Mr. Altschuler seems to forget that Tim Bishop's job is not to represent the will of his Catholic constituents, but ALL of his constituents.

Mr. Altschuler, instead of coming to east enders with a positive vision for the future, you come to us with a divisive wedge issue. Your false accusations and misrepresentations ring of the worst kind of politics. 56% of ALL Catholics approve of the President's compromise, and if you look at just female Catholics the number is higher. Sister Carol Keehan, the president of the Catholic Hospital Organization, told The Associated Press that the "framework developed has responded to the issues we identified that needed to be fixed." The non-profit Catholic United issued a statement of support stating that President Obama "has shown [them] that he is willing to rise above the partisan fray to deliver an actual policy solution that both meets the health care needs of all employees and respects the religious liberty of Catholic Institutions.

Mr. Altschuler, we know you are against the president and Mr. Bishop, but what are you for? Lower taxes for the rich, higher taxes for the poor and lower middle class, cuts to social security and medicare, and tax breaks for companies that outsource American jobs? You cannot run on your experience, so instead you reach for the low hanging fruit.

cont. "Obamacare" maintained the status quo. Despite the right's cries of European Socialism the Affordable Care Act left the system to private insurers and that is why rates are going up. More people are uninsured because 2 unpaid for wars, deregulation, and Bush tax cuts destroyed our economy. As an outsourcer you had a direct hand in the failure of our economy.

East Enders who lost their jobs should remember that Alschuler's business was to ship your jobs off to other countries, leaving tens of thousands of Americans unemployed. That's how he made his fortune and now he wants to be our Congressman. When you look at your bank account, ask yourself if this is the kind of person who would make American lives better or worse, American homes richer or poorer. Haven't we had enough of these robber barons?

Where does religious freedom end and theocracy begin? Using Mr. Alschuler's logic, the Mormons should still be permitted to practice polygamy.
Although I am a Republican, I am an AMERICAN first. I refuse to vote for any candidate who has a platform of negativity and divisiveness.

I realize that Patch is a liberal publication, but I find it a laugh that everyone here is talking about divisiveness, negativity and partisan, its sort of the kettle calling the pot black. The talking points thrown around here are right out of the MSM, MSNBC and to me are very nieve.

Obamacare continuation of the status quo?, Obamacare was shoved down our throats, and we are just beginning to find out what is in it. Obamacare is a racist program and it is not constitutional. Lets not forget that we are ALL Americans, and Obamacare gives preferences to minorities, that is fair?
http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/12/obamacare-is-ra.html

Let's be clear: despite left-wing organizations and pundits proliferating volumes of statistics describing how the majority of Catholic women use birth control or why their definition of "women's health" is more important than religious doctrine, the real issue is the invasion of previously protected religious rights -- rights guaranteed by our Constitution -- and what is behind this invasion. AGAIN this is not constitutional, the debate, despite what the mandate’s supporters say, is about religious freedom — not contraception.

Of course this comes from a President (OBama) who calls the Constitution a deeply flawed document (2001)

And we keep repeating Randy Altschuler's sending jobs out of the country, if you did some research you would know that is NOT true, but you keep repeating the talking points.

49.5% of American's did not pay taxes in 2009, personally, given that status, I don't think they should be permitted to vote as they have a bias to vote for clowns who will continue their dependance.

In 2010, for the first time ever, average spending on dependence programs per recipient exceeded the country's per-capita disposable income. The American public's dependence on the federal government shot up 23% in just two years under President Obama, with 67 million now relying on some federal program.

The dependency index has dipped only seven times in the past 49 years, three of which were under President Reagan and two under President Clinton.

Personally, I am sick of the class warfare that has become so popular with this administration, divide and conquer. This is the most divisive administration in history. As far as the so called rich needing to pay more, try reading this article before stating that again
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/12/12/fact-checking-president-obama-on-trickle-down-economics/

Randy Altschuler is correct! Where in the U.S. Constitution does it guarantee the right to free birth control? Representative Bishop is not standing up for the 1St Amendment. Furthermore, President Obama’s so-called compromise is not a compromise at all, It only mandates that the insurance company pay for what the government demands. By the way who pays the insurance company? The Catholic institution, so where is the compromise? With this Administration and Congressman Bishop’s support we never know what we will HAVE to pay for next. For those who want FREE stuff from the government watch what you wish for soon you may be asked to pay for things you do not approve of, that is why we need to restore free market principles for our economy to grow! Congressman Bishop is a supporter of government knows best. He must be defeated this November.

Randy Altschuler made millions of dollars shipping American jobs overseas.Now he wants POWER. I think Randy Altschuler should step aside and give an unemployed person an opportunity to have a job.

Mary Beth, as for 1st Amendment rights, they are not about other people paying for things some want. It is that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

So you want the GOVERNMENT to tell companies and individuals what they MUST purchase???? That is also unconstitutional. What if the Government demanded you purchase something you do not want to purchase?

I am a Catholic who had the luck never to use Birth Control. I have five children, thank God and I can remember when I was aghast at my friend with six children and used birth control and horrors, went up to receive Holy Communion. I soon realized how wrong I was. I read in the Catholic newspapers and various priests that using birth control was a matter of conscience. I was ashamed at my "piousness." The Catholic church is out of step. I'm sure many of those Catholics are on the "pill." They are most likely not practicing rhythm. I heard that some parishoners clapped wildly when the pastor mentioned that Obama had buckled. How many of the clappers were using birth control. You are not killing a child by using it. And everytime I hear the word Obamacare" I know it is a negative comment. No one tells you just what is in Obamacare. Just one thing allows kids to remain on their parents heallth care until they get a job with coverage. Check it all out. Stop making a political issue out of this. I was so glad that on Sunday, my pastor here had all the married couples face each other, hold hands and then we repeated the marriage vows. Love was present there. Just before the end of mass the pastor mentioned the Bishops message without comment and I turned to my neighbor and said, "Now a word from our sponsor." Jesus preached love not devisivness. Amen!

this is so absurd I don't know why the patch even published this! the president has already accommodated the church's archaic and ignored tenet about birth control. in 28 states, churches have had to provide birth control for over a decade and he just relieved them of it! so saying this president is attacking the church is just a lie that only people who don't bother to TURN ON THE NEWS FOR THEMSELVES are stupid enough to believe. Do the people this letter is aimed at influencing KNOW THAT THE PRESIDENT ALREADY CHANGED THE POLICY TO SUIT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? Smithtown patch? you should be apologizing for publishing this. Its not even factual and its purely to upset people who don't know better.

The church in the first part of my "comment" was in Smithtown. My church is in SAn Francisco and St. James.

