GOP follies continue with contraception issue

The U.S. Senate votes today on an amendment by U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds.

Politically, Republicans apparently believe they have a winner in the issue and a number of conservative pundits have encouraged them in that faith. But every poll I’ve seen tells quite a different story.

The most recent is a newly released CBS News/NY Times poll in which 65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance. Fifty-nine percent believe that requirement should also apply to religiously affiliated employers.

And among Catholic voters, the ones supposedly so upset that their church’s religious liberty has been “attacked”?

“A new New York Times/CBS News poll has found that 57 percent of Catholic voters supported the requirement for religiously affiliated employers, like hospitals or universities, to cover the full cost of birth control for their employees, while 36 percent opposed it (7 percent said they did not know). There was almost no difference between Catholic and other voters on the question.”

The Obama administration, in other words, is far more in tune with members of the Catholic Church than are the leaders of that venerable institution or the Republican Party. In fact, it’s been fascinating to see how quickly and easily conservatives can convince themselves that this time, this time, they’ve finally got the American people behind them as they rush into political battle, only to look back behind them and find that same small band of followers urging them on against the multitudes.

That’s what happened on the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, which is why the House Republicans have had to beat such a hasty retreat on those issues in recent days. Positions that they once thought would make them wildly popular have instead become huge burdens that they are trying to shuck as quickly and quietly as possible. And it’s happening now on the contraception issue as well.

In fact, as this contraception issue plays out, the huge “gender gap” I wrote about Monday, with female voters backing Obama by more than 20 points over both Romney and Santorum, will be cemented into place and perhaps even expand. It’s a long way between now and November, but if Republicans want to turn this trend around they better start doing things differently.

And doing things differently just doesn’t come naturally to them.

– Jay Bookman

740 comments Add your comment

[...] GOP follies continue with contraception issueAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds. [...]

man behind the curtain

February 15th, 2012
10:15 am

Truth is “smoove” Obama has pretty much played the GOP congress his whole term. They thought handing over an economy in tatters and monstrous debt would be a stick they could beat him with. So far he’s done most of the beating.

Jerome Horwitz

February 15th, 2012
10:15 am

The Grand Ostrich Party once again sticks their heads in the sand. With all the issues that truly need attention they engage in garbage like this. I just can’t fathom why all the fuss about this – it’s the 21st century folks. Not the Dark Ages.

jm

February 15th, 2012
10:16 am

yawn. if Obama would just start regulating the rubber industry better, I bet we could get rubber prices down enough where they could just make condoms as available as straws in a fast food restaurant.

on the substance of the issue: folks, let’s tell the federal government to beat it and get their nose out of our business.

carlosgvv

February 15th, 2012
10:16 am

Republican motovations in contraception , as in all other issues, are determined solely by what they believe will get them the most votes. They believe the crazed Tea Party is the Party future and will act accordingly. If they are proven wrong in the Nov. election, look for them to do the Romney flip-flop on this and most other issues.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:17 am

and the contraception trap closes around the skinny ankles of the GOP.

too funny by half!

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:18 am

Condoms made of rubber?

Do you bounce?

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:18 am

jm

rubber?

do you bounce?

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:19 am

sorry about the double post

but count it as a double dribble for jm

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
10:19 am

Tell us again why the government should tell the private sector what they must pay for.

So people are able to afford health insurance but cannot afford to pay for their birth control?

And because of that, the rest of us must be forced to pay for that coverage?

Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:20 am

The Catholic poll is kind of a joke, honestly. Some Catholic churches are more conservative than others. The more conservative ones – that do not support BC – should not have to provide it as part of an insurance policy.

You can’t just say “Catholic” any more than you can say “Jewish” and assume it’s this homogeneous glob that all have the same beliefs religiously or morally.

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:20 am

There is no limit to the right-wing capacity for self-delusion. I posted about this on Facebook, simply a short post asking how this issue qualifies as a political winner, and a righty friend immediately accused me of “nonsensical ranting.”

southdem

February 15th, 2012
10:21 am

This is the natural result of the development of Fox News and talk radio. The Republicans live in their own echo chamber and they never get different points of view, or if they do, they don’t believe them.

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:21 am

Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception? Apparently there’s been another amendment to the Constitution. Guess I messed the memo…

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am

“Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?”

Liberals……………

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am

this arguement over “contraception” alone is a loser for the GOP…they need to focus on the mandate of “obamacare” in general, and why it needs to be repealed. Focusing on one aspect, contraception, is a loser, politically.

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:23 am

Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception?

Umm, there are myriad government regulations regarding all manner of insurance, not just health. At both the state and federal level.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

February 15th, 2012
10:23 am

Its all the GOP has now.

Other than lying, of course. “Obama is a S O O O O C I A L I S T!”

Meanwhile Larry Fink, who manages $3.7 trillion (more than anyone in the world), says go 100% into stocks.

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:24 am

No wonder there is such idiological divide, the Left has not a clue what the debate is truly about.

There is cultural and moral issues within, but the core is Liberty. The Left continues to give away their liberties in favor of the nanny state.

Obamacare is the largest give up of Liberty in our history and the current debate is but the first collateral damage with many more likely to arise.

The Right does not want to ban contraceptives. Instead, they want to give Liberty to business owners to offer or not offer it with the government’s nose out of it.

The 65% is not surprising since too many citiizens today want everything given them.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

“Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception? ”

darlin’, if you’re paying a premium, it AIN’T FREE …

but, thanks for your poutrage …

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

Instead, they want to give Liberty to business owners to offer or not offer it with the government’s nose out of it.

I assume then you’re in favor of allowing employers to choose not to cover cardiac or prenatal care? Or allowing the Mormon church to “opt out” of anti-bigamy laws?

St Simons - we're on Island time

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

so out of touch with 21st century America, it’s just cringe-worthy

what dey tryin to do mon, evoke so much pathos that they get pity-votes

can we have a 5 inning mercy rule, like in little league?

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

“Its all the GOP has now.”

If you only read the AJC, I guess that’s what you would believe. For people who can think on their own, let’s see, there is;

1) Multi-trillion dollar annual deficits
2) Douobled national debt
3) sustained unemployment
4) clownish foreign policy
5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon

etc, etc, etc

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

“The 65% is not surprising since too many citiizens today want everything given them.”

and, again, it’s not being GIVEN to you if you’re effing PAYING for it …

sheesh …

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

Funny how one can write about the echo chamber of “fox news and right wing radio”, in a left wing echo chamber…in a left wing echo chamber…in a left wing echo chamber…oh the irony…oh the irony…oh the irony.

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

SunkinUK,

If what you pay does not cover the costs of your expenses, indeed it is free.

Now if you wanted to charge higher premiums for those that choose the birth control option, we could talk.

But you know that is unacceptable. You want others to pay your way.

Nothing new here….

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

USinUK, did you make that “poutrage” term up all by yourself? Is “poutrage” what causes you libs to whine about the rich not paying enough taxes when they pay virtually ALL the taxes? LMAO…

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

Republicans is trying their bestest to show us that they can indeed by stoopider than once thought even possible. What they needs is a following with bigger torches so they can be in the majority.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

Well, I don’t see why people can’t just stop Doing It. That way, there’d be no need for birth control and this whole flap would go away. Anyhow, with this country being in so much trouble and all, seems to me people should be willing to give up fun. Matter of fact, I’m not having much fun and I don’t see why other people should have fun. Besides, it’s for having kids. What’s the point of having birth control if it blocks you from having kids?

Just don’t make me pay taxes to support your kids. I’m all for forcing the women to have kids, but I draw the line when it comes to making me pay to raise them.

Have a good Hump Day everybody.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

B. Shockley — “Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception?”

You clearly don’t understand how medical insurance got to the state it is in the first place. Go do some reading about the history of medical insurance in the US, then when you’ve educated yourself on the topic, come back and we can discuss.

“Apparently there’s been another amendment to the Constitution. Guess I messed the memo…”

No, you’re just unaware of that whole ‘regulating interstate commerce’ power that the Constitution explicitly grants to the government. You’re also clearly unaware of, again, how we got health coverage paid for in the way we do in this country.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
10:30 am

Paying $3 for a $12 meal is not paying your way….

sheeesh…..

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:30 am

Holmes – you are overboard.

USinUK – employer provided insurance is paid in large part by the employer. That is the debate here – if employers must include contraceptives in their insurance plans. If there is a copay for the drug, you are only paying for a portion. No one says you can’t purchase and pay the full amount. It’s called choice; it’s called Liberty.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:31 am

“I assume then you’re in favor of allowing employers to choose not to cover cardiac or prenatal care? ”

or Scientologists to not cover ANY meds for mental health …

mm

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

I am so tired of churches trying to dictate our laws. It’s time to strip all churches of their tax exempt status.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

@Johnny Reb – you’re spot on. The left has no idea what this debate is about.

Liberals think – for better or worse – that is government has the ability to do something and it will benefit people, it must be inherently good. Birth control for all is, in a vacuum, a good thing.

Conservatives (well, true conservatives) think: Even though this program may be good, does the government have the right or authority to do it?

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

First Asscroft and now Blunt.

Missouri can really pick some winners, huh?

Since at least World War II, a Republican candidate for president has never taken a majority of Catholic votes.

And doing things differently just doesn’t come naturally to them.

No doubt, though that assessment may be a tad harsh.

I believe a compelling argument can be made that the GOP is no longer stuck in 1951.

They have rocketed up to 1952.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

B. Shockley — “5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon”

I do not repose any trust in your prediction of commodity prices, but if you can accurately predict the COB prices of a dozen commodity prices on a date say, six months hence, then I might start believing your predictions on this score.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

February 15th, 2012
10:33 am

1) Multi-trillion dollar annual deficits
2) Douobled national debt
3) sustained unemployment
4) clownish foreign policy
5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon

All Bush legacy. I don’t care how many times you complain about hearing it either.

And Obama is taking foreign thugs out left and right without expensive ground wars. The Bush deficit is shrinking and the market says the economy is healing. Crude oil prices are 2/3 Bush highs and production is way up.

Hannity talking points are nothing but lies.

Jerome Horwitz

February 15th, 2012
10:33 am

Rather than say “free” it should be that these services are part of the premium. While employers pay a majority of the premium employees do indeed pay part of the premium and should have more say. This is just another good reason why we need single payer health coverage in this country. Along with the fact we spend more that any other country and have horrible overall health statistics.

One thing I’ve noted, and it is a generality, is that conservatives worry more about the rights of companies and liberals are concerned with the rights of individuals.

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:34 am

ty webb – if conservatives did not participate on this blog the bus would have ended up on the left ditch long ago. The number of posts per Jay piece would be drastically down. And most of all, the Left would think they have won.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:35 am

No wonder there is such idiological divide, the Left has not a clue what the debate is truly about.

Really? So the majority of people have no idea what this debate is about? Fascinating elitist attitude you got going there.

You just hate that your team is losing AGAIN.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:35 am

Paying $3 for a $12 meal is not paying your way….

Is that the latest Groupon deal.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Follies is the perfect word.

Ta Ra Ra Boom De Yay!

This is a HUGE mistake for the right.

HUGE. BIG. LARGE. GINORMUS.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

The number of posts per Jay piece would be drastically down. And most of all, the Left would think they have won.

Just like all over the south, white make southerners are convinced they are 100% right about everything, just because that’s the only people they talk to.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Bryan G – I don’t know about “conservatives” or “liberals” – but I can tell you what *I* think …

*I* think that it’s complete and utter BOLLOCKS that ANYone has the right to deny me access to safe and legal drug in my insurance simply because THEY don’t agree with it. You don’t like it / think it’s immoral, then you have the right to NOT use it … you, however, do NOT have the right to deny anyone else access to it.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Jerome Horwitz – you summed up perfectly (although inadvertently) the divide here.

A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.

An employee at a religious employer has no RIGHT to birth control. As a matter of fact, there’s no RIGHT to health care. These are not individual rights.

I’m all for individual rights – speech, religion, assembly, to remain silent, to have a gun – but birth control ain’t one of them. (and I’m not anti-birth control. Heck, we need more of it.)

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

Lest I checked, Republicans can still freely liberate themselves at the RiteAid up the road. They still sell Trojans to anyone with the purchase price, no questions asked. :lol:

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

ByteMe – the way the Left and main stream media is reporting the issue, plus the fact that poll results can be manipulated with the question and who is asked, calls into question the 65%. Plus, there are so many people on the government doll now that if you subtract their affect the number is low. The true answer will be in November.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

USinUK – If I’m your employer – and you work for me, you should work under my terms. You don’t have a RIGHT to birth control.

And, nothing about the policy says that you can’t go out an buy your own. You certainly may.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

If JohnnyReb did not post here, how would we know what the one percent is thinking. :roll:

jm

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

“Just like all over the south, white make southerners are convinced they are 100% right about everything, just because that’s the only people they talk to.”

Dumbest post of the day award!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

Bryan – the problem is that we are NOT talking about churches – in that case, I completely agree with you.

But, when it comes to secular institutions (hospitals, universities, etc), then, no, the religious beliefs should NOT be allowed to dictate basic issues of access.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.

Religious employers — chuches, synagogues, etc. — DO have that right (in all but 8 states, by the way).

But if the guy running Staples decides that he doesn’t want his underpaid associates to receive contraceptive care because he believes what his Catholic Church tells him about needing to make as many babies as possible, does the government have a place to step in and say “no, this is not the norm and your religious beliefs do not extend to enforcing your beliefs on others”?

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:40 am

“The most recent is a newly released CBS News/NY Times poll in which 65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance. Fifty-nine percent believe that requirement should also apply to religiously affiliated employers”

Yes. Of course. And I would like to see how these questions were framed. Perhaps they should have been framed in a more truthful manner. For example I wonder how many would have responded favorably to the governments actions if the first question were postulated like this- “Should the govt be able to impose coverage for birth control on a religious institution whose teachings specifically are against the use of contraceptives”.

And as a corollary to that question I think a little voter enightenment should be built into the 2nd question regarding making insurance companies pay for contraceptives. The question should be framed like this- “Would you be willing to pay higher health insurance premiums if the government imposes contracptive coverage on previously exempt religious institutions?”

The educated among us understand that this contraceptives requirement is going to be passed along to the rest of us in higher insurance premiums. The liberals of course either don’t understand this or if they do they then have no problem restricting other people’s choice and freedom by imposing a benefit provided to some at the expense of everyone else.

Typical lib thought- appealing to the worst in groups of people by offering some sort of free goodie paid for by everyone else. Nothing new there.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:40 am

Dumbest post of the day award

This from the troll who thinks Mitt is going to win :roll:

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

Bryan G. should not offer insurance to his employees. There. All fixed.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

Yes. Of course. And I would like to see how these questions were framed

Google is ready when you are. The poll details are available online.

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

“And most of all, the Left would think they have won.”

JohnnyReb
well, they have “won” in the short term…however, when the other party takes over the reigns(maybe 2012, maybe 2016, maybe not even until 2020), me thinks they might object to turing over their liberty to the federal government…I just hope they haven’t thrown all their “not in our name” bumper stickers away.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

USinUK – if it’s a Catholic hospital, my position is that it should be allowed to determine employment and insurance by its religious beliefs. If employees do not like that, they can vote with their feet and go elsewhere. I respect your opinion, but that is mine.

ByteMe – I don’t think there’s a difference. I really don’t. The people can work at Office Max or a different Staples if they don’t like it (in your example).

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

Bryan G – “A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.”

“If I’m your employer – and you work for me, you should work under my terms. You don’t have a RIGHT to birth control.”

Super Duper, now, why don’t you provide us all with a copy of the letter you sent to the 28 states (including Georgia) that have had the BC provision on the books for over a decade. I’d be curious to see if your concern then matches your concern now. Or, did you just become concerned when Obama said it?

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

TaxPayer – you need to read up on how much income it takes to put one in the 1%. A married couple filing jointly who owns an S-Corp with medium and above success can easily go into the 1% category. It does not mean they are rich, it just means they pay high federal income taxes, more than a 1/3 of their income.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

The U.S. Senate votes today on an amendment by U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds.

Would the US Senator push forward something in the same manner if it violated Islamic beliefs?? Hindu beliefs?? Judaism beliefs?? Does that law not violate the 1st Amendment by creating a law that specifically respects a religion?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Seems like somebody’s trying to do an end around the Constitution. No self-respecting Conservative would run afoul of the Constitution, would they?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

Taxpayer – no, I’m all for employees having access to contraception. Were I an employer, by all means they could. Obviously you don’t understand what we’re talking about. Heck, I’m not even religious. But I believe in religious freedom

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

ByteMe – I don’t think there’s a difference. I really don’t. The people can work at Office Max or a different Staples if they don’t like it (in your example).

Spoken like someone who hasn’t seen the stats on unemployment amongst that crowd. You act like those jobs are just sitting there waiting for someone to come get them.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

Bryan – 10:42 – sorry, but whether it’s a Catholic / Jewish / Methodist hospital makes no difference. They’re providing a HEALTHCARE service, not a religious one.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:44 am

Get Religion Out Of My Government!!

Misty Fyed

February 15th, 2012
10:44 am

It’s called Religious freedom. If you want insured contraception….Don’t work for someone who is opposed to it. What is so hard to understand about the bill of rights Jay? the percentage of people favoring or opposed is irrelevant. Here you have an administration trying to deny the free exercise of their religion. They aren’t forcing people to do anything…join any religion…pray at certain times. They just want to run their business and are opposed to contraception.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:45 am

Butch – honestly I didn’t know that was the law until now. That doesn’t make my objection (or the objection that many others have) any less relevant.

Just because something – that I believe is contrary to the 1st Amendment – happens elsewhere does not make it okay now.

And I’m not anti-Obama. I get that it’s easier for you to shoot the messenger (me) than the message.

godless heathen

February 15th, 2012
10:45 am

“does the government have a place to step in and say “no, this is not the norm and your religious beliefs do not extend to enforcing your beliefs on others”?”

Today’s short answer: No.

St Simons - we're on Island time

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

there’s manufactured outrage, then there’s poutrage,
but manufactured poutrage?

manufacturing poutrage, to make a hail mary (haha) pass
for the catholics, 98% of who disagree with them on this.

This is how far down they have gone. This is how out of touch
they are. The once proud pahhty of Lincoln, reduced to this.

Heck, I wouldn’t wanna believe in evolution, either.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am
“Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?”

Liberals……………

Oh lawdy. Ben Shockley done hit em wif da truth.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

But I believe in religious freedom

Whose religious freedom is being infringed? No one is telling him he can’t pray to his God or believe what he wants. We’re all saying he can’t impose that belief on others through economic means. And we’re not telling him he can’t avoid birth control. We’re all for him doing that if he wants. We’re saying he can’t force his belief on others. And, yes, the government can and does enforce that (see polygamy.. or not).

Pizzaman

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

A reminder “Republicans”!!!!!!!:
1. 28 states, including GA already “require” this same coverage, didn’t ecome an issue till the President supported it in an election year;
2. 5$ a gallon gas is ONLY possible because gas is sold on the “Free” market. NO federal regulation on the price, only emissions;
3. PLEASE, PLEASE…… nominate a “businessman/religious one. I remember all too well what a great job the last Repunlican, business school grad, conservative Christan did as President!!!!!!!!!!!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

as I pointed to yesterday … the fact of the matter is that the US is at a turning point in regards to healthcare:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152621/Fewer-Americans-Employer-Based-Health-Insurance.aspx

if it is going to be completely severed from employment, then there needs to be nationalized health care

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

Misty Fyed – “It’s called Religious freedom”

Precisely. Now, please show us where it states in the BC provision that everyone who has it made available to them will be forced to use it against their will and/or religious beliefs.

Bill Orvis White

February 15th, 2012
10:47 am

If anyone can read between the lines, he would know that this is about big gov’t dictating their lack of values on religious institutions. This president and his enablers in Congress, the liberal media and George Soros have once again, acted arrogantly by forcing contraception on the population. This gives the green-light to the public that sexual debauchery and secularism are OK. It’s all NOT OK! We need to get back to the basics whereby we promote marriage between man and woman. This is one of many examples of how Hussein Obama has been running a socialistic administration with this dictate. This needs to stop. I’m warmed over that the honorable Senator Santorum is getting much-deserved attention. If He does not get the nomination, I truly hope that He would have a major role in a Romney administration.
Amen,
Bill

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

(CNN) — Mitt Romney is learning that there are costs to an ugly, extended primary fight marked by a rush to the far right. Independent voters get alienated by the extremism.

This is a problem with polarization — and it’s already showing signs of benefiting President Barack Obama.

After trailing Romney for months among independent voters in a hypothetical matchup, the president is back on top — 51% to 42% in a new Pew Research Center Poll.

Just four months ago, the numbers were almost reversed, totaling a 19% swing since the primaries began in earnest. This isn’t subtle — it’s something close to an outright revolt of the independents in response to the spectacle they’ve seen in the Republican contests since Iowa — avalanches of negative ads and an outright pander-fest to various forces on the far right.

A new CNN/ORC International poll finds that 53% of independents have an unfavorable view of Romney, compared with 44% last month.

Mission Accomplished as Flip Romney shoots his own feet off…

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

“What is so hard to understand about the bill of rights”

because, my dear, INSURANCE /= the rosary, stations of the cross, etc … THOSE are, in fact, the practice of religion … insurance coverage is not.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

Pizzaman, they can’t hear you over the noises in their heads. In fact, we can barely hear them.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

“Dear Policyholder

Thanks to recent legislation sponsored by House Republicans giving employers the right to drop health care provisions we find morally objectionable, we are informing you that the following benefits of your health coverage are being eliminated.

1.

2.

3.

4…

Additionally, we are considering dropping hospice provisions, any coverage that artificially extends life beyond what God intended without man’s intervention, as well as all vaccines. If God wanted you to live, he’d have given you a better immune system.

On the bright side, your premiums will remain the same.

Thank you for your attention, and thank the Republican House.”

Yup, that’s a sure-fire vote getter!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

(and, FWIW, government has stepped in and prohibited certain “religious” practices in the past … which is why snake-handling is against the law in GA)

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

if it is going to be completely severed from employment, then there needs to be nationalized health care

That’s really what businesses want, but the Democrats didn’t have the guts to pull the trigger.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?

Leave the banksters and BIG business out of this…

Mr. Snarky

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

The Repubs are just playing to their base…shocker!
They don’t actually care what most Americans think.

hryder

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

The official position of the Catholic Church is no artifical birth control. This current controversy should never have arisen. The so called Obama health care bill should never have been proposed let alone passed by Congress. Vote out ALL incumbents in the November elections.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

USinner @ 10:48

Some think that just because it involves a church in some form or fashion that it’s automatically deemed religious. You’re better off trying to bake cookies using cement instead of flour. :)

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

I know if I were Obama, I’d be having a field day with the anti-Obama Republicans. Watching them try their best to be opposite and their little heads just essplodin’ all over themselves. But wait. He is. :lol:

That Obama! He can be so uppity at times. :lol:

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:51 am

I’m sorry…I feel like this whole chain is people not understanding what the argument is.

The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.

When you work for an employer, you give up some of your personal freedom – that’s a fact. You can’t run around saying “my employer sucks, I hate him!” You have a RIGHT to do that, but you don’t have a right to keep your job after saying it.

The people that want BC can still get it – and buy it on their own.

I’m not anti-Obama, anti-health reform, or anti-contraception. I know it’s easier just to say that about someone rather than actually listen. I think the Federal Government is overstepping. If you disagree, that’s fine. Then don’t fuss when the government oversteps again. Or again.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:53 am

Bryan G. – “honestly I didn’t know that was the law until now”

I will definitely give you a free pass on that one. My point is that it’s been on the books for a long time without anyone having any issues with it.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:53 am

Brocephus – by the way, LOVING the new tagline!

and, yes, I totally agree with your 10:50 – just because it’s Our Lady of Perpetual Guilt Hospital, it’s a HOSPITAL, not a church,.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:54 am

The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.

Although the employer is “tied” to a religion, the employment, itself, is not religious based. Therefore, it does not fall under the religious exemption.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

“I loves me some birth control mandated by the friendly folks at big gubment and subsidized by other taxpayers”- Thomas Jefferson

Why oh why?

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

I’m loving the late-2011/early-2012 incarnation of the Regressive Party. They really seem to want to make this one easy for the President and his party. Me likey!!! :)

Jay – jm still spewing infantile, hate-filled invective; does not reflect well on the blog. Just sayin’.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

USinUK – Snake handling churches creep me out. I (quite literally by accident) wandered into one up in the woods in NE Alabama when I was a kid. I had been out camping for a few days and didn’t realize what time it was, or really even that it was Sunday, but knew the church was open to the public pretty much always, so I thought I would take a peak. Yeah, not going back there again.

N-GA

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

Actually this is similar to the issue of selling alcohol/beer/wine. It is perfectly legal to do so, yet some counties refuse to permit it, or they permit sales on any day but Sunday.

The bottom line is: If you don’t want to drink alcohol because of religious beliefs, don’t buy it! The same holds true for contraceptives! However don’t impose your religious views on others.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

“The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.”

The Federal government is telling an employer OF A SECULAR ORGANIZATION (hospital/university) – that it must provide contraception to its employees

full stop.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:56 am

Although the employer is “tied” to a religion, the employment, itself, is not religious based. Therefore, it does not fall under the religious exemption.

And just so Bryan understands, there’s quite a bit of Supreme Court case law to back this position up. We’re not making it up and even Scalia has re-affirmed it in his writings.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:56 am

““I loves me some birth control mandated by the friendly folks at big gubment and subsidized by other taxpayers”- Thomas Jefferson”

considering how many little red-headed slaves were running around at Monticello, he probably would have …

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:56 am

USinUK – a Catholic-run hospital is not a secular employer.

