DWS: Hey, it’s government’s job to impose their values on people, or something

posted at 12:10 pm on February 17, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Debbie Wasserman Schultz wants people to know that she opposes the imposition of values onto others … when relationships are voluntary.  In an interview with Megyn Kelly at Fox caught by Doug Powers at the Boss Emeritus’ site, the DNC chair denounces employers who impose their values by, er, deciding whether or not to pay for contraception for their employees.  The DNC chair also denounces religious organizations who try to practice what they preach over the demand for subsidies from their employees — for products and services that are so readily available that the CDC shows that 99% of all reproductive-age women who wanted to avoid pregnancy had access to them, and where employees could look for better benefit packages by going to work somewhere else.

But in involuntary relationships — say, where government dictates its values to employers within the US through massive regulation?  Debbie Downer is totally down with that:

“The flip side of this is that religious institutions shouldn’t be imposing their values, necessarily, on their employees who don’t necessarily subscribe to those values.”

Well, here’s the solution to that: if you don’t subscribe to the doctrines of the religious organization for which you work, find another job.  Benefit packages are a competitive part of compensation, and those who don’t like the package at one employer can vote with their feet by working elsewhere.  Believe me, as a hiring manager for 15 years, those competitive practices do work, and businesses are constantly calculating their competitive position on all forms of compensation.  That’s the nature of voluntary, market-based associations like employment.

Even besides that point, going off onto a harangue about the evils of imposing one’s values while demanding compliance with a government mandate that forces religious organizations to subordinate their doctrine to the values of this President is about as good a demonstration of irony as one will see.


Related Posts:

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Where did this come from? Is there a huge group of catholic employed women complaining about their access to contraception or is this imagined by Øbama to stick it to the Catholic Church.
And if 99% of Americans have used contraception in their lifetime, then it mustn’t be too hard to get, or too expensive, eh? We are fighting this battle over 1%? That’s rich.

ctmom on February 17, 2012 at 12:18 PM

It would be sweet to know their names, cause then the communion line would be much shorter, and hopefully the confession line much longer.

To approach the Body of Christ with a mortal sin on your soul is to condemn yourself. Aborting progeny through toxic chemicals puts you outside the faith. Only a good confession can bring you back into the fold. And a firm amendment to stop using abortifacients.

elm on February 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Skank…!

Seven Percent Solution on February 17, 2012 at 1:35 PM

She is a very disturbed and disturbing woman. Basically, she has no principles. Like most liberal elites, her direction is a dictate of consensus among fringe interest groups.

pat on February 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM

I hope the candidates and super PAC’s are compiling these sound bites. Every other ad needs to be of her spouting her radicalism and broadcast non-stop in places where the people are normal, unlike Florida 20. Where I live. Sigh.

T.D.D. on February 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM

If the government wants to give out free contraceptives, just publish millions of posters, DVDs and MP3s of this twit and pass them out gratis. Would be more effective than Scared Straight.

PJ Emeritus on February 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM

I thought I read yesterday that the White House had told this woman to muzzle it. Obviously she didn’t get what they were saying, which is not surprising based on the lack of intelligence she constantly displays.

lukjuj on February 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM

If I could steal from Dennis Miller for a moment:

This chick’s about as stable as Crispin Glover.

Thanks Denny, that one fits so well for so many on the left.

a5minmajor on February 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Well, here’s the solution to that: if you don’t subscribe to the doctrines of the religious organization for which you work, find another job.

Stop making sense.

mankai on February 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I don’t think very many employers compete to attract females so lame they can’t manage their own contraceptive issues.

jodetoad on February 17, 2012 at 1:53 PM

There goes my lunch.

BoxHead1 on February 17, 2012 at 1:54 PM

I thought I read yesterday that the White House had told this woman to muzzle it. Obviously she didn’t get what they were saying, which is not surprising based on the lack of intelligence she constantly displays.

lukjuj on February 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM

That was nothing more than a public vaccination for the WH. This way, DWS can do or say whatever comes to mind, then the WH can say “Hey, we told her to cool it, so don’t blame us……..pssst…Debbie, don’t forget about Newt’s affairs…..”