To those who want Government to tell us what we MUST buy I say watch out for what you wish for. To all who are bashing private business how do you think it will be when the Government controls all business and we will be left with no choices other than the Government run entities.

its time we all stop being maipulated by people trying to scare us!! this government has no interest in taking over business. it has done more to HELP private and small businesses survive the economic disaster. if it wasn't for the big mess left to it from the prior administration, having to SAVE businesses like GM, would never even come up. How does anyone construe making preventative healthcare available to all women as prescribed by their doctors into the government MAKING us buy contraceptives is a real stretch... wooo lets all be AFRAID.

ScDad's comments were vulgar Henry.

Anyone want to clue me in on what jobs Tim Bishop has created in the US? Anyone? Bueller....Bueller....... So nice of Tim Bishop to give away my money and everyone else's to illegal immigrants and entitlement riders. Because what Tim Bishop is, is a socialist. Funny how the only ammo everyone has is how Randy outsourced meanwhile he created jobs here. Get back to me on anything Tim Bishop did other than raise taxes and give your money to other people.

he voted for every jobs act there was in congress. but what can any of them do in divided government where one side will always block. the no contraception rule in the catholic church dates back to when they wanted to increase there numbers against the romans. thats how old that is. thats how relevant it is today. imho. the fact that children are born to those who can't afford them doesn't matter to the church. is the church for abstinence or obstinence? They may someday realize the church is more powerful when its doctrines are relevant and the church is bigger than any one doctrine and let this one go.

rob, this might be obvious but he's a public servant on the federal level and his efforts are in that venue. most people know randy from last time. the new jersian who got dis'd by his own state and had to come here. so he hired some people in a company dedicated to outsourcing. he didn't impress then and he doesn't impress now.

Enough. I thought this was about birth control and how it has been turned into a political issue. Actually, I think having this forum is great. Whatever "side" you're on. Just don't be mean in your comments. Definitely not pointing fingers at anyone.

Pure and self-serving political bs. Altshuler could not win the first time around. So, here we go, try the divide and conquer routine. Yes, I have read Macchiavelli. Hey, Altshuler, who asked your opinion anyway?!

Robkoz, over 3 million new jobs were created by this administration. Every vote Bushop cast in favor of progressive legislation, including the stimulus, helped create jobs. The few jobs Altschuler created are insignificant in the face of the tens if thousands he destroyed.

I will say it again, given an opportunity to speak to his would be constituents Randy chose not to inspire with a positive vision for the future, but to spew political rhetoric. Are you and Mr Altschuler aware that these very same contraceptive mandates have existed in this state for years? Was it ever a concern to either of you or the catholic church before this week?

The Constitution neither guarantees the right to birth control, nor corporate bailouts. What it does do is separate church from state. The opportunism of these johnny-come-latelys (no pun intended) is so rank you can smell it even in cyber space.

okay then, I went to Altschuler's own website for global logic. He has 400 job openings. 9 in california, 2 in virginia and the rest are all OVERSEAS! its right there on his company's own website. and what is the service his company is offering?

G L O B A L I Z A T I O N

so who is he kidding?? Altschuler is very much STILL a job outsourcer! Its right there on his own company's website! .

@ blue bella, let's talk about debt and who voted to increase it. I found MANY websites pointing the finger at Tim Bishop for increasing the debt. Here's a simple one that summarizes it:
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/House/New_York/Tim_Bishop/Views/Debt,_Deficit,_Spending,_and_the_Size_of_Government/

The "temporary debt" that saved American corporations and American jobs? I guess as a fan of Alschuler, you're accustom to seeing those jobs sent to India and Pakistan (our beloved ally who hid Osama).

All you liberals let me know what's improved on Long Island since Tim Bishop's been in office. I'll wait...

the poltical guide is a republican website. the votes they refer to are simple up and down votes on the debt ceiling. take care...

Let us not forget the money that Bush GAVE AWAY to his cronies on Wall Street as a bonus for the inside information that the Dow would drop 3,000 points after their dirty deeds were uncovered and then paid for by the American taxpayers who became unemployed and lost their own homes. Nice that Altschuler is associated with this bunch of thieves. At least we know which candidate to AVOID in November.

rob, who is responsible for the bank bailout? under whose administration? I'll wait.

"libtards"? Don't your parents limit your computer time?

Rob, You're long on blame and short on facts. I'll point to your "billions given away to 'green' companies' comment, as a prime example.

In the morning, none of this will matter. Altschuler's attorneys will have called Patch and sanitized the people's replies to his outrageous letter.

the potus plan to help rebuild america in a very positive way was to enact cap-and-trade to move american business into green technologies and simultaneously support green companies like solar panels and battery makers and fund training for all those losing their jobs in green industry training. It was a wonderful strategy but we all watched in horror as the republicans changed their minds at the last minute and blocked all cap-and-trade restrictions. it killed all that great planning and left companies like solandra with no increase in business. he called the plan like a pair of scissors. one prong was the investment in the green industry and the other prong was the passing of cap-and-trade. to this day, it irks me that the republicans actually have the nerve to blame him for the failure of the plan when it was they themselves that blocked cap-and-trade, and killed it for all of us.

Rob, Your billions just turned into millions, just like the number of jobs that Alschuler created?

Fortune is a liberal magazine and 535 million equals billions? Now I know why you harbor such resentment towards public schools.

do it rob. list the companies and why they went under. and how much money went with them. do it. i'll wait.

I wonder how your Obama numbers compare to the dollars spent by the military on programs that never got off the ground? Your only see from one eye, young man.

So, the $535 million dollars to which you refer...that's less than 6 hours on the taxpayer clock fighting the wars that Bush started and that Obama brought to a close after getting rid of the enemy's command and control. No wonder Altschuler can only talk about birth control. It's right out of the GOP play book.

i'm learning that 96 percent of catholic woman have used birth control at some time in their lives. I'm so glad Altschuler wrote this crock of a letter. How many voters have wives and DAUGHTERS who they would much rather have access to birth control than not. Go republicans! keep up the anti-family-planning drumbeat! you are working yourselves into a american-taliban labeled corner. this is backfiring!

Ever hear the saying if you don't feed the strays they'll go away? When someone trolls the boards spewing wingnut nonsense and citing right wing propaganda they are simply best ignored. Anyone agree?

Let's play nice, kids. "Old man". "Trolls." More people care about this than you can imagine. That number is so great, it can't be found on your search engine.

Frog had a good point about the cost of the wars Bush started. Still worried about that 535 "million"? Your too busy counting pennies while the dollars are flying over your head. And that point is right out of GOP Candidate Training. You'll hear repeated in every race as a distraction from the Bush fiasco, along with other propaganda and side shows intended to get voters to look the other way.

i see your list rob. i'm not double checking anything but the figures you yourself provided. they add up to NO billions. not 'billions". so what happened? facts! we like FACTS!

the Range Fuels funding was a "W" issue that only finished into the current administration. This post does sadden me. If you read my post, I remember the background on this green initiative and it was an admirable effort.

Take if from a good nurse, the GOP could use a good enema!

