The Chicago Sun-Times is blaming the Bush administration for what they claim is sure to be a rise in unplanned pregnancies at colleges and universities across the country. It hasn't happened yet, mind you, but they are sure it's gonna! Naturally, the paper cannot imagine we should place any blame on the stupid students who are getting themselves pregnant. I mean, it HAS to be Bush's fault, you see, with personal responsibility being so last century and all. No, the Sun-Times is sure that a cut in the amount of Federal money doled out to our institutions of higher learning for cheap birth control is going to wreak havoc with the student body. Our kids are obviously too stupid to get by without that government spending.
The Sun-Times, worrying that the cost of birth control available to students in colleges is going to rise, imagines a law reducing Federal spending is somehow forcing students to have unprotected sex. "Birth-control costs soaring at colleges -- Pregnancies could rise now that law limits drugmaker incentives", they proclaim. This calamity is all being blamed on the "Deficit Reduction Act signed by President Bush last year" according to the Sun-Times.
Women and Minorities Hardest Hit
The Sun-Times focuses on a poor, poor student of a "low-income home" because she has somehow, or the other, gotten herself pregnant. Amazingly, after going off birth control, Elizabeth Harris, a pre-med student at the University of Chicago (UIC), "found she was pregnant," the Sun-times laments.
Imagine, a pre-med student not realizing she could become pregnant as a result of unprotected sex? Shocking, eh?
Naturally, the Sun-Times wants to make it seem that "low-income" students are hit hardest so they subtly imply that with a paragraph header that says "Low-income students hit hard." They claim that our Miss. Harris is in a bind because she just cannot afford birth control. She is so poor that the $35 a month for her prescription was just too much for her. Why, she even had to cancel her trip to Costa Rica last Spring because of this whole pregnancy thingie.
Last spring, 20-year-old pre-med student Elizabeth Harris had only Costa Rica on her mind. She was hoping to wine and dine there while taking a few biology courses.
But the Waukegan native and University of Illinois at Chicago junior had to skip her trip.
Having gone off birth control, Harris found she was pregnant. She said she quit when the cost of her prescription at the UIC clinic more than doubled.
Imagine being so poor that your trip to Costa Rica has to be cancelled?
I wish I was that poor.
So, why is the cost of birth control at colleges going up. It's that mean 'ol Bush, of course!
The price increase in hormonal birth control can be traced to the Deficit Reduction Act signed by President Bush last year, aimed at reducing federal spending by $39 billion. The legislation made it more costly for drug makers to offer low-cost birth control to college clinics. Then the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued regulations that dropped college clinics from a list of agencies to which drug companies could sell discounted drugs.
So, there you have it. Bush is causing well meaning, yet curiously stupid pre-med students to get pregnant because he is allowing less Federal money to unconstitutionally go to fund birth control drugs in our colleges and universities than was previously unconstitutionally going to fund birth control drugs in our colleges and universities.
It's a dastardly plot, I tell you.
The Sun-Times is, of course, absolutely sure that our university students are just too darn stupid to stay out of such trouble. Heck, we can't expect students to think of their future, finish school, get their degree and begin their lives in a planned and sensible way, can we? We MUST have that nanny state government out there to hold their hands... or hold their contraception... for them.
And who can deny that it's all Bush's fault?
That sex pusher!















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Wow
August 22, 2007 - 05:26 ET by well99Wish I could go to Costa Rica.Cant afford it.Sometimes I wonder if the media has a clue.They must assume were all as stupid as they are.They have the common sense of a rock.I guess being a Elitist means you dont have to think.They just dont get it.
Um, no. It is the fault of
August 22, 2007 - 05:49 ET by mostlymoderateUm, no. It is the fault of a sex-crazed youth with role models like floozie whores Paris Hilton, Britany Spears, Justin Timberlake, Jessica Simpson and Angelina (lesbian) Jolie. The media IS the problem. The media has raised a generation of tatoo'ed losers, with crappy choices in music, celebrity, and movies. (sorry, I had to rant. I know there are a lot of good kids out there) :-)
No problem
August 22, 2007 - 07:05 ET by well99Rant all you want...) I have to agree.The media looks for the worst example of role models and then puts them in the spotlight.Also in this country to many consider celebs something special.Doesnt matter if it is music,sports,or actors.actress.They arent really ..they just have a different job then most.Pays alot better anyways.Doesnt make them special.If kids need a role model it should come from families or from the real stars like first responders.
I don't mind the rant but
August 22, 2007 - 11:25 ET by BinxlyI don't mind the rant but be sure you're judging the book by it's contents and not its cover. I know plenty of women and men who look like normal, law abiding, well kept individuals but in personality are easy, cheap, lying, rude, selfish jerks who care only for themselves. On the other hand, I know of plenty tattooed, out of center, eccentric-styled, and 'different' looking people who are the nicest people you could meet, and educated too. I'm one of them. I got crap all the time for my unnatural colored hair and punk style when I was younger, people assumed I was some moronic deviant who brought nothing to the table. Now I get crap for having tattoos, or long, styled hair and get crap from people ranging from Im too androgenous (somehow thats seen as a threat cause it 'confuses children') and because I go to the pub and have tattoos, I must be a nasty drunk with nothing to bring to the table.
