Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Obama Refuses To Budge

(A follow-up to this previous post. Settle in for one of my long posts)

According to this source:
Despite renewed statements of concern by Catholic leaders and lawmakers, the Obama administration is done negotiating and will finalize its plan requiring insurance companies to provide free contraception to women working and studying at religious institutions, President Obama’s chief of staff said Sunday....
What Obama has done is this: by forcing all insurance companies to provide contraception free of charge to insureds, these institutions, including hospitals, will have to (1) knuckle under, (2) stop providing any employer-based health insurance (They may not legally be able to do so), or (3) close their doors. Obama's mandate goes into effect on August 1, 2012.

Suppose you and I worked for one of these institutions? Would we stay as employees if there were no health insurance offered by our employer? Could we stay? Individual policies are expensive beyond belief and offer coverage more limited than that of group plans.

We have one world-famous Catholic hospital here in the Washington, D.C. area: Georgetown University Medical Center. This facility provides services at a level that no other nearby facility can, particularly in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. What happens to people's health care if Georgetown Hospital closes its doors?

And what of the Catholic University of America?

Now let's make it personal.

If you personally believe that Obama's mandate is one that violates God's law, are you going to cancel your health-insurance coverage? After all, if you have a group plan, you personally are voluntarily paying into a plan that funds Obama's mandate, which includes abortion pills.

Uncomfortable thought, isn't it?

"These are the times that try men's souls" — in a context different than the original context.

Once a government policy in place, undoing that policy is a Herculean task or an impossibility.

Make no mistake: Even though, thus far, the Catholic bishops have rejected Obama's mandate, Obama has won this round (and even beyond as I will note at the end of this blog post):
...[The bishops] said they still had "serious moral concerns," noting that the proposal didn't contain provisions for religious employers who self-insure, meaning the employer takes on the underlying risk of covering employees' health care....
I venture to guess that many employers cannot afford to take on that risk, particularly if high-risk individuals are in the pool of insureds.

On a Constitutional level, Silverfiddle recently made the following point at his site:
Does the federal government have the authority to tell a business to give things away? That's what Obama's tissue-thin fig leaf of a compromise does.... If the government can do this, why not command grocery stores to give food away?
Do Americans understand that Obama's recent mandate is tyranny most foul and Constitutionally baseless?

Do Americans realize what's at stake?


Additional Reading (contrasting viewpoint): "How Obama Set a Contraception Trap for the Right" by Andrew Sullivan.

56 comments:

  1. Obama Blames “Founding Fathers” For Making It Difficult For Him To “Bring Change”But..."I will keep plotting"
    When Mr. Obama says, "Everyone plays by the same set of rules," it means they conform to his rules.

    Totalitarian regime:

    Government by a little group of leaders on the basis of an ideology, that claims general validity for all aspects of life and usually attempts to replace religion. The regime does not tolerate any deviation from its state ideology. Regime opponents are persecuted, tortured, detained in concentration camps and members of ethnic minorities are killed in mass executions (genocide).
    Historic examples of totalitarian regimes include: National Socialism (Germany under Hitler, 1933-1945) and Stalinism.

    http://www.democracy-building.info/definition-democracy.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. The regime does not tolerate any deviation from its state ideology.

    And history shows, over and over again, the citizens will not band together soon enough to prevent a totalitarian regime from continuing down its tyrannical path and enslaving the people.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This "Contraception" business in truth has NOTHING to do with obeying or disobeying "God's Law." It has nothing to do with RELIGION per se at ALL.

    The Tyrannists (Obummer is just a Figurehead, believe me) are using Leftist Thinking and Leftist "Revolutionary" tactics to bring about yet another Great Leap Forward in achieving total control through CENTRALIZED POWER.

    Don't you realize that by FORCING private insurance companies to GIVE AWAY products readily obtained at your local pharmacy or through your private physician, insurance rates will have to RISE in direct proportion. In other words the cost will be passed on to YOU and ME. This will make private insurance less affordable than ever, thus bolstering the Tyrannist's case for a "Single Payer" system -- i.e. Euro-Canadian-style Socialized Medicine.

