Sun Mar 4, 2012, 03:33 PM
Judi Lynn (78,150 posts)
Chris Wallace: Fox News covers contraception for female employees
Source: Raw Story
Chris Wallace: Fox News covers contraception for female employees By David Edwards Sunday, March 4, 2012 15:20 EST Last week, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said a Georgetown University student was a “slut” and a “prostitute” for wanting oral contraceptives to be covered by her health insurance — but it’s not clear if he feels the same about the female employees who receive birth control pills from Fox News. During a discussion about women’s health issues on Sunday, Fox News host Chris Wallace revealed that the insurance provided by the conservative news network included oral contraceptives. “Before coming on today, I checked with the women here at Fox News and it turns out that Fox News health coverage does cover — there’s a co-pay — but it does cover contraception,” Wallace explained. “When it comes to contraception, you know the idea that — and we’re not talking about religious institutions. According to the Blunt amendment, any — U.S. Steel, as I said, Fox News, any company could simply decide, we are not going to offer that. An insurance company could decide, one that has no ties to any religious organization.” Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel argued that requiring basic health care for women was a slippery slope towards forcing employers to pay for “dental implants.” Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/04/chris-wallace-fox-news-covers-contraception-for-female-employees/
|
25 replies, 5764 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| Judi Lynn | Mar 2012 | OP | |
| Vinca | Mar 2012 | #1 | |
| underpants | Mar 2012 | #2 | |
| Cirque du So-What | Mar 2012 | #6 | |
| LiberalEsto | Mar 2012 | #7 | |
| sarcasmo | Mar 2012 | #13 | |
| xxqqqzme | Mar 2012 | #14 | |
| onehandle | Mar 2012 | #19 | |
| aaaaaa5a | Mar 2012 | #20 | |
| libinnyandia | Mar 2012 | #22 | |
| Jim Lane | Mar 2012 | #24 | |
| otohara | Mar 2012 | #25 | |
| kestrel91316 | Mar 2012 | #3 | |
| nolabear | Mar 2012 | #4 | |
| otohara | Mar 2012 | #5 | |
| greymattermom | Mar 2012 | #8 | |
| Iliyah | Mar 2012 | #9 | |
| Viva | Mar 2012 | #10 | |
| HangOnKids | Mar 2012 | #11 | |
| SemperEadem | Mar 2012 | #12 | |
| high density | Mar 2012 | #15 | |
| sakabatou | Mar 2012 | #16 | |
| mrmx9 | Mar 2012 | #17 | |
| jillan | Mar 2012 | #18 | |
| Islandlife | Mar 2012 | #21 | |
| ghjtydger | Mar 2012 | #23 |
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 03:38 PM
Vinca (22,006 posts)
1. Well, obviously they're sluts and prostitutes.
|
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 03:48 PM
underpants (105,663 posts)
2. Fox News Blondes
![]() |
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:14 PM
Cirque du So-What (9,162 posts)
6. My eyes are burning
|
from the powerful stench of peroxides and other bleaching agents wafting from that photo.
|
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:17 PM
LiberalEsto (16,919 posts)
7. Is there some kind of clone factory somewhere?
|
Or are these all robots with interchangeable heads?
|
Response to LiberalEsto (Reply #7)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 05:18 PM
sarcasmo (13,560 posts)
13. The Stepford wives factory.
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 05:22 PM
xxqqqzme (13,458 posts)
14. And if they weren't
|
blond when they walked in the door, they were before they went on camera.
That is one mighty white bunch. |
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:49 PM
onehandle (35,998 posts)
19. I don't get it. Isn't that all the same woman?
|
|
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 08:22 PM
aaaaaa5a (3,703 posts)
20. Women aren't individuals. Don't think. Value looks only. All must conform to one beauty standard.
|
Last edited Sun Mar 4, 2012, 08:25 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) This...
Reminds me of this.... You are being brainwashed. |
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 09:24 PM
libinnyandia (1,374 posts)
22. I wonder what the total would be if you added up their IQs:o)
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 09:54 PM
Jim Lane (3,884 posts)
24. You've insulted all those women by lumping them in with Glenn Beck.
|
But, seriously, where did you get that montage?
|
Response to underpants (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 11:03 PM
otohara (21,683 posts)
25. All They Need Are Tiaras
|
I had no idea so many blondes work there.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:05 PM
kestrel91316 (45,688 posts)
3. All those female news readers and chatterboxes on Faux need to wear their
|
"slut" and "prostitute" name tags right on camera.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:05 PM
nolabear (15,016 posts)
4. Okay. Good on 'em.
|
Hope it gets brought up at every opportunity.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:05 PM
otohara (21,683 posts)
5. Good - Hope They Never Miss A Pill
|
for the sake of the planet.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:21 PM
greymattermom (980 posts)
8. how about coffee?
|
Can Marriott deny coverage to employees who drink coffee?
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:28 PM
Iliyah (2,504 posts)
9. hehehe, do onto others as you want
|
it done onto you, oh wait, that doesn't apply to the non-believers!
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 04:49 PM
Viva (30 posts)
10. It's the Law
|
in New York State
-- 28 states require insurers that cover prescription drugs to provide coverage of the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive drugs and devices; 17 of these states also require coverage of related outpatient services.
-- 2 states exclude emergency contraception from the required coverage. -- 1 state excludes minor dependents from coverage. http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_ICC.pdf |
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 05:01 PM
HangOnKids (2,678 posts)
11. "slippery slope towards forcing employers to pay for “dental implants.”
|
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 05:16 PM
SemperEadem (8,023 posts)
12. what a stupid non sequitur
|
Last edited Sun Mar 4, 2012, 05:18 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2) Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel argued that requiring basic health care for women was a slippery slope towards forcing employers to pay for “dental implants.” Well, as it stands right now, a whole lot of dental work isn't covered by insurance companies (that should be looked at again considering how the condition of the teeth and gums are connected to plaque in the veins, etc. and its ties to stroke and heart disease) and no one has been denied the free practice of their religion so far... Just like elective plastic surgery isn't covered and isn't going to be covered by insurance already---and people still have the free exercise of their religion. so if a woman has had a radical mastectomy to deal with breast cancer, is strassel going to holler, scream and cry like the stupid little girl she is and say that reconstructive surgery should not be covered too? THIS IS NOTHING BUT AN ALL OUT WAR ON WOMEN AND REDUCTION OF THEM TO SECOND/THIRD CLASS CITIZENSHIP. The next thing they're going to attack is women having the vote--hardly 100 years ago, we finally got the vote and now these neanderthals want to drag us by the hair back to the 17th century. |
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:13 PM
high density (13,384 posts)
15. It's 2012
|
The fact that we're talking about contraceptives is completely ridiculous. If this is and gas prices are the GOP's top issues then I'd say the pendulum is about ready for a fast snap back from the right.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:15 PM
sakabatou (29,251 posts)
16. Suh-PRISE!
|
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:18 PM
mrmx9 (223 posts)
17. Was it in response to all the visits to Fox News studios from Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich?
|
I can see why they would want to protect their female employees!
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 06:31 PM
jillan (31,392 posts)
18. I would love to see all those blonde bimbos on faux with a baby bump...
|
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 08:38 PM
Islandlife (212 posts)
21. Would it be to their advantage to have the Feds pay instead?
|
Make fox pay for their own if they want it. And even if they don't want it, make them buy it and provide for all.
|
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Sun Mar 4, 2012, 09:35 PM
ghjtydger (20 posts)
23. Spam deleted by NRaleighLiberal (MIR Team)


