President Obama is an Idiot

President Obama is an Idiot December 9, 2014

What kind of political idiot would pick a fight with the Little Sisters of the Poor?

Our president, that’s who.

The Little Sisters of the Poor had their day in court yesterday. Arrayed against them were the forces of the President of the United States and his Justice Department.

I have no words for this stupidity. Even if the President wins this fight, he loses. It defies political logic.

From the Becket Fund:

Sr. Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor:

As Little Sisters of the Poor, we offer the neediest elderly of every race and religion a home where they will be welcomed as Christ, cared for as family and accompanied with dignity until God calls them to Himself.  We have done this for over 175 years because of our faith in God and our vocation as Little Sisters of the Poor.

But now the government demands we choose between our care for the elderly poor and our faith.  We cannot do that and we should not have to.  It is a choice that violates our nation’s historic commitment to ensure that people from diverse faiths can freely follow God’s calling in their lives. But the government forces us to either violate our conscience or take millions of dollars that we raise by begging for the care of the elderly poor and instead pay fines to the IRS.

We are not seeking special privileges.  The government exempts huge corporations, small businesses, and other religious ministries from what they are imposing on us–we are simply asking to carry on our mission to serve the elderly poor as we have always done for 175 years.

We are thankful that the court has heard our case and for the work of the Becket Fund, and we prayerfully await the judges’ decision.

The following statement can be attributed to Mark Rienzi, Senior Counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters of the Poor:

A year after losing at the Supreme Court, the government’s aggressive pursuit of the Little Sisters of the Poor continues. Untold millions of people have managed to get contraceptives without the involvement of nuns.  The idea that the most powerful government in the world cannot come up with a way to distribute these products without forcing the Little Sisters to participate is ridiculous.

"I didn't state that very well, sorry. Nothing wrong with the link, I just couldn't ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"You don't remember Lyndon Johnson doing any such thing because he didn't do any such ..."

Dr Christine Ford in Hiding Because ..."
"I haven't had the opportunity to read the FBI investigation. I'm not in the habit ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"Was there something wrong with the link?"

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."

Browse Our Archives

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

52 responses to “President Obama is an Idiot”

  1. I loved the way Charles Krauthammer expressed it. It went something like this, not a direct quote: “He didn’t just pick a fight with some big corporation, he picked a fight with Sisters. He didn’t just pick a fight with Big Sisters, he picked a fight with Little Sisters. He didn’t just pick a fight with rich big sisters, he picked a fight with Little Sisters of the Poor. How stupid can you get?” LOL.

  2. Seriously, if SCOTUS says Hobby Lobby doesn’t have to pay, why should the Little Sisters. Maybe Hobby Lobby can loan their high priced lawyer to the Little Sisters.

      • So they took the trouble to go up against the Government of the United States for no reason, and the Supreme Court granted them standing for no reason. I swear, the willingness of Obama supporters to believe what they must know to be false defeats any rational argument and vaults easily over the most mountainous evidence. What can a poor, rationalistic Catholic, trying to hold on to reason and logic, do in the presence of such granite faith?

        • The Becket Fund, a right wing group opposed to people having the right to health care trolled around looking for litigant.

          • And your point is? That these women AND THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA were both so stupid as to be led by the nose by an insignificant conservative fund? I know you people like to imagine that “Christians are poor, ignorant and easily led” (quote), but you should not show your prejudice quite so openly.

      • Actually, neither was Hobby Lobby. They didn’t want it offered by the insurance companies to their employees AT ALL.

  3. Sadly the sisters are at the mercy of a misguided hierarchy of celibate men who really do not care about the reproductive needs of women. Thank goodness, President Obama does care about justice, which includes caring about the reproductive needs of women. I am disappointed to see that this article is written by a fellow Catholic who is a woman and who seems to disparage the rights of women to have their reproductive needs met through the Affordable Care Act.

    Sincerely, Dr Rosemary Eileen McHugh, M.D., M.Spir.

    • If your Master’s degree has not led you to love your Church more than your anti-Christian feminist agenda, then it isn’t worth much and there’s no sense in displaying such credentials unless it’s simply to make you feel like a big girl.