Cindy Lou

February 15th, 2012
10:57 am

@Jerome Horwitz = Great post at 10:33am but your 10:15am is insulting. Ostriches are noble creatures and should not in any way be compared to the GOP :)

Women

February 15th, 2012
10:57 am

I want my birth control and I want it subsidized and paid for by everyone else. Thank you. Now pay up suckers!

Michael G.

February 15th, 2012
10:57 am

Funny how the current administration and the media have tried to turn this from an abortion issue (one they lose,) to a “contraception” issue (one they think they can win). In its simplest form, it all boils down to folks on the left wanting the ability to murder babies.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
10:58 am

Bryan – Exactly who is being forced to provide the birth control? Are you telling me that I’ll be able to run down to the Catholic Church on Peachtree and pick up a pack of birth control pills? Or are they just not being allowed to dictate to the insurance companies that they don’t want their employees using it?

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:58 am

(ir) – 10:55 – I think that ANY organization that pulls the “if your faith is strong enough, you’ll be safe” line should be taken to the wood shed – whether it’s handling snakes or saying that your faith will fight off that tumor in your brain.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:58 am

I wonder if any Republican politician has stopped long enough to realize that they are making a better argument in favor of a single payer system than any Democrat ever made? All that fuss about “government run” healthcare, and it’s the Conservatives who are showing why it would be a better system than our current stuff. I wonder if that’s why Obama’s operatives pushed this contraception thing in the first place? Keep going GOP, and we will see Obama with a 2nd term pusing single payer with your very own arguments.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

It’s good to see so many people stand up and demand that the federal government not interfere with deeply held religious beliefs. While your at it, perhaps you’d like to start a petition to reinstate polygamy in Utah. After all, they had to give it up to be a state. The Catholics can have their insurance sans contraception as long as I can have their daughters for my sister wives. Deal?

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

USinUK – a Catholic-run hospital is not a secular employer.

Ask all the Jewish doctors who work there and Buddhists who get treated there without even knowing the Catholic Church owns it. Ask the employees at Catholic-affiliated Georgetown University, who all currently get contraceptive care as part of their health package.

There’s really case law about this, so you’re arguing against established law.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

I wondered where everyone went……….

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

Bro – I’m all for a public option and, maybe even, single payer.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

Bryan – Do Catholic-run hospitals receive any federal funding?

Paul

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am

“can easily go into the 1% category. It does not mean they are rich,”

Sorry, applicant, although you scored in the top 1% of all high school seniors on GPA, SAT and ACT, tests of reasoning and situational analysis, this does not mean you are smart.

In what mindset is the top 1% not considered ‘rich’? Do some people think reality shows about housewives in Jersey or Beverly Hills are about average folks?

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

Bryan – I didn’t want to use the word “business” since we’re talking schools and hospitals … which is why i said organization

the fact is, the service they are providing is a SECULAR service, not religious

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

USinner @ 10:56

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The tagline came about from a ways back when some of Jay’s antagonists here were fretting over the “Browning” of America.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

“The Federal government is telling an employer OF A SECULAR ORGANIZATION (hospital/university) – that it must provide contraception to its employees”

Come again. How is it secular if its a Catholic hospital or university? Critical thinking skills FAIL!

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

It’s a long way between now and November, but if Republicans want to turn this trend around they better start doing things differently.

This doubling-down on the stupid on contraception is, clearly, a Hail Mary (no offense intended to those who really do beseech Mary thus) pass.

I think they’ll keep throwing these Hail Mary passes until they’re out of time, every time they get the ball.

Honestly, I didn’t think they were that far behind/that desperate, but I seem to be proven wrong the more I read about the way they’re handling this, and any number of other issues (see also the pipeline business, their bizarre positioning on the efficacy of the auto bailout, just to name two that come immediately to mind.)

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

I wonder if that’s why Obama’s operatives pushed this contraception thing in the first place?

They’re doing it, because they want women and young (fertile) people to vote for them in November and the Republicans are being really nice sports and playing along.

Mad Max

February 15th, 2012
11:00 am

Nancy – now that we passed it, and our HHS czar has told us what’s in it, we still don’t like it. And how in God’s name did contraception and abortion beciome rights under the constitution? I guess it’s the “pusuit of happiness” wording! So are vasectomy’s fully paid for too?

Curious Observer

February 15th, 2012
11:01 am

So a political party that’s totally opposed to the Affordable Care Act and vows to repeal it is now engaged in disputing a single provision of that act? I must have awakened in the land of Oz.

Fly-on-the-wall

February 15th, 2012
11:02 am

Here’s one thing to think on…50 years ago people were worried that if JFK were elected he would take orders from the Pope and Rome. Here we are 50 years later and the evangelical right is lining up behind Rome.

So when did the right start taking orders from foreign governments?

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:02 am

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has advocated capping medical malpractice awards at $250,000, but in 1999, his wife sued her doctor over a back injury and asked for twice that amount

As ABC News reports, Santorum’s wife, Karen, sued a Virginia-based chiropractor for half-a-million dollars for allegedly bungling a spinal adjustment.

The suit charged that in November 1996, Karen saw Dr. David Dolberg for a spinal alignment, according to an article by Roll Call on Dec. 13, 1999. The adjustment, however, was performed improperly and resulted in a herniated disk that caused her physical pain and emotional suffering, and required surgery and multiple doctors’ visits, she alleged.

She sued for $500,000, despite the fact that her medical bills totaled approximately $18,800.

While the jury awarded Karen $350,000, a judge later reduced the amount to $175,000.

That hypocrisy runs deep in the GOP.

Peadawg

February 15th, 2012
11:02 am

“The U.S. Senate votes today on an amendment by U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds.”

I’m perfectly ok w/ the exemption for religious-affiliated institution. No problem whatsoever. But what’s the point of extended it to any private business?

AT

February 15th, 2012
11:02 am

This argument continues to be framed incorrectly. The issue is not access to contraception, the issue is who is going to pay for it. What is at stake is the Executive branch having the right to dictate, on a whim, that a created right to have free contraception trumps the first amendment rights of those being forced to pay.

Who supports it and who doesn’t is irrelevant. The Constitution is clear on this one.

reebok

February 15th, 2012
11:03 am

The GOP is going straight over the cliff in this election. The good news is, in 2016, they will have to tack back towards sanity with a moderate like Jon Huntsman, who was the only potential candidate I ever thought could beat Pres Obama this time around.

Mad Max

February 15th, 2012
11:03 am

Curios – A lot of us have felt that way since Obama assumed office.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:03 am

USinUK – From other visits to that church (no other while they were in session), their average attendance is somewhere in the neighborhood of 12-20, so I don’t think they’re convincing too many people. But I agree. The Mrs. wants to work with social services at hospitals advocating for children who want treatment for their illnesses but are being denied because of their parent’s religious beliefs when she graduates law school.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

Mad Max – “And how in God’s name did contraception and abortion beciome rights under the constitution?”

Hey, as long as your jumping on the bandwagon, please tell us when we can expect to see parked in front of the gold dome protesting the very same stipulations that Georgia has had on the books for over 13 years.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

As long as those religious affiliated organizations get ZERO tax money, I say drive on……..

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

Religious disregard for equal justice under law is to me, particularly onerous. Many times in our history, the men who have led this republic have had to stand up to tyrants who hide behind robes and other such garments.

The Catholic church is no more exempt from the law of the land than any other special interest group.

Samuel L. Jackson

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

I love this browning of America. It allows us to go back into identity politics and tribalism based on race. Its a great day when I can say I voted for Obama solely because he is black and its with people. Now if whitey votes for a white candidate solely because he’s white. Well than that there is a whole different story. That would be institutional racism. You know. The Man bringing us down.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

USinUK

I was wondering about the snake-handling decision when I got to your post. Nice.

I notice I still haven’t received any votes of “aye, aye” from those who support the Republican/Catholic position to the question of if they support the same for Sharia.

Golly, wonder why?

(get ready for the chorus of “but that’s different!!! )

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
11:04 am

IR – I believe they do. Now that’s certainly a separate issue. But my point, frankly, is more of a general than specific nature.

For example, let’s say Chick-Fil-A – due to religious objections – did not want to provide BC. I don’t believe the Federal Gov’t should be able to mandate that they have to provide insurance that will provide for BC. The employees can certainly get it on their own, but without CFA subsidizing it.

5-0

February 15th, 2012
11:05 am

This blog is a unique glimpse into the mind of a liberal. It’s frightening. There is no protection sacred as long as 51% or more are opposed to it at any given time. There is no course of action that is unwise as long as 51% favor it.

This nation would never have existed with this mindset. Unfortunately,,,,you’d probably be ok with that.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:05 am

Bryan G

If you step back and look at the gist of the GOP argument against the contraception thing, they are showing exactly why a single payer system will be much better than our current system. No religion or employer would be required to pay for something they didn’t believe in because they would not have to pay for anything at all. I’m beginning to question the motivation behind this entire dust up. When you step back, it’s almost like someone’s making commercials to advocate for a single payer system. Funny thing is, the people who were most against it are making the best arguments for it. IF that is indeed the case, I don’t think there’s enough spin or flip-flopping that can make this stuff disappear. You always have to be aware of the long term reprecussions of short term thinking.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:06 am

ByteMe @ 11:00

Read my 11:05, and you’ll see why I think there’s more at play.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:06 am

If there’s a hospital out there that offers prayer as its sole healing service then I’m in favor of allowing that hospital to choose not to offer contraception coverage in its insurance plan.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:06 am

This nation would never have existed with this mindset.

Yep, without forward-thinkers who wanted something better for everyone, we would have still been slaves to England.

:roll:

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:06 am

At – “The issue is not access to contraception, the issue is who is going to pay for it.”

Really, because that’s not what Father asshat was saying on FOX last night. He was equating contraceptive provision to a jew being forced to eat pork.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
11:06 am

If the Catholic Church owns a sweatshop in the Bronx, is the sweatshop a religious institution?

Can the Catholic Church exempt itself from workplace safety conditions if they cite a moral objection?

Can a business be secular while the owner is a religious institution?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
11:07 am

TaxPayer – I hope that hospital has a big morgue. :)

CJ

February 15th, 2012
11:07 am

When Republicans wrap up the contraception issue, perhaps the can get started on establishing inquisitions for those accused of heresy–death by burning for those found guilty.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:07 am

I’m perfectly ok w/ the exemption for religious-affiliated institution. No problem whatsoever. But what’s the point of extended it to any private business?

Political overreach???

Ayn Rant

February 15th, 2012
11:07 am

Don’t employees have freedom of, and from, religion? I don’t read the Bill of Rights as granting freedom of religion only to employers and the elderly celibates in Rome who decide Catholic dogma.

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
11:07 am

the whole “28 states including georgia” arguement is weak. The majority of those states have provisions similar to the one being put into the federal law. As for Georgia, you are exempt if you don’t provide prescription drug coverage. All religious entity needs to do is not provide a prescription drug benefit as part of their insurance…which is already the case with a lot of insurance policies…and to quote the great Paul Harvey…”and that is the rest of the story”…please find another talking point.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:08 am

Paying $3 for a $12 meal

in Wingnut World, prescription contraception = a meal.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:08 am

Bro, my 10:49 back to you. :)

I’m still partial to the Swiss health care model. Basic insurance from cradle to grave paid for with taxes, the rest you can supplement yourself through insurance companies.

But we get what we get when we make sausages.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:08 am

“The tagline came about from a ways back when some of Jay’s antagonists here were fretting over the “Browning” of America.”

I don’t know about you but I prefer using olive oil when I brown … dry rubs get too smoky

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:08 am

Sounds like a good strategy to me – take ObamaCare apart one stupid clause at a time, thus gutting the lunatic program.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:09 am

Personally, I hope the gender gap stays the same size, but moves. As in, more men AND women start supporting Obama.

And BTW, I am reposting THIS:

Did anyone happen to see the Republican reasoning for extending the payroll tax cut without paying for it?

The reasoning is this: They now believe that this is an issue that they happen to agree with the President and the Democrats on, therefore they agreed to pass it in a bipartisan way, so they could move on to other issues where there is legitimate disagreement.

This is a very reasonable position, and I applaud the Republicans for their ability to agree and compromise on something. I hope they carry it to other reasonable measures.

But I also want to make one other thing clear – to all you folks out there who think that the President has not shown leadership, and that is why the Republicans were trying to block him, I would like to point to this compromise and their reasoning, showing you that they agreed, not begrudgingly, to advance the President’s position. The President made his case over and over again and the Republicans said “Yes, we agree, happily.”

Guess what that is? LEADERSHIP!

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:09 am

Maybe after enough provisions are gutted we can call it ZombieCare.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

Thulsa – “How is it secular if its a Catholic hospital or university? ”

answered in my 11:00

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

The employees can certainly get it on their own, but without CFA subsidizing it.

So, if CFA were to not offer health insurance for religious reasons and instead chose to give employees an allotment to spend on their own, would CFA eliminate that allotment for any employee that chose to purchase insurance with their money that covered contraception or, better yet, would they just fire that employee based on religious grounds. Tell me how that works out for ya, Bryan.

Mad Max

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

Am Vet – Since everyone is subject to the law of the land per your post, what about Obama’s budget disregarding the law he passed in August, the defense of marriage act? Seems like Obama has set the precedent for disregarding the law of the land.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

5-0

February 15th, 2012
11:05 am

This blog is a unique glimpse into the mind of a liberal. It’s frightening. There is no protection sacred as long as 51% or more are opposed to it at any given time. There is no course of action that is unwise as long as 51% favor it.

This nation would never have existed with this mindset. Unfortunately,,,,you’d probably be ok with that.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It’s also a great place to see the vapidness of the Conservative mind. Especially when one reads insipid like this one. The total lack of logic and original thought runs rampant as the major theme of most of the propaganda posts you fellers make.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

The majority of those states have provisions similar to the one being put into the federal law

You mean that churches don’t have to have it and everyone else does? Yes, that’s what is being put into Federal Law unless Obama backtracks.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

“Maybe after enough provisions are gutted we can call it ZombieCare.”

great … then a lot of the numpties on your side of the aisle will be eligible

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:10 am

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am
Bryan – Do Catholic-run hospitals receive any federal funding?

Probably and that’s a good point. But its a 2 way street. They also pay federal taxes through employee salaries, property taxes, sales taxes, and probably other taxes I haven’t even thought of.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:11 am

ty: the whole “28 states including georgia” arguement is weak. The majority of those states have provisions similar to the one being put into the federal law.

Thank you for making the point FOR non-conservatives, while somehow managing to believe the same said point is weak….

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:11 am

Max, what’s your talking point of the moment?

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:11 am

You surely saw Obama’s hilarious “compromise,” that religious institutions would not have to pay for contraceptives, and users would get them free because the insurance companies will pay for it. As if the stuff is free-floating in the universe. Have we ever had a president less literate in economics?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
11:11 am

TaxPayer – I’m okay with them doing either.

If the employee doesn’t like it, leave. If the customer doesn’t like it, eat somewhere else. You have no right to work at CFA. They should be as silly as they want to be – at their own peril.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
11:12 am

Maybe the GOP will suggest we add a moral exception to all laws. You don’t have to obey the law if you have moral objections to it.

Reminds me of when Kennesaw enacted the law that the head of every household should have a gun.and keep it in the house. Then they added a clause that said basically unless you don’t want to. Hard to challenge a law like that.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:12 am

ByteMe

Didn’t know that was their model, but I’ve said all along that we should have gone that route. The basic infrastructure is already in place, so there would not be any growing pains or set up issues to deal with.

in Wingnut World, prescription contraception = a meal.

That gives you an idea of what they’re eating!!!

USinner

:) The last boston butt that I put on the smoker was done with a dry rub. mmmmmmmmmm

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:12 am

ty webb – “please find another talking point.”

We’d love to, but the GOP, the Catholic Church and Fox News won’t let it die. Trust me, I watched 3 straight hours of Fox last night. Greta, O’Reilly and Hannity. Not one of them seemed interested in changing the conversation.

willie lynch

February 15th, 2012
11:12 am

Someone explain the explosion in health care cost that had occurred prior to Jan, 2009?

“From 1999 to 2009, health insurance premiums skyrocketed while Americans’ wages and cost of living grew at a much slower rate. Premiums more than doubled, rising by over $7,500 for the average family with employer-sponsored insurance. The cost of an employer-based family coverage plan rose from 12 to 22 percent of family income over the decade. Health insurance costs jumped as a percentage of private sector compensation from 5.4 to 7.3 percent from 1999 to 2009, eroding workers’ wages. Small businesses were particularly hard hit. The proportion of small employers offering health insurance dropped from 65 to 59 percent between 1999 and 2009. Part of the reason for rising costs has been reduced competition: these increases occurred at a time of tremendous consolidation in the insurance markets, both national and local.”

Blame President Obama? You people are delusional.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:12 am

ragnar – I’ll say this again slowly since the numb-above-the-shoulders don’t seem to get it:

if

you’re

paying

a

premium

it

AIN’T

FREE

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:13 am

Am Vet – Since everyone is subject to the law of the land per your post, what about Obama’s budget disregarding the law he passed in August, the defense of marriage act? Seems like Obama has set the precedent for disregarding the law of the land.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I’m sure that in YOUR mind, that made some sort of sense. But for the rest of us could you try to translate that a little? What “budget disregarding the law” did President Obama somehow pass all by him self apparently not only disregarding the law, but also by passing the house and senate as well?

Calm down, take a deep breath and try to ask your question in a way that people can understand what you are TRYING to say.

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:13 am

At least the public is now getting a real look at how ObamaCare operates, diktat by panels.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:13 am

ragnar: As if the stuff is free-floating in the universe. Have we ever had a president less literate in economics?

I suppose the money saved on NOT caring for massive amounts of unplanned children means nothing to you?

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:13 am

Bro — low and slow … you’re my kinda guy …

:-)

straitroad

February 15th, 2012
11:14 am

If dictator Obama mandated that all people should cut off their left pinky finger, Bookman and the rest of the sheep on this board would be in lock-step. I have no doubt. What a bunch of losers.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:14 am

So Bryan, you’re good with an employer firing you because you used contraception.

Mad Max

February 15th, 2012
11:14 am

Byte me – just saying that AmVet’s outrage seems to be hypocritical

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

oy.

yeah, straitroad, self-mutilation = birth control

thanks for showing us how you … ummm … “think” (using the term loosely)

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

Butch: ty webb – “please find another talking point.”

We’d love to, but the GOP, the Catholic Church and Fox News won’t let it die. Trust me, I watched 3 straight hours of Fox last night. Greta, O’Reilly and Hannity. Not one of them seemed interested in changing the conversation.

This is my favorite argument btw. “You’re making sense! You’re winning the argument! PLEASE STOP TALKING!”

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

Dear Adam @ 11:13, good morning, no like everything else the loopy leader proposes, those savings do not exist in the real world, and could not be harvested by the overlords anyway. People pay for their own contraception now, but you are just adding a middle man.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

“the fact is, the service they are providing is a SECULAR service, not religious”

Ummm. No. It is not a secular service when it is being done at a religious based institution and in particular when you receive charity care that charity care is not “secular”. Where do you guys come up with such utter silliness? Is there a liberal silly factory that just pumps out nonsensical silliness for ya’ll to dispense? Lawdy.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

Bryan – So, if a hospital accepts federal funds, and treats patients, and most likely employs people who aren’t Catholic, why exactly should the be exempt from providing insurance benefits that follow the guidelines of the country/state they operate in? Your example about Chick-Fil-A is ridiculous and asinine. Yes, the founder and owner of all things Chick-Fil-A is very religious. But that is his right as a person. His company falls under all sorts of laws that he may not like, but still has to follow. Chick-Fil-A should not, is not, and should never be exempt from providing insurance that meets the laws governing every other insurance policy in the country/state.

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

“Fifty-nine percent believe that requirement should also apply to religiously affiliated employers.”

Proves the idiocy that is known has the American Electorate. Does the same 59% believe in seperation of church & state??? Does the same 59% celebrate Valentine’s Day without even the scant knowledge that this is to celebrate an early Christian marytr???

Jay, please stop trying to relate Roman Catholics to republicans. Catholics usually also vote for Democratic candidates.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:15 am

At least the public is now getting a real look at how ObamaCare operates, diktat by panels.

And more of the general population is getting a better idea of just how those Republican brains tick.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:16 am

Max, how so? Please try to explain, because at least two of us here are curious, which means there’s likely 10,000 others who haven’t jumped in :)

Senior Citizen Kane

February 15th, 2012
11:16 am

Read Charles Krauthammer’s take on this — ‘The Gospel According to Obama’ — much more insightful than anything you’ll read here.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
11:16 am

TaxPayer – If that’s what they want to do, sure. You can go work somewhere else if you don’t like it.

Look, obviously this hypothetical has now become an extreme and beyond reality. The point that I am making is simple. I believe this is an overreach by the Federal Government. Just as I think various other programs have been (cough, Patriot Act).

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
11:17 am

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:17 am

If dictator Obama mandated that all people should cut off their left pinky finger, Bookman and the rest of the sheep on this board would be in lock-step. I have no doubt. What a bunch of losers.

Not Intended To Be a Factual Statement.

Here’s the difference: Liberals and moderates and basically anyone who is NOT part of the conservatives are allowed to have different views. Conservatives are NOT allowed to have different views unless the want to risk being drummed out of their favorite party or worse LABELED A LIBERAL.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
11:17 am

Max, you’ll have to be specific before I can even try to understand your point, but even so, if you think that the current president taking liberties with US law is the very first, your last name must be van Winkle.

His predecessor, for example, regularly used the US Constitution to wipe his ___. And that ain’t just me who knows that. The ABA wrote him three different times outlining their concerns for his serial disregard of American laws. In five different areas of law!

I say this not to justify BHO’s doing the same – if he has – but that we live in an age of legal pyschobabble, where torture is enhanced interrogation and wholesale thievery has been legalized.

Well, what do you know? Yet another right wing racist trying to strut his stuff at JB’s.

Poor bigoted dolt, jonesing for the good old days at Ms. Tucker’s…

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:17 am

It is not a secular service when it is being done at a religious based institution and in particular when you receive charity care that charity care is not “secular”.

Yes, it is a secular service. You really are out of step with current case law. And they don’t exclusively receive “charity” any more than Northside Hospital does… in fact, they get services payment from the government just like all other hospitals, so they are required to follow the same rules.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

Funny how the current administration and the media have tried to turn this from an abortion issue (one they lose,)

on what planet do you think Obama’s pro-choice stance is a loser?

Have you seen ANY polling on reproductive freedom to support this?

Everything I’ve seen shows a clear majority of Americans support the provisions of Roe v. Wade, and want first trimester abortion to be legal. What’s more, a majority of Americans don’t want judges appointed who’d overturn the 1973 decision. See also:

http://pollingreport.com/abortion2.htm

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

irrational, why should Chic-Fil-A not be exempted when Obama exempted McDonalds???? It is obvious that the admin picks-and-chooses who to exempt & who not to exempt in this “free” “pass it to know what is it in” fiasco.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

Oh and….Protect your prostates boys.

They are next.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

USinner

I was warned by the family that I needed to do at least two the next time. I had a 9lb shoulder, and it disappeared in a matter of minutes.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

Thulsa – So St. Joseph’s, when they were Catholic, didn’t provide health care to anyone regardless of race, religion, or national origin? You mean, the health care they provided only fit with in the Catholic guidelines? So, I guess they didn’t treat anyone who had a child out of wedlock, or after having that child had their tubes tied? Huh, I wasn’t aware of that. I assumed, being a hospital and all, that they preformed pretty much the same services as every other hospital.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

ragnar: good morning, no like everything else the loopy leader proposes, those savings do not exist in the real world, and could not be harvested by the overlords anyway.

“You did not lend me a book, and anyway it was a horrible read…”

Paul

February 15th, 2012
11:19 am

This place really seems like short-attention span theater.

From just five days ago:

“Scalia, himself a devout and very conservative Catholic, wrote in the majority decision:

“We have never held that an individual’s religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the State is free to regulate. On the contrary, the record of more than a century of our free exercise jurisprudence contradicts that proposition…”
and from an earlier decision:

“To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and, in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.”

and

“he most relevent to the current controversy is a a 1982 case that closely parallels the current discussion over contraception. In United States v. Lee, the Supreme Court found that there was nothing unconstitutional in requiring an Amish employer to withhold and pay Social Security taxes for his workers even though “the Amish faith prohibited participation in governmental support programs.”

Here’s how they put it:

“When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes that are binding on others in that activity. Granting an exemption from social security taxes to an employer operates to impose the employer’s religious faith on the employees.”

You would not need to change a single word of that paragraph to apply it to the contraceptive debate.

In his own opinion in the Smith case, Scalia wraps it up rather bluntly:

“Respondents urge us to hold, quite simply, that when otherwise prohibitable conduct is accompanied by religious convictions, not only the convictions but the conduct itself must be free from governmental regulation. We have never held that, and decline to do so now.”

Okay, I’m guessing many posters here remember that thread.

They just choose to ignore it.

Facts are such irritating things.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/02/10/arguing-for-obama-justice-antonin-scalia/

Ayn Rant

February 15th, 2012
11:19 am

You 150 people who submitted the comments above: aren’t you supposed to be working? Are you using your office computers to read and reply to AJC blogs? Don’t you know that business assets should not be used for personal business?

When Jay or Kyle post, 100-200 comments get posted within an hour.

How can we elderly continue living la Doce Vida on Social Security and Medicare if the working-age people who pay payroll taxes are slouching on the job?

