Ol’ Ed is still standing athwart history shouting ‘STOP!’

Which is probably the same thing he’ll say if Peggy takes up the offer at CPAC.

Ahhh, Ed Rogers! Perhaps the greatest living ass-kisser of our time. He’s had his tongue up Lee Atwater’s and Haley Barbour’s assholes for so long, it’s stained permanently and looks like a Snickers bar, peanuts included.

But there is this gem referencing the column with Eskew from his bio at the Post;

So now I am writing five days a week for The Post alongside Carter Eskew! Carter is smart, and he has great hair. I am a little intimidated. If this blog were The Partridge Family, he would be David Cassidy and I would be Danny Bonaduce.

I really can’t argue with that.

Also shorter Rogers:

Keep it up, Kenyan, and the 20% who hate you will really hate you, and then we can make the Nazi-Pope president or something!

If our media didn’t suck, they might occasionally point out that the Catholic Church has to cover birth control under insurance plans in something like 27 or 28 states already.

This has nothing to do with offending Catholic beliefs, which something like 98% of Catholic women don’t believe anyway, and everything to do with opening the door so that every fucking business owner who claims to be Catholic can get out of paying for coverage for his female employees’ reproductive health. Just the camel’s nose under the tent flap.

Jenn has it nailed, exactly. The HMC is acting on behalf of every low-wage corporation in the US who doesn’t want to provide health care under ACA. If the HMC can get an exemption, then so can the parent companies of such health care-lavishing outfits as KFC and WalMart.

Camel’s nose indeed.

Wait, what?!

This has nothing with deeply held religious beliefs, personal convictions, or moral consciousness? It’s about protecting helpless corporations?

Shocked, I tell you, shocked.

“In a close race, this could make the difference.” It’s only February and they’re already desperate.

Turns out that Catholic Democrats support Obama on this issue:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/09/1063189/-Catholic-Democrats-are-bailing-on-Obama-on-birth-control-eh-?via=blog_1

Somebody tell the White House — they seem not to know this.

Thanks. I’ve been saying all along (not that I’m such a smarty-pants), that this is only about the money, honey. No one wants to pay for anyone’s health care insurance and/or health care anymore.

Women & kids are the thin edge of the wedge. The “usual suspects” who are first to be rounded up.

White entitled males may think they’ve got it made. Well, unless they’re part of the 1%, their turn is next.

Fools!

Noonan is such a twit …

sui generis

Why didn’t the guy just say unique?

Frenchified bastard.

Yeah, because this is SOOOOOOO important. Not like teh economy…jobs…..etc.

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) required all new health insurance plans to cover birth control for women without co-pays, co-insurance or a deductible.

The insurance companies will likely pass the added costs on to consumers (e.g. company or individual health plans).

SQUIRREL!

Unplanned pregnancies are expensive. My guess is the net effect of absorbing contraception copays is to make the overall cost go down.

Oh my. Looks like someone will be getting laid at CPAC this weekend

Ed’s gonna get himself a Nooner Noonan.

Oh but it’s a very reliable distraction, isn’t it? Esp for the 25% who fall for this shite endlessly. That’s my other “take” for why this is being drummed up into a “big deal.” JMHO, of course.

eeeeeewwwwwww

heh: I think that’s a fate that Ed deserves!!

Hey….Peggy Noonan is HOTTTT. Now, admittedly, she ain’t no Cynthia McFadden. But…..What are we discussing, Sharia what????

The insurance companies may become benevolent and pay all costs out of their profit, but I doubt it. So in effect, the consumer pays the full cost up-front in premiums, whether needed or not.

I’ll never be in need of such a thing, but it seems to me it would make more sense to be offered two types of health insurance policies. One would be a cheaper “opt out” policy that doesn’t cover birth control and the other “opt in”, for those who wanted such a thing.

Even if you “opt out” you can still get excellent low cost services at Planned Parenthood and the like.

TBogg, if it weren’t for you, Chris Hayes, and some other individuals (mosty right here at fdl) I’d be perilously close to declaring that it’s a tenet of my religion that no male may be allowed to speak regarding women’s health issues, reproductive or otherwise, at any time, let alone make any law regarding them.

I.am.so.sick.of.this.

JennofArk – you are so right…and it is finally getting mentioned here and there, that the bishops have kept quiet for years after LOSING lawsuits protesting those state laws, and covered contraception as required by yes, 28 states! I’ve been a little nuts on the subject, tweeting and posting all over the place to that effect.

Peggy Noonan? Peggy’s one of the brainwashed; she isn’t gonna get over it. Chris Hayes himself admits to nearly falling for the argument…then his opened. He said on Maddow he thinks it’s a generational thing. Tim Egan at the NYT, usually reliable on librul issues, wrote a column that was doing so well until he said that while the church was coming around…in the meantime, “a third way” must be found to compromise!
It was the middle of the night, the inhalers and other meds I’m taking for this stoopid bronchitis were keeping me up and edgy, and …right now I don’t remember what I wrote. But I was steamed. Again.

This. has. to. stop.

Thank you TBogg. Great work, as always.

That’s the “compromise” the Bishops have already rejected. As have we, the women. do you have any idea how expensive contraception is? No? Have any idea what the low-level hospital or college worker earns? No again? Yes? Either way, shut the f up.
You don’t get a say.

Oh, and I’m so pissed off I forgot – there’s an excellent chance, as pointed out elsewhere, that separate non-contraception-covering insurance would be more expensive because specially tailored exceptions to the standard policy are..duh..more costly.

So this isn’t even about the money. It’s about power. Power over women and power over democrats and over the United States government.

FTW.

Also. Alternate shorter Ed:

I am a great tracker. My pack sent me on a special mission, all by myself. Have you seen a bird Kenyan? I am going to find one, and I am on the scent. I am a great tracker; did I mention that?

Ha…comments at the Times…as most placed I’ve looked (well, I don’t read Politico, unless TBogg makes me) are running well against the apologizing for the Church, the administration, and the possibility of “compromise.”

I just checked my posting, which is now preceded by dozens more, and mine has 18 recommends! Among the highest I’ve seen so far. None of the ones supporting exempting the church-run businesses has any recommends at all.

Of course, it’s the bishops who can get direct phone calls and personal visits to our rulers (nope, not governors, not any more), while all we can do is leave messages on the WH line or post angrily on pubic forums.
Nonetheless, we need to stay loud.

Where are those pubic forums to which you refer? And why would someone need to be angry while posting on one?

While I don’t disagree with you that insurance premiums might go up, it is a lot less expensive for insurance companies to pay for the pill than it is for pre-natal, post-natal, and birth costs to say nothing of hormonal treatment of women who have gone off of the pill.

It’s not just about sex, for some women it is a hormonal issue that needs to be addressed daily just like people who need blood pressure medication or any medical need.

Yeah, yeah, TBogg, there ya go again being all fact-y.

It’s a wimminz problem with lady bitz ‘n other icky stuff, so why should some Y-chromosome have to pay for *that*????? A true HE-MAN, like John Galt, wouldn’t pay for wimminpillz – eh, whot?

All I can say about this issue is that for the Church, if one of the pillars falls, they all fall. For some it would be welcome, others, horrifying.

It’s the logical outcome to all the manipulations of scripture, which as a basic document is woefully incomplete or papered over with fill-ins to suit the writers.

Perhaps it’s time.

Somebody tell the White House

??? What good would that do ???

I’m not suggesting my idea was that great, it’s just that most people don’t realize they’re paying for this mandate. Everyone thought the mandate to buy health insurance in general was bad, but this isn’t?

As far as “pill”, vs. “pre-natal, post-natal, and birth costs” go, the insurance companies won’t care. They’ll figure out how much are the costs, add profit, and bill accordingly. I imagine the insurance companies love this excuse for higher premiums. I read another post where PP said they were in favor of this as well. No wonder, they’re going to be able to bill insurance companies for procedures and products they were haviing to discount because of non-coverage before.

I’m not for or against this on any level except that it’s a government “mandate” that costs people money whether they want it or not. And in this case, Big Insurance and Big Birth Control are in bed togeather. (hope that made someone smile)

If you’re for this because it’s “so great for women”, then you probably think car insurance is “great for women” too, cause you pre-pay and are covered when you need it.

And if you’re against this for relig. reasons, maybe you’re doing it wrong. If you provide your employees health insurance that covers “satan worship camp” and your “flock” decides to participate, the problem is not the insurance. (not meant as a moral comparison)

Once again, we’re re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Might I suggest that none of this would be an issue if we had a Public Option? This is like the bank robbers discussing the color of the get-away car.

Partly agree with johnnyred, but we don’t have the public option so we’ve got to make what we have work as well as we can make it work. I.e., fund the goddam contraception that 98% of people use. (And, incidentally, fund the sex education that the other 2% obviously need.) It speaks to America’s squeamish and juvenile attitude toward sex that insurance companies pay for having children but not avoiding having children, although it is obviously less expensive to avoid having them. Applying planning and foresight to procreation is somehow too icky to contemplate.

tejanarusa, Amen and Me too. Been posting all over the place and making phone calls. It’s completely nuts.

Right on Red!

I’m sure the get-away car would be an off white with a funny hat.

And a half glass of wine…………………..

Only if the opt-out version doesn’t pay for erectile-dysfunction drugs and prostate exams. Because if women can’t get medical coverage for their reproductive parts, then men shouldn’t get it either.

That’s about what it’s like at my local major newspaper. And the comments about TanMan’s position are about 20 to 1 against him.

Contraception is not only cheaper than pregnancy, it’s also much safer.

Yes. I’ve already asked this before, but what is the Church’s position on covering Viagra for unmarried men? They’re not even allowed to jack off, you know.

Also, calling prohibition of contraceptives a “sacred tenet” is particularly loathsome.

All I can say about this issue is that for the Church, if one of the pillars falls, they all fall.

Nah. They’ve been falling for centuries. The Reformation didn’t exactly put HMC out of business. (And neither has priestly pedophilia.) They splinter, yes. But there are enough believers to keep the censers burning.

Actually, no. The state regulations (or at least the majority of them) cover insurance plans but don’t cover organizations who self-insure, which many religious organizations do to opt out of those requirements. The HHS rule seems to cover self-insurance as well. This was pointed out by some dickwad on the comments thread at http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_02/catholics_the_contraception_ma035251.php and appears to be accurate.

Oh, yes, the pedophilia. Well, it turns out that mistakes were made, and those are being rectified now. Starting with that apology. What were they thinking?