BobMbx on February 17, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Scratch a liberal… there is always a dictatorial tyrant inside, every single time.

She’s typical of the new left.

mark81150 on February 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM

So when DWS says ‘Free-access’ she really means ‘free’ – as in No-cost.

Does that mean that if the Downgrade Administration doesn’t force private entities to give away food, housing, transportation, clothing, dry cleaning, child care, diapers, furniture, etc.

That Those items are being denied to those people?

Does she really mean this?

Chip on February 17, 2012 at 2:01 PM

The Dems found their mold (UGLY) and stuck with it.

askwhatif on February 17, 2012 at 2:06 PM

She is a very disturbed and disturbing woman. Basically, she has no principles. Like most liberal elites, her direction is a dictate of consensus among fringe interest groups.

pat on February 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Gov Clinton’s hometown newspaper gave their presidential endorsement to George H W Bush. They reasoned, after having witnessed Gov Clinton in action for many years, that (and I paraphrase here) The good news is that Gov Clinton cannot be compromised. The bad news is that Gov Clinton cannot be compromised because he has no principles. We endorse GHWB.

jb34461 on February 17, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Wow. And liberals (and establishment Repubs) call Palin stupid. It’s actually difficult to be self-contradictory in such a short space, but DWS and that OMB director sure seem adept at it.

BillyWilly on February 17, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Hmm, perhaps the Dems have “past syndrome”. That’s when they make laws that they wish their Mothers had been forced to abide by.

askwhatif on February 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM

If the government wants to give out free contraceptives, just publish millions of posters, DVDs and MP3s of this twit and pass them out gratis. Would be more effective than Scared Straight.

PJ Emeritus on February 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM

Just so you know, there is a new ‘generic’ version of the pill. When you open the contraceptive container, a poster of Debby’s husband pops out.

askwhatif on February 17, 2012 at 2:14 PM

religious institutions shouldn’t be imposing their values, necessarily, on their employees who don’t necessarily subscribe to those values.”

“But when it’s far-left femiNazi government bureaucrats imposing their values on others who don’t necessarily subscribe to those values, then it’s perfectly justified and should be backed with the full force of law.”

Too bad there’s no pill to fix chronic stupidity and cluelessness, eh Debbie?

AZCoyote on February 17, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Even besides that point, going off onto a harangue about the evils of imposing one’s values while demanding compliance with a government mandate that forces religious organizations to subordinate their doctrine to the values of this President is about as good a demonstration of irony tyranny as one will see.

affenhauer on February 17, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Eventually, when they stop trying to hide it, they’ll also have to put the Chinese, Venezuelan, and Iranian flag emblems somewhere on their shirts next to the Che portrait.

Have to add the “Great Leader,” “Dear Leader,” and “New Leader” portrait pins, as well.

PKO Strany on February 17, 2012 at 2:24 PM

To whom it may concern, DWS is not a Nazi and this should never be said of her. She is a misguided Jewish American and only that.

I think the term is “kapo.”

PKO Strany on February 17, 2012 at 2:29 PM

DWS looks like the result of a strange DNA splice of Chelsea Clinton and Miss Piggy.

Hawt.

CorporatePiggy on February 17, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Dedicated to Debbie-Wasserman-Schmutz

Schadenfreude on February 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Tyrant.

Buttercup on February 17, 2012 at 2:53 PM

That FACE – That HAIR – That VOICE – That SEVERELY DAMAGED BRAIN – - – What a “woman”!

Pork-Chop on February 17, 2012 at 3:02 PM

There is only so much coverage to a policy, right? So at what point does free contraception and its related costs (funny) interfere with covering true necessities that I can’t cover like cancer treatment and associated medication?

I want the choice of having insurance coverage that covers my cancer treatment instead of your contraception, Debbie. You’re being pretty anti-choice, don’t you think? I mean, I can’t go to a local public bathroom and find a cancer treatment dispenser but you certainly can get your contraception there.

LetsBfrank on February 17, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Petty woman

Schadenfreude on February 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Secular Humanism is a very powerful religion.

