Progressives Really Worried About “Slippery Slopes” For Contraception Case

By William Teach March 26, 2014 – 8:34 am

Even a few Leftist Supreme Court justices were worried about “slippery slopes” during the oral arguments Tuesday at the Court. The lawyers should have told them “hey, that’s an interesting point, however, we are concerned with the government forcing our client to provide free abortifacients in the insurance they partially pay for, not some nebulous hypothetical”. Chiding a judge who has certainly made up her mind prior to oral arguments isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Here’s the latest from Ruth Marcus

Slippery Slopes Before The Court

In the context of talking about limits on free speech, it’s common to say that your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. That seems like a sensible way to think about the freedom of religion case just argued before the Supreme Court: whether employers can be required to pay for contraceptive methods that would violate their religious convictions.

Most disputes about religious freedom are bilateral — with the government on one side and the individual claiming infringement of religious liberty on the other.

But Tuesday’s cases, involving Oklahoma crafts store Hobby Lobby and Pennsylvania cabinetmaker Conestoga Wood, implicate a third party — the companies’ employees, and their rights under the Affordable Care Act to no-added-cost contraception. Respecting the religious claims of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood threatens to diminish the rights of their workers.

Ruth goes on to whine about Citizens United, as a Good Progressive should, whining about companies not being people. But, companies are made up of people, and those companies have certain beliefs. Consider Chik-fil-A: they are closed on Sunday’s, even in malls. Not every employee cares, some are probably not even Christians. In Liberal World, they are being punished for the beliefs of the company. They don’t get to work on Sundays.

Ruth’s central point is that denying abortifacients, which is the primary cause of the Hobby Lobby case, to employees diminishes their rights. Well, no one is stopping the employees to express their right to work somewhere else.

But where to draw the line on corporate personhood is just one of the slippery slopes these cases pose. The other involves what religious claims to respect and how to balance competing needs.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pressed this issue a mere 42 words into Clement’s argument: What about employers religiously opposed to vaccines? Or blood transfusions?

What about them? Here’s an interesting point: they can bring up their own lawsuits. Furthermore, those are a wee bit more important than whether someone can get free condoms and birth control pills, as well as sterilization and abortifacients. Especially free. Especially when the PPACA does not actually include a mandate for to provide those, nor provide any of those for free. The entire “mandate” was created by Team Obama. Are there any employers actually trying to deny those? Any examples? There does come a point where there is a “compelling case” for the government to mandate coverage. And, are they free? In most cases, no.

If things like these are so darned important, why are all life saving drugs and procedures not free? In fact, most drugs are not free under Ocare. People must first meet the deductible, of which the average Ocare deductible is a shade over $5,000. At that point, people will then pay copays to get the drugs. You can get all sorts of free preventative screenings per Ocare (which simply raises the price of insurance), along with a few drugs. What about cancer drugs? HIV drugs? Insulin? How about smoking cessation drugs? I take OTC allergy pills, and, since one of those allergies is dust mites, I take one at least 4 days a week. Why are they not free? I need them for quality of life, certainly more than someone needs a $2 condom.

Progressives proclaim that this is all anti-woman Yet, they did not include free mastectomies or other things necessary for women. How about free mini-pads and tampons? Pills to help with heavy flow days and water retention? Hysterectomies?

Why contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients? Because this was a political decision designed to patronize the Democrat voter base. Period. Barbara Boxer complains that this is a slippery slope to denying AIDS medicine. Yet, those medicines aren’t provided free per either the ACA nor an HHS rule. Strange. HIV/AIDS patients have to first meet their deductibles, then have copays.

Not offering contraceptives, sterilization procedures, nor abortifactients, whether free or at all, has no bearing on the “rights of workers”. Those workers can pay for them themselves. Or find another job. It really is that simple, once you get beyond the unhinged rhetoric of Democrats.

Read: Progressives Really Worried About “Slippery Slopes” For Contraception Case »

Posted in Democrats, Healthcare, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Obama To Allow Delay In Signing Up For Ocare

By William Teach March 26, 2014 – 7:39 am

It’s a small change, but another change to It’s. The. Law.

(Washington Post) The Obama administration has decided to give extra time to Americans who say that they are unable to enroll in health plans through the federal insurance marketplace by the March 31 deadline.

