…yeah, well there OUGHTA be one for this shameful behavior:
This is what’s wrong with the entitlement society. Only thing she didn’t mention was free contraception. Free or not, I damn sure hope she’s taking it. Lazy bitch!
Okay, I don’t know about you, but I am about damn fed up of all this bullying by Media Matters, and even moreso the advertisers who caved to their pressure to pull their advertising from Rush Limbaugh’s show. How do we fight this? We let these advertisers know EXACTLY how we feel about their pussification inflicted by the left-wing media. If I have ever done business with any of these nine corporations, it has already been cut off, or will soon be cut off. I will also make note for time immemorial to NEVER do business with ANY of them, and will tell my friends to do the same.
Scribes, pundits and patriots everywhere… READY YOUR PENS, KEYBOARDS, AND TELEPHONES! Let these wusses know the boycott door swings both ways!
Please share this info with everyone you know who cares about free speech (and the hypocritical left-wing media).
P.S. I find it quite amusing that as of this date and time (11:52 PM ET), “Tax Resolution Services” is still displaying Rush’s image as a testimonial on their site.
I wonder if Rush (or his attorneys) are aware of this? If you know him and can let him know, I implore you to do so.
These companies are no better than our appeaser-in-chief. Besides, how many OWSers or Media Matters leftards do you think use these companies or services? They either couldn’t afford them, or wouldn’t support their “corporateness” in principle. Good lord! It’s time these tards got a taste of their own medicine.
Okay, so that may sound harsh, but how else do you describe Sec. Sebilius’ explanation of the cost-effectiveness of the manadate? She explains that because fewer babies will be born, insurance premiums will actually be either a net-neutral or net-negative. Let me get this straight then; here’s the recipe:
The woman wants to have as much sex as she can
They get “free” contraception from the government
The babies they would normally have had are therefore never born
The insurance carrier (i.e., Obamacare) is spared from pre/post-natal, ob/gyn, then pediatric care costs
The woman gets to go on having as much sex as she wants
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.
“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”
Ummmmm….so from this we’re supposed to glean that having a child is a bad thing? Is this part of the Obama administration’s “green” agenda? I know that sounds like a stretch, but there are many so-called environmentalists who believe that over-population would be bad for the environment.
Are decreased birth rates in the Western world what we really want? There are plenty of studies out that show lower birth rates in Western countries are really going to prove detrimental to civilization globally. From Demographic Winter:
The years have not been kind to this most important institution – the family, particularly the last four decades. Worldwide, families have broken down at a historically unprecedented pace. There are certainly records of how now-extinct societies have experienced similar declines before their demise, but what we now face is unique in that it has a global spread. This has ominous portent.
The family’s importance to basic social structures has perhaps been more explored and discussed than its importance to other aspects of our world, and certainly deserves continued study. What is probably less obvious, and therefore less examined, is the family’s impact on such things as the rule of law, democratic structures, societal and even technological advancement, education, successful commerce and economic structures. Society depends on these in order to remain stable and the family’s impact on them is profound.
When the great social experiments of the 1960’s were launched, and when concern over a “population bomb” loomed large, we did not have the social science and economic studies we have available to us today. So the world embarked unknowingly on a self-destructive course.
Do we really want to go down this sacrificial path for woman’s (and man’s) pleasure alone? I hope we don’t turn out to be that selfish as a civilization. But if Obama and Sebelius have their way, children will soon be nothing more than a choice (before or after the fact). If we continue down this path, how can we truly expect to be able to self-sustain? That frightening answer is, no, we cannot.
You have to watch the whole thing because it’s really incredible. Chris Wallace asked the first key question I don’t think anybody else has asked about the new “preventive care” or “contraception” mandate that was handed down as part of Obamacare. The question came early on, and Jack Lew’s answer was stunningly blatant. Here’s the key portion to which I am referring, from the Fox News transcript:
WALLACE: Before we get to the president’s new budget and I promise we will, I want to clear up some lingering question about the president’s revised policy about providing health insurance coverage for birth control to the employees of religious institutions. The president now says that Catholic institutions don’t have to provide the coverage but the insurance companies do.
The question — where does the president get the power to tell a private company they have to offer a product and offer it for free?
LEW: Well, Chris, just to be clear — the president has the authority under the Affordable Care Act to have these kinds of rules take affect.
Wait what?
Please, I want everyone to pay attention to this and pass it along. This interview, en toto, was quite revealing, but this first bit made me hit rewind on my DVR about six times, making sure I heard what he said. His response was not from the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence or even any of the Federalist Papers.
Until Obamacare, a.k.a., the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, was passed by Congress, the Executive Branch did not have such broad and overreaching powers. Forget about the individual mandate and contraceptive issues in the news lately…we must focus, folks, on this one glaring (and frightening) fact of this legislation. If Obamacare grants the Executive Branch the power to force indiviudal companies to provide something for FREE to all women everywhere, there is absolutely NO limit to what else this administration can conjure up.
Jack Lew and all the other apologists for this latest heinous power grab seem to be trying to convince us that “studies show” (~rolling my eyes~) providing contraception and “preventive care” for women’s “health” issues actually makes the cost of the insurance premiums cheaper, so there really is no “cost” to the insurance companies; it’s apprently break-even for them. Yes, that’s right… it’s cheaper to prevent a woman from getting pregnant and a baby from being born, so why the heck would ANYBODY be against this mandate? /sarc
What country is this in which we live…China?
And Mr. Lew et. al.; if this will cost the insurance companies “nothing,” why are you claiming it will save women approximately $600 per year? It either costs or it doesn’t. You can’t have it both ways.
But I digress.
Let’s forget about how much contraception costs; let’s just focus on why I am writing this post in the first place. The most significant and important question whe should ALL be askng today is this: what part of the Constitution grants the President or Congress the absolute right or authority by which they can force a PRIVATE company to give, FOR FREE, any service or product to any American? Just once more for punctuation and clarity, here again is Jack Lew giving his stunning response to Chris Wallace:
After you watch it and hear it, just let that tiny part just simmer and tell me if you think this is just an “access” or “women’s healthcare” issue. And lastly, can we disabuse these folks of this nonsense about “access” to contraception? Did I miss something here? Are birth control pills are now illegal and no longer available by another other method, or through any other manner? Are they prohibitively so expensive that everyday Americans can no longer afford them? If that is the case, how about condoms? Last I heard they are at the point at which they’ll probably just start falling from the sky, courtesy of the condom fairy!
If you think this is anything less than an absolute overreach and power grab from the Obama administration, you are kidding youself.
Is this rich, or what? Joy Behar has been nominally “religious” in the past, only alluding to the fact that she’s Catholic, but when it comes to all others besides herself (see “Republicans” or “Conservatives”), religion has always been a bad thing.
Yet today she seems to go whole-hog (pun intended) to defend Obama’s recent National Prayer Day Breakfast speech, where he tries to invoke scripture, saying that Jesus Christ would be in favor of his wealth redistribution plans via increased taxes on the wealthy, i.e.,”socialism.” And Joy finds Jesus.
She argues with Elisabeth Hasselbeck that the right must have forgotten the “meek shal inherit the earth” part of the bible.
Huh?
Joy, you should be very careful citing scripture, especially if you don’t know it yourself.
What does the meek inheriting the earth have to do with Jesus supporting taxing the wealthy? What about the passage from 2 Thessalonians, 3:10 “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat?”
Joy, thou doth not knowest where thy speaketh from.
Joy also can’t resist getting a dig in at her favorite target, President Bush. She says he only discussed faith from what he learned “in the 12 step program.” Really Joy? What, are you 12? Really? Elisabeth rightly takes you to task on that, too. Then what is this nonsense that Whoopi gets into, saying for them to do a fair “tit-for-tat” comparison of what different Presidents have said, they (Whoopi & Elisabeth) would have to both do oppo research so they could provide equal examples of both. Hey, Whoopi…since when did “equal time” or “fair and balanced” enter your vernacular when bashing the right? And then Barbara piles on, saying she understands why people like Elisabeth would have her view since they don’t like Obama. Et. tu, Barbara?
This should come as no surprise to anyone, mostly to Joy. Admit it, Joy…Elisabeth got the best of you, and you couldn’t stand it. Sadly I think you believe God speaks against “false profits,” instead of “false prophets.” Unfortunately you probably don’t know any better. Nevertheless, I don’t feel sorry for you one bit. It’s so obvious when you get angry when you lose arguments… and OH, DO I LOVE THOSE MOMENTS!