<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>If Bush Did It &#187; Health Care</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ifbushdidit.com/category/health-care/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com</link>
	<description>We would still be hearing about it!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:12:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Inequality: An Unavoidable Byproduct of Capitalism?</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/12/inequality-an-unavoidable-byproduct-of-capitalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/12/inequality-an-unavoidable-byproduct-of-capitalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>arlenschumer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anarchists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[election 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harold-meyerson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solely-national]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/12/inequality-an-unavoidable-byproduct-of-capitalism/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A CNN segment with Ali Velshi. Mostly of interest here are the comments by Harold Meyerson, who is introduced as a columnist at the Washington Post , but who is in fact a hard-line leftist and Vice-Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America (via Discover the Networks ). And from the DSA website, " Where We Stand: The Political Perspective of the Democratic Socialists of America ": Socialists have historically supported public ownership and control of the major economic institutions of society -- the large corporations -- in order to eliminate the injustice and inequality of a class-based society, and have depended on the the organization of a working class party to gain state power to achieve such ends. In the United States, socialists joined with others on the Left to build a broad-based, anti-corporate coalition, with the unions at the center, to address the needs of the majority by opposing the excesses of private enterprise. Many socialists have seen the Democratic Party, since at least the New Deal, as the key political arena in which to consolidate this coalition, because the Democratic Party held the allegiance of our natural allies. Through control of the government by the Democratic Party coalition, led by anti-corporate forces, a progressive program regulating the corporations, redistributing income, fostering economic growth and expanding social programs could be realized. With the end of the post-World War II economic boom and the rise of global economic competitors in East Asia and Europe in the 1970s came the demise of the brief majoritarian moment of this progressive coalition that promised--but did not deliver--economic and social justice for all. A vicious corporate assault on the trade union movement and a right-wing racist,populist appeal to downwardly mobile, disgruntled white blue-collar workers contributed to the disintegration of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s. Today, the mildly redistributive welfare state liberalism of the 1960s, which accepted the corporate dominance of economic decision-making, can no longer be the programmatic basis for a majoritarian progressive politics. New Deal and Great Society liberalism depended upon redistribution at the margins of an ever-expanding economic pie. But today corporations no longer aspire to expand production and consumption by raising global living standards; rather, global capital engages in a race to increase profits by "downsizing" and lowering wages. With the collapse of the political economy of corporate liberalism came the atrophy of the very institutions upon which the progressive politics of the New Deal and Great Society had been constructed. No longer do the social bases for a majoritarian democratic politics -- strong trade unions, social movements and urban, Democratic political machines -- simply await mobilization by a proper electoral appeal. Rather, a next left must be built from the grassroots up. Given the globalization of economic power, such grassroots movements will increasingly focus upon building a countervailing power to that of the transnational corporations. A number of positive signs of this democratic and grassroots realignment have emerged. New labor leadership has pledged to organize a workforce increasingly constituted by women, people of color, and immigrant workers. Inner-city grassroots community organizations are placing reinvestment, job creation, and economic democracy at the heart of their organizing. The women's movement increasingly argues that only by restructuring work and child care can true gender equality be realized. And the fight for national health care -- a modest reform long provided by all other industrial democracies -- united a broad coalition of activists and constituencies. But such movements cannot be solely national in scope. Rather, today's social movements must be as global as the corporate power they confront; they must cooperate across national boundaries and promote interstate democratic regulation of transnational capital. If socialism cannot be achieved primarily from above, through a democratic government that owns, control and regulates the major corporations, then it must emerge from below, through a democratic transformation of the institutions of civil society, particularly those in the economic sphere -- in other words, a program for economic democracy . As inequalities of wealth and income increase and the wages and living standards of most are either stagnant or falling, social needs expand. Only a revitalized public sector can universally and democratically meet those needs. In other words, a socialist revolution. Freakin' Harold Meyerson, damned Marxist asshole. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/12/inequality-an-unavoidable-byproduct-of-capitalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Choosing Life and Beating the Odds</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/choosing-life-and-beating-the-odds/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/choosing-life-and-beating-the-odds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>joshuapousts</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[been-involved]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cassy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cassy-fiano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[choosing-life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[some-troubling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-alternative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/choosing-life-and-beating-the-odds/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ **Written by Doug Powers Some of you might be familiar with Cassy Fiano, a writer/blogger I&#8217;ve gotten to know over the years. Cassy&#8217;s husband is in the US Marine Corps and is currently serving in Afghanistan. It&#8217;s through them that I became aware of, and have taken part in, the Project Valour-IT fundraisers (which Michelle has also been involved with). Recently Cassy and her husband got some troubling news: Their unborn son has been diagnosed with Down syndrome. Cassy has written about it in her latest column, Choosing Life and Beating the Odds: Accepting Down Syndrome . My wife and I have friends who have a similar story. Their son was born a couple of years ago and all I can say is they&#8217;ve never once regretted their decision (like Cassy, the alternative was never an option for them), and they can&#8217;t imagine their lives without him. If a society is indeed judged by how it treats its most helpless, people like Cassy, her husband, friends of my family and countless others out there who choose life are reasons to remain optimistic about our future. **Written by Doug Powers Twitter @ThePowersThatBe ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/choosing-life-and-beating-the-odds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US bishops voice objections to birth control rule 
    (AP)</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/us-bishops-voice-objections-to-birth-control-rule-ap/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/us-bishops-voice-objections-to-birth-control-rule-ap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:41:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>prsnlinjurys</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clear-protections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expressing-grave]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moral-concerns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president-barack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revamped-health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roman-catholic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rule-on-birth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/us-bishops-voice-objections-to-birth-control-rule-ap/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AP - The nation's Roman Catholic bishops are expressing grave doubts about President Barack Obama's revamped health care rule on birth control. They say it raises serious moral concerns and lacks clear protections for certain employers, insurers and individuals.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/11/us-bishops-voice-objections-to-birth-control-rule-ap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s Birth Control Backtrack an Interesting Compromise 
    (ContributorNetwork)</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-birth-control-backtrack-an-interesting-compromise-contributornetwork/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-birth-control-backtrack-an-interesting-compromise-contributornetwork/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 04:16:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>RomieObriant368</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth-control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[offer-free]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[requirement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reuters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-health]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-birth-control-backtrack-an-interesting-compromise-contributornetwork/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ContributorNetwork - COMMENTARY &#124; According to Reuters, President Barack Obama today announced he was backtracking on the health care rule that would require religious employers to offer free birth control to their employees. Instead, the requirement would fall onto the insurance companies to pay for these services. Which means, of course, that the controversy isn't over.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-birth-control-backtrack-an-interesting-compromise-contributornetwork/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-fraudulent-abortion-mandate-accommodation-updated-prez-condemns-cynical-opposition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-fraudulent-abortion-mandate-accommodation-updated-prez-condemns-cynical-opposition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bt5iek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hawaii]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press-release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religious]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weekly-standard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-fraudulent-abortion-mandate-accommodation-updated-prez-condemns-cynical-opposition/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ File under: &#8220;How to fake a walkback.