Get back to work, you lot! Leave the political comments to those with long experience and plenty of time on their hands.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

Thulsa – “It is not a secular service when it is being done at a religious based institution and in particular when you receive charity care that charity care is not “secular”.”

dearheart, a colonoscopy is not religious
neither is an echocardiogram
or an MRI
or stitches
or a cast

Accounting is not religious
nor is biology
or English Lit

it doesn’t matter who owns the joint.

THOSE are secular services.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

Proves the idiocy that is known has the American Electorate.

You only have to look at Georgia state elections to see that. No need to look at a national poll.

Just sayin–

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

Political polls (seems to be the latest love craze by libs) are about as useful as pre-season college football polls.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

Adam@11:17

Another post that made sense, that’s two days in a row. Are there two Adam’s here now?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

MiltonMan: Jay, please stop trying to relate Roman Catholics to republicans. Catholics usually also vote for Democratic candidates.

As shown clearly by Jay and other people, it’s not Catholics, it’s their overlords.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
11:21 am

The thing to do is to repeal the mandates. Don’t require corporations to cover their employees at all. We need to move away from employer provided health insurance. Nutty system. People should buy their own individual policies in the open market. Cheap policies with very high deductibles is all most people need and if we went to an open market system they could do that.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:21 am

Bro – A 9lb shoulder wouldn’t last long in my house and there are only two of us. What were you thinking? ;)

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:21 am

SCK — OHNOES!!! Charles K doesn’t like Obama!!!

whatever will we do!!!

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:22 am

Facts are such irritating things.

No, blind ideological rantings are irritating. Facts set us free.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:23 am

Bryan G.,

If you ever think of running for public office, please do us a favor and relay your beliefs very clearly up front — like that Santorum fella is tryin’ to do. After all, I wouldn’t want you to go and get yourself recalled once people found out that you do not believe in separation of church and state, amongst other things. That would be an undue burden on the taxpaying population.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:23 am

Bryan G.,

If you ever think of running for public office, please do us a favor and relay your beliefs very clearly up front — like that Santorum fella is tryin’ to do. After all, I wouldn’t want you to go and get yourself recalled once people found out that you do not believe in separation of church and state, amongst other things. That would be an undue burden on the taxpaying population.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:23 am

(ir) and Bro … :lol:

the sequel to “gone in 60 seconds” … starring a 9-lb pork shoulder … the sexy co-star? slaw.

md

February 15th, 2012
11:23 am

“That’s what happened on the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, which is why the House Republicans have had to beat such a hasty retreat on those issues in recent days. ”

Yep……and the same folks bitching about not getting a payroll tax cut will be the same ones bitching when SS has to make cuts in the future due to lack of funding……….and when employers can’t afford to hire new employees because the unemployment insurance costs have to be paid first……..

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:24 am

I double posted! I have not had that happen in like forever! Cool!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:24 am

“No, blind ideological rantings are irritating. Facts set us free.”

(screw the polite golf clap … you get raucous applause for that one)

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:24 am

Paul

It’s a well documented fact that the average American has an attention span shorter than the diameter of a gnat’s ass. :)

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
11:25 am

The GOP primary season is already half over and this is a pre-season poll?

Hello?!

It’s halftime and you’re already down 28 to zip.

Looks like it’s time for a Republican fumblerooskie play.

Occasionally they work!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b25G-ZkSJJI

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:25 am

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:13 am
At least the public is now getting a real look at how ObamaCare operates, diktat by panels

Ragnar,

No. Not really. Just wait until 2014 when and if Obamacare kicks in with its myriad tax hikes in the billions. There is a reason why they put off the ugliness until 2014. Its gonna get real fun when folks wake up and realize how much the latest gubment boondoggle is gonna cost us.

http://www.atr.org/comprehensive-list-tax-hikes-obamacare-a5758

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:25 am

Brosephus: and you expect us to elect loser clowns like Roy Barnes (proven loser), Jim Martin, Vernon Jones, etc., etc. How about you democrats nominate someone who is worth a crap in this state???

Who will be the chosen one for you in 14: Hank “Guam will tip over” Johnson???

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:25 am

when Obama exempted McDonalds [from contraceptive coverage]????

Not Intended to Be a Factual Statement

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:26 am

(ir)

I was experimenting with a new rub recipe.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:26 am

Steve: I hope not….

fedup

February 15th, 2012
11:26 am

Well, if this is truly all about the “liberty” of the private sector, then a boss who is a Jehovah’s Witness should not be forced to pay for healthcare coverage that covers blood transfusions. Right?

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:27 am

Gosh, Thulsa … Grover Norquist doesn’t like anything Obama has done??

http://www.atr.org/about

I’m SHOCKED!!! Shocked, I tells ya!!!

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:27 am

MiltonMan – “Political polls (seems to be the latest love craze by libs) are about as useful as pre-season college football polls.”

Agreed. Hopefully you will post and re-post this everytime someone on the right wants to spout off about how much better their side is based on poll numbers. Thanks!

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:27 am

Come on md, don’t you want to see an end to all them entitlements. Well, what better way than to quit funding them. Republicans should be rejoicing. We’ve already reduced corporate taxes to a pittance and now we are working on getting rid of payroll taxes and the Republicans will make sure that the wealthiest get their tax cuts. That Republican Utopia can’t be far away now. I can almost see the light at the end of that tunnel. Let’s celebrate the timely demise of the federal government. A toast.

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:27 am

Adam: and if you ever attended a Catholic service, the zombies follow lockstep with what their “leaders” tell them to do – comprable to Hilter youth.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:27 am

The thing to do is to repeal the mandates. Don’t require corporations to cover their employees at all. We need to move away from employer provided health insurance.

Baby steps….

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:28 am

Bro: if you want, someday during FNM, I’ll post how I get a smoked brisket that’s outta this world.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:28 am

Brosephus™ “Browning America since 1973″

February 15th, 2012
11:18 am

USinner

I was warned by the family that I needed to do at least two the next time. I had a 9lb shoulder, and it disappeared in a matter of minutes.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You need a green egg bro. Last couple I’ve done on the egg were just phenomenal. At least 12 hours @ 180 degrees…………..

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:28 am

Dear Thulsa @ 11:25, good morning, you are obviously right. Best hope now might be a Supreme Court ruling that “breathing is not interstate commerce.”

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:28 am

I was experimenting with a new rub recipe.

is that what the kids are calling it these days?

Recon 2533 1811

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

Without really knowing how the CBS/New York Times poll was taken or how questions were asked I wouldn’t be as quick to jump to conclusions as Jay is apparently willing to do. In my opinion regarding this issue, which is as good as anyone on this blog, I doubt if the majority of American people look favorably upon the federal government stepping into the domain of religious beliefs and mandating that those institutions must offer birth control or pregnancy termination medications that are contrary to their moral doctrine. The Obama administrations recent proposed solution has turned out to be poorly thought out and unworkable. This notion about GOP folly might not be as much folly as the folly Democrats basked in prior to the last national election. They suffered a “shellacking” as a result.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

MiltonMan

I’m not a Democrat, nor am I a Republican. I wish both of y’all would nominate somebody actually worth voting for. Seeing as though no GOP leader wants to enact ethics, I don’t foresee anybody worth a damn coming with a (R) behind their name. You should clean your own home before trying to talk about how messy someone else’s is. You’d look far less hypocritical that way. On the otherhand, if you are going for the hypocritical look, I’ll petition to add that to the olympics. You’d be the favorite for the gold.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

Milton – 11:27 – holy moly … I’m a loud and proud former Catholic, but even I find that statement offensive.

and completely untrue

(proof: see the number of Catholics who use birth control)

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

md: The Republicans are the ones who decided they would pass the extension without paying for it at all. The Democrats still wanted to pay for it by putting a surtax on millionaires, which would have made the cuts revenue neutral. The Republicans initially wanted to pay for tax cuts to middle class americans by cutting something else from middle class americans. They eventually gave that up.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

Byteme: We won’t hear anything else from Mad Max. That was just a drive by troll shot apparently.

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

Butch: the only time I ever, ever make reference to a poll is in response to whenever someone references any poll that shows candidate x leads candidate y & z.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:29 am

MiltonMan – Are the republicans that get the nod really any better? I would argue (and I truly never thought I could make this argument) that Roy may have been a better choice than Deal. At least he wouldn’t have been in such a hurry to remove usable lanes of 85 and make them cost to use, or do the same on 75 if Deal gets his way.

USinUK – I’d watch that. But I’m more of a “the pork stands alone” type guy. Maybe a bit of mustard and a bun. Now I want bbq for lunch. Mmmm Fat Matt’s.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:30 am

MiltonMan: Adam: and if you ever attended a Catholic service, the zombies follow lockstep with what their “leaders” tell them to do – comprable to Hilter youth.

Actually many do not. And I attended Catholic services for years.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:30 am

“it doesn’t matter who owns the joint.”

Actually it does matter who owns the joint. If your mind can’t make the distinction between a Catholic charity hospital and a for profit hospital then there’s not much I can do for you. I can’t make it any simpler ma’am.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:30 am

Fred, ah well. We tried.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:31 am

ByteMe

Cool. Brisket’s a tough one to get right.

————

Fred

I’ve thought about getting one, but not until my Brinkmann completely collapses from overuse. :)

BP

February 15th, 2012
11:31 am

As a gay male I have to have pregnancy coverage in my health care coverage. I am not allowed to opt out. If I was able to taylor my insurance to my needs I might be able to lower my costs. But by law I have to take the maternity coverage. This spreads the cost over everybody in my plan. I choose not to use the maternity coverage. If you disagree with the birth control portion of your policy don’t ues it.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:31 am

“Best hope now might be a Supreme Court ruling that “breathing is not interstate commerce.””

well, since corporations are “people”, I wouldn’t hold out much hope for that

Tealiban Party

February 15th, 2012
11:31 am

I guess since the GOP’ers already have the 1% locked up, they are now aiming for the 2% of Catholic women that do no use contraceptives.

md

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

soco,

From our discussion last night:

http://articles.boston.com/2011-05-19/news/29561404_1_saudi-arabia-saudis-fear-security-force

And let’s not forget where the Saudis get the parts to maintain what little bit of military they do have….

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

Read Charles Krauthammer’s take on this — ‘The Gospel According to Obama’ — much more insightful than anything you’ll read here.

Read it. Not insightful, just more of the same nonsense that generosity may only come from an individual. Also, citing Leviticus as evidence will win no points from me.

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

Adam – another clueles lib spouting off that the payroll tax cuts are not being paid for.

Brush up pal. There is now a “new” fee on any mortgage that attempts to pay for this.

Jefferson

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

Throw the ball , watch the dog chase the ball.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

Hey, I just heard that Obama wants to make it mandatory that everyone who rides in a car has to wear a seat belt! I’m outraged!! Keep the federal government out of my car!!! I hope the states don’t go along with this insanity from the dictator in chief!

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

Adam@11:29

So why don’t the Democrat’s vote No if they don’t get the surtax on millionaires if it means so much to them?

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:32 am

dB

You’re talking about this rub recipe, right? ;)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012_swimsuit/painting/

mm

February 15th, 2012
11:33 am

The GOP already has the religious vote wrapped, and they have for years. So who do they think they are going to swing in their favor?

I actually think they are going to lose some of those votes. I’ll bet alot of religious folks don’t want the church telling them what to do once they walk out the church doors.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:33 am

Adam: and if you ever attended a Catholic service, the zombies follow lockstep with what their “leaders” tell them to do – comprable to Hilter youth.

I’m thinking you’ve not only never attended “a Catholic service” (it’s called “Mass”, last I checked), you probably don’t know any actual Catholics.

Also too–I let a lot of offensive sh-t fly without saying anything, and it’s probably been years since I clicked the “report this comment” link, but that was beyond the pale

Trusslady

February 15th, 2012
11:34 am

So let me understand all you “free market” types. You are okay with a company/religion telling an insurance company what kind of products they can offer in their policies, but if the government does the same thing…….
I work in risk management, and the one thing you want to do to mitigate the risk of pregnancy is birth control. Men controlled insurance companies (and now the men of the GOP and religion) want to ensure that women cannot get access to that risk mitigation (and please don’t offer your tired, just don’t do it mantra). And yet, when a 70 year old man can’t get an erection, lets make darn sure he can get drugs to control that (nature is trying to tell you something guys).
Men. Can’t live with ‘em and the law won’t let you kill ‘em.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:34 am

Best hope now might be a Supreme Court ruling that “breathing is not interstate commerce.”

Ragnar,

Why shouldn’t breathing be regulated by the Feds? After all it was Obama who invented air.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:34 am

MiltonMan: Sorry to break it to you but the “hidden” mortgage fee was proposed BEFORE the House Republicans passed a clean extension of the payroll tax cut, saying they were dropping any pay-fors.

Soothsayer

February 15th, 2012
11:34 am

Jay, if people would just stop having sex, this whole problem would go away in no time!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:34 am

Thulsa – it doesn’t matter WHO owns it, the service they are providing is NOT inherently religious.

period.

sorry that is too much for you to wrap your little mind around

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:35 am

md

There is that. I’m willing to bet that as China furthers their technology, we will have to work much harder on maintaining that relationship. I see that link as one that was required a while back but may be nearing the end of it’s shelf life.

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:35 am

Dear USinUK @ 11:31, good morning, I think you continue to misread Citizens United. The court only stated that free people binding together, whether as a corporation, union, or not-for-profit entity, to make a statement on political issues do not lose their right to free speech.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:35 am

You’re talking about this rub recipe, right?

so many punchlines, so many opportunities to be permanently banned…

barking frog

February 15th, 2012
11:36 am

Now splain me lucy…a religious affiliated business buys a group
policy and specifies that it will not cover contraceptives. An employee
can then go to the insurance company and the insurance company
must provide the employee a policy that covers contraceptives
free of charge by order of the US Government. I know this
can be done because Richard Nixon ordered the oil companies
to sell gas at a certain price until he told them they could change
the price. I don’t understand why the issue continues.

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
11:36 am

Dear Thulsa @ 11:34, ha.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:36 am

Soothsayer – ” if people would just stop having sex, this whole problem would go away in no time!”

Oddly enough, I believe that’s what Santorum is going for. LOL

md

February 15th, 2012
11:36 am

“The Republicans are the ones who decided they would pass the extension without paying for it at all. The Democrats still wanted to pay for it by putting a surtax on millionaires, which would have made the cuts revenue neutral.”

And you have fallen in the trap……..neither side should be advocating a payroll tax cut when we are already having trouble with SS and Medicare…….that is the point.

Silly side chooser games is the distraction the misfits are counting on.

Iron Fist

February 15th, 2012
11:37 am

Why should government force you to pay for something that you are against?

Because they can. You only thought you had rights and freedoms. But they will not stand in the face of majority rule. We will have our way. We have only tolerated your concepts of freedom until we gained enough precedents to roll over them without a second glance.

“you” as an individual have no “rights”.

“We” the people will decide for you. There is no room for individual freedoms in a centralized government.

Next question.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
11:38 am

Bryan G — “USinUK – If I’m your employer – and you work for me, you should work under my terms.”

Fortunately, you offer insurance under the government’s terms, not your own. Same thing goes for retirement programs, hourly wages and overtime and a host of other employee benefits.

They BOTH suck

February 15th, 2012
11:38 am

I guess since the Catholics as most Christians believe that one’s body is vessel of God then they should not extend insurance to anyone who drinks alcohol to excess, smokes at all, eats too many sweets, fried foods, consumes soft drinks, is overweight, etc or for that matter isn’t on a routine exercise program of some sort

From a “moral” perspective, we would not want any religious institutions going against their belief, right?

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

February 15th, 2012
11:39 am

MiltonMan was right. The mortgage fee was part of the 2 month extension, although the fee is for 10 years.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:39 am

Steve: Because Democrats are more willing to meet Republicans halfway to get the payroll tax cut extension. What is interesting though – Republicans blinked first, dropping all pay-fors when they are supposedly about debt reduction. So why did they do THAT, if paying for it meant so much to them?

A direct answer to your question is that initially Republicans demanded a pay-for, and so the Democrats met halfway. The original Democrat position was ALWAYS to just have the tax cut without paying for it. Agree with that or not, but that’s the facts. Republicans, who always pay for tax cuts with NOTHING, suddenly wanted a pay-for for a tax cut.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:39 am

dB

Thought you’d appreciate that one. :)

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:39 am

Wow – amazing that the uneduated masses on here (aka as libs) cannot even understand the following 2nd grade logic:

(1) Catholics generally do not support republicans. Check any number of the polls that you trolls also throw around here like a rag-doll
(2) The payroll tax extension (”supported” by both parties) is covered by a new mortgage fee.
(3) The top 1% are not republicans – rich folks like Buffet, Gates, Zuckerburg, etc., etc. are firmly implanted within the democratic fold. If these “good” people truly want “fair” taxes how come they simply do not write a check to Uncle Sam???

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:39 am

There is no room for individual freedoms in a centralized government.

Whatever-Airline-takes-you-to-Somalia is ready when you are.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:40 am

As a gay male I have to have pregnancy coverage in my health care coverage. I am not allowed to opt out.

Women have to have prostate coverage in their plans.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:40 am

Bryan – hate to be the one to break it to you, but those terms are regulated by the government –

from the hours you can make me work
to the conditions
the the legal protections

so, no, you DON’T get to determine the “terms” under which I work

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:40 am

Brocephus: Don’t wait. You get one and your Brinkman will rust from non use. I always had an excuse not to get one (mostly the price lol) but my wife surprised me with one for Christmas 2 years ago. I haven’t fired up the weber since. you can do low and slow or hot and fast as it will get up to 750 degrees. Yesterday she gave me a $50 gift card from the Egg store (the HQ is about a mile from my house) and I’m going to go get the pizza stone. Although she doesn’t know it, tomorrow I am making pizza. I’ll be using USinUK and her hubby’s sauce (they each have a different one) lol and am looking up dough recipe’s……………

BTW What’s your rub? I have a good one that is very basic which makes it very “expandable.”

Byte: Definitely bust loose with the Brisket on FNM. LOl I’ll even play the BBQ song……..

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:40 am

“Women have to have prostate coverage in their plans.”

not to mention, Viagra

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:24 am
I double posted! I have not had that happen in like forever! Cool!

Taxpayer,

Well I reckon that just makes you doubly impodent. Just messin with ya.

Nice post on Santorum’s wife and the chiropractor. I’m not much on digging up dirt on people’s wives and frankly she didn’t do anything illegal or even wrong in most people’s eyes. But I do find it reprehensible to sue for a quarter million in punitive damages although I don’t know the full story. If someone messes up your spine that can possibly mean lifelong pain and there’s no amount of money that can replace that kind of pain. Still I’m always suspicious of money grabs against doctors. If you find or see a more detailed link on that subject then please post.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

md: And you have fallen in the trap……..neither side should be advocating a payroll tax cut when we are already having trouble with SS and Medicare…….that is the point.

That’s called moving the goalpost. Your original point was that it would cause a lack of funding. A revenue neutral proposal eliminates that argument. So I guess I see why you moved the goalpost.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

stands – I only have one recipe for a good rub. ;) Sorry, couldn’t resist.

ByteMe – I’ll take you up on that brisket recipe. I have one brisket recipe, but my mother-in-law lives 100 miles or so from me so I don’t get it that often. :)

Thulsa – So do Catholic Hospitals not tie women’s tubes after they have children? Simple question, yes or no answer. Says a lot about whether they stick strictly to their faith or not.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

From a “moral” perspective, we would not want any religious institutions going against their belief, right?

Yep. F’rinstance, in those years between the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the LDS church’s decision in 1978 to not regard blacks as “stained by the mark of Cain”, I guess any Mormon owned business could simply refuse to hire or serve black folks because of their religious beliefs.

amirite?

Ennis

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

USinUK @1036…. I’m with you.. If you aint gonna use birth control, don’t use it. But your right to not use it is not your right to tell me not to use it. I use my employer insurance that affects me, and don’t use the part that I don’t need. It should be the same for everyone. Choose what you want, leave what u don’t want.

barking frog

February 15th, 2012
11:42 am

USinUK, 11:40, “not to mention Viagra”
—-
I believe that is a win-win situation.

Steve

February 15th, 2012
11:43 am

Love the example from the reporter yesterday breaking down the budget…maybe simple enough for even liberals to understand.

Household Annual Income – $29,000
Household Annual Budget – $38,000
(For the libs…you are spending $9,000 more than you make…this is not good)
Household Debt – $153,000
(For the libs…this is really bad…starting getting the forms to file bankruptcy…)

In my house we would cut the household budget, cut up the credit cards, start working some overtime, and start saving some money to pay off the debt.

Maybe I am way off base on this. I am sure the libs will explain away basic common sense and blame George Bush 3.5 years later.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:43 am

(3) The top 1% are not republicans – rich folks like Buffet, Gates, Zuckerburg, etc., etc. are firmly implanted within the democratic fold. If these “good” people truly want “fair” taxes how come they simply do not write a check to Uncle Sam???

Hate to break it to you, dude, but they are BOTH Republican and Democrat. They simply have the resources to buy the best politicians that money can own. Add the fact that many in Congress belong to the 1%, and your whole statement is blown out of the water. I’m sure Rep. Issa (R) would be quite offended at you calling him a Democrat.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

February 15th, 2012
11:43 am

Adam,

Seems to me they both blinked because of November. Just because the Republicans folded didn’t force the Democrats to fold. It just gave them an easy way out.

Who was the the real winner? Millionaires…..they dodged more taxes again.

JMHO

md

February 15th, 2012
11:43 am

“I’m willing to bet that as China furthers their technology, we will have to work much harder on maintaining that relationship.”

And I’m welling to bet China won’t give a fig what happens to us once they become the dominate economy on the planet……it will be a no holds barred free for all for the planet’s finite resources…..their national interest will come first.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
11:44 am

Doom — “Come again. How is it secular if its a Catholic hospital or university? Critical thinking skills FAIL!”

Again, if the service provided is secular, then it’s a secular organization, regardless of whether it’s a Catholic hospital, a Baptist university or whatever. This is a matter of settled law.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
11:44 am

They BOTH suck

February 15th, 2012
11:38 am
“I guess since the Catholics as most Christians believe that one’s body is vessel of God”

They BOTH suck,

Well we may be on the same page again on something. I’ve seen a few women’s bodies that were certainly “vessels of God”.

Normal

February 15th, 2012
11:44 am

Sorry to be getting into this one late, but alittle over a hour ago Brian G. said,

“Conservatives (well, true conservatives) think: Even though this program may be good, does the government have the right or authority to do it?”

Evidently he doesn’t live in Virginia:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tobias-barrington-wolff/virginia-ultrasound-bill_b_1278832.html

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:44 am

“I believe that is a win-win situation.”

darlin, if it lasts 4 hours, that would NOT be a win for anyone …

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
11:45 am

Sooth – I heard a rumor that you were knowledgeable about the either green architecture or architecture in general or both? Realizing it is way off topic, I’d be interested in having a conversation with you about this type stuff.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:45 am

MiltonMan: (1) Catholics generally do not support republicans. Check any number of the polls that you trolls also throw around here like a rag-doll
(2) The payroll tax extension (”supported” by both parties) is covered by a new mortgage fee.
(3) The top 1% are not republicans – rich folks like Buffet, Gates, Zuckerburg, etc., etc. are firmly implanted within the democratic fold. If these “good” people truly want “fair” taxes how come they simply do not write a check to Uncle Sam???

1) Correct
2) Only true if you are talking about the 2 month extension, not the recent “deal” reached that will extend it for 10 months without a pay-for
3) The entire top 1% is not made up of three people, and though they are easy targets for uneducated people (aka cons, see how that works?), the majority of the top 1%, according to actual factual data, support mostly conservative causes.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:46 am

the reporter yesterday breaking down the budget…maybe simple enough

as I mentioned this morning–you left out the part where this mythical “family” issues and controls its own currency, and has a standing army it can call upon to invade/occupy their neighbor’s place if they need stuff.

They BOTH suck

February 15th, 2012
11:46 am

TD @ 11:44

Yes we are on the same page………… NOOOOOOOOOO Doubt

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:46 am

JHM – 11:44 – there are none so blind as those who have their fingers in their ears singing LALALALALALALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU …

or something like that

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:46 am

stands – yet again trying to prove his intellectual superiority only to fall on his face. My roommate in college was a Catholic & we went to alot of “singles mixers” at his church – liked the idea of having a keg in the basement of the church. I was interested in joining until I found out pretty rudely that it was not acceptable to hit on the nuns. Plenty of Catholics here in North Fulton pal that I know. We discuss religion pretty often.

barking frog

February 15th, 2012
11:46 am

Joe Hussein Mama, 11:44, would it change if a sign was posted
‘No services provided unless you’re willing to be inculcated’ ?

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:47 am

Fred

The last one I tried was a recipe that my wife got from a beer can chicken recipe. I’ll have to see if I can find it online and post it for you. I’m kind of a dinosaur when it comes to grilling. I’ve been thinking about doing an old school pit in my backyard.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
11:47 am

ByteMe – I’ll take you up on that brisket recipe. I have one brisket recipe, but my mother-in-law lives 100 miles or so from me so I don’t get it that often.

Remind me Friday or when we get a thread everyone agrees on and we’re just bored :)

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:48 am

dB – 11:46 – dammit, now I have an image of a standing army attacking a GS troop to “embargo” their cookies …

MiltonMan

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am

Adam, please do explain if the libs have a monopoly on “well educated” people how come areas like Atlanta, DeKalb, Clayton (areas who struggle to keep the local schools at a 3rd world country level) are heavily democratic???

Jefferson

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am

Health insurance should provide this benefit.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am

Hmmm, looks like it’s LUNCH time!

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am

md

No argument from me on that one. That’s why I can’t understand the zeal at which companies go to China for business. They’re simply using our knowledge to turn around and beat us at our own game. In the name of cheap labor and profits, our business leaders are rushing us towards that cliff.

barking frog

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am

USinUK, 11:44, ouch!