    Like everything else the Left does it's ALL about wresting Power and Control away from the private sector and OUT of the hands of the Individual.

    "Religion," always a hyper-emotional issue best left alone, has been USED as WEDGE to split the people away from their liberty.

    Leftists are not "just another point of view." Leftists are The ENEMIES of FREEDOM.

    DON'T fall for their insidious tactics. VOTE THEM OUT. And if that fails to work, ROUST them out by MAIN FORCE..

    "The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed [every now and then] by the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    ~ Thomas Jefferson

    If Obama & CO are allowed to get away with THIS, you will soon see businesses of ALL kinds "required" to GIVE AWAY their goods and services to "those in need."

    That, my friends, is COMMUNISM. Communism brought about by STEALTH. Communism that -- if left unchecked -- will have to be destroyed by VIOLENCE. The alternative is acquiescence to existence as a virtual galley slave on a state-run Trireme.

    There is nothing "academic" about this crisis. It's not "theoretical" or "rhetorical" it is ACTUAL. We are being slowly-but-surely THROTTLED to DEATH by insidious, relentless machinations of the LEFT -- many of whom now all themselves "Neo-Conservatives."

    Younger generations have been thoroughly DUPED to the point where, even though they may THINK they re "conservative," their indoctrinated views in truth have rendered them PAWNS of the LEFT.

    And they now have it firmly fixed in The Public Mind that McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, and NIXON were evil!

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  4. FT,
    This "Contraception" business in truth has NOTHING to do with obeying or disobeying "God's Law." It has nothing to do with RELIGION per se at ALL.

    I'm not sure that I agree with that portion of your comment. I know of and personally know a lot of people who feel to the contrary.

    I'm not one of those people who cry out, "Overturn Roe v. Wade!" I, of course, have my own personal convictions regarding abortion. That said, Roe v. Wade, in and of itself, doesn't FORCE a woman or a girl to undergo abortion. The abortion is a choice -- legally, anyway.

    BUT

    I know a lot of people who claim to stand on God's Word as their basis for their pro-life stance. These people are sincere in their belief, IMO.

    Are these same people, particularly those who are not particularly political, willing to stand up and be counted -- to be Daniels -- when the financial consequences have the potential to be great? How strong is the pro-lifers' commitment, after all?

    You made my other point better than I did:

    If Obama & CO are allowed to get away with THIS, you will soon see businesses of ALL kinds "required" to GIVE AWAY their goods and services to "those in need."

    Redistribution -- in the name of social "justice."

    This will make private insurance less affordable than ever, thus bolstering the Tyrannist's case for a "Single Payer" system...

    Isn't that the real goal of ObamaCare?

    -----------

    Anyway, I hope that my post makes people willing to raise an outcry on one or both levels:

    (1) the faith-based one

    (2) the Constitutional one

    It's now or never!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good morning, AOW.

    All I was really trying to say was that the attack on "RELIGION," is in truth an attack on LIBERTY.

    "Religion" is just being USED by the Left as another ploy to implement another Power Grab.

    The true goal of the left is the destruction of FREEDOM and the establishment of TOTALITARIANISM.

    I'm not one who believes martyrdom is the ideal response to oppression. I have always believed faith was -- and ought to be -- a very private thing. True faith can sustain one in a dungeon or a palace -- under tyranny or in resistance to the temptations to licentiousness that too often accompany freedom.

    I feel indignant when faith is USED to further purely POLITICAL goals, even when it is employed by conservatives.

    For instance, I find the loudmouthed Jay Sekulow -- a self-professed convert to Christianity from Judaism, who has made himself prominent in the evangelical movement as an attorney purportedly representing evangelical interests -- to be thoroughly obnoxious. I can't stand to listen to him. Rarely have I encountered anyone more full of himself.

    In case you haven't noticed, I don't like AGGRESSIVENESS at all.

    Isn't it supposed to be the MEEK who will inherit the earth?

    I find "the still, small voice" far more persuasive than any of the boomers.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  6. FT,
    "Religion" is just being USED by the Left as another ploy to implement another Power Grab.

    Yes, and I'm not irked at you. My comment may have sounded that way.

    I AM irked over the fact that so many pro-lifers whom I know will not stand up and be counted.

    Old saying: "Put your money where you're mouth is."

    I am losing sleep over this matter, BTW.

    ReplyDelete
  7. FT,
    Anyway, let's see what comments come in here.

    It is very possible that I've made the post too personal.

    Oh, well, My site, my choice.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't agree with the Obama administration. Government has no business mandating to a private organization what they shall or shall not provide...

    I also do not see Catholics cancelling their health care for vastly mre expensive privately bought policies. I guess it's a case of putting one's money where one's mouth is!

    However, having worked for a Catholic hospital in the past, I find I do not agree with them on everything.

    While I would never get an abortion, I find preventive birth control to be OK.

    After choosing that birth control pills, ect, weren't the right choice for us after our third child, my husband decided to have a vasectomy. Due to a minor complication, this procedure had to be done not in the doctor's office, but in an OR at great personal cost to us. At the time, my Catholic insurance would not pay for the procedure.

    A man's body naturally re-absorbes unexpelled sperm. After a vasectomy, only seminal fluid is ejaculated. Considering that God ordains relations between a man and wife, how is this a 'waste' or abortifactant, particularly between a commited married couple with multiple children?

    *sigh*

    ReplyDelete
  9. Quite frankly I hope he keeps it up. Losing is all he will do on this issue.

    People that will vote for him because he passed it - the far left - were going to anyways.

    People who will vote against him for doing it may have voted for him to begin with.

    All in all the issue itself is not going to be a huge deal. The danger for him is losing the Catholic church and having priests attack him from the pulpit. This could sway some Catholics who are soft on him.

    Finally, and most importantly, it restarts the whole "Obama is anti-Religion" discussion again - in the election year.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Is anyone else finding the comments from the left interesting on this?

    We are hearing that the GOP proposing to allow companies to opt out of having to pay for birth control is infringing on a women's right to it.

    Keep in mind, no one is trying to outlaw birth control pills. The Obama administration is making companies pay for it in full. The GOP is trying to stop this.

    Interesting mentality that not giving something for free now equates to disallowing it...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Brooke,
    Interesting anecdote.

    All health insurance policies have limitations. Those limitations often stem from affordability on that part of the insurance company.

    In the case of Catholic insurance, some limitations stem from church teachings. And I know others who had to pay for certain procedures specifically because of the limitations of Catholic insurance.

    That said, the fact is that no insurance company can afford to pay for every possible procedure.

    Here's a reach, but I'll type it in anyway....Suppose plastic surgery -- the kind that isn't post-accident or post-mastectomy -- is deemed necessary because, without the surgery, "the wellness" of the patient is jeopardized -- specifically, this woman is clinically depressed because her neck is a turkey wattle. Will insurance companies then have to pay for those procedures as well? And why should I fund fixing her turkey wattle when I'd like to have my turkey wattle fixed. Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Progressive public education has done an excellent job prepping the battlefield. How many Americans now believe their rights come from the constitution, and that if the law is passed, we must obey?

    People have no concept of what a right is, and see nothing wrong with using the power of the state to force others to give them stuff.

    This is sad...

    Thanks for the linkage!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I just found THIS at Maggie's Notebook: "Church Premiums Go Down?"

    Maggie also points out the following:

    Blue Cross Blue Shield says these services cost about $2.83 BILLION annually. The cost will shift to “administrative” costs, premiums are adjusted up.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Silverfiddle,
    It's beyond sad.

    It is the destruction of the republic!

    ReplyDelete
  15. You might want to check out my post today, Obama fails to tell Americans about the dangers of Contraception. "The Pill" is a known carcinogen, and causes cancer. Women are being duped and not told the truth about the danger involved in order to promote the progressive agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Obama and Axelrod have calculated the the majority of women will support Obama on this and will vote for him in November. Checkmate, America!

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Progressive public education has done an excellent job prepping the battlefield. How many Americans now believe their rights come from the constitution, and that if the law is passed, we must obey?"

    A very good argument, SilverFiddle, that could be interpreted to support my contention, which so angered and offended your colleague Finntann, that Marx-inspired "Progressive" thinking and Marxian-style initiatives should have been SUPPRESSED by law and driven back under the slimy rocks from which they emanated, and thence CRUSHED.

    Calculated, strategically employed Evil deserves NO VOICE in a decent, well-maintained society.

    Sorry! I guess I've just redefined myself as a "Suppressionist." So be it.

    I prefer to think of myself as an exponent of good, old-fashioned, ultra-pragmatic Common Sense.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  18. He's already got L'il Ricky talking out against birth control.

    Ricky's taking the bait and this is being played masterfully.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ducky, I can see how you think that but the CNN quotes I've read in the past are very different....most of the sites carrying that story cut off what he continued to say. His views on birth control 'come from his catholic faith' but he 'voted for 12 years in the senate to allow contraceptive funding and it's a 'personal decision'.
    Of course, some of the sites take that statement and say (and I quote) "Santorum is after your birth control" and "Santorum is against women's rights and against birth control. He prefers that women stay barefoot and pregnant."

    the lies will continue...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Hi AOW.
    As i already said at IBA, i presume Obama won't back down.He's aiming for something much bigger!
    If he gets his second term he will claim although i stoud up against the Constitution amendments people voted for me and backed me.
    We no longer need such a outdated document America must renovate their laws.
    Exit Constitution!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Here in Missouri, we voted to reject Obamacare and the individual mandate. It is now against the constitution of the state of Missouri to comply with Obamacare.

    We're not California. No circus court of appeals is going to overturn the will and vote of the people here.

    Not without gunfire.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Bunkerville has rightly pointed out some important information that all here at this thread should read! See THIS!

    ReplyDelete
  23. There has got to be some way to overturn this atrocity.

    It is so hard not hate Obama. I cannot stand that he claims to be a "Christian" when he is plainly not.

    He is a marxist/fascist dictator.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 98% of Catholic women use birth control.

    It saves lives.

    Obama's solution was smart and fair.

    The Catholic Church is out of touch and now acting like hypocrites in wanting the government to deny birth control even it's not on their insurance-or their dime.

    So, if you work for Morons and they don't believe in blood transfusions-and you need one-it's ok if they let you die?

    Think, people, think.

    The loony GOP is actually running with this not realizing they are only making themselves look even more like out of touch dinosaurs.

    It's what they're good at. Keep it up!

    LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  26. PS, those of you who have to go down the 'communism' route or "marxist/fascist dictator" crap (well, which one is it?) or actually questioning his 'Christianity,' (which only points to your own lack thereof) or quoting Jefferson's "Tree of Liberty..."

    You're well beyond just being 'out of touch dinosaurs.' You're delusional and pretty dumb to by led by the nose by the corporate media who need to create another wedge issue to deflect from the economic growth that has been happening and the lower unemployment rate.

    Why do you hate America so?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Supposedly the Senate is going to take him on concerning this. They need to be taking him on on EVERYTHING he is doing. Where have they been?

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  28. Liberalmann,
    Depending on your age, you will rue the the day that we out of touch dinosaurs are gone.

    I won't even to into the matter of how out of touch YOU are.

    ReplyDelete
  29. *Facepalm*

    I assume by typing Morons in his absurd hypothetical comment, Liberalmann meant Mormon, who absolutely do believe in blood transfusions and other life-saving procedures.

    I believe LM was trying to speak about Jehovah's Witnesses, and even they don't really all agree on such a ban.

    I also don't know that they employ a whole lot of people or are a major insurance provider.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Obama vs. the Church", an essay by Rich Lowry. He makes some important points in that essay, IMO. Please read that essay.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Brooke,
    I assume by typing Morons in his absurd hypothetical comment, Liberalmann meant Mormon, who absolutely do believe in blood transfusions and other life-saving procedures.

    LOL! I had overlooked his previous comment as I'm still on my first cup of coffee.

    You're absolutely correct that Mormons do permit blood transfusions and that Jehovah's Witnesses do not.

    Obviously, Liberalmann doesn't know much about those two groups. To him, any with the label "Christian" are all the same -- that it, idiots, as far as he's concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  32. What the leftists fail to realize this is a step by step process..take a little liberty here and little there and the sheeple will go along until you find yourself in a dictatorship....

    ReplyDelete
  33. What the leftists fail to realize this is a step by step process..take a little liberty here and little there and the sheeple will go along until you find yourself in a dictatorship....

    ReplyDelete
  34. The fact remains, nit pickers, is should a religion decide the life and death of it's congregation or can the government step in and require them?

    In this case Obama came up with an alternative plan and still the right finds a way to bitch.

    What if you worked for Christian Scientists? Can they be allowed to deny you health care altogether?

    Ding, dongs.

    And OK Debbie, give me a list of this 'EVERYTHING he is doing.' Thant should be stopped. How about the Bill requiring equitable salary for women in the marketplace? If you work this is, would you rather go back to the uneven system?

    You rather go back to a system of health care where the insurance companies decide who live and die?

    If you get your warped news from more than Fox/Rush you'd see that Obama is one of the most accomplished Presidents:

    www.whattheheckhasobamadonesofar.com

    ReplyDelete
  35. Blogginator,

    Leftists are aware of what they're doing. Their aim has ALWAYS been to supplant freedom with DICTATORSHIP.

    None of this should surprise any of us. It's been in the works for well over a hundred years Nothing "spontaneous" there.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  36. What if you worked for Christian Scientists? Can they be allowed to deny you health care altogether?

    I've worked for a Christian Scientist before. She didn't provide health insurance at all.

    That's fine. At the time, small business employers weren't required to.

    Calling in sick was a bitch though. "No ma'am, I don't have faith that I can imagine the flu virus I'm infected with doesn't exist. What good would a doctor's excuse do if you don't believe in the efficacy of medicine? Sure, I'll come to work, but I'll make you and everyone else sick as hell."

    And I did.

    ReplyDelete
  37. So we all get our marching orders from Fox and Rush?

    LOLOLOLOLOL!!!

    Oh, oh, oh, and we're nit-pickers, too!

    HAHAHAHAAAA!!! This from the guy that thinks 'Morons' aka 'Mormons' are the same as Jehovah's Witnesses, yet let one of us make the slightest mistake and watch the never-ending exoriation begin!

    Ah, Liberals. Thy name is hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Beamish, I worked at a secular hospital.

    If I called off for illness (not having a spleen makes that happen more frequently), I was punished for not showing up. If I came in while running a fever, ect, I was punished as possibly infecting eldery or immuno-supressed patients.

    It isn't always religion, it is the idiocy of college-trained management and the 'staffing grid.'

    ReplyDelete
  39. Did anyone ask about Christian Scientists? I just scanned the article again and ran quickly through the posts and did not see any reference to CS.

    That said, I've known many Christian Scientists and I can't imagine one of them denying sick leave to an employee not involved in the CS movement.

    Coercion is not their style. They believe in conversion through demonstration -- i.e. living their lives in such a way that it attracts followers.

    You'd have to study Christian Science in some depth -- as I have years ago -- to understand what they really believe. Aside from asking those who pledge membership to give up all contact with alcohol and tobacco (never a bad idea anyway!) they put no restrictions on members -- and certainly none on anyone outside the congregation.

    There's a great deal of merit in their approach to faith, but I'm very much afraid the Christian Science movement long ago passed its peak. Too bad! It has much good to offer -- more so than ever today mired as we are in mechanistic theories and adoration of garbage.

    The so-called Christian Science Monitor (newspaper) has virtually nothing to do with CS anymore, and has lost most of its integrity since the demise of Erwin D. Canham in 1982. The Monitor today, unfortunately, is just another liberal rag taken over by the same journalistic Establishment that gives you all the other liberal rags.

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  40. FT,

    Liberalmann mentioned CS. It is s/he that I'm quoting.

    You're probably right about what what CS's believe and how pushy or not pushy they can be with their religion.

    The one I worked for was the Webster's Dictionary definition of a total @#$@#.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Okay, Beamish. My bad. Sorry. I never read L-man's horse shit. Too predictable. Too boring. A waste of time -- in my never humble opinion.

    ~ FT

    ReplyDelete
  42. Freestinker said: "Leftists are aware of what they're doing. Their aim has ALWAYS been to supplant freedom with DICTATORSHIP."

    You never cease to amaze with your asinine, bombastic comments which have no basis in fact or merit.

    Brooke, It's so hard to talk with dolts like you sometime. Yeah I said 'morons.' I meant Morons. Duh!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Liberalmann,
    Note this warning at the top of the comments box:

    Caveat: Continued invectives and personal attacks will result in deletion.

    If you continue to insult my friends, you're out of here.

    My blog, my rules.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I'm a dolt? You capitalized 'morons' as a proper noun, which led to the logical conclusion that you were improperly spelling the name of a specific group of people.

    Now, far be it from me to be the grammar police, but I'm sure even you could see how most folks would draw that conclusion.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Brooke,
    Well, I AM the grammar police, and you're exactly correct about proper nouns.

    I was going to make that point myself, BTW, but got caught up in doing tasks here at home. Early morning blood work at the lab for Mr. AOW.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Freethinker is right on this. Leftism is generally the ideology of economic fascism. As leftists always push for those who rule over us to have more power and privileges.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I let this go by the 1st time but I refute the claim that 98% of Catholic women use birth control. I call B.S. unless you are excluding all women not eligible to have children.,past menopause, those that have chosen steralization or they are pregnant or just gave birth. In addition the term is too broad because there are natural methods Rthym etc that are considered birth control but they are not prohibited by Faith... There are several studies that confirm the logic of these other factors as the women's reproductive life does not fit into the dogma of the leftists.

    As usual Liberals toss around information that they have not researched or thought about in an effort to sound more intelligent than they are....

    ReplyDelete
  48. Now, Blogginator, you do know what they call people who use the Rhythm System of birth control, don't you?

    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    |
    }
    |
    That's right. They call them PARENTS.

    Cole Porter wrote a song about it.

    I got rhythm
    I got pregnant.
    Got my baby.

    Who could ask for anything more?


    §;-D

    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  49. FT,
    Cole Porter!

    Now, there was a wonderful composer of popular songs! Never mind his orientation and those not-so-hidden messages in many of his songs.

    I've got some nice and quite easy arrangements of some of his pieces.

    ReplyDelete
  50. This does reveal Obama to be the thug he really is. As Paul A. Rahe wrote:

    '[T]here can be only one reason why Sebelius, Pelosi, and Obama decided to proceed. They wanted to show the bishops and the Catholic laity who is boss. They wanted to make those who think contraception wrong and abortion a species of murder complicit in both. They wanted to rub the noses of their opponents in it. They wanted to marginalize them. Humiliation was, in fact, their only aim, and malice, their motive."

    This is ominous.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Liberalmann,

    What if you worked for Christian Scientists? Can they be allowed to deny you health care altogether?

    What an insight into the mind (sarcasm) of a liberal.

    That statement gets right to the meat of this contraceptive debate.

    Yes, a company should be allowed to not offer health insurance. Only a far-left socialist thinks the government should be allowed to mandate what a company offers as benefits or what those benefits include.

    We, as potential employers, have a simple recourse - don't work for them. Until Obama companies did not offer health insurance because the brown shirts dictated it, they offered insurance to attract and retain good employees. You know, before Obama, when people actually had jobs...

    ReplyDelete
  52. Chuck,
    Spot on! Thanks for leaving that excellent comment.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Chuck is right on but that of course is the goal. Get everyone on the government plan.......

    ReplyDelete
  54. A further reflection on this: Catholic leaders have supported the expansion of the welfare state over the decades and were for ObamaCare.

    They did a deal with the devil and now they see the fine print.

    Because of the corruption that permeates the Obama regime Catholic bishops are discovering that they don't have the clout they might otherwise expect. You would think that Obama would reward them for their support for ObamaCare but apparently he knows he can get more votes by using Catholics to create a wedge issue and please the rest of his liberal base by taking on the church.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective