to actually read this shit makes me physically ill

It’s Barack Obama’s funeral. If he signs this it cements it for me. I will not vote for him in 2012. I really don’t care what excuse he gives for doing this. It’s unconscienable.

Conscious clauses? Really?

Isn’t the executive order only affirming current law? It is not like he is restricting abortion coverage.

Catholic Bishops oppose executive order so they will not give Stupak cover.

Obama said long ago that he would not allow abortion to be the issue that would kill reform so he will offer this to Stupak if he wants the cover. However, this is a political, not legal move, so the Senate language will become the law.

cwaltz

If Obama signs language that the HC Reform will uphold current law – why would that bother you?

Because Catholic Bishops don’t oppose health care reform, they oppose Democratic everything. If this same bill had been presented by Republicans, (and judging by the looks of it, it could have been), the Bishops would have embraced it and bullied their sheeple to support it.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” -ALEXANDER TYTLER

Today the Democrats may achieve their dream of filling in a hole in the goal of Cradle to Grave socialism. From SCHIP to ObamaCare and Medicare, government will control your health care. Of course that will just be a start. Once you start eating or doing things that cost to much, well, that will have to be regulated.

It’s going to be one of those days.
Don’t start the feeding this early.

PolitiFact has an article that quotes what Obama told Planned Parenthood back when he was a running for the Democratic nomination.

In a July 17, 2007, appearance before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Obama said the following: “In my mind, reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care, so it is at the center and at the heart of the plan that I propose. Essentially what we’re doing is, we’re going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don’t have health insurance. It will be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services, as well as mental health services and disease management services, because part of our interest is to make sure that we’re putting more money into preventive care.”…

[In] a story that ran in the Chicago Tribune on July 18, 2007, the day after Obama’s Planned Parenthood speech… Washington bureau reporter Mike Dorning wrote that when Obama was asked about his proposal for expanded access to health insurance, the candidate “said it would cover ‘reproductive health services.’ Contacted afterward, an Obama spokesman said that included abortions.”

Here’s video of Obama’s speech to Planned Parenthood. I haven’t watched it yet, but I did see some excerpts that overlapped what PolitiFact reports. (FWIW, the video containing the excerpts just got taken down in the past few days)

I’m a socialist. This bill is not.

If Churches paid taxes (especially property taxes) we could all pay significantly lower property taxes. No Religious Organization has been shy about (often) overtly (at least covertly) telling their members how to vote.

Most except the Unitarians tell their flock to vote Republican. They love war.

I’m aware of all of those facts. It’s just gravy on my reasons for being anti-theist. :-)

Indeed. It is always better to contract with private companies, regardless of the cost in service, money and life and death.

The government does not control “healthcare” with Obamacare. Under Obamacare, American “Healthcare” will be controlled by Health Insurance Companies just like its always been. Insurance companies have been made richer and more powerful by Obamacare.

The poor (who won’t qualify for Medicaid) whom we are lead to believe stand to benefit will be worse off. The government (taxpayers) will subsidize their insurance premiums. Their insurance policies will be worthless in providing any health care to them. The “low cost”, ie: shitty, policies the working poor can “afford” will carry high deductibles, high out-of-pocket limits, high co-pays.

Though they will be saddled with insurance premiums (for an unusable “product”), they will still need to go to emergency rooms for any real health care.

Maybe we should call it the rape gurney Joe clause?

Great. So if someone at Aetna, who’s in a decision-making capacity, has an objection to providing abortion coverage, Aetna doesn’t have to provide abortion coverage at all, in any of its policies. If you voted for Obama, hang your head in shame.

“b) None of the funds appropriated in this Act, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are appropriated in this Act, shall be expended for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.” yes he is. why? because most health insurance plans offer such riders.

Those who seek benefits under this legislation will not have such coverage offered.

This legislation essentially means the returns to backrooms and coat hangers for many.

That’s the way I read it. Bad news. Religiosity has killed the Enlightenment.

