Military Archbishop Defies Secretary of Army

The recent ruling from Obama's HHS that all entities providing healthcare services must include contraceptives and abortion prevention services to include the "morning-after" pill. Though Archbishops all across the United States wrote letters that their priests read aloud during Sunday masses, one Archbishop was instructed not to do so.

His name is Timothy Broglio and he is at the head of the Archdiocese for the Military Services, which is responsible for providing Catholic services to Catholics in the military all over the world. He was instructed by the Army's Office of the Chief of Chaplains not to have his letter read from the pulpit during his masses.

The decision seemed to set up a showdown between the Military and the administration.

Via CNS News:

Archbishop Broglio’s letter opposing the regulation and describing it as a violation of the constitutional rights of Catholics was read verbatim at Masses served by Navy and Air Force chaplains around the world.

However, the Army’s Office of the Chief of Chaplains attempted to silence Catholic Army chaplains from reading it at their Masses—an effort rejected and resisted by Archbishop Broglio.

“On Thursday, January 26, Archbishop Broglio emailed a pastoral letter to Catholic military chaplains with instructions that it be read from the pulpit at Sunday Masses the following weekend in all military chapels,” the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military said in a statement.

Someone had to blink. Fortunately, it appears Broglio is not the one who did:

“The Army's Office of the Chief of Chaplains subsequently sent an email to senior chaplains advising them that the Archbishop's letter was not coordinated with that office and asked that it not be read from the pulpit,” said the archdiocese’s statement. “The Chief's office directed that the letter was to be mentioned in the Mass announcements and distributed in printed form in the back of the chapel.”

On Saturday, Jan. 28, after the Army’s Office of the Chief of Chaplains issued this directive, Archbishop Broglio spoke with Secretary of the Army John McHugh, a political appointee of President Barack Obama.

Archbishop Broglio’s position was that, in trying to stop Catholic Army chaplains from reading his pastoral letter, the Army was violating his First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion and the First Amendment rights of Catholic chaplains and Catholic service members.

“Archbishop Broglio and the Archdiocese stand firm in the belief, based on legal precedent, that such a directive from the Army constituted a violation of his Constitutionally-protected right of free speech and the free exercise of religion, as well as those same rights of all military chaplains and their congregants,” said the statement from the archdiocese.

In his Jan. 28 telephone conversation with Army Secretary McHugh, Archbishop Broglio was able to extract from the secretary an admission that it had been wrong for the secretary to try to silence the Catholic chaplains. The archbishop decided that the line in his letter that said Catholics cannot and will not comply with the “unjust law” of the HHS regulation would not be read aloud in Catholic Masses by the chaplains, but that the rest of the letter would.

The line stating "we will not ... comply with this unjust law" did remain, however, in the printed letter that was distributed at Masses said by Army chaplains and it remains in the copies of the letter posted on the website of the Archdiocese for the Military.

It's safe to say that the Obama administration appears to have lost this particular battle and that Broglio's one concession was so minor, that to call it a face-saving gesture for Obama would be a stretch.

While a good sign, rhetoric alone will not accomplish much. The Archbishops will have to get out of their chairs and organize at some point, if they want to see this rule withdrawn.

Read it all. 

Video: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius Admits Obamacare a Fraud

Perhaps this is why politicians don't give one word answers very often. In this case, Kathleen Sebelius was questioned by Representative John Shimkus (R-IL) during a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee hearing about the funding of Obamacare and the charges of double counting, which the opponents of Obamacare have been screaming about for nearly two years now. On one hand, the administration has touted savings of $500 Billion in cuts to Medicare but it's also using that $500 Billion to fund Obamacare, making the law far more costly than they've been saying.

Watch as Shimkus presses Sebelius on what amounts to an issue of 'cooking the books.' Her one word answer is an admission that the administration has done just that.

Shocking



Via Fox Nation

Again, Joe Wilson's two words in 2009 continue to age very, very well.

SEBELIUS SAYS IT'S TIME FOR 'REEDUCATION'

There's a school of thought that says there are no accidents when it comes to things like this. I'm coming down on the side that this was not a calculated effort on the part of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius but a window into her psyche and how she views the American people as well as government's role in dealing with them.

Via the Weekly Standard:

“Unfortunately, there still is a great deal of confusion about what is in [the reform law] and what isn’t,” Sebelius told ABC News Radio in an interview Monday.

“So, we have a lot of reeducation to do,” Sebelius said.

Note that Sebelius doesn't just want to re-educate people who oppose Obamacare; she wants to do a lot of it.

Then there's the implication of the word itself. There are three definitions for the word "Re-educate". They are:

–verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing.
1. to educate again, as for new purposes.
2. to educate for resumption of normal activities, as a disabled person.
3. to rehabilitate or reform through education, training, political indoctrination, etc.

It should be fairly obvious that definition #3 most closely aligns with what Sebelius is talking about. Those who oppose Obamacare are more familiar with the bill than those who wrote it so she is clearly advocating political indoctrination from a position of power and contempt.

Sebelius wants to make your mind right. Period.

VIDEO: HHS WITHELD DAMNING REPORT

This takes us to the height of egregious government. According to the American Spectator, a report was delivered to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius one week before passage of Obamacare that proved health care costs will go up, not down with passage.

That report was held back by the HHS. Via the Spectator:

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama's health care "reform" law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius's staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

"The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote," says an HHS source. "Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think."

Here's a video from Fox's Special Report:



h/t to Gateway Pundit for posting the video.

VIDEO: HHS SECRETARY KATHLEEN SEBELIUS UNMASKS HERSELF AGAIN

Kathleen wouldn't be able to hide from this one even if she walked around with her face in her sleeve all day. She was caught on tape in April of 2007 saying that she wanted to eventually get to single payer (gov't run healthcare) but advocated doing "everything we can" to close the gap.

Take note of how she explains exactly how the language in the Senate version of the health care bill will allow abortions to be taxpayer-funded. Nothing to worry about. Barbara Boxer helped to write this part.

It's all about "accounting"....



h/t to NEWSREAL

WILL UNIONS ADMINISTER OBAMACARE?

Mark Mix at the Wall Street Journal has an excellent piece on the level of involvment unions will have in Obamacare. Mix seems to be asserting that a common theme in all of the various bills floating through congress will force the health care industry to become unionized.

He even provides recent examples from the last ten years that would serve as microcosms for WHAT WE CAN EXPECT if Obamacare passes.

The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.

Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (class)" reimbursement plan.

SEIU and ACORN have benefitted mightily by the Stimulus package. What groups of people do labor unions have absolute disdain for? Capitalists come to mind. Would their bias factor in to decisions about who should receive care?

Mix then points to the tremendous powers that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would have while being directed by union officials.

Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.

At what point would patients have to pay union dues before receiving treatment?

Read the WHOLE THING

NOT SO FAST: OBAMA NOT LETTING GO EASILY?

Earlier today, HHS Secretary and Pro-Abort Kathleen Sebelius told CNN that the government option for health care is "not an essential part" of reform. White flags were raised and Obama's ego was no doubt pricked.

Time to reverse course? Apparently so.

A White House official choosing to remain anonymous apparently sought to "clarify" the White House position that Sebelius so eloquenty MIS-STATED. THE ATLANTIC has more...

The official said that the White House did not intend to change its messaging and that Sebelius simply meant to echo the president, who has acknowledged that the public option is a tough sell in the Senate and is, at the same time, a must-pass for House Democrats, and is not, in the president's view, the most important element of the reform package.

Note to Ms. Sebelius. The Obama doesn't like it when you mess up.

Who knows. This was just as likely an intentional trial balloon to see how the far left nutroots would react. Based on this new stance from the White House, my guess is that the early returns are not good.

Then we have the White House Liar, er, I mean spokesperson Linda Douglass chiming in with her two cents.

"Nothing has changed.," she said. "The President has always said that what is essential that health insurance reform lower costs, ensure that there are affordable options for all Americans and increase choice and competition in the health insurance market. He believes that the public option is the best way to achieve these goals."

For what it's worth, Linda Douglass has already depleted any vestige of credibility she had and absolutely can't be believed at all. In fact, Wrong Way Feldman is more trustworthy.

Apparently, another White House official said Sebelius didn't misspeak. So what's the truth?

Let's think this one through. Obama is in campaign mode because his administration is in damage control. The American people are getting justifiably angrier by the day because of this administration's antics and lack of tangible answers. Obama is so good at saying NOTHING when he talks that he still has a significant contingent of this population significantly hypnotized into thinking he's got it all figured out.

Are we to believe that Kathleen Sebelius went on the Sunday talk show circuit and misspoke? Not a chance. She was trapsed out there to test the white flag on Sunday morning and now the White House is coming out on Sunday evening to moderate its position. This likely means that the strategy didn't go over well.

If she really did commit a faux paux and indicated an Obama surrender when it wasn't authorized, Sebelius may want to invest in some "Under the Bus" repellant.

In any case, these are interesting times.

h/t to FREE REPUBLIC