As Good a Conspiracy Theory as any to Explain Obama’s Attack on the Catholic Church [Reader Post]

Loading

President Obama’s recent decision to force the Catholic Church to violate their religious beliefs and provide contraceptives and morning after pills in their health care packages surprised me. No, I was not surprised to see this as a logical progression of Obamacare – I was more surprised by the timing. I am among those who believe that Obama will get re-elected in 2012 no matter what happens in the next few months – that will be a separate post in it itself. Without going too much in depth into what I plan to write a big part of my theory comes down to two observations: What is Barack Obama’s greatest love and passion in his life? Barack Obama. And what is his greatest talent, the one thing that sets him above the rest? Convincing other people that they should love Barack Obama almost as much as he does. In other words, he has the perfect skill set for getting elected to public office, regardless of experience or his record. Given how Catholics came out in support of Obama in 2008, why would he spit in the church’s eye right now and risk alienating this voter base with just a few months to election?

It makes absolutely no sense, unless you look at the bigger picture. Obama’s re-election campaign unofficially kicked off with the Occupy Wall Street movement. It got the unionistas and professional leftists out to energize his "young and stupid" demographic that had lost a lot of its enthusiasm for Obama, and also to help set his 2012 campaign theme of envy and resentment toward your neighbor. Does that sound like an over the top statement? The president can’t run on his record – sustained high unemployment, soaring deficits, high fuel prices thanks to an anti-energy policy, not to mention a foreign policy where the good guys don’t trust us and the bad guys think we’re a joke. How many leaders have you seen who after three years in their position continue to whine about the job they inherited? Hence, the "Obama in 2012 – It’s someone else’s fault" campaign theme.

The president is very good at getting himself elected to office – whether getting opponents thrown off the ballot, sealed divorce records released, accepting illegal campaign contributions from foreign donors, or having a fawning press ignore his every flaw while shining a glaring light on every weakness of his opponents, no matter how small or petty. When Mitt Romney shaped up as the most obvious opponent for him to face in November, the OWS campaign makes perfect sense to start building resentment and envy toward Americans who are actually competent enough to lead successful careers. But then a funny thing happened.

As the Not-Romneys fell by the wayside one by one, somebody that nobody saw as a viable threat was still standing and going strong. No, I’m not talking about Gingrich. I’m talking about the recent rise of Rick Santorum. Aside from running against Ron Paul (which will never happen), no remaining candidate is as desirable an opponent for Obama as Rick Santorum. He is by far the most social conservative among the candidates, and he has made enough statements regarding women and gays that he would make the perfect target to whip up enthusiasm in a very unenthusiastic left wing base, not to mention the 24/7 news cycle will allow the Palace Guards in the press to ignore real issues and President Obama’s performance while painting Santorum as enough of an extremist to turn off any moderates.

As for abandoning the Catholic vote, Obama has already issued his faux-compromise. My guess is that he’s got enough tricks up his sleeve to throw out between now and November to convince Catholics that he doesn’t really believe that the right to free contraceptives trumps religious freedom. On one of the Sunday new shows George Will chided the Catholic bishops for getting behind Obamacare without thinking through where it would logically progress. I would argue the same about the American people making the decision to elect Obama in 2008. For that matter, I sincerely hope that you are not among the economically illiterate who were led to believe the claims of, "If you like your insurance you can keep it" or that "your premiums will not go up."

Back to the Catholic Church insurance decision – why now? Obama could have easily waited until after the November elections to show his views on religious liberty in this country. If you’re reading this you already know about Santorum’s surge in the polls and recent victories in the primaries. The timing of this announcement was perfect to push religious conservatives toward not the Mormon, but the outspoken Christian in the bunch who is suddenly riding a wave of momentum. We’ve seen how quickly political fortunes come and go, and with enough momentum Santorum could ride this wave to the nomination, helping Obama not only get re-elected, but fire up enough turnout from his base to take back the losses from the 2010 elections.

Any of my regular readers (thank you, both of you!) probably notice something missing from this post. I’m big on citing my sources and embedding links to support my assertions – there aren’t any here. Yes, I could put links backing my statements about the economy and foreign policy, etc, but that wasn’t the purpose of this post. The rest of what I’ve written here are nothing more than my own observations, personal analysis, and theories taking them to a logical conclusion. I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that this is anything more than a conspiracy theory. I just see something happening that makes no sense and am looking for an explanation. If anyone has a better theory, please comment!

Cross posted at Brother Bob’s Blog

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
61 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Good analysis Brother Bob! I only disagree with the Obama gets reelected part. I believe that their is enough anger at Obama in this country to even overcome the Santorum strong conservatism. There is a wealth of non-stop ads waiting to knock down the Obama charisma. All one has to do is keep educating the voters of the administrations record. No negative false ads needed.

I can’t find a point in your article to argue, Brother Bob; but just want to reinforce the basic premise that the more the Obamanation team can get the GOP candidates to talk and rant about social issues instead of the economy, jobs, gas prices and the direction the country is taking in general – the better His chances…..

Pecozbill

You confuse the popular Catholic position with the Catholic official position. Just because some Catholic officials confronted Obama on contraception doesn’t mean he isn’t popular with Catholics and will lose votes—especially since most of their female members of the Church have used, or do use, contraception regularly. Latin American countries have one of the highest Catholic population in the world, and also one of the highest abortion rates.