Again, the acts define the character, not its packaging.
mostlymod...
August 22, 2007 - 11:29 ET by LionKingNice rant. If I had not seen other posts of yours, I might confuse you with a conservative...just step to the right, a little more...LOL
Abstinence is dirt
August 22, 2007 - 05:48 ET by motherbeltAbstinence is dirt cheap.
Free, in fact.
Anyone think of that? Nah, too provincial.
Birth control
August 22, 2007 - 06:48 ET by totalkaosdaveTotalKaosDave
Thank GOD for abortion...or are the liberals pissed off they may have to pay for that themselves too...
yeah, the resulting
August 22, 2007 - 11:51 ET by TruthMongeryeah, the resulting abortion boom - this should be good news!
are they thanking GW for this then?
abstinence is "not
August 22, 2007 - 11:46 ET by TruthMongerabstinence is "not realistic"
drunk college kids fishing in the dark for lost clothes with condoms buried somewhere in the pockets is much more reliable
bal told me so anyways
The sad part is to us, its
August 22, 2007 - 07:03 ET by USA4freedomThe sad part is to us, its sooo obvious. To some one who
just scans the press while looking for the sports page it does not hit them.
She said: "[The price] steered me away," said
Harris. "I don't blame them [UIC], but I might not be in the situation I
am in now."
In other words,
“I” might not be in the situation if “you” would have paid
for my birth control pills. And yes, the condoms that were (free) read: paid
for by every one but.. her, were not used..
The article stated:
“Some health
officials fear students will be forced to rely on condoms, which may not be as
effective. "When it's not planned sex, something like a condom may not be
used," said Dr. Nandini Khatkhate, UIC medical director at Family Medicine
Center.
Harris would agree with
the statement. She said that even though UIC provides free condoms she would
only use them "once in a while." Other times she and her partner were
feeling spontaneous and "it just happened," she explained.”
Look miss pre med, pregnancy “just does not- just happen”.it’s
not like you were walking down the street and a bird craps on your head.
Ok lets review: Because someone does not keep the price of
the pill down to what you want to pay.
Because you did not use a “free” condom because you were
“feeling spontaneous”
Because you could not afford the pill but could somehow
manage to take a trip over seas.
Because Miss, Harris could not resist having sex.
And all of this.. is Bush’s fault. Got it..
I wish he was around when it was my turn to pay for beer..
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
LMAO! Head of nail, meet
August 22, 2007 - 07:39 ET by motherbeltLMAO! Head of nail, meet hammer.
Sheesh!
This is our younger generation....excuses, excuses.
"When it's not planned sex, something like a condom may not be
used," said Dr. Nandini Khatkhate,
HELLO???? IF you're on birth control, you are PLANNING to have sex. If you are smart enough to plan for your sexual activity by using oral contraceptives, you should be smart enough to plan by having condoms handy.
She said: "[The price] steered me away," said Harris. "I don't blame them [UIC], but I might not be in the situation Iam in now."
Of course you blame them. You self-centered little twit...you think that just because you don't want to pay for something it should be given to you for free. Why? So that YOU don't have to suffer the consequences of YOUR actions.
Grow the hell up.
without making tasteless jokes
August 22, 2007 - 09:07 ET by sarcasmoBy taking your words out of context (but it was tempting) or being too-explicit, I think it's safe to say there exist a few forms of sex which don't require condoms or other contraceptives. This is 100% the fault of the irresponsible future-doctor (who, like many future-lawyers, scares the hell out of me!) and her partner.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
the great thing about
August 22, 2007 - 11:48 ET by TruthMongerthe great thing about libertarians is they do take personal responsibility:)
I have three words for this
August 22, 2007 - 10:08 ET by Ruths husband BenI have three words for this woman who thinks it is Bush's fault she got pregnant:
Brazillian bikini wax
There. Problem solved.
i blame bubba
August 22, 2007 - 11:49 ET by TruthMongerI could definitely see blaming bubba for unwanted pregnancies - but not GW - too damn much integrity and honor and respectability, etc, etc, etc...
Last time I checked...
August 22, 2007 - 07:13 ET by indianaconservative1. UIUC was not that cheap of a college to attend let alone the pre-med part. 2. I wish my wife could purchase BC pills for $35.00.
They are suppose to get
August 22, 2007 - 07:39 ET by Senior ChiefThey are suppose to get "educated", instead of being impregnated. They can get pregnant all they want without going to college...
To the liberal minded studentry, why birth controls? Those soon-to-be babies if indoctrinated right, will most likely turn lefty democrack. So, carry the baby and take care of them. It was nobody's fault since you were slut-y and choose to be pregnant. Find the father and take responsibility. Stup-d ho!
$15 per month.
August 22, 2007 - 08:01 ET by allanfI would think that the patents for many kinds of hormonal birth control pills have expired. The drugs should be generic and relatively inexpensive.
This from a Womens Health Forum which describes the cost as between $15 and $25 a month
Bush Responsible for PMS!
