Friday News Roundup - Domestic
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-02-17/friday-news-roundup-domestic
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., left, reaches out to Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 16, 2012, to celebrate as members of the bi-partisan House and Senate conferees on the payroll tax cut extension signed the compromise agreement.
(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Congressional lawmakers debated mandated coverage of contraceptives in the health care law. Several Democrats walked out of a hearing on the provision in the House of Representatives. Congress moved closer to ending the fight over the payroll tax cut exemption. The House and Senate are expected to vote today on the $143 billion dollar package. With a narrow lead in Michigan, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum defended his opposition to the auto industry bailout. And more good news on the economy as housing starts rose last month. John Dickerson of Slate.com, Susan Page of USA Today and Jerry Seib of The Wall Street Journal join Diane for analysis of the week's top national news stories.
Guests
Susan Page
Washington bureau chief for USA Today.
Jerry Seib
Washington bureau chief, The Wall Street Journal.
John Dickerson
chief political correspondent for Slate.com and CBS political analyst and contributor. Author of "On Her Trail: My Mother, Nancy Dickerson, TV News' First Woman Star."
Friday News Roundup Video
The panelists discuss the ongoing debate on mandating health care coverage for contraceptives in relation to religious organizations and employers:
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Mitt Romney's inability to close the deal on the nomination is leading to the possibility of an elongated primary process. Because the Republicans can’t decide which lunatic to have in the lead….Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul all have reasons to not drop out of the race! At the end of each primary there is now a chance the Republican nominee will have to deal with the fallout of a brokered convention. The first since primaries and caucuses became the critical method of choosing nominees.
In short the Republican party, is having an identity crisis: the Reagan coalition between the religious right wing and the fiscal hawks is finally falling apart. It's a fascinating process, albeit not pretty, to watch…. but it couldn’t be happening to nicer people!
This inevitably leads to the real bad news in all of this….that Obama will retain the White House and the lunatics that have disrupted everything for the past two years will be in charge of both houses of Congress. We will be faced with four more years of gridlock and nothing being accomplished because the conservatives will feel that they…. through the defeat at their run for the White House…..believe, the reason that they lost was that they weren’t conservative enough.
Conservatism must be defeated or the country as we know it will perish. Americans really need to wake up.
Could you and your guests discuss the issue of insider trading in congress and the STOCK act? The Daily Show covered this on Wednesday and it was extremely disturbing.
OK, TB a lot of what you write is true and self evident. The republican party trying to find itself is nothing to be ashamed of. Whether you agree with republicans or not, they do operate from a basis of principled ideas. I would say this, the democrat party doesn't do this. Notice how the unchanged foreign policy of G.B. is now widely accepted by the left only because a liberal democrat is in charge. Notice how the liberals now support domestic policy regarding the war on terror that in the past they had nothing but contempt for under G.B. Unprincipled hypocrisy defines the democrat party and they are more to blame for policy stagnation through their efforts to paint every proposal offered from the other side as evil. Obama had a golden opportunity to address the spending crisis and chose class warfare instead. There is in the Obama administration an obvious effort to increase government control over every aspect of our lives, I think this is what will do him in, I only hope we don't end up with another "compassionate conservative' the word "conservative" doesn't mean anything these days, it's just a stupid word used to link back to the exaggerated successes of Ronald Reagan.
Can you address the issue of the newly formed Obama administration initiatives for school lunch programs that in effect created an army of government contolled Lunch Box Nazi's.
A preschool girl was told her homemade meal wasn't healthy enough - so a school cafeteria monitor made her eat chicken nuggets instead.
The rejected meal consisted of a turkey and cheese sandwich on whole wheat bread, with a side of a banana, potato chips, and apple juice.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2101354/Food-police-reject-presc...
Monte:
You must have the Rush Limbaugh program blaring in your right ear....he's been railing on this for over an hour! (yeah I listen...you have to know what the enemy is up to and what he's telling the troops).
Doncha think that massive unemployment, lack of paying jobs, lack of health insurance for over 45 million Americans rank higher than what the "lunch box nazi's" might be up to?
Culture wars, culture wars, culture wars.....