Isn't it somewhat Orwellian for the government to require that health plans cover all and sundry expenses in the name of "access"? The more that health plans must pay for, the fewer people can afford the premiums. Health care costs have skyrocketed since the so-called "Affordable Care Act" passed, and the number of uninsured has only gone up. There can be no broadening of care without cost control.

The number of uninsured has risen because the unemployed have lost their company policies and they cannot afford to replace them. Healthcare costs are continually on the rise. Mine has double in my lifetime, long before Obama went to Washington. And no healthcare plan covers "everything". I have one of the most generous of plans and I just got stiffed for a multi-thousand dollar doctor bill not covered by Oxford.

I thought we were discussing birth control. When did this become a battle between Republicans and Democrats? Did I miss something?

Yes, I believe you missed the letter from the Republican candidate which blamed the incumbent for everything troubling this country except the disappearance of Judge Crater.

How are you guys any better than those in Washington. You enjoy arguing so much you forget the point is to cooperate for the LONG term good of all. We have the leaders we DESERVE.

@ Fred, got to laugh at that word "progressives" because your party has been anything but progressing. Since the FDR administration the "dependent" class has increased exponentially. All those entitlements that were created to stamp out poverty has done nothing but created a "lazy" class, an "abusive" class. So you "progressives" that posted here have set nothing straight. You are in such denial of the failure of your party that you can only focus on the failure of the other. And as a Democrat I believe in womans rights. So sorry bud, can't be a "right winger" if I believe in a woman's right to choose, or gay rights, as well as not being religious. But you should drop the "progressive" part of your party because American history has already proven it's anything but.

I hope I live to see the day when both parties will work for the good of the country.

I had to log off and do a comprehensive virus scan while on this forum. if you were here with me, you may have also been affected. take care.

Randy Outsourcer and the Republican party are on the wrong side of this issue - as usual:

"The new CBS/New York Times poll shows that the White House’s fight over contraception in health insurance plans is in fact on the winning side with the public — and among Catholics, too, the group whose church leadership has mounted the mount vigorous campaign against it.

The poll of American adults asked: “Do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that private health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female patients?” The answer was: Support 66%, Oppose 26%.

A follow-up question then specifically brought the religious element into the equation: “And what about for religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital or university — do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that their health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female employees?”

The answer was still a very sizable majority: Support 61%, Oppose 31%. And on that followup question, Catholics were essentially identical to the top-line at 61%-32%. Women also supported it by 66%-28%, and men by 55%-38%."

I'm a Republican and my husband is an Independent. We're not voting for Altschuler. He's not from Long Island. He moved here to run for office. He doesn't know our fishing industry, farming, the tourist who visit out east. Without this know how, who does he think he represents. We're on Social Security and I don't want this guy taking it away with one of those cut this and cut that ideas that they think is popular. Phooey on him and all those like him! What happened to the America I once knew. We can't count on Republicans any more. They're smoking some funny stuff and it went to their heads.

I constantly hear from the left 'seperation of church and state, serperation of church and state' over and over again yet you have no problem telling a church what to do even if it is against its beliefs?

Pay attention: Churches are exempt. Again, churches are exempt. And, after the compromise, so are catholic affiliated groups like schools and hospitals. But you live in a state where ONLY churches are exempt and it has been that way for some time:

"In New York Connecticut, and 26 other states, the only exempt institutions are churches, where the majority of people they employ and serve are presumed to share anti-contraception values. Twenty of them provide conscience exemptions to different categories of religious organizations, according to a study [PDF] by the Guttmacher Institute, which focuses on sexuality and reproductive rights. That leaves most religious hospitals, schools, universities, charities and social services mandated to provide workers with contraception, because they employ and serve a broader group of people."

Why did Randy and his fellow republicans never cry foul before? Because they are only motivated by an irrational hate of President Obama.

It is very promising to see that a majority of people posting here, men and women, are fair-minded individuals who understand that this is a made up controversy meant to distract from the fact that the economy is improving.

Whenever republicans feel threatened they fall back on the old social issues that once bitterly divided this country but are now only relevant to a very small group of small-minded conservatives who are out of touch with progressive enlightenment.

Funny that people keep saying how Randy isn't from here and is only using NY. How many of you voted for Hillary Clinton when she ran against Lazio when you knew she was blatantly using NY to get to the White House? Interesting how hypocrisy rears it ugly head once again.

so because you are bring the argument to hillary and not addressing the fact that randy isn't from here? are you conceding he came here to run in a local election after being run out of his own state?

We're with you Mr. Morton. Altschuler sent jobs out of the country when Americans needed them most. We don't want a fake Long Islander going to Congress for us. My husband was a fisherman. What does Altschuler know about the plight of fishermen? Bishop is the fisherman's friend and always has been. Thank you Congressman Bishop.

Bob, I think you are foolish to think Altschuler can bring jobs to Long Island. He would have done so by now but hasn't.

@ Frog, a day late and a dollar short. Do you have any idea how much of a hypocrite you are. Laughing at how you support her after the fact. What a joke.

Once again, when you stop shopping at Target and Walmart for those low low prices that you want, don't be complaining about outsourcing because that's exactly what you're supporting. MADE IN CHINA.

Rob, When you mature, the Kool-Aid you drink today will taste bitter, sweet boy.

George W had an MBA and both the deficit and the economy were destroyed on his watch. I'm tired of people who run businesses thinking they know how to lead. A good CEO might let america's auto industry die. A good leader wouldn't consider it.

Say what you will but this mess was unnecessary and yet another mindless blunder by the Obama regime that does nothing for the nation but divide us even more. Also, it never was about contraception or women's rights; it was all about power and our pathetic excuse of a president's heavy and undisciplined use of it. If you support Barack Obama's naked ambitions then you do not support liberty, you do not support freedom, you do not support the Constitution and you do not support America.

preliator. thats a ridiculous string of bs. the country isn't divided on this issue. 98 percent of catholics use birth control. thats divided to you? one out of two americans now support the president and agree with what he is doing. (news came out today). are you really going to call ALL people who don't agree with you: people who don't support the country?? or freedom or liberty?? thats absurd and myopic.

Altschuler is un-american. He made 300 million through OfficeTiger, an outsourcing company that performs back office support services for American companies in India. A traitor to America.

Dont let him fool you with wedge issues.

I'm what they call a "blank" in politics. I cannot support Altschuler. He took jobs from Long Islanders in the midst of our worst economy. Shame on him.

Altschuler sold us up the river, sending American jobs overseas. He'll do the same to Long Islanders in Washington.

Look, some of you can delude yourselves all you want but the simple fact is that this fight did not have to happen and was just another political act by a deeply troubled president who appeals to the lowest common denominator. It was an act that overtly attacks faith, a deliberate poke in the eye that for some reason the so-called 'smartest president ever' continues to do.

