Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 23, 2014 in At TMV, Featured, Health, Politics, Women | 43 comments

Huckabee on Libido 101

shutterstock_158310416

Webster’s: li-bi-do (li-bi’do) n. [L.libido, lubido, pleasure, wantonness…] 1. the sexual urge or instinct…

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (R), on “libido” according to the Washington Post:

If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing them for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it…

After all the gaffes Republicans have made on rape and so many other women’s issues, it seems to me that they would stay away from words and concepts such as women’s sexual urges or wantonness.

But apparently they won’t or cannot.

I know, I know, Huckabee is accusing Democrats of thinking that women can’t control their libido without the government’s help.

But that in itself is false, offensive and suicidal for Republicans.

Responding to Huckabee’s outrageous accusation, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund put out the following statement:

The problem isn’t what Mike Huckabee says – it’s what he and too many other politicians believe. These politicians need a basic anatomy and sex ed course. Birth control is basic, preventive health care for women. It helps women plan their pregnancies and manage their lives, and many women use it for a variety of other medical reasons, including treatment of endometriosis that can lead to infertility. The fact that Mike Huckabee doesn’t understand what birth control does is a perfect illustration of why decisions about birth control should be left to a woman and her doctor, without interference from politicians.

Amen.

image: www.shutterstock.com

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 The Moderate Voice
  • decisions about birth control should be left to a woman and her doctor, without interference from politicians.

    To be clear, I am pro choice and pro birth control. Having said that:

    I am less in favor of late term abortion laws that are sometimes (even if rarely) used as birth control. Is there room to separate birth control from abortion to help clarify the discussion?

  • The_Ohioan

    I don’t think birth control can be separated from abortion. Both involve the woman’s decisions about her body; one prevents pregnancy and alleviates other medical conditions, the other is a decision about a medical condition.

    But this thread is about birth control not abortion, so we should probably keep it to that. Both the politicians and the radical right need instruction in basic anatomy and sex education. Not to mention personal freedom to control their own lives.

  • I don’t think birth control can be separated from abortion.

    Okay.

    But this thread is about birth control not abortion

    Can we separate them or not?

    While I agree with you about the far right and comments like Huckabee’s, I would argue, the far left, far right and middle needs education in science. And that science is why laws relative to abortion as birth control will be changing.

  • The_Ohioan

    I don’t think birth control can be separated from abortion as far as a woman’s freedom to control her body. We can separate them on this thread and probably should because Mr. Huckabee is addressing birth control pills and not late term abortion used as birth control, which is a situation that happens so seldom it is an esoteric subject.

    Perhaps you can submit an article on that and we can have a discussion about that another time; including why you think education in science will affect laws about a woman’s choice about any abortion early, middle, or late term.

  • JSpencer

    Huckabee proves once again what has been obvious for a very long time. The GOP is clueless when it comes to women. And please, neither the subject nor the problem here is abortion. Let’s try to focus.

  • We agree about Huckabee’s comments.

    late term abortion used as birth control, which is a situation that happens so seldom it is an esoteric subject.

    Perhaps esoteric now. However, the cognitive ability of a fetus to know his or her mother, to understand sounds and the child’s ability to feel pain are under question. Politicians and voters have laid out elective abortion windows that science is showing may be too broad. Medical science is rapidly shedding new data on this. Politicians are part of the process as they are an avenue for voters to create change.

    As a reminder, I am pro choice. The far left (not you The_Ohioan) shouldn’t be caught looking like deniers of science.

    The last time I spent a half day responding to your comment “Links please” on an a thread with over 45 comments related to how physicians are thinking about Obamacare, mine was the last comment. It was followed by silence. I think I’ll pass and let others do the work.

  • Thanks, JSpencer. I will bow out now.

  • roro80

    We don’t need to talk about abortion, let alone late-term abortion, let alone elective late-term abortion, at all in reference to this discussion. Huckster is very clearly talking about the contraception mandate, and not abortion, which (unfortunately, in my opinion) is not at all allowed to be mandated for coverage by insurance companies. If you want to talk about the ethics of late-term abortion, KP, there are places to do that, and if this is that place, it’s not a big deal to me. BUT that has absolutely nothing at all to do with DDW’s post.

    In my opinion, the post is about a guy who is supposedly a national spiritual leader, a possible presidential candidate, who is in essense saying “why won’t you stupid sluts let me empower you by taking away your medicine??” This guy, man. *shakes head*

  • roro80

    “The far left (not you The_Ohioan) shouldn’t be caught looking like deniers of science.”

