Under fire, Obama adjusts his birth control policy

         
     President Obama decided to do an about face with his decision on forcing the Religious groups in providing coverage for contraception.    I do not believe the President was really thinking about the consequence of his actions and after consulting with his campaign people thought that he better change course and reverse his action.


By BEN FELLER

WASHINGTON (AP) - Under fierce election-year fire, President Barack Obama on Friday abruptly abandoned his stand that religious organizations must pay for birth control for workers, scrambling to end a furor raging from the Catholic Church to Congress to his re-election foes. He demanded that insurance 
companies step in to provide the coverage instead.

Obama's compromise means ultimately that women would still get birth control without having to pay for it, no matter where they work. The president insisted he had stuck by that driving principle even in switching his approach, and the White House vehemently rejected any characterization that Obama had retreated under pressure.

Yet there was no doubt that Obama had found himself in an untenable position. He needed to walk back fast and find another route to his goal.
The controversy over contraception and religious liberty was overshadowing his agenda, threatening to alienate key voters and giving ammunition to the Republicans running for his job. It was a mess that knocked the White House off its message and vision for a second term.

Leaders from opposite sides of the divisive debate said they supported the outcome - or at least suggested they probably could live with it. Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of New York, the head of the nation's Roman Catholic bishops and a fierce critic of the original rule covering hospitals and other employers, said the bishops were reserving judgment but that Obama's move was a good first step.

At least one Republican who is hoping to oust Obama from the White House was conceding nothing. Though not mentioning the birth control issue, Newt Gingrich assailed the president's views of religious rights and said "I frankly don't care what deal he tries to cut. ... If he wins re-election, he will wage war on the Catholic Church the morning after he's re-elected."
Obama, acknowledging he wanted a resolution to the controversy, ordered advisers to find a middle ground in days, not within a year as had been the plan before the uproar. He said he spoke as a Christian who cherishes religious freedom and as a president unwilling to give up on free contraceptive care.

"I've been confident from the start that we could work out a sensible approach here, just as I promised," Obama said. "I understand some folks in Washington may want to treat this as another political wedge issue, but it shouldn't be. I certainly never saw it that way."
Under the new plan, religious employers such as charities, universities and hospitals will not have to offer contraception and will not have to refer their employees to places that provide it. If an employer opts out of the requirement, its insurance company must provide birth control for free in a separate arrangement with workers who want it.

"Very pleased," was how Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, reacted in a statement distributed by the White House. Her trade group represents Catholic hospitals that had fought against the birth control requirement, and Keehan said the new arrangement addresses the concerns it had.
In searching for a way out of the crisis, Obama also had to mindful not to anger many women and fellow Democrats.

Planned Parenthood, a prominent women's health organization, said Obama had reaffirmed his commitment to birth control coverage. The group's president, Cecile Richards, added, though, that it would be monitoring for "rigorous, fair and consistent" enforcement so women get the promised coverage.
Before announcing his decision to reporters, Obama telephoned Keehan, Richards and Dolan.
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, where Gingrich made his comments, many said the White House rewrite did not change anything.
"It's an accounting trick," said Mike Gonzales of the Heritage Foundation. "Do they think people are stupid?"

The debate within the White House was intense even before the Jan. 20 decision was announced to exempt only churches and other houses of worships from the requirement that employers must cover free contraception. Other religious organizations were given an extra year to comply, but that concession didn't do enough.

First in a rumble, and then in a roar, critics formed a movement to overturn what they considered to be an egregious violation. Bishops assailed the policy in Sunday Masses and Republican leaders in Congress pledged to push a legislative repeal.
The White House seemed to be caught flatfooted.

"The past three weeks have witnessed a remarkable unity of Americans from all religions, or none at all, worried about the erosion of religious freedom and government intrusion into issues of faith and morals," said Dolan, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The turmoil, in turn, prompted advocates from other sides to get vocal in the battle for public opinion. They defended the rights of women and the need for preventive health care, including contraception, to be provided without fee for people of all faiths, no matter where they work.

Billions Of Barrels Of Untapped U.S. Oil

Bakken Oil Field

Billions Of Barrels Of Untapped U.S. Oil

 

The Clock is ticking and Iran appears to still challenge the United States warships in the area of the Strait of Hormuz.  

Should Iran attempt in any fashion to block the Strait, they(Ahmadinejad) will be making a serious miscalculation that the United States will do nothing and allow the Iranians to block the Strait.

I want to believe the Mad Dog Ahmadinejad will back off his threats to block the Strait, however he is just stupid enough to believe that he could pull off blocking the strait. If he does, he is letting his pride get in the way of his better judgment.  He must know that if the United States wanted to, the Naval Forces would turn their little boats into a scrap heap, and literally litter the bottom of the Strait with the remains of their ships and turn their crew into fish food.

That is the plain unadulterated truth. However if Ahmadinejad must know for sure, then sir, do what you must, however it will be in vain, and you will lose, that too is also the truth.  If you so truly believe that what I say is not true, then you as the alleged commander in chief, climb aboard one of your warships and lead the charge sir and attack.

For several reasons, the risk of an open conflict with Ahmadinejad seems to be higher for some reason in this election year than at any point since the anointed one a took office with a PLEDGE to try to BRIDGE 30 years of hostility.  A clash would represent a failure of Obama's U.S. policy on several fronts, and vault now-dormant national security concerns into the presidential election contest. In short, Obama has no idea concerning foreign policy.

 

The U.S. still hopes that international pressure will persuade Iran to back down on its disputed nuclear program, but the Islamic regime shows no sign it would willingly give up a project has become a point of national pride. A bomb, or the ability to quickly make one, could also be worth much more to Iran as a bargaining chip down the road.

The United States may not of  had to deal as much with the threats of Ahmadinejad threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz if we had only accepted the Keystone Pipeline and if Obama would have pushed forward an initiative to explore the opening the Bakkens; but no, no we just might kill a jack rabbit or two, or we just might harm the environment in some manner.  OBAMA  and  CONGRESS  and  would have made attempts to open the Bakken oil reserve.

In A landmark paper by Dow and a companion paper by Williams (1974) recognized the Bakken formation as a major source for the oil produced in the Williston Basin. however SNOPES says now the the amount is far less than first indicated. Now Snopes HAS A very LEFT WING slant to it, so I do not give it much credibility. Regardless, their is no doubt enough oil in the ground to off sent oil from the middle east or Venezuela.

Supreme Court Ban on Warrantless GPS Tracking Has Wider Implications

2012 High Court

Supreme Court Bans GPS By TexasBrady
 

For those of you who are currently in currently in Law Enforcement, the Supreme Court now says you had better develop your probable cause, because the High Court said in a unanimous decision that you MUST secure a search warrant before you can attach any GPS tracking device, and yes it includes the sneaky way of tossing a cell phone underneath the seat of your target vehicle. Being a Police Officer (Ret), I could see this coming.

What does this mean for your local Police, not much really, other than they will really have to develop some air tight probable cause, better known in police jargon as PC.  Building PC can some time get a little complicated, especially if your case is weak in the first place.  The judge wants you to sell him that you have a solid case and convince him that you are not just going on a fishing expedition.
If the judge signs it, turn around and run before he changes his mind.  Once signed the Officer(s) have a limited time to execute the warrant, In Texas you have three days to execute the search warrant, excluding the day of issuance and the day of execution.

How do the police determine if he needs a search warrant? Basically you need a warrant to enter any home, property, and vehicle(s), out buildings on the property so on and so forth. You may also need to obtain a warrant to secure bodily fluids, hair fingerprints. If your warrant is evidentiary in nature, the warrant must be signed by a court of record.

Bridge Comes to San Francisco With a Made-in-China Label

It is simply amazing that a State as California that is drowning in unemployment could not find a company that would compete with China. It does not surprise me in the least as California is a liberal state, that more than likely made the decision to let China build the in between puffs of marijuana.

Why do I say that, because that is the only way it makes any sense to me in the first place..(Puff…pufffff ah….ok dude just let China build the bridge man..puff puff..) It is your State you gotta live there, not me….as far as I care, name it after somebody famous from China. It is a sad day that California could not find or would not find a USA company to build that bridge..

At a sprawling manufacturing complex here, hundreds of Chinese laborers are now completing work on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Next month, the last four of more than two dozen giant steel modules — each with a roadbed segment about half the size of a football field — will be loaded onto a huge ship and transported 6,500 miles to Oakland.  There, they will be assembled to fit into the eastern span of the new Bay Bridge.

The project is part of China’s continual move up the global economic value chain — from cheap toys to Apple iPads to commercial jetliners — as it aims to become the world’s civil engineer. The assembly work in California, and the pouring of the concrete road surface, will be done by Americans. But construction of the bridge decks and the materials that went into them are a Made in China affair. California officials say the state saved hundreds of millions of dollars by turning to China.

“They’ve produced a pretty impressive bridge for us,” Tony Anziano, a program manager at the California Department of Transportation, said a few weeks ago. He was touring the 1.2-square-mile manufacturing site that the Chinese company created to do the bridge work. “Four years ago, there were just steel plates here and lots of orange groves.”