TB, There is truth in that, but know the lunch box thing does feed right in to the larger narrative of Obama's obsession of government control. Also know my libertarianism is almost as unwelcome in "conservative" circles as is liberalism. Glad you listen to the show, shows your more opened minded than I would have given you credit for. Concerns over unemployment and health care are universal but I recoil at the notion of government involvement. Like all government social programs, good intentions to help the poor become middle class vote buying bargaining chips that we cannot afford. Maybe even now the "middle class" so burdened with overall taxes to pay for the government we have will be forced to seek government assistance to survive and therefor will support ever increasing government growth and regulations. I heard yesterday the federal government provides 5% of the funding for public schools but mandates 70% of the regulations.
Here is something of far greater concern to American freedom and liberty than the lunch box nazis that Monte is worried about:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/16/police-tank-purchase-new-hampsh...
Cops purchasing tanks and armored cars! They know what is coming.....
They have already anticipated armed revolt. This has nothing whatsoever to do with homeland security and terrorist threats. It isn't about a threat from without or about people breaking into a school and shooting it up.
This is about quelling local opposition to authority. This is about putting down food riots and runs on banks.
Left or Right no longer matters....think about that.
Teece Bowman wrote:
"Here is something of far greater concern to American freedom and liberty than the lunch box nazis that Monte is worried about":
Completely agree, the force feeding of government chicken nuggets needs the militarization of local police departments. Joking aside it's all pretty much the same thing, an overbearing dictatorial government. "were from the government and were here to help"
The "media matters" news story is very interesting, hope someone picks up on that. Anyone?
The Rep Issa led hearing “Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience?” is the most blatant example of conservative Republicans defining religious liberty as something that is valid only if it is in agreement with conservative Republican views.
Religious liberty is not allowed in opposition to war.
Religious liberty is not allowed in opposition to capital punishment.
Religious liberty is not allowed for plural marriage.
Religious liberty is not allowed for Catholics supporting worker rights and labor unions as the primary means of social justice in the work place.
In fact, while conservative Republicans demand policy satisfy the Pope on contraception, but conservative Republicans call the Pope's statement of religious duty to oppose war, to promote social justice via labor unions, to promote social justice through government poverty programs, etc to an unacceptable meddling in government policy by religious leaders.
Conservative Republicans are cynically and crassly invoking a religious liberty they, and the Constitution, rejects simply because the Pope and the Catholic church provide a convenient bludgeon to hit Obama and Democrats. This political use of religious is equivalent to using religion to justify slavery.
"Michael Pettengill wrote:
The Rep Issa led hearing “Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience?” is the most blatant example of conservative Republicans defining religious liberty as something that is valid only if it is in agreement with conservative Republican views.
Religious liberty is not allowed in opposition to war.
Religious liberty is not allowed in opposition to capital punishment.
Religious liberty is not allowed for plural marriage.
Religious liberty is not allowed for Catholics supporting worker rights and labor unions as the primary means of social justice in the work place.
In fact, while conservative Republicans demand policy satisfy the Pope on contraception, but conservative Republicans call the Pope's statement of religious duty to oppose war, to promote social justice via labor unions, to promote social justice through government poverty programs, etc to an unacceptable meddling in government policy by religious leaders.
Conservative Republicans are cynically and crassly invoking a religious liberty they, and the Constitution, rejects simply because the Pope and the Catholic church provide a convenient bludgeon to hit Obama and Democrats. This political use of religious is equivalent to using religion to justify slavery"
Mike: You don't think Democratics have done the same thing. During the last election , Obama coharts were stating that they had much in common with Catholics in their social teaching of helping the poor ,etc after not being able to defend Obama's abortion record.
Obama gets elected with the majority Catholic vote and his thanks to the Catholics is to throw the middle finger at them for their beliefs on contraception coverage and the morning after pill.
Goes both ways Mike.
Everyday we have these arguments the republicans are off white and the democrats are egg shell, we all should know by now they are the same. I keep hoping the levy breaks and we vote for a real game changer. Ron Paul 2012
Hey Teece,
I am assuming your disagreeable, mean spirited attitudes are a result of
a lack of physical execrcise which has caused your weight problem.
Try a salad and stay off the Limbaughs.
Susan, Jerry or John,
Will someone please point out that HHS does not require Catholic employers to cover contraceptives. What HHS says is that those employers that do not provide specified services will have the option to pay a tax instead. The tax is unwelcome, may be unfair, and certainly seems onerous. But, paying taxes is not an issue of conscience for the Catholic Church. This is true even when those taxes pay for unjust wars (Iraq was a preventive war, not preemptive), or when those taxes pay for contraceptives for Medicaid recipients.
Ask yourself this question. If the tax were $1 per employee rather than $2,000, would the Catholic Church be claiming religious persecution? Of course they wouldn't. And that's the point. At its core this isn't a question of conscience, it's about money and power.
Here's an excerpt from Kennedy's speech:
" I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish, where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all".
HOW CAN THE T-PARTY ATTACK ON OUR GOVERNMENT TO INSTALL THE VATICAN CONTROL,NOT BE THE ONLY STORY?
Until the law is repealed, please spend all of your shows talking about the incredibly stupid, painful, insulting, terrorizing Va. law mandating invasive ultrasound before an abortion. It's not surprising that a down-state legislator got it passed in one house, but to get through both and have the governor sign it would prove that a) Virginia men can't be trusted to represent women and b) redistricting has created a new form of inbreeding.
Teece Bowman wrote:
"Conservatism must be defeated or the country as we know it will perish. "
and
"Here is something of far greater concern to American freedom and liberty ..."
TB, what must be defeated and is the greatest concern to American freeom and liberty is Progressivism, represented by entitlements. Pure and simple. The nanny state does not work and always leads to the enslavement of the people it purports to serve. Obama won't touch entitlements and not just for political reasons; he BELIEVES in entitlements and the nanny state. History has shown Progressivism to be a failure at maintaining a sustainable society.
The words attributed to Alexander Tyler (albeit falsely, but they are none the less true) come back to me now on almost a daily basis.
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years.
(cont)
During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to selfishness;
From selfishness to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.
Those steps track the time-line of our country. I think we are somewhere between "selfishness" and "complacency" - headed for bondage. When people are dependent enough, and government is big eough, bondage results. That is the end product of the Progressive philosophy. God help us.
It could not get any more absurd watching five Catholic males I think three were bishops sitting at a table in our nations capitol addressing and deciding what womens reproductive rights are. I am so glad I left the Catholic church
Hello Diane and guest panel,
I have a question regarding the agreement to extend unemployment benefits and payroll tax cut.
Is it possible that this agreement will hasten another debt ceiling increase, and position it right before the election, creating another firestorm similar to last summer?
Is it possible that this is could be a 'trojan horse' from republicans?
Thank you.
I am concerned that the Congress has just taken out a type of the "interest only" loan against the Social Security fund because we've put no collateral down in the form of feet-to-the-fire repayment plan. This type of mortgage is what started the housing debacle in 2004!
Your commentators may want to note that the extension of the unemployment benefits will be paid for, in part, by significantly increasing the amount of money that new federal employees will pay toward the federal employee pension plan.
Saturday Night Live has to run with that image of a woman holding a Bayer aspirin between their legs for birth control. They will run with this
But
As Dr. Marcy Wheeler at Emptywheel.net points out at her website.... http://www.emptywheel.net/2012/02/16/since-when-do-catholic-bishops-take... Did anyone else find it odd that Bishop William Lori tried to draw an analogy between birth control and pig flesh?
He starts: "For my testimony today, I would like to tell a story. Let’s call it, “The Parable of the Kosher Deli.”
Once upon a time, a new law is proposed, so that any business that serves food must serve pork. There is a narrow exception for kosher catering halls attached to synagogues, since they serve mostly members of that synagogue, but kosher delicatessens are still subject to the mandate."
Marcy Wheeler one of the best bloggers of our time ran with this absurdity
There is more. But what the heck was that all about?
If Rick Santorum becomes the republican nominee for the presidency, are liberals likely to be stirred in any significant numbers to protest his strict socially conservative beliefs?
Andrew Sullivan wins the war on words in the birth control war
"And then to hand the Democrats an opportunity for a walk-out that would only make the issue - especially in TV soundbites - more about contraception than religious liberty? It's political and p.r. malpractice. My view that this is the wedge issue that will finally hurt the GOP has not been disproven today, has it?"
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/02/mad-men.html
I was sitting in a restaurant fifteen years ago, and a large party of nurses from a local hospital was having a luncheon get together. Late in the party I overheard one nurse ask another, could she refuse to assist in gender reassignment surgery. The older and wiser nurse, said, no, unlike abortion, if you wanted to rise and be selected as a surgery nurse at that hospital, your career would be over if you refused to assist at sex reassignment surgery. This was all new to me, nursing, and rising in the heirarchy of a hospital. I had never thought about it. But, I overheard this from a nursing conversation at a social luncheon. I checked with a cousin-in-law who is a surgical nurse, when I next saw her (thanksgiving) and her response, "That is well known. You are whispered that from the git go if you want to take surgery assignments." So, while you can refuse to assist in abortions, or tube tying, you are not allowed to refuse working on sex reassignment at the local hospital.
I find it hard to understand why, in 2012, women's access to birth control is in contention. For a woman in her childbearing years, the ability to control if and when she has children is crucial to management of her personal health. From the point of view of our society and our economy, her control of her own fertility lets her also control her productivity and economic stability. No one has to use any type of birth control, but for an employer to be allowed to exclude it from available health services is counter to individual freedom and the greater societal good.
kathleen,
This is interesting because I drew the same analogy, but the scenario is a little different. Just because people like to eat pork, does that mean that Kosher restaurants must provide it for their non-Jewish employees to eat in the privacy of their homes!?
The absurdity of the idea that "birth control is a right" and therefore employers must provide it for their employees absolutely floors me.
First, employers aren't required to provide anything for their employees but safe working conditions and agreed upon pay for their services.
Second, this is little more than a full-out assault on the first amendment by the left. With attacks on gun ownership, speech (as in CU v FEC), and now religious freedom, which freedom do you suppose the left will attack next?
Is it not obvious that the Catholic church is sexist. Why do they not permit women to be priests. Their disapproval of birth control is a form of control over women. Just like how women can't have drivers licenses in Saudi Arabia. When an unplanned pregnancy occurs who is directly affected? The women. My boyfriends sister is catholic. She lost her job, lost her insurance, ran out of refills on her birth control. Had no parent to go to for guidance ( since her father is a sexist catholic deacon) Then had an unplanned pregnancy after a one night stand. Its really shut down her options for her future. Not to mention the break down of the family unit with her son being raised my a single mother in poverty on welfare. How is this good for society?
My husband is the only physician in a rural community in northeastern Oklahoma with area population of approximately 9400 and an 82% low-income level according to the school's free and reduced lunch program. He loves his practice and those for whom he is honored to care. We have a wonderful lifestyle and would not change one thing. However, as one of the busiest family practice physicians in the region, he has a huge number of Soonercare patients. Medicaid patients make up approximately 20% of his practice with Medicare making up approximately 50-55% of his practice. He has not received a check from Medicare/Medicaid since early November! Imagine not getting that percentage of your paycheck for four months! We still have to pay our taxes...which is approximately 40% of our income totally (around 30% federal), which we gladly pay for the good of everyone! And we also must pay our staff and bills. Three years ago, we didn't get a check from Medicare for 6 months!! A friend of ours is a Mental Health Counselor who works for a company on a contractoral basis, and he has not been paid since December!! This type of problem happens periodically, but usually only for several weeks. No one can explain to us why the reimbursements are not being paid. This makes physicians like my husband, who turns away private pay patients on a daily basis, seriously consider whether they can continue to accept Medicare/Medicaid patients. There are three other physicians in our county who are having the same problems. My husband was one of the first in our region to go totally electronic...about 10 years ago! He sends his data to Medicare through a clearing house. I don't hear alot of talk about taking care of physicians to insure we have doctors in the future!
How can the caller (male)say that birth control isn't expensive? That is VERY out of touch! Birth control pills are $70/$100 dollars per month, and if a woman is in a low end job and barely making ends meet, that is a LOT of money!