The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The @AmandaMarcotte Birth Control ObamaCare Fear-Mongering Crusade

Posted on | March 24, 2014 | 36 Comments

Donald Douglas points out that everyone’s favorite baby-killing enthusiast has found a new focus for her feminist lunatic rage, namely a pending Supreme Court case about the ObamaCare mandate that insurers must provide free contraceptive coverage.

Before addressing Amanda Marcotte’s irrational claims directly, let me ask: Does anyone else remember the Iraq War military draft conspiracy theories spread by the Left during the Bush administration?

One of the dirty little secrets of the Bush-era antiwar movement was how the Left cynically exploited the vast ignorance of American youth to foment antiwar sentiment on college campuses: The 9/11 “Truthers” were the most gaudy example of this, but there was also the claim that the Iraq invasion was a “War for Oil” conspiracy to enrich Halliburton and fatten U.S. oil company profits, and arguably the antiwar Left’s most blatant lie was that neocons in the Bush administration were secretly plotting to reinstitute the military draft. It wasn’t just crackpots at the Daily Kos promoting this, either. Howard Dean said it in a 2004 speech at Brown University: “I think that George Bush is certainly going to have a draft if he goes into a second term, and any young person who doesn’t want to go to Iraq might think twice about voting for him.”

This kind of irresponsible fear-mongering builds on the mythmaking success of the academic Left and the liberal media. Nobody under age 50 remembers that it was a Republican, Richard Nixon, who ended the military draft on the advice of free-market economist Milton Friedman, nor have the young ever been told how Democrats branded Ronald Reagan a warmonger who would lead us to nuclear Armageddon, when in point of fact, it was Reagan who successfully negotiated the elimination of nuclear weapons and ultimately ended the Cold War.

Because young people are not taught about the long and sordid history of Democrat dishonesty, each new liberal lie is enthusiastically embraced by college kids who think it is always the “smart” thing to believe the worst about Republicans.

Thus we return to Amanda Marcotte, who sees the Hobby Lobby case as the first step toward a theocratic “breeder” dystopia:

Well, I have a theory and it’s that this case is about more than just getting the contraception mandate overturned or giving your boss rights to force you to abide by his religious dogma by manipulating your compensation package, though those are also important agenda items for the right. This case is also about manipulating the media, specifically to warm the mainstream media up to the idea that contraception is “controversial” . . . The idea is to get the mainstream media sources to say, “One side says birth control is abortion” over and over and over and over again, until the idea “birth control=abortion” is considered a normal one in American culture. And since abortion is controversial, then, they hope, they can make contraception controversial, too. Once contraception is “controversial” like abortion is, then it’s a hop, skip and a jump away to convincing Republicans it’s politically safe now to start passing laws restricting access to it.

This is one of those ideas that are so crazy only a feminist could possibly believe it. Not even the most devout Catholic or fervent evangelical “Dominionist” can really envision a scenario whereby laws “restricting access” to contraception would be enacted by Republicans or anyone else, even in the most conservative states. Like the deliberately false fearmongering about a return to the military draft 10 years ago, Marcotte and others on the Left are now trying to confuse women, to make them believe that if they vote Republican, the Pill and condoms will soon be outlawed. Witness how Amanda Marcotte begins her discussion of the pending Supreme Court case:

Arguments start this week for Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court case that will determine the fate of the contraception mandate put forth by the Department of Health and Human Services after the Affordable Care Act was passed into law. The contraception mandate is part of a larger mandate by the ACA to classify dozens of medical services, like wellness checks and vaccinations, as “preventive” care, which would then require insurance plans to cover them without a copay. The idea is that this will both make health insurance work better for enrollees and save money overall by encouraging prevention. Contraception was included after the Institute of Medicine recommended it for its well-known effects of preventing unwanted pregnancy, and thereby preventing unplanned child-bearing and abortion.

What this case is actually about (no matter what Amanda Marcotte or anyone else tries to tell you) is the attempt by Democrats to dictate the type of health insurance employers must provide. Everyone who isn’t on the payroll of the White House or the DNC agrees by now that ObamaCare is an unworkable scheme, a policy catastrophe that proves the truth of every criticism of central government planning ever made by Mises, Hayek, Friedman and Sowell.

Marcotte refuses to admit that ObamaCare is actually anti-choice, in the economic sense, as the various mandates limit the options of workers and employers in terms of the health insurance options available to them. ObamaCare requires employers to provide comprehensive coverage of contraception with no copay, that is to say, health insurance must cover 100% of the cost of contraceptives.

Well, why?

Marcotte and other Democrats endeavor to frame the argument in the euphemistic language of “women’s health,” but as always, it’s about the money, specifically about using the force of federal law to fund Planned Parenthood and to expand the influence of the radical population-control movement. It’s not about “health” (some forms of contraception involve serious health risks), and it’s not about “choice” (Hobby Lobby isn’t trying to prohibit contraception), it’s about control.

