Obamateurism of the Day

posted at 8:05 am on February 13, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Call Greg Hengler a cynic.  Barack Obama explained on Friday that he’s being reasonable with all of these benighted Catholics and other religious organizations who object to facilitating contraception and abortifacients that their doctrines consider immoral.  It’s merely a few with a cyncal desire to play politics with health care that are causing Obama a political headache:

Here’s the relevant quote, emphasis mine:

And that’s why, from the very beginning of this process, I spoke directly to various Catholic officials, and I promised that before finalizing the rule as it applied to them, we would spend the next year working with institutions like Catholic hospitals and Catholic universities to find an equitable solution that protects religious liberty and ensures that every woman has access to the care that she needs.

Now, after the many genuine concerns that have been raised over the last few weeks, as well as, frankly, the more cynical desire on the part of some to make this into a political football, it became clear that spending months hammering out a solution was not going to be an option, that we needed to move this faster.  So last week, I directed the Department of Health and Human Services to speed up the process that had already been envisioned.  We weren’t going to spend a year doing this; we’re going to spend a week or two doing this.

Not to be too cynical about this, but Obama last spoke with those Catholic officials months ago regarding his mandate.  And no one at the White House bothered to contact them when it came time to offer this “accommodation,” as the bishops made clear on Friday after the Obama administration announced it.  That sounds a lot like a cynical desire to punt a political football rather than figuring out exactly why the church objected to it in the first place.  And that failure looks like the product of a cynical desire to impose the same mandate while making it look like a compromise.

Frankly, this looks like a case of projection — and a cynical case at that.

Got an Obamateurism of the Day? If you see a foul-up by Barack Obama, e-mail it to me at obamaisms@edmorrissey.com with the quote and the link to the Obamateurism. I’ll post the best Obamateurisms on a daily basis, depending on how many I receive. Include a link to your blog, and I’ll give some link love as well. And unlike Slate, I promise to end the feature when Barack Obama leaves office.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Come on, guys.

Washington Nearsider on February 13, 2012 at 8:09 AM

Thou shalt have only one God. Me.

TimBuk3 on February 13, 2012 at 8:09 AM

Exactamundo, the dems will make this about only about contraception use and not about how to pay for it….with the medias help

and the gop will be on defense again

Arghhhhh

cmsinaz on February 13, 2012 at 8:12 AM

This may not be the most blatant Obamateurism but it is the biggest political mistake he’s made so far.

When did the president get the power to declare someone’s product has to be given away free?

wildcat72 on February 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM

It’s sad that only the Catholic Church seems to have an issue with this piggery.

OldEnglish on February 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Once again, it isn’t even a matter of doctrine here, it’s a matter of separation of Church and state, a violation of the first amendment! The feds have no authority to tell the churches what to do as well as no authority to tell the insurance companies what to sell. This dictator is getting a little to big for his britches.

flytier on February 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Not cool.

rogerb on February 13, 2012 at 8:19 AM

We weren’t going to spend a year doing this; we’re going to spend a week or two doing this.

You’ll take what we give you, rubes, and you’ll like it — or not, who cares?

It’s good to be King.

AZCoyote on February 13, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Why don’t the Republicans take up the cause head-on and make the REPEAL of OBAMACARE a top priority instead of being so mealy-mouthed about it? That would easily solve so many problems:

1. Voter turn-out
2. Obamacare’s repeal would help loosen the stranglehold on the economy
3. Both the religious freedom and the individual liberty issues would be addressed solved simultaneously

Caveat: Romney could NOT be the nominee because he has no credibility on the Romneycare/Obamacare issue

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Hopefully he loses in November. If so, this is the beginning of the end of his time in the White House.

22044 on February 13, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Does he ever give a speech that doesn’t make one instantly think lie and spin?I’m glad Ed highlights the meat and I don’t have to watch.

docflash on February 13, 2012 at 8:25 AM

Come on, guys.

Washington Nearsider on February 13, 2012 at 8:09 AM

First comment and threadwinner right off the bat!

bernzright777 on February 13, 2012 at 8:26 AM

This may not be the most blatant Obamateurism but it is the biggest political mistake he’s made so far.