Like not stamp collecting is a hobby, or bald is a hair color.

mythicknight on February 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM

If I could steal from Dennis Miller for a moment:

This chick’s about as stable as Crispin Glover.

Thanks Denny, that one fits so well for so many on the left.

a5minmajor on February 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Clever to pick a guy to compare her to when making the assertion that she just might be a wee bit off! Can’t be too careful these days.

I think Ed’s point at the end of his post really makes the case that Deb is just plain good at making no sense at all . . . though perhaps he did so in a way that was a bit too kind:

“[G]oing off onto a harangue about the evils of imposing one’s values while demanding compliance with a government mandate that forces religious organizations to subordinate their doctrine to the values of this President is about as good a demonstration of irony as one will see.”

Trochilus on February 17, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Well, here’s the solution to that: if you don’t subscribe to the doctrines of the religious organization for which you work, find another job.

Stop making sense.

mankai on February 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM

This was my first response as well. If you are not Catholic, working for a Catholic institution that does not want to fund your contraceptives due to their religious beliefs, you have the freedom (there’s that word again!) to look for another job which meets your particular needs.

But we must remember… in the socialist/communist state, there are only worker’s rights, not business’ rights. So is it any wonder that the far lefties who love the socialist state can not fathom the concept that the worker does not have the right to conform the business to his/her needs, rather than the freedom for both business and workforce to find equally agreeable employment situations?

gravityman on February 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Unawares like Debbie Schultz are pushing anti-biblical policies on America that is slowly destroying America… they have not to learnt the lesson of history and our enemies

apocalypse on February 17, 2012 at 3:38 PM

They have not learnt the lesson of history and our enemies

apocalypse on February 17, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I’m all giddy that I predicted her rediculousness back when she got her SECOND job, considering her first and only should be as Representative.

She has not devated on iota on her programming.

John Kettlewell on February 17, 2012 at 3:40 PM

But we must remember… in the socialist/communist state, there are only worker’s rights, not business’ rights. So is it any wonder that the far lefties who love the socialist state can not fathom the concept that the worker does not have the right to conform the business to his/her needs, rather than the freedom for both business and workforce to find equally agreeable employment situations?

gravityman on February 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM

To follow up by quoting myself…

When you consider the statement above about only the worker having rights, and businesses are owned by the state and must conform to the workers needs… well…

A factory of 1,000 workers must have people with vastly different needs to which the business must conform to meet all of them… it is their worker’s right afterall for the business to meet all of their needs (and by extension, the state when all business is state owned). However, surely of those 1,000 workers, many of them must of diametrically opposed needs making it impossible for the business to accomodate all of them. The only way to solve such a crisis is to give everyone the same things, right? Surely you can’t resolve all of the needs of each individual with opposing needs in such a way as to still have a business which can accomplish anything within a reasonable cost?

But wait, you say, because perhaps you have now spotted the real problem…

If everyone must now conform to the standards set by the state, since the state can’t accomodate every individual need in a reasonable manner, then there really are no “worker’s rights”, are there? The only entity remaining with rights is the state, which it then grants to the worker in it’s infinite benevolence.

Is there any wonder that socialism/communism has failed? Is there any wonder why it is impossible for only “worker’s rights” to exist, and how by it’s very nature the idea of workers as the only rights holders is an absolute fallacy?

gravityman on February 17, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Even besides that point, going off onto a harangue about the evils of imposing one’s values while demanding compliance with a government mandate that forces religious organizations to subordinate their doctrine to the values of this President is about as good a demonstration of irony as one will see.

A perfect distillation of liberal thought. If private citizens and private institutions do X it’s evil. But if government does X it’s good.

Liberals can’t stand it when private citizens and organizations make their own decisions and enter into voluntary associations without government approval or intrusion.

gwelf on February 17, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Every time I hear this BI-otches voice, I vomit. Please. Let’s get rid of Debbie. Please make sure that this SKANK is fired come November. Throw your support and money to Karen Harrington http://www.karenforcongress.com/

jpmotu on February 17, 2012 at 3:58 PM

She sounds like Santorum. Does she want government to “get involved in the bedroom” too?

