Hobby Lobby 1 Obama The Abortionist 0

Hobby Lobby 1 Obama The Abortionist 0

Obama’s probably a little bummed that the Supreme Court overruled his Hobby Lobby contraception mandate. Sociopaths have a tendency to get a little angry when things don’t go their way. They do things, unspeakable things. So far, no leaked word yet from the White House of the unspeakable acts committed there within. His minions are, if anything, loyal. Plus, the people’s house, the White House, has sub-basements, sure to stifle any screams of terror that might emanate from down below. I’ll bet it’s hot down there, very hot. Because Obama’s hot and madder than hell. And he’s angry to boot.

Though the recent Supreme Court’s decision was a big win for Hobby Lobby, there are still thousands upon thousands of people who may be forced by Obamacare to participate in the murder of their own grandchildren. Under the Affordable Care Act, parents can keep their kids on their policy until those children reach the age of 26. And if that child of theirs decides to have an abortion that destroys the life growing in the womb, so be it. Just send the bill to the would-be grandma and grandpa.

Would-be Grandmas and Grandpas do have an out though. They can stop claiming the abortion-minded child as a dependent, thereby forcing the child to seek their own health insurance. That’s probably easier to do once that child has reached 18, but I’m sure that the government would be happy to provide that person with affordable healthcare and even subsidize that healthcare when necessary.

Remember the State of the Union in 2009 when Obama said that no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions? I do. I remember. Anyone receiving an Obamacare subsidy though is receiving federal dollars, federal tax money. Money that is taken by force from the U.S. federal government to fund the murderous killing of helpless innocent babies in the womb.

Bob Unruh wrote about the Supreme Court Hobby Lobby vs. Obamacare decision over at WND:

The U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision Monday ruled that a “closely held” for-profit business can opt out of Obamacare’s controversial contraception requirement based on religious objections.

Hobby Lobby’s argument was based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, which protects the individual beliefs of citizens.

The majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito dismissed the Department of Health and Human Services argument that the companies cannot sue because they are for-profit corporations and that the owners cannot sue because the regulations apply only to the companies. Alito said that “would leave merchants with a difficult choice: give up the right to seek judicial protection of their religious liberty or forgo the benefits of operating as corporations.”

The opinion said the RFRA’s text “shows that Congress designed the statute to provide very broad protection for religious liberty and did not intend to put merchants to such a choice.”

Alito said “the purpose of extending rights to corporations is to protect the rights of people associated with the corporation, including shareholders, officers, and employees.”

“Protecting the free-exercise rights of closely held corporations thus protects the religious liberty of humans who own and control them.”

The opinion said while the dissent argues RFRA does not cover Conestoga, Hobby Lobby and Mardel, an affiliate company of Hobby Lobby, because they cannot “exercise religion,” the justices “offer no persuasive explanation for this conclusion.”

“The corporate form alone cannot explain it because RFRA indisputable protects nonprofit corporations. And the profit-making objective of the corporations cannot explain it because the court has entertained the free-exercise claims of individuals who were attempting to make a profit as retail merchants.”

The court said that “business practices compelled or limited by the tenets of a religious doctrine fall comfortably within the understanding of the ‘exercise of religion.’”

While the court ruling was not a sweeping First Amendment freedom of religion ruling, it concluded: “HHS’s contraceptive mandate substantially burdens the exercise of religion.”

“It requires the Hahns and Greens to engage in conduct that seriously violates their sincere religious belief that life begins at conception.”

The opinion made clear the priority of protecting religion.

“RFRA’s question is whether the mandate imposes a substantial burden on the objecting parties’ ability to conduct business in accordance with their religious beliefs. … It is not for the court to say that the religious beliefs of the plaintiffs are mistaken or unreasonable.”

Joining Alito were Chief Justice John Roberts, whose determination two years that Obamacare was a tax saved the law, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

The opinion concluded that if the government is demanding free abortion-inducing drugs for women, it should pay for them.

Continue reading at WND

Continue reading

HHS: Obamacare Not Delayed! Pssst. Hey Bub, Want a Delay?

julia hhs obamacare mandate loophole

On Wedesday, Katheleen Sebelius appeared before Congress and said that there would be no more delays with the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. But there’s a hitch with that. A delay may not be a delay.

Okay, when is a delay not a delay? When it’s a “hardship,” that’s when. Just about everybody has experienced a hardship or two of one type or another at some point in their lives. I mean, nobody’s life is perfect, right?. Surely, everybody gets into a little trouble every now and again. Well, almost everybody. I guess maybe there are few saints left, but I haven’t met any of them.

For the rest of the world it’s like, where’s your homework? The dog ate it. Your payment is late. I got robbed. Or your significant other finds out you were with someone else. It wasn’t me. All sorts of things can happen.