Federal officials confirmed Tuesday evening that all consumers who have begun to apply for coverage on HealthCare.gov, but who do not finish by Monday, will have until about mid-April to ask for an extension.

Under the new rules, people will be able to qualify for an extension by checking a blue box on HealthCare.gov to indicate that they tried to enroll before the deadline. This method will rely on an honor system; the government will not try to determine whether the person is telling the truth.

Interesting: if it’s so difficult to enroll through healthcare.gov that one cannot get it done in six months (remember, it was launched October 1st), and need another half month or so, perhaps the website was a disaster and people should be fired, like, say, HHS head Kathleen Sebelius.

The rules, which will apply to the federal exchanges operating in three dozen states, will essentially create a large loophole even as White House officials have repeatedly said that the March 31 deadline was firm. The extra time will not technically alter the deadline but will create a broad new category of people eligible for what’s known as a special enrollment period.

Semantics. It’s yet another lawless change to the ACA. Team Obama states that this is needed to deal with the “surge” of people flocking to the website at the last minute. Sure thing, Sparky, sure thing. Didn’t Kathleen Sebelius testify to Congress that there would be no more delays to the law? Yes, she did. This was just two weeks ago.

I’m not sure why Obama was so upset about the government shutdown over Ocare: he’s delaying everything himself.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Obama To Allow Delay In Signing Up For Ocare »

Posted in Barry Obama, Healthcare | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Here We Go: NY Times Editorial Board Wants Massive Regulation On E-Cigs

By William Teach March 25, 2014 – 3:20 pm

When we refer to the left as Progressives, what we are talking about, as Jonah Golberg wrote in his book Liberal Fascism, is that they are nice fascists. They’re just here to help. With massive government control. This is why Jonah put a smiley face on the cover. Transfats are bad for you, so they must be controlled and/or banned. Salt? Same. School lunches. You name it, they have their hands in it, because You Don’t Know Better. Except abortion. Then they want zero regulations or restrictions. Anyhow, I mentioned yesterday an opinion piece masquerading as an article about how nicotine is “poison by the barrel”, which followed an editorial about e-cigs, both at the NY Times. Now the EB steps in again

Lethal Liquid Nicotine

As little as a teaspoon of liquid nicotine — the key ingredient in electronic cigarettes — can kill a small child and less than a tablespoon, at high concentrations, can kill an adult. Yet some vendors are offering to sell the lethal product over the Internet by the gallon or barrel, with little control over how it is handled, as reported by Matt Richtel in The Times on Monday.

Nice coordination. Nice hysteria. I wonder how many products are sold over the Internet that could be considered “lethal”? Maybe we should just shut all commerce on the web down. Anyhow, if companies are selling crappy product, people will buy elsewhere. That’s the way it works.

Regulation is much tighter in Europe and other advanced countries. The European Parliament limits the amount of nicotine in e-cigarettes to 20 milligrams per milliliter, or a 2 percent concentration, which can cause sickness but is rarely fatal in children. It also requires childproof and tamper-proof packaging and graphic health warnings. Canada goes even further and regulates liquid nicotine and e-cigarettes under the strict rules that govern the safety of drugs; the manufacturers must submit scientific evidence demonstrating safety, quality and efficacy.

By all means, let’s replicate the notions of countries that have crummy economies, that do all they can to stifle commerce, all for “your own good”, before the facts are in. This is the default position of Progressives: if it moves, regulate it. And tax it. And cause its price to artificially increase.

Now, the Times does browbeat Obama for failing to move regulations forward via executive action and agency rule making quite a bit in the article. Moving on

The use of electronic cigarettes has soared in recent years because of the claim that they allow smokers to satisfy their nicotine addictions without inhaling the tars and other toxins found in tobacco smoke. But the devices carry some risks, like extreme addictiveness for young people just starting to smoke, harmful side effects at high doses and toxic ingredients caused by quality control problems in some factories. And now the potential dangers seem to be growing. An Israeli toddler died last year after drinking from a small bottle of liquid nicotine that her grandfather used to refill his e-cigarette.