EddieC on February 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Secular Humanism is a very powerful religion
Really?
How many churches of this powerful religion exist? Humor me with specifics.
Good Lt on February 17, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Ok. Department of Education. Pick any federal or state department, agency or bureaucracy prized by liberals as pushing social justice.

gwelf on February 17, 2012 at 4:02 PM

It’s not like there’s a double standard or anything….oh…wait…

LizardLips on February 17, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Secular Humanism is a very powerful religion.
Like not stamp collecting is a hobby, or bald is a hair color.
mythicknight on February 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM

No like the liberal rational for a bigger and more powerful government that prizes equality of outcome and social justice and “fairness”.

gwelf on February 17, 2012 at 4:10 PM

When will technology advance to the point where my laptop will come with a SHOCK button to, er, discipline an interviewee?

madmonkphotog on February 17, 2012 at 4:11 PM

So am I to understand then that Santorum or Romney as president will be no different than Obama?

gwelf on February 17, 2012 at 4:21 PM

WHATSERNAME-SCHLITZ!!!
I think a couple of you people owe skanks an apology.

S. D. on February 17, 2012 at 4:31 PM

I have seen the face of evil and it truly is as ugly as imagined it would be.

ghettogasman on February 17, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Again I stress…

There is NO way we could lose 2012 if we just keep putting this message out there.

Enough with the white glove treatment. We need someone that’s willing to fight damnit.

I don’t care at this point who the candidate is, as long as we get someone that’s going to act like they know how important this time around really is.

BlaxPac on February 17, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Don’t blame her for being ugly, she can’t help that. No amount of “Covergirl” product can help her out there. But, there is no excuse for a grown woman her age demonstrating the level of stupidity and dishonesty that she does on a consistent basis.

DWS personifies the notion that “you can’t fix stupid.”

BruthaMan on February 17, 2012 at 5:01 PM

I would link a photo of Nancy Pelosi for the contest, but I am too lazy to look for one. Thus, you have a choice between two of the Dems’ homeliest women: DWS at the thread opening or this one of Hilary (!): http://www.daylife.com/photo/0dNI2Ge0slbxP?__site=daylife&q=Clinton

Yoiks!

onlineanalyst on February 17, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Maybe DWS should go on a date with Rick Santorum. He is down with using the federal government to shape social values, too.

onlineanalyst on February 17, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Having beliefs and values of your own, does not mean you want to force them on others. DWS wants to force her beliefs on me and I disagree with her to my core. I think she is vile. And I am woman. Rick Santorum does not want the government to force his beliefs or DWS beliefs on the rest of us through government mandates. Do Not spreas falsehoods about Rick Santorum.

Alborn on February 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM

as a once young frisky male in america I spent big bucks on rubbers, so by Dem I want my money refunded to me directly by the Obama campaign.

the discrimination against males is intolerable!

losarkos on February 17, 2012 at 5:29 PM

By the way, Chris Christie just vetoed the gay marriage law in New Jersey the day after the assembly passed it:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46429188#.Tz7VX_F5Mf1

One of the most conservative governors in one of the most blue states while keeping high approvals – extremely unusual for NJ incumbents, NJers tend to dislike all their politicians.

He’s the guy who could run away with this election.

joana on February 17, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Debbie Downer is the gift that keeps on giving to Republicans. I hope she stays on as DNC chairwoman indefinitely. The GOP could just run her interviews as ads with minimum commentary needed.

simkeith on February 17, 2012 at 5:37 PM

angryed on February 17, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Akzed on February 17, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Talon on February 17, 2012 at 1:17 PM

If you’re truly interested.

MadisonConservative on February 17, 2012 at 5:38 PM

There is no imposition of values. Employees can walk if they don’t like not getting free birth control and abortions. Employers can choose to include or not

scboy on February 17, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Sometimes I just can’t suspend my disbelief.

