Ryan's War

Perhaps the end is finally near. Yes, yes, I know you've been seeing that here since last week. But now, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) is signaling that an end to the Armageddon death threat is in sight.

Yet even with the encouraging signs from the Senate, President Obama is still warning the nation of the consequences of allowing Armageddon to commence. Perhaps he just wants to drive home the point in case the House G-O-TEA Crazy Caucus tries to force Republican "leaders" to derail any last-minute budget deal.

Of course, it doesn't help that the G-O-TEA Crazy Caucus is getting a boost from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-"TEA" Curious). Over the weekend, he threatened to blow up any budget deal if it doesn't deny women access to contraception. Oh, yes. That's right. He went there.

Salon's Joan Walsh noticed this... And she noted what we had discussed earlier on how this melee must be resolved.

Ryan, who was savaged by some on the right last week for seeming to trade the goal of repealing Obamacare in exchange for Obama embracing most of the infamous Ryan budget, is now back to Obamacare. In fact, he’s insisting the House GOP shouldn’t back any deal that opens the government or extends the debt ceiling deadline without major changes to the Affordable Care Act, including letting employers withhold birth-control coverage from insurance plans for religious reasons.

Get it? They’re back to their crusade against birth control access. If that doesn’t define delusional, I’m not sure what does. [...]

Now Ryan is really, really angry at Senate Republicans,according to NRO’s Jonathan Strong, and he’s going to take his ball and go home. “They’re trying to cut the House out, and trying to jam us with the Senate. We’re not going to roll over and take that,” Ryan told reporters on Saturday.

The only way this ends is the only way it ever was going to end: with House Speaker John Boehner, having let extremist GOP babies cry themselves out, finally passing a deal with the support of Democrats. And he shouldn’t count on them being the Democrats who approved the debt-ceiling “deal” that ultimately imposed sequester cuts, or the fiscal-cliff deal that compromised on tax rates and kicked those cuts down the road. On both the Senate and House side – where Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi openly frets that Democrats have “been enablers” of the “irresponsible” GOP – there’s a new tone of toughness. Let’s hope it holds.

They just couldn't help themselves. They had to go there. They just had an urge to slip another Culture War battle into the Shutdown Shitfest that they started.

Did they really think they could get away with this? Does Paul Ryan truly believe he has some special license to subject his extremist agenda on the nation, an extremist agenda that most Americans rejected last year?

We've said it before, but we'll have to say it again today: Contraception saves lives. And if Paul Ryan was serious about pursuing "pro-life" policies, he'd admit this.

While the G-O-TEA culture warriors may be thrilled about the prospect of another battle in their War on Women, everyone else just wants an end to both the Armageddon death threats and the nonsensical attacks on women's health care.

Guess what Americans now consider to be the nation's biggest problem? Hint: It's not contraception. It's also not abortion. And it isn't even women making their own health care decisions. Nope, it's actually government dysfunction (according to Gallup). So instead of threatening to force Armageddon upon America if we don't force more women into unwanted pregnancies, why can't Paul Ryan and his fellow Republicans agree to solve America's actual biggest problem?

The War on Women... That Dean Heller Doesn't Want You to See.

After reading Karoun Demirjian's Sun article on the impact Rush Limbaugh may be having on Nevada's US Senate race, one gets the sense that Shelley Berkley is just "desperate to manufacture controversy". We've heard plenty from reporters and pundits on the political games supposedly being played in "Limbaugh-gate". However, we're still not hearing enough about the actual policies being debated in Congress.

Thankfully, Nevada's own Desert Beacon has been able to cut through the spin and deliver the real story here.

When the Obama Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services proposed that basic health care insurance policy coverage would include contraceptive prescriptions the issue was drawn into focus. The compromise position was adopted saying that no religious institution which did not tolerate views accepting of contraception would be required to offer such coverage — but, health insurance corporations would be required to offer the coverage to those wishing such provisions.

Unfortunately for the improvement of our national political dialogue, the level of mis-information soon out shouted the level of accurate commentary. Opponents of comprehensive health care reform (health insurance corporations) have treated us to a barrage of fact-free statements like, “This is taxpayer funded contraception…,” which, of course, it isn’t. Twisting the logic to say that a coverage requirement for basic policies is tantamount to a taxpayer subsidization of contraceptives necessitates mental gymnastics comparable to the contortions of Cirque du Soliel.

A Gordian Knot of similar proportions is also required to frame this issue in terms of religious freedom. The concept of religious freedom as contemplated in an American context requires the accommodation of varying religious precepts, NOT the acquiescence to the precepts of any single institution. If the views of the Catholic Bishops had prevailed, then what we would have experienced was the antithesis of religious freedom, i.e. one group imposing its views on all the rest. The American public seems to sense this.

