February 8, 2012

“Signatures to Rescind HHS Contraceptive Mandate Exceed Those on Petition in Favor of Policy 5 to 1″

Which, while suggestive, is not particularly dispositive with respect to public sentiment.

Whereas conservative stalwart John Boehner’s having taken to the floor of Congress to pledge an overturn of the mandate is a much better indicator of public opinion — because we all know that, without some compelling internal polling data telling GOP leadership where they should stand on the issue, John Boehner would just keep his mouth shut and hope Obama and the Democrats don’t come after him in the press.

Because they aren’t very nice, those progressive Democrats. And that sometimes makes Mr Speaker Boehner cry.

(h/t Steve Ertelt)

Posted by Jeff G. @ 11:26am
50 comments | Trackback

Comments (50)

  1. Signatures to Rescind HHS Contraceptive Mandate Exceed Those on Petition in Favor of Policy 5 to 1

    This obviously doesn’t matter because Romney didn’t campaign there.

  2. The good thing about the religion of Proggobama’s overreach is its overreach: Folks are going to wise up.

  3. Doesn’t matter if it’s 5 to 1 or 500 to 1.

    Because one man with courage inevitability dialectical materialism MAKES a majority.

    shit Jackson said

  4. I have to shake my head at this. My crazy Obamacare supporting cousin got furious with sputtering fury when I (essentially) called her a sell-out for supporting Obamacare since it would fund abortions (with the $6 billion to Planned Parenthood just the appetizer). How dare I, how dare I, question what was the single most important issue of her life? She didn’t need to prove her street cred to me!

    Yeah, it’s really a shame there were no clues to this. I bet she’s really surprised.

  5. Ella, I once threatened to make up a picket sign for my lovely bride that read: “GET THE GOVT INTO MY UTERUS NOW!”

    Once.

  6. I’m wondering on the question whether — once Obama and Co. figure out how to back away from this stupid tyrannical policy — the Catholics who’ve been alerted to offense now will withhold their votes from Obama on principled grounds, despite any future “apparent” capitulation by Obama on the principle [though he will in fact have done so solely on devious, pragmatic, electoral grounds]?

    In other words, is the damage done to his electoral prospect permanent damage? Or, are many currently offended Catholic voters committed leftists enough to ignore the insult and vote for the offender anyhow?

  7. Jay Carney doesn’t exactly make it sound like Obama’s looking for a way to back down.

  8. Granted Ernst, but I’m reading the campaign’s indicators, plus the simple math.

  9. If, on the other hand, Obama sticks with the policy in the face of electoral revolt, the question I’ve asked alters somewhat. The currently offended Catholics would have good reason to remain offended, or at least in greater numbers than if Obama were to back away, insofar as they’d lack the mitigation that he had backed away, and the matter had slipped their minds, to rough it out in general terms.

  10. WaPo has a poll showing 52% of self-identified Catholics are in favor of Obama’s position, according to Rush, just now, so maybe they don’t see the problem we see.

  11. I think he has done tremendous damage to he’s reelectablity, sdferr. A lot of people who were willing to overlook a lot for the sake of their own sense of altruism, are not willing to overlook such overt meddling in their spiritual lives, even if they only give it lipservice most of the time.

    Who can he toss under the bus for this if not Sebelius? That may be dangerous since her family is very wealthy and quite connected in the insurance rackets. They are trying to do a walk-back today by claiming that this is merely a misunderstanding (read: Stupid papists) and claiming this is all about birth control and tossing out the ever popular red herring of “well, if you’re going to take federal funds…”

    He may have taken the tiger by the tail. I surely hope so.

  12. I hear him, but to be particular about it, I’m speaking of Catholics who do take offense, as opposed to Catholics who don’t take offense, so to that extent, I think I can disregard that polling, be it valid or not.

  13. Mr Speaker Boehner would probably cry if HHS restricted the use of spray-on tan.

  14. “…are not willing to overlook such overt meddling in their spiritual lives…”

    It may be that many folk’s concerns will be tailored in this narrow fashion — restricted, in a sense, to their personal involvement (“He’s aiming at me!”) — yet I think it sad to the extent that would be so, on account of the wider principle supporting a right which in the final analysis has far greater implications for the nation as a whole. Cannot people think of the nation as a whole? Cannot people think the next step?

  15. Well, if we’re talking about a subset of Catholics, Obama’s already written them off (white working class voters —granted not the exact same subset of the voting populace, but I’m positive there’s considerable overlap), so from Obama’s perspective, it doesn’t matter what they do. This is about keeping the Feminists in his base bouyed up.*

    As to what offended Catholics do, since it’s unlikely that Obama is going to reverse himself, they’ll either stay offended or they’ll get over it.

    Interesting how he’s focused on placating and rewarding his base, while the wizards of smart on our side all tell us we need to tone it down, lest we offend the all-knowing, all-powerful moderates and independents.

  16. “…Obama’s already written them off…”

    Some, perhaps. But, hey, I’ve heard noise about E.J. Dionne, for instance. This is to say, there may well be quite a large number of people, many Catholics among them, who would otherwise have been in Obama’s column, but who, in light of this policy, have turned away. Otherwise, how to account for Axelrod’s waffling? It is not beyond a possibility that the White House has miscalculated, in other words, that they’ve actually made an error that they will rue. If this weren’t the case, I believe there would be no stir at all, and yet, we do see quite a stir, a ferment building, not diminishing.

  17. Obama doesn’t miscalculate. The problem here is that the ignorant masses have failed to fully appreciate (indeed are incapable of appreciating) the depth and breadth of his wisdom and compassion for their plight.

    They will be made to learn

  18. Imagine how the Muslims are going to react when they find out about the mandate for cooter-shaving in Obamacare.

  19. Obama’s convinced he can win the Catholic vote without the Church. I think he will. The Church in America has been playing far left politics for too long. They’ve allowed Biden and Pelosi and their ilk to parade around dragging their Rosary’s into photo ops, banking on that ol’ JFK magic to get them through. Now it’s bit them on the ass. Oh well.

  20. That WaPo poll result would tend to confirm your observation LMC.

  21. I sometimes wonder if they feel they have the game rigged well enough they’re confident enough votes will be found regardless. How many elections in the last decade have been won by losing a stack of absentee ballots and/or finding a trunk full of forgotten ballots in key areas?

    There’s a reason proof of identity is more stringent when buying cold medicine than when voting…

  22. I wouldn’t underestimate the Church, guys. They’ve got 2,000 years of experience at this sort of thing.

  23. He never met a principle he didn’t feel the need to do extensive internal polling about.

  24. President Obama is “sensitive” to the concerns expressed by religious leaders on the contraception issue and wants to find a way to implement the decision that can “allay some of the concerns expressed,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday.

    Yeah, blather always works when the spokes-heel is backed into a corner. Baffle ‘em with bullshit, is the way that saying goes. Thing is, the bullshit welcome has worn out through overuse.

  25. I liked how the trunkfull of ballots were all votes for Al Franken. They didn’t even try to hide their crime.

  26. I wouldn’t underestimate the Church, guys. They’ve got 2,000 years of experience at this sort of thing.

    Exactly. Axelrod and Company have underestimated their opponent when they chose this hill to die on.

  27. Cannot people think of the nation as a whole? Cannot people think the next step?

    People are reacting at the moment. It is personal to many and they have not necessarily thought it through to the next step. Yet.

  28. I liked how the trunkfull of ballots were all votes for Al Franken. They didn’t even try to hide their crime.

    You mean like 2000 when the “over votes” in some district appeared to have come from someone shoving a spike through the “Gore” punches? That way the valid Gore votes would stay valid, abstentions were turned into Gore votes, and Bush votes were invalidated!

  29. The Church is going to be fine. Catholic schools, universities, charitable organizations, and churches, perhaps not.

  30. You figure the papists are gonna just skip the whole “Holy Spirit moving one to do good works in Christ’s name” thing? I beg to differ.

  31. I’m not looking any further than the implementation of the mandate Squid, cognizant of the fact that a lot of things need to happen before that does.

    But that WaPo poll ought to have Catholics concerned.

  32. I’m thinking that this is really the first “in your face” enforcement of Obamacare. Hard to imagine a bigger target than the Catholic church for an HHS ruling that says, “Yes, we really meant to take over healthcare. So STFU.”
    Either they are supremely self-confident that this will stick (and that smaller targets will crumble after seeing it), or they misread the sleeping giant. I’m hoping it’s the latter. Most sentient Americans are aware of the Catholic position on contraception and abortion and this is bound to start people thinking, “First they came for the Catholics . . .”. May be a turning point.

  33. What niggles the back of my brain is a thought that the Catholic Church has kinda put itself in a box, by becoming co-dependent with the government running all their schools, universities, hospitals and programs.

    I just hope they know, even if this gets reversed, the proggs won’t give up. They never do. And while Christians, Jews, and Buddhists can co-exist, the religion of Progressivism, like the religion of Mohammad, must absorb all others.

  34. RI Red, admittedly, a majority of people have never supported Obamacare. But, of those who did (either happily or in sad resignation), if they were getting something out of it then, they’ll still want that thing now.

    E.g., my cousin above. She adopted a Down’s kid with no ability or intention of ever paying all of her medical bills. Obamacare promises to take care of that, and so she sold out whatever pro-life cred she had for the price of an insurance premium. My aunt has no intention, ever under any circumstances, of taking care of my grandmother. Obamacare promises, shall we say, a “final solution” to that problem. Neither will lose any sleep over this.

  35. “if they were getting something out of it then, they’ll still want that thing now.”

    Ella, that applies equally to all “entitlements”. And since there’s no way we can pay for all of the programs, those wanting entitlements are going to have a serious wake-up call. And their first target is not going to be the gov, it’s going to be the people who finally put their foot down and said, “No. More. Money.”

    In a real world, the Supremes will find the individual mandate unconstitutional and that may keep Obamacare from actually becoming an entitlement. Still doesn’t solve the other entitlement problems, but it does take one off the table. Assuming the R side bends to our conservative pressure.

  36. Evidently though, Joe Biden and Bill Daley know something that the WaPo poll doesn’t know. What could that be? I doubt it’s an attachment to another poll, in preference, say, to the Washington Post’s poll. Could it be a recollection, however dim, that the intent of the First Amendment to the Constitution is to vouchsafe a guarantee against government reaching into the religious consciences of individual citizens and their religious organizations? And that any law which, as such, violates that fundamental principle will meet with a groundswell of resistance sure to damage the electoral prospects of any person or party who supports such a manifestly unconstitutional law-making? I’ll leave it to them to say at some future date.

  37. I’m going with your point sdferr. To put it in Carville-esque slogan-speak; it’s the first amendment, stupid :)

    Even those guys get that…

  38. Evenso Bob, I’ve heard no small number of Obama apologists suggest that there simply is no substantive First Amendment issue at hand, no issue whatsoever, they say. This tells me a couple of things. These apologists either don’t understand the First Amendment (and in all probability, where it came from and why), or, in the alternative, supposing they do understand it, they believe the majority of American voters are so ignorant that they don’t understand the Amendment, and hence, can be won over by a wall of lies and bullshitting. In either case, I’d suggest, these Obama apologists doom themselves.

  39. Agreed, they’re dooming themselves. And it’s hard to pin down from whence their opinions spring forth, but I think you’ve done a pretty good job presenting the possibilities.

    I personally would like to know the breakdown, though we probably never will get any definitive account. Because the former group, most likely inclusive of Justice Ruth Bader “the US Constitution isn’t a good model” Ginsberg, may actually be less a danger to our society than the latter-grifters and con-men who think themselves a 21st century aristocracy.

    Or apparatchicks…Whatever shoe noose fits best.

    Because if more of Mr. Santorums discussions of the nature of liberty as the founders intended get wider play, and people actually pay attention, than those same grifters may be singing their swan song.

    Let’s hope so.

  40. What niggles the back of my brain is a thought that the Catholic Church has kinda put itself in a box, by becoming co-dependent with the government running all their schools, universities, hospitals and programs.

    I don’t think the ties to government itself are so much the problem as are the ties to a certain type of Catholic politician that they thus far refuse to cut.

  41. Is anyone else feeling as many tipping points as I am? Lots coming to a head in the near term.

  42. Looks like there’s a discrepancy between the WaPo’s poll results regarding American Catholic’s opinion of the HHS mandate and Obergruppenfuhrer McPollsters Rasmussen’s

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2012/50_oppose_gov_t_mandate_for_religious_organizations_to_provide_contraceptives

    Must be the ol’ likely voters vs adults thing. But who knows? WaPo’s stopped providing the sample affiliation data.

    I wonder why…

  43. Bob, polls were covered by Sam Clemens – lies, damn lies and statistics.

  44. Heh, “Disregarding WaPo Polls since 1995″ is my middle name.

  45. Now Lebanon’s Syria Watch page: Feb. 8 — Syrian security forces killed on Wednesday 177 people, including 93 people in Homs, Al-Arabiya reported.

    The Syrian army and thug-militia has intensified their barbarity the last few days, across their country but in particular shelling the city of Homs relentlessly. Ball-less Obama stands apart, watching. Is he cheering too, or just eating popcorn as he views the scene? Who can say?

  46. Me too sdferr, in large part because of the wisdom of the quote provided by R.I.Red.

  47. And if Assad’s barbarism is not enough, I’ve read reports that 15000 Iranian troops are there to help out; probably Al-Quds types. Bastards…

  48. madame clinton beating the war drum

    http://www.drudgereport.com/

  49. WaPo/ABC is the one that now will not report the breakdown R/I/D that they are using and also seem to like polling “adults” not “registered voters” or “likely voters”.

  50. Okay, fellers. I just picked up my youngest son from CCD class where he informs me that they spent the better part of an hour talking about Obama and how he is trying to drive a stake through the heart of our colleges and hospitals.

    We go to the Cathedral this weekend to meet with our Bishop prior to the kids making their Confirmation in April. I’ll report back of the Mass and its homily.

Leave a Reply