Amanda Marcotte wants Democrats in control of the federal government, and she wants the government in charge of everything.

Her ridiculous fear-mongering, which presents the Hobby Lobby case as the first stealthy step down a slippery slope to theocracy, is in fact the exact opposite of truth: Amanda Marcotte is an outspoken proponent of taxpayer-funded abortion, and one might more accurately see ObamaCare as moving in the direction of making “free” abortion a matter of compulsory federal law.

“Sex is about reproduction. This is the natural function of sex, biologically speaking, and it’s odd how the same liberal fanatics who enjoy endlessly lecturing us about Darwinism and global warming — ‘The science is settled!’ — are so unscientific about sex.”
Robert Stacy McCain, Oct. 23, 2013

Neither facts nor logic support Amanda Marcotte’s claims, which are actually rooted in emotional abnormality on her part, representing her bizarre pathological fear and hatred of babies: “I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”

 

 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • RKae

    I was in a basement artsy theatre a few years ago and they were advertising their upcoming production. I don’t recall the title, but it’s irrelevant, as it was just a locally-written piece of nonsense, and no one’s ever going to mount the thing again.

    But I remember the first line of the description: “It’s the mid-’80s and the human race stands on the brink of nuclear annihilation because of Ronald Reagan.” Mind you, this is a play written in the 2000s, but set in the 1980s. They’re still trying to wring dramatic tension out of a “nuclear annihilation” that never got around to happening.

  • RS

    This case is also about manipulating the media, specifically to warm the mainstream media up to the idea that contraception is “controversial”

    There is certainly a deliberate misstating of the case on the part of the Left. Evidently, Marcotte’s Reality, it’s not controversial to require someone to violate his own religious beliefs contrary to the First Amendment, so long as you get what you want. Not to mention the fact that all these “free” services are not, in fact, free. Alas Mandy is too stupid to understand the concept of “hidden costs,” probably because Econ 101 was not a requirement for her “Vexation Based Upon The Shape Of My Genitals” degree.

  • RKae

    “…liberal fanatics who enjoy endlessly lecturing us about Darwinism and global warming…”

    And don’t even get started on “transgenderism!” Talk about liberals thinking “nature doesn’t know what it’s doing and we have to fix it!”

  • robertstacymccain

    Econ 101 was not a requirement for her “Vexation Based Upon The Shape Of My Genitals” degree.

    Math, logic, biology — these are all tricks of the heteronormative patriarchy.

  • rodander

    So the argument is: you don’t want corporations deciding whether you get free contraceptives, you want the federal government deciding whether you get free contraceptives.

    The only way that makes sense is to surround it with so much pseudo-intellectual fog that the only thing that gets through to the low-information ward of the state is “free contraceptives”.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/ Adjoran

    Stacy has the hots for Mandy.

    Not only does he keep trying to get her attention like an 8 year old pulling on a girl’s pigtails, but he continues to use her high school prom picture.

    In reality, she looks like this now (2013):

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    In her book, It’s a Jungle Out There, Miss Marcotte was trying to push the meme that conservatives wanted to outlaw artificial contraception. The trouble is, there was no information at all that that was what conservatives were actually trying to do.

    So, she focused on a very small group called Quiverfull, which eschews contraception and urges that couples have large families. Here’s NPR’s story on them, which states that there are roughly 10,000 “Quiverfull” families in the United States; that’s not exactly a lot out of 315,000,000 people! Miss Marcotte’s sole evidence was the existence of this primarily conservative Protestant group (Quiverfull is not a denomination in itself), but she did the best with what she had.

    Contraception is widely available and very inexpensive in our country, but the Obama Administration’s policies would actually make it more expensive, not less, as I discussed here, by taking a drug that is commonly paid for in cash, and thus has competitive price pressures, and making it a full-coverage medication, complete with the associated billing costs.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    No pic showing.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana
  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    I’ll turn 61 next month, and my darling bride (of 34 years, 10 months and 5 days) is 54. Why should we be paying for contraceptive coverage when, even if we had used it previously, my wife is beyond the age at which pregnancy is a possibility for her?

    Amazing how Kathleen Sebelius and Amanda Marcotte think that they know so much about our family that they think we just have to have health insurance which provides birth control pills.

  • RS

    Marcotte forgets the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, which established a right to privacy for, inter alia, using contraception. How my private right suddenly becomes a mandate for everyone else is simple, logical step which eludes the intellectual titans of the Left.

  • Alan Markus

    Slightly off-topic, but it does have to do with universal health care and abortion:

    Aborted babies incinerated to heat UK hospitals
    The remains of more than 15,000 babies were incinerated as ‘clinical waste’ by hospitals in Britain with some used in ‘waste to energy’ plants

    But I guess to a liberal, it might be all good: plenty of abortions, government health care, cost-savings, and it’s “green-good-for-the-environment”.

