What a way to start the new year...

with a bunch of things that make you shake your head in wonderment.

In no particular order: 

Commie Bill de Blasio is sworn in as New York's mayor at one minute after midnight with his "ex-lesbian" (wait - I thought you were born one way or another) wife holding some book or another and watched over by his daughter wearing a witch's hat and his hopelessly out of date son sporting a big afro and scruffy jeans.

 His first announcement is the imminent banning of horse drawn carriages in Central Park, because we all know what an important issue that is.


Now read this and let it roll around in your mind for a few minutes.  The absurdity is stunning. (emphasis mine)

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor granted a temporary exemption late Tuesday to a small group of Catholic nuns that shields it from having to comply with a part of President Obama's healthcare law that requires it to provide contraceptive coverage in its insurance plans. source

The amount of money and man hours (which is really the same as money), to force the taxpayers of this country to pay for the birth control of those too stupid or lazy to buy their own, and then to further call it a "women's health issue"...well, words escape me. We all know how badly a bunch of nuns need birth control, now don't we?

Are people so severely math-challenged that they can't add up the skyrocketing cost of a monthly premium, a huge deductible, and still having to pay 40% - 60% of a medical bill while doing the happy dance over getting "free" birth control?  No, you moron - your "free" birth control just cost you tens of thousands of dollars.

Yep, ranks right up there with the huge number of "health" policies that will pay for abortion on demand, after the individual pays, of course, an exorbitant monthly premium and shells out a huge deductible, and an additional percentage of the bill, because nothing says freedom like a dead baby.

Moving on to Obama's most urgent priority, after he returns from his luxurious vacation in Hawaii;  why, it's extending unemployment insurance to people who have lost their jobs because of the policies of this administration.

Nancy Pelosi thinks unemployment is the "biggest job creator and boost to the economy", because for the math challenged, we all know that taking, for instance, $100.00 away from one person and giving it to someone else to spend means there is now $200.00 floating around in the ether - or something. 
 


And in an effort to relieve one of our other huge problems, income inequality, we are witnessing the push for a higher minimum wage.  I work in a grocery store a few hours a week, and if they had to pay the teenage baggers and cart pushers $10.00 per hour, I can safely predict that the entire bunch of the aforementioned teenagers would be out of a job.

You may also expect to see robots making your hamburgers at your favorite fast food place in the very near future.  A robot will do a better job, cost less, not show up late, call in hungover sick, and won't have disgusting eyebrow or nose rings.

Fun in the Mile High City:

Denver, in living up to its name as the "Mile High City", has residents lined up to fork over two hundred plus dollars for an ounce of marijuana. Can you use your unemployment bennies to buy your pot?  Expect a surge of really fat people in Denver soon.

As many as 30 stores throughout Colorado will sell recreational weed. But it's uncertain how many will open on the holiday, according to marijuana advocates and state officials.

Of the estimated 30 stores, 18 are in Denver, and several were expected to be open for business at the earliest allowed time, 8 a.m. MT. One Denver shop scheduled a news conference for the occasion.

"With Washington state next to implement marijuana legalization and other states strongly considering enacting similar laws, we believe this marks the beginning of the end of the nation's decades-long war on marijuana and its harmful human and fiscal toll," Ezekiel Edwards, a director at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. source

 Sheeple Report out of Connecticut:

Connecticut gun owners are rushing to register certain firearms and ammunition that will be considered illegal contraband in the new year.

Under a wide-ranging gun control law passed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, they have until Tuesday to submit the paperwork with the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. source

Emergency Services and Public Protection???  If this doesn't send chills down your spine, you must be dead.

 Here's what I've got to say about all this crap:

Something lighter:

Golden wordsmith, Francis Porretto, has convinced me to try some science fiction reading.  Naturally, I will take this foray into a literary genre I'm not fond of with one of his books, Which Art in Hope since he is capable of stringing together words with such magnificence that I am almost ashamed to put fingers to keyboard.  The question of the century is, "Can Frank Porretto make me actually like science fiction?  A full report will be issued upon completion of the book.

