Washington Post: Reid, Pelosi Hobby Lobby Commentary is Not Factual

The Washington Post took Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to task for the bizarre verbal temper tantrums they’ve been throwing over the Hobby Lobby decision.

The article pointed out that many of the claims both of these very powerful national leaders have been making about the decision are factually inaccurate. Even though the article focuses on politicians who act on the national stage, they could also include a number of their colleagues in the media in this same accusation. The truth has been largely left out of the media discussion of the Hobby Lobby decision.

It’s a great article, and I hope you follow the link and read it in its entirety.

Meanwhile, here are a few excerpts from The Washington Post:

Nothing in the ruling allows a company to stop a woman from getting or filling a prescription for contraceptives, but that salient fact is often lost.

…“Really, we should be afraid of this court.  The five guys who start determining what contraceptions are legal. Let’s not even go there.” — Pelosi This is a very odd statement from the House Democratic leader, given that the majority opinion flatly states that “under our cases, women (and men) have a constitutional right to obtain contraceptives,” citing the 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, which under the right to privacy nullified a law prohibiting the use of contraceptives.

… Later, in the same news conference, Pelosi decried that “five men could get down to specifics of whether a woman should use a diaphragm and she should pay for it herself or her boss.” Hobby Lobby involved the owners’ objection to four types of birth control but not diaphragms.

… “The one thing we are going to do during this work period, sooner rather than later, is to ensure that women’s lives are not determined by virtue of five white men. This Hobby Lobby decision is outrageous, and we are going to do something about it.” — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), remarks to reporters, on July 8   The Hobby Lobby decision was written by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. That’s certainly five men, but Thomas is African American.

This is deeply troubling because you have organized religions that oppose health care, period. So if you have an employer who is a member of an organized religion and they decide, you know, I wouldn’t provide health care to my own family because I object religiously, I’m not going to allow any kind of health-care treatment.” — Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), Democratic National Committee chair, appearing on MSNBC, June 30  While there are some religions that object to certain medical procedures, Wasserman Schultz goes to quite an extreme to suggest that employers could block an employee from seeking any kind of health-care treatment. (Again, the issue was who would pay for contraceptives, not whether someone was barred from getting contraceptives.) …

… — Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), interview on MSNBC, June 30  Is Slaughter really saying that the court has taken away an employee’s religious freedom because some contraceptives may not be covered by insurance?

Rep David Dank was My Friend. His Funeral is Today.
Cyber War Can Be Real War.
Killing Grandma to Kiss the Zeitgeist.
Planned Parenthood, Helping Sex Traffickers Force Their Victims to Have Abortions
  • FW Ken

    Not to belabor the point, but the comments (lies) listed in the WaPo article are being said in comboxes everywhere, including here.

    • hamiltonr

      I know. The difference is here, there are good people like you who will answer them. I thank you for that, Ken.

  • SisterCynthia

    Either people are speaking hysterically (I.e., not thinking first) or they are employing the age old method of manipulators, where you simply repeat a lie, forcefully, over and over in hopes of pushing your would-be victim to cowtow to your version of reality and treat the lie as truth. The goal being that even if they retain a gut level suspicion that it’s a lie, they will stop challenging you on it and you’ve reframed things to artificially give yourself the high ground. :-p

  • fredx2

    In recent years, there seems to have been an actual tactic of misrepresenting the truth on the part of Democrats. Of course, both sides do it, but Democrats seem to have accepted it as a legitimate political tactic – it’s not just that some people get carried away and exaggerate, it seems like the party talking points knowingly distort things and then insist as many Democrats as possible repeat the lies.

    For people who used to complain about the Republicans “spreading fear” (war on women) they seem to be experts at spreading fear unnecessarily.

    • hamiltonr

      Actually, it goes both ways Fred. Big time. It’s just that the Dems, at least on the national level, are lying about the Church, life and family, which matter greatly to Catholics.

      The Rs consistently lie about money and their actual agenda.

      Both of them lie about themselves.

      Odd as this sounds, both of them tend to tell the truth when they are accusing one another. When the Ds say that the Rs are the puppets of corporate powers and never met a war they didn’t like, they’re telling the truth. When the Rs say the Ds are attacking the faith and totally in the bag for abortion, they’re telling the truth.

      • AnneG

        I agree overall, Rebecca. But, I think the Chicago administration has lifted crony capitalism to a new, breathtaking level. Almost rivals Mexico and that is not a compliment.

  • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

    What it really does is threaten the ability of Planned Parenthood and Pharmaceutical Companies to *overcharge* when billing insurance- and it’s all about the dollars in the campaign fund at that level, for both Republicans and Democrats. If something threatens the profitability of a donor, you attempt to quash it.