    Ugh. They should be less willing to be caught as deniers of agency.

  • Huckabee is such an moron — and JS, you’re right, it seems the GOP is entirely clueless when it comes to women. Back in the late 60’s and into the 80’s, I took birth control pills due to extremely painful menstrual cramps and excessive bleeding once a month. The whole thing was debilitating. Those pills helped me manage my life and took the stress away. Seems the condition I had is a genetic thing, my nieces have the same problem — 19 years and up to 30 years is their age range.
    They take the pill for the same reasons I did.

    Did my libido go hog-wild due to taking the pill?! holy crap, no! Taking the pill didn’t change my morals — or my sexual inclinations. Ever.

    The other thing I wonder about, reading all this stuff — why is it always (90% of the time anyway) MEN who want to control women’s access to birth control and (I know this ain’t an abortion thread) but also access to abortion? What is this need for control over women’s lives all about? — I can’t figure it out. There are children in poverty conditions in the US right now, children who were, in many cases, not WANTED children, but women had them — and now, the GOP wants to cut back on food vouchers so those women can feed them. If men want women to have those children, to obstruct their abilities to seek out birth control to eliminate the ability to get impregnated, or if they do get pregnant, to obstruct their abilities to access early abortion opportunities — why then don’t they want to help those women who must (in many cases without the aid of the fathers) feed, clothe and educate those children on their own. For women, this looks like a shi**y deal the whole way round.

    What I’d like to ask Kevin is, what about that brain-dead woman in Texas — 14 or so weeks pregnant — being kept alive for the sake of the child. She wanted no extreme efforts to be made to keep her alive — yet that’s what they’re doing, all for the sake of the child. Is this right? Where does a woman’s right to choose start — and where does it end?

  • cjjack

    What is this need for control over women’s lives all about? — I can’t figure it out.

    I think it is important to phrase it, not as a need for control, but rather a need to re-assert control.

    Remember, these are people for who the best way forward is to move back. They speak of a “simpler time” and “traditional values” in reverent tones. The era that seems to epitomize this is the 1950s. Before all this pesky “equal rights” stuff. When a woman’s place was in the home, taking care of the household and raising the children while the man went off to work. Subservience was part of this idyllic culture they idolize and believe has been lost, so it follows that in order to return to that culture, we need to put women back in their proper place.

    Huck’s remarks about libido and government paying for contraception are merely the dressing on the windows. If you look past it and through those windows, you’ll find a man who – like a lot of evangelicals – wants women to get back in the kitchen, get pregnant, and shut the hell up.

  • If you want to talk about the ethics of late-term abortion, KP, there are places to do that, and if this is that place, it’s not a big deal to me. BUT that has absolutely nothing at all to do with DDW’s post.

    My bad. My apologies Dorian.

    What I’d like to ask Kevin is, what about that brain-dead woman in Texas — 14 or so weeks pregnant — being kept alive for the sake of the child. Where does a woman’s right to choose start — and where does it end?

    It is a painful discussion that has to be had. I would let her and the fetus go. I have my DNR (do not resuscitate) in place. CRAP, I admit I don’t have all the answers.

    I don’t think anything I wrote above insinuates I have all the answers. My view is that rapidly changing medical science will continue to shed light on the optics of abortion and that I think laws will be altered (even if minimally to support science). It is not made in an emotional way. I am pro choice and pro birth control.

    Again, I am agree with Dorian and others that Huckabee and Repubs are not well served by his comments.

  • slamfu

    LOL omg, is he serious? Another GOP foot in mouth grand slam. Lets count the number of things wrong with this. First off, I don’t see how the govt is providing birth control here. A woman buys insurance, goes to her doctor, gets a prescription(or not), insurance pays for it like any other medical service, not sure exactly where the govt comes into the equation to dole out birth control.

    Second, in what world is it that the GOP is empowering women by taking away their options and dems are pulling a fast one on women by trying to keep those options open? Does he really expect anyone to fall for that one? And how exactly is a woman supposed to “control her reproductive system” without birth control? As mentioned, someone sounds like they are in serious need of a sex ed class.

    Third, how is it when trying to woo women voters they manage to always imply somehow that women who use birth control are sex crazed hussies who are dodging God’s rightful plan to punish women with pregnancy for having sex outside the bonds of marriage. I mean, if women can have consequence free sex they might show the poor judgement and casual attitude towards promiscuous sex we would normally associate with men, for whom that’s all cool. Someone needs to get those sluts* under control and by God the GOP is the party to do it!