I’m sorry a child died, and some have been harmed, but life is inherently risky. People, including kids, are harmed and killed every day from all sorts of products, even ones that are heavily regulated. How many die from cars? Wind turbines killed 14 people in England alone in 2011. There have been other deaths and injuries from wind turbines. A turbine just killed two people in the Netherlands in October 2013. Wind turbines are known to cause “headaches, ringing in her ears, insomnia and dizziness” (though more research needs to be done to establish this as more than a casual health issue). By Progressive, and NY Times, standards, they should be heavily regulated and even banned.

It’s time that the Obama administration allowed the F.D.A. to propose rules and begin taking public comment. The F.D.A. should limit the amount of liquid nicotine in any container sold to consumers, stop sales on the Internet, require childproof packaging and ban labels and flavorings that appeal to children. It will be crucial to prohibit the sale of liquid nicotine in very high concentrations; 10 percent and 7.2 percent solutions are widely available on the Internet and are lethal even in small quantities.

This is what Conservatives refer to when they talk about Big Government, and Progressive love of Big Government. American Conservative doctrine, which is more like Classical Liberal theory, discusses that the government that governs least governs best, and understands that there are times when the government should become involved, but they should use a light touch. Don’t go overboard. That’s not what the Times’ EB is proposing, as you read. Stop sales on the Internet? That’s insane. Ban all fun flavors? Those flavors make vaping fun, which helps people quite real cigarettes. And are individual choice. Limit concentrations? Limit size? This is the heavy hand of Progressivism.

Read: Here We Go: NY Times Editorial Board Wants Massive Regulation On E-Cigs »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Economy, Wonky Media | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 25, 2014 – 2:39 pm

…is extreme snow caused by the oceans boiling due to use of DVRs, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on more feminist nonsense.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Warmists Blame Washington Landslide On “Climate Change”

By William Teach March 25, 2014 – 10:02 am

Nobody should be surprised, except that it took them till Monday to write up the blame

Landslide Kills 8 People In Washington As Climate Change Makes Them More Likely In The Future

A fatal landslide on Saturday morning tore down a small community in northwest Washington state, killing at least eight people. Officials said the cause of the landslide was ground saturation resulting from recent heavy rainfall. This March was the sixth-wettest since 1922, according to Johnny Burg, a National Weather Service meteorologist in Seattle who spoke with the New York Times, who also said the rains followed a drier-than-normal spell from October to January. (big snip)

“More extreme rain events –- the sudden and intense rain that we’ve been experiencing more frequently so a lot of the state routes are vulnerable to landslides today and the projections are that those will be worse,” Carol Lee Roalkvam, an environmental policy analyst with the Washington State Department of Transportation, told Oregon Public Broadcasting last year.

According to the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group, in the near future climate change will cause the region to see less snowpack, earlier snowmelt, and more winter rainfall, leading to more landslides.

Nice. Using tragedy for political benefit. Do you know what this doesn’t prove? Anthropogenic causation. Slate is not to be outdone

Climate Change May Make Terrible Mudslides More Common

One of the most well-forecast and consequential components of human-caused climate change is the tendency for rainstorms to become more intense as the planet warms. As the effect becomes more pronounced, that will make follow-on events like flooding and landslides more common.

Again, they can say it is human-caused, but they can’t prove it. And, again, this is a bunch of wackjobs taking advantage of a tragedy for political purposes.

Read: Surprise: Warmists Blame Washington Landslide On “Climate Change” »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on Surprise: Warmists Blame Washington Landslide On “Climate Change” | Trackback URL

UN’s WMO Blames Cold And Snow On Global Warming

By William Teach March 25, 2014 – 8:43 am

No one should be surprised in the least that the IPCC will go down this road

(Daily Caller) The United Nations’ weather arm says that global warming was responsible for last year’s droughts, heat waves and heavy rains, as well as the freezing cold winters in North America and record sea ice coverage in Antarctica.

The U.N.’s World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says that 2013 tied with 2007 as the sixth warmest year on record, and proved that the world was still on a warming trend. This warming trend, the WMO contends, is caused by human activity and is responsible for driving extreme weather events last year, including Australia’s record-setting heat wave and the record-low temperatures in United States.

“There is no standstill in global warming,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud in a statement. “The warming of our oceans has accelerated, and at lower depths. More than 90 percent of the excess energy trapped by greenhouse gases is stored in the oceans. Levels of these greenhouse gases are at record levels, meaning that our atmosphere and oceans will continue to warm for centuries to come. The laws of physics are non-negotiable.”