When did the president get the power to declare someone’s product has to be given away free?

wildcat72 on February 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM

Right after he got the power to force people to buy a product.

It works hand in hand…but we still don’t know what else is in the bill even after we voted on it.

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:29 AM

there they are, the dread “Some”…tangentially related to “They” and “Them”….

Strawmen, all of them, burn them to the ground!!!/

ted c on February 13, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Those damn bitter clingers….sheesh, can’t a guy just eat his waffle anymore?

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 8:31 AM

I am so sick of Obama getting away with this crap. If he had an R after his name, the left would made him into a combination of Nixon/Dan Quayle/GWBush a long time ago and all but had him impeached in the court of public opinion to say the least if not in actual reality.

GeorgiaBuckeye on February 13, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Yeah, the first word that pops to mind when a normal person thinks of men of the cloth: cynical

Project we much.

forest on February 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Let’s remember one important thing here that the Dems and particularly the jug-eared dictator and his partisan whore at HHS want you to forget. THIS ISN’T ABOUT CONTRACEPTION PER SE.
The real debate here is over the Constitution and the role of government in our lives. Obama says that he by imperial fiat without the consent of the governed through a legislative process can declare contraception without co-pay a right. At no time has a Presidential administration so irresponsibly decided to make-up rights that are nowhere to be found in our governing documents. Insurance is governed by the states and, yet, we have the jug-eared despot declaring that insurers have to pay for contraception without co-pay. It’s a very chilling attack on our Constitution.

And as a side-issue, let’s remember that this just isn’t a Catholic thing. Baptists may be okay with some forms of contraception but they also run large health systems and they object to the self-abortion drugs (morning after pills). And, by the way, many of these religious-based organizations self-insure so the Obama administration is still demanding Catholics and Baptists fund stuff that they consider immoral. So, even if you fall into the Dems trap of demonizing faith instead of looking at the greater attack on our freedoms, this whole push (for political reasons) is a massive OOTD worthy of finalist status as OOTY.

Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:33 AM

flytier on February 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Fully agree.

multiuseless on February 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM

And that’s why, from the very beginning of this process, I spoke directly to various Catholic officials

Who cares if you spoke to Catholic officials and who cares what they said.

I’m not Catholic. I object to this mandate. I have not authorized any “officials” to voice my positions and no one spoke to me directly. You are infringing my right to freedom of religion even if every other religious “official” agrees with you.

Lost in Jersey on February 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM

The real irony is that there were millions of Catholics who voted for this clown in 2008…refused to listen to reason, insisting instead that a vote for Obama would be a vote against racism.

Never bothered to read the fine print.

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 8:36 AM

The insurance companies will pay for it… by raising health insurance premiums. They can only remain in business as long as they turn a profit. Every mandate in Obamacare will have an upward pressure on costs and thus on premiums.

If 99% of women use birth control then this must mean that my lesbian and celibate friends are the real 1%.

Laurence on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 AM

“And no one at the White House bothered to contact them when it came time to offer this “accommodation,” as the bishops made clear on Friday after the Obama administration announced it. That sounds a lot like a cynical desire to punt a political football rather than figuring out exactly why the church objected to it in the first place. And that failure looks like the product of a cynical desire to impose the same mandate while making it look like a compromise.

Frankly, this looks like a case of projection — and a cynical case at that.” Ed

It appears as though President SmartPower “screwed the pooch”, as it were.
As if HE gives a flyin’ flock what anyone else thinks or believes.
Barry believes in nothing and no one except his own power and “stature” – which is soon (hopefully) to be listed as THE worst POTUS ever!
Coming from ChiTown, ChicagØbama has probably only ever met “cafeteria catholics”.
No Sale, Barry.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

The real irony is that there were millions of Catholics who voted for this clown in 2008…refused to listen to reason, insisting instead that a vote for Obama would be a vote against racism.

Never bothered to read the fine print.

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Try to remember that in 2008 we didn’t have Obamacare. Things were different then. It was a choice of Bush lap dog McCain against….well….something different. Now we see what the “different” is, and we like it less now. But who knew?

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Why don’t the Republicans take up the cause head-on and make the REPEAL of OBAMACARE a top priority instead of being so mealy-mouthed about it?