It turns out that the Obama Administration understands this all too well and is willing to forgive us our trespasses as we would forgive those who trespass against us. Obama is hoping that we will especially forgive him and the Democrats before the upcoming election later this year where a whole slew of Senate seats are up in play.

Released unceremoniously earlier this month by Health and Human Services (HHS) was the Application for Exemption from the Shared Responsibility Payment for Individuals who Experience Hardships. The application form gives the obligatory Obamacare rundown such as explaining that in 2014 everybody is supposed to have health coverage or make a payment on their federal income tax return and what not. Then goes on to say that some people are exempt. It further says that you can the use this application to “apply for an exemption from the shared responsibility payment.” For those of you not familiar with the new governmentspeak, a shared responsibility payment is a tax. It’s your tax. You know, your fair share.
Please note: From the glorious laborings of the progressive and liberal mind (the enlightened ones), never use three letters when describing something when you can use three words. Multisyllable words are preferred.

The application then goes on to list hardship categories and documentation that’s required and says that “You may qualify for a hardship exemption if you experienced one of the following” and goes on to list: you were homeless, or you were evicted in the last six months or were facing eviction or foreclosure, or got a shutoff notice from a utility company, or you experienced domestic violence, bankruptcy, medical bills in the last 24 months, increased expenses due to caring for an ill, disabled, or aging family member, or your current health plan is being cancelled and you can’t afford another plan (even though Obamacare was signed into law as the “Affordable Care Act”).

All but two or three hardships require documentation be submitted with your exemption application. If you are homeless or have experienced domestic violence, then no documentation is required.

And if none of the above fits your hardship classification, they’ve got a category for that too, it’s kind of a catch-all, if you know what I mean. If you’ve experienced another hardship in obtaining health  insurance (wink wink, nudge nudge), well that’s covered. They would like for you to submit documentation for that, if possible (wink wink, nudge nudge). No documentation? No problem. That sounds alarmingly familiar, doesn’t it? Just like our immigration policy, right?

HHS Obamacare loophole hardship exemption

With so many delays so far (there’s been almost 40 changes total to Obamacare), it’s a wonder that there’s anything left for the Democrats to crow about to their dwindling body politic. “We want healthcare! When do we want it? Eh, whenever.

Continue reading

IRS Readies to Collect Obamacare Tax, err… Individual Shared Responsibility Payment

IRS Swat

The left and the right. Yin and yang. Good and bad. Right and wrong. If it’s right, it’s individual reponsibility. If it’s left, it’s individual “shared” responsiblity.

What that means is, that for the left there is no responsibility at all. And why should there be?

There is no need to be responsible when other individuals will pick up the tab when you slack off. No health insurance? Obamacare! No money? No problem! Obama will  subsidize you.

And because Obama loves the American people so much, he’s having his friends over the IRS  “remind” us that they will be ready to collect our payments of our individual shared responsibility starting with our 2014 tax returns when filing in 2015.

The Obama administration argued vehemently that the penalty for failing to comply with the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act was not a tax and they even pursued that argument to the Supreme Court. But not once do I recall anyone referring to it as an individual shared responsibility payment.

Anyways, this is a new year and a time for new things. So, the IRS has decided to help us out here a little bit and has given us a catchy phrase. Apparently the word tax was not enough of a tongue twister, it being too low-brow an’ all, to be acceptable by the Obama administration. And besides, the poor things had worked for so long and so hard claiming that it wasn’t a tax.

But the folks over at Americans for Tax Reform still do. A tax to them is akin to Stein’s rose. Tax is a tax is a tax is a tax.

According to Americans for Tax Reform which caught this a few days ago:

President Obama’s Internal Revenue Service today quietly released a series of Obamacare “Health Care Tax Tips” warning Americans that they must obtain “qualifying” health insurance – as defined by the federal government – or face a “shared responsibility payment” when filing their tax returns in 2015. The term “shared responsibility payment” refers to the Obamacare individual mandate tax, one of at least seven tax hikes in the healthcare law that directly hit families making less than $250,000 per year.

In “Four Tax Facts about the Health Care Law for Individuals” the agency writes:

Your 2014 tax return will ask if you had insurance coverage or qualified for an exemption.  If not, you may owe a shared responsibility payment when you file in 2015.

In “The Individual Shared Responsibility Payment- An Overview” the agency warns Americans they must prove they were covered each and every month of the year:

For any month in 2014 that you or any of your dependents don’t maintain coverage and don’t qualify for an exemption, you will need to make an individual shared responsibility payment with your 2014 tax return filed in 2015.

Calling it something else doesn’t make it any better nor does it help the American public forget what it really is. It’s a tax, plain and simple.

Continue reading