This is why I was irritated when I saw Jon Ralston give credence to the radical right's meme of "ObamaCare attacks religious liberty!!!!!!!" Just because Erick Erickson's and Rush Limbaugh's lies about women's health care are being repeated by Dean Heller doesn't make them true. And just because Shelley Berkley is making this into a campaign issue doesn't negate the fact that Republicans keep proposing legislation to restrict women's access to needed health care.

Funny enough, a REPUBLICAN state legislator in New York actually summed up what's at stake quite well.



And so did a G-O-TEA Representative from Pennsylvania, albeit from a different angle.



Never mind that...

The “financial” logic is sound. A study from 2000 estimated that it costs employers 15 to 17 percent more to not provide contraceptive coverage to employees than it would if the insurance coverage included the benefit. This higher spending accounts for the direct medical costs of a pregnancy and indirect expenses like employee absence and reduced productivity.

So is this "the new normal" that we're supposed to embrace and the media are supposed to provide with "fair and balanced" coverage? So the G-O-TEA wants to reduce women to baby-making machines that are "malfunctioning" if they're doing anything other than serving their men while barefoot and pregnant at home?

So are we supposed to ignore REPUBLICAN women running away from the Blunt Amendment and the G-O-TEA effort to criminalize anything and everything other than heterosexual procreative "missionary" sex (except when their own members are "dabbling" in it)?

Last night, Rachel Maddow actually put this whole matter into proper perspective.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I know that not everyone gets excited about discussing the details of contraception and reproductive health care policy, and I suspect that's why many in the media have been more than happy to reduce this discussion to "just another partisan mud fight"... But it's not. Ralston may not like the Berkley campaign comparing Dean Heller to Rush Limbaugh, but the fact of the matter is that Dean Heller voted exactly how Rush Limbaugh wanted him to vote in supporting the Blunt Amendment to restrict women's health care access. And if Heller doesn't like the political repercussions of this, he only has himself to blame.

Here Are the Women.

Ever since Rush Limbaugh started attacking American women for using contraceptives, there's been an intense firestorm over not just women's reproductive rights, but also more basic issues of where women stand in America today. Last night, Nevada's own Harry Reid discussed this with Lawrence O'Donnell on his MSNBC show.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

“Even in the Rush Limbaugh world, there’s certain things you can’t say. And what brought his attention to this is lots and lots of sponsors of his program said, no more, you’ve gone too far,” Reid said in an exclusive interview with MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell. “Rush Limbaugh, each day that goes by, is becoming less credible with the American people.”

Rush Limbaugh offered another half-ish apology to Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student he called a “slut” and a “prostitute” on his show last week. She spoke before a congressional hearing in support of health insurance policies covering birth control, which riled up the conservative radio show host.

“We cannot have something like this take place, that’s embarrassing to our country. It’s embarrassing to the Congress to have a woman who had something to say — she was invited to testify and was disinvited by an all-male group of people,” said Reid, a frequent political target of Limbaugh. “You can’t do that to women in America anymore.” [...]

“Women are entitled for contraception, so their contraceptives of their choice. That’s what this was all about,” Reid told O’Donnell. “We should never run into the firestorm that we did, that people calling this fine woman, by all means.”

For the past three weeks, we've been hearing plenty from certain G-O-TEA men about what women are supposed to be doing with their bodies. But now, the women (and Democrats) are fighting back.

“No one had any clue that Sen. Blunt would be offering this amendment or that any of this debate would be unfolding,” Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) (pictured above) told TPM Friday. Baldwin is one of a group of women senators and challengers set to barnstorm several western states this week to raise money and awareness for Democrats.

There are more women running for Senate this year than there were in 1992 — the so-called “Year of the Woman” — Baldwin noted, and she suggested that will put Democrats in a good position this fall.

“You can hazard your own guess: Is it a coincidence?” Baldwin said of the number of women running. “Maybe it’s not a coincidence that there are a lot of women running and we feel as though there are so many economic issues that impact women that are being fought right now.”

The western tour had been planned for weeks before Blunt’s amendment and Limbaugh’s attack on Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke overtook the national debate. The group is ready to take advantage of the fortuitous timing.

“I would certainly say that, for example, when you have a panel on women’s health that’s all men called to testify, it does show that a lot of the folks in charge today are out of touch and just don’t get it,” Baldwin said. “I think we’ll probably draw some attention to that.”

Of course, one of the women that the DSCC is highlighting happens to be none other than Nevada's own Shelley Berkley. Now that Dean Heller is on record opposing women's access to contraception, Berkley is reminding us of what he just voted for.

