Progressive Government Fails

[The Rabbi]

The Left and Obama apologists just had another setback
for their radical leftist agenda:


DC appellate court rules against HHS contraception mandate, for religious liberty

The Obama administration said that the requirement is necessary to protect women’s health and abortion rights. The judges were unconvinced that forcing companies to violate their religious rights was appropriate.

Brown wrote that “it is clear the government has failed to demonstrate how such a right — whether described as noninterference, privacy, or autonomy — can extend to the compelled subsidization of a woman’s procreative practices.”

“The provision of these services — even without the contraceptive mandate — by and large fulfills the statutory command for insurers to provide gender-specific preventive care,” she wrote. “At the very least, the statutory scheme will not go to pieces.”​

The HHS mandate burdens their exercise of religion by pressuring them to approve and endorse the inclusion of objectionable coverage in their companies’ health plans. “They can either abide by the sacred tenets of their faith, pay a penalty of over $14 million, and cripple the companies they have spent a lifetime building, or they become complicit in a grave moral wrong.” (Slip op. at 20; see generally pp. 17-23.) The government’s supposedly compelling interest is nebulous (slip op. at 23-28), and even if it were compelling, the HHS mandate is not the least restrictive means of furthering that interest (slip op. at 28-32.)​

"Religious Liberty" does not exist in commerce. Corporations are not people and do not have 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion. Obviously this is just another attack on the 1st Amendment and given the current make up of the Supreme Court we might end up with yet another Citizens United travesty of justice. At least that is what this lawsuit is hoping will be the outcome. Should that occur the unintended consequences will be dire. Corporations will be allowed to fire people simply because they don't belong to a particular religion or believe in creation.

Bullshit.
First, Citizens United was a wonderful decision on 1A rights, a real landmark.
Second, corporations are "persons" under the 14thA. Logically they should have 1A rights as well. But that is the case.
Third, companies would violate equal protection laws firing people for religious practices or beliefs. But if they did, so what? Why is it your business?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If we rolled America back in time, and condition, to the Gilded Age, would conservatives be happy then?

 

[Plasmaball]

If we rolled America back in time, and condition, to the Gilded Age, would conservatives be happy then?

i would be, then couldnt vote nor really have an opinion. she would be a baby maker.

 

[Plasmaball]

You mean as long as they weren't from one of the racial groups targeted for sterilization by progressive policies?



.

well no. before the womens right to vote they couldnt vote, but then anyone who knows the Constitution would know this

 

[NYcarbineer]

You mean as long as they weren't from one of the racial groups targeted for sterilization by progressive policies?



.

well no. before the womens right to vote they couldnt vote, but then anyone who knows the Constitution would know this

Eugenics wasn't a 'progressive' idea.

 

[Londoner]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just banal cliches that have calcified into talking points.

It would be nice if she gave us anything with more substance. (For instance, I read a critique of the housing meltdown by an Austrian economist inspired by rightwing hero, Friedrich Hayek. It was brilliant and interesting, and it was delivered in an academic, non-partisan tone. I'd love to see the OP say something that isn't on every rightwing website. I'd love to see her struggle with the ideas rather than just spamming for the right). Maybe she could present a comparative analysis of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession" - and explain to us which of the two economies relies more on "progressive" policies. (Who knows what she means by progressive, but I'm guessing it's the demand centered policies of the Keynesians).

If she did compare the American and German economies, she would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains that were more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the rest of the country falls deeply into debt just to survive). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which kept high wage manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who moved production to freedom hating nations like China because of its ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same tired bullshit we see repeated everywhere.

 

[The Rabbi]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She just keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just complete distortions that survived only because of constant repetition in the rightwing echo chamber.

It would be nice if she gave us a study of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession".

She would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the country dies). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which worked hard to keep manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who flocked to freedom hating nations like China for ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same spam we see repeated everywhere.

This is largely because the German gov't resisted the urge to "stimulate" its economy and regulate even more, unlike Obama and the Dems.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Obama's recovery has been worse than Bush's recession.

 

[Neotrotsky]

It sure was promoted by them.
A lot did favor sterilization or what was called "negative eugenics"
stopping those with "undesirable traits" from passing them on.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Left and Obama apologists just had another setback
for their radical leftist agenda:


DC appellate court rules against HHS contraception mandate, for religious liberty

The Obama administration said that the requirement is necessary to protect women’s health and abortion rights. The judges were unconvinced that forcing companies to violate their religious rights was appropriate.

Brown wrote that “it is clear the government has failed to demonstrate how such a right — whether described as noninterference, privacy, or autonomy — can extend to the compelled subsidization of a woman’s procreative practices.”

“The provision of these services — even without the contraceptive mandate — by and large fulfills the statutory command for insurers to provide gender-specific preventive care,” she wrote. “At the very least, the statutory scheme will not go to pieces.”​

The HHS mandate burdens their exercise of religion by pressuring them to approve and endorse the inclusion of objectionable coverage in their companies’ health plans. “They can either abide by the sacred tenets of their faith, pay a penalty of over $14 million, and cripple the companies they have spent a lifetime building, or they become complicit in a grave moral wrong.” (Slip op. at 20; see generally pp. 17-23.) The government’s supposedly compelling interest is nebulous (slip op. at 23-28), and even if it were compelling, the HHS mandate is not the least restrictive means of furthering that interest (slip op. at 28-32.)​

"Religious Liberty" does not exist in commerce. Corporations are not people and do not have 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion. Obviously this is just another attack on the 1st Amendment and given the current make up of the Supreme Court we might end up with yet another Citizens United travesty of justice. At least that is what this lawsuit is hoping will be the outcome. Should that occur the unintended consequences will be dire. Corporations will be allowed to fire people simply because they don't belong to a particular religion or believe in creation.

Bullshit.
First, Citizens United was a wonderful decision on 1A rights, a real landmark.

100% wrong!

Second, corporations are "persons" under the 14thA.

100% wrong!

Logically they should have 1A rights as well. But that is the case.

100% wrong!

Third, companies would violate equal protection laws firing people for religious practices or beliefs.

That would be overturned if the SCOTUS supports the lawsuit per the unintended consequences scenario proposed above.

But if they did, so what? Why is it your business?

Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just banal cliches that have calcified into talking points.

It would be nice if she gave us anything with more substance. (For instance, I read a critique of the housing meltdown by an Austrian economist inspired by rightwing hero, Friedrich Hayek. It was brilliant and interesting, and it was delivered in an academic, non-partisan tone. I'd love to see the OP say something that isn't on every rightwing website. I'd love to see her struggle with the ideas rather than just spamming for the right). Maybe she could present a comparative analysis of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession" - and explain to us which of the two economies relies more on "progressive" policies. (Who knows what she means by progressive, but I'm guessing it's the demand centered policies of the Keynesians).

If she did compare the American and German economies, she would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains that were more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the rest of the country falls deeply into debt just to survive). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which kept high wage manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who moved production to freedom hating nations like China because of its ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same tired bullshit we see repeated everywhere.

Excellent post!

 

[P@triot]

Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

So then why do asshats like you support trampling on the U.S. Constitution and the rights of citizens?

 

[P@triot]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just banal cliches that have calcified into talking points.

It would be nice if she gave us anything with more substance. (For instance, I read a critique of the housing meltdown by an Austrian economist inspired by rightwing hero, Friedrich Hayek. It was brilliant and interesting, and it was delivered in an academic, non-partisan tone. I'd love to see the OP say something that isn't on every rightwing website. I'd love to see her struggle with the ideas rather than just spamming for the right). Maybe she could present a comparative analysis of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession" - and explain to us which of the two economies relies more on "progressive" policies. (Who knows what she means by progressive, but I'm guessing it's the demand centered policies of the Keynesians).

If she did compare the American and German economies, she would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains that were more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the rest of the country falls deeply into debt just to survive). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which kept high wage manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who moved production to freedom hating nations like China because of its ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same tired bullshit we see repeated everywhere.

Ah yes, the smug and very disingenuous "intellectual" Dumbocrat. Allow me to simplify for everyone what [MENTION=24221]Londoner[/MENTION] desperately tried to mask by using words such as "substance", "critique", "comparative analysis" and citing "Friedrich Hayek":

"Oh shit - the OP was 100% dead on and I simply cannot refute anything that was stated with facts. Therefore, I better fantasize about myself being some exotic intellect who studies Harvard published papers all day and demand more than what the OP posted in hopes that their inability to expand any further will some how discredit their indisputable facts. No where is my smoking jacket and pipe that my parents bought me for my birthday?"

This is, without a doubt, the most disingenuous and smug post I have encountered on USMB and it illustrates a disturbing trend I've noticed on USMB. Dumbocrats have been so throughly defeated with facts that they are left with nothing but to nonsensically declare the facts are "too simple".

The Earth is round. It is that "simple". I know because I've seen a picture of the Earth and I know what round is. I don't need to hire a Yale mathematician to explain to Dumbocrats on USMB that the set of all points in a plane that are at a given distance from a given point, the centre and that the distance between those given points and the centre is called the radius. I know it's a fuck'n circle because I have common sense and an IQ above that of a barn yard animal.

Fire is hot. It really is that "simple". I know because I've experienced increased temperature as I move closer to it and decreased temperature as I move further from it. I don't need to hire a Princeton professor to explain the rapid oxidation of a material in the exothermic chemical process of combustion, releasing heat, light, and various reaction products. I know it's fuck'n hot because I have common sense and an IQ above that of a barn yard animal.

So now that you've wasted our time with a post that added zero value or facts to the discussion, what's your next fantasy junior? You gonna tell us how you're a Navy Seal? Maybe a millionaire? Oh - maybe a spy?!? Fuck'n idiot...

 

[P@triot]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just banal cliches that have calcified into talking points.

It would be nice if she gave us anything with more substance. (For instance, I read a critique of the housing meltdown by an Austrian economist inspired by rightwing hero, Friedrich Hayek. It was brilliant and interesting, and it was delivered in an academic, non-partisan tone. I'd love to see the OP say something that isn't on every rightwing website. I'd love to see her struggle with the ideas rather than just spamming for the right). Maybe she could present a comparative analysis of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession" - and explain to us which of the two economies relies more on "progressive" policies. (Who knows what she means by progressive, but I'm guessing it's the demand centered policies of the Keynesians).

If she did compare the American and German economies, she would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains that were more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the rest of the country falls deeply into debt just to survive). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which kept high wage manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who moved production to freedom hating nations like China because of its ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same tired bullshit we see repeated everywhere.

Excellent post!

If it's so "excellent", where do you two dumb-asses "display some evidence that you've researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level" in disputing it?

It would be nice if either of you gave us anything with more substance.

Is love to see you two buffoons "struggle with ideas" (what an utterly asinine statement by [MENTION=24221]Londoner[/MENTION] who is throwing out yet another ignorant libtard buzz term created by an equally ignorant libtard who combined terms in a completely nonsensical fashion because they were too stupid to even know the definition of the word struggle) - instead one of you spews paragraphs without actually saying anything and the other cheers like a redneck at a rural high school football game.

Maybe you buffoons could do a "comparative analysis" of how you each harbor fantasies of homosexual encounters with what you imagine to be "intellects" (in other words, any wannabe who uses libtard buzz words)?

It's just sad to see that you two have been relegated to the liberal "cut & paste" our favorite buzz words culture...

 

[PoliticalChic]

It sure was promoted by them.
A lot did favor sterilization or what was called "negative eugenics"
stopping those with "undesirable traits" from passing them on.

Actually, eugenics was totally Progressive in origin, aim, and design.


Also telling was the fact that the only vote against the state in the Buck case, in an 8-1 decision, was the archconservative and only Catholic on the court, Pierce Butler. “Butler was a Roman Catholic and a Democrat, but was also, most importantly, a political conservative.”
Pierce Butler


1. The most revered of liberal icons, Oliver Wendell Holmes, concurred with eugenics, to the extent that he attempted to write it into the Constitution. In 1927, a young unwed mother named Carrie Buck was sterilized against her will by order of the Supreme Court, decision (Buck v. Bell) written by Oliver Wendell Holmes..." Pierce Butler

2. After eugenics was discredited by Nazi use, leading American eugenicists turned to contraception and abortion for population control. In 1953 they issued a document entitled "Freedom of Choice for Parenthood: A Program of Positive Eugenics," in which they linked so-called "voluntary parenthood" to natural selection. CSC - The Darwinian Basis for Eugenics

a. Obama's 'science czar' John Holdren went further...he wanted poison in the water supply!

 

[Derideo_Te]

Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

So then why do asshats like you support trampling on the U.S. Constitution and the rights of citizens?

Calling yourself names now, Rottwelier?

 

[Derideo_Te]

I wish the OP would display some evidence that she's researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level. She keeps repeating rightwing talking points. Some of them are true, some of them are simplifications, while others are just banal cliches that have calcified into talking points.

It would be nice if she gave us anything with more substance. (For instance, I read a critique of the housing meltdown by an Austrian economist inspired by rightwing hero, Friedrich Hayek. It was brilliant and interesting, and it was delivered in an academic, non-partisan tone. I'd love to see the OP say something that isn't on every rightwing website. I'd love to see her struggle with the ideas rather than just spamming for the right). Maybe she could present a comparative analysis of the German and American economies. Perhaps she could compare the relative growth and output of the economies since the "Great Recession" - and explain to us which of the two economies relies more on "progressive" policies. (Who knows what she means by progressive, but I'm guessing it's the demand centered policies of the Keynesians).

If she did compare the American and German economies, she would notice that Germany has kept a much higher output with much better employment numbers. she would notice that Germany outpaced the US by a large margin between 1995 and 2010, with gains that were more widely shared (as opposed to all the gains of economic growth accruing to a narrow elite as the rest of the country falls deeply into debt just to survive). She would also notice that the US piled up much higher trade deficits compared to Germany, which kept high wage manufacturing jobs at home (compared to the aggressive offshoring of American corporations who moved production to freedom hating nations like China because of its ultra-cheap labor). Even more, she would see that Germany has far more progressive policies with much higher wages/benefits/safety nets for their middle class. Indeed, Germany has maintained strong trade unions along with a strong social contract between business and labor that resulted in increased efforts to maintain employment during the Great Recession (whereas American firms rapidly accelerated layoffs.). The result of all these progressive policies is that German consumer spending is much higher, and their economy is doing much better.

The OP doesn't have to take my word for it. That's not the point. It's just sad to see that she is part of the right wing "cut and paste" culture which merely seeks to indoctrinate people. It would be great to see her give us a deeper analysis - in whatever form that takes - rather than the same tired bullshit we see repeated everywhere.

Excellent post!

If it's so "excellent", where do you two dumb-asses "display some evidence that you've researched this stuff at more than just the "Talk Radio" level" in disputing it?

It would be nice if either of you gave us anything with more substance.

Is love to see you two buffoons "struggle with ideas" (what an utterly asinine statement by [MENTION=24221]Londoner[/MENTION] who is throwing out yet another ignorant libtard buzz term created by an equally ignorant libtard who combined terms in a completely nonsensical fashion because they were too stupid to even know the definition of the word struggle) - instead one of you spews paragraphs without actually saying anything and the other cheers like a redneck at a rural high school football game.

Maybe you buffoons could do a "comparative analysis" of how you each harbor fantasies of homosexual encounters with what you imagine to be "intellects" (in other words, any wannabe who uses libtard buzz words)?

It's just sad to see that you two have been relegated to the liberal "cut & paste" our favorite buzz words culture...

Oh, the IRONY!

 

[The Rabbi]

"Religious Liberty" does not exist in commerce. Corporations are not people and do not have 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion. Obviously this is just another attack on the 1st Amendment and given the current make up of the Supreme Court we might end up with yet another Citizens United travesty of justice. At least that is what this lawsuit is hoping will be the outcome. Should that occur the unintended consequences will be dire. Corporations will be allowed to fire people simply because they don't belong to a particular religion or believe in creation.

Bullshit.
First, Citizens United was a wonderful decision on 1A rights, a real landmark.

100% wrong!100% wrong!100% wrong!

Third, companies would violate equal protection laws firing people for religious practices or beliefs.

That would be overturned if the SCOTUS supports the lawsuit per the unintended consequences scenario proposed above.

But if they did, so what? Why is it your business?

Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

And nary a fact or argument presented.
Typical.
It's wrong because he says it's wrong. He just knows it is, somehow.

 

[Derideo_Te]

It sure was promoted by them.
A lot did favor sterilization or what was called "negative eugenics"
stopping those with "undesirable traits" from passing them on.

Actually, eugenics was totally Progressive in origin, aim, and design.


Also telling was the fact that the only vote against the state in the Buck case, in an 8-1 decision, was the archconservative and only Catholic on the court, Pierce Butler. “Butler was a Roman Catholic and a Democrat, but was also, most importantly, a political conservative.”
Pierce Butler


1. The most revered of liberal icons, Oliver Wendell Holmes, concurred with eugenics, to the extent that he attempted to write it into the Constitution. In 1927, a young unwed mother named Carrie Buck was sterilized against her will by order of the Supreme Court, decision (Buck v. Bell) written by Oliver Wendell Holmes..." Pierce Butler

2. After eugenics was discredited by Nazi use, leading American eugenicists turned to contraception and abortion for population control. In 1953 they issued a document entitled "Freedom of Choice for Parenthood: A Program of Positive Eugenics," in which they linked so-called "voluntary parenthood" to natural selection. CSC - The Darwinian Basis for Eugenics

a. Obama's 'science czar' John Holdren went further...he wanted poison in the water supply!

Debunked disinformation, PC. Those concepts were included in the book as examples of what had been proposed in the past. Holden himself does not espouse those views. This is typical of the extreme right trying to discredit the Obama administration with patently false allegations.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Bullshit.
First, Citizens United was a wonderful decision on 1A rights, a real landmark.

100% wrong!100% wrong!100% wrong!That would be overturned if the SCOTUS supports the lawsuit per the unintended consequences scenario proposed above.

But if they did, so what? Why is it your business?

Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

And nary a fact or argument presented.
Typical.
It's wrong because he says it's wrong. He just knows it is, somehow.

Onus is on you to substantiate your allegations when you have been called on them.

 

[The Rabbi]

100% wrong!100% wrong!100% wrong!That would be overturned if the SCOTUS supports the lawsuit per the unintended consequences scenario proposed above.
Upholding the rights of all citizens is the duty of every American.

And nary a fact or argument presented.
Typical.
It's wrong because he says it's wrong. He just knows it is, somehow.

Onus is on you to substantiate your allegations when you have been called on them.

Bullshit.
You have nothing.