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
11:50 am

I just called Sen.’s Isakson and Chambliss offices advising them to pass this amendment. It’s not about contraception, it is a religious freedom issue that hinges upon the separation of church and state’s mandate that the government not force churches to violate their values and principles.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
11:50 am

Steve

February 15th, 2012
11:43 am

Love the example from the reporter yesterday breaking down the budget…maybe simple enough for even liberals to understand.

Household Annual Income – $29,000
Household Annual Budget – $38,000
(For the libs…you are spending $9,000 more than you make…this is not good)
Household Debt – $153,000
(For the libs…this is really bad…starting getting the forms to file bankruptcy…)

In my house we would cut the household budget, cut up the credit cards, start working some overtime, and start saving some money to pay off the debt.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I know you *just saw* that yesterday, and it’s *just coincidence* that Boortz posted it on his website 3 years ago………

Paul

February 15th, 2012
11:51 am

Morning, Thulsa

“If your mind can’t make the distinction between a Catholic charity hospital and a for profit hospital then there’s not much I can do for you. ”

Is a Catholic charity hospital a commercial enterprise?

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
11:51 am

man, my scroll wheel is getting one helluva workout this morning.

To wit, poor rags, I’m still so embarrassed for him regarding what happened yesterday that I simply can’t bear to watch his super slow mo train wrecks anymore.

As for this boneheaded statement – “The top 1% are not republicans…” – lets take a look at the US Congress as a small sampling, shall we?

In the House, 23 Republicans and 10 Democrats are in the 1%, while in the Senate, Democrats edge out Republican one percenters 13-11.

That is 34 cons and 23 dems.

Hmmm….

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
11:52 am

My roommate in college was a Catholic & we went to alot of “singles mixers” at his church

doesn’t sound like you attended Mass, nor did you observe — what was the delightful phrase you used? — “zombies follow[ing] lockstep with what their “leaders” tell them to do – comprable to Hilter youth.”

You know, we all post a-holish things from time to time.

Some of us are decent enough to own up to being a-holes. It says a lot about your lack of character that you can’t just own up to it now.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
11:53 am

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:53 am

MiltonMan: Adam, please do explain if the libs have a monopoly on “well educated” people how come areas like Atlanta, DeKalb, Clayton (areas who struggle to keep the local schools at a 3rd world country level) are heavily democratic???

You made the claim first, and now you’re basing it on something like that? Let me show you a more national picture:

http://www.edweek.org/media/2009/01/21/0121sow-c1.jpg

Georgia is a majority conservative STATE. THAT’S why.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
11:53 am

NOW I’m going to LUNCH.

In the mean time, MiltonMan: You get NOTHING. You LOSE! Good DAY sir :D

RB from Gwinnett

February 15th, 2012
11:54 am

Who gives a crap what 65% of people “want” Jay?? It’s not about what people want, it’s about what is right and what the feds are entitled to force on the people by the constitution. This issue is out of bounds. But you and your minions don’t care because its open season on Christians with you clowns every day of the year.

I bet if we poll the greater ATL area, 65% of people would like for the AJC to stop being a liberal mouthpiece for Obama and every other socialist cause, but that doesn’t give government the right to make it so, does it?!!

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
11:54 am

Hey Steve,

At a 9k per year deficit, how many years would it take to amass a 150k debt. Just curious. Is it something that skips a decade before starting up again or what.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:55 am

Talking Head – “I just called Sen.’s Isakson and Chambliss offices advising them to pass this amendment. It’s not about contraception, it is a religious freedom issue that hinges upon the separation of church and state’s mandate that the government not force churches to violate their values and principles.”

So you asked them to repeal a law that’s been on the Georgia books for over 13 years?

BP

February 15th, 2012
11:55 am

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
11:40 am

“Women have to have prostate coverage in their plans.”

not to mention, Viagra
My point exactly.

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
11:56 am

“Adam, please do explain if the libs have a monopoly on “well educated” people how come areas like Atlanta, DeKalb, Clayton (areas who struggle to keep the local schools at a 3rd world country level) are heavily democratic???”

The key to success for those areas is dependent upon spending other people’s money to achieve their ends.

Of course, they are always just a tax increase or two away from success.

Remember, you are talking about areas that had to be “forced” by government to address their failing sewer systems. How “smart” is that?

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
11:57 am

RB from Gwinnett

Didn’t anyone ever tell you we are a democratic republic where the legislature is elected by the people. The people vote for the canditate who agree with them. It does matter what the voters think.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
11:58 am

RB from Gwinnett – “But you and your minions don’t care”

I was unaware that Chief Justice Scalia was one of Jays “minions”. Please tell us Jay, how long have you had this influence over the SCOTUS. And while your at it, please enlighten RB as to exactly when Georgia passed the very same law. (Hint RB, it was 13 years before Obama even mentioned it).

Steve

February 15th, 2012
11:58 am

Freddie…what’s your point…it was awesome watching Jay Carney squirm his way through it.

I think Mitt Romney would understand the basic example….therefore I am voting ROMNEY in 2012!!!

F. Sinkwich

February 15th, 2012
11:59 am

Just repeal Obamacare and this issue will go away.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

Brosephus™ “Browning America since 1973″

February 15th, 2012
11:47 am

Fred

The last one I tried was a recipe that my wife got from a beer can chicken recipe. I’ll have to see if I can find it online and post it for you. I’m kind of a dinosaur when it comes to grilling. I’ve been thinking about doing an old school pit in my backyard.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Green Egg is a straight rip from the Asian Hibachi pot which is 1000 or 2000 years old. Can’t get much more “old school” than that…………

Rub: 1 tablespoon each: salt, pepper, brown sugar, paprika.

Try that one time on your beer butt chicken. Then try “adding” to it. I’ve added (seperately and all at the same time and in different proportions)) garlic and herb Mrs. Dash, Cayenne, garlic powder, rubbed sage, oregano, thyme……… oh lord too many things to recall them all lol. But the base rub is excellent and lends easily to adaptations.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

F. Sinkwich – “Just repeal Obamacare and this issue will go away.”

Except in Georgia and the other 27 states that currently carry this provision.

md

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

“That’s called moving the goalpost. Your original point was that it would cause a lack of funding. A revenue neutral proposal eliminates that argument. So I guess I see why you moved the goalpost.”

Moving goalposts? Not if one understands that payroll tax is the sole funding mechanism for SS….

As I said, the misfits set the trap…..and folks are falling into it. It’s the same trap as saying there is a trust fund for SS……and there is…..except it exists only on paper, there are no actual funds, it’s a shell game moving money around.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

Just repeal Obamacare and this issue will go away.

Right, because it was the law in Georgia before Obamacare and no one complained about it then.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

rb

Hey c’mon down the weather is fine, the fishing is spectacular and the beaches are pristine!! C’mon down and take a load off your fanny, and put the load right back on me! I’ll even pick up the tab, c’mon down…

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:01 pm

Fred

Adding that one to the notebook. Thanks.

They BOTH suck

February 15th, 2012
12:01 pm

This Bill is going nowhere

It is a ruse for the Republicans to get Democrats on record then to frame the narrative as Dems being anti religious…. Plain and simple (To a percentage of people “anti religious” means anything that doesn’t fit my religious and/or political views: not all people but a percentage)

A few months ago, I read articles from pundits on both sides saying that this election, for the most part, wouldn’t be about social issues. That was before the economic indicators started trending in the right direction. This will be the first of many things to come; abortion topic in some form or another will rear its head, maybe school prayer………. You get the picture…… Both sides use certain topics (scare tactics) in their efforts to get out the base…….. Part of the Repub base is the Evangelical vote and so they will bring out the social issues.

To be “fair and balanced”, in some form of fashion Obama himself or through the super pacs ( that he was against before he was for them) will hammer on Medicare, Medicaid, SS, etc, etc………

All part of the game folks………… Grab some popcorn, a hot dog and a beer and enjoy the show we call US politics in an Presidential election year

The Thin Guy

February 15th, 2012
12:02 pm

If women prefer The Indonesian Imbecile by 20 percent, it’s time to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment. The question is should people be forced to pay taxes for programs they abhor or are in direct contradiction with their religious beliefs? Thoreau went to the clink rather than pay taxes to support a war with Mexico. But he was like the Unabomber, a nut who lived in a shack in the woods. Being a devout Druid, I have no dog in this fight. But I am forced to pay taxes to support NPR and PBS which are simply propaganda tools for left wing loonies to spew their vile hatred of everything that is decent and right. Please folks: put those rubbers on. You might make a mistake and make a democrat and we are already way overloaded with them and their grabby ways.

Libertarian

February 15th, 2012
12:02 pm

What concerns me more than all this contraception BS is that deficit spending during Obama’s four years in the White House will be an estimated $5.170 trillion. During 8 years of Bush, his deficit spending was $3.402 trillion.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
12:03 pm

The Green Egg is a straight rip from the Asian Hibachi pot which is 1000 or 2000 years old. Can’t get much more “old school” than that…………

I’m too lazy to babysit charcoal, so I went the propane route. Once you have enough wood in there, you can’t tell the difference, but it does keep the temperature pretty consistent and doesn’t weigh a f**king ton like the egg does.

BTW, I recommend getting what’s called a “cabinet dolly” (with locking casters) if you get a smoker. Best investment I ever made for my aching back.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:03 pm

Some of my best friends are conservative, fatty toking, papist, lesbian/transgender, strong on defense, vegetarian, African American, gun toting 1%ers from North Fulton.

And we used to party like animals at those Catholic service thingies…

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
12:03 pm

RB from Gwinnett – “Who gives a crap what 65% of people “want”
-Hitler, 1939.

Okay, I may have made that last part up. :)

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
12:05 pm

But I am forced to pay taxes to support NPR and PBS

…whose combined funding over the past ten years might pay for about ten days’ worth of Chimpy McWarhard-on’s Excellent Eye-Rack adventure.

Cry me a freaking river.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:05 pm

Libertarian

Is that figure arrived using FY2009 numbers?

Southern Woman

February 15th, 2012
12:05 pm

I pay the same insurance premiums as my male co-workers that use Viagra, that IS covered by our insurance, so why shouldn’t by birth control be covered by insurance?

Libertarian

February 15th, 2012
12:05 pm

“Right, because it was the law in Georgia before Obamacare and no one complained about it then.”–not true

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

“If women prefer The Indonesian Imbecile by 20 percent, it’s time to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment. ”

yet more proof that some people choose celibacy …

for others, celibacy chooses them …

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

The German people wanted Hitler until they did not want him.

The American people wanted Obama until……

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:00 pm

rb

Hey c’mon down the weather is fine, the fishing is spectacular and the beaches are pristine!! C’mon down and take a load off your fanny, and put the load right back on me! I’ll even pick up the tab, c’mon down…
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yeah, make ME that offer lol. I’ll be down in hours Cheese Whiz. Hell, I’ll even figure out how to load the Egg in the truck so it doesn’t fall over.

You talking fresh water fishing or salt water fishing?

mm

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

Fred,

For Big Green Egg pizza, be sure to use place parchment paper under the crust before you place it on the stone. Otherwise, you will be cleaning up a huge mess. Believe me, I know. Also, make sure the top of the stone is above the bottom lip of the egg so you get the pizza peel under the pizza.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

they both@12:01

That, my friend, is a very astute observation. One I completely agree with but the only problem is that horse has done been whupped to death. all they’ll be doing is grinding the bones at this point..

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:06 pm

“The Indonesian Imbecile…”

He’s an Arab, you twit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YIq5Q15L1o

F. Sinkwich

February 15th, 2012
12:07 pm

“F. Sinkwich – “Just repeal Obamacare and this issue will go away.”

Except in Georgia and the other 27 states that currently carry this provision.”

Ding Ding Ding! Butch wins!

That’s exactly where these issues belong.

Good job, Butch.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
12:07 pm

Southern Woman – “so why shouldn’t by birth control be covered by insurance?”

Because Viagra is wholly supported by the Church and 100% endorsed by God. :)

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
12:07 pm

Wow, the cons are still shooting themselves in the foot over this? Absolutely amazing.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
12:07 pm

so why shouldn’t by birth control be covered by insurance?

“Because it covers icky ladyparts stuff.”
–The US Council of Catholic Bishops

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:08 pm

You perverted right wing f ups can take your Hitler and Nazi references and put them where the sun doesn’t shine.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:09 pm

fred

You’re welcome any time, it’s just that I’m concerned about my good friend rb, he seems to be lacking a sense of humor, or really doesn’t to get out much. I’d like to show him a good time…

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

February 15th, 2012
12:09 pm

Well, I’m with that fellow that says we shouldn’t have insurance from our employers and we ought to go out and buy individual policies. I want a policy that’s sold by a real American shyster that will make sure if my ovaries ever go bad I can get new ones if I’ll just pay the first $50,000 of the cost. I can have a bake sale or something to raise the money. If God had of wanted you to have health insurance paid for by somebody else, He would of made sure you were born with a little insurance policy in your hands.

That’s my opinion and it’s very true. Have a good lunch everybody.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:10 pm

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
12:11 pm

yeah, let’s defend federal overreach by pointing to overreach by the states.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:12 pm

**yeah, let’s defend federal overreach by pointing to overreach by the states.**

Exactly, all 57 of them…

Ennis

February 15th, 2012
12:12 pm

I’m a over the road truck driver. From time to time I get into a small town whereby the local “good ole boys” sit around all morning discussing what’s going on. Since most small towns have dried up, Jay’s blog has taken it’s place. I see the same “OLE” 10 people on this blog every day. After awhile I can tell you precisely which player will come down on which side on every issue Jay writes about. Can’t you guys get together on one (1) issue?? Why all this hate and discontent??? Just asking

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:12 pm

Mick

Are you trying to take RB to The Cheetah? :)

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:13 pm

Brocephus – 12:10 – I live to serve :-)

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
12:13 pm

ty webb – “yeah, let’s defend federal overreach by pointing to overreach by the states”
Who’s defending it? Merely pointing out that no one seemed to give a crap about it until Obama dared mention it. Up until then, I bet you couldn’t find 5 people who were even aware that they lived in a state that already had the provision on the books.

St Simons - we're on Island time

February 15th, 2012
12:13 pm

Ok, accounting check – BS meter pegging out.

Do Catholic (for that matter, all) hospitals accept
Medicare reimbursement? Snap. The End.

Think.before.you.type.
The sound bites on Faux/Amradio sound so good, like candy to your ear
when you hear them, but you can’t just re-type them. They lie.
They’ve successfully sued in a Fla court to do so.

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
12:15 pm

hmmm…a 12:05 post calling a president “chimpy”…which reminds me, what’s the “racial code/dog whistle” word of the day?

RB from Gwinnett

February 15th, 2012
12:16 pm

Oscar – “Didn’t anyone ever tell you we are a democratic republic where the legislature is elected by the people. The people vote for the canditate who agree with them. It does matter what the voters think.”. I guess you’re ok with letting all the states votes on gay marriage stand then, right?

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:17 pm

USinner

Sometimes, this place is better entertainment than anything I’ve seen on tv, radio, or film.

RB from Gwinnett

February 15th, 2012
12:17 pm

Birth control and Viagra are elective and should not be paid by INSURANCE.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:18 pm

AMVet needs to study a bit of world history it seems. The consolidation of power in a centralized government is not new. Neither is the idea that one charismatic leader called the shots in that centralized government.

Nor is the final outcome.
I guess AmVet would rather we just be good “Americans” and not question, just like the good “Germans” did.

But we are going to question. And if you do not have the answers to those questions, that’s your issue. So go ahead and call us names.

But it’s a poor substitute for substantive answers. We are not going to sit back and be “good” Americans until it is too late.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:18 pm

RB – 12:16 – you seem to confuse “what the voters think” with “what’s permitted in the state constitution”

just because the voters in CA thought that prohibiting gays from marrying was A-OK, it went against the State Constitution …

so, no, what the voters think isn’t the be-all/end-all some think it is.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
12:18 pm

They BOTH suck

February 15th, 2012
12:19 pm

Bro @ 12:12

Cheetah too tame……… Take him to the Pony

At least that’s what “they” tell me

[...] Shift on Providing Contraception Splits CriticsNew York TimesTechnorati -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -The News Heraldall 1,694 news [...]

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
12:19 pm

hmmm…a 12:05 post calling a president “chimpy”…

replying to a guy who called Obama “the Indonesian Imbecile.”

although I appreciate you not taking issue with the “McWarhard-on” business.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:20 pm

“Birth control and Viagra are elective and should not be paid by INSURANCE.”

so are breast reductions – but those are covered …
so is rhinoplasty, but that’s covered
so is ACL surgery (I mean, a torn ACL won’t kill you), but that’s covered …

so your point is MOOT.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
12:20 pm

RB from Gwinnett

Right, I am. Ok by me for gays to get married.

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
12:20 pm

let’s defend federal overreach by pointing to overreach by the states

If it’s such horrible overreach, why wasn’t it an issue before now?

A thoroughly red state like Georgia does this without complaint, but let the black guy do it and ZOMG we’re living under Hitler?

Sane non-talkie radio programmed people notice this kind of thing.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:20 pm

They BOTH

Surrreee, somebody told you. :)

getalife

February 15th, 2012
12:21 pm

Yeah, allowing Catholic priests to preach morality after they covered up their own crimes was a typical con losing argument.

Axelrod is toying with the gop now.

Midori

February 15th, 2012
12:23 pm

Mrs. G @ 12:18:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

did the artist peg them or what???

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
12:26 pm

Midori

The picked their battle and lost.

BIG TIME.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
12:26 pm

RB — “Birth control and Viagra are elective and should not be paid by INSURANCE.”

No. There are actually medical reasons *beyond* contraception for women to take BC, so your argument just sailed right out the window.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:27 pm

GG – 12:18 – hahahaha … classic.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:30 pm

RB: Who gives a crap what 65% of people “want” Jay??

Conservatives, and you, when talking about “ObamaCare,” obviously.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:30 pm

““Birth control and Viagra are elective and should not be paid by INSURANCE.”

so are breast reductions – but those are covered …
so is rhinoplasty, but that’s covered
so is ACL surgery (I mean, a torn ACL won’t kill you), but that’s covered …

so your point is MOOT.”

Epic Fail here. The issue is whether or not government forces what items are covered. NOT what the insurance copy has offered to cover for premiums received.

Even more of an issue is that it is one person deciding this. Barack Obama. He’s not in the legislature. He is in the Executive Branch. He is acting well beyond his scope of authority.

Yet because you agree with his action despite those facts, you are willing to go along. As soon as someone else does the same and you disagree, how quickly your position will shift. And when you do, you will not even recognize your own flip flop.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:30 pm

Sinkwich: Just repeal Obamacare and this issue will go away

The conservative soul is revealed…..

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:31 pm

There are actually medical reasons *beyond* contraception for women to take BC, so your argument just sailed right out the window.

I’ve witnessed, firsthand, an ex who was like Jekyll/Hyde when it came to her monthly cycle. She was able to handle things much better with the pill than without.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
12:31 pm

Jefferson

February 15th, 2012
11:49 am
Health insurance should provide this benefit.

Aaaand of course when insurance rates go up because we all have to subsidize this who is Jefferson naturally going to blame? Well those evil ole insurance companies! Of course.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:31 pm

usinuk@12:20

I just loves it when you get on a roll :lol:

brosephus

I’m assuming that’s a ride at one of the parks down here? I’ll try anything once and if it will get good ole rb to lighten up a bit – I’m there!!

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
12:32 pm

“but let the black guy do it and ZOMG we’re living under Hitler?”

wow, the “racist” charge… I swear, I didn’t see that one coming. And apparently, jay’s peanut gallery hasn’t heard any Conservatives or GOP’ers argue for a smaller federal government which leaves a great number of things up to individual states…and before I get branded with using the “states rights” non-dogwhistle dogwhistle…this for me, includes laws regarding marriage, healthcare, education…let States debate these issues and decide what laws and provisions and exemptions to their laws they want.

Josey Whales

February 15th, 2012
12:32 pm

Southern Woman – I agree with you 100%. I love women, and women on Birth Control, I love 100 times more…….:-)

No need for viagara, not yet……..Jack Daniels works just fine…..

JOE Cool-Republicans Call Him MESSIAH, I Just Call Him Mr. President

February 15th, 2012
12:32 pm

“Cheetah too tame……… Take him to the Pony”

Take em to Follies…..goes with the headline

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:33 pm

“The issue is whether or not government forces what items are covered.”

sorry, but that’s government’s ROLE … which is why they have done things in the past like forced insurance companies to cover Viagra … and 24 hour hospital stays for vaginal childbirth … because if there WASN’T some kind of “nanny” (to use your favorite metaphor) to snap them in line, they’d charge us out the wazzoo for sweet fanny adams in coverage.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:33 pm

md: Not if one understands that payroll tax is the sole funding mechanism for SS…

So, I post that a revenue neutral proposal, in other words the “lack of funding” is made up for by something else, and you come back with “lack of funding” again. Way to completely ignore what I said.

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
12:34 pm

What’s to stop Barry from mandating the insurance companies cover the cost of transportation to and from the doctor and pharmacy?

What’s the use of health insurance if you cannot get to the facilities?

It only makes sense.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:34 pm

They BOTH suck: A few months ago, I read articles from pundits on both sides saying that this election, for the most part, wouldn’t be about social issues. That was before the economic indicators started trending in the right direction.

Exactly. The only reason the Republicans got a LANDSLIDE VICTORY nearly everywhere in the country in 2010 was because they focused on running on the ECONOMY, not on social issues. And they duped everyone, won their elections, and went right back to social issues! And now that independents not only see how they were duped, but see the culture wars returning, they WILL vote Democrat this time.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:35 pm

Mick

It’s entertainment, but not something you can legally pay to ride. :) The Cheetah is one of Miami’s better known gentleman’s club.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:35 pm

The issue is whether or not government forces what items are covered.

No, the issue is CONTRACEPTION – SPECIFICALLY. It has nothing to do with “federal overreach” because EVERYTHING the federal government does can be labeled this by anyone, and it has nothing to do with religious freedom because religious freedom is about not being forced to pay for it, which they are not now. And btw, “religious freedom” is not “freedom to impose my religious will on others by making sure NO ONE gets contraception covered.” Having someone ignore a law because of a “moral objection” is CHAOS.

Careful conservatives, you might soon become anarchists….

weetamoe

February 15th, 2012
12:35 pm

Get to your Hopey-Changey gas station before Obama Petrol goes from four and a half to five bucks a gallon.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
12:35 pm

Enter your comments hereso are breast reductions – but those are covered
_______

Up the uncovered breasts!!!!

John Galt.

February 15th, 2012
12:36 pm

“sorry, but that’s government’s ROLE … which is why they have done things in the past like forced insurance companies to cover Viagra … and 24 hour hospital stays for vaginal childbirth … because if there WASN’T some kind of “nanny” (to use your favorite metaphor) to snap them in line, they’d charge us out the wazzoo for sweet fanny adams in coverage.”

Another Fail. That is not why we have government. Exactly where did you acquire your socialist education?

matrixband

February 15th, 2012
12:36 pm

can the Christian Scientists exclude blood transfusions, or organ transplants? Can a church exclude treatment for sexually transmitted diseases for someone not married???

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:36 pm

Common Sense: What’s to stop Barry from mandating the insurance companies cover the cost of transportation to and from the doctor and pharmacy?

What makes you think this ISN’T covered for people who are disabled etc, or who take the ambulance?

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:36 pm

What pray tell is it, with all of these Randians such that they are obsessed fans of the Nazis?

Their entire philosophy is a fantasy of narcissistic rubbish…

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:37 pm

“Careful conservatives, you might soon become anarchists….”

That’s a better outcome than your dictatorship.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:37 pm

They BOTH suck : I haven’t been to The Pink pony in over 10 or 15 years. But I can meet you there in about 15 minutes for now and we can see if it’s really a house of sin……….. :D

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:38 pm

John Gal: Another Fail. That is not why we have government

Yes it is. Where exactly did you acquire your BullSh*t degree?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:39 pm

“Careful conservatives, you might soon become anarchists….”

That’s a better outcome than your dictatorship.

The libertarian soul is revealed…..

Recon 2533 1811

February 15th, 2012
12:39 pm

Probably a much more objective look into Obama’s approval among Catholic voters. It’s hard to say if his recent slight dip in approval is a result of the contraception controversy. He won a fair majority of the Catholic vote in 08 and can’t afford losing it in November. At this point he’s in negative territory with Catholic voters according to Gallup.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152636/Catholics-Approval-Obama-Little-Changed.aspx

getalife

February 15th, 2012
12:39 pm

Some of my exes worked at the Gold Club and Cheetah III.

Always loved to stop in to say hello :)

WOODSTOCK MIKE

February 15th, 2012
12:40 pm

“The most recent is a newly released CBS News/NY Times poll in which 65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance.”

Wait, you mean liberals want somebody else to pay for it? I can’t believe it!

gm

February 15th, 2012
12:40 pm

The rep have nothing to run on, the economy is turning around slowly, Obama is still killing the bad guys, Newt is at the end, this audultry will say anything now, this is a bunch of old rep men, keeping this going instead of talking about jobs, once again the rep party speaks for women but did not introduce bills to protect women for equal pay, Obama did.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
12:40 pm

The libertarian soul is revealed…

I’m pretty sure anyone posting as “John Galt” doesn’t have a soul to reveal.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:41 pm

“That is not why we have government. ”

oy.

what part of the Commerce Clause do you not understand???

well, besides all of it.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:41 pm

WOODSTOCK: Wait, you mean liberals want somebody else to pay for it? I can’t believe it!