    * – women sluts, not the men sluts. Male sluts are totally accepted in conservative circles.

  • ordinarysparrow

    I am stuck on the most basic here….

    See if i am reading this one right?

    …making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing them for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido….

    So if they would just control their libido they would not need the pills
    that sounds like abstinence, right?

    Promotion of Abstinence for all sexually active couples as campaign strategy?

    I do not believe that will win votes with either women or men?

    A bigger question is what is occurring that these politicians cannot learn to curb their mouths on issues such as this? So counter-productive….

  • The_Ohioan

    Context is everything. From the WaPo article:

    Huckabee, who finished second in the 2008 GOP presidential race, has said he is considering another run in 2016.

  • cjjack writes:

    I think it is important to phrase it, not as a need for control, but rather a need to re-assert control.
    Remember, these are people for who the best way forward is to move back. They speak of a “simpler time” and “traditional values” in reverent tones. The era that seems to epitomize this is the 1950s. Before all this pesky “equal rights” stuff. When a woman’s place was in the home, taking care of the household and raising the children while the man went off to work. Subservience was part of this idyllic culture they idolize and believe has been lost, so it follows that in order to return to that culture, we need to put women back in their proper place.

    You see, that’s what I always figured — but still, holy cow, “Leave it to Beaver” and “Daddy Knows Best” weren’t reality. Don’t they know that? 50+ years later?! I’ve read that close to 50% of the working population of the US is women (don’t have figures, but I actually DID read that someplace) – women working to help your economy grow. In my country, it’s OVER 50%, (again, no link to share) …. and in either country (I’m in Canada), we get paid 70-80% of what men in the same positions get– still these morons want us barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, in other words, ‘our proper place’.
    It’s almost too much to even absorb. I just have to shake my head.

    I’m not arguing with you cjjack, truly — I’m just friggin’ frustrated at their reasoning. It’s wearying. But then, back in the late 60’s, they called me a ‘bra burner’ — despite the fact I never went without a bra. I have been fighting this stupidity for many decades. I thought we’d be further ahead by now, than we seem to be. I guess I just underestimated how much they really hate women. Thank you for your kind response cj, it means a lot that you read my post and that you understand.

    Kevin writes about the brain-dead woman in Texas, pregnant with child:

    It is a painful discussion that has to be had. I would let her and the fetus go. I have my DNR (do not resuscitate) in place. CRAP, I admit I don’t have all the answers.

    I don’t think anything I wrote above insinuates I have all the answers.

    My apologies if I implied I thought you had all the answers, Kevin, I didn’t mean to. I don’t have ANY of the answers at this point either and I’m getting weary of the battle. In all my working years, I paid the same rate of taxes as men who did the same work, I got no breaks due to my gender. I’m thinking it’s probably the same in the US. Yet doors keep closing all over the place to women and barriers keep popping up. I’m glad you think they should do the right thing and let that poor woman and her wee baby go. Her wishes need to be respected. And in the end, God will understand, I truly believe that.

    It just seems to me that there’s so little ‘kindness’ to fellow human beings involved in Huckabee’s view, and in the general across-the-board GOP attitude — it makes me feel so sad — anyway, this is me signing out on this thread for now.

    So often there are posts here in TMV that animate me, provoke me and make me want to respond. This was one of them.
    Unfortunately, it’s those threads that also almost always get me into trouble for opening up my big mouth. God speed to all of you from Brownie and me.

  • sheknows

    Huckabee is so far gone he is in actual orbit.
    He just doesn’t understand that his opinions belong in a pulpit, preferably somewhere in the 1720’s, not in the news representing a political party who, let’s face it, doesn’t think much clearer than he does.

    His ” just say no” approach to birth control hasn’t really worked for the past 53 years, but like many Republicans, hasn’t noticed too many changes in the last 53 years.
    He is stuck in his world of righteous judgment and poor advice and shows absolutely no knowledge of women. Just a typical Republican guy trying to make the world realize how the leftist devils are leading our women to hell.
    Gives me a severe headache to think about all the women who listen to him and others like him ..and vote GOP.

  • brownies girl, no apologies needed. My “CRAP” comment was as much a mea culpa as anything else and was a way of acknowledging the limits of my ‘ability to know’.

