Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
Proof that Ricochet exists in a separate world from some of our neighbors.
First check out the portrayal by The Hill of a president unfairly attacked and set-upon by sinister forces. The headline, "Religion burns Obama again."
'“It almost appears that every time he tries to steer clear of [the intersection of politics and religion], he steps right into it,” said Susan MacManus, a professor of political science at the University of South Florida. “He’s trying not to call attention to it and then he finds himself in the middle of it.”'
Uh huh.
And The Hill is pretty mild compared to the view from Midtown Manhattan. The New York Times editorial team immediately mans the barricades to defend the indefensible by means of its preferred tactic: an offensive against a straw man.
In a piece bearing the lofty title, "The Freedom to Choose Birth Control" we see dimly, through the smoke of red hot righteous indignation, Saint Barack battling the forces of degeneracy who stand within inches of extinguishing the last flicker of access to contraceptive technology.
"In response to a phony crisis over “religious liberty” engendered by the right, President Obama seems to have stood his ground on an essential principle — free access to birth control for any woman. That access, along with the ability to receive family planning and preventive health services, was at the foundation of health care reform."
Now they tell me. All the president's lofty rhetoric during the healthcare debate insisting his purpose was "bending the cost curve" while providing millions of uninsured Americans access to a basic health insurance policy was just a sham. Today the Times admits that "an essential principle -- free access to birth control for any woman" along with "family planning"--Newspeak for abortion--and "preventive health services, was at the foundation of health care reform."
Obamacare delenda est
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
Sep '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
Unrestrained sexual gratification is a human right.
Aug '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
"Free access to birth control" is an "essential principle"?
Dec '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
There ain't no such thing as a free pill.
Jul '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
Obama is interested in 100% government sponsored abortions. I prefer not to pay for them at all. This fight is the set up for Obama's second term in which he will continue to issue edicts in all areas to gain control of the commanding heights of the economy. The current fight has many goals for the administration but power is number one.
Mar '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
Long before Obama, Erica Jong understood his current quest for votes based on the now mythic "Z.F." Who knew that when Obama co-opted this base desire it would morph from a mere want to a right--an "essential principle"--under ObamaCare?
May '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
I've noticed that Sec. Sebelius repeatedly uses the phrase "full range of reproductive health choices" when defending the administration's goals. From their point of view, supposedly, Church organizations and other conscientious objectors are imposing obstacles on women, preventing them from exercising their freedom to control their "reproductive destiny" (a phrase I've seen elsewhere) completely unfettered.
But take note of what the law doesn't include. HHS is not mandating insurance coverage (with no co-pay, co-insurance, or deductible) for pregnancy tests, pre-natal treatment, delivery, and post-partem care.
It is mandating "free" access to the full range of reproductive health choices, except for the one option that actually involves reproduction.
Party of Death, indeed.
Dec '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
I cannot imagine a discussion based upon a premise that is more tiresome. This is like trying to politely comment on a Santorum post and having him respond that I need to re-evaluate the concept of marriage.
The only meaningful point is that government has no business being involved in any of these issues in the first place. The rest of this is just counting angels dancing on pin heads and deciding how much government is allowed to do, in what area. Good luck, ever, convincing a majority of the populace to agree with you as you shove your shoulders deeper into the bear-trap that the Supreme Court set in 1973. They were evil and they did it anyway and yet so many people still argue about just how much government is allowed to do.
40 years, next year, and probably 40 million abortions later, conservatives are still arguing between "choice" and "life". How's that working out for you?
You are fighting over the wrong terrain. If you want right-leaning people to listen to you, stop answering to left-leaning policies and start thinking about emphasizing limited government, in the first place.
(continued)
Dec '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
(continued)
I abhor abortion.
But I don't think for a moment that politiciains are going to make this go away.
That's up to us, in our families and communities.
It is the left that is determined to make "choice", in all of it's facets, front and center in our politics. They only win if we go along. We win if we rob them of their issue, straighten out our families, and restore limited government.
For a non-CoC-compliant discussion of how we are driving good people away, consider listening to this. Somwhere in there, they get to gay marriage and all of the other things that excercise people that are forgetting that the Left has an agenda. The Left wants us divided.
A government that neither allows, nor compels, certain behaviors is our conservative government.
Anything else is just a distraction that the Left has placed in our paths to weaken us.
Dec '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
I'm hearing from defenders of Obama's proposals that opposition to those proposals is an assault on women's freedom to choose birth control. These people are making explicit what we have always suspected about them: their worldview is the freedom to choose something necessarily must include someone else paying for it.
Dec '10
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
George Savage: Proof that Ricochet exists in a separate world from some of our neighbors.
First check out the portrayal by The Hill of a president unfairly attacked and set-upon by sinister forces. The headline, "Religion burns Obama again."
'“It almost appears that every time he tries to steer clear of [the intersection of politics and religion], he steps right into it,” said Susan MacManus, a professor of political science at the University of South Florida. “He’s trying not to call attention to it and then he finds himself in the middle of it.”'
Uh huh.
Obama is bringing into focus the fact that his is not the icky, old-fashioned God who makes all kinds of rules for what people must and must not do, but rather the cool modern Deity that has only one commandment: "If it feels good, you have a right to do it and a requirement to pay for others to get it."
Jul '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
It's pretty clear that the NY Times is enjoying the Pelosi-esque "pass it to find out what's in it" re-interpretation of literally anything regarding "health care", in that they'll get to cherry pick the items they like in the package and claim that that was what it was about all along. I would suggest that the NYT editors go back a year or two when this catastrophe was first sent rolling down the hill toward what's left of America, and check their own coverage of Obamacare, to remind themselves just how much this reproductive choice and freedom of choosing things with stuff for women was the driving political and socia-economic force that really meant that we mandate coverage for spermicide.
It can't get much clearer. We have literally been plowing dirt with our train for a long time, because we left the rails some time ago. There is quite literally no part of the individual's life that is not now, in every sense, part of the Business of the Leviathan. Worse, Barry lies to us late in the day on Friday, to cover his shame.
An embarrassment to himself, and us.
Edited on February 12, 2012 at 2:48amMay '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
If health care is a right that the government provides for free, what about our other rights? Shouldn't the government also provide free guns?
Can you imagine an amendment that provided 1 dollar for free guns for each dollar spent on Planned Parenthood? That debate would be fun to watch.
(Extraneous thought: Maybe we are already doing that via the Dept. of Justice. Fast and Furious.)
Jul '11
Re: Our Post-Partisan President is Misunderstood Again
It is almost like Obama and his administration do not understand religion or religious people. They can not seem to fathom the concept of true faith. That a group of people can hold faithful to their beliefs and not sell them for personal advantage or 20 pieces of silver. Could it be that the administration is not religious at all and do not understand belief in God as most do? Could the administration be made up of the type of people that go to Church for material reasons and not for the greater worship of God and the betterment of their souls? I hope this is not so, but fear it might be.