I deeply resent your lowest common denominator just because I don't agree with you.
I was lucky enough not to need the "pill" but that's all it was. Luck! Have you used birth control or do you have a large number of children. The president is the president of all people. He was trying to protect those who needed access to the "pill." I guess he could have kept quiet and not risked the outpouring of hate from the anti's but he was true to what he believed. I am lucky enough to have a good health policy which I will lose if my husband dies before me. No one is claiming our president is the smartest, that is not a factor. Whether you vote for or against him, stop being so hateful.

no president has that power preliator... the president's powers are limited and have to be 'approved' by congress... if the bill doesn't pass, it's not a law.

The President did a poor job with his initial rule requiring all employer provided healthcare coverage to cover contraceptives which led to the religious freedom uproar. The change made to correct that error should have resolved this discussion, but the Catholic church just continues to hammer away on the issue. As a church going Catholic, I am sick of hearing about the evils of contraception being preached to an audience where nearly every married couple of child bearing age is using some form of birth control. Every family around me, including my own, has one or two children evenly spaced out by two or three years. I doubt very many are using the rhythm method. If my pastor at St. Patricks in Smithtown feels so strongly about the issue, why doesn’t he ask every parishioner who uses birth control to leave. What about the men who are using erectile dysfunction medications. The church should also be against these drugs since sex is something that they say should only occur for procreation. I have heard more bashing of Obama from the pulpit over contraception in the past few weeks then during all the years when the scandal involving priests sexually abusing children was making news. I am really considering whether it is time to leave the church.

@ Irisheyes, there was plenty of seating available at the Nesconset Library. Actually 1:30 is a great time. Nice place too. Not really too disapointed that no one showed. Got through a few chapters instead.

@ Fred Stewart, thanks for the link. I've seen most of his votes. According to his votes he's a party follower, not a leader. He's the type that votes in favor of keeping himself in office. Randy may have outsourced but Tim Bishop sold us out.

An academic argument to be made that as this whole mess falls under the shadow of "Obamacare" and the odds are that this monstrous act is going to be found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and struck down. It renders all of the nonsense and lies that flow from the Obama regime moot and this act by a power hungry president an empty and worthless act...much like his election.

I don't like hateful comments from either party. I hate negative ads or comments but everyone in our country has the right to speak. This whole magilla was about contraception and in the Patch it segued into rants about Bishop and Altschuler. In our country we are long overdue for decent health care for everyone. I am lucky enough to be covered by my husband's plan and hope he outlives me since then I will be forced to find a plan to fit my budget. Luckily I'm in my eighties so I don't have that many years to worry about it. As far as the Nesconset Library I have asked the ladies to complain about the entrance/exit. Going in, coming from Lake, there is no arrow showing the entrance and coming out it's a tight squeeze since cars go both ways. Luckily I'm in San Francisco a lot of time and don't have to face this issue too often. I love the library and use it on both coasts.

Kevin, don't leave the church. I felt that way last Sunday in San Francisco and then I went to my St. Dominic's where the pastor had us do our marriage vows and didn't mention the birth control issue until the end of mass when he said that we all must us our conscience to decide these issues. Jesus didn't go around preaching birth control just love and compassion for everyone. So when you go to St. Patrick's just don't listen to the pastor. He was very mean and uncaring to some kids I know who when they missed a confirrmation class and were honest enough to tell the truth about their being on vacation with their loving parents was practically crucified. Luckily they didn't leave the church.

By Paul Kengor
A fascinating theory has been advanced by Dick Morris, which, in turn, is being considered by Rush Limbaugh and other leading conservatives. Morris speculates that the Obama HHS mandate on contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients is a fight with the Catholic Church that Team Obama wants -- and with the focus based narrowly on contraception, not abortifacients.

Dick Morris may be right. It seems no accident that Obama publicly noted that the vast majority of Catholic women use contraception. Yes, the vast majority does, but the vast majority does not support abortifacients -- that is, "contraceptive" drugs that cause or induce an abortion.

Obama is underscoring "contraception" generally, not abortifacients specifically. Sadly, our superficial media, which reflexively ramrods everything into a 10-second sound-bite, is aiding and abetting his tactic. Again and again, I hear reporters refer to Obama's mandate not as a mandate on "contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs" (which it is), but as simply one on "contraception."

Continued below>>>

I could not agree more with the article above by Paul Kengor, and the GOP just feed right into it and walk right into the Trap, happens EVERY time.

Quite a genius plan by Obuma and his team, as it point out, the key, he knows most Roman Catholic Women use contraception (non abortion inducing) . Also, I know quite a few Catholic women that for themselves personally are Pro-life, However, they have no issue with other women if they want to be pro-choice.

Obama will get re-elected, just watch and wait. I hope I am wrong, but I can see it coming. America has changed folks, and the slogan now in the average American's uneducated ill-informed mind is " Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your country can do for you"

Hang on my friends, we think it's bad now, just wait til this Joker get's his next 4 years

Corruption: All this talk about Obama, when we should be talking about Bush and the Republicans who got us into this mess. Don't be distracted. The mess was Bush's, on his watch and a result of his policies. History will show him as one of the worst Presidents to serve this country.

Regarding the lowest common denominator or lowering the bar. This concept is a VERY serious problem is the country. We are being led over the cliff by a complicit press that is slowly going bankrupt. For instance, this president has been described as the Affirmative Action president, the bar was seriously dropped when Obama ran for president, that is a fact. Bush's, even John Kerry's college grades were such an issue, but oddly, Obama's grades were never released, for this the smartest president of all time. I mean, I am not too bright, but....if the grades from this smartest person in the room were so great, I would think they would be released, wouldn't you? He had troubling associations with white and Jew hating Reverend Wright, and he had association with Bill Ayers, and bought land from a convicted felon who currently is serving time, Tony Rezko. He rarely voted Yea or Ney in the Senate so that we could see what he was about but instead voted Present. He made the statement "white people's greed, drives a world in need" but the sheep "did their research" reading the NY Times, Newsday and listening to CNN and MSNBC and voted. Read up on the Affirmative Action president, do your independent research, get the search engines going but read this and step away from your keyboard and THINK!
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/obama_the_affirmative_action_president.html

Mike according to politifact your assignment of who created this debt is not true. sorry!

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ (D-NJ)

1) Over the course of the Bush[43] administration there was a 72% increase in the national debt, from $5.7 trillion to $9.8 trillion – MOSTLY TRUE

2) At the end of the Bush [43] administration, the U.S. had a $1.5 trillion budget deficit - TRUE

SEN. MENENDEZ: And it’s not just talking about President Bush, it’s the policies that they espouse that are in essence Bush’s policies. Those led us to a 72 percent increase in the debt from $5.7 trillion to $9.8 trillion when Bush left. It led us to a massive elimination of the surplus that Bill Clinton gave George Bush, and he had a $1.5 trillion deficit when he left office

1) According to the Treasury Department, when George W. Bush took office in 2001 the national debt was $5.73 trillion and when Bush left office in 2009, the national debt had increased to $10.63 trillion. That’s a 85% increase of $4.9 trillion. Sen. Menendez is off by 13%, but he is correct in the underlying message that the national debt did significantly increase under George W. Bush. Thus, we rate Sen. Menendez’s statement MOSTLY TRUE.