Why would it bother me? Gee, perhaps because I’m one of those people who actually believe current law was wrong to begin with. I’m opposed to funding a faith based office because I find the faith based groups who run around spouting marriage is between one man and one woman repugnant. Where’s my amendment so I don’t have to fund it? How about those that are mortally opposed to war? Can they get out of funding the DoD?

Furthermore, I have huge problems with someone who made a big deal about how he was going to repeal the conscience clause reiterating it in his executive order.

I hope he enjoys winning the battle. It just may cause him to lose the war.

If government controlled the healthcare instead of big insurance for profit corporations, you would actually have healthcare instead of bankruptcy proceedings when you break your leg. Oh my, it’s the end of the world as we know it if the government runs healthcare. Why look at those miserable failed socialist states like Canada where the government runs healthcare! They are all dying endlessly as they do without everything……..good grief. Back to Fox News with ya.

THat’s a little harsh, don’t you think? As disappointing as he is, we had every reason to believe that he was, at the very least, a Democrat.

I dont understand. Can a president just by an executive order decide how a law is interpreted?

It’s Hyde creeping into the private sector; Hyde Creep.

No, unfortunately, you didn’t have every reason. As someone who had him as a Senator, I assure you that he had no track record of standing up for anything except corporations. It was all there to see. Too many people just chose to ignore the history. He was going to be so historic, don’t you know.

If the Congress lets him. It’s called the unitary executive and it requires a lack of institutional pride in the Judicial and Legislative branches.

Sickening. If someone had told me a year ago that this would be going down,
I never would have believed it. And I was not a huge Obama fan to begin with.

The fundies will just flood the system with nurses aides and nurses who will refuse to care for women’s needs.

Even janitors will refuse to clean facilities where women’s care might take place.

Where does it end?

RH Reality Check sent out a questionnaire to each of the Democratic candidates for president back in 2007. Here’s how the Obama campaign responded to their question about the Hyde amendment:

Obama does not support the Hyde amendment. He believes that the federal government should not use its dollars to intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

In honor of the late Henry Hyde, perhaps we should refer to
this abomination as Obama’s youthful indiscretion.

Who’s in to have truckloads of metal coathangers delivered to Bart Stupak and the Archdiocese in DC? I’m on unemployment, get my check on Tuesday night and can kick in about $50. Maybe some need to go the Oval Office too.

This:

“(5) Nothing in this Subsection shall be construed to authorize a health plan to deny coverage for all medical care, or for life-preserving care, to an individual based on a view that treats extending the life or preserving the health of the individual as of lower value than extending the life or preserving the health of others because of the individual’s disability or other characteristic.”

Says to me that a mother’s life will no longer be a consideration if the fetus is physically challenged. If the fetus is in such bad condition that it imperils the life of the mother…she’ll be allowed to die, in other words.
Am I wrong?

You know something else, I’m over this shit. It’s time for the tax-exemption for Churches to end. They wanna play, they gotta pay. Fuck’em. Fuck’em all.

So, Obama just took it off Stupak and put it all in his executive order so Stupak, or any other Dem, wouldn’t have to take political heat from this…?

Very good point, Joe.

If Churches, the rich, and corporations paid their fair share of taxes we’d be in so much better shape. But apparetnly, Obama and Congress prefer the middle class give them a free ride.

Instead of Obama voters ‘hanging their heads in shame’ or seeing a future of utter subjugation for womankind, how about fucking agitating and CHANGING this if we don’t like it?

The teabaggers and Republicans vow to retake Congress and repeal all this. And if they get in they’ll raise hell until it actually happens. Well, if progressives are really so upset about this Executive Order, get out on the fucking National Mall with a sign and do something about it. Don’t whine about how ‘the fix is in’ and ‘we were sold out a long time ago’ — do something. Because the righties most certainly will.