It's time for breakfast and later today a full-on feast.  After reading the "food porn" post my husband wandered into the dining room and rather wistfully asked, "Are we really having french fries?"  Um - yeah, we are.

Have a wonderful day, peeps...

Creepy ad claims little girl's dreams are being subverted...

if the taxpayers don't pay for their birth control and eventually their abortions.

First of all, this woman appears to be fully capable of buying birth control for her daughters if that's her wish.  She is also free to drive one or the other of the girls to an abortion clinic to have her grandchild sliced and diced when and if they are "punished" with a baby.  She can even start a monthly budget entry for saving up for getting rid of inconvenient grandchildren.

What decent mother assumes that her daughters will, at the earliest age possible, rut like little feral animals?  I remember when little girls dreamed of being mommies. 




H/T Creative Minority Report

Think Progress article title is not just misleading - it's a lie...

not paying for someone's birth control is not denying access.

Yet...........take a gander at this title:

Missouri Legislature Approves Bill Allowing Employers To Deny Access To Birth Control

NO. IT. DOESN'T!

It does not deny access.  It simply says you cannot force someone to pay for your birth control.

Please tell me women are not so dumb that they would believe this crapola! 

Make no mistake about this war on women meme that is being shouted from the roof top of every radical lefty.  It is really about what's headed our way, which is publicly funded abortion.

Father Jenkins of Notre Dame sues his BFF Obama over contraception mandate...

uh oh!

What happened to the proud priest who was so honored to have the most pro-abortion president in the history of this country speak at Notre Dame?  How many times must we remind peeps about rolling around in the mud and thinking they're not going to get dirty?  

May 21, 2012

A Message from Father John Jenkins, C.S.C.,

President, University of Notre Dame

Today the University of Notre Dame filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana regarding a recent mandate from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  That mandate requires Notre Dame and similar religious organizations to provide in their insurance plans abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilization procedures, which are contrary to Catholic teaching.  The decision to file this lawsuit came after much deliberation, discussion and efforts to find a solution acceptable to the various parties.

Let me say very clearly what this lawsuit is not about:  it is not about preventing women from having access to contraception, nor even about preventing the Government from providing such services.  Many of our faculty, staff and students -- both Catholic and non-Catholic -- have made conscientious decisions to use contraceptives.  As we assert the right to follow our conscience, we respect their right to follow theirs.  And we believe that, if the Government wishes to provide such services, means are available that do not compel religious organizations to serve as its agents.  We do not seek to impose our religious beliefs on others; we simply ask that the Government not impose its values on the University when those values conflict with our religious teachings. We have engaged in conversations to find a resolution that respects the consciences of all and we will continue to do so.

This filing is about the freedom of a religious organization to live its mission, and its significance goes well beyond any debate about contraceptives.  For if we concede that the Government can decide which religious organizations are sufficiently religious to be awarded the freedom to follow the principles that define their mission, then we have begun to walk down a path that ultimately leads to the undermining of those institutions.  For if one Presidential Administration can override our religious purpose and use religious organizations to advance policies that undercut our values, then surely another Administration will do the same for another very different set of policies, each time invoking some concept of popular will or the public good, with the result these religious organizations become mere tools for the exercise of government power, morally subservient to the state, and not free from its infringements.  If that happens, it will be the end of genuinely religious organizations in all but name. 

The details of the process that led to the mandate are publicly known.  In an Interim Final Ruling issued August 3, 2011, the federal government required employers to provide the objectionable services. A narrow exemption was given to religious institutions that serve and employ primarily members of their own faith, but, departing from a long tradition in federal law, organizations like Notre Dame—schools, universities, hospitals and charitable organizations that serve and employ people of all faiths and none—were granted no exemption, but instead were made subject to the law to the same extent as any secular organization.  On September 28, I submitted a formal comment encouraging the Administration to follow precedent and adopt a broader exemption.

Despite some positive indications, the Administration announced on January 20, 2012, that its interim rule would be adopted as final without change.  After an outcry from across the political spectrum, President Obama announced on February 10 that his Administration would attempt to accommodate the concerns of religious organizations.  We were encouraged by this announcement and have engaged in conversations with Administration officials to find an acceptable resolution.  Although I do not question the good intentions and sincerity of all involved in these discussions, progress has not been encouraging and an announcement seeking comments on how to structure any accommodation (HHS Advanced Notification of Proposed Rule Making on preventative services policy, March 16, 2012) provides little in the way of a specific, substantive proposal or a definite timeline for resolution.   Moreover, the process laid out in this announcement will last months, making it impossible for us to plan for and implement any changes to our health plans by the government-mandated deadlines. We will continue in earnest our discussions with Administration officials in an effort to find a resolution, but, after much deliberation, we have concluded that we have no option but to appeal to the courts regarding the fundamental issue of religious freedom.

It is for these reasons that we have filed this lawsuit neither lightly nor gladly, but with sober determination.

The university's complaint can be read in full here

It's time for the GOP to stand up and confront the lies...

and we must and should do our part.

The first thing I read this morning was an article by Larrey Anderson, over at American Thinker,  The Democrats' Biggest Lie, which deals with this whole kerfuffle over "access to birth control."  I'm not sure if it could be considered the biggest lie they've ever told, but it certainly is getting a lot of attention.

Democrats want to make women believe that if we have a Republican president, the administration will begin banning birth control.  As Larrey points out, they don't necessarily use those exact words, but will instead imply such a thing will happen, and thereby raise the anxiety levels of women.

Many of the commenters have made the classic mistake of thinking, "Who would ever believe such a thing?"

Of course it's a lie. The only people who believe in this tripe are those who stood in line to receive handouts from Obama's "stash." Responding to the lie is precisely what the liars want.

This is dangerous thinking.  I routinely visit our local county Democratic Facebook page and see women consistently tout the party line about "not having access to birth control."  These are not welfare queens, but women with a semblance of education who are involved in the political process. Some of them are actually running for local offices such as city commissioner.

You and I see this for what it is; a nonsensical distraction from the worst record of any president in the history of the United States.  Our country is drowning in debt, gas prices are as high as $5.00 in some places, we have high sustained unemployment, and democrats want to talk about birth control?  When they're not talking about birth control, they're ginning up race riots in Florida or saying stay-at-home moms don't work. 

Here's a commenter over at AT that gets it: (emphasis mine)

Have you people learned nothing about perception? It doesn't matter one damn bit whether these are lies coming from the progressive liberals. Of course they're lies. We conservatives all know that. The problem is that the great masses of voters don't realize this and believe the lies because they perceive them to be true. You think that because we all care about knowing what's going on by reading American Thinker and other conservative websites that everyone does? They don't! Most Americans couldn't care less and tune out the whole depressing mess. Who can blame them? It's easier to be entertained than to think. So, they hear some fantastic lie from the progressives and think that it has to be true because no one would make up something that outrageous. And, if they did, we'd hear about it. Oh yeah? From whom would we hear about it? The mainstream media who is wholly owned by the progressives? That's as far as most Americans are willing to look because they don't care enough to get involved. Stop assuming that Americans will recognize that these are lies and start yelling that these are lies. And, do it in places where the progressive liberals hang out. You're preaching to the choir here.

Exactly!

May I suggest that you find your local Democratic Facebook page, or the pages of people running for a local office of some sort, and whenever you read something that is ridiculous, jump in and nicely correct them.  I keep bookmark folders loaded with information on different subjects so I always have an arsenal of facts and figures handy.  Larrey's article will go in my folder called "health", and the next time someone says something stupid about the "war on women", "access to birth control", or "women's health issues, I will have plenty of ammunition.

Read Larrey's article for more information on how propaganda works:

The Democrats' Biggest Lie 

For additional tips read: 

Top 10 Ways to School Your Leftist Friends on Facebook

Your WTF moment of the day from Maggie's Notebook:

Are Your Grandparents in this Simulating Safe Sex Video?

Good grief!!!

Michelle to Hold Four Fundraisers in Two Days and guess who's left holding the tab for her travel?

And while the country sinks into oblivion, the federal government and Congress is worried about some baseball player juicing up with steroids.  Is that not insane? 