    • “….misguided hierarchy of celibate men…” Please…

      “…reproductive needs of women.” Are you kidding me?

      “…President Obama does care about justice…” WHAT!?!?!?!?!
      Wow.

    • The Little Sisters of the Poor are at the mercy of God and the Church that He established here on earth to guide all of His people, a church they chose to belong to and reaffirm their membership in each and every day of their lives and their ministry. If the “hierarchy of celibate men” is misguided, then the celibate women of the Little Sisters are as well as both are guided by the Lord that leads them to give their lives in the service of others.

      God and the Church care for all the needs of His people. A want and a need are two different things. And just because someone wants something does not mean that it is in their best interest.

    • I am disappointed that you decide that other Catholic women who disagree with you must ‘not care’ about women and their reproductive health. Why assume that snyone who disagrees with you does so out of contempt for wonen and their health? I choose to see people with your position as ones who genuinely believe you are caring for other women, even though I think your sincere beliefs are seriously misguided. Why cannot you extend the same courtesy to those who disagree with you, that we are coming from a place of genuine care? Supporters of the ACA as the only way to care for women are the closed-minded ones here.

      True mercy includes giving your opposition the benefit of the doubt until they prove themselves to be acting with intentional ill intent. It is saying, “I understand that you think you are being helpful, but you are wrong,” which is what I say to your position. I don’t say, “You don’t care about women because you want them to take drugs that can cause serious side effects that alter the natural rhythms of their bodies so they can be at the mercy of men’s sexual whims rather than being empowered by learning about how their own bodies work.” Saying, “I think you are wrong” is very different than saying, “you dont care about women.” Stop accusing and instead look into the real reasons that real people disagree with widespread contraceptive use (health concerns, estrogen in the waterways, excessive pharmaceutical costs, decreased libido, increase in risky sexual behaviors because of feeling “safe” to name a few) instead of assuming we don’t care about ourselves. I don’t use birth control because I *do* care about myself.

    • Dr. McHugh – abortion destroys the lives of women – both emotionally and physically. If you truly care about women, stop promoting something that increases their chances of death, and suicide, by 156%. These women do not need abortions. They need help, and hope, in getting through whatever it is that is leading them to feel they need an abortion.

    • Dr. McHugh, when you’re talking about the “reproductive needs of women” don’t you really mean “women should be able to have sex anytime without dealing with its natural consequence, conception. Conception should be prevented by using chemicals or barriers which the insurance must pay for, and if conception occurs then the woman should be able to kill the child at will – but only before birth, not after?” How can you be surprised that a Catholic woman would argue against this?
      And, really, WHY should medical insurance companies pay for contraceptive measures? Should they cover condoms? Maybe just generic ones, you know, the plain ones? The more exotic would have a copay.
      Why should anyone cover anyone else’s contraceptive methods? How is this a medical necessity?

  4. Since I see that my comment is being held for approval, I wonder if it will be listed or will it be deleted by the powers that want to silence those Catholics who want to stand up for those who have no voice.

    • Paranoid, much?

      And for which voiceless Catholics are you willing to stand up for? The unborn? The elderly? No, no, not them. Your immense courage has compelled you to stand up for the incessant whines of the sexually irresponsible college girls who want to get their freak on while nuns pay for their birth control. How admirable of you. You’re right up there with St. Joan of Arc. I’m sure one day us evil Catholic males will regret ever chosing the gospel over women like you 😉

        • I believe I stated clearly the problem with her ideas. Choosing a woman’s right to be promiscuous over a baby’s right to life and the care of the elderly is vile. To choose an anti-Christian agenda over the gospel handed down to us by Christ is equally vile as well. Those are ideas that have no basis in a civilized Christian society.