Mike you have to really stop reporting those figures as fact. where the heck did you get them?? the Karl Rove website? Glenn Beck?? This is politifact:

1) According to the Treasury Department, the current holding of debt on the day President Obama was sworn in, January 20, 2009, was $10.618 trillion and on May 21, 2010, the debt was at $12.978 trillion. This means that in that time the debt has increased by 22.31%. So Sen. Cornyn was off by .69%. Therefore stating that the debt has gone up by 23% since Obama was sworn in is MOSTLY TRUE.

2) However, it is also worth examining how Sen. Cornyn attaches that number to a statement or assertion that seems to indicate that Pres. Obama and the Democratic leadership are “responsible” for this total increase. To suggest that is highly misleading. Pres. Obama’s first budget did not take effect the day he was sworn in. If looking at the debt that Pres. Obama and the Democratic majority are “responsible” for as Sen. Cornyn suggests, then Oct 1, 2009 is the reasonable start date, when fiscal year 2010 and Pres. Obama’s first budget took effect. The debt at that point was $11.920 trillion, meaning the increase from then to May 21 was 8.95%.

My brother got a tax deduction because Altschuler outsourced his job, but he lost his healthcare, savings and wife.

Funny how we used to say "two out of three ain't bad" - now I guess it's one out of three ain't bad!

Billy Moyers wrote a brilliant piece defending the president entitled, "Freedom of and FROM religion"

The last paragraph nails it: "So here we are once again, arguing over how to honor religious liberty without it becoming the liberty to impose on others moral beliefs they don't share. Our practical solution is the one Barack Obama embraced the other day: protect freedom of religion -- and protect freedom from religion. Can't get more American than that."

These boards accurately reflect how progressive Americans are on this issue with a vast majority supporting the president's compromise and a small minority of culture-warriors opposing. The hypocrisy of the right is stunning, especially when you consider how many republicans signed off on this exact legislation (and in many cases with NO exemption for churches) in their own states. They are so desperate to paint the president as "anti-religion", "anti-America" and "other" that they will say and do anything to destroy a man, who is more of a centrist than a liberal.

Mr. Altschuler has started off his campaign, not with the promise of a positive vision for Long Island, but by spewing divisive rhetoric. Considering the article was clearly written before the compromise it should not have been printed after, or, at the very least, Mr. Altschuler should have shown some class and modified his comments. But do we really expect that of a man who so brazenly defends the wanton destruction of American jobs?

I've watched you bloggers go from Altschuler's fuzzy-fact interns to neo-Nazi hate mongers; neither of which I like. One thing you can be sure of with Congressman Bishop: he is an honest, hard-working representative of the people who is not a part of that sort of nonsense. Neither am I and neither are self-respecting America-loving residents on Long Island. We fought in America's wars and saw the worst, ran bayonets through the hearts of our enemies for freedom and we're not about to let our nation fall into the grips of politicians who employ hate-mongering operatives to get themselves elected here on Long Island. Don't bother to reply with more of your jibberish.

Enough! Let's move on and try to keep hate our of all our comments. We are all entitled to our opinions and our responses. Respect each other. Love conquers all.

One last thing. It's scary to see what's on our people's book list. I suggest The Lorax by Dr. Seuss, my favorite book by him. Save the planet with caring and love, not hate. Amen.

I'm a life-long Conservative and I'm voting for Tim Bishop. Only Bishop knows Long Island like our representative should.

Is it so hard for people to recall that our country was founded by those seeking religious freedom? Henry VIII's Act of Supremacy named him as head of the new Church of England. Anyone violating his rules was subject to penalty including death. The Acts of Uniformity followed. There was no room for diversity in old England and many escaped to America in search of freedom.
Our President is following in the steps of Henry VIII, establishing a state religion with penalties for those who do not follow. How long will it take for him to require that Catholic hospitals perform abortions? The reach of this government keeps growing.
Recently, his Dept. of Justice fought the Luthern Church, insisting that a minister that the church had fired for not following its teachings be able to keep his job. He told the church, "forget your doctrine, we make the doctrine here". The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled against the administrations aggressive attack on established religion.
What is his next target? Those of you that are defending him today should be wary. Your special cause or belief may be the next one that is outlawed by a government that knows no bound.

Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism is an important book to read. Most just take the title as an insult not understanding what the premise of the book is and that is that Fascism which is when Government works hand in hand with big business is dangerous. Liberal Fascism is what is going on in government now aka Crony Capitalism. The liberal part is saying that it will come at us with a happy face. Ideas are all sold as it is "good for you". Next thing you know your freedoms are gone and government through big business will control everything.

Perhaps Wilbur, but it has continued ten-fold under President Obama. Don't we want the Crony Capitalism/Fascism with a Happy Face to end???? That is why we must vote candidates in who want smaller government and less taxes and less onerous regulations. Candidates who follow the U.S. Constitution.

What does that have to with my point about Liberal Fascism being when Government works hand in hand with big business aka Crony Capitalism? The liberal part is that ideas are all sold as it is "good for you". Next thing you know your freedoms are gone and government through big business will control everything.
Do you like Liberal Fascism under that definition?

Wilbur Freewright, you say "When the churches got active in politics, they left themselves open to political manipulation."

And you are correct. You are describing the position of the Catholic church in the United States. For years, the church hierarchy has supported the big government policies of the Democrats (and Republicans), viewing entitlements and welfare as the charity they hope to promote and undertake. Now, their conspiracy with big government is backfiring, leaving them "open to political manipulation", as you say. The church's partner in "charity" is now moving to strip the church of its ability to defend and practice its own doctrines.

Read Paul Rahe's column "American Catholicism's Pact With the Devil" for a complete disection of how the church left itself "open to political manipulation". (Link: http://ricochet.com/main-feed/American-Catholicism-s-Pact-With-the-Devil).

Wilbur I never said ANYTHING about putting Government employees into the ranks of the unemployed. Let the free market work. End Crony Capitalism. Cut bloated government. We will all be better off.

Nice slogans, every one, but until you have a plan that does not wreck people's lives, it's just a slogan afterall. I understand your frustration. I don't advocate unnecessary hirings; even the unions don't push to put more on the job than are needed, lest they be done away with in their entirety. No, everyone must be responsible for getting the job done at the lowest possible cost. I don't have the solution either, but I know that shipping American jobs overseas won't help America or American families. So don't ask me or my family to support Altschuler. It's never going to happy.

I am sure you saw the headlines from yesterday: 'Where are the women?'