Alas, there is a standstill, with a miniscule .14F increase since 1997 and .28F since 1990. And some data shows a zero degree increase since 2000. Some data even shows a slight decrease since 2000, though it would also be considered statistically insignificant. As for extreme weather, America saw a record year for unextreme weather in 2013. 2014 is seeing another year of record low numbers of tornadoes. The US has not seen a landfalling major hurricane since October 2005, which will shatter the record set during the Civil War era if there are none through November. There has been only 1 hurricane since October 2008, and it could be argued that Issac was simply a strong tropical storm. There is no link between “climate change” and extreme weather. The whole meme has been debunked.

But, Warmists will not give up, the cult must continue, hence the blame of mankind’s release of greenhouse gases, specifically what they unscientifically call “carbon”, making it so warm that it is cold and snowy

Oddly enough, warming is also responsible for the “frigid polar air [that] plummeted into parts of Europe and the southeast United States,” and “Antarctic sea ice extent [that] reached a record daily maximum.”

Global warming also meant that “Israel, Jordan, and Syria were struck by unprecedented snowfall,” according to the WMO.

Got that? You drove a fossil fueled vehicle and made it so hot it snowed in Jordan. And don’t forget Cairo. And Vietnam. The polar vortex as caused by “climate change” (a reminder: when you see climate change in quotation marks, it refers to the notion from Warmists that all climate changes are caused mostly/solely by Mankind) has been debunked. Arctic ice increased this year. The Antarctic ice has been increasing, and the temps decreasing, all except for one small portion. Much of the world has seen cold and snowy winters for the last 5 of 6 winters. Oh, and the new report is at odds with…the IPCC

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that there “is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century.” The IPCC also said current data shows “no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century. … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”

The IPCC states that there is a lack of evidence to prove man-induced extreme weather. Pish tosh, there’s a narrative to push, so the WMO releases their scary report. Who needs evidence? Have Warmists ever needed facts and evidence?

Read: UN’s WMO Blames Cold And Snow On Global Warming »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers, UN | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Decides Ending NSA Bulk Data Collection Is An Awesome Legislative Issue

By William Teach March 25, 2014 – 8:11 am

After fighting against truly restricting the data collection programs by the NSA, which vastly expanded during his own time in office (and, yes, I do throw Blame at Bush and Congressional Dems and Republicans, as well), Mr. Obama has decided that this would be a great issue

(NY Times) The Obama administration is preparing to unveil a legislative proposal for a far-reaching overhaul of the National Security Agency’s once-secret bulk phone records program in a way that — if approved by Congress — would end the aspect that has most alarmed privacy advocates since its existence was leaked last year, according to senior administration officials.

Under the proposal, they said, the N.S.A. would end its systematic collection of data about Americans’ calling habits. The bulk records would stay in the hands of phone companies, which would not be required to retain the data for any longer than they normally would. And the N.S.A. could obtain specific records only with permission from a judge, using a new kind of court order.

In a speech in January, President Obama said he wanted to get the N.S.A. out of the business of collecting call records in bulk while preserving the program’s abilities. He acknowledged, however, that there was no easy way to do so, and had instructed Justice Department and intelligence officials to come up with a plan by March 28 — Friday — when the current court order authorizing the program expires.

I hate to by cynical on this, but we’re talking about the Obama and his administration, and he rarely does anything that isn’t hyper-political. It’s interesting to note that Obama has unilaterally changed the law and/or the way law is adhered to, including, but not limited to, laws like DOMA, illegal immigration, and his own signature law, Obamacare. He never bothered sending legislation over to Congress. Why is he bothering this time? He’s the POTUS. He could simply tell the NSA to Stop It! Why the legislation now?

The cynical part in me has a feeling that the legislative proposal will either be a) nothing anyone can really vote on, simply a basic idea on a sticky note, no details, and he’ll excoriate Congress to pass his “legislation”, or b) a detailed piece of legislation that will include one or more poison pills, making it unlikely that Republicans will vote for it, allowing Obama and the Dems to blast the GOP. Either one is likely. We could even see a combination. This will be turned into campaign wedge issue as the mid-terms approach.

But, it is a start. But why just phone records? What about all our other data? Our email? Or texts? Our browsing habits? Etc?

