700 Billion Condoms
By Mitch Berg
Nancy Pelosi: make birth control part of the stimulus:
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”
By that logic, think how much money we’d save if we “aborted” everyone on welfare!
I suppose it’s patriotic – just like paying more taxes…
No, really – birth control won’t be necessary for this particular stimulus, since we’re all getting [indelicate sex-act and anatomical reference redacted for propriety’s sake]
January 26th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Yeah, what about all the unborn citizens that won’t be helping pay the tab on our projected $30 trillion debt in 20 years? That should really help the economy!
That woman is frickin’ BRILLIANT!
January 26th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Just think if everybody was a clown-car-vagina Republican like Sarah Palin? Our kindergartens would be full of kids named Lampshade, Traffic Cone, Tangent and Shakemix.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:27 am
I’m in favor of zero population growth.
Quality over quantity, fewer people to have to stretch resources to accomodate.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:55 am
I wish they had started with the zero-population-growth right after WW2 when there were only 3 billion people on the planet. Then we’d have more stuff!
January 26th, 2009 at 10:58 am
I wish they’d started zero-population growth before that day your mom spent her whole welfare check on liquor and that traveling vacuum-cleaner salesman stopped by.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Ha! I get it! That was you trying to make a cut down AC! Is that what they call this ‘snappin’ thing? Lemme try! Yo mamma’s armpits is so hairy looks like she got buckwheat in a headlock!
Now it’s your turn!
January 26th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Hey ladies, come on down to Angryclown’s Women’s Health Clinic. No fetus can beat us!
January 26th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Abstinence only has been less than successful as a program. A LOT less than successful.
I don’t like to find myself in agreement with Pelosi, but yes, making it easier for people to control their own reproductive choices makes a certain financial sense, especially in a period where so many people have lost their health care access.
A condom, or birth control pills, IUDs, etc. are a lot less expensive than supplementing or outright paying for the health care of children whose parents cannot afford to do so, particularly for 18 years plus.
If we are going to cut spending, how about we discontinue government medical payments for Viagra, and similar recreational pharmaceuticals?
A different approach to accomplishing the same result….
January 26th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Publicly funded condoms will not help the economy one bit, not in the way you suggest nor in how Pelosi attempts to hide her true motives.
These free condoms are a political payoff, patronage, to entities who funded the campaigns of Pelosi & other democrats.
The condom manufacturers are getting their payoff. Planned Parenthood is a multi-billion dollar business that enthusiastically & generously supports leftist Democrats, not the least of whom is Pelosi. they will distribute the condoms & their “services” will become more well known for when an “accident” happens.
Do you ever wonder why every crisis these people manufacture requires more leftist government power & less freedom? It’s a farce! Global socialism is not going to save the world! Your willingness to give up freedom to the state because “something has to be done” is silliness, sorry.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Shirt,
How is giving people the option to use condoms inexpensively – to control their own reproduction – giving up freedom to the state?
It’s not like anyone is being forced to use a condom at some kind of official gunpoint, or losing their right to vote if they don’t practice birthcontrol, etc.
DO condom manufacturers donate to democratic political campaigns? Or is that supposition. I’m not suggesting you are making that up, it is a sincere question, to which I don’t know the answer.
I don’t see anyone addressing government subsidizing of viagra here btw….