Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 01/27/2009 9:50 am

Limbaugh Attacks Pelosi Over Contraceptive Stimulus

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© AP

Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives are hopping mad over economic stimulus money meant to aid state family-planning programs. And it appears they’ve won this battle.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been taking a lot of heat for including money in the $825 billion stimulus bill for state family-planning programs, including Medicaid-funded contraceptives. The bill contains $87 billion in emergency Medicaid funding to help states. It has turned into a lightning rod for some Republicans who say not only does this program not constitute job creation or stimulate the economy, but it is also paramount to abortion.

Limbaugh on Monday essentially said family planning "is abortion all over the world," adding: “When I think of reducing budget deficits, it would never occur to me to think about eliminating people … If she wants fewer births, I have the way to do this, and it won’t require any contraception. You simply put pictures of Nancy Pelosi … put pictures of Pelosi in every cheap motel room in America today, that will keep birth rates down because that picture will keep a lot of things down." We doubt that’s true, but the Democrats do appear to backing down.

Here’s what Pelosi recently told ABC News about why the money was originally included:

Well, the family-planning services reduced costs, it reduced costs. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crisis now, and — and part of it, what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements that are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those — one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, is — will reduce cost to the state, and to the federal government … We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Now, that plan may not be "stimulus," per se, but it seems the economy should have little to do with family planning. If you’re not in a position to have a child, then shouldn’t you have access to proper programs? What do you think?

404 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

DeBúrca obj
Exactly! That is why I posted that link, to not only put this into perspective but to get our eyes back on the ball!
By DeBúrca obj on 01/27/2009 4:51 pm
Diana T
Thank you, Sherrie. Why is it always family planning? Birth control does not always mean abortion; note that these are men that are complaining. You know the old saying…If men had the babies, there would be no question about birth control methods.
By Diana T on 01/27/2009 11:12 am
DeBúrca obj
Exactly Diana! Rush is trying to divert attention from the important services of family planning by using the hot button word. Planned Parenthood provides core medical services such as contraception and accompanying health care, education, and information. Here is their 2007 Medical Services Summary: Contraception— 36 percent of services in 2007 Reversible Contraception Clients, Women** 2,360,796 Emergency Contraception Kits 1,423,365 Tubal Sterilization Clients 532 Reversible Contraception Clients, Men 102,405 Vasectomy Clients 2,882 3,889,980 STI/STD Testing and Treatment — 31 percent of services in 2007 STI Procedures, Women and Men 2,994,749 HIV Testing Procedures, Women 257,877 HIV Testing Procedures, Men 80,077 HIV Testing Procedures, Gender Not Reported 30,519 3,363,222 Cancer Screening and Prevention — 17 percent of services in 2007 Pap Tests 968,682 Breast Exams/ Breast Care 851,232 Colposcopy Procedures*** 46,522 LOOP/LEEP Procedures*** 2,652 Cryotherapy Procedures*** 2,411 1,871,499 Other Women’s Health Services — 11 percent of services in 2007 Pregnancy Tests 1,183,325 Prenatal Clients 10,914 Midlife Clients 12,783 Infertility Clients 318 1,207,340 Abortion Services — 3 percent of services in 2007 Abortion Procedures 305,310 Other Services — 2 percent of services in 2007 Primary Care Clients, Women and Men 21,247 Adoption Referrals to Other Agencies 4,912 Other Services, Women and Men**** 228,964 255,123
By DeBúrca obj on 01/27/2009 4:06 pm
Diana T
Goodness, I am so impressed with your research here, DeB. How did you do it? You had to copy every word;apparently you did not import it. When are people going to realize that when there are not unwanted pregnancies, girls can finish their schooling and women can keep their jobs? I found the reversible contraceptions very interesting. I had my tubes tied when the kids were older; never looked back. Another statistic here is the amound of HIV and STD testing done at these facilities. So very important, and yet, I wonder how many people don’t realize how many of done. .
By Diana T on 01/27/2009 5:22 pm
DeBúrca obj
This is the thing too, aside from the bail out issue… when we were denying aid to these places in third world countries (one of the first things President Obama changed), we were virtually taking limiting all of the above services… merely because those facilities provided abortion as ONE service among all the rest. People like Limbaugh are hurting women by their over the top language. He cares NOTHING for women whatsoever, nor does he give a damn about the abortion issue. He is using it as a wedge issue to attack President Obama… whom he said he hopes will “fail”, and Democrats in general.
By DeBúrca obj on 01/27/2009 7:26 pm
DeBúrca obj
TYPO: … we were virtually limiting…. (take taking out!)
By DeBúrca obj on 01/27/2009 7:27 pm
Diana T
DeB, did you read this? I think Rush is miffed because he didn’t get invited to the conservative columnist dinner that Obama had at George Will’s house. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/27/gop-house-member-to-rush_n_1614…
By Diana T on 01/27/2009 8:31 pm
DeBúrca obj
I love this part: “Right now Rush is being played. The Obama dinner with conservative columnists, shortly before his inauguration, was as much about excluding Rush as coddling the columnists. Not only did the conservatives fawn, but Rush fumed. It got under his skin.” funny!
By DeBúrca obj on 01/27/2009 8:35 pm
Diana T
As Obama ratings go up, Limbaugh ratings go down. That’s all the guy is thinking about. And, whatever happens to the rest of us, well that’s small potatos compared to a multi-million contract.
By Diana T on 01/27/2009 8:24 pm
Lori F.
This comment has been deleted as it violated the Ten Commandments of Posting on our website.
By Lori F. on 01/28/2009 1:45 am
Diana T
I prefer to think of wow as a wonderful gathering place, mostly composed of women, who enjoy each others company, and have conversations on all sorts of subjects. We are polite and civil to one another—those of us who have been here from the beginning. No, we do not often agree with each other, but, we are polite. And, can you honestly say you would walk up to a perfect stranger and call her stupid simply because she doesn’t see eye to eye with your opinions? So, I will walk away and ignore you, and perhaps you will learn that being civil to one another is at least a consideration. And, Limbaugh is a big fat talking suit, as far as my thinking goes, and I stand by my opinions.
By Diana T on 01/28/2009 9:27 am
DeBúrca obj
Diana… how does it feel to be asked if you are “stupid” by a person who thinks that because Rush Limbaugh is making money for his vile radio commentary… that he is more credible than our new President?
By DeBúrca obj on 01/28/2009 8:32 am
Diana T
Funny you should ask. Because of the first sentence, I didn’t read the rest of it. But, what I would say….wait a minute…I will say it. Stay tuned…
By Diana T on 01/28/2009 9:21 am
Rush L
Psst: The New term is STI (Sexually Transmitted Infections vs. Sexually Transmitted Decease). STI vs. STD You may have asked yourself why we use the term sexually transmitted infection (STI), instead of the term sexually transmitted disease (STD). The term “infection” more accurately describes conditions where sexual partners may not have symptoms and may not be aware that they have an infection, and because many of these infections are actually curable. The term “infection” carries less of a social stigma than the term “disease.” The term STI is also being used by leading sexual health organizations such as Planned Parenthood. http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/s…
By Rush L on 01/27/2009 8:01 pm
Diana T
whatever.
By Diana T on 01/27/2009 8:22 pm