Because women weren't allowed to speak for themselves as witnesses in yesterday's contraception rule hearing held by the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, it was up to New York's own Rep. Carolyn Maloney and her Democratic colleagues to speak up for women. I know you were as proud as I was to have a New York woman stand up and demand to be counted. I think what Congresswoman Maloney was really asking was where are the women throughout the halls of power on Capitol Hill and in Albany?

Of the 40 members of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, just 4 are women. Of the 212 members of the New York State Legislature, just 45 are women.

I can think of no better example than the leadership shown by Rep. Maloney yesterday as to why we need progressive New York women to run for office.

@ Beav, your partisan bias is showing.
1. The war on terror started BEFORE 9-11, the Clinton administration. Or did you have your blinders on back in 1993?
2. Bush solely started the war? Hmmm, maybe you're forgetting that the Dems AND Reps gave him the green light. Plus he had the the US citizens behind him! How soon we forget.
3. I don't see Obama putting the brakes on the middle east any time soon. Hmmm, maybe cause they all know how dangerous the situation is for us in the long run.

And it was Altschuler who sent American jobs overseas during the recession. Unforgiveable. I could never vote for Altschuler.

Our son-in-law faced the competition of Altschuler's outsourcing service when he applied for jobs last year. Uneven playing fields were created by Altschuler's company. He left American workers and their families lying in the ditch. We're registered Independents voting for Congressman Bishop. My son-in-law is registered as a Republican, has been all his life, but won't vote for Altschuler. It's criminal what he did to our country right when we needed jobs the most.

Dear Fred 'n Freeda, I read your post and I apologize for voting for Altschuler 2 years ago. It won't happen again. He wrongly calls himself a St James businessman, which is another lie, I found out. He was moved to Long Island by the Republican committee just to run for Congress. I've lived here for 67 years, worked here, raised my family and watched my grandkids go through local schools. Mr. Altschuler does not know a thing about us or our neighbors, our business problems, our family farm, my uncle's fishing business out east that he's struggled with for decades. Congressman Bishop is approachable and helped us through an issue. He's been coming to our community meetings for years and understands us very well. He's got our vote again and we're Republicans, too.

Where is Representative Bishop on the Keystone Pipe? Doesn't he want jobs? Doesn't he want lower prices at the pump? Oh no he was for Cap and Trade that will necessarily skyrocket our fuel prices. For the green energy crowd, we can not drive our cars using the sun just yet.

Bishop & Obama are for the pipeline in principle you say, so I guess they are just playing politics with jobs and oil prices? Great. Also remember President Obama let all the oil rigs go to Brazil for offshore drilling. He wants the US to be Brazil's biggest consumer of their oil. Why don't we drill for our own? Maybe we could even export some and make some money.

Patch received a letter to the editor in response to this op-ed. You can read it here: Letter to the Editor: Altschuler Op-Ed Is 'Chaos Campaigning' http://southampton.patch.com/articles/letter-to-the-editor-altschuler-op-ed-is-chaos-campaigning

Altschuler wants to bury his past, then buy a seat in Congress with money made off American job losses he created. This church stuff is a smoke screen and it's out of date. It was announced at church LAST WEEK that Obama REVERSE Bush's requirement that the church hand out contraception. Why did Altschuler lie about this? Can't run from your past. He'll learn again this election.

I am grateful to have a Congressman who has represented the east end with such integrity and the presence of mind to be responsive to his constituents and reasoned and reasonable. just listen to his Rogers Memorial Library presentations on TV and see how he responds to the issues. Mr. Altschuler's letter was so full of the code words I have come to see so often in our divisive political world. We call the Affordable Health Care Act "ObamaCare" to incite anger instead of discussing the facts. It may be accurate to call it President Obama's Affordable Health Care Act. But in reality it is ours. And the facts are important. Mr. Altschuller did not get them correct when discussing the importance of the birth control question for woman and for practicing Catholic individuals in our country. If Mr. Altschuler is elected would he want to repeal no-cost contraceptive coverage in New York that is so important to woman--and to men? Would he work to take away the advances to the prescription drug plan that I as a senior depend on so dearly? He is not a candidate I can support based on his positions and incitefulness. Thank you Congressman Bishop for so many of your forthright positions and your presence as my representative. Dianne

Dianne said it better than me. Bishop has been a friend to the farmer on Long Island and the fishin man too. Altshila lives in a hoyti toyti mansion on the gold coast. Only thing he knows bout farmin is the stuff his man spreads on his fancy gardens. Hows he gonna work for us regular folk and working people when he's just a smarty pants college boy made money from selling our boys jobs while they was fightin them Arabs. Coming home to nothin now. What's Altshilas plan to help our boys? Bishop is way ahead of him on jobs. Saw the article bout thepresidents plan and it sounds right to me. Honor our vets. Get them work. I can help them a bit.

One could almost believe Randy Altschuler has been secretly recruited by the Democrats. After all, what he's saying is so directly opposed to what most people think and do, it's hugely damaging to himself and Republicans generally, and hugely helpful to Tim Bishop and Democrats generally. I think he's gone over.

I'd like to add my voice to John Bouvier's informative letter. It saddens me that the nasty campaign season has begun with Randy's Op-Ed piece trying to denigrate Congressman Tim Bishop. Mr. Bishop has a history of bi-partisanship and his continued reelection to office provides sufficient evidence that this is the case. He gets things done for his constituents and cares about our well-being and the health of our country. Other than wanting to take away women's hard-earned rights and chanting the anti-big government mantra, Randy has not provided any compelling platform that would convince an intelligent voter that he is a substantial candidate. Tim Bishop has consistently proven he's the man for the job and I am extremely proud of and grateful for his ceaseless efforts in our behalf.

If Tim Bishop is so wonderful could the Bishopphiles post his exhaustive list of his major legislative accomplishments? I don't mean other bills he just signed on to, I want a list of his bills, his ideas, that were made into law. I mean after eight plus years in office and simply how awesome he is it must be pretty long, right?

It sickens me to see negative comments no matter who you "like." It serves no purpose. I wish that each candidate whether local or national, just state what they are and what they believe in and what the PROMISE to do once they are elected. What everyone is saying here doesn't change anyone's minds but only feeds into hatefullness.

Jill, I began to think I must have missed what he said in his comments so I scrolled back way to the beginning ready to apologize to you for not understanding what he was saying and guess what. It seems that he was attacking the president about the birth control issue etc etc. It was just an attack. So thank you for responding but no apology is necessary.

Obama the Lawbreaker versus the Catholic Church
By Richard Viguerie and Mark Fitzgibbons

In response to the Obama administration mandate requiring Catholic institutions to pay for insurance covering contraception, U.S. Catholic bishops announced that they will not "obey" that "law."

The bishops have gotten it wrong and backwards, and in doing so have yielded the moral high ground that is rightfully theirs.