So what did he vote for? Simply put, Dean Heller voted to allow employers to deny insurance coverage of any kind of preventive health care due to "moral objections". And of course, the one type of preventive health care getting the most attention here has been contraception. Contraception is not just important preventive health care for women, but it's also beneficial to our economy. Yet for some reason, we don't often hear that from the likes of Dean Heller. Nope, it seems like we've just been hearing plenty of lies and misperceptions.



Even some Republican women seem to be backing away from Rush Limbaugh and the Blunt Amendment. It just goes to show how extreme the G-O-TEA has gone in its embrace of Rush Limbaugh and the "CUL'CHUR WARZZZ!!!" against America's women.

It's starting to look like the women are not going to take it any more.

Remember This: Dean Heller Joined the G-O-TEA's War on Women

Remember this.

And remember this.



And remember this.

Unperturbed after Senate Democrats blocked their effort to let employer health plans refuse to cover birth control and other preventive services, Republican leaders are vowing to keep up the fight after the vote. And Democrats are more than happy to let them — all the way up until the November elections.

“This fight is not over,” said Senate GOP Conference Vice Chair Roy Blunt (R-MO), the author of the amendment that was tabled 51-48 on Thursday. “I will continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers of Congress to protect the rights that make our nation great.”

Though many Republicans would like to give the issue a rest, fearing voter backlash, the GOP can’t easily soft-peddle in this culture war conflagration. And that was clear today on both sides of the Capitol. [...]

The close Senate vote reflects a strong GOP effort to contain the political consequences of pushing the controversial amendment before the public had a chance to weigh in. After a concerted whip effort, only one Republican — Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) — defected. All other waffling GOPers, including Scott Brown (MA), Susan Collins (ME), and Dean Heller (NV) fell into line. Indeed more Democrats (three in total) crossed the aisle to vote for the Blunt amendment than vice versa. But there’s a good reason Dem leaders pushed anyway: on issues like contraception, they’re confident they’ll win the broader battle for public perception.

“Once again, Republicans have proposed a sweeping overreach into the lives, and health, of America’s women,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), calling the Blunt measure an “extreme amendment to a completely unrelated bill that would allow an employer or insurance company to claim a vague ‘moral conviction’ as an excuse to deny women health care coverage.”

There’s a reason Dems are confident: 63 percent of American adults support Obama’s contraception mandate, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll.

Dean Heller has joined the G-O-TEA in its "CUL'CHUR WARZZZ!!!" (or is it now a "crusade"?) against America's women.



Just remember this next time Dean Heller tries to tell you he's "moderate" and "cares about Nevada's women".



Lame. And total GOP FAIL.

Will Dean Heller Join the G-O-TEA's War on Women?

Jon Ralston reported on Twitter early this morning that Senator Dean Heller (R-Tea Party) is leaning toward voting for the Blunt Amendment. OK, so why should we care? Here's why.

Under the measure, an insurer or an employer would be able to claim a moral or religious objection to covering HIV/AIDS screenings, Type 2 Diabetes treatments, cancer tests or anything else they deem inappropriate or the result of an “unhealthy” or “immoral” lifestyle. Similarly, a health plan could refuse to cover mental health care on the grounds that the plan believes that psychiatric problems should be treated with prayer.

Individuals too can opt out of coverage if it is contrary to their religious or moral beliefs, radically undermining “the basic principle of insurance, which involves pooling the risks for all possible medical needs of all enrollees.” As the National Women’s Law Center explains, Blunt’s language is vague enough that “insurers may be able to sell plans that do not cover services required by the new health care law to an entire market because one individual objects, so all consumers in a market lose their right to coverage of the full range of critical health services.” As a result, a man “purchasing an insurance plan offered to women and men could object to maternity coverage, so the plan would not have to cover it, even though such coverage is required as part of the essential health benefits.”

And of course, all this madness started with the G-O-TEA's urge to crawl into women's pants to probe their private parts. YUCK!



Even a few Senate Republicans, like the retiring Olympia Snowe (R-ME), think this goes way too far.



67% of Americans oppose anti-woman legislation like the Blunt Amendment, and health care policy experts have warned about the major risks of restricting access to all kinds of necessary preventive care because of vague "moral" objections. So why are Congressional Republicans so eager to vote on this crap?

So far, it seems like Dean Heller wants to join his BFF Mitt Romney in playing both sides of this issue and pandering to the radical "tea party" right while still looking vaguely "moderate".



I guess he's afraid that his other BFF, Joe Heck, was perhaps a little too blunt on Blunt.



I guess we'll have to wait and see if Heller tries to claim "this has nothing to do with women's health issues". Joe Heck already proved how radically out of touch he is with Nevada women. Will Dean Heller show the same?

(By the way, now's a great time to sign PLAN's petition to Heller and Senator Reid to ask them to oppose the Blunt Amendment and stop the attack on women's health care.)