Seriously, how can the Democrats watch this woman emit even 5% of the nutty stuff that comes out of her mouth without calling an emergency meeting to have her disappeared or at least gagged??

monkeyboy on February 17, 2012 at 5:46 PM

DWS — what a buffoon. But then again, maybe the stratagem is that one buffoon in a party of buffoons is harder to pick out of a crowd. They didn’t get the message in 2010. They will have the opportunity to hear it again in 2012. I never saw a party so in need of a top to bottom housecleaning.

grogster on February 17, 2012 at 5:48 PM

But in involuntary relationships — say, where government dictates its values to employers within the US through massive regulation? Debbie Downer is totally down with that:

She and SweaterVest have an awful lot in common. They only differ on which “moral” values to impose.

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Maybe DWS should go on a date with Rick Santorum. He is down with using the federal government to shape social values, too.

onlineanalyst on February 17, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Actually that has NEVER been his contention. His contention is that local and state government can make moral laws and policy, and that the federal government should stay out of it.

But I am sure you are one of those hiding your contraception in case he decides to come for it.//

melle1228 on February 17, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Barbara Boxer

SouthernGent on February 17, 2012 at 12:25 PM
No “gentleman” would exlude Babs!

Rovin on February 17, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Ahem! That’s Senator Babs to you. And don’t forget that she worked long and hard to enjoy that title, Ma’am.

onlineanalyst on February 17, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Dumb as a rock and still sinking!

Not-a-Marxist on February 17, 2012 at 5:55 PM

DWS: Hey, it’s government’s job to impose their values on people, or something

C’mon Ed, that’s not what she said. I don’t like her either, but the real story is that she, her party, and the administration are hypocrites for trying to force Obamacare down our throats while at the same time accusing the Catholic church for trying to force their beliefs on non-catholics working at Catholic hospitals.
If you watch the full interview on FoxNews’ website, the rebuttal person from the Catholic league gave a great counterpoint argument.

RMCS_USN on February 17, 2012 at 5:56 PM

This b*tch needs a one way ticket to Palestine!

vietvet68 on February 17, 2012 at 6:03 PM

She is the one person who’s parents should have taken advantage of an abortion. I would have gladly paid for it!

vietvet68 on February 17, 2012 at 6:06 PM

It’s not irony. It’s the way that liberals operate. They rail and protest against an imposition of morality and “responsibility” until they get into power, then they use those positive words against us. They wait until they have so abused a concept that they can freely equivocate on it and call for people to be “responsible” and have “civic pride”.

Progressivism is an agenda that is 100% full of crap. There’s no getting around it. Back before they liked the word “evil”, by remaking it for their purposes, they claimed that words like “evil” are only used to enforce one’s own worldview.

Everything cycles from violation to imposition to ambiguity to a reformed use of the word.

Axeman on February 17, 2012 at 6:10 PM

How can these people do this without considering a different president with ideas they oppose will now be able to do the same to them?

I’m in shock that this is happening in the United States.

Jocelyn on February 17, 2012 at 6:10 PM

She and SweaterVest have an awful lot in common. They only differ on which “moral” values to impose.

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 5:49 PM

No they don’t. Wasserman-Shultz is full square behind a imposition that the federal government is NOW involved in. Santorum’s is in your mind, based on some popular Chicken-little extrapolation of what he has said on the subject of Constitutional authority and States rights and some bad reading skills.

Axeman on February 17, 2012 at 6:16 PM

so what are the costs of a years worth of birth control pills.

I had heard this amounts to $20.00 a month but don’t if this figure is correct

but the real problem is the more services the govt demands healthcare plans should cover, the more costly the insurance.

Des[pite the contention of the oval office occupier and blabbermouth, there is no free lunch

tuttle from tacoma on February 17, 2012 at 6:16 PM

I think our POTUS is a great leader compared to this lady.

We should have her checked. She could have been captured by Jeff Dahlmer and had her head drilled. It has to be something that extreme.

Then he found out about her gender and let her go.

vietvet68 on February 17, 2012 at 6:06 PM

They tried to abort Saddam Hussein and it failed. You have to remember that her parents are from her gene pool. They may not be the most effective people on the planet.

IlikedAUH2O on February 17, 2012 at 6:20 PM

There is a great Shultz crab house in Baltimore. I keep trying to find someone to treat to a meal there during Lent.