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Because the issue of Obamacare is incredibly complex and includes a lot of controversial issues including medicare reform. Why do you think Pelosi refused to let anybody read the damn thing before forcing a vote in the Congress?

In a sound bite environment, a candidate can call for the repeal of Obamacare but will ultimately fall short as a campaigner when asked exactly how they would do it. It would require hours and several white boards to be done correctly. That is why the candidates call repeal of Obamacare as a top priority and leave it like that. Plus the public is not going to get really riled over Obamacare in its entireity. Various people will support various provisions which bleeds off the kind of outrage that makes this a top cause of firing the jug-eared idiot.

Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

‘Before finalizing the rule as it applies to them’, doesn’t sound like equal protection under the law to me. Why weren’t these rules finalized before the bill was passed and signed into law if it’s part of Ocare? The regime is winging it on passed law. All of which is unconstitutional besides being a power grab.

Kissmygrits on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 AM

‘Before finalizing the rule as it applies to them’, doesn’t sound like equal protection under the law to me. Why weren’t these rules finalized before the bill was passed and signed into law if it’s part of Ocare? The regime is winging it on passed law. All of which is unconstitutional besides being a power grab.

Kissmygrits on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 AM

The Congress fell down on the job by being too lazy to cross the “T”s and dot the “I”s when drafting this bill, thus abrogating it’s power to the Executive Branch, which to me is unconstitutional and treasonous. Congress should be drawn and quartered for their utter disrespect of their office.

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

This is more of Obama working in a Chicago echo chamber. He was warned that this was not going to sit well with certain groups but, apparently, he was tag teamed by Michelle Obama, Valarie Jarrett, and Secretary Sebelius to pass this anyway because these radical feminists wanted this mandate despite the moral reservations pushing religious organizations to rebel.

I also think the abrupt change in the position of US Bishops has to be seen as the Catholic rank-and-file telling their leaders that Friday’s statement in qualified support was unacceptable. I honestly think the jug-eared idiot has managed to spark a culture war in the midst of what is supposed to be an economic election. He’s managed to rile people up who would otherwise vote for him on the basis of the lies about the economy improving.

Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Does this edict require employers to pay for plans that pay for rubbers or vasectomies for men?

Or is the diktat sexist as well as being Unconstitutional?

forest on February 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

The Liar-in-Chief is never held accountable for what he says by the old media. Never any follow-up. That has to change!

KOOLAID2 on February 13, 2012 at 8:49 AM

If this article at the National Review is true, then his press conference was nothing but a sham.

Despite what President Obama said at his White House press conference, the actual regulations make permanent the “interim final regulations” issued August 3, 2011 — the ones that sparked the furor in the first place.
GrannySunni on February 13, 2012 at 8:27 AM

They should have figured it out when Oboobi issued the sham EO for Stupak two years ago. Taxpayers will fund abortion and shutup about it. If nothing else, this is the hill he will stand on no matter the cost — his legacy as potus of death.

AH_C on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM

flytier on February 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Even if it weren’t the Church Obama was ordering around, it gets back to the basic question of constitutionality and the role of government: “Does government get to boss you around and tell you that you must buy something because they think you should?”

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:21 AM

I believe that tyrants at the state level are no better than tyrants at the national level, no matter what Ann Coulter says. And the fact that a state is populated with petty tyrants, as Massachusetts apparently is, changes nothing–the states have a great deal of sovereignty, but I will never agree they have the authority to force people to buy something, no matter how great a majority thinks it’s for their own good.

DrMagnolias on February 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

But who knew?

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Those of us who were actually paying attention at the time.

[The HA Archives, along with a number of other blogs, are chock full of all sorts of "stuff" about Obama, who he hung around with, and who was financing him and so forth; stuff that the MSM and way too many Americans refused to report, discuss, or publicize...so, a lot knew...but a lot more refused to listen.]

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM

In a sound bite environment, a candidate can call for the repeal of Obamacare but will ultimately fall short as a campaigner when asked exactly how they would do it. It would require hours and several white boards to be done correctly. That is why the candidates call repeal of Obamacare as a top priority and leave it like that. Plus the public is not going to get really riled over Obamacare in its entireity. Various people will support various provisions which bleeds off the kind of outrage that makes this a top cause of firing the jug-eared idiot.

Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Most voters don’t seem to understand that when a candidate promises to do something like cut a trillion bucks from the budget or repeal Obamacare, they don’t have the power to do that. This is a job for Congress and the the ability of Congress to repeal or reduce anything, based on their dismal track record, is unrealistic.

“Promise her anything, but give her Arpege.” ~~ARPEGE PERFUME (1945)

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

If this article at the National Review is true, then his press conference was nothing but a sham.

Despite what President Obama said at his White House press conference, the actual regulations make permanent the “interim final regulations” issued August 3, 2011 — the ones that sparked the furor in the first place.

GrannySunni on February 13, 2012 at 8:27 AM

I read or heard somewhere that this “compromise” was the administration’s ultimate position all along. In other words, the decision announced earlier was merely a false step to make it look like they were compromising.

And Obama’s statement about deciding to push this through now rather than later … supports the proposition that this was a political move to help bolster the Santorum campaign. I just wish the GOP had anyone half as deviously smart as the evil geniuses on the other side.

Syzygy on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Obama lied to America Friday. Shortly after his press conference this document was filed without the changes promised to the Catholic church.

“Accordingly, the amendment to the interim final rule with comment period amending 45 CFR 147.130(a)(1)(iv) which was published in the Federal Register at 76 FR 46621-46626 on August 3, 2011, is adopted as a final rule without change.”

[FR Doc. 2012-3547 Filed 02/10/2012 at 3:45 pm
Publication Date: 02/15/2012]

http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2012-03547_PI.pdf

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290859/nothing-squid-ink-ed-haislmaier

I really don’t believe this is an Obamateurism, it’s part of his plan to transform America.

GrannySunni on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

“Eat your peas, and take your free pills. You have my blessing.”-BHO,2012

Yoop on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Longing for the day when the name Obama, if spoken at all, is held on par with that of Vidkun whatsizname…

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 AM

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

The whole damn law is unconstitutional–no bill they ever drafted would be constitutional.

DrMagnolias on February 13, 2012 at 8:59 AM

They should have figured it out when Oboobi issued the sham EO for Stupak two years ago. Taxpayers will fund abortion and shutup about it. If nothing else, this is the hill he will stand on no matter the cost — his legacy as potus of death.

AH_C on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Exactly. Even Stupak is backing away from this now. I’m just waiting for the Catholic church to excommunicate all their members responsible for this bill. I’m sure that will never happen though.

GrannySunni on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I shall hencetofore publish my decrees and entertain nary a squibble from ye peasantry…..Wheretoforewhich all peasantry shall genuflect and utter psalms of praise and worship in the direction of the monarchy….

and so it was written.

ted c on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

He should be issuing these pronouncements while standing atop a pile of former Democratic congressmen who walked the plank for him in 2010.

advances.

ted c on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Most voters don’t seem to understand that when a candidate promises to do something like cut a trillion bucks from the budget or repeal Obamacare, they don’t have the power to do that. This is a job for Congress and the the ability of Congress to repeal or reduce anything, based on their dismal track record, is unrealistic.

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Exactly. Also, it will be moot if the SCOTUS strikes down Obamacare as unconstitutional.

Syzygy on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

ted c on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 AM

“Barack Husein Obama, Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm.”

Does that count? :-)

coldwarrior on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Serves as a nice distraction from Holder and Fast & Furious, doesn’t it? When was the last report by the lame stream media about F&F?

joated on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM

My Oh My …
Samuel L. Jackson just admitted that he voted for Slappy because Barry is “black” (actually, Barry is half-frican American). I recall a famous quote:

“The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides with the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Blessed is he who in the name of charity and good will shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon those with great vengeance and with furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know that my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.” – Jules Winfield

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJCa6Bp6vOo

Time’s a wastin’, GOP.
(btw … don’t bother telling me that’s not a complete Bible verse)

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 AM

I honestly think the jug-eared idiot has managed to spark a culture religious war in the midst of what is supposed to be an economic election. He’s managed to rile people up who would otherwise vote for him on the basis of the lies about the economy improving.

Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Lets call a spade a spade. No need for PC on this issue.

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 AM

If contraception is “essential” to womens’ healthcare, why aren’t food, housing, clothing, and transportation also essential?