    I agree with your comments to cjjack. I am married to a woman and we have two adult daughters. I have been humbled in a good way for decades 🙂

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    just my .02 in response to why some men want to control what women do with their lives, their souls, their bodies, their minds.

    I think if one looks back to some of the ‘founding fathers’ and ‘the awakening’ of past century larded with would-be self-annointed shriekers who claimed to be ‘religious’ prophesizers with direct line to Creator… one might see that now debunked religious ‘principle’–that so-called god, mythologically in some men’s writings, who made up out of whole cloth that god gave ONLY certain men dominion over all others, including native people, animals, women, immigrants and slaves, land, water, minerals, resources… ‘divine provenance’ a right to take whatever the despots wanted–their inflated off the charts classism and rationalization of murder and plunder… to see all that, I think one can see the roots more clearly. I believe the corrupt idea of ‘divine provenance, that is a right by SOME to dominate others, is a late progression of a malignantly narcissistic idea from long ago.

    I’m for life. And I wish that all children were not only wanted, but also decently and lovingly taken care of, with resources given to make it so. The part that i turn over and over, is the latter: the resources to take good care of one’s children. For instance medical care ought be easily within reach of all, also roof over head in safe environs, deep nutrition, excellent education, support and help of many kinds that not only familial.

  • heinrich_metz

    The real reason that Republican men don’t know anything about women is because that have never had a REAL loving sexual relationship with a woman. Republican women get pregnant by having sex with the pool cleaner if they are one percenters or by some anonomyous cowboy at the corner bar if they are not. The ladies become pregnant because their husbands won’t let them use birth control. They complete the pregnancy because their husbands won’t let them have an abortion. They raise the children telling them how worthless they are and how they have ruined their lives. The children grow up bitter and hating themselves and others, thus perpetualting the Republican mind set. You see, the real reason that Republican men are against birth control and abortion is because it threatens the existance of Republican Party. Also, if everyone else is bitter and hateful, they don’t feel so left out. This also works for Christian Fundementalists. And woe is us when Republicanism is mixed with Christian Fundementalism. We get things like wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and maybe with Iran and Syria to boot.

  • cincyindep

    If one is against abortion, one really should be for universal coverage of contraception. Unwanted pregnancy is the leading/predominant cause of abortion. It’s estimated that 49% of all pregnancies were unintended.

  • ordinarysparrow

    Looks to me this from Huckabee is just the beginning of what is coming….

    Republicans resolve to speak out against abortion to prove there is no war on women….

    http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/14703/republicans-resolve-to-speak-out-against-abortion-to-prove-there-is-no-war-on-women

  • JSpencer

    Kevin, I’m sorry if you got the impression I was going after you. I certainly wasn’t suggesting you “bow out”, I just didn’t want to see the discussion focus on abortion, which is a subject people tend to heat up about quickly. I have to say, I intensely dislike the expression “pro-life” because the implication is that anyone who believes women should have the right to decide this important issue is pro-death, which is misleading and immediately polarizing.

    In any case (as you can see) there is strong feeling that the GOP’s problem with women has to do with control and that an anti-choice stance as just one manifestation of that. As for late tem abortions (since the door has been opened) the subject is mostly used as a club by choice opponents. Some data and context would be helpful here and I really hope everyone checks out this link:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/what_we_are_debating_when_we_d.html

    The “debate” will continue, but we won’t make any progress as long as disingenuous subtext (intentional or otherwise) is part and parcel. Again Kevin, this isn’t directed at you. I enjoy and appreciate the persepective you lend to TMV and realize the subject at hand is one we all have an emotional investment in.

  • sheknows

    Dr. E brings up an excellent point. On the one hand, Republican males want to eliminate abortion and don’t want birth control. On the other, they cut food stamps, social programs and refuse to expand Medicaid in their predominant states, thereby making all these unwed or single moms or families with too many mouths to feed sentenced to a life full of extreme difficulty, or much worse.

    So people like Huckabee and the other evangelicals is don’t have sex and you won’t have any problems. The only time anyone should be having sex is when they are planning on having children. If they don’t behave that way…the way we believe they should behave, we will not assist them in their sinful lives. (this thinking also can be applied to poverty with the same lack of assistance for their “laziness”)

    How in this age of such wonderful technology and new scientific discoveries can people like this still exist, let alone be in leadership positions in the 21st century?

  • ordinarysparrow

    I am at least 80/20 Pro-Life, i believer there are always going to be exceptions and special considerations… Yet i am 100% Pro-Choice….And i am most willing to advocate for women and children to have quality life and to encourage collective support when needed to give the woman and the child quality of life with viable life choices from birth to grave, then Choice will lean towards Life…I want to believe we are wired that way as a species….