    • Madam, of course you have a right to disagree with Rebecca and support murder and abortion. You are even entitled, if you wish, to strike a ridiculously heroic pose and pretend that you are going up against the powers of the universe in the name of the powerless and persecuted martyrs of the White House, the mass media, Hollywood, and other whom Franz Fanon would no doubt have classed among the damned of the Earth. What you have no right to do is to claim to be Catholic while doing it. I see by your name that your parents prized a notion of Irish descent, but that no more entitles you to call yourself Catholic than it entitles you to call yourself an Ulster Protestant, a Celtic pagan, or an agnostic like James Joyce. Catholicism is not inherited with the blood. Catholicism only means one thing: to believe the bodies of doctrine taught by the Bishop of Rome and by the Bishops in communion with him . End of story. To say anything else would be the same as to claim that I can be a black-haired blonde, or a square triangle.

  5. We can never forget the holocaust that began before the holocaust. That being the Nazis opening hundreds of state run facilities for people with disabilities in Germany. The mass extermination in the Nazi death camps originated and were perfected in earlier use against people with physical, emotional, and intellectual disabilities. Just as you see today, through the social acceptance of abortion for “not normal” children, the acceptance of euthanasia of the elderly and now even for parents to put to death, children THEY feel are a burden to society and family… “Would you, if you were a cripple, want to vegetate forever?–Dr. Tergesten, in the propaganda film Ich Klage an! (I Accuse!, 1941)” When the government controls healthcare decisions, what could go wrong? EVERYTHING. Government becomes the one playing “god”. The propaganda today in the US to accept this guy and the culture of death, along with all things contrary to LIFE, is no different then it was in Germany. No different then it was was with the Bolsheviks. No different then how China pushed for the One Child policy. PERIOD! Hes not an idiot. Hes NUTS. Along with the people supporting him and his entire administration.

  6. A lame duck president would do this. There are many reasons why term limitations are a bad idea, but this is one not everyone thinks of: a politician who no longer faces elections can do what he pleases. IIRC, Bill Clinton’s second term was concluded with a disgraceful series of presidential pardons. What does Obama have to lose? If by any chance he finds a judge unprincipled enough to agree with him, he has established a precedent that will do immeasurable mischief in future relationships of Church and State, and if he fails, well, it’s not as if it were his first failure, is it now?

    • Most presidents care deeply about their place in history. President Obama has compromised his place in history deeply by attacking the First Amendment with the HHS Mandate. That’s mainly what I was referring to.

      I do agree that he doesn’t care about the political consequences of his actions to his political party or to his colleagues, or, for that matter, to this nation.

      • Yes, President Obama does care about his place in history. Steve Tirone, above, has got it exactly right. He wants to be remembered as the hero who blew the blast of progress and modernity against the horrors of medieval repression. If he succeeds,there’s his place in history. If he fails, there’s still his place in history, among the many glorious failures of left mythology from the Conspiracy of Equals to the Commune of Paris.

      • It’s a not cut and dry whether he is “attacking the First Amendment.” The Supreme Court ruled that the mandate requires people to get insurance is legal under the government’s right to collect taxes. The Court ruled that requiring “small” companies to provide contraceptives is problematic, but that’s the mandate.

        I think most of the President’s policies haven’t gone far enough, but for the most part I’m proud of what he has accomplished. His place in history seems to be intact from where I stand.

        And to claim that the President just doesn’t care about what happens to this nations, his party or his colleagues is ridiculous. His vision of what is good for this country might be different than yours, but he doesn’t *not* care. He does everything that he does because he cares.

          • I’d say that most left-leaning people who are disappointed in the President are upset he hasn’t been *more* progressive. He did not bring *enough* change. But by in large most Democrats who were elected with him still support the majority of his positions and policies. Which specific people are you talking about?

            • I’m talking about the many members of Congress who were defeated for following him down his yellow brick road instead of representing their constituents. He used his clout — including dastardly threats against his own party members — to pass the Affordable Health Care Act and got them defeated. This was a disregard for his colleagues and his party.

              • Not just “dastardly threats”. He deliberately destroyed poor Bart Stupak. That taught everyone else in the party a lesson – for the time being. And that is why they are now all coming out in rebellion: when six years of adhesion to an aggressive agenda got them nothing but electoral disaster, suddenly all the old irritations come up at once.