Misnomer. Health insurance is paid for by individual premiums.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:41 pm

stands: I’m pretty sure anyone posting as “John Galt” doesn’t have a soul to reveal.

Good point.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
12:41 pm

What’s to stop Barry from mandating the insurance companies

________

Those are covered but assuming they were not. Congress can stop the president from mandating anything, just by passing a law and overriding his veto.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:42 pm

Galt, you remind of the tool who blogs here under the name of John Birch.

Neither of you has a clue as to who or what you model your goofy names after.

That drug addled parasite hero of yours abhorred anarchy…

Joseph

February 15th, 2012
12:43 pm

Rasmussen Reports 2/4 – 2/5 1000 LV 54 41 Favor Repeal +13

Yep the public is solidly behind Obama and the dems……

JOE Cool-Republicans Call Him MESSIAH, I Just Call Him Mr. President

February 15th, 2012
12:45 pm

Recon 2533 1811

February 15th, 2012
12:39 pm

Since you like Polls…..

President Barack Obama’s job approval rating has hit the 50-percent mark–an important reelection barometer–and he would beat any of the major Republican contenders for the White House if the vote were held today, according to a new CBS/New York Times public opinion poll that illustrates the political benefits of a steady stream of positive economic news.

In hypothetical match-ups, Obama bests Rick Santorum 49 percent to 41 percent, Mitt Romney 48 percent to 42 percent, Ron Paul 50 percent to 39 percent, and former House speaker Newt Gingrich 54 percent to 36 percent, according to the survey, which was conducted from Feb. 8 to Feb. 13. The margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/15/us/politics/20120215_poll_docs.html

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:45 pm

getalfe

I never got a chance to visit the Gold Club, but I do remember the Taj Mahal in Marietta.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:47 pm

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:38 pm

John Gal: Another Fail. That is not why we have government

Yes it is. Where exactly did you acquire your BullSh*t degree?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adam: It’s been my experience that anyone who uses as a screen name a character from that ridiculously stupid and verbose book written by that weirdo amped up Meth Ho Ayn Rand isn’t very smart to begin with.

I usually don’t read what they post.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:47 pm

Adam, your arguments are always week. They are founded in nothing more than mob rule. And when you cannot win the argument, you type in capitals as if screaming.

There is no fundamental right to lay claim to the assets of others for you to use as the mob dictates.

We are not a collective. We never will be. Collectives fail because too many want too much and will work too little to achieve it. But, like every liberal endeavor, success is just around the corner with one more spending increase and one more tax increase.

The Federal Government is a limited government. The 10th Amendment is real. The push back is growing. And it will be a lot stronger than you can imagine. That’s because the only thing you can imagine is a nanny state where the government satiates all of your needs…

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:47 pm

MiltonMan
February 15th, 2012
11:20 am

Political polls (seems to be the latest love craze by libs) are about as useful as pre-season college football polls.

According to one of the conservatives here, those reciting poll numbers are wasting their time and energy. :)

getalife

February 15th, 2012
12:48 pm

Bro,

I spent too much time at the Gold Club but never visited the Taj Mahal.

md

February 15th, 2012
12:50 pm

“So, I post that a revenue neutral proposal, in other words the “lack of funding” is made up for by something else, and you come back with “lack of funding” again. Way to completely ignore what I said.”

Shell game Adam……pay to play. The misfits have you right where they want you……..one may also notice that the new budget had nothing in it pertaining to SS………

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
12:51 pm

birthers and tenthers and bears…..oh my

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

brosephus

Ohhhh….well I’m not that much into that type of entertainment cause I’m so good at creatin my own, if you know what I mean :lol: Besides, nothing above a pg rating for mr. rb..

By the way, I’m dead serious, if any of you bookmaniacs get down this way, please, give me a holler!!! I’ll show you a miami that you never knew existed and we’ll start out at tobacco road…

gm

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

This shows what a bunch of idiots the rep are, Rick gets beat in his home town by 30 points for reelection, yet he is leading the rep national, hello, right wing nut jobs, dont you think his home town know him better.
If his home town did not want him, why on God earth should the rest of America vote for him as President? the right are a bunch of sickos””

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
12:51 pm

birthers and tenthers and bears…..oh my
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

LOL or put another way………….

w.imagepoop.com/image/1889/I-See-Stupid-People.html

getalife

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

“one may also notice that the new budget had nothing in it pertaining to SS…”

Duh, it is your party that wants to end SS and Medicare.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

“birthers and tenthers and bears…..oh my”

thoundth like you have a lithp

Recon 2533 1811

February 15th, 2012
12:52 pm

Joe cool,

I scan Gallup and Rasmussen. As respected professional polling organizations they’re typically more accurate than the media polls as in the one you’ve referenced. Head to head match ups between Obama and the candidates don’t portend much. It won’t be until there’s a crowned Republican nominee that the head to head match up polls will provide very much in the way of accuracy.

Cosby

February 15th, 2012
12:53 pm

this is so much BS…The real issue not being discussed is how the Federal government can tell a private enterprise what benefits it can or cannot offer their employees. Will the next issue be they have to pay for hair cuts, facils,etc…the point has been missed on this issue. but then Jay and most of the idiots think the Federal government should take care of us from birth to death..that being the case, death will come sooner. by the way Jay..birth Control is not a right, health care is not a right and empoler does not have to supply either.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
12:53 pm

The Taj was nice. I hated to see it close down.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
12:54 pm

AmVet, your ignorance on these issues run deep.

Which part of the Constitution do you not get? Separation of Powers? The Bill of Rights?

Where does it say government shall run companies, telling them what prices to charge and what to produce? If you have that you have a fascist government.

To disagree means that you do not yourself have a right to what you yourself produce. All is owned by the state, and they get to decide what you get to keep.

Yet you fail to see this.

The question one should ask is why?

getalife

February 15th, 2012
12:54 pm

“The Taj was nice. I hated to see it close down.”

Ditto on the Gold Club.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
12:56 pm

Another extremely important fact to note about Mr. Galt.

He has, to my knowledge, never once posted a single, solitary piece of empirical, verifiable data.

Not once.

And he says that Adam’s arguments are weak???

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
12:56 pm

The real issue is…..take our tax $$$$$ – one way or another -
and follow the rules.

AND

We can and should make health care a right.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:56 pm

John Galt: Adam, your arguments are always week. They are founded in nothing more than mob rule. And when you cannot win the argument, you type in capitals as if screaming.

You obviously don’t read many of my posts. You also apparently are unable to differentiate between a word or two in all caps and emphasis. Would you care to check my spelling and grammar as well? By the way, it’s “weak,” not “week,” and you’re still incorrect.

There is no fundamental right to lay claim to the assets of others for you to use as the mob dictates.

No one is dictating that, unless you consider paying premiums as “laying claim to the assets of others.” Or if you see taxes that way. But in both cases, that calls your sanity into question, as if it wasn’t already.

We are not a collective. We never will be. Collectives fail because too many want too much and will work too little to achieve it.

Yes, everyone in this country is an island completely unto themselves. OR, we are a collective and you just WISH we weren’t. Oh look, a capitalized word. I must be screaming at you. So SO sorry.

The Federal Government is a limited government. The 10th Amendment is real.

As are the 14th amendment (codifying federal law superseding state law), the 16th amendment (collection of taxes), the part of the Constitution known as the Commerce Clause, and the part of the Constitution that allows for the ratification of new Amendments.

Since you did not know that, I am going to guess you did not get a quality education.

The push back is growing. And it will be a lot stronger than you can imagine. That’s because the only thing you can imagine is a nanny state where the government satiates all of your needs…

Your “revolution” is nothing more than a whimper. And your continued use of buzz words such as “nanny state” do not reflect that actual happenings of actual law, no matter how much you wish otherwise.

And btw, you clearly don’t even know what the word “weak” means if you 1) think my arguments are always weak and/or 2) think your own arguments above are the opposite.

(this is what we call getting OWNED, by the way)

Fred

February 15th, 2012
12:57 pm

Mick; Any Miami you show me would be a Miami I don’t know as I’ve never been there before lol. My BIL currently lives there, but I wouldn’t walk across the street to urinate on him if he were on fire.

But hey, the wife and daughter can see him and me and you could hang out lol. Then we (you too if you want) can drive down to the keys. Always wanted to go there too.

Man it would be sweet to do that for my daughters spring break (they could fly to Miami, and I could drive) but I think it falls the same week as the Primaries here (march 6th) and I’m a precinct poll manager dammit. My patriotic duty. LOl I think we have the youngest average age by about 40 years of any other precinct in Dekalb County……..

Recon 0311 2533

February 15th, 2012
12:58 pm

Hadn’t really payed any attention to my handle until a short time ago. Somehow it was changed. Ummm, strange but for accuracy purposes, I changed it back to its original entry.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
12:58 pm

md: Shell game Adam……pay to play. The misfits have you right where they want you……..one may also notice that the new budget had nothing in it pertaining to SS……

While I agree that the SS budget is purely an accounting detail, what you are failing to get is that if someone puts in a pay-for, that makes it so the revenue continues anyway. I will assume, actually, that you understand this and are instead advocating for some other point entirely, ignoring mine for whatever reason, which is, as I said before, moving the goal posts.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
12:58 pm

Wait, you mean liberals want somebody else to pay for it?

I’ve been paying for, at minimum, a decent chunk of (and for several years, ALL OF) my family’s health insurance premiums.

So, no.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
12:59 pm

fred

Love to see you down here, I do think I might be out in vegas march 9 – 14, other than that I’m here always ready for or trying to create a good time…

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
1:00 pm

“It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to.”
– Thomas Jefferson

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:00 pm

Cosby: The real issue not being discussed is how the Federal government can tell a private enterprise what benefits it can or cannot offer their employees

That’s because it’s a settled issue exactly what gives the Federal Government that authority.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:01 pm

Cosby – “by the way Jay..birth Control is not a right, health care is not a right and empoler does not have to supply either.”

Exactly, now get on down to the Gold Dome and demand that your lawmakers pull that decade old provision off the books!

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
1:06 pm

The Adam Rule:

(this is what we call getting OWNED, by the way)

If you have to state this yourself, you have already failed.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
1:07 pm

“That’s because it’s a settled issue exactly what gives the Federal Government that authority.”

Saying this does not make it so.

If it did, we would not even have this topic today, would we?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
1:07 pm

There was also a time that a majority of the American Public was oppossed to Cival Rights as well.

Didn’t mean that those of the majority were right!

I am for contraception, it should be a womans right to choose, or a mans right as well.

However I cannot support any act or measure that would FORCE any one to pay for anything that they feel is a violation of their faith. Its that simple the people who would be paying the bill for this would be force to ignore or worse violate their faith and/or beliefs as a cost of doing business in the United States. (in the case of catholic hospitals, its the catholic church and its bishops and on down the line of command)

Are all of us ready to lay or faith and beliefs aside and be forced to forsake them for the greater good of everyone else?

LIFE, LIBERTY, PURSUIT of HAPPINESS!

How is there any liberty when one if FORCED to go against their own beliefs as a cost of doing business here in the USA?

BeeJay

February 15th, 2012
1:07 pm

It is downright scary that “65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance,” because it means that number believes the government should have their hands in the private insurance industry. I say, back off. There are problems with health insurance, and problems with coverage, but the solution does not lie in the hands of Obama or his liberal minions, who think the federal government ought to control everything, even, apparently now, one’s religious beliefs. Religious freedom is a right and is one of the underlying principles of our nation. Again I say, back off, Obama. And back off, Mr. bookman.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
1:09 pm

“it means that number believes the government should have their hands in the private insurance industry”

oyVEY …

the insurance industry IS regulated … as well it should be …

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
1:09 pm

John Galt

One of the reasons we have government is to promote the general welfare. Congress is given the authority in the constituion to pass laws that provide for the general welfare.

Scooter

February 15th, 2012
1:09 pm

I don’t need polls to tell me most people would rather someone else pay for their conveniences and a minority who wants to be responsible for their own.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:10 pm

John Galt: Saying [it] does not make it so.

Back at ya, BUDDY.

By the way, I notice you didn’t refute my points on the Constitution, could that be because you KNOW you were bested?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:10 pm

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
1:06 pm

The Adam Rule:

(this is what we call getting OWNED, by the way)

If you have to state this yourself, you have already failed.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

He didn’t have to state it for anyone but you Cons. The rest of us already saw it.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:11 pm

Oscar: Congress is given the authority in the constituion to pass laws that provide for the general welfare.

Cue the “It’s ‘promote’ not ‘provide!’” whining talking point.

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
1:11 pm

The push back is growing. And it will be a lot stronger than you can imagine.

The idea you’ll run to your treehouse and pull up the rope ladder…not really scary.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:13 pm

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
1:07 pm
How is there any liberty when one if FORCED to go against their own beliefs as a cost of doing business here in the USA?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That’s not exactly correct. It’s the cost of getting US Taxpayer money to DO your business.

All those Catholic entities have to do is QUIT TAKING US TAX PAYER MONEY.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:14 pm

afternoon, Generation$crewed

I don’t believe you were here when a supporting thread was posted.

You may want to read it for background.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/02/10/arguing-for-obama-justice-antonin-scalia/

I’m sure you’ll think about it. Many others here just blew right past it because they heeded the warning signs – their heads were about to explode.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:14 pm

Fred: All those Catholic entities have to do is QUIT TAKING US TAX PAYER MONEY.

Stop “shouting” Fred :D

Mr Right

February 15th, 2012
1:16 pm

Wow, it’s getting kind of scarey with the Gov. authority anymore! Not only telling you have got to buy certain things but also what you can eat. Did ya’ll see where the powers that be “had the authority” to not allow a child to eat its lunch that his mother packed him! Wake up folks and see where this is going! A certain party thinks they know better than you do so they say “we have the authority” to tell you what you can or can’t do! WAKE UP FOLKS!!

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:16 pm

Adam: You have to shout at some. They have a hard time hearing with their head up their butt………

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
1:17 pm

Adam

Nope, it’s promote in the preamble, but under the section on powers of congress, it’s provide. You should read it sometime.

JB

February 15th, 2012
1:18 pm

employers are only required to have workers comp insurance and match SS tax. That’s it.

Obama sweating the latest news out of Iran. Israel IS NOT going to let them develop nukes, regardless of our stance. A dust of between those two is not good news for Obama( or us) If they attack, this is reality for Obama:
1. 6-7 dollar gas, uniformed vote hurt
2. Unemployment shoots up to 12-13 %: Moderate and fence sitter vote hurt
3. Leave Israel to fend for themselves. Ought to be the nail in the coffin for the j\Jewish vote
4. Interesting how many ” main stream American Dems waiting on a GOP candidate to vote for the GOP. ( my sister in law and her husband voted for Obama. Both have told me if it Romney is the man, they will vote for him)

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
1:18 pm

The idea you’ll run to your treehouse and pull up the rope ladder…not really scary.

Now that’s funny!

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:21 pm

Oscar: Nope, it’s promote in the preamble, but under the section on powers of congress, it’s provide. You should read it sometime.

I did realize that. I was just trying to get the old talking point out of the way early :)

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:21 pm

Mr. Right

From yesterday: Fox News reported around lunchtime that the ‘inspector’ worked in the school cafeteria, the school apologized to the mother and said the incident should never have happened.

Backtracking some of the reports, it appears as the same information was forwarded by a few moms to the local media, the media assumed, because they’d read it in several emails, it was true.

Proof positive local media is conservative!! :-)

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:21 pm

Scooter – “I don’t need polls to tell me most people would rather someone else pay for their conveniences and a minority who wants to be responsible for their own.”

Well said. Now, can you tell me if parents are the minority or the majority, and if the latter, why should I as a non-parent have to pay for their childs education out of my tax dollars?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:22 pm

Mr Right WAKE UP FOLKS!!

My ears, my ears!

Adam

February 15th, 2012
1:23 pm

AT

February 15th, 2012
1:23 pm

The other thing not mentioned in Jay’s article is that the same mandate covers abortion inducing drugs as well. This takes the objection way outside of just the Catholic church. Plenty of other people have no religious issue with contraception, but do with abortion.

md

February 15th, 2012
1:24 pm

“Duh, it is your party that wants to end SS and Medicare.”

You must mean both parties, as both have cut funding to both programs when both are in trouble….

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
1:25 pm

I did realize that. I was just trying to get the old talking point out of the way early

____

May be old, but it’s still good enough to cover John Galt’s objections.

Mick

February 15th, 2012
1:25 pm

So, if israel chooses war, what could romney do? We have a US president not a president of the world – no matter who is in the white house…

Mr Right

February 15th, 2012
1:25 pm

Paul
So you are saying they apologized for something that didn’t happen?

jconservative

February 15th, 2012
1:25 pm

Any remedy the various churches get will need to come from the courts.

There are three cases in the pipeline that will decide the issue one way or the other. Two cases from the Catholic community, Belmont Abbey College and EWTN-TV Network, and one case from an interdenominational college, Colorado Christian University.

The US is not a religious nation and religion will always lose a political battle.

dorae

February 15th, 2012
1:29 pm

Birth control is available free or at reduced costs at your local health department. Why does birth control have to be covered by religious orgainazations or their affiliates?

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
1:29 pm

Any remedy the various churches get will need to come from the courts.

In other words they need activist judges to thwart the will of the majority. You think they’ll consult Teh Gayz for legal strategy?

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:31 pm

dorae – “Why does birth control have to be covered by religious orgainazations or their affiliates?

Ask your leaders in Georgia, or Mitt Romney for that matter. Both supported the BC provision and passed it into law years before Obama even came on to the scene.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:31 pm

AT

“Plenty of other people have no religious issue with contraception, but do with abortion.”

And I’d guess those folks would not use that provision of their policy.

Just like I’d guess Jehovah’s Witnesses wouldn’t use the blood transfusion part.

And Seventh-day Adventists wouldn’t order meat in their meals if their policy covered meals.

JB

February 15th, 2012
1:32 pm

Mick, that is a great question. My only thought might be that The Irans would go from 50/50 of having to deal with us with Obama calling the shots, to KNOWING that the entire might of the ole evil US Military may come down on them….Which might give them some pause. Maybe. All I can can go on is History, and I do remember the bed wetter Carter left the stage and Reagan took the oath, they wised up. Maybe they will wise up. Being wiped off the earth in 3-4 days would give anyone pause. Ask the Jews.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:33 pm

Mr. Right

No. The ‘inspector’ was a school employee who worked in the cafeteria and confiscated the kid’s lunch. It wasn’t, as was reported here “a government inspector, part of Obama’s Gestapo, conducting an inspection…”

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:34 pm

Mr. Right

And since their employee did something they shouldn’t have done, the school apologized.

Seems quite appropriate.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:35 pm

Paul – ” It wasn’t, as was reported here “a government inspector, part of Obama’s Gestapo, conducting an inspection…”

Shhhhhhh………you weren’t supposed to know that. Obama is an iron fisted dictator, who, if he had his way, would personally insert IUD’s into every female in America.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:36 pm

jconservative

“There are three cases in the pipeline that will decide the issue ”

This is getting old.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/02/10/arguing-for-obama-justice-antonin-scalia/

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:36 pm

Oh, and did I mention he would perform the procedure at a Catholic church and wipe his hands with the constitution when he was finished?

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
1:36 pm

So the highly decorated Naval Academy grad, Carter, OKs a military mission to rescue the hostages while the never-served Reagan cuts and runs from Lebanon, but Jimmy is the bedwetter?

Man, you gotta love Reagnistas…

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:37 pm

dorae

“. Why does birth control have to be covered by religious orgainazations or their affiliates?”

It’s not.

It’s provided by the health insurance company selected by the employer for their employees.

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
1:37 pm

Paul
February 15th, 2012
1:14 pm
I read the piece the first time it was offered up. Just because I do not comment does not mean I do not read. Commenting on here becomes pointless sometimes. Too many children who are stuck in their side is better than the other side.

But,
President Gordon B. Hinckley, prior president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints made the following statement in 1998 about the Church’s position on plural marriage
“This Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church…. If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church.”
So seems this is not an issue in which The Morman Faith’s leaders do not consider it to be a staple of their faith…..

Also if there is no historical reference for not making exceptions based upon ones religious beliefs, then why did the Obama administration give out so many waivers for the Health care law? Why can those with a religious objection such as Catholics be given a similar waiver to protect those who do hold that as a core belief?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
1:39 pm

this is called a false liberal template that was first coordinated through the white house and the liberal media by george stephanopoulos in a debate over a month ago………..keep trying to drag this out bookman, it exposes you and your radical ilk……….NO ONE has a problem finding contraception, it is in every corner store and is given out for free in clinics across the country………..the real issue here is a first ammendment issue that hussein obama wants to challenge, plain and simple………this highlights once again the lack of integrity and journalistic standards b/t radical libs like you and george in the mainstream media………..i love to expose libs and their ilk…..

md

February 15th, 2012
1:40 pm

” It wasn’t, as was reported here “a government inspector, part of Obama’s Gestapo, conducting an inspection…”

And as I was the one that posted it here using “gestapo”, one may want to revisit the post to understand that Paul himself is taking it out of context……..funny how the story changes as it moves down the line.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:41 pm

Billybob – “the real issue here is a first ammendment issue that hussein obama wants to challenge, plain and simple”

Well, Romney did it first. I guess that seals your vote for Santorum. Right?

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
1:41 pm

“Don’t cry over spilled ilk.”
– Thomas Jefferson

AT

February 15th, 2012
1:41 pm

Paul,
But the issue is this: Do you want the federal government forcing the religions to pay for these services that they find objectionable, in violation of their first amendment rights? Can the gov’t force Muslim organizations to serve pork, Hindi to serve beef (or any animal). Should the Amish be forced to cover sex change operations. Certainly Muslims would not have to buy the pork, Amish wouldn’t choose to have sex change operations. Your argument misses the point.

Thulsa Doom's gift to the liberals

February 15th, 2012
1:42 pm

Liberals should love this one. Its a youtube on why conservatives suck. Even the conservatives on here will find it funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvLZ-M_HS-w&feature=youtube_gdata_player

WOODSTOCK MIKE

February 15th, 2012
1:42 pm

Why do Democrats bash organized religion so much and still go to church and pray? For instance, when Whitney Houston died last weekend I saw several far left liberals on TV saying over and over again to please pray for Whitney and her family. But, the same far left liberals also mock Republicans for having a strong religous faith?? Seems like more liberal hypocrisy to me, nothing new…

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
1:42 pm

Where was the Republican outrage when all of the children of the Catholic church were being raped by numerous Priest all over the country. Then to find out that the Bishops, just ignored the acts with indifference and transferring the offending priests to different locations where many continued their deviant behavior againist more children? will someone please explain the logic of this selective outrage, we are all witnessing?

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:43 pm

AT – “Your argument misses the point.”

As does yours, unless you can show us where the provision explicitly states that all those who have BC as part of their insurance offering will be forced to use it.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
1:43 pm

I’m guessing the term template is now in vogue with HeadRush and the other talking head welfare kings…

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:43 pm

Mick

February 15th, 2012
1:43 pm

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:44 pm

AT

February 15th, 2012
1:41 pm

Paul,
But the issue is this: Do you want the federal government forcing the religions to pay for these services that they find objectionable, in violation of their first amendment rights? Can the gov’t force Muslim organizations to serve pork, Hindi to serve beef (or any animal). Should the Amish be forced to cover sex change operations. Certainly Muslims would not have to buy the pork, Amish wouldn’t choose to have sex change operations. Your argument misses the point.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And you “argument” misses any and all logical thought………

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:44 pm

WOODSTOCK MIKE – “Why do Democrats bash organized religion so much and still go to church and pray? ”

Well, I’m not a Democrat or a Liberal and I don’t go to church. I guess my question would be why do so many people claim to be Christians and then act so un-Christ like?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
1:46 pm

Also if there is no historical reference for not making exceptions based upon ones religious beliefs, then why did the Obama administration give out so many waivers for the Health care law? Why can those with a religious objection such as Catholics be given a similar waiver to protect those who do hold that as a core belief?
Just because a supreme court justice declares something or even if the supreme court makes a ruling on something does not always make it the right thing to do or even the legal thing as decisions are later overturned. But mostly because the justices are human and as humans they ALL make dumb statements and rulings….. Don’t believe me examine these 2……
1857
Dred Scott v. Sandford
1896
Plessy v. Ferguson

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
1:47 pm

Mike, feigning to be religious is big business in this country. Especially the Jesus business.

Personally, I am an equal opportunity basher.

I bash Moozlims, papists, Talibaptists and even my own Hebe tribe.

Where I do draw the line is with Aphrodite, and only because she was so hot…

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:47 pm

Bernie – “Where was the Republican outrage when all of the children of the Catholic church were being raped by numerous Priest all over the country.”

Because it wasn’t suggested by Obama silly. What, the priests a raping boys? Did Obama have anything to do with it? No? Well then, it’s all good by me.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
1:48 pm

So the highly decorated Naval Academy grad, Carter, OKs a military mission to rescue the hostages while the never-served Reagan cuts and runs from Lebanon, but Jimmy is the bedwetter?

I was thinking about posting something like that as a reply, but…

anyway, just what IS the deal with using “bedwetter” as a pejorative? Is someone with this particular medical condition somehow incapable of bravery while awake?

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
1:49 pm

NO ONE has a problem finding contraception, it is in every corner store and is given out for free in clinics across the country

Anonymous medical advice posted on blogs by a “Billybob” should be enough reassurance for anyone. Thanks, d00d.

Josey Whales

February 15th, 2012
1:51 pm

Momma’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe……………….

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:52 pm

Aquagirl – “Anonymous medical advice posted on blogs by a “Billybob” should be enough reassurance for anyone.”