    I really like Leonard Shlain’s writings that takes a anthropological view continues to be the dominate mind stream… He suggest that in the early development of the species that sex was initially performed from the rear position of the female… like animals, which made it very accessible for males to take a woman over and have sex when they wanted and where they wanted due to their physical size and strength…Then we evolved to a more erect stance which repositioned the female’s sexual anatomy.

    Why did big-brained Homo sapiens suddenly emerge some 150,000 years ago? In this provocative new book, Leonard Shlain, author the bestselling Art & Physics and The Alphabet Versus the Goddess argues that profound alterations in female sexuality hold the key to this mystery.

    Long ago, due to the narrowness of her bipedal pelvis and the increasing size of her infants’ heads, the human female began to experience high childbirth death rates, precipitating a crisis for the species. Natural selection adapted her to this unique environmental stress by drastically reconfiguring her hormonal reproductive cycle. Her estrus disappeared and menses mysteriously entrained with the periodicity of the moon. Women formulated the concept of a month, which in turn allowed them to make the connection between sex and pregnancy. Upon learning the majestic secret of time these ancestral females then gained the power to refuse sex when they were ovulating. Men were forced to confront women who possessed a mind of their own.

    Women taught men about time and the men used this knowledge to become the planet’s most fearsome predator. Unfortunately, they also discovered that they were mortal. Men, then invented religions to soften the certainty of death. Subsequently, they belatedly grasped the function of sex. The possibility of achieving a kind of immortality through heirs drove men to construct patriarchal cultures whose purpose was to control women’s reproductive choices.

    At an evolutionary level this works for me…..I agree with Dr. E it is an old old issue… I once had a dog that was a genetic throwback…

    Our words have changed, but the energy is similar to when males like Huckabee could mount women from behind and dominate by power over…

    For us to evolve beyond the sex wars, i believe we have to move to a bigger container… Which is not male vs. female, but rather move to a model of global motherhood…We all need to create a new language on these issues…

    Instead of sleazy women, lets talk about Motherhood and what that energy is about….

    Man and woman have within them the capacity to open to universal motherhood…
    which is a compassion, love in action, not only for one’s own children but for all children, for all people, for the earth, animals, plants, rocks, rivers, oceans, and atmosphere… It is a love that is extended beyond color, sex, gender orientation, to all nature’s beings. For one that has removed the restrictions of the mind, every creature is a child…Such love, such embrace is Love… God 101 is God Loves….That is all we need to know about God….

    If you don’t like the religious language, which i can understand, then lets strip it down till we can agree on what is furthering and what is non-furthering…

  • roro80

    Did my libido go hog-wild due to taking the pill?!

    Brownies girl, I think you misunderstood. It’s not just taking the pill, it’s having insurance that pays for part of the pill (all private insurance is now to be called “government handouts”, or “Uncle Sugar” for short), that makes your libido uncontrollable. If you would just pony up the cash for the contraception, your libido would then be considered acceptable.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    If you would just pony up the cash for the contraception, your libido would then be considered acceptable.

    You hit the nail right on the libido, roro 🙂

    (added: and you, too, ordinarysparrow)

  • roro80

    ordinarysparrow — that book looks fascinating. I’ve always been very interested in the connections between superstition and women’s cycles (13 moons a year, 13 periods a year, 13 as an unlucky number, witches, etc), but I never thought about a possible biological connection between the 13 moons and 13 periods a year as a natural time-keeping method. Very very interesting theory.

  • roro80

    DDW — I know, right? Makes total sense. Huckabee is a genius, and his War For Women sounds AMAZING.

  • ordinarysparrow

    I am going to add a link for a lecture by Leonard Shlain which gives an evolutionary view …..

    Sex, Time, and Power

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT6t39MDGhA#t=132

  • sheknows

    “Why did big-brained Homo sapiens suddenly emerge some 150,000 years ago? In this provocative new book, Leonard Shlain, author the bestselling Art & Physics and The Alphabet Versus the Goddess argues that profound alterations in female sexuality hold the key to this mystery.”

    I am confused..is that a typo in the article? Big brained Homo Sapiens suddenly appeared well over 10,000 years ago , according to history. Who built the pyramids for one thing? Just askin……

  • sheknows

    Nevermind…I guess 150k is greater than 10k. Just misread it. Thanks.

