Liberals really ought to make up their minds about this.
As a general rule, it often takes little more than a stiff breeze to render left wingers confused and incoherent. The Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobby case has hit the left with the force of an early hurricane, and left wingers have responded accordingly. Textbook example of this was evident yesterday during an exchange between Democrat strategist Donna Brazile and GOP political consultant Matthew Dowd on the Sunday talk show "This Week." (Video after the jump)
Here's what was said between Dowd and Brazile after Matt Bai, Yahoo's national political correspondent, described the divisions on the high court in the ruling as a reflection of those within the nation as a whole --
BAI: You're seeing the cultural divisions at large in the country play out as you always do.
DOWD: It is a problem because people now take the court decisions and are now viewed in a partisan way. That never used to be the case, so we now accept or reject what the court says based upon our partisan leanings, and that's never happened before.
BRAZILE: But we don't pick and choose among what services, what reproductive services, or what health care services men use, but we do it among women. And birth control, contraception (crosstalk), they're for women's health.
DOWD: I don't know who, nobody's banning it. Nobody is banning it!
BRAZILE: But you're saying that if I work and I contribute, my health care now has to be basically tailored by my boss. (incredulous) That is wrong!
DOWD (pouncing): That's the Affordable Care Act. That's the Affordable Care Act.
GUEST HOST MARTHA RADDATZ (changing subject to something truly significant): OK, Donna, Donna, Matt (Raddatz talking over Brazile's response to Dowd), hang on, 'cause we're going to talk about the World Cup, whether you like it or not, and I know you want to talk about the World Cup.
Liberals have decreed, through the employer mandate in Obamacare, that employers become involved in their workers' health coverage. And now that this is actually in place, liberals are apoplectic that employers are involved in their workers' health coverage. The old adage "be careful what you wish for" clearly eludes them.
Equally amusing is Brazile's disingenuous claim that "we don't pick and choose" which "reproductive services" should be made available for men, only women. That's because Obamacare doesn't provide them for men. Which begs the question -- was this a good-faith attempt to mitigate actual or perceived disparities in medical care between women and men, or (more likely) a cynical attempt to widen the gender gap that helps Democrats in elections?
Also worth noting here is Dowd's curious claim that Supreme Court decisions have "never" been interpreted "based upon our partisan leanings." Which is true -- but only if one ignores the court's rulings since Bush v. Gore ... and also the Warren court putting the rights of criminals before those of victims ... Southern Democrats' anger over Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka ... FDR's attempt to pack the court ...