Obama Set to Remove Rule that Allows Health Workers to Refuse Participating in Abortions

If I were a health care worker, here’s how I would reply to my supervisor for forcing me to participate in an abortion:  “Obama is a fascist totalitarian Commie and can kiss my butt!  I’m not going to Hell for him!  I QUIT!!!!”

Then, after half the health care workers quit because of this piece of pure evil totalitarian, anti-religion, pro-killing BS, the upper management at the hospitals and clinics will give Obama the bird and allow the health care workers to do whatever they want.  Remember, the health care community is already strapped for experience workers….

Obama Set to Undo ‘Conscience’ Rule for Health Workers

By DAVID STOUT – New York Times
Published: February 27, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration moved on Friday to undo a last-minute Bush administration rule granting broad protections to health workers who refuse to take part in abortions or provide other health care that goes against their consciences.

The Department of Health and Human Services served notice on Friday, through a message to the White House Office of Management and Budget, that it intends to rescind the regulation, which was originally announced on Dec. 19, 2008, and took effect on the day President Obama took office.

When the administration publishes official notice of its intent, probably next week, a 30-day period for public comment will begin, after which the regulation can be repealed or modified.

It has been known for weeks that President Obama intended to review the rule and other last-minute regulatory actions once he took office, so the notice on Friday beginning the process was not a surprise. Even so, considerable emotion surrounds the issue, as illustrated by the shorthand used to describe the Dec. 19 rule. Its supporters called it the “provider conscience regulation,” while the Planned Parenthood Federation of America disdained it as a “midnight regulation.”

The rule prohibits recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or assist in abortions or sterilization procedures because of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Its supporters included the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Health Association, which represents Catholic hospitals.

In praising the Bush administration last fall, Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, said that in recent years “we have seen a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other health care providers to perform or refer for abortions and sterilizations.”

Tea Party by the St. Louis Arch

Well, it was cold.  Damn cold;  And yet, we had about 1500+ show up!  Pretty darn good on a workday for Conservatives and Republicans who hardly ever get involved with protests.  In fact, most of the folks I talked with in the crowd were saying that this was the first time they had ever protested anything in their lives!

It seems that America is really pissed off!!!

Anyway, here are some photos that I took.   In case you couldn’t tell, the location is on the steps of the Arch right next to the Mississippi River—which is the river we dumped the tea into, of course:

Power to the People!!!

Even Mothers and their little children were doing their part! – Ain’t homeschooling wonderful?!!

Gun Control. Why is this difficult?

I came across this little jewel this morning and decided to make a few comments of my own.

27 February 2009, Philadelphia Inquirer
The wounding of a city police detective yesterday and a 12-year-old West Philadelphia boy’s critical shooting on Wednesday offer the latest proof that the struggle to keep guns out of the hands of would-be killers is far from over.
-If it bleeds it leads; always a classic start but just who is attempting to keep the guns out of criminal hands and how? How many weapons do they have and when was their first usage? Now I will admit I do not know the answer myself but I strongly doubt gun violence in Philly is a new phenomenon.

That makes a rare victory for gun-control advocates this week all the more sweet. In a convincing, 7-2 decision Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a 1996 law written by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.) that bars anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from owning a firearm.
-Upholding a 13 year old law changed what exactly? Are all the victims of domestic violence suddenly safe? Are those guilty of domestic violence incapable of harming anyone without a firearm? The only thing this law really accomplishes is adding an additional charge after a victim has been endangered and then only if a firearm was present when the crime was committed. The victim? Well sucks to be them; once again law enforcement has a worthless tool to protect the innocence.

The decision will preserve safeguards for thousands of women, who are most often the victims of domestic abuse. Lautenberg says the law has helped keep more than 150,000 guns out of the hands of abusers. The ruling also protects police officers, who are first responders in domestic disputes.
-As much as I think cops real purpose is hunting down the guilty and not protecting anyone; I do not want to see any of them injured. Reality is criminals do have plenty of weapons and they will continue to use them. It does not matter if an immediate death penalty for everyone with a weapon was a standard police tactic; most of the same criminals would still have weapons of their own. Ask the Mexican border police how far anti guns laws have gotten them. Now imagine a world with both organized gangs and newly criminalized weapon owners hunt down the police before the police hunt them down. Make outlaws out of all legal gun owners, they will also organize, and resist, not a pretty scenario is it?

Open Thread

I’m off to a Tea Party.

Please feel free to talk amongst yourselves and leave interesting links here.

– Doc

Muzzie Tries to Kill Obama

I’m going with the Sudden Jihad Syndrome combined with “if someone changes his religion, kill him” angle here.

Remember, Muzzies see Obama as an apostate…

Chicago Man Arrested for Allegedly Targeting Obama With HIV-Infected Blood
It’s only the second time ever that HIV-infected blood has been sent with malicious intent through the U.S. mail system, a spokesman for the U.S. Postal Inspection Service said.

By Mike Levine
FOXNews.com
Friday, February 27, 2009

A man from President Obama’s hometown of Chicago has been arrested for allegedly sending Obama and his staff envelopes containing HIV-infected blood, in the hopes of killing or harming them.

It’s only the second time ever that HIV-infected blood has been sent with malicious intent through the U.S. mail system, a spokesman for the U.S. Postal Inspection Service said.

In the weeks leading up to Obama’s inauguration, Saad Hussein, an Ethiopian refugee in his late 20’s, sent an envelope addressed to “Barack Obama” to offices of the Illinois government in Springfield, Ill., according to court documents. The envelope contained a series of unusual items, including a letter with reddish stains and an admission ticket for Obama’s election-night celebration in Chicago’s Grant Park. Court documents said Hussein, who takes drugs to treat a mental illness, later told FBI agents he is “very sick with HIV” and cut his fingers with a razor so he could bleed on the letter.

Hazmat teams were called in after the envelope was opened, and offices of the Illinois Department on Aging and the Department of Revenue were locked down for nearly two hours, locking 300 staffers in their offices, court documents said.

Hussein, with his brother acting as an interpreter, told FBI agents he was actually “an admirer” of Obama and was “seeking help from the government,” according to court documents. He also told them he was hoping to obtain tickets to the inaugural ceremonies in Washington, the documents said.

Days after sending the letter to Obama, Hussein allegedly placed two more letters in the mail, one addressed to “Emanuel,” an apparent reference to Obama’s current chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. The two letters contained what appeared to be dried blood, the court documents said.