  • sheknows

    Btw.. the number 13 shows up in many different cultures as being either sacred or significant. Probably due to lunar cycles?

  • roro80

    sheknows — I would guess from both lunar cycles and woman cycles. The two are pretty inextricably linked as far as cultural meanings. I just think it’s so interesting there may be a biological basis…

  • Thanks, JSpencer. All is well in KP-ville. Again, apologies to readers for shifting focus away from Dorian’s article.

  • slamfu

    Lets get back on track. Namely the following 2 key issues which illustrate why the GOP is unlikely to get major support from women(and minorities, although this case is women specific):

    1) They want to rebrand and convince America that they aren’t waging a “War on Women”

    2) They think speeches like this one will help that cause

    They are so tone deaf to their own ignorance I think they might just be incapable of fixing the problem.

  • roro80 wrote:

    Brownies girl, I think you misunderstood. It’s not just taking the pill, it’s having insurance that pays for part of the pill (all private insurance is now to be called “government handouts”, or “Uncle Sugar” for short), that makes your libido uncontrollable. If you would just pony up the cash for the contraception, your libido would then be considered acceptable.

    Your response made me laugh out loud m’dear – and I guess you have a point. When I took those b/c pills, it was for a medical condition — so our health plan up here covered it for the most part, with an added, oh, I think it was about $6 per month contribution from me. Not that difficult to find, I was making about $150 a week back in the 60’s and early 70’s. A fortune that went a long way in those days when you could feed and house yourself in a small bed-sit for about $40 per week. Weren’t THOSE the days?! This is not to say that I didn’t use the b/c pills for (for me) their secondary use — but that’s a whole other story not for this place.

    I’m still left wondering how come the GOP doesn’t compare prices for food stamps and health care for wee babies and homes for single moms against the price of allowing women have access to safe government supplied birth control so they don’t get pregnant and might even, maybe, get jobs where they could add to whatever’s coming in, in income tax. Wouldn’t they be waaaay ahead, in the long run?

    Just seems a no-brainer to me — but then, I’m getting older — a lot of stuff doesn’t make sense to me anymore. In your country and in mine.

    Meantime, my one wish today (not to hi-jack the thread) is for some judge down in Florida to find that idiotic imp Beiber guilty and send him home, not to be able to work in the US again. Not that we NEED him back — he just needs to get stuff straight in his head, and home’s the best place to do it. IMHO. Between him and Rob Ford, we’re getting a pretty crappy reputation up here.

  • JSpencer

    Between him and Rob Ford, we’re getting a pretty crappy reputation up here.

    Right, and all that weather you’re sending us doesn’t help either.

  • bluebelle

    Huck gets the Hypocrite of the Year award– back in 2005 Governor Huckabee mandated that health insurance policies issued in Arkansas cover contraceptives– from Huff Po:

    “Huckabee signed state legislation in 2005 that required all health insurance plans providing prescription drug coverage to cover contraceptive drugs and devices as well. According to the Arkansas Times, Huckabee’s exemption for religious organizations was actually narrower than the exemption in the Affordable Care Act”

    Now, of course, Democrats supporting the ACA mandate are forcing women to become victims of their own gender- and convincing them that they cannot control their own libidoes
    Good luck with that presidential run in ’16, Mike

  • sheknows

    Thanks bluebelle. Did not know that about Huck. How can he even possibly think this wouldn’t be brought out?? I know Americans have poor memories, but really??
    The saddest element of this revelation is that the man TRULY doesn’t have any religious convictions at all, which we might forgive him for. This is all another form of jacking everyone around to get a political edge.

  • bluebelle

    She knows: Its pathetic that in the end, Huckabee is just another everyday huckster hoping that nobody will bother to google his legislative history. Republican deeply felt “principles” give way to political expediency once again.

    Wouldn’t that bill become the Romneycare of ’16 if against all odds he succeeded in winning his party’s nomination??
    It would be funny if it wasn’t all so very predictable.

  • epiphyte

    With apologies to the easily offended, and acknowledgment to Robin Williams…

    “That man is more direly in need of a bl…ob than any white man in history.”

  • ordinarysparrow

    A Psychic Prediction Here:

    Huckabee is going to oppose Gov. Insurance cover of the female equivalent of Viagra drugs that will likely be here before long…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/serra-sippel/a-door-opens-for-womens-right-to-sexual-pleasure_b_4653145.html?utm_hp_ref=women&ir=Women

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com