Regardless of what it is being used for, I always thought the Dems screamed bloody murder whenever Bushie signed Executive Orders as being unconstitutional, blah, blah, blah? Am I wrong? So why aren’t Dems like Markos screaming about this one? Oh, nevermind. Got lost in a timewarp there for a second. Better now with coffee :-)

Signs change politicians minds? Wow. That’s new. Haven’t seen a demonstration of thousands change their minds yet on anything, but knock yourself out and good luck.

Yes, you are wrong.
Signing statements.

That is the “give me your endorsement” speech where he also said “The first bill I’ll sign will be the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first bill I’ll sign”.

I’ve started watching Obama’s speech to Planned Parenthood, from when he was running to get the Democratic nomination for president. This is from the six minute mark (video – if there’s no sound, try skipping around):

We know that a women’s right to make a decision about how many children to have and when, without government interference, is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country.

How things change.

You should consider posting that on NARALS face book page. They are trying to declare victory right now.

Cross-posted from downstairs.

…This is not the first “Executive” Order that Obama has signed regarding women’s bodies: The first was to rescind the 11th hour Bush Conscience Clause that expanded Church. It was painted then as a major victory for women. It was not a victory.

It gave HHS “orders” to examine Conscience Clauses, after a 30 day public comment period. I never heard the new language come. Now I have with this bill. It extends the conscience clause to cover entities, insurance companies as a whole, not just the doctors or pharmacist. He extended corporate personhood in this bill in more ways than one. He got back to us alright!…

If the “leaked” EO is true, it goes well beyond the Bush 11th hour clause.

Jon’s liveblogging
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/21/liveblog-house-floor-debate-on-health-care-bill/

Exactly. Hate to start a class war. But really that’s what it always is. The Obama daughters, and my daughters-and every damn REPUBLICAN on the hill will still get any abortion services they need.

But the poor won’t. They can’t afford it. And even more than that they can’t afford another mouth to feed. It entrenches poverty. So for every damn middle class blogger on Daily Kos or that reads the Washington Post there are plenty of poor women in American that have never heard of you or your damn reasons for supporting this president. They have no voice. Obama has endless voices speaking for him.

I’m afraid it does more than potentially affect Planned Parenthood’s clinic funding. This little part right here does it:

“The term ‘‘health benefits coverage’’ means the package of services covered by a managed care provider or organization pursuant to a contract or other arrangement.”

If the clinic provides abortion services, it can kiss any federal money goodbye. For those who don’t think this is a big deal, consider that Jane has been right all along, and this whole sham will work to make abortion access nearly impossible except for abortions paid for out of pocket. It will force reproductive-age women to find services in a separate medical market. You can bet that market won’t be equal. Welcome to the new ghetto for women.

Eureka, NARAL knows about that speech. Video and quotes from it were sent to them upon their endorsement to him well over a year ago, as a means to say to them, “hold his feet to the fire.”

One more point to K-Lo in her argument: the effect here will be far from having no legal authority. This is an executive order, not a signing statement. Other examples of executive orders that did, in fact, hold the force of law: Emancipation Proclamation; creation of Works Progress Administration (kicked off the New Deal); desegregation of the United States Armed Forces. Her argument that the EO means nothing and has no legal power is utter bull.

No, but mass movements might, if people actually commit to them. At least the Tea Partiers have their Repub representatives scared to support anything to the left of Dick Cheney. Will they actually change anything? I dunno. But they’ve managed to determine much of the course of the debate because they get out there and they’re relentless.

What do folks on the left seem to do? After a few things break against them they throw up their hands, whine, and tell others “hope that works out for you”, bemoaning the End Of Freedom on some comment board.

I mean, why even bother to bitch and moan if you honestly think it’s completely hopeless and we’re all doomed? I just don’t get the point.

But, hey, if it works for you…

Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review, not Kathryn Jean Lopez. And while I have no love for K-Lo, it’s a bit of a cheap shot to make a big deal out of a typo on a blog.

The only reason the Teabaggers get so much attention is because the corporate media loves them for who they are. Unwitting corporate tools fighting for health insurance companies.