Anyhow, the proof will be in the details of the proposed legislation, and the conduct of Team Obama when released, as to whether this is sincere or a wedge issue.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Decides Ending NSA Bulk Data Collection Is An Awesome Legislative Issue »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | Comments Off on Obama Decides Ending NSA Bulk Data Collection Is An Awesome Legislative Issue | Trackback URL

Got Bubonic Plague? That’s Why You Need Ocare!

By William Teach March 24, 2014 – 2:58 pm

Well, it could happen! (via Twitchy)

Good grief.

Obviously, this has caused lots of derision, such as

https://twitter.com/kankokage/status/448167025341235200

https://twitter.com/SamValley/statuses/448114843292147713

and then

Boom!

Read: Got Bubonic Plague? That’s Why You Need Ocare! »

Posted in Healthcare, Unhinged Tools | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 24, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…are ocean winds that are being changed because someone used a hair dryer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on whiny Democrats being terrorized by mean ads.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NY Times Really Upset Over E-liquids, Calls Them Poison By The Barrel

By William Teach March 24, 2014 – 11:12 am

Previously, we saw the NY Times editorial board calling for lots of Government restrictions on electronic cigarettes, which matches some in the progressive community doing the same. In fact, the Times has been covering e-cigs for awhile now, and taking the position that since we do not really know, regulate! Today we get

Selling a Poison by the Barrel: Liquid Nicotine for E-Cigarettes

A dangerous new form of a powerful stimulant is hitting markets nationwide, for sale by the vial, the gallon and even the barrel.

The drug is nicotine, in its potent, liquid form — extracted from tobacco and tinctured with a cocktail of flavorings, colorings and assorted chemicals to feed the fast-growing electronic cigarette industry.

These “e-liquids,” the key ingredients in e-cigarettes, are powerful neurotoxins. Tiny amounts, whether ingested or absorbed through the skin, can cause vomiting and seizures and even be lethal. A teaspoon of even highly diluted e-liquid can kill a small child.

Obviously, this means heavy regulation by Government. There’s no doubt that nicotine in a liquid form can be dangerous: when I fill my e-cig tanks, I’m careful, and immediately wash my hands. Though it is only a tiny bit getting on my fingers, typically from taking the cap off the tank.

But, like e-cigarettes, e-liquids are not regulated by federal authorities. They are mixed on factory floors and in the back rooms of shops, and sold legally in stores and online in small bottles that are kept casually around the house for regular refilling of e-cigarettes.

And, in Liberal World, everything MUST be regulated by the federal authorities. Interestingly, I’m not so sure that liberals who use e-cigs would agree. I also find it interesting that these same liberals at the NY Times, along with the other Dems calling for massive regulation, have no problem with a non-related person taking an underage girl across state lines for an abortion. In fact, they think making sure there are no restrictions on abortion is a Great Idea.

The problems with adults, like those with children, owe to carelessness and lack of understanding of the risks. In the cases of exposure in children, “a lot of parents didn’t realize it was toxic until the kid started vomiting,” said Ashley Webb, director of the Kentucky Regional Poison Control Center at Kosair Children’s Hospital.

And since some people are pure idiots, others have to pay the price. Anyone else getting the idea that the “article” belongs in the opinion section, not the business section?

Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association, said she would also favor regulations, including those that would include childproof bottles and warning labels, and also manufacturing standards. But she said many companies already were doing that voluntarily, and that parents also needed to take some responsibility.

I don’t have a problem with that. Though, adults seem to have more problems with childproof bottles than children. There are warning labels on the liquid I purchase. There are warnings on the Blu e-cigs I started with. Some manufacturing standards would not be bad. I like that the people at the store I purchase from are puffing on the same stuff I am buying. They wouldn’t be doing that if they were concerned over what they were purchasing.

But that’s not what this push is about. This is about massive government regulation, and increasing taxation on a sector of the economy that is moving and growing. And, as noted time and time again in the comments, this is simply a hysterical scare story, in other words, an opinion piece in disguise. This is the Nanny State in action. We can have a legitimate, rational, adult debate without the bat-guano crazy.

Read: NY Times Really Upset Over E-liquids, Calls Them Poison By The Barrel »

Posted in Economy, Wonky Media | 16 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove