The White House sought Tuesday to soothe concerns over a controversial birth control rule that has led to Republican attacks and tension among close allies of the administration.

The efforts followed mounting criticism from Catholics and other faith leaders that a new rule requiring certain religious institutions to cover contraception as part of their employee health plans violates their constitutional rights.

And they came as White House officials began hearing complaints from some of their own allies and advisers, who view the rule as a policy mistake that feeds what they see as an unfair charge from Republicans: that President Obama is anti-religion.  (Yeah, really!  It’s unfair to note that the guy is pro-abortion, thumbs his nose at the church and the Constitution to throw a bone to his moonbat base, etc. … but hey, where would you get the crazy idea that the guy is anti-religion or anything? – CL)

Even Chris Matthews?  Dude, when Tingles says his boy’s wrong, that should make the front page of the comPost!

Normally, the Catholic church runs interference for the Democrats.  I’m guessing that’s why Chairman Zero shoved this down their throats: he figured they’d stick with him and his party like they always do.  Considering they backed ObamaCare in the first place, I’m not sure why they are surprised by this.  Unless they thought they could get a waiver just like every other B.O.-friendly organization that also didn’t want to be subject to ObamaCare’s onerous requirements.

Those who dispute that characterization “may not like the language,’’ she said, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing’’ that she insists put women at physical risk, although Catholic providers strongly disagree.

Yeah, can you believe the nerve of Catholics obeying their doctrine like she doesn’t?  Can you believe that they actually have a conscience?  How did that happen?

There’s nothing quite like a politician scorned.

When voters in Ohio’s 1st Congressional District threw Democrat Steve Driehaus out of office after only one term, he did not bow out gracefully.  No, he decided to get even.  So he did what anyone does in today’s culture: he sued somebody.

Charging that its activities contributed to his defeat and thus to his “loss of livelihood,” Driehaus is suing the Susan B. Anthony List, a group that supports pro-life candidates for Congress and which has been one of the leading and most effective organizations involved in the fight to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood.

What a jackwagon.

Let the arrogance and gall sink in for a second.  Driehaus is saying that because he lost an election, he had a “loss of livelihood”…as if he had a right to live off of the taxpayers’ dime!  Hey, he’d fit right in with the Occupy Wall Street losers, wouldn’t he?  With that kind of entitlement mentality, no wonder he’s a Democrat.

So why did the Susan B. Anthony List oppose Driehaus?

During the 2010 elections the Susan B. Anthony List engaged in a campaign to identify and call out a group of allegedly anti-abortion-rights members of Congress who provided the margin that allowed President Barack Obama’s reform of the nation’s healthcare system to get through the U.S. House of Representatives. The Susan B. Anthony List said their vote in favor of the law, which did not include any pro-life protections, amounted to a betrayal of their pro-life principles.

According to Driehaus, who was one of that group, what the Susan B. Anthony List said in its public communications amounted to a malicious lie that contributed to his defeat. …

The SBA List said that voting for ObamaCare was a vote against their pro-life principles.  How can this be a lie?  They saw a vote for ObamaCare without the Stupak Amendment as a vote against pro-life, and Driehaus did vote for ObamaCare.  So exactly where is the lie?

Anywho, at least a judge is tossing the case out of court with a guffaw and scorn.  Nah, just kidding:

…Amazingly, rather than laugh the suit out of court U.S. District Court judge Timothy S. Black, an Obama appointee, is allowing it to go forward.
…
Driehaus’s suit is breaking new legal ground and may already be having a very chilling effect on political speech. It goes directly at the heart of our First Amendment protections and criminalizes what is at least a difference of opinion. And it’s curious that the case has not received more attention from the national press.

What is equally curious, however, is why Judge Black has allowed the case to move forward and why he did not recuse himself from it since, as Barbara Hollingsworth reported Friday in The Washington Examiner, he apparently is the former president and director of the Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati.  As seeming conflicts of interest go this one is a real humdinger.

First Amendment?  Bueller?  Bueller?

So, an Obama appointee who used to be the director of Planned Parenthood of Cincinnati didn’t think there was a conflict of interest in hearing a case involving an organization who is opposed to PP’s mission?  A man who used to run the nation’s largest taxpayer-funded abortion mill organization is somehow totally objective when it comes to lawsuits against a group that was undoubtedly a thorn in his side?  Un-friggin’-believable!

I doubt any court above this one will uphold a ruling in favor of Driehaus, and I am certain that higher courts would take Black to the woodshed.  But how shameful is it that a loser sues a group for trying (with success) to get him defeated in an election by simply reporting his vote and not endorsing him for his vote?  Election results would be forever altered if courts allow this kind of shameful sore loserness to occur.

She also compared Republican efforts to curb infanticide with Nazis.  In Slaughterville, the Nazi-like barbarism isn’t the killing of babies, but depriving women of taxpayer funds at the federal level to subsidize the infanticide.

Moron.

A West Philadelphia abortion doctor, his wife and eight other suspects are now under arrest following a grand jury investigation.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 69, faces eight counts of murder in the deaths of a woman following a botched abortion at his office, along with the deaths of seven other babies who, prosecutors allege, were born alive following illegal late-term abortions and then were killed by severing their spinal cords with a pair of scissors. …

Gosnell is facing Murder in the 3rd Degree for the death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar. Mrs. Mongar died on November 20, 2009 when she was overdosed with anesthetics prescribed by Gosnell. He is also facing seven Murder charges for the deaths of infants who were killed after being born viable and alive during the 6th, 7th and 8th month of pregnancy. Gosnell is also facing numerous other charges.

You know what’s sicker than this monster “physician”?  The pro-abortion political machine in PA ran interference for this guy!

May God have mercy on their souls, and may our judicial system have no such mercy.

These Planned Parenthood vermin are sick, vile, evil cretins.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), a Catholic, publicly stated earlier this year that she had a duty to pursue policies “in keeping with the values” of Jesus Christ, the “Word made Flesh.” But at a press briefing last week, when reminded of this statement, Pelosi declined to say when Jesus got the right to life.
 
“Whenever it was,” said Pelosi, “we bow our heads when we talk about it in church, and that’s where I’d like to talk about that.”

Didn’t seem to bother her to talk about it outside of church when she was on her “Word made flesh” roll in three months prior to this retreat, did it?

In the latest development in the race for the open U.S. Senate seat in Florida, Governor Charlie Crist is coming under fire for removing the pro-life section of his campaign website. This comes on the day the legislature sent him a bill that would allow women to see an ultrasound of their baby before an abortion.

Crist has already hinted he will veto the legislation, which also allows Florida to opt out of some of the abortion funding under the new national health care law President Barack Obama signed.

That he would potentially veto a pro-life bill will broad support from voters is another indication of his strategy to leave the Republican Party and run as an independent.

In order to boost his “indy” street cred, he feels he has to switch positions on a matter that, regardless on which side of the debate you fall, virtually no one switches.  You don’t often see someone who runs on a “sanctity of life” platform wake up one day and say “On second thought, abortion’s not so bad.”  If you ever needed proof that he has no principles, here you go.

May God have mercy on his soul.

Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, the congressman who led anti-abortion rights Democrats in the House during health care negotiations, will retire this year, CBS News has learned. He is expected to announce his plans later this morning.

Had Stupak sought re-election, he would have faced challengers from both the left and the right backed by interest groups angered by Stupak’s health care vote.

Smooth move, Ex-Lax.  You managed to tick off the right and the left.  That takes a certain je ne sais quoi to pull that off, dude.

PICKET: Then how come you didn’t vote for Pence’s amendment to de-fund Planned Parenthood back in 2009?

STUPAK: I don’t think I ever voted to de-fund Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood does not do abortions…in my district. Planned Parenthood has a number of clinics in my district that provide health care for my people. Therefore, these clinics do quite well in my district, and I’m all for health care and extending it to everybody–access to health care, so that’s just another way. Also on Planned Parenthood , when they do it, there is a segregation of funds that go with it. It’s usually about four hundred million they tried to de-fund on Planned Parenthood. Maybe this time, I’ll look at it again if Pence brings it up. Maybe I’ll vote differently this time, but you’re right I did vote against it.

 At least two Planned Parenthood clinics exist in Mr. Stupak’s district. One is located in Petoskey and the other in Marquette. The services offered at each clinic are listed as follows:

In Marquette:

Abortion Referral
Birth Control Services
Emergency Contraception
General Health Care
Men’s Health Services
Women’s Health Services
STD Testing & Treatment
Patient Education
Pregnancy Testing, Options & Services

In Petoskey:

Abortion Referral
Birth Control Services
Emergency Contraception
General Health Care
HIV Testing
Men’s Health Services
Patient Education
Pregnancy Testing, Options & Services
STD Testing & Treatment
Women’s Health Services

Mr. Stupak seems to toe the line, given both of these clinics include abortion referral services. If he wanted to protect the sanctity of life, why agree to continue funding clinics that recommend places for women to have abortions? Planned Parenthood describes this referral service:

Planned Parenthood health centers in communities around the country offer you the health care you need. Our caring and knowledgeable staff provide a wide range of services — including abortion services. Health centers that do not provide abortion services provide abortion referrals.

It is unfortunate that Mr. Stupak is okay with this, but it is not surprising. He can say he is supportive of these clinics or the health reform act in the name of “access to health care,” because as far as he is concerned, his conscience is clear.

Overnight, Stupuke went from pro-life darling to pro-abortion amigo.

Like I said before, there is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat.

Supposed pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak may well have been bribed in order to buy his vote to support Barack Obama’s health care “reform.” //  Late Sunday, meticulous research by accountability-minded bloggers first brought to light a stealthy press release from Stupak’s own office this past Friday. The release announced a US Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration grant in the value of $726 409 for three airports in northern Michigan, meant to go to maintenance and improvements; Stupak represents Michigan’s 1^st district. Suspicions have only increased with greater fervor since Stupak represented the so-called “pro-life” bloc of Democrat holdouts who wanted greater protections against abortion provisions included in the Senate version of Obamacare when it went to the House. Yet Stupak sold out on Sunday when offered a legally meaningless “executive order” that will be overruled by judges anyway, as the pro-abortion language in the bill carries more weight. If true, Stupak sold his soul for very little; after all, at least Mary Landrieu got $300 million for her state in the Louisiana Purchase.

What makes Stupak look really guilty in this matter is the very fishy timing of his sudden about-face, especially when you consider the recent timeline of his public statements on his stand on abortion language in the bill. As late as this past Friday, the 19^th, Stupak was a firm “no,” even going and speaking to FNC’s Greta Van Susteren in reiterating his unreliably pro-life bloc of Democrats’ opposition to Obamacare. Then, though, came the press release later in the day, but also on Friday about how his northern Michigan district would get a cool $726,409 for airport improvements.

Now, fast forward to Saturday when Stupak wasn’t that vocal anymore—as he had consistently been in the days before his bribe, er, I mean, “grant” for his district—on how he’d vote. Finally, that brings us to  Sunday when he revealed how he’d sell his soul for a mere, useless piece of paper, an “executive order,” strengthening limits on abortion. As the National Right to Life Committee reasoned so very convincingly, the order doesn’t overturn any of the pro-abortion language in the bill, and courts will enforce a bill over an executive order. …

He’s totally against federal funding for the slaughter of unborn babies.  Unless his district can get some new goodies, in which case, what’s a few more fetal carcasses, right?  Good luck selling that one at the Pearly Gates, Stupork.

The National Right to Life Committee argued that seven objectionable pro-abortion provisions in the Senate bill are unchanged.

“The executive order promised by President Obama was issued for political effect. It changes nothing. It does not correct any of the serious pro-abortion provisions in the bill. The president cannot amend a bill by issuing an order, and the federal courts will enforce what the law says,” the group said.

Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund President Marjorie Dannenfelser said the group was revoking its “Defender of Life” award to Stupak, which was to be awarded at its Wednesday night gala.

“We were planning to honor Congressman Stupak for his efforts to keep abortion-funding out of health care reform. We will no longer be doing so,” Dannenfelser said. “Let me be clear: any representative, including Rep. Stupak, who votes for this health care bill can no longer call themselves ‘pro-life.’” 

And for what?  For assurances from the Senate and from B.O. that his anti-abortion language will appear at a later time, yet to be determined?

Here’s the thing, though: Stupak intended on making sure ObamaCare would pass, even if his abortion concerns weren’t settled.  Video proof is here, from a town hall last year with Stupunk.  He says he wants abortion funding prohibited, but he won’t stop the bill from passing.  So if he winds up voting “No”, it’s only because Queen Nancy released him to vote that way, since she browbeat enough Dems into submitting and supporting their pyrrhic bill.

There is no such thing as a principled pro-life Democrat.  Stupuke just proved it.  When push comes to shove, these people are Democrats first, and everything else second.

Today is the feast of St. Joseph the Worker, particularly important to Italian-Americans. It’s a day where we remember and pray to St. Joseph to benefit the workers of America, and that’s exactly what our health-care bill will do. … Every order that you can think of was there [on a list of endorsements], saying they wanted us to pass this life-affirming legislation.

I’m sure God will be pleased, no?  For those of you on the left, that was a sarcastic and rhetorical question.

Authorities say a 37-year-old Los Angeles man has been arrested on suspicion of murder for the death of an unborn child believed to be his.

Police said in a press release that Joshua Woodward was arrested Sunday in Los Angeles and is being held on $2 million bail in a county jail.

Police say the arrest came after an investigation on Monday revealed “suspicious circumstances of a miscarriage.” Investigators estimate the fetus was in its 13th week.

Police released no information on the mother or the circumstances of the child’s death.

The release says Woodward is believed to have ties to Miami and Chicago and detectives are also seeking information in those cities.

Investigators are set to present the case to prosecutors on Tuesday.

A deputy at the jail had no information on an attorney for Woodward.

Just to recap:

When a mother wants to be rid of her unborn child, it’s not muder…it’s a “health care procedure”, and one that Pelosi and Co. want to federally fund.

When a man wants to be rid of his unborn child, it’s murder…and a heinous one, too.

When a woman kills her unborn child, it’s not a “child”, but a fetus.

