Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 02/10/2012 View Thu 02/09/2012 View Wed 02/08/2012 View Tue 02/07/2012 View Mon 02/06/2012 View Sun 02/05/2012 View Sat 02/04/2012
1
2012-02-10 Home Front: Politix
Reid slaps down move to repeal Obama's contraceptive rule
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by ryuge 2012-02-10 00:43|| || Front Page|| [11127 views ]  Top

#1 Harry listens to His Master's Voice
Posted by Bobby 2012-02-10 05:58||   2012-02-10 05:58|| Front Page Top

#2 And once the 'final rule' is announced, Reid will say "It's final, a done deal, and we can't mess with it."
Posted by Glenmore 2012-02-10 07:57||   2012-02-10 07:57|| Front Page Top

#3 all you panjandrums (Reid, PeeYewSee, Sebelius)please stop calling yourselves Catholic, Mormon, etc
Posted by jack salami 2012-02-10 08:03||   2012-02-10 08:03|| Front Page Top

#4 WH to announce birth-control 'compromise'
I guess we'll see if it's also a 1st Amendment compromise.
Posted by ryuge 2012-02-10 09:08||   2012-02-10 09:08|| Front Page Top

#5 Keep this issue alive as long as you can, Harry. It's a winner for sure.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2012-02-10 09:55||   2012-02-10 09:55|| Front Page Top

#6 With the Catholics on this 100%.

Why is the rule being determined in the White House, eh? Thought Congress made the rules and Executive enforces them...oh yeah, waivers, the quite descriminate enforcement, or lack of enforcement, exemption, of the law.

But hey, like Paloski said, gotta pass it to find out all the neat-o stuff in it.
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-02-10 11:56||   2012-02-10 11:56|| Front Page Top

#7 President Barack Obama, hoping to quell an intensifying political backlash, on Friday will announce a new policy that no longer requires a broad swath of religious organizations to provide employees with contraception coverage in health-insurance plans.

Under the new policy, insurance companies will be required to offer free contraception for these workers, a subtle shift aimed at moving the onus from the employer to the insurer, a senior administration official said.


This guy is an idiot
Posted by Beavis 2012-02-10 12:08||   2012-02-10 12:08|| Front Page Top

#8 Read the compromise, not much of one if I'm reading it right:

Groups do not by the contriceptions, the insurance companies actually purchase them, but they must still be distributed by the groups, right? Let me distill this if I'm getting it right:

Vegan restaurant, PETA posters on the wall, Whale Wars on repeat, the whole nine yards and the two point conversion, dig? Does that mean that I can go into that restaurant and by law use their kitchen at my convienance to make whale steak with dog skewer niblets and they by law must not only let me in, but let me eat there, cannot say anything bad about my food or me no matter how much I yumm and lick chops, then they must do my dishes. I mean they didn't have to pay for it or even transport it there just let me use the facilities..Is that right?
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-02-10 12:08||   2012-02-10 12:08|| Front Page Top

#9 jack salami:

Even better. How about the Catholics, Mormons, etc excommunicate these fools.
Posted by Iblis 2012-02-10 12:16||   2012-02-10 12:16|| Front Page Top

#10 "Compromise"? The Mandate/Presidential-edict is not LAW, whether Catholics or Insurance Offices are the targets of Obama's spital.
Posted by Chenter Barnsmell9450 2012-02-10 13:54||   2012-02-10 13:54|| Front Page Top

#11 fwiw, whether this administrative rule passes muster with the 1st amendment is dicey but possible.

however, there is also the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which provides stronger protection against administrative actions like the one that HHS promulgated. This is because the RFRA requires strict scrutiny so HHS would have had to determine that the administration was narrowly tailored and the regulation is the least restrictive means possible to achieve a compelling govt purpose.
Posted by Lord Garth 2012-02-10 15:09||   2012-02-10 15:09|| Front Page Top

#12 Contraception and Abortion is *NOT* a compelling federal government purpose IMHO.
Posted by CrazyFool 2012-02-10 15:49||   2012-02-10 15:49|| Front Page Top

#13 CF, would you object to free contraceptives for OWS?
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2012-02-10 16:21||   2012-02-10 16:21|| Front Page Top

#14 LOL, g(r)om!

From Iowahawk's twitter account:
"The fact I don't want to pay for your contraceptives doesn't mean I want you to reproduce."
Posted by ryuge 2012-02-10 18:28||   2012-02-10 18:28|| Front Page Top

#15 Pregnancy is not a blessing to Obama, American babies is a disease. Check his record as an Illinois State Senator.
Posted by Chenter Barnsmell9450 2012-02-10 19:13||   2012-02-10 19:13|| Front Page Top

#16 Tempting G(r)om... very tempting.

What I was getting at was that it should not be done at the Federal level. The problem I have is that at the federal level it's too far removed from the people it effects. Influences like Planned genocide Parenthood, Unions, and others have far more influence (and can focus their influence better) at the federal congressional level than in 50 different states. Same with Education, Labor, etc...
Posted by CrazyFool 2012-02-10 23:17||   2012-02-10 23:17|| Front Page Top

23:31 Chesh Squank6666
23:17 CrazyFool
22:53 trailing wife
22:33 Chesh Squank6666
22:19 Chesh Squank6666
22:16 trailing wife
22:01 Chesh Squank6666
21:53 trailing wife
21:50 gorb
21:19 gorb
21:12 gorb
20:51 Zhang Fei
20:33 Zhang Fei
20:18 Anonymoose
20:07 OldSpook
20:05 OldSpook
19:52 Northern Cousin
19:38 Omoluque Hapsburg8162
19:37 Barbara
19:30 Northern Cousin
19:28 Barbara
19:26 Steve White
19:18 Eric Jablow
19:13 Chenter Barnsmell9450









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com