Wasn’t he the one that supported the Keystone XL because the Ilk herds were increasing in Alaska due to the warmth of the pipeline?

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
1:53 pm

G$ — “why did the Obama administration give out so many waivers for the Health care law?”

Organizations that *already* met certain standards in the ACA ahead of time were given waivers from complying with the first set of standards in it. They’re not being *excused* from complying because they *already* largely comply with the standards that are going to be introduced early. They’re just being given a pass on the first tranche of changes, but they still have to comply with subsequent ones when they come in.

You pretty clearly did not read anything about what they waivers were and why they were given out.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:53 pm

Generation

I took it from your first post regarding religious institutions engaging in commercial activity that you hadn’t read the thread.

The facts of polygamy are not the issue, nor is the current policy of the LDS church. The issues is, as the Court wrote, “To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and, in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.”

The facts of the case are used to illustrate the greater principle of law.

I do not believe the waivers were granted because religious institutions cited doctrinal conflicts, were they? That is the issue here.

_____________________________________________________________

“this is called a false liberal template that was first coordinated through the white house and the liberal media by george stephanopoulos in a debate over a month ago”

Someone’s been listening to Dick Morris… who made clear he was speculating…..

_____________________________________________

md

thanks for popping in. I considered dropping the quotes as I knew someone would take issue that it wasn’t word for word exact, but do you state the intent of your post was not to link ‘government inspector’ with ‘Obama’ with some Nazi reference?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

AT

“But the issue is this: Do you want the federal government forcing the religions to pay for these services that they find objectionable, in violation of their first amendment rights”

Nope. As long as it’s restricted to their churches. Once they engage in commercial activity, it is a whole different issue, as the Court put it in United States v. Lee:

““When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes that are binding on others in that activity. Granting an exemption from social security taxes to an employer operates to impose the employer’s religious faith on the employees.”

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
1:54 pm

i’ve been explaining liberal media false TEMPLATES on this site for a couple of years now…….and like i’ve said, people like me are exposing radical libs and their lies and deceptions like those on this site more and more and it’s fun……….enjoy, but don’t touch the fact of what stephanopoulos actually did………..the incestuous nature of the lib media and the dem party is front and center as it should be…..i want more and more intelligent, educated voters while the dems continue to promise things to citizens for their vote……either way, hussein’s own words and actions will be his downfall……..i love it

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
1:56 pm

just what IS the deal with using “bedwetter” as a pejorative?

It’s probably one of the words that Newt ok’d, along with liberal and stuff.

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
1:56 pm

Wasn’t he the one that supported the Keystone XL because the Ilk herds were increasing

And now he’s complaining about the Ilk? Men can never make up their minds. Or maybe he’s just a little touchy because it’s that time of the month for him.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:57 pm

Billybob – “…..i want more and more intelligent, educated voters”

So do I, but I keep getting stuck with sheeple who only vote Democrat or Republican.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:57 pm

Generation

“Just because a supreme court justice declares something or even if the supreme court makes a ruling on something does not always make it the right thing to do or even the legal thing as decisions are later overturned. ”

That’s a common misconception. Once the Court rules, it is law. Period. Later times may view the ruling as improper, at which time a new ruling is issued. But it’s still the law until that point.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
1:58 pm

aqua,
that’s not medical advice…..that is a fact which you ignore b/c it doesn’t fit the template……see how that works…..either way hussein doesn’t have the power in the constitution to do this……the end

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
1:58 pm

B. Cassidy — “the Ilk herds were increasing in Alaska due to the warmth of the pipeline?”

Ilk tend to congregate whenever they hear DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW. It’s like a mating call to them.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
1:58 pm

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:52 pm

Aquagirl – “Anonymous medical advice posted on blogs by a “Billybob” should be enough reassurance for anyone.”

Wasn’t he the one that supported the Keystone XL because the Ilk herds were increasing in Alaska due to the warmth of the pipeline?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hey now buddy. Don’t you be dissing Keith Stone. He’s my hero.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNz0kdGLX-E

rcs

February 15th, 2012
1:59 pm

why doesn’t Harry Reid squash this bill and move on to more important issues? the senate is going to vote on this when we’ve gone 1000+ days without a budget? jobs bills? deficit? tax reform? why are they voting on contraceptives?

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
1:59 pm

Billybob – “either way hussein doesn’t have the power in the constitution to do this”

Super, can you show us a copy of the letter you have drafted to Governor Deal demanding that he repeal the law in Georgia?

AT

February 15th, 2012
1:59 pm

Butch/Fred,
So you’d be ok with the gov’t forcing PETA to serve steak at a fundraiser? It’s the same thing. The gov’t is forcing a private entity to provide a service/product that is directly opposed to the beliefs of the organization.

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
2:00 pm

“G$ — “why did the Obama administration give out so many waivers for the Health care law?”

Organizations that *already* met certain standards in the ACA ahead of time were given waivers from complying with the first set of standards in it. They’re not being *excused* from complying because they *already* largely comply with the standards that are going to be introduced early. They’re just being given a pass on the first tranche of changes, but they still have to comply with subsequent ones when they come in.

You pretty clearly did not read anything about what they waivers were and why they were given out.”

Wow, is that what the Ministry of Truth told you (aka Media Matters).

The truth is that these waivers were given out because almost every one of these companies claimed the limit regulation would force significant hikes — in some cases, even a 100 percent increase — in premiums.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/business/07insure.html?_r=4&adxnnl=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1290021504-/j6fLt27IQiZ0H6GDp5WOg

This healthcare law is a sham. You will continue to see your premiums rise, and our healthcare service will get worse.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:00 pm

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
1:54 pm

i’ve been explaining liberal media false TEMPLATES on this site for a couple of years now…….and like i’ve said, people like me are exposing radical libs and their lies and deceptions like those on this site more and more and it’s fun……….enjoy, but don’t touch the fact of what stephanopoulos actually did………..the incestuous nature of the lib media and the dem party is front and center as it should be…..i want more and more intelligent, educated voters while the dems continue to promise things to citizens for their vote……either way, hussein’s own words and actions will be his downfall……..i love it
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wow. All I can say is Tinfoil hat anyone?

http://berkeley.intel-research.net/arahimi/helmet/

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:00 pm

Billybob — ” the dems continue to promise things to citizens for their vote……”

I left the GOP in 2003, and started voting for Democrats in 2004. What did the Democrats promise me for my vote?

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:01 pm

rcs – ” why are they voting on contraceptives?”

Because FOX needs something to comment on 24/7 to keep their rabid viewers entertained.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:01 pm

thanks for agreeing with me that hussein doesn’t have the constitutional authority to do what he is trying to do…..

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:02 pm

md?

I tried to find your original post but don’t recall the thread. The one where you did or did not link government inspector with Obama with some Nazi reference? Can you share it?

AT

How on earth do you go from “services provided under health care policies for employees of a commercial activity” to “gov’t forcing PETA to serve steak at a fundraiser”?

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
2:02 pm

So you’d be ok with the gov’t forcing PETA to serve steak at a fundraiser? It’s the same thing.

It’s only the same thing in El RushBo’s brain.

md

February 15th, 2012
2:02 pm

“but do you state the intent of your post was not to link ‘government inspector’ with ‘Obama’ with some Nazi reference?”

Nope…..if I did, I would have said Obama……

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:03 pm

AT

February 15th, 2012
1:59 pm

Butch/Fred,
So you’d be ok with the gov’t forcing PETA to serve steak at a fundraiser? It’s the same thing. The gov’t is forcing a private entity to provide a service/product that is directly opposed to the beliefs of the organization.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You really ARE intellectually challenged aren’t you? Does PETA receive TAX PAYER MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT?

No? I didn’t think so. Case closed.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
2:03 pm

“The idea you’ll run to your treehouse and pull up the rope ladder…not really scary.”

How profound. What does scare you is that you will one day need to provide for yourself.

And that the production of others is something you are not entitled to. But you will get used to the idea.

Get Real

February 15th, 2012
2:03 pm

Only follies to liberal, progressive atheists

Also, NYT poll..right, I guess they just talked to the OWS crowd…

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:03 pm

Where’s the budget? 3 years and counting……….And please don’t say we’re waiting on the GOP, Obama had all the keys for two years……Too busy golfing and flying around the world I guess.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:04 pm

separated at birth……fred and the osterich
dems have grown the entitlement state for decades and they continually promise to take care of people especially while they are campaigning……..it’s pretty easy to see and expose…..your welcome

AT

February 15th, 2012
2:04 pm

Enter your comments here

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
2:04 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
1:53 pm
Paul it is kinda risky using as your only defense for this as what the supreme court has said.

I wouldn’t say you agree with either of these cases…….1857
Dred Scott v. Sandford
1896
Plessy v. Ferguson

The supreme court had already ruled it at the time. As I am sure many of those oppossed to Cival Rights used it as an argument for not allowing Cival Rights.

The Amish of Northern NewYork were not granted an exemption?

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:05 pm

Any site where a guy can go and talk to Dems without the Obama chip on their shoulder?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:05 pm

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
2:03 pm

“The idea you’ll run to your treehouse and pull up the rope ladder…not really scary.”

How profound. What does scare you is that you will one day need to provide for yourself.

And that the production of others is something you are not entitled to. But you will get used to the idea.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Does anyone else see the irony of this persons posting that last sentence on the internet?

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:05 pm

AT – “The gov’t is forcing a private entity to provide a service/product that is directly opposed to the beliefs of the organization.”

But not forcing them to use it. BIG difference. If they were forced to use it, then yes, I would have a problem. Tell me, do you think stores should stop selling condoms because Catholics find that it violates their beliefs?

Guy Incognito

February 15th, 2012
2:06 pm

Fred

“Where non-animal replacements are not yet available or fully validated, PETA lobbies companies and government agencies to provide funding for research and development and …”

http://www.peta.org/…/government-required…testing-overview.aspx -

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:06 pm

md

Where’s the post?

And are you sure you’re the only one who posted a similar line?

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:07 pm

Bookman does attract the “fringe”

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:07 pm

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:04 pm

separated at birth……fred and the osterich
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYS0weula7w&feature=endscreen&NR=1

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
2:07 pm

can you show us a copy of the letter you have drafted to Governor Deal demanding that he repeal the law in Georgia?

Look, he made a blog post, everyone knows that determines how reality works.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:08 pm

Guy Incogmnito: How apropos. Your link comes up as :Bad request.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:08 pm

Billybob – “have grown the entitlement state for decades ”

You mean like parents feeling entitled to my money to educate their offspring?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:08 pm

jb,
waste of time stating anything of substance to these radical libs who love to dring ilk……….they are supporting a guy who wants to fundamentally change(socialism/central gov’t planning) this country and a pres who is subverting the constitution……..they support this and the only thing left to do is expose them for who and what they are…………nov 2012 will be the smackdown on their ideology

Jim Warren

February 15th, 2012
2:09 pm

I respectfully feel that contraception pills, devices, etc. should be available as they prevent unwanted pregnancy from recreational sex. Not sure why insurance should PAY for this, much less be MADE to make it available, however. It would seem to follow that I should be able to get my insurance to cover, say, a bucket of chicken and two liters of COKE to help cure my hangover due to my recreational drinking. The logic is the same. Or rather the ILLOGIC is the same.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:10 pm

Billybob – “waste of time stating anything of substance to these radical libs”

I’m guessing that’s why you haven’t done it yet.

USMC

February 15th, 2012
2:10 pm

“AmVet – Like most decent Americans, I’m a Marxist.”–Amvet

Well at least Amvet has the stones to simply admit the truth. I respect that. :-)

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:10 pm

aqua……zzzzzzzz

Abrazos

February 15th, 2012
2:11 pm

As Jon Stewart said Monday night, “This government ‘hates’ religious organizations so much, it lets them keep $100 billion a year in offerings tax free. Persecute MY a** like that! I’d love it!”

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
2:11 pm

Well, I just do not believe that the Republican candidates are capable of communicating just what their billionaire backer’s beliefs are. They need to spell it out in detail. And be specific. Is Viagra to be covered by health insurance in their world or not, for example? And, will everyone get to pay no taxes or just the wealthiest? If just the wealthiest get to pay no taxes, what is the cutoff? We need to know these things and much more. Republicans are just not answering the questions that need to be answered.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:11 pm

Jim Warren – “The logic is the same. Or rather the ILLOGIC is the same.”

Yes, much like getting your panties in a wad over legislature that has been on the books for over a decade, but only now becoming incensed because you don’t like the current administration.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:12 pm

Generation

I was responding to your post in which you said

“Just because a supreme court justice declares something or even if the supreme court makes a ruling on something does not always make it the right thing to do or even the legal thing as decisions are later overturned. ”

How do I restate ‘when the Supreme Court rules, that is the law. Period.”?

People may not like it. People may object for a variety of reasons. It may later be overturned. But for the time being it’s the law.

md

February 15th, 2012
2:12 pm

“Where’s the post?

Downstairs somewhere……don’t remember which floor either…….it was in response to getalife posting something about Santorum requiring such and such…….but the exact words used were “food gestapo”…….a general reference to gov’t. over reach.

“And are you sure you’re the only one who posted a similar line?”"

No, not sure at all………

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:12 pm

Yo Butch, maybe you need more dynamite………..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHXK2t50S-8

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:13 pm

Yep Billybob, the 2010 mid term slaughter and the fact that ANY moderate Dem avoids Obama like the plague gives me hope. Hope is not on these blogs. Just where you go feed the animals.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:13 pm

T Head — “Wow, is that what the Ministry of Truth told you (aka Media Matters). The truth is that these waivers were given out because almost every one of these companies claimed the limit regulation would force significant hikes — in some cases, even a 100 percent increase — in premiums.”

Employers dropping employee coverage is *not* one of the aims of the ACA. In fact, it’s *against* at least one of the aims. Some employers did get waivers because of cost, and many got waivers because they already largely complied. However, the fact that some employers got waivers for cost reasons does not invalidate the program.

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/147715-number-of-healthcare-reform-law-waivers-climbs-above-1000

Conservatives, like yourself, have been disingenuous and dishonest about the purpose of the waivers.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/10/401561/debunking-the-gops-health-care-waiver-hysteria/?mobile=nc

I look forward to correcting additional misconceptions you may have about the waiver program.

“This healthcare law is a sham. You will continue to see your premiums rise, and our healthcare service will get worse.”

I’m pretty sure that my premiums would continue going up and our healthcare service would continue getting worse *without* health care reform.

Look, the GOP dropped the ball on it and refused to work with the Democrats. Quite a few GOP ideas even made it into the ACA. If y’all didn’t like it, you had plenty of opportunity to work on it and improve it before it came up for a vote.

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
2:13 pm

Dear Jim @ 2:09, where did you get the idea that logic has a place on this blog? Well written, nevertheless.

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
2:14 pm

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
2:15 pm

So you’d be ok with the gov’t forcing PETA to serve steak at a fundraiser? It’s the same thing.

It would seem to follow that I should be able to get my insurance to cover, say, a bucket of chicken and two liters of COKE to help cure…

I believe that dB brought this up this earlier, but why is it that theses silly arguments compare eating and sex?

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
2:15 pm

Dear Joe @ 2:13, good afternoon, you lack of understanding of economics is unabated. Any restrictions compelled by diktat make delivery of the product more expensive. The constrictions in ObamaCare virtually guarantee that many employers will find it economic to pay the ObamaCare fines and abandon the obligation to provide insurance. That is a design feature of ObamaCare.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:16 pm

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
2:13 pm

Dear Jim @ 2:09, where did you get the idea that logic has a place on this blog? Well written, nevertheless.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Are you stupid, being deliberately obtuse, or just ignorant? If you are ignorant I will make one more effort to educate you. If you are stupid or deliberately being obtuse there is no point.

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:16 pm

Taxpayer………..Here’s a novel idea. Why doesn’t everyone pay SOME taxes,and I’m not talking about cigarette, booze and gas taxes. Real federal income taxes. 5 bucks per thousand would be a start….And this “I’m having 5 kids” earned income tax needs to be reduced

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:17 pm

T. Head — “aannnnnndddd i stop reading”

Annnnnnnnd your ignorance continues.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:18 pm

md

Thanks for that. I’m sure you know there was no intent to misrepresent. I’m just one of those who doesn’t much care for Nazi references, given the millions killed and the atrocities committed.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:19 pm

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
2:14 pm

http://thingprogress.org…..aannnnnndddd i stop reading
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Don’t worry, I read the whole thing. It said………

Bad Request

Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.
Apache/2.2.9 (Debian) PHP/5.2.6-1+lenny9 with Suhosin-Patch Server at thingprogress.org…..aannnnnndddd Port 80

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
2:19 pm

Joe H,

Additionally, the ACA is a sham because it continues a flawed system, employer based healthcare insurance. If individuals were given the same tax deduction that employers receive, you would be able to customize your insurance (rather than getting a generic one size fits all plan that almost always gives more than you need which drives the cost of care up) plans and if you lost your job or changed jobs you would be able to keep the plan.

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
2:19 pm

Dear Fred @ 2:16, all will agree that the quality of your posts has an amazing consistency. Epithets every time, all the time, but content free.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:19 pm

R. Danneskjold — “Dear Joe @ 2:13, good afternoon, you lack of understanding of economics is unabated.”

I see your hind end is still sore from the beating it received last evening.

“Any restrictions compelled by diktat make delivery of the product more expensive.”

Irrelevant to the question under discussion.

“The constrictions in ObamaCare virtually guarantee that many employers will find it economic to pay the ObamaCare fines and abandon the obligation to provide insurance. That is a design feature of ObamaCare.”

Given your shining example of FAIL last evening in the Schiavo discussion, I’m sure you’ll understand when I say that I’m afraid that I can’t give your spittle-flecked gibberings much credence on this particular topic, either.

md

February 15th, 2012
2:21 pm

“I respectfully feel that contraception pills, devices, etc. should be available as they prevent unwanted pregnancy from recreational sex. Not sure why insurance should PAY for this, much less be MADE to make it available, however.”

Does this mean the condom dispensing machines in the truck stop bathrooms will now take an insurance card??

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
2:21 pm

This latest round of bric-a-brac from the ranks of the Goofy Odd People represents a regression in times of yesteryear when contraception was front stage. Since the economy is recovering, is this the only populist message they can revisit to charge up their base? They should have their licenses to practice politics revoked for malfeasance. If this is the pole they chose to hang their chapeaus on then they will surely fall to the floor. Let’s face it, the GOP is desparate, whistling through the graveyard, and hasn’t a clue how to restore trust in Republican voters, who they themselves, are growing weary of the clown show.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:22 pm

T. Head — “Additionally, the ACA is a sham because it continues a flawed system, employer based healthcare insurance. If individuals were given the same tax deduction that employers receive, you would be able to customize your insurance (rather than getting a generic one size fits all plan that almost always gives more than you need which drives the cost of care up) plans and if you lost your job or changed jobs you would be able to keep the plan.”

Yes. We KNOW this.

We pushed for single-payer, which is even simpler than that, but y’all pooped your collective pants over it.

If you didn’t want ACA, which is imperfect by any measure, then you should have come to the table ready to negotiate and work. You didn’t, and you see what we have as a result.

AT

February 15th, 2012
2:23 pm

The question is simple: Should the gov’t’s desire to force religious institutions to violate their religious convictions supersede their 1st amendment rights? Must they also surrender their rights to speech, press, free assembly, due process, the right to bear arms, etc. because they have received gov’t money?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
2:23 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:12 pm

The supreme court has NEVER ruled in favor of forcing a private citizen to purchase a product mandated by the federal Government.

To attribute what Scalia said into that is not accurate. And you of the people on this blog are smart enough to know that.

Social Security that the Amish had to pay is not a product.

Health Insurance is a product. Forcing one to purchase a product that contains an element oppossed to their religious beliefs has never been dealt with by the Supreme court yet, its coming but hasn’t happened yet.

If determined our national cost of food would be lowered by requirering Each American to by a set amount of meat products each month would you then also be in favor of forcing each of us regardless of religous beliefs to then buy pork and thus handle pork products???

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
2:24 pm

Mittsiah Sheetsies.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
2:24 pm

JB – “And this “I’m having 5 kids” earned income tax needs to be reduced”

I would vote for eliminating it entirely along with the provision that requires my taxes to go toward schools, meals, busses and roads for other peoples children.

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:24 pm

I’m open mined enough to understand the euphoria of the far left on here. You’ve been waiting your entire life to have one of your own in the White House to ” make things right” and stick it to a system that just doesn’t seem right to you, that the world is a much better model of civilization to pattern ourselves after. And,a incentive based society for winners and losers is not for everyone.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:24 pm

ragnar danneskjold

February 15th, 2012
2:19 pm

Dear Fred @ 2:16, all will agree that the quality of your posts has an amazing consistency. Epithets every time, all the time, but content free.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A request for information is an epithet? It’s a legitimate request and the three options I outlined are the only logical ones to draw. Either you lack necessary information needed to make a reasoned and informed judgement (ignorant) or you have the necessary information needed to make a reasoned and informed judgement but are unable to process it (stupid), or you have the necessary information needed to make a reasoned and informed judgement yet choose to lie about it and twist it, (deliberately obtuse).

What is “insulting” about logic?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:26 pm

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
2:21 pm

This latest round of bric-a-brac from the ranks of the Goofy Odd People represents a regression in times of yesteryear when contraception was front stage. Since the economy is recovering, is this the only populist message they can revisit to charge up their base? They should have their licenses to practice politics revoked for malfeasance. If this is the pole they chose to hang their chapeaus on then they will surely fall to the floor. Let’s face it, the GOP is desparate, whistling through the graveyard, and hasn’t a clue how to restore trust in Republican voters, who they themselves, are growing weary of the clown show.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sweet, a leftist troll doing a drive by for a change of pace……………..

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
2:26 pm

If individuals were given the same tax deduction that employers receive

________

Good idea. But it would be enough just to eliminate the tax deductions that employers receive. That would be a sufficient incentive for them to drop employee coverage.

Aquagirl

February 15th, 2012
2:26 pm

contraception pills, devices, etc. should be available as they prevent unwanted pregnancy from recreational sex.

Oh the godless hordes and their recreational sex. Believe it or not, the Duggars are not everyone’s ideal family model.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:26 pm

hey libs……what of media matters/nbc and their coordination with the white house…….incestuous like i said…..and i’m sure you can throw thinkprogresss in there as well joe……exposing the lack of integrity and honesty and dignity that libs will exercise for the power to control people(like we are seeing with hussein)is easy to expose……and lots of fun

monty

February 15th, 2012
2:27 pm

If this was some Islamic thing then all the liberals would be in support and certainly not go public with a criticism. But Catholic institutions are fair game. Hypocrites.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
2:27 pm

Taxpayer………..Here’s a novel idea. Why doesn’t everyone pay SOME taxes

It’s okay by me if everyone has to pay something but, for one thing, that will piss off a lot of millionaires that currently pay no income taxes and secondly, I don’t think folks like Newt will be happy unless they get taxed at the same lower rate that Mitt and hedge fund managers and such get taxed at. They seem to think it “unfair” that some wealthy pay less taxes than other “wealthy”. The good news is that none of them are too concerned about the poor or middle class so maybe things will just stay the same for most of us and that means we have certainty in our lives. Isn’t that great.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
2:27 pm

If you have to depend on someone else to pay for your contraceptives, maybe you need to keep your clothes on. OMG, would it kill a lib to actually have to pay for something himself?

md

February 15th, 2012
2:28 pm

“Employers dropping employee coverage is *not* one of the aims of the ACA.”

I’d say the jury is still out on that one……if the dems ultimately want single payer, baby steps may dictate companies dropping out one by one into the “pool”……then??

And for the record, I see no problem with some sort of Medicare for all…..paid through payroll taxes.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:28 pm

Kamchak

“why is it that theses silly arguments compare eating and sex?”

Two things lots of people want to enjoy (and, obviously, overdo) but have hangups about?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
2:28 pm

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
2:15 pm

“I believe that dB brought this up this earlier, but why is it that theses silly arguments compare eating and sex?”

Yet you raised no issue when Jay did an entire article about Scalia’s words when in the article Jay used examples including throwing ones self on the burning body of ones husband in relation to contraception…..

So I guess those making the food analogy were only giving a more tamed version of the examples laid forth to us by the host.

Again you saw his examples as valid and not silly, or let me guess you just didn’t feel like commenting on it then?

Odd how silly examples seem to only be silly when they contradict what we think huh?

Talking Head

February 15th, 2012
2:28 pm

“We pushed for single-payer, which is even simpler than that, but y’all pooped your collective pants over it.

If you didn’t want ACA, which is imperfect by any measure, then you should have come to the table ready to negotiate and work. You didn’t, and you see what we have as a result.”

Single-payer is worse than employer based insurance coverage. One payer dictating what services can be covered, how much they should cost, how much should be reimbursed, how much tax is needed. How is a bureaucracy in any way more knowledgable about healthcare than actual healthcare providers?

Also, I’m not in Congress therefore I was in no position to ‘come to the table.’ I notified my Congressmen that I didn’t want this to pass, which was all I could do.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:28 pm

AT — “The question is simple: Should the gov’t’s desire to force religious institutions to violate their religious convictions supersede their 1st amendment rights?”

What First Amendment rights to “religious institutions” have, precisely? The Constitution explicitly grants First Amendment rights to *individuals,* not to *institutions.*

“Must they also surrender their rights to speech, press, free assembly, due process, the right to bear arms, etc. because they have received gov’t money?”

I don’t believe that religious institutions are granted those rights anywhere in the Constitution, and I challenge you to demonstrate otherwise.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
2:29 pm

AT

February 15th, 2012
2:23 pm

The question is simple: Should the gov’t’s desire to force religious institutions to violate their religious convictions supersede their 1st amendment rights? Must they also surrender their rights to speech, press, free assembly, due process, the right to bear arms, etc. because they have received gov’t money?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yes. Once they receive Gov’t money, they have become a gov’t supplicant first (which means they have to follow the rules) and a “religious organization” second.

once they start operating secular businesses, they need to follow secular laws and rules. The legal precedence for that is irreproachable after so many tests.