When a man kills his unborn child, it’s not a fetus, but a “child”.

God help us.

I’m leaning towards the latter.

“These are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation: that is, that we look out for one another; that is, I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper. And in the wealthiest nation in the world right now we are neglecting to live up to that call.”

Really?  You mean like you take care of this brother, i.e. your actual brother?

I’ll bet he begs to differ.

Another whopper from Oprompter:

A reader points out that President Obama’s call with the rabbis today — as recorded in Rabbi Jack Moline’s and other clerics‘ Twitter feeds — freights health care reform with a great deal of religious meaning, and veers into the blend of policy and faith that outraged liberals in the last administration.

“We are God’s partners in matters of life and death,” Obama said, according to Moline (paging Sarah Palin…), quoting from the Rosh Hashanah prayer that says that in the holiday period, it is decided “who shall live and who shall die.”

Yeah, if you can just get past that whole “commitment to allow the unfettered slaughter of the unborn” thingy, he’s a virtual champion of life, no?

The baby who survived the abortion in the Chicago hospital only to die later from a lack of medical care (a vote that Obama cast against said baby) was unavailable for comment.

Ahmanutjob says he won the Iranian “election”.  We know it was rigged.  Pro-reform students say they’re screwed if Obama accepts the tainted election results that confirm Ahmanutjob’s victory.  Obama says “Hey, sucks for you, reformers!” by legitimizing vote fraud, like his mentor Jimmy “the Dhimmi” Carter would do.  Of course, considering his deep ties to ACORN, this should come as no surprise.

Oprompter fires an Inspector General who was investigating an Uhhh-bama ally, a move that should have generated tons of outrage due to its reeking of Chicago-style corruption and cronyism.  Firing an I.G. is rare, even more so than, oh, firing U.S. Attorneys who serve at the pleasure of the president.  Yet for some really weird reason, the left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy) made a lot of noise over the latter scenario when a Republican administration did it.  But nope…no liberal media bias!

Here is an outstanding column on the left’s and the MSM’s (it’s a redundant Monday, what can I say?) efforts to link abortionist George Tiller’s murderer to us pro-lifers.  I just want to know: Why is it “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale” to play “guilt by association” with Obama and guys he actually DID personally know and associate with (Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Farrakahn), but it’s totally acceptable to play “guilt by association” with von Brunn and millions of people he didn’t know or who didn’t know him?  Nope…no liberal media bias!

By the way, since the MSM is telling us that Sotomayor’s compelling story (born poor, raised poor, life as a minority, overcomes all to be a federal judge) is reason enough for America to love her and to put her on the court, I do have to ask: where was the MSM when this same story manifested itself in Clarence Thomas and Miguel Estrada?  Nope…no liberal media bias!

Some wingnut psycho murdered an abortion doctor in Kansas.  Predictably, the MSM chooses to make this nutjob the face of principled anti-infanticide folks like me.  I don’t know how many different ways we can cite “Thou shalt not murder” to show where we stand on murder, both babies and abortion doctors.  If this nutbar were a true Christian (who wasn’t deranged, that is), he would be aware of both the aforementioned commandment, as well as Romans 12:19: “Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY,” says the Lord.”

B.O. offers his “personal commitment” to Muslims.  Yeah, I bet.

As we leave May and head into June, New York gets a big dose of global “warming”, AKA a freeze watch.

For once, I agree with the Russkies, and they would know first hand about this: “American capitalism gone with a whimper.”  The column is excellent, however critical (though largely accurate) it may be of American society.

Not content with being the inspiration for a word that reflects journalistic malfeasance, NYT leftist columnist Maureen Dowd decided to further erode what shreds of credibility she had remaining by plagiarizing a lefty blog.  This, of course, qualifies her to be vice-president now.

While Nancy Peliar is going down quicker than Monica Lewinsky in her presidential kneepads over her lies regarding what she knew about torture/waterboarding, she does the predictable: she blames Bush.  Alas, Leon Panetta (THAT Leon Panetta?) throws her under the bus on that one, too.  So what does the White House have to say on the matter?  “Present.“

Dick Cheney says that Obama is a threat to national security.  Gore slams Cheney for the comments, saying that he at least waited two years before accusing Bush of “betraying the country” and “playing on our fears.”  There’s a problem with the Goreacle’s comments, though: he’s lying through his teeth.  “Two years” apparently means “a little less than one year, several times.”  His lies were easy to verify via a cursory search on the Internet, which led Adam White to quip: “I’ve turned Al Gore’s own creation against him.”  

Bubba recently said that Dick Cheney should avoid criticizing Oprompter, because “I do hope he gets some target practice before he goes out again.”  Someone please tell me that a man who had a little “shooting” trouble of his own around a certain blue dress is not critiquing anyone’s aim!