Brother Bob
don’t anyone crucifie me for this, but
my first thought came like this; DOES HE WANT OUT?
he knows about what many STATES think about him and will block him anyway they can,
some are ready now as we speak to unleash the bottom truth which will scar his reputation
forever and diminish his power a lot more than already down low unrecoverable at this time,
he know the DEMOCRATS want him out and are trying to save their skin until they vote against him in the next election, we know because they are not hiding it as now we see it, all what is left for OBAMA is to save his skin now but not save his party which he doesn’t care, never did, as his actions shown clearly.
he will seek the UN JOB TO FURTHER HIS DESTRUCTION OF A COUNRTY HE HATE, HE WAS RAISED TO HATE. HE already shown his preference for the UN, many times.

Soros and unions got Obama elected. He had very little to do with it except to read a Teleprompter BADLY and flaunt his yellowish, tan skin. Obama did not write any of his speeches.

Occupy is a bust. Young people have seen Hope and Change as the lie it is. They want to move out of their parent’s house and get a job.

Unions have shown their corruption in Wisconsin and Ohio and everywhere.
Catholics have been stabbed in the back with the Jews. Only the Blacks on welfare will vote for Obama. He thinks with ACORN — he can steal the election with the Chicago Way!

ABO 2012 (Anybody But Obama)!!

You are wrong… he will win regardless of those he alienates.

It shall be an… Amusing spectacle to behold.

Otherwise, half the urban centers burn.

Excellent post, Brother Bob!

I’ve been scratching my head about this whole contraception mandate thing, and the only conclusion I could think of was very similar to what you wrote.

If the GOP does wind up nominating Santorum, I really hope he’ll focus like a laserbeam on Obama’s record of failure. There will already be plenty of folks like us who will discuss the social issues surrounding this election. If Santorum or Romney go with a social instead of economic focus, it’ll be four more years of Obamafail.

Brother Bob from OP: No, I was not surprised to see this as a logical progression of Obamacare – I was more surprised by the timing.

…snip…

Obama could have easily waited until after the November elections to show his views on religious liberty in this country. … snip… The timing of this announcement was perfect to push religious conservatives toward not the Mormon, but the outspoken Christian in the bunch who is suddenly riding a wave of momentum.

I’ve tried to make this point all over the place as of late, Brother Bob… even doing the “no plan.. and thanks for not noticing” post a couple of days ago. But if you didn’t get that perspective, I’m going to throw in a few things here you may not have considered while chewing over the timing that surprised you. It did not surprise me.

Choosing between a Santorum or Romney opponent for the general is like asking someone whether they want New York cheesecake or chocolate ice cream for dessert. They are both a win-win moment. Since the nomination was preordained for Romney, it was only natural for the admin to hone their evil-white-guy-corporatist rhetoric.

For the dark horse in this unusual primary, Santorum, it’s probably as much a surprise to Obama as to the rest of us that he’s made any headway… mostly due to being the perceived (but not really) last man standing. So what’s a POTUS with no acceptable record of performance to do? Easy.

Divert and distract, and kill two birds with one stone. Let the most religious guy self-implode while getting the nation acclimated to the idea that the federal government can mandate coverage minimums, as long as they provide religious exceptions.

It’s easily predictable that this federal mandate would kindle a firestorm between the staunch socially conservative and the rest of the conservatives. And for the former, Santorum is their iconic “face”. Foolishly, Santorum follows the rabbit off the path, and focuses fiery pulpit type rhetoric on this instead of the main point… which is this is an attack not on the church, but on states rights an every American. Why? Because the federal government has NO authority to mandate that to anyone… religious or not.

As a mark of it’s success, look at the conversation today. While the religious argue for religious exceptions that are not included currently, Obama has won… because you’ve just admitted that the feds *do* have the authority to mandate this nationwide – just as long as they provide religious exceptions.

Nope, nope and nope. And that is what every candidate on the campaign trail should be saying… the feds have no authority to do this at all because it’s an overreach of federal powers… as is all of O’healthcare.

Evidence that this tactic to encourage Santorum self-implode is already visible. True to the fast moving changes in this primary, an assumed solid Santorum lead is already evaporating over this past week, and Romney has been steadily regaining his support in Michigan and nationally. Despite both running negative ads, as of today the two are in a virtual tie in the polls. It was just a week or so ago that Santorum was up in double digits.

What’s happened? Santorum has kept talking, harping and hoping to capitalize on his social conservative creds by following that rabbit off the beaten path of economy, jobs, spending and debt – and yes, repeal of O’healthcare. He’s attempting to look “angry” and strong, and trying to use the Newt-attack-the-media trick (not so effectively…).

But what he forgets is the issues and their import… social issues are not topping the list for voters in 2012. Thus Santorum ends up appearing the one trick pony, not to mention missing the boat on the real issue.

Consider all the benefits with the timing… Santorum shooting off his own foot (just let him keep talking…), plus getting the nation to admit the feds CAN mandate coverage minimums nationwide. And all about an issue that really isn’t all that controversial since most want their contraceptives covered by insurance policies. Believe you me, accepting Obama’s religious “compromise” on this would end any debate differences between the two candidates because the Republicans embraced the larger issue – a federal mandate being within their purvey.

Obama had everything to gain by teasing the rabbit off the path. He knew very well that, with two religious frontrunners, they would blindly follow, and fall into the trap. As far as which of the two end up on top? Doesn’t matter. He’s prepared to demonize either one.

Brother Bob If Santorum geta the nom. it’s truly a God send for BHO. Large majority of Catholics agree with Obama on contraceptive flap.

Indies won’t buy into Rick’s social Conservatism.With Romney,Gingrich and Paul staying in I think we’ll see a brokered convention.