August 22, 2007 - 09:57 ET by Dee Bunkgreat point allanf - but I'm sure she wanted that new kind that allows women to completely skip their period. Bush is for Bit*hes- that jerk!
I get it
August 22, 2007 - 08:54 ET by Mica the MagnificentOh NO!
The government didn't fix the pothole on my street.
I guess I'll just keep running over it with my car until I damage my front end.
Then, it will be the governments fault.
I first heard about this in
August 22, 2007 - 09:17 ET by TheConservativeChemistI first heard about this in the newspaper of the university where I work. After all the sob stories from these "vulnerable" college girls, my initial thought was:
DON'T HAVE SEX!!
Jeez, it's not rocket science...no sex=no pregnancy.
Of course when the left has been telling youth for DECADES that irresponsible sex and promiscuity are "inevitable" in college and "rites of passage", of course you will get this moronic "boo-hoo for me" attitude.
Just another way of trying to take personal responsibility away from people and put it on the government (say, didn't the USSR do things like this too? Hmmm....the Dems, the Commies....I'm just sayin'........)
"Yesterday's Communists are Today's Democrats....
Yesterday's Democrats are Today's Republicans..." - An analogy made by *ME*
Three comments
August 22, 2007 - 09:55 ET by iveseenitall1. Won't it be great when newspapers go the way of the fountain pen.
2. Anyone who can't (won't) see what modern lieralism has wrought is either blind or a hypocrite.
3. These are our kids, dammit! Look what's been done to them.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
BIRTH CONTROL
August 22, 2007 - 10:15 ET by tymanThe bottom line is this, these students are adults. They are going to school. If Dad and Mom are paying for school and a place to live, I would think they would help out Johnny and Suzie getting what they need. If they have a scholorship, then maybe they ought to get as job instead spending money on partying or having sex. That is what responsible adults do.
Kids versus Adults
August 22, 2007 - 10:20 ET by Sergeant ROCKKids want all of the thrills of being an adult, but none of the responsibilities.
somehow, I managed to make
August 22, 2007 - 14:25 ET by Khyrissomehow, I managed to make it through college without having "inevitable" sex.
It's not that hard to say "no," even for guys. It's not emasculating... and retards that would tease me for turning down "silver platter opportunities" were just that... retards and nothing more.
I consider that more of a "rite of passage" than capitulation to peer pressure.
Wow...
August 22, 2007 - 10:07 ET by ksimm81Is this a serious article?
As a black woman, I especially felt insulted when the author of the Chicago paper implied that minorities (synonomous with 'low income', of course) are too stupid to realize that keeping your legs closed could keep you from having unwanted pregnancies!
Should Bush hire the chastity police to follow all of the college students around to keep them from getting pregnant being that there is no money to fund birth control?
And this girl was too poor to buy birth control but not too poor to got to Costa Rica??
You have GOT to be kidding me. This article truly nauseated me.
Will we be blaming Bush for everything that goes wrong ten years after he has left office? Twenty? Thirty?
Ridiculous.....
In the year 2016...
August 22, 2007 - 10:12 ET by Sergeant ROCK... democRATS will still be running against GW during the primaries.
You're so right Sarge. All
August 22, 2007 - 11:37 ET by Senior ChiefYou're so right Sarge. All of demoCRACK presidential candidates are campaigning against GW, of course with the help of leftoid media. These wanna-be leaders has no agenda, but to trash this administration. No solution, no positive outlook, but future gloom and doom...
SHOCK AND AWE!
August 22, 2007 - 11:42 ET by Sergeant ROCKIt's GW's last salvo against the democRATS. Imagine their surprise when they figure out that Bush is not running again!
Bush outsmarts them yet again!
lol
ksimm81, see my comment
August 22, 2007 - 11:09 ET by motherbeltksimm81, see my comment above about abstinence being free.
I'm glad I'm not the only one with that viewpoint.
You know, I keep finding
August 22, 2007 - 11:07 ET by motherbeltYou know, I keep finding more trash in this article. Here's the latest to hit me:
The price increase in hormonal birth control can be traced to the
Deficit Reduction Act signed by President Bush last year, aimed at
reducing federal spending by $39 billion. (emphasis mine.)
Who passed the Act and sent it to the President for signing? Wasn't it the Congress and the Senate???? So why do they escape any blame for this tragedy?
But what the heck....just blast Bush, as if he just issues decrees and new, evil laws are created.
The MSM should be content
August 22, 2007 - 11:42 ET by AJThe MSM should be content about this. I mean, after all, everyone is "expressing" themselves--- and consequences? Ah, who cares about the consequences of premarital sex? I mean, if you get pregnant, just go have an abortion or make your mommy and daddy take care of the child so you can party and drink and have even more sex.
more plausible
August 22, 2007 - 11:51 ET by LionKingIt would be more plausible if they said that Bill Clinton was responsible. Not sure if he is on the college tour yet...I guess it depends if he has finished the high school tour.
[College co-eds...be careful of Slick Willy and his slick...]
On my way home, Rush
August 22, 2007 - 16:07 ET by Senior ChiefOn my way home, Rush mentioned the 4th alternative not to get pregnant...Do the Lewinsky...and its free!