Obama is over

February 15th, 2012
2:29 pm

Your spin today talks around the issue and misses the point. The debate is not over birth contol like you are trying to shift it. The problem here is that the President signed off on legislation that fundamentally violates Freedom of Religion protected by the Constitution. Just as the Constitution prohibits government from regulating religious organizations, it prevents religious organizations from regulating Government. Despite Obama’s illusions of grandeur, he is not the Ayatollah and cannot dictate how Government rules religious organizations and their congregations. Make no mistake, Obama created this mess and has no one to blame but himself. It is also extremely short sighted of your pollsters to underestimate the power of organized religion.

YOUR party SUCKS! But MINE is GRRRRRREAT! (formerly That Black Guy)

February 15th, 2012
2:30 pm

Super Duper, now, why don’t you provide us all with a copy of the letter you sent to the 28 states (including Georgia) that have had the BC provision on the books for over a decade. I’d be curious to see if your concern then matches your concern now. Or, did you just become concerned when Obama said it?

BC, my comment is not directed at you directly, but to all those who say “___ states have had ______ laws on the books for years, where was your outrage then?”

I would hazard to guess that NO ONE on this blog knows EVERY law, rule, mandate, reg etc of the state they live in.

Some laws people only find out about when it is reported on in the news or it affects their personal life.

IMO

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:31 pm

G$ — “Social Security that the Amish had to pay is not a product. Health Insurance is a product. Forcing one to purchase a product that contains an element oppossed to their religious beliefs has never been dealt with by the Supreme court yet, its coming but hasn’t happened yet.”

The Amish have well-documented religious principles that were persuasive to the courts, and so they were exempted from participating in SS. What well-documented religious principles do you adhere to that are so opposed to health insurance? Have you ever had health insurance before?

“If determined our national cost of food would be lowered by requirering Each American to by a set amount of meat products each month would you then also be in favor of forcing each of us regardless of religous beliefs to then buy pork and thus handle pork products???”

Bad example. Vegetables and fruit are almost always cheaper to produce than meat.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:32 pm

lucifer,
this issue was brought to the forefront by dems to use the template to deceive, but they want people to ignore the fact that hussein doesn’t have the power to dictate this in the first place…..your premise exposed and obliterated……the end……….

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:32 pm

( this will be fun)………..I still don’t think the guy was born here…………..But, I reading people who wouldn’t care. Be happier if he went around in Kenyan Garb.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:33 pm

Generation

“The supreme court has NEVER ruled in favor of forcing a private citizen to purchase a product mandated by the federal Government.

To attribute what Scalia said into that is not accurate. And you of the people on this blog are smart enough to know that.”

Cases uses general principles to apply to the specific.

The general principle was stated in the section dealing with commercial activities, religious beliefs and statute.

“Forcing one to purchase a product that contains an element oppossed to their religious beliefs has never been dealt with by the Supreme court yet, its coming but hasn’t happened yet”

Republicans have framed this into an issue about forcing religious employers of commercial activities to provide services which are against their beliefs. It has not, as far as I can tell, been about forcing employees of commercial activities owned by religious institutions to purchase policies containing provisions they find objectionable.

Or has the opposition moved the goal posts again?

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:34 pm

T. Head — “Single-payer is worse than employer based insurance coverage. One payer dictating what services can be covered, how much they should cost, how much should be reimbursed, how much tax is needed. How is a bureaucracy in any way more knowledgable about healthcare than actual healthcare providers?”

How is a health insurance system such as we have now in any way more knowedgeable about healthcare than actual healthcare providers? All the criticisms you have about government insurance are just as applicable to private insurance.

“Also, I’m not in Congress therefore I was in no position to ‘come to the table.’ I notified my Congressmen that I didn’t want this to pass, which was all I could do.”

Then it seems your complaints are somewhat misdirected.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
2:34 pm

Regarding the military on Jimmy Carter, Reagan, Obama, etc.

Carter gets an undue amount of criticism for the failed Iran rescue mission. Seriously. Is it really the man’s fault that a desert storm blew up and sheet just didn’t go right? By their very nature military missions are risky and to give great credit or fault to a president over a mission fail or success is kinda silly. The only thing I can fault Carter with is allowing the interservice rivalry and careerism to reach such a point that this venture had to be split up by all 4 military branches.

Same with Obama. Should he really get all that credit for a mission that 90% of us would have given the go ahead on? And its not as if the man himself tracked down UBL.

Reagan? Good grief if you look at the Grenada invasion it was very poorly managed and carried out with unnecessary loss of life. Same with the Marine barracks in Lebanon- another failure that you can attribute to Reagan. I’ll give Reagan 2 military failures but will credit him for the military buildup that eventually brought about the demise of the Soviet Union.

Too much credit or too much blame is given to various presidents on smaller scale military successes or failures where the potus really doesn’t have much to do with that mission’s success or failure.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:35 pm

md — “I’d say the jury is still out on that one……if the dems ultimately want single payer, baby steps may dictate companies dropping out one by one into the “pool”……then??”

Yes, well that wouldn’t be the ACA then, now would it? :roll:

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:36 pm

jay,
you need to have a conference call with your incestuous lib/dem party buddies and come up with some new template tricks, b/c everything you employ at the moment is being exposed by people like me……..good luck lib

md

February 15th, 2012
2:39 pm

“Thanks for that. I’m sure you know there was no intent to misrepresent. ”

Paul….actually got a chuckle from it…..reminded me of the game in school where we sit in a circle and whisper a short story to the kid next to us with the last one standing up and telling the story out loud……..it NEVER was the same story.

JB

February 15th, 2012
2:40 pm

Far left, about 5-10 %. Left, about another 10,maybe 15%……. And there is a reason for those low numbers. The mean word is “Loons”…. A kinder word is “misunderstood”.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
2:42 pm

Talking Head: http://thingprogress.org…..aannnnnndddd i stop reading

Mr. Burns aka Rupert Murdoch says “Exxxxxcellent….”

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
2:42 pm

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
2:31 pm

Yes I have had insurance, i have insurance now. Paid for it myself and everything! Even went thru and picked out the exact policy I wanted to pay for.

Why are you oppossed to any group religious or not having the right to choose which product they buy?

Are their any other industries or products you feel we should not be able to choose to purchase or not?

I have no religious views that would prohibit me from taking part in this HC plan without violating my faith.

However i am not in support of forcing any group to violate their faith through a government mandate.

Are you for the government mandating the violation of one faith in any and all cases or just in this case?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:43 pm

hey jay,
the guy who was in charge of saying that husseincare was going to save money is now out saying that it will exponentially increase costs…..what say you any libs here?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
2:45 pm

Billybob: b/c everything you employ at the moment is being exposed by people like me…

BOOGAH BOOGAH BOOGAH!

md

February 15th, 2012
2:46 pm

“Yes, well that wouldn’t be the ACA then, now would it?”

You said “aim of”…………

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:46 pm

Generation

Just to clarify your Amish point: it was not the case that an individual Amish person objected to SS withholding from his wages because of religious belief.

It was a case about an Amish guy running a business who didn’t want to pay taxes because he said it conflicted with his religion.

Guy woulda won, we’d have about 80 million Amish in this country.

Oscar

February 15th, 2012
2:49 pm

Just as the Constitution prohibits government from regulating religious organizations, it prevents religious organizations from regulating Government.

_____

That is nowhere near what the Constitution says about religion.

AT

February 15th, 2012
2:49 pm

Fred,
So in your view, people on welfare have no God given rights except those granted by dictate of the federal gov’t?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:49 pm

adam……kleenex?

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
2:50 pm

Yet you raised no issue when Jay did an entire article about Scalia’s words when in the article Jay used examples including throwing ones self on the burning body of ones husband in relation to contraception…..

Jay used examples of throwing ones self on the burning body of ones husband?

Did you even read Jay’s piece on that?

Jay cited the Supreme Courts decision — Or if a wife religiously believed it was her duty to burn herself upon the funeral pile of her dead husband; would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into practice?

Your comparison with this and Jay’s earlier piece is false at best, dishonest at worst. Eating is not a religious experience (well at least not in this sense anyway) while the practice of sati is, and it wasn’t Jay that brought this up, it was the SCOTUS.

Go play your gotcha games with someone else, sport.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:50 pm

md

I remember that game from elementary school. Seem to recall you could whisper something … let’s just say that the teacher wouldn’t like and a few kids later get to listen what came out.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
2:51 pm

media matters/nbc and their coordination with the white house…

hilarious.

You don’t know any actual progressives, do you?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:52 pm

hussein went around the country selling his obamacare on the fact that it would reduce costs…….now the guy who gave him that talking point is out saying that it will dramatically raise costs……jay, what say you or any of your ilk here……….like i said, his own words and actions will destroy this radical man and your ideology….can you accept that?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
2:53 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:33 pm

“Or has the opposition moved the goal posts again?”

1st, don’t ask me to take responsibility for the republican party. I don’t ask you to defend the actions or words of the democrats as a whole. And yes from your stated positions on this blog you are certainly more in tune with democrats than independants or republicans.

I can only speak for my issues.

The leaders of the church who use church funds to pay for the insurance coverage are being forced to spend church money to buy a product that contains a portion that the leaders of the church are morally against and religously against.

Therefore they ae being forced to pay for something they have as a main teaching point to their congregation. It in essence forces the church leaders to be hypocrites.

I have moved no goal post.

Is your position that you are in favor of the government forcing all of its citizens to purchase products? Not pay taxes but purchase products?

Notice i ain’t asking what the democrats position is, i am communicating with you therfore i am only concerned with your opinion and your defense of that opinion.

But apparently i am also a voice of teh Republican Party.

Simply amazing…. see why I don’t post nearly as much anymore!!!!

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
2:53 pm

I know this thread, she is dead. However, for anyone happening by, here’s a very good summary of the existing state insurance coverage provisions–see, in particular, the chart on Page 3.

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_ICC.pdf

(meant to re-post it earlier, since it was so germane to the discussion.)

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:54 pm

you deny this sfd?

YOUR party SUCKS! But MINE is GRRRRRREAT! (formerly That Black Guy)

February 15th, 2012
2:55 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
10:59 am
“can easily go into the 1% category. It does not mean they are rich,”

In what mindset is the top 1% not considered ‘rich’? Do some people think reality shows about housewives in Jersey or Beverly Hills are about average folks?

Paul, what is “rich”? I mean, is it income above a certain amount? If so, what is that amount?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
2:56 pm

You don’t know any actual progressives, do you?

Inside the bubble, man!

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:00 pm

irrelevant either way..,…….don’t play your games adam……

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
3:00 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
2:46 pm

Yeah, cause Insurance and taxes are the same thing?

When did products become taxes?

In this case seems that a majority of women want the contraception, so there would be no 80 million additional catholic business owners.

Anyway if they did President Obama said teh Insurance companies woul be forced to offer the free contraception but just as not part of the policy remember. And I bet none of those insurance companies would raise the premium rate to compansate for the free service do ya? Thus still forcing those oppossed to “pay” for the contraception.

Jay

February 15th, 2012
3:00 pm

Does this person who has you so hot and lathered up have a name, BillyBob?

godless heathen

February 15th, 2012
3:00 pm

Give up the “28 states require” line that the White House distributed as a talking point unless exemptions are going to be offered in the Fed version.

.kaiserhealthnews.org
Catholic Contraception Controversy: The State Of Pay

By Diane Webber

February 8th, 2012, 5:00 PM

Two Democratic governors — Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut and Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland — tried to tamp down the controversy over contraception coverage at Catholic institutions this week by quoting the same number: 28 states already require insurance coverage of contraception.

That’s true and it’s mentioned in a state policy brief by the reproductive health think tank, the Guttmacher Institute. But it’s not the whole story.

The same report shows that 20 of those 28 states have exemptions from the coverage policy for religious employers and insurers. Guttmacher categorizes eight of those exemptions as “expansive” – and both Connecticut and Maryland are in that category.

For Maryland, that means that most Catholic schools, universities and hospitals are not required to cover contraception for their employees. In Connecticut, religious insurers are required to offer contraceptive coverage through a subcontract, according to the report.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:01 pm

school is out libs……exposed much……again

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:02 pm

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
2:36 pm

jay,
you need to have a conference call with your incestuous lib/dem party buddies and come up with some new template tricks, b/c everything you employ at the moment is being exposed by people like me……..good luck lib
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You are truly a legend in your own mind. LOL I want 50 cents worth of whatever you are smoking. But just 50 cents, I don’t think I could handle a bucks worth……..

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:02 pm

“GOP follies continue with contraception issue”
This is why Obama has a chance to be re-elected. You have people in the media writing headlines like this. What about DEM follies? Wasn’t everyone blaming Bush when gas was $2.50 a gallon? What is it now? Funny that Jay talks about the ‘majority’ of the people do not support the Republicans on this issue. Guess what, the ‘majority’ didn’t support Obama with healthcare either. Debbie Wasserman Shultz is a headline a day, but very rarely do the main stream media talk about her. Nancy Pelosi says ‘we have to sign it to see what is in it first’ about the health care bill. Again, where is the main stream media on that comment?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
3:04 pm

Billybob: You have exposed NOTHING. But by all means, if you think you can expose lies by telling the truth, go for it. Just make sure it’s actually lies you’re exposed and truth you’re putting in it’s place. As far as I can tell, you are replacing truth with lies and calling it “exposing liberals.”

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:04 pm

AT

February 15th, 2012
2:49 pm

Fred,
So in your view, people on welfare have no God given rights except those granted by dictate of the federal gov’t?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you can show where I said that then please do. Better yet, if you can show by what twisted thought pattern you drew that conclusion from the statements I have made that would be even better. I always like to try to understand new lifeforms and their thought patterns no matter how illogical or strange they may be.

stands for decibels

February 15th, 2012
3:06 pm

deny what, BB?

that media matters, nbc and the White house actively coordinate their activities?

Adam

February 15th, 2012
3:06 pm

Wasn’t everyone blaming Bush when gas was $2.50 a gallon?

They were wrong then and wrong now.

Kamchak

February 15th, 2012
3:06 pm

Billybob: You have exposed NOTHING.

Oh, I don’t know ’bout that. I’d say his template is showing.

williebkind

February 15th, 2012
3:08 pm

So sex is more important than separation of church and state! You liberals sure do like sex to give up the constitution.

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
3:08 pm

BullyBog: You can’t be serious. Hussein? Hussein? What color is the sky in your world? (Please tell me your state prevents you from getting anywhere near a voting machine.)

Fred: Betcha had to look up “bric-a-brack,” didn’t you?

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:08 pm

Hey Jay, do a column on that congressman from Georgia who is afraid that Guam will ‘cap size’ if we put anymore troops there. Or Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee who asked the folks at NASA to ‘take a picture of the American flag we put on Mars’. The dems say some funny stuff, to bad your liberal convictions get in the way of your ‘journalism’.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
3:11 pm

“The constrictions in ObamaCare virtually guarantee that many employers will find it economic to pay the ObamaCare fines and abandon the obligation to provide insurance. That is a design feature of ObamaCare.”

That is pretty much what is expected in the field. Matter of fact its already happening. Obamacare gonna be good for Doomy. The rest of you not so much.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:12 pm

@ Adam,

I completely agree, the president can not (and should not) control gas prices. My point is that the media goes after Republicans for EVERYTHING, but dems always get a pass from the media. If they were more balanced, maybe they wouldn’t be losing so many viewers.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
3:13 pm

So sex is more important than separation of church and state!

You have identified the conservative viewpoint, not the liberal one. Denying contraception to people because “it is a license to do unnatural things” is all about the conservatives’ obsession with denying people the right to have sex except when married and trying to have a kid. The rest of the world considers sex a fact of life.

fedup

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

Insurance companies have very eagerly offered plans with contraception coverage because effective contraception reduces overall healthcare costs for women. Come on, we know that insurance companies are oh-so-fond of excluding anything that is not profitable for them to cover, and if contraception coverage hurt their bottomline, they would not cover it. That is why insurance companies have covered contraception for a long time and we women have come to accept it as an ordinary part of our health coverage. My contraception is not free. I do-pay a co-pay but the cost is less per month due to my healthcare coverage. I am fine with the co-pay.

Imagine if if my boss can decide to nix parts of my healthcare coverage because of his religion preferences. That is abhorrent to me. It is not that I am looking for something for free which seems to be a common slur in the comments on this blog. It is the idea that someone else’s religion can directly affect MY healthcare. That is what is making me so very angry.

I am an independent who would be very willing to vote for a practical, rational, conservative Republican with some creative ideas who is a dynamic, courteous leader. This contraception garbage is p*ssing me off and repulsing me. If this nonsense continues, I am willing to take 4 more years of President Obama.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

sfd…..meet valerie jarrett

JB

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

At the end of the day, you gotta feel good they’re are only really 5 or 6 loons posting here. Just robo posting.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

Generation

Hear a lot of repeats here of what the Party puts out. I didn’t accuse you, notice, I asked if this was coming from the Party.

“The leaders of the church who use church funds to pay for the insurance coverage are being forced to spend church money ”

Not the case. It’s the commercial activity that’s engaged in commerce. Not the church. I’d find it surprising if, say, Catholic Hospital of Baltimore was set up so church funds flowed to the business and the church was legally on the hook for the actions of the doctors.

“Is your position that you are in favor of the government forcing all of its citizens to purchase products? Not pay taxes but purchase products?”

Well of course I do, in the matter of health care. I hold it a very conservative position that people be responsible for themselves and not live a fun lifestyle, then get sick and expect other people to pay to take care of them. I don’t see it as moral, either, for someone to say “I don’t want to buy health insurance. I want to race motorcycles. (like a caller on NPRs Diane Rehm show did.). When confronted with the idea if he injured himself the panelists would be forced to pay for his care he said “I never thought of it that way”

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:15 pm

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
3:08 pm
Fred: Betcha had to look up “bric-a-brack,” didn’t you?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No Not at all. I’m used to transposing for people who can’t spell. I knew you meant bric-a-brac, even though you can’t spell the word. I also am quite familiar with the definition.

Nice your drive by came back around. I’m always happy to play with new trolls.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
3:15 pm

My point is that the media goes after Republicans for EVERYTHING, but dems always get a pass from the media.

This is not true. And the only reason Fox gets more viewers is because of how much ENTERTAINMENT is there, versus actual unbiased reporting (which is mostly NOT present on the network). It also still does not have more viewers than the broadcast networks anyway.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:15 pm

You know, there is some pretty bad schnit going on over in Iran. Maybe the main stream media will pick up on it soon instead of discussing what teams Obama has picked in his March Madness pool.

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
3:16 pm

You just have to ask yourself if Rick Santorum has ever masterbated in his life :-)

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:17 pm

lucifer, 3:08
good one……….?????

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:18 pm

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:15 pm

You know, there is some pretty bad schnit going on over in Iran. Maybe the main stream media will pick up on it soon instead of discussing what teams Obama has picked in his March Madness pool.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Really? You actually POSTED that? March madness is still a bit off there Sport. you cons will believe and post ANYTHING regardless of how stupid it is………

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:19 pm

Your Party

“Paul, what is “rich”? I mean, is it income above a certain amount? If so, what is that amount?”

How about if, in a population of 300,000,000, you’re making more than 299.700,000…. and if your annual income is the same as about seven in the middle, then you can call it rich, really well off, super comfortable, or any other descriptive terrm.

But if you’re in the top 1% and feel inadequate and envious of those making a million a year and think they’re the rich ones, that’s okay, too.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:19 pm

adam,
keep talking about the media, you expose yourself better than anyone else could…..thank you

really?

February 15th, 2012
3:19 pm

Are we really this backwards? Amazing.

md

February 15th, 2012
3:20 pm

“Not the case. It’s the commercial activity that’s engaged in commerce. Not the church. I’d find it surprising if, say, Catholic Hospital of Baltimore was set up so church funds flowed to the business and the church was legally on the hook for the actions of the doctors.”

Might want to revisit that one Paul…..in the case of self-insureds, the “compromise” requires the church to pay either way.

AT

February 15th, 2012
3:20 pm

Fred,

You said: “Once they receive Gov’t money, they have become a gov’t supplicant first (which means they have to follow the rules) ”

So, people on welfare, “receiving gov’t money”, according to your statement above, are “gov’t supplicant(s) first”, their God given rights of free speech, religion, etc. are secondary.

No need to get upset, just pushing the debate…:).

md

February 15th, 2012
3:23 pm

“So, people on welfare, “receiving gov’t money”, according to your statement above, are “gov’t supplicant(s) first”, their God given rights of free speech, religion, etc. are secondary.”

Actually, yes…..check out the latest union claims in CT and MI in regards to folks on Medicaid that care for family members……..they are now “gov’t employees”.

I kid you not…..the slippery slope just gave way.

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
3:25 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

So Boston College, Holy Cross, Gonzaga are not going to be included in being forced to provide contraception for their employees.

These are all colleges that have members of the Catholic Church installed as the leadership, as well as stating Catholic principles as being part of the mission statement of the college.

So they should be forced to eductae their students one thing and proclaim to stand for one thing but be forced by the federal govenment to betray their teachings and their faith?

Do you honestly have that little regard for others beliefs and what they mean to them?

Or do you have compassion for their feelings but feel the government has teh right to tell them what beleifs they can practice and which ones they cannot?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:28 pm

No AT you aren’t “pushing the debate” you are comparing apples and oranges. just because they are both fruits doesn’t mean that if I think orange skins are bitter and suck the moisture out of my mouth means that I think the same about apples skins.

Religious entities IE Churches receive a lot of leeway due to the First Amendment. you can’t force a Catholic or Baptisit, or Muslim church to make a female a priest. A Muslim or Jew to eat pork, ect………. but when ANY of those groups move BEYOND their “Church” and open up secular businesses and receive Gov’t money for them, just as any other business, they are then subject to US labor Laws. Did you know that preachers (at least Christian preachers, I don’t know about the others) do not have to pay unemployment tax or Social Security if they don’t want to? But you better believe the administrator of a Baptist Hospital who ISN’T a preacher sure as hell does.

The Catholic hospitals do not even have to offer insurance for their employees. But once the DO offer insurance, then they have to follow the same damn laws as every one else.

What is so hard to understand about that?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:29 pm

md

February 15th, 2012
3:23 pm
Actually, yes…..check out the latest union claims in CT and MI in regards to folks on Medicaid that care for family members……..they are now “gov’t employees”.

I kid you not…..the slippery slope just gave way.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Are you crapping me? Can you link a source? LOL I don’t even know where to begin to try to google that……….

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:33 pm

md

How so? Who are the ’self insureds? The employees of the business?

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
3:34 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm

And just so you know…. we all hear alot of dem talking points in your post as well, although you will claim to be an independant.

Doesn’t mean the thoughts are not what you feel or believe. Also doesn’t mean i would ask you to speak for the opposition. As I do not expect any of us to follow lockstep with any party. But this blog has certainly lowered my expectations to that.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:36 pm

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
3:34 pm

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:14 pm
As I do not expect any of us to follow lockstep with any party.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well you are certainly one of the few Republicans to feel that. Most of you call ANYONE who doesn’t walk lockstep with the far right a “lib” or “leftist’ or worse.

AT

February 15th, 2012
3:36 pm

Ok Fred, sorry to get ya riled…have a good afternoon.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:37 pm

Generation$crewed

What a church does with its employees, I don’t much care. Like the recent case about labor law not applying to religious institutions when it comes to firing..

But if a church decides to set up a commercial enterprise, that’s an entirely different arena.

md

February 15th, 2012
3:39 pm

I recommend folks do their own research, but this is the gist:

“Robert Haynes and his wife, Patricia, take care of their cerebral palsy-stricken son and daughter in their Macomb Township home. Taxpayers help out with monthly checks to the Haynes family. The checks, which are sent by the state, allow them to keep their son and daughter at home instead of having them institutionalized.

But some of the taxpayer dollars that are supposed to go to the Haynes family are being siphoned off. The state takes a $30 monthly deduction from the checks and sends it to the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). This deduction is the result of the forced unionization of home health care workers that came about in a deal between unions and politicians in Lansing.

“We’re not even home health care workers. We’re just parents taking care of our kids,” said Robert Haynes, a retired Detroit police officer. “Our daughter is 34 and our son is 30. They have cerebral palsy. They are basically like 6-month-olds in adult bodies. They need to be fed and they wear diapers. We could sure use that $30 a month that’s being sent to the union.””

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
3:39 pm

G%$ — “Why are you oppossed to any group religious or not having the right to choose which product they buy?”

Because birth control is mandated coverage. Religious groups don’t get a pass on the law.

“Are their any other industries or products you feel we should not be able to choose to purchase or not?”

I think you should be forced to buy a tinfoil hat.

“I have no religious views that would prohibit me from taking part in this HC plan without violating my faith.”

Good.

“However i am not in support of forcing any group to violate their faith through a government mandate.”

Fortunately, that’s not what was happening.

“Are you for the government mandating the violation of one faith in any and all cases or just in this case?”

Groups don’t have rights. Individuals do. Read your Constitution.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:39 pm

Generation

And when I came on the blog in the Bush years, the Left vilified me as a neocon.

Seems a lot of people want to take a person’s views on a matter and slot them into a party.

But in all fairness, since I came on this blog the Republican Party has moved so far Right it’s a caricature of its former self. Which probably explains why many Republicans see me as a Democratic lib.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
3:40 pm

AT — “their God given rights of free speech, religion, etc. are secondary.”

