Protection for Some but not for Others
Timothy Birdnow Reading the comments on my American Thinker article http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/prediction_global_warming_will_cause_everything_comments.html#disqus_thread about my insurance troubles, (I was denied coverage for a portable defibrilator, the purpose of which was to protect me from sudden heart stoppage resulting from Congestive Heart Failure) I was struck with the realization that Barack Obama wants to demand that all insurers cover contraceptive costs, essentially freeing women like Sandra Fluke to have as much sex as she wishes, yet coverage for another sort of protection - from Near Death Syndrome - is considered unnecessary. So, protection is good if the purpose is essentially for pleasure but unwarranted if it is about survival. In short, Mr. Obama wants the public to get screwed either way. Food for thought.