If Romney loses Mich.and performs poorly on S.T losing in Ohio, Rove and company will be pushing hard for Jeb. to get in.

Very unsettled.

Hi Brother Bob. Interesting conspiracy theory.

The fact of the matter is that HHS followed the recommendations of a 6 month investigation of the Institute of Medicine, which recommended the policy on a 13-1 vote, including all of the physicians on the panel. The only dissenting vote was from a Ph.D., who felt that research methods which formed the basis of his prior career had been disrespected. http://iom.edu/Reports/2011/Clinical-Preventive-Services-for-Women-Closing-the-Gaps.aspx

The Institute of Medicine is the medical arm of the National Academy of Sciences, chartered under the same statutes.

Now, you can quarrel or disagree with the IOM recommendations, but your post makes it sound as if Obama came up with some Machiavellian scheme, based entirely on political calculus. Not so. You should also acknowledge that the exact same “attack on the Catholic Church” has been made by 28 different state governments, including 8 which have no exemptions. You should also acknowledge that Obama’s position is supported by the Catholic Hospital Association, which represents the main Catholic institutions which would be affected. It’s also supported by a healthy majority of the Catholic laity.

I am not saying that there are not arguments to be made in opposition to the announced policy. I think that “Aqua,” in particular, has done a good job of representing the anti-Obama position on this. But this particular blog post is more than a bit of a stretch.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

Larry, I am in partial agreement with you, and in fact on some specifics not discussed, perhaps even more. Fact is the Obama admin was simply implementing regulations that are required to be done by the O’healthcare law enacted almost two years ago. This one is sort of a no brainer since, as a popular issue, most would like every little thing (like contraceptives) covered by their insurance.

The larger point is that the federal overreach encroaches on the states’ authority to regulate insurers minimum coverages .. that is not a sanctioned federal power. However even at the state level, they are not allowed to infringe on the 1st Amendment, and not accommodate for a religious institution’s or individuals religious beliefs. Therefore the states that offer no exceptions, based on that amendment, should have been hauled to court for their mandates.

The fact that they didn’t doesn’t make the mandate constitutional. Just makes it an infringement that has gone unchallenged.

As far as the timing, which is what Brother Bob seems to be focusing on for the bulk of his opinion, it’s not rocket science. Any attempts to get the Republican campaign off of the economy/debt/spending is a win for Obama. And allowing any of the candidates to willingly allow themselves to be painted as a radical religious nut, denying “free” (not really) contraceptive care via insurance coverage, is doing themselves no favors with the bulk of the nation.

The fact that the Republicans would be embracing an unconstitutional federal mandate power – as long as it included exceptions – is another big perk. It takes that subject off the debate table in the general.

Do I think announcing and publicizing this mandate was a deliberate political ploy? Indeed I do. They’ve been hedging on implementing most of O’healthcare, many items which were effective upon enactment, during this campaign year because of anticipated controversy. In this case, this item provided controversy that weighed in his political favor.

openid.aol.com/runnswim
DOES THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE RECIEVE MONEYTARY HELP FROM GOVERNEMENT or being sponsored by GOVERNMENT PAYERS TAX MONEYS?
or fully independant.?

Hi Bees,

re the Institute of Medicine:

http://www.iom.edu/

From Wikipedia:

Operations

The Institute and The National Academies use a unique process [2] to obtain authoritative, objective, and scientifically balanced answers to difficult questions of national importance. Their work is conducted by committees of volunteer scientists—leading national and international experts—who serve without compensation.

Committees are carefully composed to assure the requisite expertise and to avoid bias or conflict of interest. Every report produced by IOM committees undergoes extensive review and evaluation by a group of external experts who are anonymous to the committee, and whose names are revealed only once the study is published.

The majority of IOM studies and other activities are requested and funded by the federal government. Private industry, foundations, and state and local governments also initiate studies, as does the IOM itself.

The IOM works in a broad range of categories, including: mental health, child health, food & nutrition, aging, women’s health, education, public policy, healthcare & quality, diseases, global health, workplace, military & veterans, health sciences, environment, treatment, public health & prevention, and minority health.

The reports of the IOM are made available online for free by the publishing arm of the United States National Academies, the National Academies Press, in multiple formats.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

@Richard Wheeler:
Ummm no, a large majority of Catholics DO NOT agree with obama. At your age it’s beyond reason that you have your head shoved so far up…. You are in danger of disappearing.

The CBS poll you are likely thinking of is bogus
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2012/02/15/cbs-trumpets-slanted-poll-61-catholics-support-obamacare-mandate

Here are actual numbers
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/08/rasmussen-majority-opposes-obama-contraception-mandate-on-religious-organizations/

CNN: Americans Oppose Obama HHS Mandate 50-44 Percent

openid.aol.com/runnswim
so, they are dependent on GOVERNEMENT moneys,
why would you not understand why the AMERICANS have been push to become SUSPICIOUS of anything coming from GOVERNEMENT SPONSORED ORGANIZATIONS, whatever name and work activity they do,
because this distrust has been fed by the so many lies given to the PEOPLE, who are getting more and more aware of it, following BLOGS LIKE THIS FA, which dedicate their POSTS TO EXPOSING THE UNDERLAY
of what THE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO HIDE TO THE PUBLIC, including their intent to impose their long arms onto everyone poor or middle class or rich, they are out to socialize and turn the ALL AMERICA a COMMUNIST NATION, slowly but surely as even GOD is being order to be silent
never seen BEFORE in this GOD LOVING AMERICA,
YOU said the word MACHIAVELIC and it is the right word but not for this BLOG AUTHOR, AND NOT FOR THIS FLOPPING ACE BLOG.
only for those imposing it to AMERICA. in theses last
almost 4 years,

It is my firm belief if Obama wins a second term, there will be a revolution in this country. Obama surely plans to take away our guns. In doing so he will cross a line which will spark that revolution.

