I realize that this is off topic for what is posted here but I have been wanting to ask this question for some time. My question is, in all the debate about the health care law and birth control, why does one side of the story seem to be completely ignored? The right is focusing on the single women, which is an important part, however what about the married families that could greatly benefit from the economic advantages to not having more children? As a teacher I see many children suffering because the family can barely afford to support the kids they have, yet continue to have kids. I realize some of it may be religious beliefs but would be interested to see how much of it could be due to lack of funds for proper health care and being able to afford means of birth control. I also ask this as a soon-to-be mother looking toward after my baby is born. Without my health insurance and access to birth control, my husband and I would be at a great financial loss were we to accidentally get pregnant again soon after the baby is born. Why have I heard no information from this side to date?

Thank you,

Anne Bovee

Casper, WY

Eric Cantor needs pressed on the subject of the "leader" of the Republicans, Rush Limbaugh. They have quoted him, gone on his show and now they need to let the rest of us know if they are of the same opinion on women. His sponsors are distancing themselves from him. Where are the real men of the Republican party????

I agree that we need to maintain our religious freedom however not even one health insurance company is a religious organization. A hospital may be run by a religious organization but a hospital is not an insurance company. How can an intelligent individual think that providing contraception is a choice and not a medical issue.

Where do you think they are, Linda? They're hiding behind destructive, divisive sociopathic buggers like Limbaugh who now claims he was only joking about his repeated verbal assault Ms Fluke.

Hang in there, everyone.

Your friend,

Warren

Warren G. Richards

Mesa AZ

After the Jack Abramoff lobby scandal, Newt Gingrich was quoted on national talk radio as saying, " True American Democracy no longer exists for the average American. That privilege now only belongs to those who have enough money to buy it." Now in this presidential election we are seeing America's Democracy and Constitution under further attack and the rights and liberties of Americans compromised further by the recent Supreme Court Ruling, the Military Authorization Act' and the Patriot Act. Clearly there has been an American Corporate Coup D'etat in Washington and the warnings from past Presidents Roosevelt and Eisenhower are now a reality.

Given our nation's past history of the last 60 years, it is a certainty our country will stage another war with Iran within the near future. Some say by June. History has proven time and again as government power becomes under the control of the few, and becomes ever increasingly imperialistic, tyranny, corruption the eventual destruction of the country will definitely follow.

It is too bad David and the rest of the news media are under the same corporate control our government is. The propaganda machine is alive and well.

I've not heard anyone address how males are effected.Does a guy not have coverage if he chooses a vessectamie.

Mr. Gingrich needs to answer the questions. He is forever trying to revise or avoid the questions by side stepping and expounding in a tirade of political propaganda. Every week, Mr. Gregory allows this kind of off the subject response. If guest refuse to answer the questions, cut the guest off and go to the next question. This is not the Newt Gingrich Show and we tune in to get information, not to hear a pompous, aloof and into himself individual blow smoke. If the guests do not want to answer questions, keep them off the program!!!!!!! Likewise, why are you still addressing Mr. Gingrich as Speaker? He is a “FORMER” Speaker of the House. That goes for other people who are addressed inappropriately – example: Governor Romney, President Clinton, etc. They no longer hold those positions and should be addressed in a manner that correctly reflects their current status.

In regards to Mr. Limbaugh, his comments were completely off color. His statements had nothing to do with religious freedom, but just a kind of bullying and hypocrisy. It amazes me, Mr. Limbaugh and others in his camp have said nothing about insurance companies paying for Viagra, but make a big issue of paying for birth control.

Just Me!

I am currently a practicing catholic, and I am a nurse. However I believe in birth control. I am also an independent. I wouldn't vote for any of the Republicans that are in the race right now not only because of this issue, but this cinches it. I would love for meet the press, to have the balls to have a regular woman on the show to give her point of view. Here is what bother me. When I saw the one particular female republican congresswoman on the news last week, saying that forcing religious organizations to provide contraception as part of their health plan, suppresses her religious freedom, makes me want to scream. If she doesn't want to use the benefit, no one is going to force her. But what about the nurse, or food service worker, or secretary, or maintenance worker who works for a catholic hospital because they need a job and that is the only place they can get one. Should they have less health care choices than the hospital down the street because they are not of that faith? I think this whole discussion is absurd!!! and we are going backwards/ I never thought my daughter would have to deal with this in her generation.

I am a registered Republican, and a small business owner. I am embarassed to say that no one in my party seems to understand the basics of supply and demand. No intelligent small business owner is going to "invest" (i.e. purchase more equipment or hire more staff) unless they can be assured that the demand side of their business will increase to pay for the investment. Sales (demand) MUST increase to offset the cost of the expansion (investment).

We are a supplier of products the the electronics industry. September of 2008 brought reality to the surface, teaching us of how closely related we were to the automobile industry. Yes, on the far fringe, but when the big 3 pulled back their production by almost 50%, we expected to go chapter 7 ( i.e. complete liquidation).

When considering to invest, I expect a return on my investment of at least 12 % for the first year, using EBIT values. This is the advice of our accountant Without a guarantee of a 12% ROI, or a marked increase in demand for the products that my new equipment or employees will manufacture, I will surely go broke.

I am waiting for the likes of Cantor, Boehner, Romney, and all of the other Republican talking heads to make this argument. Since they have not, I wonder when the last time these talking heads had to go to a bank for a loan, or an increase in a line of credit. It is simply not happening, and that is the reality of life.