  7. Are you kidding me?!? This is sound, even brilliant strategy, from Obama’s point of view. He’s cracking down on a bunch of weird old medieval shrews who wear funny clothes (sshhh, don’t mention any similarity between the habit and the hijab) and are so freaky that they. Don’t. Have. Sex. and who are obedient to MEN (can you believe it?) who have the unmitigated gall to actively oppose the Holy Sacrifice of the Reproductive Rights Clinic. He’s playing to his base. I hear variants of this from my atheist friends all the time.

  8. NOTE: I’m getting a spate of replies to one commenter that are becoming increasingly unkind and uncharitable. I don’t agree with this particular commenter myself, but Public Catholic is not the place for Public Thrashings. Restrain your anger and be kind to one another.

  9. It’s a simple plan. If the administration would demand this of the Little Sisters of the Poor, then who are the rest of us unholy peons to object to paying for something we deem objectionable. It’s not like we’re better or holier than those nuns and if they cannot oppose Caesar, then how can we even pretend to do so?

  10. Let’s be perfectly clear on what the Little Sisters are arguing here. The argument is that it’s a violation of their religious conscience to file a piece of paperwork in order to register their objection.

    That’s it. Merely having to write “I object to providing abortion coverage” is somehow a violation of their conscience? Really? You can say that having to fill out a form violates your religious conscience with a straight face?

    And as for “picking a fight” – the Little Sisters were the one who filed the lawsuit, the ones who “picked the fight.”

    I notice that those people here who are siding with the Little Sisters are framing this suit as one of “Obama forcing the Little Sisters to pay for abortion services” when that’s patently false. How twisted is it that, when after already allowing an exemption, those who would get the exemption object to having to fill out one little form in order to get their exemption. Why does Rebecca, as well as everyone else favoring the sisters, consistently fail to mention what the suit actually entails? Is it that, when explained clearly, it makes the Little Sisters’ claim seem petty and silly?

    Besides, why should they care if their coverage includes abortion services? Are they afraid that the nuns are going to be turning out in droves to get abortions if they’re covered?

    • IB, the ACA was passed under suspect, possibly illegal circumstances and certainly deceptive circumstances. The “accommodation” was another ruse to continue a very bad law. See Dr Jonathan Gruber’s testimony if you have any doubts. It’s “one little form” that amounts to a serious violent assault on th Little Sisters’ Freedom of Religion, from the First Amendment.
      We care because we have protected religious beliefs from God. Snarky comments not withstanding.

    • Suppose I filed a piece of paperwork. And suppose that the piece of paperwork were my consent for the execution by torture of the person who sings himself Islandbrewer. Would you repeat that argument? Paperwork is omnipotent. Paperwork can cancel your identity or give you one. Paperwork can kill. Your argument does not, as an argument, exist: it is only a piece of cheap verbal incitement based on the fact that the word “paperwork” sounds empty and boring to anyone who has not bothered to think about it. In other words, you are trying to stir up those who don’t think.

  11. anyone that attacks the religious beliefs of people is wrong?
    in this country as it was when there was religious freedom, not freedom from religion.
    fill out a form?
    when you don’t even need a proof of citizenship,
    only low lives attack people doing as much good as these sisters do every day without any expectation of anything, except, expecting to be allowed to continue without giving up their beliefs
    they thinking it is wrong is enough for any decent person, but some low lives think otherwise
    you one of the second group?–I’M NOT

  12. ” The idea that the most powerful government in the world cannot come up with a way to distribute these products without forcing the Little Sisters to participate is ridiculous.”

    If the government told the sisters that if they notify the government that they cannot provide contraceptives to their employees due to their religious beliefs, the government will arrange for the coverage, the sisters would think that by notifying the government that they won’t provide the coverage they are complicit in a sin. The only thing that will make them happy is if there is no way whatsoever that their employees have the coverage.

  13. It never ceases to amaze me that people who are in favor of the Obamacare insurance coverage keep saying that those who do not want contraception and abortion coverage are not being asked to pay for it. Of course they will be paying for it. We are told that the Insurance providers will be paying for the contraception coverage! Insurance companies NEVER give coverage free. The cost of the contraception coverage is included in the other coverage – medical, major medical, etc., but not shown separately. The total cost will most definitely cover the costs the insurer will provide. All of them. “The insurer will provide the cover without charge” is a LIE.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.