Privacy is a right! Freedom of choice! KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS!
(Unless it’s a committed Catholic’s bedroom, in which case the Papist’s hostility toward contraception is just crazy and irrational, and so has no justifiable claim to privacy, it being a crime against reason itself, and so can’t in good SCIENTIFIC and MEDICAL conscience be allowed to stand in the way of women’s health. In other words, the complaints of a few nutjobs that their privacy is being invaded cannot be permitted to trump a person’s right to fuck using other people’s money as a sperm barrier, or, if that fails, an egg beater.)
Now. Who wants to go tell the military what kinds of foods soldiers must eat?
It is exceptionally depressing to think of how health care has changed in my lifetime. When I was born – and both my mother an father were employed – mom at AT&T and dad at McDonnell Douglas – they had to pay for my birth – 100%. And it was apparently affordable for them as entry level employees. My dad was on the assembly line and my mother was some sort of pre installation tech. The only health insurance they could buy through their employee benefits was catastrophic health insurance. Each time they went to the doctor it not covered. None of their prescriptions were covered. And yet somehow they managed to exist and live and feed my sister and I and pay their mortgage.
When I first paid into health insurance it was 1990. My copay’s were 5/10/25 dollars. I think I made 10 bucks an hour tops. Of course since I was 21 year I wasn’t sick that often nor did I have kids. Still though, it seems that health care was affordable until the government got involved with HMO’s and all that. Since then – 20 years ago copays are now roughly 25/40/50/150 (the 50 is for urgent care – 40 for specialist). All have increased roughly 5 times in 20 years while most professional careers payrolls haven’t even nearly doubled. I think this was the plan all along. Red-tape healthcare so much that prices would only balloon so the “natural” fix would seem to be a universal system.
In regards to the Catholic problem, I wonder if socialist Italy has a similar program in regards to contraception?
Y U NO GO ALONG WITH PROGRAM?
You’re not SUPPOSED to be noticing those kinds of details, donchaknow?
Verse 3 is: “just give us our FREE SHIT! and LEAVE US THE FUCK ALONE!”
amirite?
wasn’t the whole idea behind the co-pays supposed to make it a natural cost-benefit analysis (in other words, is that $25 office visit going to be cheaper than driving to the nearest farmacia and buying a box of bandaids/antihistamine) so as to save the time and energy of doctors and urgent care centers, not to mention the administrative costs of the insurance company for paperwork they won’t have to do)?
However, now that everyone has insurance that covers everything imaginable, the next step is to have car insurance that covers things like bumper sticker removal and new paint jobs, “maybe tighten that squeaky hubcap while we’re at it, and an exhaust pipe bleaching, of course…”
And then the Government will insist that car insurers will have to pay for detailing and progressives will insist that a car wash “is a basic human right”…
KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS!
Doesn’t this explicitly invite the feds in?
If the feds provide a woman an IUD, haven’t they just been invited into far more than the bedroom?
And more rules, regulations etc ALWAYS are added in future years, because there are legions of bureaucrats that we pay to do nothing but refine our laws, and they dutifully add more and more pages of revisions to laws every month and almost never do these people work to remove or rescind anything.
Keep your laws off of my body, but make laws that make other people pay to give me free stuff to put in my body… whew. What a huge distinction that is.
Lets for a minute wonder aloud if medical science was to have created an InterAnal device (IAD?) that prevented transmission of STD’s and whatever else.
Well geez, what knuckledragging godbotherng fool would it take to say “hey knock yourself out… go to the drugstore and buy one, have at it…” but I refuse to buy the IAD for you?
Is that a hate crime or something?
So are the feds going to step up and make everyone chip into the system?
What a mess of a country we are right now… fuck
Verse 3 (revised):
AFTER you give ME all the FREE shit to which I AM ENTITLED, you may then GO AWAY and LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!
Funny thing, Rick Santorum is a Catholic. So, is the administration trying help Santorum get the GOP nomination, through alienating Catholics, because Obama’s election team thinks Santorum is easier to beat than Romney?
Or is the administration just stupid?
Both?
What about through appeasing leftist Catholics? Like: “Say, look at how out of step Santorum is with these friendly to us Catholics over here! Hey, he’s a weirdo, ain’t he?”
One of Schumer’s minions was on the radio today making exactly that same argument, sdferr.
They never mention that the CHA operates independently and without the authority of the USCCB.
I’m starting to think they omit that little bit of information on pupose.
The administration, either on it’s own or buy assissting the Romney campaign with some timely “dirt” (my guess) already took out the only candidate they were even slightly worried about. They’re planning on running Romney because they think largely like establishment Republicans think, and thus, Romney it is.
or on purpose
I think I read that Her Highness Michelle told some airman/serf that he will learn to like his vegetables.
I tend to hear that as a command and the kid probably answered “yes ma’am”.
From the evil Bush family:
“I do not like broccoli. And I haven’t liked it since I was a little kid and my mother made me eat it. And I’m President of the United States and I’m not going to eat any more broccoli.”
At least she’s picking on someone her own size, Steve. I was starting to feel sorry for all the fat little kids in her photo ops with their sorry plates of crudites.
leigh, check this out and see what you think?
sdferr, leigh, it’s always about politics and power with this administration, isn’t it? Gad, as bad as Bush was, at least we caught a break once in a while.
Blake, for another instance — and some entertaining snark on the side — see this.
sdferr, sheesh. There is a lot to ponder on in that piece. I’ll have to think about it a bit and then expand on my thoughts.
For now, it sounds like a lot of “I tol’ ya so!” from the author wrapped around a kernel of truth about the embrace that Catholicism has given to social programs over the last century. I think he is making too pat a case for his pov, but I need to reread it and make sure I didn’t miss something.
Thanks!
cpac straw poll results
link
I think Mrs. Palin is about to speak at CPAC.
Watch it live here: http://cpac.cc/
or cspan.org
I am so depressed.
That we’re so oppresssed.
And the press won’t ‘fess.
Up.
Hey, hey, hey.
“Too pat a case for” the intent of freedom of conscience in its breadth and depth? That sounds odd, if I may be permitted to sum it so.
Blake,
Capt. Ed interviewed Santorum at CPAC and must have read your mind:
“I then asked Santorum to offer a bit of political analysis and ask him how the Obama administration could have bungled this so badly in an election year. “This is who they are,” Santorum replied.”
Darn Skippy!!!
Since my comments aren’t worth $3.67/mo (esp. not in the shortest month of the year — that’s like an extra cent a day!) I’ll respond to Paul Rahe’s op/ed here:
Rahe’s analysis of the Catholic Church in America overlooks a couple of things, that he’s surely aware of:
First, owing to the fact that Republican party was the Yankee party right up to (well, when? Buckley, I guess) the New Deal era, the Church was already tied to the Democrat party and Democratic politics. Not all Democrats were Catholic, but most Catholics were Democrats. So that’s a factor in the Church’s “faustian bargain” with FDR.
Secondly, I suspect most Democrats back then either didn’t realize they were flirting with socialism, or thought that socialism would only get the Democrat party a little bit pregnant, so to speak.
Thirdly, when the New Left overtook and transformed the Democrat party in the late 60s, the Church was embroiled in its own little social, political and cultural upheaval—known as the Second Vatican Council.
My point being, we didn’t find ourselves here because of the acts of a small cadre of Bad Men or Foolish Men. Albeit, it may be the case that Foolish Men trying to make the best of a bad situation made it easier for Bad Men to turn a bad situation into an impossible one.
That last was IRT Blake’s #7
Danger, great answer by Santorum.
If anyone is interested, it sounded like Mrs. Palin took a couple of veiled swipes at Romney. There were a couple of remarks about electing a candidate who “instinctively turns right” and that “it’s too late in life to teach a candidate how to be conservative.”
I’m paraphrasing but I think I got the gist of the remarks correct.
Another way to think of it is that the Democrats treat Catholics the same way Republicans treat conservatives:
SHUT UP AND VOTE! they said.
Thanks for your vote. Now go away.
leigh
I get it, but is it really fair for the wife of the Commander in Chief of the whole USA (it used to just be the military)
the wife of the King of the World that isn’t China or the Middle East tells some poor airman he has to eat his broccoli and “learn to like it”
*bleep* that
I’m in a bad mood… besides the country wandering willingly off to be completely and irrevocably screwed, my neighbor (the founder of Kinko’s) my neighbor, who is across my fence, but about 5 acres away is have some sort of MC’d kids events and raffles.
All good. Except I hate the noise, and, well, where is mine? really now. Yeah, my invitation musta got lost in the mail.. like last time. Selfish bastard is fucking successful and do I even get sent over a pitcher of margaritas and a veggie tray with tofu ranch? No. So I had to fucking make my own. Kids? Charity? Fuck all that, this is about ME!!!!!!!!
until the government got involved with HMO’s and all that
You had me up to this point.
I’ve worked in health care finance for the past 22 years, 10 of them with an HMO. HMO’s came into being BECAUSE costs were beginning to rise, not the other way around. The purpose of an HMO is to keep people from getting unnecessary tests and care if possible.
Health care is expensive just because it is – technology is better (it costs a lot of money for hi-res MRI machines, for example), drugs are WAY better than in the 70’s and prior, etc. To add to that – because prices went up (and people wanted to “do something”), government got their hands on it and jacked it up even more by adding services as part of standard packages (at the state level, this was going on before Obamacare).
The paradox is this: because health care is better, people are living longer, and need more healthcare later in life, thus driving up the cost. And of course, the government just exacerbates the situation.
By the way – at the HMO I worked at, I did their budget for 4 straight years; their medical loss ratio (claims payments divided by gross revenue) was around 90%. 7-8% was administrative expenses, and they retained about 2-3%. Nobody got filthy rich.
It ain’t greedy HMO’s, doctors, insurance companies or the like, despite the media BS.
Weren’t HMO’s one of Turd Kennedy’s projects? One that just a few years after creating, he started crusading against as “inhuman organizations created by greedy bastards out to rape the public”?
Crawford – I’m not sure, but the one I worked for was formed in 1979. The Detroit Big 3 were major contributors to its creation. This was, of course, before Kennedy made it one of his pet projects.
I do.
“Not mine.”
And that goes for the rest of you, too.
Turns out he was, I Callahan:
(Turd Kennedy, 1978)
(Turd Kennedy, 2001)
That was, of course, the Turd’s approach to everything in politics: screw it up, declare a new fix for what he screwed up, then screw it up even more with the “fix”. It’s simply amazing to find how many of the most disastrous policies today have their roots in Kennedy — healthcare, immigration, and education. It’s like his life’s goal was to weaken and destroy the country.
Conservative Political Action favors the guy who supported stimulus, TARP, cap and trade, gun control, federal minimum wage hikes, and an individual mandate.
I rest my case about the majority of the “conservative” blogosphere. All the want is to become part of the establishment. They are there to network and become insiders.
Kennedy did introduce the first bill backing them, but he was nowhere near being a founder:
LINK
Don’t mean to quibble, but HMO’s were around way before Turd. He just jumped on the bandwagon when it looked like he could get some credit (as usual).
And as soon as he could, found a way to demonize them so he could lead the next stage in taking control of your healthcare from you.
And as soon as he could, found a way to demonize them so he could lead the next
This.
HMO’s were one of the first steps in bringing us Obamacare(and Romneycare and the attempt of Hillarycare before).
Way back in the seventies.
link
What’s Geraghty have to say about this big CPAC straw poll vote for MItt Romney in which he decisively defeated Rick Santorum by 8 whole points, but won no delegates, I’m wondering.
What year did HMO’s become state sponsored?
Oh, 1973…
HMO’s were one of the first steps in bringing us Obamacare(and Romneycare and the attempt of Hillarycare before). Way back in the seventies.
Maybe it was used as a stepping stone. But does that mean that had HMO’s not been created, that big government types wouldn’t have wanted to eventually completely control health care?
Once again – HMO’s were created to network physicians, hospitals, and patients, to save money in the long run. The fact that government came in and screwed it all up doesn’t change that. Unfortunately, there has been so much misinformation about this subject that even conservatives have bought the media line.
I rest my case about the majority of the “conservative” blogosphere. All the want is to become part of the establishment. They are there to network and become insiders.
I wouldn’t go so far at to say a majority Jeff. At most it’s 38%, isn’t it? And that presumes the entirety of Romney’s support consists of tools
—of one kind or another.
“Maybe it was used as a stepping stone. But does that mean that had HMO’s not been created, that big government types wouldn’t have wanted to eventually completely control health care?”
Point taken Callahan. Still, HMO’s created a(relatively) easy path.
Considering that it is held in Washington DC, that Romney only got 38% is heartening to me. If he can only pull 38% out of a largely beltway crowd says his support is not strong even in Rino-land.
oh my the elusive 40
link
the power of condoms
link
It does sound odd. That isn’t where I was going with that thought, though. I was thinking the author was a bit too ready to have the church leaping gleefully into bed with the state in his examples. I think his case for freedom of conscience, especially in that it should be inclusive of all citizens of all faiths or none, is a good one. Further, he gives many good historical examples of how the hierarchy of the church structure was useful in informing the structure of parlimentary government.
“Too pat” also alludes to his corrections to the original column. He erroneously refers to the USCCB taking the bait from Obama, and makes an error about FDR’s female cabinet member’s faith. The latter is not a deal breaker, the former makes me give him a side-eye and think he was going for the “Flash!” headline and beating his fellow journos to the punch—a one-two punch since he also works at Hillsdale College.
Sorry to be tardy. I had tacos to make.
RIP Whitney Houston. Gone at 48.
“…the author was a bit too ready to have the church leaping gleefully into bed with the state in his examples”
leigh, I’m uncertain as to the antecedent to this reference? Please, fill me in what you mean (if only to pluck a quote)?
There’s this:
And this:
I may be all wrong in my suppostition about what appears to be the author’s take that the church has created in itself a kind of Frankenstein’s monster in the 20th century. It just struck me the wrong way (and I am not necessarily saying he is wrong and I am righ) that he would accused the American Catholic church of conceit, when he himself seems to be rather prideful about pointing to it and saying “J’accuse!”
Rahe’s larger point is that the institutional church forgets at its own peril that the Two Cities co-exist in this world and the City of God cannot subsume and incorporate the City of Man. It’s not the first time it’s made that mistake, and hopefully for us, it won’t be the last.
I’m not quite getting your last sentence, Ernst. Can you unpack it for me?
So, as I understand it, you read Rahe as somehow re-writing history, or what’s the term of art?, writing “revisionist” history, making something appear to be the case that was not the case? It’s not an unreasonable charge, I guess, but either way, pro or con, would take a heap of research and case making to prove. However that may be, as my old kitchen buddy Jose used to say, “ee no my yob”.
Hat Trick !!!
link
Rahe rewriting/revising history, sdferr? Nah. He is an historian and most certainly knows a great deal more about these matters than do I. I think I am too close to the subject and/or idea of Church and State having illicit relations right now to have an objective opinion about it. I’ve been reading around the interwebs a lot the last few days and I’m taking a jaundiced view for now, and it’s not Rahe’s fault. I’ve had my shrinker’s hat jammed on too hard and ascribing ulterior motives to a lot of people who don’t deserve it.
“politics of generosity.”
we steal money from peeps and give to our peeps(after some transaction fees)
Thanks, geoff. That article is informative.
The charge Rahe levels against Cardinal Bernardin, leigh, is serious enough to warrant vigorous skepticism, as even he would agree, I believe (since I don’t think he makes such arguments frivolously). So, pressing the charge from every angle is probably a good thing, in my estimation, both for Rahe’s sake — testing the strength of his charge against whatever evidence he can muster — and for the church’s sake, eliciting the truth that must be seen to be understood. Evenso, still, “ee no my yob”.
more “politics of generosity”
link
keith ellison on the “politics of generosity”
link
link
So the head of something called the American Conservative Union is looking toward another Bush — one who believes most conservatives are racist for protesting illegal immigration?
Seriously. We’ve been coopted everywhere. There’s no saving this Party.
Jeb Fucking Bush. Or Chris Christie. Or Mike Huckabee.
And I thought we couldn’t possibly do worse than Romney.
But notice: no Sarah Palin. Telling.
Cardinal Bernardin should’ve been excommunicated after his weak-sauce rejoinder against abortion, back in ’83. There’s blood on his hands for it.
now we know why maine goes rino
link
Oh, definately, sdferr. I’m certainly not in the camp of those who think the church is incapable of doing bad things. I’ve read too much of our history to think the clergy are all a bunch of angels or devils, depending on which side of the fence one likes to reside on.
As in all things, the truth will out, so we’ll just have to be patient.
I appreciate your insights very much so, you’ll make it your job, mister! ;)
Romney wins CPAC, which effective guts CPAC of any claim to be a ‘Conservative’ group AFAIC.
oh lookey here from business week
link
for the post modern crowd
link
here’s some uk progg speak
link
ACU head Al Cardenas was born in Cuba in 1948…
Is it possible that there’s a little election year identity politics pandering going on? Or just a longtime supporter reaping the rewards of years of loyalty.
Ooops, wrong thread.
the “pog” is a super balm
link
more post modern drivel
link
geez the leftards know a good marketing gimmick
link
some progg from nz
link
link
It is not generosity when what you are giving has been stolen. It is the division of spoils and the payoff of mercenaries who have been hired on spec.
More from “The Anglican Examiner“. [sorry about the formatting]
Looked really bad in preview but ok in the comment, weird.
From Mark Steyn’s latest column.
There’s not much punch left in America’s religious institutions anymore. This could be the thorn what breaks the back of that cross-bearer.
A few random thoughts on sundry thread comments before church:
1. HMOs/PPOs et al. have been screwed by one thing above all: Healthcare is so much violently better than it was even in the 1980s that lifespans are sharply longer. HC, as I Callahan noted well, thus remains in demand for decades longer. The costs pile up 50%-100% more than was budgeted for when today’s elderly planned for retirement. The second point is a biggie: Today’s medical consumer is vastly more aware of medical technology than previous generations and is totally confident in asking or even demanding it. Ask any family practicioner for the stories of 17 year old HS athletes asking for MRIs for sprained ankles or the mom’s of 16 yr old girls wanting ultra-sounds to see if anything was “wrong down there” during a rough cycle. I suspect they get them more than is broadly understood. Add to that the legal staus quo and the high costs make complete sense.
2. The kids are fat because of the idiocy of the food pyramid. It is grains- and bread heavy. A real fine book is “Wheat Belly” and it makes a powerful argument that the wheat-centric diet of today’s American, fused with higher than healthy sugar-intakes and sedentary lifestyles, is devastating. He’s right. If FLOTUS wanted to change things properly, she’s tell the kids to eat 4-5 servings of protein, nuts, fruit and veggies a day and so some exercise. Cut out the grains and go light on potatoes/rice (but a serving or two is no sin; nor is a little vanilla/strawberry ice cream or a candy bar.)
3. I’ve done a fair amount of short-term missions work in my prior life as a catholic and now as an evangelical. The mind sets are violently different. In RC missions, you are there to help your fellow man (usually justified by a broad reading of the Book of Matthew’s “Do good works” passages); in evangelical missions, you are there to glorify God through works on behalf of his Son.
a person’s right to fuck using other people’s money as a sperm barrier, or, if that fails, an egg beater
THIS.
SteveG@31: The last time that I looked, the First Lady isn’t in the Chain of Command. It may be the case that the airmen/women selected to be in AirForce(insert number) are screened for extra-ordinary brown-nosing skills, but even then I’d expect something along the lines of “You don’t say” or “Umm-hmm”.
Richard, they usually have subtler ways of getting their own back… as when Senator Hillary Clinton visited Afghanistan and her helo was tagged “Broomstick One”….
The politics of generosity ( with other people’s money).