  • Funeral guy

    What is it about Democratic feminist goose-stepping women? Amanda Marcotte could be Lois Lerners younger sister. That ugly set to the mouth, the cold shark eyes. They could both be in the remake of Ilsa, She-wolf of the SS.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    To be fair, she isn’t supporting requiring the use of contraception, but wants to require everybody to participate in the paying for of contraception; it’s the foot in the door attack on the Catholic Church.

    But, by the same logic, we ought to be able to require drug manufacturers to sell those drugs used for execution to the states which need them; does anyone think that Miss Marcotte would support that?

  • SouthCentralPA

    I am reminded of a poem from the early years of the Soviet Union (from Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago). Tanya Khodkevich got ten years for

    “You can pray freely
    But just so God alone can hear.”

    The same sentiments are expressed by the incumbent Administration every time they loudly profess their deep, undying commitment *cough* to “freedom of worship” as if somehow our religion must be kept within the walls of church and no-where else …

  • Rob Crawford

    She was attacked by the kraken! Some nasty sucker-scarring on her arm…

  • http://deadrepublicanparty.wordpress.com/ rmnixondeceased

    Of course we were not given the Freedom of Worship in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. The 1st Amendment recognized the endowed right to Freedom of Religion, a wholly different thing than what the Obama Administration calls for and supports.

  • RS

    Jeff Goldstein continually writes about the corruption of language, and you point to one of the most glaring examples. It is no accident that the Left has changed it from “Free Exercise of Religion” to “Freedom of Worship.” This change is by design with the purpose to indoctrinate the younger generations to believe that Religion is something only practiced on Sundays and then, in a specific location. Such semantic tricks are ubiquitous anytime there’s a discussion about unalienable God-given rights.

  • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

    “The contraception mandate is part of a larger mandate by the ACA to
    classify dozens of medical services, like wellness checks and
    vaccinations, as “preventive” care, which would then require insurance
    plans to cover them without a copay.”

    Ms. Marcotte should ask her 2 dozen cats to read the PPACA and see if they can find the contraception, abortifacient, and sterilization mandate within the text. Regardless of whether cats can’t actually read, they have done as well as Excitable Amanda, as the PPACA has no requirement. In fact, this “mandate” was created by Team Obama.

    PS: Amanda sounds rather #Bossy

  • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

    Thanks. No dinner for me now.

  • jakee308

    That face of hers should be as good as a vasectomy in regards to the lessening of sperm production.

    Of course ED is a side effect.

  • Pingback: Aborted babies burned to heat hospitals in the UK | Batshit Crazy News

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady
  • MattRoss

    I can really see her in a SS uniform; directing new arrivals to the “showers.”

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Sarah had a baby at 80. Of course, she was trying to get pregnant.

  • Quartermaster

    She’s actually not bad looking. That’s another facet of her sad feminism. She could have a decent life, but has rejected it for voluntary spinsterhood and dying alone.

  • Quartermaster

    #Bossy? I denounce you!

  • Quartermaster

    They do that with rights that are inconvenient to them. They’ve been trying that with the 2nd amendment for years.

  • jakee308

    Makeup’s a magical thing.

    Anyone, ANYONE can look attractive with a good makeup job.

    I’m talking about the features of her face and the look in the eyes and knowing what goes on in that head.

  • http://www.journal14.com/ Dana

    I thought that she was 90, but, regardless of that, if the Lord decides that we should have a child at our ages, who are we to say no?

  • DavidD

    ” ‘I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.’ ”

    The woman has no self-awareness. What if her mother had felt the same way?

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Is that lipstick or baby gravy on her mouth?

  • bridget

    Why should the Left mandate that my compensation package include contraception that I don’t use?

  • sarah wells

    Please remember that “serious birth control risks” must always be calculated as relative risk to pregnancy and childbirth in a sexually active woman of child-bearing age, or to any condition prevented or treated with contraceptives in comparison with other alternatives.

    Birth control is about health. Pregnancy is risky, and in the most optimal of outcomes usually causes temporary disability and some injury even when the risk is happily accepted and the benefits (the boon of a healthy child) are overwhelmingly the desired choice. And when things go wrong, they can go very, very wrong.

    Women should make these decisions privately and with medical advice. No one objects to a nationalized entitlement health care delivery more than I do. I think people should pay for routine health care themselves, and if the government wants to encourage prudence it can shelter funds from other taxes for that purpose.

  • Pingback: Maniac Feminist @LauraLevites Unleashes Anti-Christian Hatred : The Other McCain

  • Pingback: Maniac Feminist @LauraLevites Unleashes Anti-Christian Hatred : The Other McCain