Catholic bishops and the Church's other clerical and even lay leaders have let this issue devolve into a debate about the right to use contraception when that is not even remotely accurate. Proponents of religious and economic freedom are on the defensive. Dictatorial authoritarians are defining the issue and defining their opponents as...well, dictatorial authoritarians.

However, it is the Obama administration that is refusing to obey the law. The administration is the trespasser on rights. Its people are, in fact, lawbreakers

The law being broken is our Constitution. The Constitution is America's paramount law, meaning that not only does it trump statutory laws contrary to it, but it supersedes any Obama administration mandate in violation of it.

The Constitution, of course, creates a structure for how government makes, enforces, and adjudicates law. Government lacks authority to operate in contravention of the Constitution because the Constitution is the law that governs government.

In the months running up to the 2012 presidential election, the Obama administration has taken on clearly the largest and arguably the most powerful organization and network in the United States, the Catholic Church, with all its beneficent auxiliaries such as schools and hospitals, and all its adherents.

With such contempt for the law, and against such a broad swath of the electorate when his re-election is on the line, what makes anyone think that Obama won't go on an even grander, more unprecedented rampage if he is elected in 2012, and does not need to worry about another re-election after that?

Why does any lawbreaker believe in his invincibility after successfully evading the law?

No president in American history has ever taken a step so grand -- so egregious -- against religious freedom, because up until now no president has ever shown so much contempt for the Constitution as the law that governs government. President Obama promised in 2008 that he would transform America. He could not do that without gutting our paramount law, which otherwise would restrict him.

Obama's transformation of America is based entirely in what some have described as lawlessness. That, however, is an inapt term. One may be lawless without causing harm to others. What President Obama is doing is violating our paramount law and, in doing so, causing harm to our individual, religious, and economic liberties.

When someone violates the law in ways that cause harm to others or the rights of others, that person is a lawbreaker susceptible to society's punishment. The law is intended to prohibit one person from harming others, and to punish those who violate this basic precept of civil society.

Obama is a lawbreaker unparalleled in American history not merely by the number of times he has broken the law, but by the number of victims of his lawbreaking. While violations of our paramount law, the Constitution, do not come with the penalties of punishment like violations of other laws, that does not diminish the lawbreaking nature of Obama's actions.

Catholic leaders have failed to approach the situation the right way. Oh, sure, many have said that the contraception mandate is a violation of religious liberty. But by saying they will not "obey" the contraceptive mandate "law," they have acknowledged a false premise. The mandate is not law. It is a violation of law. You cannot disobey a violation of the law.

This is not a situation of "render unto Caesar." Caesar was the law. In the United States, we have the Constitution. From that paramount law, all other laws to be obeyed flow. But the Constitution is unlike all other laws governing the people. The Constitution was written to govern government itself.

Once we begin to approach all situations from that perspective, our outlook and our responses change.

Catholic leaders assuredly want to follow the law and the dictates of their faith and consciences. Many Catholic leaders are by nature non-confrontational. However, history has been unkind to Catholic leaders who failed to confront wrongdoing and address it in appropriately moral but tactically aggressive ways.

As a lawbreaker, Mr. Obama is unworthy even of disobedience, for that would imply a legal and moral authority that he himself has ignored. No, Catholic leaders must treat Mr. Obama as the one who has disobeyed the law.

Richard A. Viguerie and Mark J. Fitzgibbons are co-authors of The Law That Governs Government: Reclaiming The Constitution From Usurpers And Society's Biggest Lawbreaker, available at ReclaimtheConstitution.com.

Did Mike forget that it was "W" who placed the contraceptive mandate on churches and Obama who removed it? This non-sense is another example of a "Wedge Issue" used to rile the church population against the President.

Mike, This is a political Wedge Issue used to divide Americans and it is not being done "in the name of God". Catholics are smarter than you think. We don't fall for that non-sense.

Obama agrees with Catholics and removed the contraceptive requirement that Bush put into law in 2002. We should thank him.

Altschuler can't do anything for me or other retirees except take away our Medicare and Social Security. Bishop will defend us.

I hate Obama Care more than anyone. I can't go to the doctor I want and I can't take the drug he prescribes and I pay more in monthly premiums and copays and receive less benefits every year.

However, Altschuler is another story. He is big on religious freedom. But what about individual freedom. Another white middle aged, male telling women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. I thought Republicans wanted less government and now they want government to mandate what is allowed. I guess big government getting involved in health care is ok as long as you agree with what they are doing. Let's hope history repeats and Altschuler is denied again.

Who benefits from running a daily expense through an insurance company but the insurance company? The indisputable fact is that insurance adds a layer of cost to the process. It's worth paying that to spread the risk on an $80,000 heart operation into a manageable monthly expense.

Birth control costs less than a latte a day. It would be cheaper to pay cash than run it through the insurance company.

If you're a well connected insurance company, of course you wouldn't see it that way.

Postman, you are right on the mark. Obamacare is just a buzz word put out by the haters. Right now I am fine, covered by my husband but if I oulive him (I hope not, I'm sure my coverage will be reasonable. I wish they would stop this topic since it gets more bitter with every comment. I'm sure the Patch is loving all this.

Here is their definition of religious employer:

Here’s North Carolina’s definition of a “religious employer” who would be exempt from the mandate to offer contraceptive coverage to employees:

(e) …As used in this subsection, the term “religious employer” means an entity for which all of the following are true:

(1) The entity is organized and operated for religious purposes and is tax exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code.

(2) The inculcation of religious values is one of the primary purposes of the entity.

(3) The entity employs primarily persons who share the religious tenets of the entity. (1999?231, s. 1; 1999?456, s. 15(a).)

But you all will continue to report false facts, to "soften" your wedge issue.

You all are bringing up more talking points being professed by the hard left like Mother Jones saying that Bush started this but >> http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/controversial-obama-birth-control-rule-already-law

The federal Affordable Care Act (ACA) looked to many states and followed NC’s commonsense exemption of churches and primarily religious institutions almost exactly.

Here’s the federal Affordable Care Act’s definition of a “religious employer” who would be exempt from the mandate to offer contraceptive coverage to employees:

A religious employer is one that: (1) has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization under Internal Revenue Code section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii). 45 C.F.R. §147.130(a)(1)(iv)(B)

There are definitions also as to what a religious employer is. So, under BUSH, churches AND religious employers were exempt.

We can see that we have a President who doesn't care, who'll use faith as a tool to achieve his ends. On taxes he'll quote the bible and tell us that Jesus would want us to pay higher taxes because 'to whom much is given, much is expected". On the other hand he'll ignore if not demean a faiths explicit views on another matter all because he says so, because he thinks other wise. That is not democracy, that is soft despotism and if you are okay with that then I am sorry, you are heading down a path that leads only to one place and you don't have to look too far back in history to see it.

PreGrader: You toss around taxes and the Bible like a Southern faith healer with an empty tent. You Republicans are desparate, look at your primaries.

