Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Cruising the Web

Mary Ann Glendon, who is often included on lists of possible nominees to the Supreme Court by Republican presidents, has an explanation of the principle behind the lawuit brought by Catholic organizations against the HHS mandate.
With this week's lawsuits, the bishops join a growing army of other plaintiffs around the country, Catholic and non-Catholic, who are asking the courts to repel an unprecedented governmental assault on the ability of religious persons and groups to practice their religion without being forced to violate their deepest moral convictions.

Religious freedom is subject to necessary limitations in the interests of public health and safety. The HHS regulations do not fall into that category. The world has gotten along fine without this mandate—the services in question are widely and cheaply available, and most employers will provide coverage for them.
That is why this is much more than what the Democrats want to portray it as - a battle against contraception; women can still get birth control. The question is whether religious organizations can be forced to pay for practices they regard as violations of their religion.

The law that is being used in these suits is one that liberal Democrats championed and passed with bipartisan support and was signed by Bill Clinton.

Tom Barrett can't seem to muster up a plan for what he'd do if he actually defeated Scott Walker in the recall election. All he has are vague wishes to "create jobs."

Is the best argument for keeping Joe Biden as Obama's vice president that he distracts ridicule away from Obama? How lame is that? And how true it is that the liberal media, which once praised Joe Biden's gaffes as endearing signs of how genuine he was, are now chiding him for hurting Obama's cause.

Though Jonathan Tobin argues that Obama will not dump Biden from the ticket because Obama's self-regard is so strong that he won't think that he needs Hillary's help. I agree. He'd never want a vice president who is regarded more positively than he is. Though I'm still not sure what she's done to earn that regard.

Heh, heh. Harold Ford says that Cory Booker shouldn't have backed off one jot from his comments that the Obama criticisms of Romney's work at Bain.

Of course, a guy who says this isn't a true Obamanian:
Booker compared what he himself needed to do after becoming mayor of his beleaguered New Jersey city with the tough love often practiced by private equity firms such as Bain. "This is not about what happened at Bain Capital. Heck, I've reduced the employees in my city 25% because it's the only way my government would survive. Call me a job-cutter, if you want."

Politico looks at four politicians and how they carried on after their political careers were destroyed after sex scandals.

Robert Samuelson argues that this election will be between competing visions of capitalism.
American capitalism is on trial. When Americans vote in November, they will unavoidably choose between these competing visions of capitalism. One would try to improve capitalism by controlling it more. The other would aim for faster economic growth by removing government obstacles. It’s a fateful debate.

Even David Brooks is dismayed by the Obama campaign. He just can't believe that the President isn't living up to the delusions that he had about Obama in 2008.

Oops. The NYT has to backtrack on calling capitalists psychopaths.

How Obama's administration works:
Obama administration officials may have pressured government contractors to change job loss estimates associated with coal regulations, audio recordings reveal.
Now that's Hope and Change.

Hey, are you ready for Alex Trebek to host the presidential debates? He couldn't do much worse than some of the journalists we've had this election.