IlikedAUH2O on February 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Everytime I look at her I see the Incredible Mr Limpet.

dont taze me bro on February 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Axeman on February 17, 2012 at 6:16 PM

So set me straight. When SV says:

Again, I know most presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues. These have profound impact on the health of our society.

what does he mean? Is he planning on doing nothing about these “important public policy issues?”

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 6:33 PM

It’s not irony when it comes out of Debbie’s mouth, it’s hypocrisy. Debbie D is down with “diversity of thought” – as long as it agrees with her thought.

GarandFan on February 17, 2012 at 6:51 PM

The lack of symmetry in her face is disturbing. Makes you wonder if it’s a reflection of what is going on in her mind.

Hening on February 17, 2012 at 6:56 PM

I like how when it comes to “helping women” contraception costs are prohibitive. But when it comes to forcing the private incurance companies to pick up the tab, then it costs practically nothing.

Of course all of the above is just smoke and mirrors to distract from the real issues of Emperor Obama subjugating religion.

Oxymoron on February 17, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Speaking of “women’s rights”…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeKwz9W8oWs

Warning: This video contains devastating logic!

itsnotaboutme on February 17, 2012 at 7:21 PM

She,s a liberal my a**.She,s a dyed in the wool totalitarian Marxist bent on forcing by law her values on everyone of us.Absolute total control on every thing we say ,eat ,car we drive,were we live ,how much we can make,how we raise our children.Karl Marx would be envious of this women.

logman1 on February 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM

what does he mean? Is he planning on doing nothing about these “important public policy issues?”

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 6:33 PM

So because I’m not an authority on what Santorum meant, any interpretation is just as good as another? I simply add an interpretation to yours.

And where does “public policy” necessitate some sort of ban? Maybe he would just de-fund the contraception giveaway industry? That “public policy”. See there’s a lot of room for interpretation there. I see what he’s saying as a social argument, consistent with his Catholicism.

So all you got is a quote and “What else could he mean?” And it appears an imagination too small to really consider the full range of what he could mean.

Gee, what else could you mean that but that there should be a religious test for social perspectives as a qualification for president. I mean what else could you mean??!!

Axeman on February 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Can that woman really be as obtuse as she acts? It has to be a put on….right?

Well, one thing is for sure, I am ecstatic that she is the face of the DNC.

csdeven on February 17, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Well, here’s the solution to that: if you don’t subscribe to the doctrines of the religious organization for which you work, find another job.

Ahhhh, but in that interview DWS insisted that these women had a right to those jobs. The woman is a loon.

csdeven on February 17, 2012 at 7:38 PM

So Schultz defends Obama imposing his values in an unlimited way by criticizing organizations that impose their values in a very limited way…

Obama’s imposition: Obey or be prosecuted.

Organizations’ imposition: Since you chose to work for us, would you please share our values? If not, you’re free to work elsewhere.

itsnotaboutme on February 17, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Ahhh…Debbie Wasserman Schultz…the only woman in America REQUIRED to douche.

jan3 on February 17, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Axeman on February 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM

The very fact that he considers the most private and personal forms of personal conduct to be “important public issues” is both offensive and gravely dangerous to liberty. Government has absolutely no business regulating our sex lives. Even if he hasn’t announced what he would do about these “important public issues,” he has declared them to be the business of government and that government has some authority to act on it.

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Blech…can somebody throw her back into the irrelevancy closet, PLEASE???

sage0925 on February 17, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Okay, this has gone way beyond simply disagreeing philosophically.

These people, these leftist nutjobs are a danger to the rest of us in general, and to the country in particular.

They must be stopped; not just ousted from power, but destroyed politically and utterly until they and their descendants will wet their pants in abject existential terror if anyone even whispers something to them about running for office again.

Midas on February 17, 2012 at 9:36 PM

DWS intentionally misses the point – the issue is NOT contraception, it is the government telling companies whom they must hire, whom they must insure and how they must insure them. Then there’s the freedom of religion aspect but why focus on reality when you can make news with fluff.

She’s so in the tank for OBama. Besides, birth control pills were really cheap and still are. Get them from Planned Parenthood if you don’t want to buy them yourself but I really think it’s time for people to start paying their own way instead of expecting the government to cover everything. Oh, that’s been said before.