There’s no such thing. The Constitution is quite clear on the point that We The People gave ourselves our rights.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:41 pm

I wonder what the ‘Occu-Stool’ protesters stance on this is as it seems they are the think tank for the democratic party.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:41 pm

md

You may recommend people do their own research, but if your post comes across pretty unclearly, asking clarification is not exactly the same as asking for research.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:41 pm

FYI……statists and all their minions DO believe that that they know better, which is what you are experienceing and seeing in the White House today gen$crewed……….jay and all the libs on this site seem to prescribe to this doctrine and folks like me don’t agree with or accept this ideology and we believe that the individual has the right to make his own decisions and way in life…….obama’s words, ego, and statist’ actions will lose in nov………and right now, millions like me all over the US are fighting for conservatism which will be the platform that the new repubublican president will follow to lead this country back to prominence and strength, not through more central gov’t planning and division like barrack hussein obama, but by unleashing the individual………..even jay’s blogs can’t stop the conservative wave that is coming…..remember libs, that your leaders created this one…….

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:43 pm

Thanks md. I’ll Google Robert Haynes and see where that leads me.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
3:44 pm

md

Did I misunderstand your 3:39, or did you post that as having something to do with your 3:20 about whether or not the Catholic Church comingles funds with its commercial enterprises and is legally responsible for the actions of the employees?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:47 pm

Yeah md, that’s just crazy: http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16001

It’s stupid abuses like that which will lead the uninformed to brand all unions as ‘evil.”

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
3:48 pm

“Religious entities IE Churches receive a lot of leeway due to the First Amendment. you can’t force a Catholic or Baptisit, or Muslim church to make a female a priest.”

FRED: Is this a new spelling for Baptist? Seems I’m not the only one hitting the tequila and keyboard at the same time…. as Jon Stewart would say … Slap, Punch, Pow!, %&#% … BACK AT YA, BIG BOY!!

williebkind

February 15th, 2012
3:49 pm

Adam

February 15th, 2012
3:13 pm

No Adam, it is just like the liberal interpretation of church and state, the 2nd admendment, and no one is denying anyone health coverage. You liberals are lying again…NO ONE IS BEING DENIED HEALTH COVERAGE.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:49 pm

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:41 pm

I wonder what the ‘Occu-Stool’ protesters stance on this is as it seems they are the think tank for the democratic party.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Stupid assed comments like this is why no one can even begin to take you seriously. You aren’t looking to “debate” or have a conversation, you are merely spewing vomitus and trolling.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:51 pm

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
3:48 pm

“Religious entities IE Churches receive a lot of leeway due to the First Amendment. you can’t force a Catholic or Baptisit, or Muslim church to make a female a priest.”

FRED: Is this a new spelling for Baptist? Seems I’m not the only one hitting the tequila and keyboard at the same time…. as Jon Stewart would say … Slap, Punch, Pow!, %&#% … BACK AT YA, BIG BOY!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Beer brother, beer. Tequila makes my clothes fall off. Since I’m old and fat that causes problems with the neighbors , they call the cops………..

williebkind

February 15th, 2012
3:52 pm

“The rest of the world considers sex a fact of life.”
The rest of the world does not have the Constitution of the United States and that is a fact of life.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:55 pm

@ Fred
I don’t debate with idiots. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.

Fred = Occu-Stool protester.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:57 pm

i take it back…..obama is not the only one who will help with his downfall……….maxine waters telling republicans to go to hell because they are demons in the same sentence announcing that, because barney frank is retiring, she will be the next chairman of the Senate Finance Committee……this is the woman who is on video telling private executives that if they didn’t do what she wanted, she would socialize their company………see, sometimes you don’t have to expose the left’s agenda, they do it themselves……right adam?

Fred

February 15th, 2012
3:57 pm

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
3:55 pm

@ Fred
I don’t debate with idiots. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.

Fred = Occu-Stool protester.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disgusted= mindless troll.

http://www.imagepoop.com/image/1889/I-See-Stupid-People.html

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
3:58 pm

must go, enjoy libs

AT

February 15th, 2012
3:59 pm

Joe,
Not really.

The Declaration of Independence declares: “they(men) are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”

The Constitution was created to build a gov’t that was prevented from trampling these rights. The Constitution does not grant us the right of speech and religion. Our Creator did that. The Constitution restricts the gov’t from restricting them. Obama has lamented this before, calling them a “series of negative rights”.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:05 pm

at,
nice job…..

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
4:06 pm

The GOP and the Catholic Bishops cries are STRAWMEN. Both groups have been amazingly and astonishing silent on the issue of sex abuse in the Catholic church whis is rampant in its wide spread occurrence. There are thousands of America’s children who have been abused by these monsters which both groups have chosen to remain quiet about or even discuss. see Ajc story today concerning this very subject! where are the BIshop’s outrage on this?

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/jury-in-pa-priest-1349940.html

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
4:06 pm

FRED: I’m going to “troll” this site more often. You’re fun to play with (however, I do admit, you make yourself a pretty easy target) :-) Yeah, and stick with beer. The sight of you running naked around the neighborhood shouting GOP slogans would, well, wouldn’t raise an eyebrow in my community. We’re surrounded by Republicans and fully realize they are capable of just about anything.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:08 pm

bernie……apples and oranges

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
4:11 pm

@ Fred

You amuse me with your quips of intelligence. But really….a mindless troll? Can’t you do better than that?

Fred = Angry Occu-Stool protester

Adam

February 15th, 2012
4:12 pm

NO ONE IS BEING DENIED HEALTH COVERAGE.

Nor is anyone forcing the churches to pay for everyone to have birth control, whether or not they want it.

However, your side has PROPOSED to deny contraceptive coverage ACROSS THE BOARD to satisfy the Catholic church. They have gone further to suggest that ANY health care law provision that is morally objectionable to a person running a business could be ignored by that business for ALL their employees. For example, vaccination coverage could be denied for people who don’t believe in those.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:13 pm

media matters will be the most transparent that the public will ever see obama and that ain’t good for democrats in nov…….you hear me jay?

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
4:16 pm

BillyBOB….ask the children if its apples or oranges! why not leave your children alone with the local priest and in time you will have change of heart.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
4:16 pm

Billybob: Ok, town crier…. *pat pat*. Here’s a Reagan doll. Go play nice now.

marc

February 15th, 2012
4:19 pm

Oh Good Lord…..if alterboys could get preggos…Bishops would be handing out the morning after pill as a sacrament……..give me a break.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:21 pm

center for american progress………media matters……….barrack obama……….nytimes……….going to get ugly on this one jay……..out

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
4:22 pm

BillyBob thinks its okay for priest to sexually abuse children. oh my, he shares the same opinion as the Catholic Bishops, oops! I forgot.

GT

February 15th, 2012
4:22 pm

Evangelicals and Catholics are two vastly different groups. Evangelicals walk lock step, most of them made adult decisions to join on their own free will. Catholics are generally several generations born into the church as babies, and as they reach their maturity may in a majority of the cases not totally buy into the beliefs of the church. A priest may say he represents 10 million Catholics but in truth he doesn’t represent anyone except the church writing the check. Now I imagine Republican know that but from what I am seeing you have one well funded candidate and three living by their bootstraps. So for a little indignation about an imagined enemy of the Catholic Church that Church might just write that candidate a campaign contribution that comes from the same pocket that may have use money to buy contraceptives, that same day. You won’t find that in the Evangelist as a whole, fewer numbers but to the point of superstition they will not take or support birth control.

When you see real Catholics or minorities lining up with Republicans in this day and time, you have a real story on your hands. This is not what is happening. Nothing would help the Republican image more than to attract a more moderate group like the Catholics, but it was like Rick Perry lining up in New York to protest antisemitic behavior of the Arabs in the UN. I give these guys credit for the shot but you are what you are and you aren’t fooling anybody, even Newt converting. I’m sure the Catholics were dancing to see his multi married soul show up and announce they were the perfect church of his type.

Adam

February 15th, 2012
4:23 pm

I love how after YEARS of being targetted by media matters, fox finally goes to war with them and you get a few people who think the jihad against the liberal media is unstoppable and will crush them within a week. I bet they think they’ll also be greeted as liberators :roll: .

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:24 pm

free speech adam…….

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
4:24 pm

The Bishops are wrong about contraception and they are certainly worng about the handling of the sexual abuse of children in the church worldwide. I think Billiybob needs a Transfer to Foxnews no one would know. :)

Adam

February 15th, 2012
4:25 pm

Oh don’t get me wrong Billybob. I LOVE hearing you speak. I absolutely love how much Media Matters is making you squirm.

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
4:27 pm

where is Rick’s Santorum outrage about the sexual abuse of children in PA? or Newt’s concerning this grave injustice to the most defenseless ones in our society?

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:33 pm

adam, you said yourself that it was media matters targeting fox….now media matters is in the white house trying to shut down dissent and hussein is trying to ‘fundamentally change’ the country and no lib can tell me what that means 3+ years in……….i would say you are on the right track my friend…….now, head back in the sand……

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
4:34 pm

AT — “Joe, Not really.”

Yes, really.

“The Declaration of Independence declares: “they(men) are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”

The Declaration of Independence is a beautiful and timeless document, but it has no force of law in this country. Your citation is irrelevant to the point.

“The Constitution was created to build a gov’t that was prevented from trampling these rights.”

Incorrect. The Constitution clearly states that We The People grant OURSELVES the rights and privileges therein outlined.

“The Constitution does not grant us the right of speech and religion.”

Yes, it does, and quite explicitly, too.

“Our Creator did that.”

No.

“The Constitution restricts the gov’t from restricting them. Obama has lamented this before, calling them a “series of negative rights”.

You are clearly misinformed and need to read the Constitution.

Billybob

February 15th, 2012
4:34 pm

bernie meet strawman…….too much fun here, but must go now…..bye libs

Mighty Righty

February 15th, 2012
4:35 pm

Are black southern baptists evangelicals? Was Dr. Martin Luther King an evangelical? Before you answer, look up the word “evangelical” in any dictionary. As for the polls on contrception, I don’t know of any religion other than catholic that is opposed to contraception. But the results of all polls is determined by how the question is asked. Ask anyone if the government should have the right to require compliance with a law that they oppose on religious grounds let alone a mandate by a government official based on his or her personal interpretation of the constitution without input from any other elected official and see what kind of poll data you get. If Obama thinks he can get away with stepping on freedom of religion rights, let him try.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
4:44 pm

This just in…..Obama says he has made it easier to navigate government web sites!!!! Jay…Jay…where are you…we need a column on this too.

Change you can step in.

Fred

February 15th, 2012
4:46 pm

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
4:06 pm

FRED: I’m going to “troll” this site more often. You’re fun to play with (however, I do admit, you make yourself a pretty easy target) :-) Yeah, and stick with beer. The sight of you running naked around the neighborhood shouting GOP slogans would, well, wouldn’t raise an eyebrow in my community. We’re surrounded by Republicans and fully realize they are capable of just about anything.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Cool. It’s been a while since I was called a republican. Been called a lib and a leftist at least 15 times today alone though.

Glad you are sticking around, that would then make NOT a troll. :D

Fred

February 15th, 2012
4:48 pm

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
4:11 pm

@ Fred

You amuse me with your quips of intelligence. But really….a mindless troll? Can’t you do better than that?

Fred = Angry Occu-Stool protester
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sorry, it’s not me who needs to do better to get an upgrade. You are merely a mindless troll. No better no worse.

AT

February 15th, 2012
4:52 pm

From the Constitution preamble: “and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves”. There is a big difference between securing rights granted to you (by Our Creator) and granting them to ourselves.

Again, the Constitution established rules and limitations for the gov’t not the people.

I think you have misquoted the Constitution here.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
4:58 pm

“You’re just a toadie who fronts for the evil rich”- Thomas Jefferson

Fred

February 15th, 2012
5:01 pm

Jump upstairs and play AT……..

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
5:04 pm

If you Google, ” Sex Abuse in the Catholic Church” the results count is 22,100,000 (twenty-two million, one-hundreed thousand ) articles.

That is an amazing and extremely OUTRAGEOUSLY high number of articles coming from a religious organization managed by the same MALE Bishops who are so outrage about Pres. Obama’s plan for womens contraception.

The HYPOCRACY is ASTOUNDING in comparison. People who live in GLASS houses should be more thoughtful.

Martin Williams

February 15th, 2012
5:07 pm

The GOP is completely silly. With all kinds issues facing this country and the rest of the world and they are talking about contraceptives. Being a Catholic for over fifty years and I know 90% + Catholics do use contraceptives. Lets talk about world poverty and hunger, thou shall feed the hungry and shelter the homeless.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
5:16 pm

AT — “From the Constitution preamble: “and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves”. There is a big difference between securing rights granted to you (by Our Creator) and granting them to ourselves.”

The Preamble contains no force of law, and has never been held by any court in the country to *be* law. However, the First Amendment contains the force of law and has repeatedly been held to be such by courts of competent jurisdiction. You are simply mistaken.

“Again, the Constitution established rules and limitations for the gov’t not the people.”

No. The Constitution also clearly specifies that the consent of We The People are the source for all enumerated and implicit rights, as well as all the powers We The People permit government to use in our name.

“I think you have misquoted the Constitution here.”

Your thoughts are in error.

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
5:18 pm

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
3:39 pm

“Because birth control is mandated coverage. Religious groups don’t get a pass on the law.”

How can you make this statement then in response to my comment (the next one in quotes) follow it up with this…..
What I said……“However i am not in support of forcing any group to violate their faith through a government mandate.”
What you responded with…..”Fortunately, that’s not what was happening.”

Did you seriously forget that you wrote birth control is a mandated coverage?

Or is it your contention that it is not a main portion of the teachings of faith given by the Catholic Church?

Gotta be one or your statements kinda don’t go together!

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
5:19 pm

G$, stand by for reply.

Disgusted

February 15th, 2012
5:21 pm

Give this group this benefit, give that group food stamps, exempt that group from taxes, or whatever that group wants, you give it to them. The theory that most Americans are single issue and if you find out what the single issue is and give them that, or, by the same token this contraception bit with Santorum, you establish the notion with the help of your willing accomplices in the media that Rick Santorum and the Republican Party want to deny women birth control pills. All you have to do is make the charge. Now, they happen to have an interview that Santorum gave years ago in which he talked about this within the context of states’ rights. He said if the state wants to ban contraception, they should have the right to do that.

Well, that becomes: Santorum supports banning contraception. So to the people in this country who do nothing but have sex mindlessly day in and day out and to whom birth control is only a means of eliminating consequences, you tell them that the Republican Party wants to take away their means of no consequences, and I don’t care what else is going on in the world, 300 nuclear weapons, tax increases, economy being destroyed, you tell that bunch of mindless, brain-dead twerps that they’re not gonna get their birth control pills, and that’s all that will matter. They’re gonna vote for Obama on that alone, and that’s what they’re counting on. Barack Obama and the Democrat Party are aiming at the lowest common denominator. They have spent decades dumbing down the American people in the education system that they run and that they have run.

Campaign for the stupid. Get the votes, buy the votes of the stupid. That’s what they’re banking on here. They firmly believe that the number of Americans educated and informed is dwarfed by the idiots. And they’re not high-minded. They don’t care to get elected with a mandate. They don’t care to get the votes of the best and brightest. They don’t care who the electorate is. They just want the votes. They don’t care if they’re even legitimate votes, for crying out loud.

It is a game that the democratic party is playing. Unfortunately, most libs are the lowest common denominator, and as long as they get whatever they want for free, they will play the game until the end.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
5:22 pm

How can you make this statement then in response to my comment (the next one in quotes) follow it up with this…..
What I said……“However i am not in support of forcing any group to violate their faith through a government mandate.”
What you responded with…..”Fortunately, that’s not what was happening.”

“Did you seriously forget that you wrote birth control is a mandated coverage?”

Nope. You simply don’t follow. Yes, birth control is a mandated coverage. No, a group is not being forced to violate their faith. Just so we’re all clear on this, groups don’t have rights under the Constitution. Individuals do.

“Or is it your contention that it is not a main portion of the teachings of faith given by the Catholic Church? Gotta be one or your statements kinda don’t go together!”

No, you simply don’t understand what I’m saying. The Catholic Church *does not have rights.* Individual Catholics do, just as any other American. But *groups,* including the Catholic Church, do not.

Generation$crewed

February 15th, 2012
5:37 pm

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
5:22 pm

Simply wow, you cannot be this simple minded. You acknowledge that groups are made of individuals, so then there are individuals whose rights are being threatened, not as a group but each member of the group as an individuals. It appears more for argument sake is your purpose.

If one single person has their religious rights trampled on it is wrong. In this case it is an entire group of religious leaders who as individuals are claiming their cival and religous rights are being threatened here.

Why do those individuals faith not matter to you?

If an individual Catholic is in charge of lets say University of Gonzaga, or Georgetown University, for argument sake then the individual or individuals who are in charge of paying salaries and/or paying insurance premiums will most certainly be forced to pay for an action which they AS AN INDIVIDUAL disagree with and furthermore find to be in vioaltion of their faith. Thus they as an individual are signing off on the money of the Catholic church to be used for a practice which the church and the individual teach is against their faith.

Bernie

February 15th, 2012
5:41 pm

Seems to me that the GOP is now a honor student from the Karen Handel Public Policy school of Thought. :)

Lose at all costs…..

LUCIFER

February 15th, 2012
5:41 pm

Listen up. Religion is a man-made invention. There is NO god. There is No Jesus. There is No Muhammad, or any other superstitious entity to believe in. As a matter of fact, religion poisons everything (Chris Hutchins is smiling). So, remove all this claptrap about celestrial boogeymen and you are left with reality. And the reality is that priests like to rape young boys! Who gives a crap about what the Catholic Church, or any other religious institution, thinks about contraception. Notice the contradiction: No birth control, perhaps an unwanted baby. But no abortion either. Seems contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies and therefore unwanted abortions. Like everything else connected to religious teachings … it just doesn’t make much sense :-(

deegee

February 15th, 2012
5:46 pm

There are 3 issues that I find disturbing about the Catholic Church. Celibacy for priests, no birth control, and hiding out predator priests. I am a Catholic and I sat in church on Saturday evening and observed that 75% of everyone in attendance was over the age of 50. What do they care about birth control? After what we have experienced over the last two weeks, I doubt that a young, fertile person of either gender that is looking for religion is going to pick the Catholics. And believe me, the Catholics could use every new dues paying member they can get.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
5:46 pm

G$ — “Simply wow, you cannot be this simple minded.”

I’m surprised by how simple-minded you appear to be.

“You acknowledge that groups are made of individuals, so then there are individuals whose rights are being threatened, not as a group but each member of the group as an individuals. It appears more for argument sake is your purpose.”

Nope. Show me where in the Constitution group rights of any kind are mentioned.

“If one single person has their religious rights trampled on it is wrong.”

I agree. But that’s not what’s happening here. No one is being forced to do anything that’s counter to their religious principles. No one is being forced to use contraception.

“In this case it is an entire group of religious leaders who as individuals are claiming their cival and religous rights are being threatened here.”

Religions don’t have rights. Churches don’t have rights. Individuals do have rights.

“Why do those individuals faith not matter to you?”

Incorrect presumption. I am completely supportive of individuals’ right to practice their religion freely and without disruption. However, you can’t show me anywhere in that legislation where the INDIVIDUAL right to freely pursue a religion of choice is being infringed upon. This cuckoo yip-yap about the freedom of churches and congregations has no Constitutional basis or support whatsoever, and I challenge you to show me different.

“If an individual Catholic is in charge of lets say University of Gonzaga, or Georgetown University, for argument sake then the individual or individuals who are in charge of paying salaries and/or paying insurance premiums will most certainly be forced to pay for an action which they AS AN INDIVIDUAL disagree with and furthermore find to be in vioaltion of their faith.”

Irrelevant under SCOTUS decision. You may remember that thread from here about a week ago.

If a law is generally applicable across society and has no overtly-anti-religious provision or purpose, then provisions which *incidentally* burden a religious person cannot be said to infringe upon their free practice of their religion. And just so you know, Antonin Scalia wrote that opinion.

“Thus they as an individual are signing off on the money of the Catholic church to be used for a practice which the church and the individual teach is against their faith.”

Irrelevant. Let me know if you need a link to the text of Scalia’s written decision.

md

February 15th, 2012
5:56 pm

“It’s stupid abuses like that which will lead the uninformed to brand all unions as ‘evil.””

And it’s crap like this that I brand many 3rd party unions as “greedy”. I have no problem with local unions between the employees and the company…..in house matters for those “in house”. 3rd party unions take it to another level entirely…..it becomes about them vs those they represent, nothing more than a wedge between 2 parties that will pay the ultimate price if agreements aren’t beneficial to both sides.

ThereGoYou

February 15th, 2012
6:06 pm

What’s wrong with not forcing Catholic Charities to pay for human rights violations?

orly fancypants

February 15th, 2012
9:35 pm

This is wrong…then any business can say they aren’t covering operations because it is against their beliefs…This is going way too far.

orly fancypants

February 15th, 2012
9:46 pm

However it is unconstitutional for Congress to make any laws regarding beliefs or regarding any established religion…It says so…IN THE CONSTITUTION…I am a patriot first because when I go to the ballpark and put my hand on my heart and listen to the national anthem or when one makes an oath of Citizenship…one is not pledging my allegiance to one’s Pope…I am a Catholic…but I am an American first. I understand the concerns of people with moral beliefs. First of all being Catholic I have always questioned the moral superiority of people of have no families of their own who quote unquote are suppose to be celibate anyway. I know I have lived with people …I am a former priest myself. I left because I didn’t think in good conscience I could good give advice about marriage and family life or dictate directives from the Roman Curia, many of whom are not celibate and many of whom are wealthy beyond means.

orly fancypants

February 15th, 2012
9:51 pm

I laugh at how Republicans are all of a sudden defending us Catholics….when for so many years much of their Rhetoric has been anti-Catholic…It’s just another pandering to get Catholic Votes. Correction…whit Catholic votes…white male Catholic votes. Those of us Catholics who work with the poor and have worked in overpopulated parts of the world know better.

orly fancypants

February 15th, 2012
9:58 pm

Well Disgusted…then why aren’t more people up and arms about Viagra sice it encourages as you put it ” endless sex day and night”.

AT

February 15th, 2012
10:16 pm

Joe,
I’ve quoted the Constitution to show you where you are misquoting. Please provide quotes where “we the people” “grant” ourselves rights. The Bill of Rights amendments all restrict the gov’t from oppressing rights that the people already have. It is there to read.

ld

February 16th, 2012
12:01 am

I strongly suspect that even a lot of those “values voters” that SAY publically that they support the GOP anti-contraception stance will, in the privacy of the voting booth, send shock waves up the GOP arse–the females, for obvious reasons, specifically including but certainly not limited to FREEDOM–the males, think child support.

ld

February 16th, 2012
12:15 am

If the “values voters” trust so much in God that they insist on putting it (In God We Trust) on US currency–notwithstanding that the love of money is, supposedly the root of evil–then

why can’t they trust God to see that the contraception fails when God wants it to fail?

why can’t they trust God to decide who should bear children or not when it comes to fertility treatments, artificial insemination?

why can’t they trust God to defend the US — why must we spend so much money on the Department of Defense that it has been impossible to get an audit of it since, well, forever and there is so much cash floating around in war zones that millions just disappear into thin air?

The LOUDEST and pushiest of the “values voters” must actually be insecure in their beliefs because they are usually too obnoxious to expect to be converting others to their cause–that leaves that they must be trying to convince themselves that they are the good people.

Mostly they just sound likes the bully on the playground.

ld

February 16th, 2012
12:18 am

Why do those primitive minded evangelical folk that trust the Lord so much– and whose bible admonishes them to cry at a birth and rejoice at a funeral –want so much MODERN medical intervention to prevent death? Why do they not leave that up to God?

Z

February 16th, 2012
4:24 am

Me thinks these Republican Politicians(MEN) are so out of touch with reality that they have forgotten that women have the right to vote. No woman in her right mind is going to vote for any of this bunch of haters of women. Just who do they think they are to dictate to women what they can and cannot have for Health-care and Contraception. Good God their wives must make them sleep on top of the sheets or most likely in the next room and can you blame them..who would want to sleep with a one of these clueless icky old republican fools that are in congress now.

Joel Edge

February 16th, 2012
5:39 am

“if Republicans want to turn this trend around they better start doing things differently.”
Pass.

Duper

February 16th, 2012
7:37 am

It’s not paranoia if they’re really after you…
…see FOX NEWS and other apparatchik targets

Adam

February 16th, 2012
8:23 am

Look, this idea that somehow the Church is being forced to do something against their will by having health care coverage AT ALL is the issue. The old white guys who run it think there should BE no health care law, and are trying to twist the issue into a pretzel to make it into an infringement on their religious freedom that they cannot, as a regular employer (such as with a Taco Bell) deny certain coverage they disagree with.

Then Obama comes out, turns out, YES THEY CAN deny coverage they don’t agree with, but they can’t stop the insurance companies from picking up the slack without charging the employer, or the employee, any more or less money. The only thing the Bishops see wrong with this is that they cannot enforce their religious belief that NO ONE should have contraception coverage.

Precipitate « What Is Local?

February 17th, 2012
10:28 am

[...] he agreed that it was a health issue not a religious one, he was not particularly concerned about the contraception debate until condoms were [...]

MTATL67

February 20th, 2012
5:24 pm

If you look at the polling numbers turn out is extremely low. That tells me that in disgust with the extremism of the Republican party the moderate Republicans are staying home. They could very well vote for the President. Latest polls show the President more than beats Santorum he spanks him 48% to 38%. Santorum would like to turn this country is some twisted Christian version of Iran.