Department of Justice Assigns 5 Prosecutors to Retrial of Roger Clemens

And finally we know the real reason Obama spent a truck load of money to go to Colombia:



"No class Obama" could have simply said, "Your country is beautiful and I would like to visit again with my family."

Another Executive Order?

Why, yes.  When does Obama find time to issue executive orders since all he does is campaign and play golf?  Who's really writing these things?

This one has to do with natural gas and fracking.  I don't know enough about the subject to have an opinion.  Should we be alarmed? (although generally, anything this administration does is cause for alarm.) You read it and tell me.  Thank you in advance.

Executive Order: Feds To Take Control of Domestic Natural Gas Production

and

MOTUS:  Wanted: Spring Break Chaperones. Adults preferred

It's time for the Catholic bishops to make public statements about Sebelius, Pelosi...

and all the rest of the rogue "Catholic" politicians who continue to call themselves Catholic while defying the teachings of the Church. 

To not do so is doing great harm to their credibility. 


Courageously Catholic in the public square
By Judie Brown

There is something intriguing and, at the same time, troubling about the upheaval being created by the Obama administration's dictate regarding religious institutions and the right of conscience. The problem is not so much what Obama has done, but what Catholics are confronted with as a result. Let me be clear. The various bishops who have made statements in opposition to what Obama has done are to be commended. They have decried the arrogance of an administration that literally wants to spit in the face of Christ and His Church.

Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, for example, says that the Obama administration has revoked the religious freedom of groups that do not regard women's fertility as a "disease." Indeed, this is true.

But when you peel away the layers of righteous indignation, we find a gruesome layer of facts that is being covered over and is not likely to be exposed by the very bishops who are uttering powerful words in defense of conscience. The bishops, as a body of religious leaders, consistently fail to act on their own words — and that will be the downfall of their recent pontificating.  read the rest

More:  

Philothea on Phire:    Priests Preaching the Truth

Pundette:   That Catholic thing again

"Free" birth control for everyone...

allow me to repeat, "It's not "free."

Kathleen Seblious:

“This decision was made after very careful consideration, including the important concerns some have raised about religious liberty,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services."  source

Preventive services?  Last time I checked pregnancy wasn't a disease, unless, of course, you're Obama and you think a baby is a "punishment."

Listen to what The Lonely Conservative has to say:

No Co-Payments for Birth Control, But I Pay Co-Payments for a Broken Wrist?

More:

Outrageous HHS Final Rule: Catholic Groups Must Cover Contraceptives

It's really about abortion...

and anyone who doesn't "get it" hasn't been paying attention.

I'm not going to make this a "Catholic" issue since it affects everyone of good will.  In a recent article I published,  Battling over birth control..., a few people missed the point and thought I was bashing Catholic teaching on birth control.  The reality is, I was putting it in perspective for the rest of the world.  Peter, Datechguy, jumped in and defended me - and I thank him. 

Obama leads what is clearly the most pro-abortion administration to ever rule over the country.  And "rule" is the operative word.  Aided by people who call themselves Catholic, such as Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy Pelosi, and helped along by bishops of the Church who naively thought they could "strike a deal" with people of no character, ObamaCare was passed in the dead of night and against the will of the American people. 

Now this administration is attacking anyone not providing "free" birth control in their insurance plans.  Just as there is ample evidence that abortion was the outcome of the legalization of birth control, we now witness what happens when the Church refuses to offer abortion referrals for victims of human trafficking.

From: The Catholic League (emphasis mine)

CATHOLIC CHURCH VS. OBAMA SHOWDOWN

On December 1, the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform will hold a hearing titled, “HHS and the Catholic Church: Examining the Politicization of Grants.” At issue is the decision by the Obama administration to deny a grant that the Catholic Church routinely receives providing for relief to the victims of human trafficking; the ruling was made despite an independent review board’s finding that gave high scores to the Church’s program.

The Church was denied the grant because it refuses to offer abortion referrals. Many Catholics, including the Catholic League, believe that the politicized nature of the decision to defund the program demands a hearing, and on Thursday we will get it. Since 2006, the Church has helped more than 2,700 trafficking victims, most of whom are women and children. 