DWS at some point will discover that all she’s been used by the Dems – they will drop her when they’re finished using her.

Pathetic. Gutsy but pathetic.

MN J on February 17, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Batsh!t crazy I tell ya. Batsh!t crazy.

chewmeister on February 17, 2012 at 10:24 PM

she looks like she smells

murrayjones on February 17, 2012 at 11:52 PM

gekkobear on February 17, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I don’t necessarily agree with the government forcing employers to provide females with contraception, but to address another facet of your view, maybe it’s because
1. men aren’t the ones who actually get pregnant and have to live with the consequences (some men walk away from their pregnant partner), and
2. I’ve heard many women say that the men leave birth control up to them. Most men don’t seem to want to bother with it.

For the other guy or two on page one of this discussion who were saying the GOP want to force their values on people.

One of the reasons I find that a silly point is that if the GOP and religious people stop fighting for what they believe in, and they sit at home and do nothing and stay out of the political process, the liberals automatically win, and all policies get set in their favor.

I don’t see why it’s acceptable for liberals and fervent secular types to fight for what they want and fight for their values, but Christians/ conservatives/ Republicans are supposed to just bow out and let the liberals/ secularists have their way on everything.

TigerPaw on February 18, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Whoa !! That is truly, an ugly sneering alien life form. And what is with her mouth? I guess the saying about ugly on the inside makes for ugly on the outside is true.

stormridercx4 on February 18, 2012 at 3:13 AM

So…if I, as a pro-life person, get a job at Planned Parenthood, does this mean they have to stop providing abortions because that is contrary to my beliefs?

Maddie on February 18, 2012 at 6:32 AM

Ahhh…Debbie Wasserman Schultz…the only woman in America REQUIRED to douche.

jan3 on February 17, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Stop. She’s not ‘required’ to douche. It’s just a practical matter as she starts leaving a body count in her wake on day 3 if she doesn’t – AS IS typical of those from her planet, I’ll remind you. Personally, I don’t think too much about her one way or the other, but every now and then I catch a glimpse of her and find myself thinking ‘…KILL IT!! KIIIIIILLLLL IT!!!! KILLLLLLLIT!!!’

But then I have a whiskey and warm butter milk, and curl up with my daughters pillow pet, and yah…it calms me right down.

Abiss on February 18, 2012 at 7:08 AM

Frankly, I think that Debbie Whasserschtiz is the best thing that has happened to the Republican party in 2011/12!! Bar none….

Pecozbill on February 18, 2012 at 8:27 AM

MJBrutus on February 17, 2012 at 8:36 PM

Do yourself a favor, and stop it already. Your Mitt-love is clouding anything resembling reasonable judgement or discernment. Rick Santorum is unafraid to say what he believes on social issues. As a former member of the political body charged with writing the laws under which this land is governed, exactly how much of those personal beliefs has he turned into laws directly impacting how you live?

If you take a breath and consider what you already know to be true, the President is not given the authority to legislate. He can speak of policy all he wants, it cannot become law without the actions of 535 other elected folks’ actions.

Santorum isn’t a coward, so he doesn’t hesitate to speak his mind that unfettered promiscuity of all forms has a deleterious impact on society. That there are moral standards which, when ignored, have consequences. You presume to convert these comments into something akin to “When I’m king, everyone must live as I say, or else!”.

Not that this is new, you’ve always thrown intellectual honesty to the winds regarding anybody who isn’t Romney.

Freelancer on February 18, 2012 at 8:38 AM

If you take a breath and consider what you already know to be true, the President is not given the authority to legislate. He can speak of policy all he wants, it cannot become law without the actions of 535 other elected folks’ actions.

Freelancer on February 18, 2012 at 8:38 AM

You aren’t arguing the point, you’re avoiding it. Did PBHO set the rules on contraceptives without 535 of his closest friends weighing in? And does the POTUS not play a large part in introducing, negotiating and influencing legislation?

That aside, the point is that one who considers such matters as personal sexual conduct to be a subject for our government to meddle in (public policy) is unfit to hold office.

MJBrutus on February 18, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3