Just askin’.

herm2416 on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

@Happy Nomad on February 13, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Lost in Jersey on February 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM

Great points, well done.

@timberline

“But who knew?”

Me, for one. Roughly 95-100% of the posters on this blog for another.

GrassMudHorsey on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Insurance is a part of an employees compensation package. Along with vacation, paid holidays, sick leave, and wages. Obama in his genius has now got us arguing and supporting an employers right to determine how an employee spends their compensation. The biggest employer is the government. Game Set Match to Obama.

meci on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

He didn’t need to speak to the bishops. He just asked Pope Katherine and her co=adjudicators Nancy and Joe. These are the only Catholics that count to the mighty O.

He wouldn’t recognize a real Catholic if they kissed him on the cheek.

elm on February 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Serves as a nice distraction from Holder and Fast & Furious, doesn’t it? When was the last first report by the lame stream media about F&F?

joated on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM

FIFY : )

herm2416 on February 13, 2012 at 9:07 AM

And Obama’s statement about deciding to push this through now rather than later … supports the proposition that this was a political move to help bolster the Santorum campaign. I just wish the GOP had anyone half as deviously smart as the evil geniuses on the other side.

Syzygy on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 AM

I hope his strategy backfires but I don’t hold much hope that the GOP will find its spine.

GrannySunni on February 13, 2012 at 9:09 AM

What he meant to say:

But the most cynical desire, on my part, is to make this into a political football. Darn tootin’! ~ BHO

Fallon on February 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Come on, guys.

Washington Nearsider on February 13, 2012 at 8:09 AM

First comment and threadwinner right off the bat!

bernzright777 on February 13, 2012 at 8:26 AM

That’s twice since I’ve been commenting. :-)

Washington Nearsider on February 13, 2012 at 9:12 AM

The Congress fell down on the job by being too lazy to cross the “T”s and dot the “I”s when drafting this bill,
Congress should be drawn and quartered for their utter disrespect of their office.
timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM

You meant the Democratic members of Congress, right? My recollection is that the Republican members had nothing to do with passing this boondoggle.

lynncgb on February 13, 2012 at 9:13 AM

If contraception is “essential” to womens’ healthcare, why aren’t food, housing, clothing, and transportation also essential?

Just askin’.

herm2416 on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

“Sheesh! My husband can not f***ing throw the ball and catch the ball at the same time.” ~ Me-chelle

Fallon on February 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Exactly. Also, it will be moot if the SCOTUS strikes down Obamacare as unconstitutional.

Syzygy on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 AM

The Supremes may strike down ObomneyCare IF Elena ‘Barren’ Kagan recuses herself like an honorable jurist should. In other words: fat chance.
BTW … I’ll never forgive John Sununu and GHW Bush for giving us David Souter, the second-coming of Ted Kazinsky.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Have seen you keep referring to “look at the ‘A’” in comments you make, but must have missed where you explain it. Explain, please? Thx.

inviolet on February 13, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Try to remember that in 2008 we didn’t have Obamacare. Things were different then. It was a choice of Bush lap dog McCain against….well….something different. Now we see what the “different” is, and we like it less now. But who knew?

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Anyone who wasn’t drinking the Kool-Aid from the MBM (Make Believe Media). Anyone who looked at literally dozens, if not hundreds, of web sites knew. This is nothing new. This is how Obama campaigned in 08 and has governed since elected. If anything, it’ll only get worse if he’s reelected.

Gladtobehere on February 13, 2012 at 9:25 AM

If contraception is “essential” to womens’ healthcare, why aren’t food, housing, clothing, and transportation also essential?

Just askin’.

herm2416 on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

He’s saving that for after the election.

Gladtobehere on February 13, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Have seen you keep referring to “look at the ‘A’” in comments you make, but must have missed where you explain it. Explain, please? Thx.

inviolet on February 13, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Air Mobile. If I post what it means, I’ll be banned.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM

By the way, it’s also a take on my middle name, The Archangel.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Privately, Obama sees recovery 1-2 years off

Obamanomics seems a bit like communism, it’s always over the horizon.

J_Crater on February 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM

But who knew?
timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Well, like others have said, I did. There was ample evidence, though all I needed to know was what he did and said in his rejection of the BAIPA to know that he was a ghoul. It wasn’t hard.

I loathe this man so very much. And I’ll extend that to include his entire administration, particularly the heretic Sebelius and any ‘Catholic’ that helped put him in power. I’m talking to you, Kmiec, oh wise one. (For thinking themselves wise they became fools). Let’s just extend it to any ‘Catholic’ Democrat period. Catholics in the party of death… I wouldn’t want to try to explain that one on judgment day. They’re putting me in danger with the anger and, yes, hatred, they inspire in me. ARGHHHH…

And the USCCB…while I stand with the bishops fighting this, and thank God you are, you did your part, too, with that pathetic piece of drivel Faithful Citizenship. You better stand strong and fight for all of us, now, not give in when just religious organizations are exempt. The First Amendment was written for every American, not just hospitals and schools! And that isn’t even as important as your responsibility to stand, and even die for the TRUTH! You are successors of The Apostles. They did not compromise with EVIL!!!

St Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle…

pannw on February 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Do I smell 1930′s Germany?

Don L on February 13, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Come on guys.

Mandate = Compromise in Austrian.

Nutstuyu on February 13, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Do I smell 1930′s Germany?

Don L on February 13, 2012 at 9:50 AM

I suppose one could conduct a compare and contrast betwixt Der Dritte Reich and the ØbozØ cabal, but who is Ernst Röhm (the homosexual SA Commander)?
Maybe the book that Billy ‘The Mad Bomber” Ayers wrote for Barry could be equated with Mein Kampf, but that’d be a stretch. However, Billy the Bomber is Barry’s Rudolf Hess.
(and many of us know what happened to him)

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 13, 2012 at 10:16 AM

This may not be the most blatant Obamateurism but it is the biggest political mistake he’s made so far.

When did the president get the power to declare someone’s product has to be given away free?

wildcat72 on February 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM

If you give a product away free that affects commerce. So, the commerce clause?

It’s no more far fetched thann some other uses of the commerce clause. Sadly.

tom on February 13, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Try to remember that in 2008 we didn’t have Obamacare. Things were different then. It was a choice of Bush lap dog McCain against….well….something different. Now we see what the “different” is, and we like it less now. But who knew?

timberline on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Anyone who actually looked at the candidates’ records-not just the fatuous media portrayal.

talkingpoints on February 13, 2012 at 10:32 AM

joated on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM

when was the first..?

affenhauer on February 13, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Yet Keystone XL which has been under review for three plus years was being RUSHED to have it figured out in 8 weeks.

Communists/fascists/totalitarians can’t have religion in their utopia and they particularly hate the Catholic Church because of how it assisted in taking down their beloved USSR.

jukin3 on February 13, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Predictably, the Kenyan Muslim wages Jihad against all American institutions and industries while the trusting victims don’t realize what’s happening openly before their eyes!! Remember in November!!

Marco on February 13, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Frankly, this looks like a case of projection — and a cynical case at that.

I like to think of it as another case of “voting present”, that jumped up and bit him on the @ss.

Laziest president ever to sit in the oval office.

Tim_CA on February 13, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Since we’re all speaking code and using dog whistles these days I submit that:

“Come on Guys” = “Listen up you punks. Do what I say or else.”

And I think I could distinctly hear the word ‘Cracker’ in that statement.

CorporatePiggy on February 13, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I don’t think this is an 0bamateurism. It’s actually quite a professional lie, an “accommodation” to make the Catholics look like fools.

JanYarnot on February 13, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Not an amateurism. An example of Chicago politics.

“Oh, what, you don’t like what I’m selling? Well, let’s see if we can make it more likeable…[punch][punch][kick] There now, that look better to you from down there on the ground?”

Never once has the Resident said that he’d consider removing the offending requirements, or reconsider the bill. He has talked of ways to make it more acceptable, or to find compromises, etc. You don’t compromise on a moral principle held by a massive group of people. You don’t compromise on a moral principle held by a single individual. When you set out to force, with a purported law, a behavior which is specifically and dogmatically disallowed by a religious organization, you are acting in an unconstitutional manner, in an un-American manner.

Freelancer on February 13, 2012 at 11:57 AM

If contraception is “essential” to womens’ healthcare, why aren’t food, housing, clothing, and transportation also essential?

Just askin’.

herm2416 on February 13, 2012 at 9:05 AM

that’s next term: ObamaHousing, ObamaCar/Transport, and last but not least, ObamaFood which Mochelle will dictate all that we eat. Cause it’s all good for our health and usefulness to the State.

AH_C on February 13, 2012 at 12:02 PM

The real debate here is over the Constitution and the role of government in our lives. Obama says that he by imperial fiat without the consent of the governed through a legislative process can declare contraception without co-pay a right.

THIS is exactly the point. It’s not about Catholics. It is about religious freedom for all, each and every individual.

Those that turn it into a “Catholic issue” are weakening the Constitution. The Constitution does not speak to the freedom of Catholics or to any one religion. In fact it speaks against it. It gives freedom to worship and freedom in religion to ALL. Forcing any one individual to support (financially or otherwise) something that offends their religion or religious belief is against the law of the land.

Yet, here we sit discussing it rather than our elected representatives urgently insisting that this not happen. Where are the calls for impeachment? Where is the outright call to STOP this? Where are the liberals that were so concerned about the rights to privacy during the security mandates after 9/11? Where is our news media?

katablog.com on February 13, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Frankly, this looks like a case of projection — and a cynical case at that.

I’ve found that more often than not, when the left accuses the right of something, the left is projecting their own wrongs upon us.

They are usually guilty of the very thing of which they are falsely accusing us!

ITguy on February 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Hope this issues helps to sink Obama’s rotten ship! He has now attacked freedom of religion. He thinks the only God people should worship is himself.

jqc1970 on February 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Make no mistake, he thinks this helps him, it doesn’t.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Failure. Failure. Failure.

This is the hallmark by which the Obama administration will be known in history. And what a tragedy it is for the African-American community, which should have been able to be proud of their First Black President.

RebeccaH on February 13, 2012 at 1:37 PM

When did the president get the power to declare someone’s product has to be given away free?

Right after he bought stock in Ortho-Novum?

-took a wild guess at it.

askwhatif on February 13, 2012 at 3:28 PM

“…their First Black President.”

OK, I’ve had enough. He may be the first multi-racial pResident, but HE IS NOT THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT!!!
(AND he is not my president, that’s for sure)

There, now I feel better.

askwhatif on February 13, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Come on guys.

Mandate = Compromise in Austrian.

Nutstuyu on February 13, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Since Obama believes Austrian is a real language, it isn’t, it’s the perfect language for Obamacare. Just like the Liberal’s reading of the Constitution, the mandates of Obamacare are now alive and can be changed at a moments notice into whatever Obama wants.

Gladtobehere on February 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM

So, Barry bought the women’s vote. How about us men? When will he issue a decree declaring that all auto insurers must provide free oil changes and new tires every two years? How come we don’t get hand-outs paid for by someone else? an we get free bread from the supermarket as well? How about free dental cleanings and x-rays every six months? After all, if Obama now has the power to force one type of business to provide free services, what’s to stop him from doing the same with other businesses? Heck, why not declare every product and service to be free?

Colony14 on February 13, 2012 at 5:26 PM

When did the president get the power to declare someone’s product has to be given away free?

wildcat72 on February 13, 2012 at 8:13 AM

It was in the bill that insurance companies became the property of Obama. Did you miss the memo? /s

I would love to watch this idiot we have for a president, spend one week working in any major insurance company with the task of explaining how to make his Obama care and this latest effort in socialist stupidity work. Heck, let him have his advisors there to point out how to do the math as if they would have any idea. That would be worth the price of a ticket to watch them trying to figure out the simplest formulas needed to do it. Even Obamamath is not going to help them.

Franklyn on February 14, 2012 at 12:49 AM

While we’re talking about Obama’s assault on religion, there’s a sneaky thing the President is also doing: a RIGHT to contraceptives???? How about the right to a face lift?

And women’s “health” issues? The pills these people are pushing add to the risk of breast cancer, blood clots, strokes, heart attacks. Are condums covered? You can get those free at your local middle school—or have the Democrats succeeded in getting them passed out at grade schools yet?

Portia46 on February 14, 2012 at 9:04 AM