Although the issue of abortion referral is on the table, the real issue is something more sinister: the pro-abortion community, which is supporting the Obama administration’s push to mandate that private healthcare plans provide coverage for sterilization and contraceptive services, has its real sights set on mandated abortion coverage. That’s why there has been an editorial and op-ed explosion in recent weeks calling for Obama to stand up to the bishops. Everyone knows that even minimum-wage earners can afford contraceptives, so this issue hardly explains the heated rhetoric. What mandated contraceptive services accomplishes is that it greases the slide towards abortion coverage.

Those who do not ascribe to the vision of sexuality entertained by “progressives,” but are nonetheless not terribly bothered by the push for contraceptive services in healthcare plans, need to wake up and smell the odor before the “progressives” start racing for home. We’re at the top of the stretch right now, which is why this hearing is critical.

 Allow me to restate my position here.  No insurance company should be required to provide "free" birth control, which is not "free."  The cost is just passed along in the form of higher insurance costs for everyone.   And in the very near future, people of good will will be required to pay even more for their insurance because we will be handing out "free" abortions.  I think that's something even non-Catholics can agree with Catholics about.

Remember recently when Pelosi made some silly remark about Catholics having this "conscience thing" meaning as long as we followed our conscience every thing would be just hunky dory? 

As I said in my article linked above, it means a well-formed conscience, Nancy.  And who's to blame for Catholic women contracepting at the same rate as the rest of the country?  Let's take a look at what happened in the 60's when the "pill" first hit the market.  Priests, who themselves had poorly formed consciences, gave a wink and a nudge to women using birth control.

I was there.  I saw it.  And it continues today.

They sided with dissenters when Pope Paul VI wrote the encyclical letter in 1968 Humanae Vitae, which explained very carefully and beautifully why birth control was wrong.   More winks and nudges were forthcoming.  I was there. I saw it.

Anyone with a properly formed conscience would see birth control for what it really is - a dangerous trip down a very slick road.  It demeans the role of women, motherhood, marriage, and family.  It turns men into "users of women", and away from their more natural role of provider and protector.  It has fostered a world in which middle school age boys refer to girls they don't like as "f*king c*nts", as I overheard in the library just last week...the girls sitting with them were nodding in agreement.

We wouldn't be having any discussion about killing a full term baby in the womb if we had listened when people smarter than us told the truth about birth control.

More:

Stacy McCain, in one of his best articles ever, takes a look at contraception and abortion from a non-Catholic view point and does it very well - and we thank him. 

Take time to read his wonderful article (if for no other reason than I spent a whole bunch of time tracking it down.)

The Pill at 50: Unhappy Un-Birthday

Battling over birth control...

While wandering around over at Memeorandum, I spied this opinion piece from the New York Times about the heartless nonsense of Catholic bishops not wanting to cover birth control in any insurance coverage provided for their employees.

Two other publications weighed in - The Washington Post and the Washington Monthly.  I had to take a peek at the comments on the second two because the Times article had none. To be expected, they were vile and viciously anti-Catholic.

Let's talk turkey here, since it is the day after Thanksgiving.  This issue really has nothing to do with Catholics, unless you're an economic dummy.  What it does have to do with is mandates.  Government mandates, to be exact. 

Listen carefully now.  Nothing is free.  Every time the government mandates more of something that someone has to provide for "free", someone else is paying for it - and that would be me and you. 

Most Catholics gave up their bitching rights long ago as they contracept at the same rate as the rest of the world.  And the bishops?  They really thought by backing ObamaCare and asking for conscience clauses they would be protected.  How naive can a bunch of guys be?  Never mind.  I seem to be full of stupid questions today. 

So never mind the Church, the bishops, or anything else except the primary issue here which would be:  I don't want to pay for your contraception.  I also don't want to pay for Viagra or any other "life style" drug for anyone, for any reason.  Read my lips - buy your own! Capice? 

For all you people leaving uninformed comments on the above mentioned articles demanding "free" birth control for everyone, think about it when your 71 year old mother doesn't get her aneurysm fixed because it would be a waste of money because of her "advanced" age.  At least you'll be able to rest easy in the knowledge that mom's birth control was "free."