It was not for nothing that Ronald Reagan touted the Eleventh Commandment: thou shall not speak badly of a fellow Republican.
It is not for nothing that 80%-to-90% of both Republicans and TEA Party Members stand by their claim that they will vote for whoever the Republican Party puts up as a nominee.

Obama is no fool.
He is like a hunting lioness going after those weak animals at the edges of the herd.

His game is to rip away those who might have supported someone-other-than-himself.

If he reasons that too much focus on social conservatism might rip away a few fiscally conservative, but socially liberal would-be Republican votes, then that’s one thing he will do.
If he reasons that focusing on business acumen as though it is a bad thing might rip away a few of the impoverished among the Republican voters, then he will do that, too.

Remember, Obama’s game is to discourage would-be Republican voters any way he can.

H.R. I guess it depends on what poll you believe. You choose Rasmussen over C.B.S.
Ras.as metioned before has BHO AHEAD of all 4 Repub. challengers AND 49-49 app. vs disapp.. Guess you believe em there as well.
btw Your continued personal insults show just how classless you really are.

mmercier
you said otherwise half of the URBAN CENTER will burn, if he’s not reelected!!!!
as a matter of fact, it is being burned now by the OCCUPIERS which they themselves
started as a new crowd to disrupt and terrorize the communities, they are being paid to destroy AMERICA, and the government are applauding their actions,
they are rendering the LAW OFFICERS hurt for some badly, because they stick to the law of the land preventing them to kill the offenders who are yes burning the place around them and targeting the LEGAL GUARDIANS OF THIS AMERICA WITH TORCHES IN FIRE.WHILE THE CAMERA IS ROLLING,
HOW much more will they do, before they are receiving stern answered by the communities sick and tired of their criminal activity,

,

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:

You should also acknowledge that the exact same “attack on the Catholic Church” has been made by 28 different state governments, including 8 which have no exemptions. You should also acknowledge that Obama’s position is supported by the Catholic Hospital Association, which represents the main Catholic institutions which would be affected. It’s also supported by a healthy majority of the Catholic laity.

Larry the “other 28 states” is an intentional misleading left talking point by Rachel Maddow. The reality of those 28 states is that they have an opt out for prescription coverage, unlike the Obama mandate, which leaves no option except civil disobedience for the the Catholic Church. That of course will eventually lead to the end of all good Catholic social programs, consequently, “government” succeeds in destroying their biggest threat to power, the moral voice of the Catholic Church.

As for the CHA, that’s a one women dissenting nun show by Sister Carolyn, a dissenting nun who does NOT represent the teachings of the CC. She is simply trying to save face for being such a big Obama supporter (was at the signing). FYI, she and Dionne of Commonweal Magazine, another leftie, were in talks with Obama before the “compromise.” It was all about making sister happy and saving face. Those two knew of the “compromise” (and approved it), even before it was public.

Lastly, I think you are all underestimating both Santorum and the American People. With genuine faith, also comes a profound God given wisdom. When/If it becomes Obama vs Santorum, I predict not only that the country will be stunned by Santorum (that wisdom also allows/enables courage in ways this country hasn’t seen in ages), but that Santorum against Obama will win in a landslide.

Patricia: Larry the “other 28 states” is an intentional misleading left talking point by Rachel Maddow. The reality of those 28 states is that they have an opt out for prescription coverage, unlike the Obama mandate, which leaves no option except civil disobedience for the the Catholic Church.

Dang… a rare day when I find myself in Larry’s corner instead of yours, Patricia.

No maam. Even a broken clock (MadCow Rachael) can be right a couple of times a day. This is a state authority issue – and the feds are not empowered to do ANY dang mandate, religious exceptions or not. MadCow is correct in pointing out that more than half of the states have implemented a form of mandatory contraceptive coverage by insurers providing prescription plans.

Although this summary of each states contraceptive laws is shy a couple (26 instead of 28), it’s a start. However you have to go to each of the state’s statutes to learn the specifics of the exceptions. Aqua was surprised to learn he lived in a state offering no religious exceptions for over a decade. Our Oregon statutes do provide for religious exceptions.

Those eight states that do not provide exceptions for religious reasons are infringing on 1st Amendment rights. Obama’s mandate? It’s infringing on 10th Amendment rights… feds are simply overreaching their authority because they don’t have the power to mandate any such thing on a national level – with or without exceptions.

It’s hard to characterize this being found under prescription coverage as a genuine “opt out”, Patricia. Where else would it be found? Your suggestion is that any insurer, who shares a religious objection with the faithful, simply not offer any prescription coverage to the state at large isn’t a solution. In fact, that would be ignoring the need for such plans which cover other drugs not objectionable. .

And the insurers have that option to steer clear of any prescription drug plan. But why would they? It’s a popular and needed product in any state.

Fact is, since most of the religious have no problems with birth control, and most definitely support it being a covered item in the insurance, the insurers have no objection fulfilling that need. And many of the faithful take advantage of that benefit. This was indicated by a poll that drj linked to, I guess assuming it would support his claim that contraceptives covered by insurance was unpopular with the nation. Or perhaps it was framed with the “agree with Obama or don’t with Obama” debate.

They are, actually, two different debates…. do you agree with Obama (at the federal level?) doing this? And do you want your contraceptives included in your insurance plan.

drj’s poll addressed the “do you agree with Obama” bit. 50% don’t like it, 44% do. Yet 81% saw nothing wrong with birth control, and 70-79% of Catholics had no problem with birth control. It seems that the results differed when the poll questions were more specific… not to mention that almost half of Americans were clueless to the controversy.

Surveys on this topic tell a mixed story because many Americans know little about the issue. Recent CBS and Fox polls indicate support for the new policy, using questions that describe the new policy in some detail.

But in the CNN poll, when asked their opinion of the Obama policy with no details spelled out, support was much less and a large partisan divide emerged.

A recent Pew poll also suggests Americans are closely divided, and that poll may hold the key to the differences. Nearly four in ten Americans say they have heard nothing at all about this controversy.

To the second debate, which actually is going to be the deciding factor… do religious women who use birth control want it covered by their insurance? Well, that was posed in a poll by the Public Religion Research Institute a couple of weeks ago.

And here’s where the Catholic women come in. According to the Public Religion Research Institute poll released today,

A majority (55%) of Americans agree that “employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception and birth control at no cost.” Four-in-ten (40%) disagree with this requirement.

Key breakdowns

58% of all Catholics agree employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception. That slides down to 52% for Catholic voters, 50% for white Catholics.
61% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say employer plans should cover contraception.
50%of white mainline Protestants want the coverage. However, for evangelical Protestants, that drops to 38%.

And perhaps of greater note among election-watchers:

Women are significantly more likely than men to agree that employers should be required to provide health care plans that cover contraception (62% vs. 47% respectively).

You can read a more detailed picture of the poll, including the attitude on religious exceptions, at the Public Religious Institute’s site. PPP had a similar poll, with similar results. Even tho the PPP was commissioned by Planned Parenthood, they did still have Catholic breakdowns. A link to the PPP/Planned Parenthood poll.

And it is the desire to have this coverage available – legitimately regulated at the state, not federal level, within constitutional limitations – that will make this a losing argument for Santorum now and in the general. Santorum is already paying the price because he’s been chewing on this during his ground campaign speeches for a while now. He had a double digit lead over Romney in MI just last week, and now they are in a virtual heat in the polls. Negative ads? Yes, both are using them, and Santorum’s campaign (not superpac) fundraising hasn’t been that much less than Romney’s. But compared to what Romney did to Newt in both IA and FL, Santorum has only had to dodge political jello from Romney. He’s sinking himself on this.

Patricia
wow the best,
thank you

@Richard Wheeler:

Don’t get too excited about obama’s rating rich. It’s still a ways away from election time.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/02/21/gallup-survey-shows-sharp-deterioration-in-job-market-in-february/
Being called classless by someone like you is a compliment. It also beats being an assistant to the destruction of freedom like you are. You have most certainly violated your military oath.

I think many of you people seem to forget that the present candidates are in the middle of a battle to get votes from a mainly social conservative party. The only candidates with plenty of money are Mitt and Ron. Rick is in a position where he has to get attention and win votes without a big budget.
Now this whole social issue is tailor made for Rick to get lots of attention and definitely is not off the path at this time. Mitt has to burn through lots of cash to get votes to combat what Rick is getting for free.
Newt had to do the same thing by saying some very out there statements that got him lots of attention but also cost him votes by being open to the “zany” accusation.
We voters need to relax and enjoy a very well run campaign by all the GOP candidates.

@Matahartley: I just got to read your previous post that you put up – good read! Even if you did steal some of my thunder =8^P

@ Larry W: Very good arguments – my one question is still about the timing of these announcements. I think that the back & forth with you, Patricia, and Matahartley have brought out any counterpoints I may have made.
That said, welcome back! I missed sparring with you on my last few “Econ for Politicians” series. Next one should be up in a few days!

@ Hard Right #14: Let’s keep it civil here. Larry is one of the lefties who comes here for an honest discussion, however much we disagree with him. If you want to use that kind of tone save it for someone who deserves it, like “liberlmann” or “liberal(objectivity)”! Not that those trolls read any responses, and probably don’t read the posts, for that matter.

And as always, thank you for posting me, Curt!

Hi Pat, 8 of the states have no exemptions and, of the rest, the main exemption (e.g. CA, NY) is for self-funded health plans. I quoted Sibelius earlier as stating that there would be exemptions, as well, for self-funded plans in the ACA. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/15/self-insuring-faith-groups-exempt-from-contracepti/

As the contraception coverage mandate was modeled directly after that in place in California, the California experience speaks to the issue of whether Catholic hospitals, universities, and/or charities will close as a result of this mandate. In California, and in other states with the mandate, the constitutionality of the mandate was challenged in state courts and upheld (in the California Supreme Court, by a 6-1 vote). To my knowledge, not a single Catholic institution closed its doors or stopped providing services because of this mandate.

One major point is that this never became a big moral cause celebre over the past decade or more that these mandates have been in place at the state level. No one accused politicians of “waging war on the Catholic Church.” It was only when it got associated with Obama that it’s suddenly part of Obama’s secret plan to secularize America or turn America into an Islamic republic.

The moral disconnect is jarring. In principle, the Catholic Church is opposed to abortion. As I’ve pointed out before, the Netherlands has free love, legal drugs, legal gay marriage, and FREE abortion on demand, yet has only 1/4 the abortion rate of the most conservative, abortion-restricted states in the USA. The abortion rate in the USA has dropped by 380,000 per year since 1985 (to a rate now approaching to that existing BEFORE Roe v Wade) , and this is the direct result of improved availability of improved contraceptive methods, combined with improved education. The contraception mandate, if spared from too many excemption carve outs, has the potential to bring down the US abortion rate by an additional 900,000 per year (1,200,000 presently, reduced by 3/4 – Netherlands experience – equals 900,000 baby killings prevented PER YEAR).

Contraception already prevents the slaughter of 100 times as many babies in the womb as the sum total of all sermons and homilies from the pulpit, Operation Rescue activities, picketing and de-funding of Planned Parenthood, appointment of conservative judges, ultrasounds of cute fetuses, 24 hour waiting periods, parental notification, and gory pictures of aborted fetuses, combined. The outright repeal of Roe v Wade would have a trivial effect on number of abortions. Institution of ObamaCare would have a truly enormous beneficial effect on reducing abortions.

Anyone who really hates abortions should be a strong supporter of ObamaCare.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

H.R. Staying with your Rasmussen theme we got BHO 51%- Newt 37%. I served and was decorated for valor (Navy Commendation Medal with Combat “V”) Aye can confirm.

Remind me what you’ve done for our country.

Hard Right
hi,
as usual you always find the treasured lings to support your comments,
thank you, you’re the best for putting the trolls back where they belong

Problem pertaining to the meaning of “Catholic Church”, if one discusses the Tudors one concentrates on perhaps Henry VIII and not the peasants cutting wheat in Yorkshire so the notion of “Catholics” is inexact. The Catholic Church needing discussion are the strategic chess players by whom I mean the Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops. Each of whom is pledged to be and become another “meddlesome priest”. These men are the masters of the game best at split tactics and diversions. Machiavellian strategy is esoteric and effective but if the Prince chooses to continue to ostrasize himself he will be ostrasized. The nuns at the Catholic Hospital Association are pledged by Holy Orders to follow the dictates of Canon Law without presumption of status or pretense. Catholics are catholic; i.e. “universal”, follow spiritual law, Canon Law and Constitutional Law because they are all united. Catholics are more than meer neighbors over there, they are people encountered daily in the marketplace and many see the current status of the public executive administration as an anathyma. ” EXCOMMUNICATE OBAMA”

@Larry: Anyone who really hates abortions should be a strong supporter of ObamaCare.

woof… that’s a leap, Larry. Let me help you out, since ya be blinded by love for the Zero… LOL

Anyone who really hates abortions should be a strong supporter of ObamaCare abstinence or birth control.

If you feel the need to glorify some government regulation, stick to the states where it’s constitutional. Obama gets no pass for trampling the 10th Amendment.

THE SOOTHSAYER
hi,
great idea for getting a conclusion on the problem, it sure would put him in a position to profess which religion he follow truly
bye

Hi Mata (#30): Contraception fails when it isn’t used or when it isn’t used properly. ObamaCare provides free contraceptives and once to twice per year free counseling on how to use contraception. Contraception has been proven to be dramatically effective in preventing abortion, according to both national and international statistics and according to common sense. No one is mandating the use of contraception, if one is opposed, for any reason. No one is mandating that a Catholic Hospital provide contraceptives or Catholic physicians prescribe contraceptives or that the Catholic laity use contraceptives. The Church has every right to believe what it believes and to promulgate those beliefs. What the Church doesn’t have the right to do is to prevent the government from making contraceptive services available to those employees who choose to use them.

The Supreme Court will determine if the mandate to purchase insurance is constitutional or not. No one ever accused Bob Dole, Chuck Grassley, or Newt Gingrich or any of a plethora of conservatives who supported the concept of an individual mandate of “trampling over the 10th Amendment.” Just one more thing which was never controversial, until associated with Obama, at which time it became the work of the Devil.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

There ya go with the past support of the mandate, based on the Heritage fiscal analysis back in the early 90s, Larry. As we’ve been thru this before, I will again have to remind you that when the lawsuits hit the courts in 2009, all of them reversed their opinion of support based on it’s infringement on Constitutional authorities.

I fail to see how the performance of contraception working, or not working, has anything to do with O’healthcare. The statement and responsibility is still an individual one…. if one doesn’t support abortions, they need to practice abstinence or birth control. That is not a “thank you” to the Zero who temporarily occupies the WH.

Larry: The Supreme Court will determine if the mandate to purchase insurance is constitutional or not.

That’s an entirely different matter than the feds, stepping on the states’ toes in telling insurers what coverage they must provide in every state. That is a power that has been, prior to Obama, always reserved to the states unchallenged. Commerce Clause as an excuse to place a mandate is a different encroachment than multi-state standards for minimum coverage, Larry. The feds have never possessed that power, and the states have always decided what an insurance provider must offer to do business in their individual states.

First, Barack Hussein Obama is intelligent but not that-that intelligent. He is crafty with discept which is a measure of sheer dishonesty.
To An Atheiest:
Can you justify atheism?
The response is often a roll of the eyes then an issue of bitter-clinger conservative ignoramous Christianity followed by there is no proof soliloquies that the “God Thing” is nothing but made up myth.
Can you explain north?
As by Julius Caesar, Act 3, Scene I where Cassius remarks “If I could pray to move then prayers would move me. But, I am as constant as the northern star of whose true fixed and resting quality there is no fellow in the filament. The skies are painted with outnumbered sparks. They are all fire and everyone doth shine but there is but one that doth hold his place.”
So do Mars and Venus and all other planets also have a Polaris star or is ours unique as our home planet is unique?
After a jumble of Big Bang, evolution, dinosaur theories the shock hits them when it is explained that that in the great out there there is no such thing as north.
After a tres boring bit their narrative enters the realm of Kantian mathmatical reasoning whereby they oftentimes mix rationalization with justification leaving them stuck as a Sisyphus stone (early article).
Alpabetically, A to Z, can you name one – just one – great atheiest music composer?
Starting with the Letter-A many supposed smart sparks jump to Beethovan skipping Albinoni.
There was Ralph Vaughn Williams (d: 1960) who fell into a deep spiritual void after driving ambulance at the Somme and losing his dear friend George Butterworth. His widow says though he later reconsiled with a Spiritual Higher Power in his closing days. Shostocovich and Katchecurian lived in a god culture where Karl Marx, Lenin, Stalin was god.

Stanford-Binet IQ-Test (took mine during hay fever season in Chicago with polin count 100+), has been best recognized as a strong measure of schoolability-teachability yet a terrible measurement of creativity and talent best explained that Barack Obama is a person with zero discernable signs of talent. Leadership is a talent, conniving is thievery and conniving is not leadership.

Hi Mata,

As we’ve been thru this before, I will again have to remind you that when the lawsuits hit the courts in 2009, all of them reversed their opinion of support based on it’s infringement on Constitutional authorities.

The point is that no one and I mean no one was at all worried that the individual mandate was a Constitutional infringement until it was associated with Obama. The Heritage Foundation proposal (which was the blueprint for RomneyCare which was the blueoprint for ObamaCare) was a proposal for a national health care plan. The GOP touted this plan in the 1990s as the “sensible conservative alternative” to socialistic HillaryCare.

Gingrich was supporting this as recently as May, 2009.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/newt-gingrich-supported-an-individual-mandate-as-recently-as-may-2009/252233/

Maybe it’s unconstitutional. Maybe it is constitutional. By definition, the Supreme Court adjudicates what is and isn’t constitutional. If SCOTUS finds it unconstitutional, then I’ll have no choice but to agree with you. If they find that it is constitutional, then you’ll have to agree with me, unless you, yourself, want to go “trampling” on the Constitution (which states that SCOTUS adjudicates what is and is not constitutional).

My current point is that it’s not OBVIOUS that it’s unconstitutional. If it were obvious, then the Heritage Foundation and all those smart GOP politicians over the years who supported the mandate would have realized that it was unconstitutional. But they didn’t realize it. So Obama would appear to be in good company, in his perhaps erroneous belief that it’s constitutional.

– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

Larry: The point is that no one and I mean no one was at all worried that the individual mandate was a Constitutional infringement until it was associated with Obama.

…snip…

My current point is that it’s not OBVIOUS that it’s unconstitutional. If it were obvious, then the Heritage Foundation and all those smart GOP politicians over the years who supported the mandate would have realized that it was unconstitutional. But they didn’t realize it.

sigh….

No, that is an incorrect characterization. No one was worried about the unconstitutional individual mandate until it was evaluated by Constitutional scholars instead of economists. There is no doubt that economically, forcing everyone one – healthy – on to the system spreads the spreads the financial risk.

I guess I’ll have to relink my comment #34 in that Dec 2011 thread that points out just who Stuart Butler is at Heritage, and his expertise. If one asks you to evaluate a proposed legislation’s possible effects, will you do so thru your medical expertise? Or will you approach it via a different field, such as accounting?

Butler did an economic white paper. The amicus brief filed in the 11th Circuit in 2009 was written by a Constitutional scholar, and from that aspect they find that a mandate… tho a financial solution.. was not a constitutional solution. When they reversed their position based on scrutinizing a specific law that was enacted, so did those conservatives who had accepted Butler’s economic perspective as a possible solution. Hey… people learn. People change their positions.

@Richard Wheeler:

Like I said, I haven’t betrayed my ideals or my my country. You have.
I don’t support America hating politicians. I don’t support people trying to destroy the Constitution. You do. Little hint rich, the problem isn’t your service which you wrongly thinks makes you better than anyone else. It’s what you’ve done since.
All the good you did, you have undone. Like all leftists, you’ve done it all for your ego and not for anyone else like you pretend.
One last thing, the dems hate you. The only time they care about you, is when they can use you to advance their agenda. Then they’ll throw you back into the trash. Thanks to your own actions, it’s where you belong.

Heritage disavowed that plan when the centralized government of the federalized states took, with vast unionista support, control of the planning. There are MSA’s Medical Savings Accounts, national purchasing beyond state license, and personal medical records keeping that can keep pace by implymenting American Express-Visa efficiencies. Go to any physician with two bennies on the counter and watch the doctor perform his best. The notion that we should tail Clement Atlee Labour Party post WW-II socialism is insane. Federal Highway from Hollywood to Boca has more chiropractors then Starbucks. Is the general population supposed to pay for aromatherapy, acupuncture, masseueses, boob jobs, Nancy Pullfaceosi stretch jobs and easy access to your qualudes and esctacy because you Jacobin morons want all for nothing?

H.R. My service doesn’t make me better than anyone else but it sure as hell makes me better than you. You really are trash. Contact me off line and we can settle this. I gave you my E-MAIL.

Richard Wheeler
now calm down , you come on a conservative BLOG and you bash the CONSERVATIVES,
so what do you expect, a thank you? get you reason in line, you are the one saying trash,
you expect the same if you do play that game or any other to deny the other to express their CONSERVATIVES views, remember you come from the other side and try to sell it here
that is kind of inciting anyone and expect the patience short fuse to hit you at time.

hi bees,

Richard argues thoughtfully – with people who are thoughtful. But no one has the obligation to put up with personal vitriol, spewed for no reason other than he/she expresses a contrarian point of view.

Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

I shall assume you were born after 75′. ilovebeeswarzone

Otherwise you forgot what it was like to go to sleep with a dozen urban centers burning.

The ocupod fags have no idea what fire they are toying with.

@Liberal1 (objectivity): Liberal 1 you along with the MSM wachos miss the real point of the abomination 0-bama is attempting to foist on the Catholic Church. That is, sense when can he spit on the 1st Amendment that separates Church and State? Ask yourself this, if it is only a Catholic Issue then why are other faiths supporting the Catholic Church on this issue? Contraception is just one issue by which 0-bama and his devils have begun their assault on religion. Your belief that this will not have an impact on the election is very encouraging to me. Keep telling yourself that and hopefully America will make history as they did the last election cycle. Either way the Senate goes back, Reid is kicked out as majority leader, and 0-bama is moot!! I call it hope for America. May God help us.

mmercier
I suppose you have seen worse, and we are aiming toward the worst also,
and that’s why we are all in the same box to unite and get it right for the sake of all young and old ,
they are setting the whole WORLD in fire,
bye

openid.aol.com/runnswim
you said people don’t have to, put up with vitriol,
I say the vitriol come in many bottles, some are are small and shaded well,
they are just but a drop within a sentence, and some have the ability to perceive it better than other,
remember the GERMAN telling the JEWS with a condescending voice and a smile on their face;
WE WILL RELOCATE YOU, ONLY TO PROTECT YOU,
BYE

Err……nevermind. I’ll just leave it at this:
1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 9th Amendment, and 10th Amendment.
All gone.

@Opened.aol.com/runnswim:

Contrary is one thing. Destructive is another. Gleefully supporting the destruction of America to satisfy your ego is worse still. You and rich are both guilty of this.

IN 4 YEARS they did not close the borders allowing thousands and more coming from all the other COUNTRIES most HATING AMERICA,,coming to fill an agenda of death to AMERICANS, they don’t leave their money here, they create jobs somewhere else against AMERICA, THEY TAKE AND GIVE NOTHING.
WHEN the CONSERVATIVE like RICK PERRY said he will be closing it for good within the first 2 years,
what does it give AMERICA FOR A CHOICE TO REGAIN THE CONTROL?
which one has the right plan? you have to be idiot to even hesitate voting for the right,
all the CANDIDATES WILL DO IT, so whoever vote have a good choice now to choose CONSERVATIVES TO DO THE JOB AND REGAIN CONFIDENCE IN PEOPLE’S MIND, that someone care for what is happening and are passionate and dedicated to create JOBS FOR AMERICA, in AMERICA AGAIN.
NOT FOR JUST A FEW WHO NOW CONTROL A LOT OF JOBS AND GIVE A LOT OF MONEY THEY TAKE FROM WORKERS,
TO OBAMA FOR HIM TO SELL HIMSELF ON THE PUBLIC STAGE TO BE REELECTED,
BUT JOBS FOR ALL AMERICA, NO PREFERENCE,

WOW,
I have to note it here, the first time I see on my site a group of big guns lined up together,,
MATA,,HARD RIGHT ,, AQUA,, COMMON SENSE,,RANDY,, ANTICSROCKS,, and from different POST
HOW ABOUT THAT and we have may more

I hear of 55 per cent wish there was someone else to enter the platform of the CANDIDATES,
they said they had vote for MCAIN, IN THE LAST ELECTION. which failed
WELL WELL, that is very telling of them wishing for the alien from space to fix it,
they better concentrate on what has been going on with the CANDIDATES WHO SURVIVED
from all kinds of attacks and insults and probe from both sides, they have endured and deserved the rank they will get as the advance of debates bring up the one THE ONLY ONE TO BEAT OBAMA,
bring another not vet by the people and loose again,
I don’t trust those 55 per cent, to help winning the election this time

@Richard Wheeler: Richard are you really that stupid or just brain washed by 0-bama and the MSM!! Catholics are NOT on the side of 0-bama and the issue is NOT contraception, as you would like to think. Lets talk 1st amendment violation by your Messiah and see where Catholics come down. If it where just Catholics then tell me why oh why is the Protestants siding with the Catholics against 0-bama. Likely you are not aware due to your limited sources or intelligence or both.

ilovebeeswarzone.

my guess is I got one right… first time in a long time. we are repeating the 60’s and 70’s. some forgot, some are dead, others are just pissed off they were incapable of bringing the structure to heel of the state.

the latter are now in the positions of power, the same positions who’s. former occupiers they called… the pigs.

excuse my editing here… big fingers, little tablet unit.

who’scomer occupiers… they referred to as pigs.

Common Sense

not all sense is common.

Roman Catholics and Jews will overwhelmingly support Obama this November, regardless of whatever actions he takes to destroy their being.

Understand the nature of the beast.

mmercier
hi, you mentioned pigs, funny it remind me of another blog ending with talking about pigs one evening,
arguing was like wrestling with pigs in the mud,
the day after I see on the news paper swimming pigs in an island of the BAHAMAS, which had swim out from a wreck and swim ashore and their offspring kept the habit of swimming for hours in that crystal clear water, they publicize their island with the slogan, THE WATER IS SO CLEAR, EVEN THE PIGS SWIM IN IT,
THEN another day I see a publicity of a pig sliding down a high rope yelling, that was the new GEICO slogan,
so you come in with pigs is for me a real good laugh, sorry about it, but I needed that laugh.
bye