provide a cell phone? Were you denied access to a cell phone? Of course not.”

Comments are closed.