&#8221; With its unconstitutional, coercive, discriminatory Obamacare abortion mandate under fire, the White House announced&#8230;nothing today. A supposed &#8220;accommodation&#8221; to the policy will result in no compromise in the impact of the HHS edict forcing religiously affiliated health care providers and employers to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives, abortifacients, and related services that violate the religious principles and freedom of the mandate&#8217;s targets. In fact, close observers say today&#8217;s announcement will make things worse. The deets : With the White House under fire for its new rule requiring employers including religious organizations to offer health insurance that fully covers birth control coverage, ABC News has learned that later today the White House — possibly President Obama himself — will likely announce an attempt to accommodate these religious groups. The move, based on state models, will almost certainly not satisfy bishops and other religious leaders since it will preserve the goal of women employees having their birth control fully covered by health insurance. Sources say it will be respectful of religious beliefs but will not back off from that goal, which many religious leaders oppose since birth control is in violation of their religious beliefs. White House officials are likening it to the so-called Hawaii compromise. Phony baloney, say Catholic bishops: It&#8217;s difficult to know what people may mean by the &#8220;Hawaii compromise.&#8221; But a central feature of the Hawaii law is that every religious organization that is eligible for the exemption has to instruct all employees in how they can access all methods of contraception and sterilization locally &#8220;in an expeditious manner.&#8221; Just a few days ago the White House was saying that this is just about coverage, that no one has to be involved in getting people to the actual services they object to. It would be no improvement to say: &#8220;Sure, you don&#8217;t have to include the coverage, you just have to send all your lay employees and women religious to the local Planned Parenthood clinic.&#8221; The Administration&#8217;s press release of January 20 hinted at such a requirement. That would not be a compromise. In some ways it would be worse. As usual, this defiant administration keeps digging itself deeper. *** The Hill calls Obama&#8217;s announcement a &#8220;retreat.&#8221; The White House will announce a retreat from its controversial rule requiring religious organizations like charities and hospitals to include contraception in their healthcare plans. President Obama has come under heavy criticism from the Catholic Church and other religious organizations, Republicans and even some Democrats over the issue, and Vice President Biden has suggested a compromise could be worked out. A White House official on Friday confirmed an announcement on changing the rule would be made Friday. The White House is referring to the change as an accommodation. It&#8217;s not a retreat. It&#8217;s a re-trick. It&#8217;s not an accommodation. It&#8217;s an abomination. *** Update 11am Weekly Standard reporter John McCormak is on a conference call with White House officials providing background on the policy head fake. He tweets &#8230; Sr. admin off.: &#8220;the insurance company, not the hospital, not the charity will be required to reach out&#8221; to women to provide contraception So religious groups will still be mandated to offer plans that cover contraception, and the abortion drug ella. Reporter asks if WH even consulted bishops before announcing &#8216;accommodation.&#8217; Sr admin official won&#8217;t say. To clarify, religious groups have to contract with INSURERS who do offer the pills, then the insurers offers free pills to women. Update 12:26pm EST &#8211; From his brief press conference, Obama attacks &#8220;cynical&#8221; opponents of abortion mandate. He says &#8220;principle&#8221; of &#8220;access to free preventative care including contraceptive services&#8221; will stand. &#8220;Religious liberty will be protected.&#8221; Translation: You&#8217;re still screwed. *** Update: On Fox News, Kathleen The Shredder Sebelius attempts to defend the policy as a &#8220;no-cost strategy&#8221; by citing &#8220;actuaries&#8221; who claim that contraceptive coverage will actually &#8220;save money.&#8221; You know who she&#8217;s citing? The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute. She repeatedly invokes &#8220;women&#8217;s health&#8221; to defend the edict. Sanger&#8217;s grim reapers have the rhetoric down pat. *** More from Steven Ertelt at Life News: Pro-Life Advocates Blast Revised Obama Pro-Abortion Mandate : Jonathan Imbody, Vice President for Government Relations for the Christian Medical Association, called the revisions “offering a distinction without a difference to mute opposition.” He said the revision fits a pattern of contempt for conscience that includes how Obama “has gutted the only federal regulation protecting the exercise of conscience in health care, denied of federal grant funds for aiding human trafficking victims because a faith-based organization refused to participate in abortion; lobbied the Supreme Court to restrict faith-based organizations’ hiring rights; and issued a coercive contraceptive mandate that imposes the government’s abortion ideology on every American.” ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/obamas-fraudulent-abortion-mandate-accommodation-updated-prez-condemns-cynical-opposition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/to-stop-the-multiplication-of-the-unfit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/to-stop-the-multiplication-of-the-unfit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:06:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sckarsz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[birth-control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[modern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[multiplication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[planned]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[planned-parenthood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white-house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[words]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/to-stop-the-multiplication-of-the-unfit/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ &#8216;To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit&#8217; by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2012 If you aren&#8217;t creeped out by the No Birth Control Left Behind rhetoric of the White House and Planned Parenthood, you aren&#8217;t listening closely enough. The anesthetic of progressive benevolence always dulls the senses. Wake up. When a bunch of wealthy white women and elite Washington bureaucrats defend the trampling of religious liberties in the name of &#8220;increased access&#8221; to &#8220;reproductive services&#8221; for &#8220;poor&#8221; women, the ghost of Margaret Sanger is cackling. As she wrote in her autobiography, Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in 1916 &#8220;to stop the multiplication of the unfit.&#8221; This, she boasted, would be &#8220;the most important and greatest step towards race betterment.&#8221; While she oversaw the mass murder of black babies, Sanger cynically recruited minority activists to front her death racket. She conspired with eugenics financier and businessman Clarence Gamble to &#8220; hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities &#8221; to sell their genocidal policies as community health and welfare services. Outright murder wouldn&#8217;t sell. But wrapping it under the egalitarian cloak of &#8220;women&#8217;s health&#8221; &#8212; and adorning it with the moral authority of black churches &#8212; would. Sanger and Gamble called their deadly campaign &#8220;The Negro Project.&#8221; In other writings, historian Mike Perry found, Sanger attacked programs that provided &#8220;medical and nursing facilities to slum mothers&#8221; because they &#8220;facilitate the function of maternity&#8221; when &#8220;the absolute necessity is to discourage it.&#8221; In an essay included in her writing collection held by the Library of Congress, Sanger urged her abortion clinic colleagues to &#8220;breed a race of thoroughbreds.&#8221; Nationwide &#8220;birth control bureaus&#8221; would propagate the proper &#8220;science of breeding&#8221; to stop impoverished, non-white women from &#8220;breeding like weeds.&#8221; Speaking with CBS veteran journalist Mike Wallace in 1957, long after her racist views had supposedly mellowed, Sanger again revealed her true colors : &#8220;I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world &#8212; that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically. Delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things just marked when they&#8217;re born. That to me is the greatest sin &#8212; that people can &#8212; can commit.&#8221; Sanger also elaborated on her anti-Catholic animus, telling one of Wallace&#8217;s reporters that New York Catholics had no right to protest the use of their tax dollars for birth city birth-control programs: &#8220; (I)t&#8217;s not only wrong, it should be made illegal for any religious group to prohibit dissemination of birth control &#8212; even among its own members.&#8221; When Wallace pressed her (&#8220;In other words, you would like to see the government legislate religious beliefs in a certain sense?&#8221;), Sanger laughed nervously and disavowed the remarks. Fast forward: Five decades and 16 million aborted black babies later, Planned Parenthood&#8217;s insidious agenda has migrated from inner-city &#8220;birth control bureaus&#8221; to public school-based health clinics to the White House &#8212; forcibly funded with taxpayer dollars just as Sanger championed. Several undercover stings by Live Action, pro-life documentarians, have exposed Planned Parenthood staff accepting donations over the years from callers posing as eugenics cheerleaders who wanted to earmark their contributions for the cause of aborting minority babies. &#8220;We can definitely designate it for an African-American,&#8221; a Tulsa, Okla., Planned Parenthood employee eagerly promised. What has cheap, easy and unmonitored &#8220;choice&#8221; for poor women in inner cities wrought? Nightmares like the Philadelphia Horror , where serial baby-killer Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his abortion clinic death squad oversaw the systematic execution of hundreds of healthy, living, breathing, squirming, viable black and Hispanic babies over 4 decades &#8212; along with several minority mothers who may have lost their lives in his grimy birth control bureau. City and state authorities looked the other way while jars of baby parts and reports of botched abortions and infanticides piled up. Beltway Democrats who now bray about their concern for &#8220;women&#8217;s health&#8221; were silent about the Gosnell massacre and countless others like it in America&#8217;s ghettos. Why? The Obama administration is crawling with the modern-day heirs of the eugenics movement, from Planned Parenthood golden girl Kathleen Sebelius at the Department of Health and Human Services to the president&#8217;s prestigious science czar John Holdren &#8212; an outspoken proponent of forced abortions and mass sterilizations and a self-proclaimed protege of eugenics guru Harrison Brown, whom he credits with inspiring him to become a scientist. Brown envisioned a government regime in which the &#8220;number of abortions and artificial inseminations permitted in a given year would be determined completely by the difference between the number of deaths and the number of births in the year previous.&#8221; He urged readers to &#8220;reconcile ourselves to the fact that artificial means must be applied to limit birth rates.&#8221; He likened the global population to a &#8220;pulsating mass of maggots.&#8221; Listen carefully as this White House dresses its Obamacare abortion mandate in the white lab coat of &#8220;reproductive services&#8221; for all. The language of &#8220;access to birth control&#8221; is the duplicitous code of Sanger&#8217;s ideological grim reapers. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/10/to-stop-the-multiplication-of-the-unfit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 01:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>exitbillyh</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[catholic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dahlkemper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nancy-pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press-release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ **Written by Doug Powers If she actually couldn&#8217;t see this coming, her family might want to make sure she never crosses the street unescorted: Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the &#8220;week-after&#8221; pill &#8220;ella&#8221; that can induce early abortions. &#8220;I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception,” Dahlkemper said in a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. What part of Nancy Pelosi&#8217;s health care law proclamation didn&#8217;t Dahlkemper understand? **Written by Doug Powers Twitter @ThePowersThatBe ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/06/how-to-make-a-liberal-politician-stand-up-against-intrusive-government/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/06/how-to-make-a-liberal-politician-stand-up-against-intrusive-government/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 02:28:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AlexisChristensen28</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[avoid-unhealthy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[encourage-lower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[make-selections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michelle obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[not-intelligent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ronda-storms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virgin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/06/how-to-make-a-liberal-politician-stand-up-against-intrusive-government/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ **Written by Doug Powers Before the payoff, here&#8217;s a brief set-up : Florida&#8217;s poor can use food stamps to buy staples like milk, vegetables, fruits and meat. But they can also use them to buy sweets like cakes, cookies and Jell-O and snack foods like chips, something a state senator wants stopped. Sen. Ronda Storms, R-Valrico, also wants to limit other welfare funds, known as Temporary Assistance For Needy Families, from being used at ATMs in casinos and strip clubs and anywhere out of state. The bill comes after reports that the debit cards welfare recipients now receive were used in those places, as well as locations in Las Vegas and the Virgin Islands in a small percentage of cases, but the state does not track what items were purchased. The bill recently passed a committee. A companion bill in the state House companion is being considered by a subcommittee. You&#8217;d think the food police would be thrilled. If there&#8217;s anything they should get behind, it&#8217;s an initiative designed to encourage lower income people to avoid unhealthy eats&#8230; right? But instead, one Democrat gives us our chuckle of the day by denouncing (albeit selectively) the notion of food police &#8212; and maybe even things like health care mandates. Get a load of this : But critics say the government shouldn&#8217;t dictate what people eat . &#8220;What I choose to ingest even though I may be on food stamps, that&#8217;s at my discretion. I don&#8217;t need government telling me what I can and cannot purchase ,&#8221; said Rep. Gwyndolen Clarke-Reed, a Pompano Beach Democrat who voted in committee against the bill (SB 1658). She said the bill is demeaning and invasive and she worries the education campaign would imply to &#8220;minorities and low-income folks that they&#8217;re not intelligent enough to make selections on the foods they want.&#8221; How many calories are burned by doubling over in laughter for several minutes? Maybe this is part of the &#8220;Let&#8217;s Move&#8221; program and people are being tricked into exercising. It wouldn&#8217;t be the first time . **Written by Doug Powers Twitter @ThePowersThatBe ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/06/how-to-make-a-liberal-politician-stand-up-against-intrusive-government/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Your Friday IRS regulation dump: Obamacare’s job-killing medical device tax</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/your-friday-irs-regulation-dump-obamacares-job-killing-medical-device-tax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/your-friday-irs-regulation-dump-obamacares-job-killing-medical-device-tax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 02:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HansonLorna33</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[before-on-how]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blasts-the-new]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[massachusetts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reported-before]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white-house]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/your-friday-irs-regulation-dump-obamacares-job-killing-medical-device-tax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ If it&#8217;s Friday, it&#8217;s another White House dump day. Cue the dump truck horn: Doot! Doot! Doot! While Obama sycophants are busy trumpeting deceptive jobs numbers, the administration is quietly moving forward with job-killing Obamacare regs and taxes. The IRS today released rules to impose the $20 billion Obamacare medical device tax scheduled to take effect next year. At a time when the White House is touting its government initiatives to champion &#8220; innovation ,&#8221; the Obamacare innovation tax on medical device/diagnostic manufacturers will kill an estimated 43,000 jobs. The very job creators President Obama purports to support are balking at the tax regs and have called for repeal . The Advanced Medical Technology Association, America&#8217;s leading association for med tech manufacturers, blasts the new rules: “[The proposed IRS regulations] highlights the need for prompt action by Congress and the Administration to repeal this anti-competitive, job-killing tax,” Stephen J. Ubl, AdvaMed president and CEO said in a statement. “Failure to repeal the device tax flies in the face of the President’s comments during the State of the Union about the need to reform our tax system to make our nation more competitive in the world market, a view shared by members of Congress from both parties,” Ubl went on to explain, adding that “the tax will create a number of complex administrative and technical burdens that must be addressed.” I&#8217;ve reported before on how the medical device tax has already resulted in operational and job cutbacks in Massachusetts, home to many medical innovators. Fewer jobs. Fewer entrepreneurs. Fewer medical advances. Winning the future&#8230;by killing it. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/your-friday-irs-regulation-dump-obamacares-job-killing-medical-device-tax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Last Republican?</title>
		<link>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/the-last-republican/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/the-last-republican/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HansonLorna33</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jesus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[romney]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/the-last-republican/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The earth has become small, and on it hops the Last Man, who makes everything small. His species is ineradicable as the flea; the Last Man lives longest. -- Nietzsche So it seems it will be Mitt. And good thing he won't be offering his main rival the second spot on the ticket. "Mitt &#038; Newt" sounds like the name of a comedy act or a network sitcom. Not right for something epic or tragic. Which is to say… not right for the times. Not even close. When you think about this election -- and you must, there is no escaping it -- you wonder if it is not just the same old, same old. Is this just another "most important election of our lifetimes," or something, actually, a little more important than that? Is it business as usual or are we entering a pre-revolutionary phase of history when, soon, nothing will be the same again? Who knows? But to ask the question is to point out how unfit Mr. Romney may be to lead during these times. To begin with, he has never given any indication that he even understands, or appreciates, the mood of these days. You can listen to Mr. Romney debate or speak for hours (some have, poor souls) and never get the feeling that he senses the fear, the uncertainty, and the outright dread that is loose in the land. People, millions of them, are not merely frightened; they are terrified. Mr. Romney's message of assurance? "I'll fix things. Trust me, I'm a businessman." An example of Mitts's insouciance would be that line about how the health care mandate isn't something to "get angry about." Nah. Geeze, man. Chill. And on the existential (sorry, only word that will do) choices about just how much government the nation can afford and how much debt it can endure (or visa versa), Romney has never exhibited the slightest sign that he appreciates what a big deal it is. Nothing, he seems to believe, to get your knickers in a twist over. He'll fix it. He's a businessman. Mr. Romney has captured the Republican flag and will carry it into battle this Fall. If he loses, those people who believed devoutly that the times require something more than a standard-issue Republican for whom all things political are negotiable and to whom there is no dispute that cannot be settled by compromise … those people will be saying, "Never again." They will have seen it before and one suspects they will be finished with a party that repeatedly sends out for slaughter candidates who do not represent their beliefs, positions, and ideas with conviction. If it is about common ground and compromise, they will say, then the hell with it and leave the Republican Party to people who consider it a boast to say, "I could work with Teddy Kennedy." If, on the other hand, Mr. Romney wins, what then? Does anyone expect that when he gets to Washington and starts running the government like a business, entitlements will reform themselves, the deficit will shrivel on its own accord, and Leviathan will shrink to a size where it can be domesticated and housebroken? Has Mr. Romney demonstrated, ever, any convictions regarding the proper size and the rightful powers of the government? Does anyone believe he shares the fear millions feel about government power and their angry indignation at its arrogance and overreach? His overriding sentiment about government seems to be that it would be nice if he were in charge of it … so it would be run (all together now) like a business. In short, does anyone think that Romney will ride into Washington next January determined to tame the town… or die trying? Mr. Romney's aim will almost surely be to take Washington on its own terms and try to "make it work." Whatever anti-Washington sentiments he might express during the campaign, the odds are they will be discarded and forgotten within weeks of his taking the oath of office in a replay of George H. W. Bush and "read my lips." The people who voted for Romney in the belief that he would take on Washington will be patronizingly told by the political class that "Governing is not the same as campaigning." "No stuff, Sherlock," the betrayed will say. "Governing is a lot more important and a lot tougher and the guys like Bush, Dole, McCain, the other Bush and, now, Romney never understood that. It is they who govern as though they were campaigning for the approval of Washington and the political class. "We never thought that electing them was the whole point and that if, afterwards, you got 'Big Government Conservatism' or 'Compassionate Conservatism,' it was no big deal because, praise Jesus, the Republicans were in charge. We always thought that the governing would be the hard part. Look how tough it was to get rid of ethanol subsidies. It is you who are confused." The betrayed will leave if Romney makes it his mission to manage his way to a second term. He'll have an easier path, this time, getting the nomination. But he will likely be the last Republican.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ifbushdidit.com/2012/02/03/the-last-republican/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