It is very easy for anyone in Congress, with a guarateed salary and government paid medical benefits, to say what is wrong with this county. I bet no one in Congress has to worry about personal cash flow. I'd like to see Cantor, Boehner, and McConnell pull a stint on "Undercover Boss". If these three yukels did what I have to do for a month just to earn a living, they would sing a very different tune. Rest assured you will NEVER see that happen.

When demand for my products increase increase beyond a utilization rate of 97% (I am now at 80%, up from 53% in 2009) , I will be the first one to line up to expand equipment and my employee base.

It is clear in my mind that President Obama, albeit a Democrat, knew what he was doing when he "bailed out" GM and Chrysler. As a result of the President's socialistric views" (Thank you Rick & Newt), we have kept our house, my kids are still in college (with no student loans), and we are no longer in abject fear of a double dip. To be clear, we am still cautious, but we are certainly better under this President than when "Dubya" left office.

If David Gregory and rest rest of "Meet the Press" is so "unbiased", why did they hammer Newt, Eric Cantor and the rest of the RNC while not even touching what Bill Maher called Sarah Palin (which was the "c" word). I am not defending Rush Limbaugh but at least what he called the "innocent" Georgetown law student (a "slut" and a "prostitute") you can say on TV (she is 30 years old, not 23 like many have said). But Bill Maher, who has as much influence on the Left as Rush has on the right AND who just gave $1 million to a Obama Super PAC gets a pass. Yes, once again, the Left gets a pass for the same thing they hammer the right for. The hypocrisy from Mr. Gregory is too much to ignore. Why anyone on right puts up with this @#$% on the right and goes on this show is ignorant.

I wish David Gregory had asked Ms. Wasserman-Schultz, when she was lamenting Rush Limbaugh's "slut" comment and acting as if she were about to cry, whether she believed it was "humorous" and acceptable for Bill Maher to label Sarah Palin as a "c*nt" and a "tw*t," and for asserting that Sarah Palin "would f*ck Rick Perry if he was black." I wish he had asked her whether she felt Maher should offer a public apology for his words. But of course that would never happen, because it would violate the double standard. For the record, I believe Limbaugh's words were inappropriate, I think it was fitting that he should apologize, and I wish it had not taken him so long; but, I know I will be waiting a very long time before I ever hear Maher apologize, or anyone in the Democrat party call on him to do so.

Or, would she have simply responded that the right should just "lighten up?"

I don't see any one of these Republicans talking about any male reproductive treatment being against your religious freedoms, just women. Even more disrespectful, Cantor thinks that Limbaugh's apology is okay! The mere fact that these Republican men don't even think women are important enough to be heard on a subject that directly affects them is unconscionable. I am not even sure they see women as people, illustrated even more by Cantor's comparison of our reproductive right to Kosher food.

I find it so offensive that religious beliefs trump women's rights! They don't even take the time to understand it, just ban it! The catholic church has been against the "The pill" since inception, they have never acknowledged its far ranging effects for women's health. It just feel like that old thinking that women are just property to be discarded when we are no longer useful as illustrated by Newt Gingrich, seems to be the GOP's thinking.

I am stunned at how shocked I am at the Republican Men's silence and ignorance of women's health in 2012. Why would I want them in office?

Gingrich weighs in on Limbaugh? A bag of hot air afraid to properly criticize his despicable defecto spokesman. Now if Chris Christie were to weigh in, that would be newsworthy.

MR. GREGORY (to REP. SCHULTZ):

Obviously, the president is in a mode here where he wants to defend himself and try to deflect because it's never good politics for an incumbent when gas prices go up. And both sides have failed to provide a long-term answer to this issue, Republicans and Democrats. Bill Clinton, the former president, said hey, that Keystone Pipeline, the president ought to get behind that. Do you think the president makes himself vulnerable by not doing everything possible to protect America against the kind of instability in the Middle East that can make gas prices spike up?

MR GREGORY, the issue at hand is not about the Keystone Pipeline or protecting America from rising gas prices. Those are political issues that have not been properly conflated with foreign policy issues. Last week, Daniel Yergin of Cambridge Energy Associates said Obama has decided to take Iran to "end game" on the nuclear weapon issue. If that is Obama's intent, (and probably it should be his intent), it would explain dramatic oil price increases in the past months. In short, speculators are betting on conflict of one kind or another. Hardliners are in control of Iran and I think it unlikely they will be deterred by sanctions in their ambition to build a bomb. That remains to be seen; sanctions will take some time to bite, and an Iranian nuclear weapon may be more forthcoming.

In any case, I object to evasive news reporting and commentary. Could it be that Obama wants to softpedal sanctions and his support for Israel's threatened attack..so as "to give diplomacy a chance to work"? Maybe. On the other hand, pandering to political complaints about rising gas prices and rejected oil pipelines does not inform the American public of what is happening and what could happen sometime soon.

Let me challenge you to raise your level of commentary and political discourse.

Plain & Simple:

PObama: Gone!
Borders: Closed!
Congress: Obey it's own laws
Language: English only
Culture: Constitution, and the Bill of Rights!

Drug Free: Mandatory Drug Screening before Welfare!
NO freebies to: Non-Citizens!
We the people are coming!

Tim Russert would be turning over in his grave the way David lets these politicians just have another campaign platform. Regardless of the question, Eric Cantor and Newt Gingrich make campaign speeches. This is really evolving into more of a softball "Larry King" type program. David should hold these politicians accountable for what they say, and not let them simply get away with outright lies and distortions.