"Catholic" Kathleen Sebelius backs "free" birth control...

 obviously she's never heard "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" 

From the Florida Independent: 

At a luncheon hosted by NARAL Pro-Choice America yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius criticized the recent pushback from anti-abortion advocates against a recent decision requiring insurance plans to cover birth control without co-pays.

Sebelius has been a key player in the recent decision by the Obama administration to make it easier for women to afford birth control. The new requirement would be implemented through the Affordable Care Act. Sebelius asked that birth control be included in a list of preventative care services to be covered by insurance companies — thereby requiring that birth control be covered without co-payments. For many women, steep co-pays have deterred them from purchasing family planning services.  source

Later in the same article it says (emphasis mine): 

According to the Associated Press:

Sebelius said the national health law increases access to birth control, which she calls the single biggest step to reducing the number of abortions.

“Forty percent of unplanned pregnancies end in those women seeking abortions,” Sebelius said, then grew sarcastic: “Wouldn’t you think that people who want to reduce the number of abortions would champion the cause of widely available, widely affordable contraceptive services? Not so much.”  source

Well, which is it Ms. Sebelius?  Is it so expensive that women can't afford it or is "widely available and widely affordable?"  And explain to me how a woman who can't afford birth control can afford an abortion.  The fact is, Ms. Sebelius - most women who have unplanned pregnancies are already on birth control. 


Cardinal DiNardo, who is the chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, has taken issue with a decision by Health and Human Services to include birth control in a list of preventive care services.

Excerpt from letter Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo

The same forces, aided by advertising and entertainment media, promote a selfish and demeaning view of human sexuality, by extolling the alleged good of sexual activity without love or commitment. This view of sex as “free” of commitment or consequences has no place for openness to new life. Hence contraceptives are promoted even to young teens as though they were essential to women’s well-being, and abortion defended as the “necessary” back-up plan when contraceptives fail. And fail they do. Studies report that most women seeking abortions were using contraception in the month they became pregnant. Again and again, studies show that increasing access to contraception fails to reduce rates of unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

Both these trends—a distorted view of sexuality and a disdain for the role of religion—are exhibited by the Department of Health and Human Services’ recent decision on the “preventive services” to be mandated in virtually all private health plans under the new health care law. The Department ruled that such mandated services will include surgical sterilization and all FDA-approved contraceptive drugs and devices—including the abortifacient drug “Ella,” a close analogue to the abortion pill RU-486.

The decision is wrong on many levels. Preventive services are aimed at preventing diseases (e.g., by vaccinations) or detecting them early to aid prompt treatment (e.g., screening for diabetes or cancer). But pregnancy is not a disease. It is the normal, healthy state by which each of us came into the world. Far from preventing disease, contraceptives can have serious health consequences of their own, for example, increasing the risk of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease, such as AIDS, increasing the risk of breast cancer from excess estrogen, and of blood clots that can lead to stroke from synthetic progestin. Mandating such coverage shows neither respect for women’s health or freedom, nor respect for the consciences of those who do not want to take part in such problematic initiatives.

The “religious employer” exemption offered by the Department is so extremely narrow that it protects almost no one. Catholic institutions providing health care and other services to the needy could be forced to fire their non-Catholic employees and cease serving the poor and vulnerable of other faiths—or stop providing health coverage at all. It has been said that Jesus himself, or the Good Samaritan of his famous parable, would not qualify as “religious enough” for the exemption, since they insisted on helping people who did not share their view of God.  read entire letter

Obama: "Darn Tooting"... "free" birth control for everyone.

Sapientiae Christianae, Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Christians as Citizens

35 page letter  (pdf) from the Bishops to HHS claiming that the decision violates the First Amendment’s religion clause, and they requested that the mandate be rescinded “in its entirety.”


Having problems commenting?  Email me at adrienne@icehouse.net and let me know.  

Obama: "Darn Tooting"...

"free" birth control for everyone.

[...]The proposed regulation, designed to implement part of Obamacare, will require all private health plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives--including those that cause abortions—without charging any fees or co-pay. These regulations were drawn to implement a provision in Obama’s health-care law that calls for all health-care plans to cover “preventive services.” read the rest

But, but - people think he's a "nice guy."