Want to get sick: According to the US Treasury, when Bush took office in 2001 the NATIONAL DEBT was $5.73 trillion and when Bush left office in 2009, the national debt had increased to $10.63 trillion. That’s a 85% increase of $4.9 trillion. At the end of the Bush administration, the U.S. had a $1.5 trillion BUDGET DEFICIT. Bush’s policies led us to the elimination of the massive surplus that Bill Clinton left in the Treasury in January, 2000. (Source: Politifact)

When does this topic stop? It's a lose lose topic. Nobody's opinion is changed. The only one liking it is the Patch.

@gj the president disregards the constitution constantly, please read:

Obama Undermining Checks and Balances in Our Constitution
By Lamar Alexander

February 3, 2012 12:16 P.M.

Last week we Republican senators had an extraordinary experience that millions of Americans have had and will have in the future: We spent a day at Mount Vernon, George Washington’s home, which is not more than about 40 minutes from the nation’s capital.

Even in the middle of winter, it is a beautiful, historic setting. It is hard to imagine why George Washington and Martha Washington would ever want to leave the place.

But despite the beauty of the place and Washington’s love for farming, he was gone from Mount Vernon for eight and a half years during the Revolutionary War. He never went home; he was always in the war. Even when he was president of the United States for eight years, he was only at Mount Vernon ten times during that time; and after the presidency, of course, he soon died. So he gave up quite a bit to be president.

There were other things that impressed me about our visit to Mount Vernon. One was the reminder that our revolution was a revolution against a king. George Washington, as commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, led a fight for independence from a king who, the signers of the Declaration of Independence stated, had a “History of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.”

Continued:

Those were our revolutionary founders talking. As president of the Philadelphia Convention, George Washington presided over the writing of the U.S. Constitution which emphasizes, if it emphasizes any one word, the idea of “liberty” in creating the system of government we enjoy today.

Another quality of George Washington’s of which we were reminded that would be good for us to think about today is his modesty and restraint.

Washington must have had remarkable presence. He never had to say very much, apparently, to command the attention and respect of his countrymen. He likely could have been general of the army as long as he wished and president of the United States as long as he wished, but he chose not to do that.

It was he who first asked to be called simply Mr. President, rather than some grand title. It was Washington who gave up his commission when the war was over, and it was Washington who stepped down after two terms and went home to Mount Vernon. In fact, that aspect of his character was imprinted upon the American character — that modesty and restraint on the part of the executive branch and a recognition that our system depends absolutely on checks and balances.

I am struck by that attitude and the different attitude I see in the administration of President Obama, which has shown disregard for those checks and balances and the limits on presidential power that our Founders and George Washington felt were so important.

Continued:

This administration, over three years, has been arrogating more power to the executive branch of government and upsetting the delicate balance, which the Founders created for the purpose of guaranteeing to each of us as individuals the maximum amount of liberty.

I remember Senator Byrd saying time and time again that the purpose of the Senate, more than anything else, was a restraint upon the tyranny of the executive branch of government. That is our purpose as a Senate.

This president’s executive excesses were first illustrated by the creation of more czars than the Romanovs had.

We have had some so-called czars in the White House for a long time — the drug czar, for example. But now we have approximately three dozen of them. These czars duplicate and dilute the responsibilities of Cabinet members; they make it harder for the Congress to have a supervisory role over exactly what they are doing. It is not only anti-democratic, it is a poor way to manage the government.

Equally disturbing to me has been this administration’s use of regulation and litigation to bypass the Congress and the will of the people when the Congress has a different point of view.

This was the case with the National Labor Relations Board and their decision in the Boeing case; which has now apparently been resolved but which was an enormous abuse of power, in my opinion

Continued:

The president has taken to blaming almost everyone for the problems we see in our lives today: First, it was President Bush, then it was the banks, then it was business, then it was the insurance companies, then it was Wall Street, then it was 1 percent of us, and now it is the Congress, which of course is in a government that is primarily run by the president’s own political party.

The president has taken to saying in his campaign speeches — and his State of the Union Address the other day — “If Congress won’t act, I will,” and he has begun to show that it is no idle threat.

Now, on top of these other abuses, his recent appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to head a new and unaccountable agency, have undermined the checks and balances that were placed in our Constitution and that George Washington so respected.

The Senate has always been the place that has insisted upon checks and balances and the liberty of the people as guaranteed by those checks and balances. The president’s recent recess appointments have shown disregard for possibly the best known and most important role of the Senate: its power of advice and consent of executive and judicial nominations as outlined in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

Continued:

These actions — four appointments during a period of time when the Senate, in my opinion, was in session — fly in the face of the principle of separation of powers and the concept of checks and balances against an imperial president.

Let’s look for a moment at the history and precedents of recess appointments. The exact length required for a recess is not defined in the Constitution, but according to the Congressional Research Service “it appears that no president, at least in the modern era, has made an intra-session recess appointment during a recess of less than ten days.”

Both parties have relied upon the adjournment clause in Article I of the Constitution to argue that the absolute minimum recess period would conceivably be three days.

We can also look at the number of recess appointments made by recent presidents. As of January 23 of this year, President Obama had made 32 recess appointments, all to full-time positions. At the same point in time in his first term, President Clinton had made nine recess appointments to full-time positions. President Bush, at about the same time, had made 35.

So they all made appointments while the Senate was in recess. That is provided for specifically in the Constitution as something the president can do. But President Clinton never did it when Congress was in recess for less than ten days. President Bush never did it when Congress was in recess for less than eleven days.

Now, unfortunately, President Obama has broken that precedent and made four appointments when we were in a recess of less than three days.

Why is that important? In 2007, the current majority leader of the Senate, Harry Reid, decided the Senate did not want President Bush making recess appointments; that is, making appointments while the Senate wasn’t in session. So the Senate refused at that time to enter into prolonged recesses. They invented the idea of pro forma recesses every three days. President Bush strenuously objected to that, but he respected it. He respected the constitutional authority of the Senate under Article I, Section 5 to determine when the Senate is in session.

On November 16, 2007, Senator Reid said: “With the Thanksgiving break looming, the administration has informed me that they would make several recess appointments.”

Senator Reid didn’t like the idea of recess appointments any more than we do, so he continued, “As a result, I am keeping the Senate in pro forma to prevent recess appointments until we get back on track.”

And on July 28, 2008 he said, “We don’t need a vote to recess. We will just be in pro forma session. We will tell the House to do the same thing.”

Continued:
The president is restricted, as Senator Reid indicated, by Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, which states that “neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.”

Last December when the House and Senate agreed to adjourn, the speaker — a Republican — and the majority leader here — a Democrat — agreed that the two chambers would hold pro forma sessions for the express purpose of not going into recess. Yet the president went ahead and made his appointments. This is a dangerous trend.

The major issue before our country is the Obama economy. That is what we will be talking about more than anything else in an election year. But liberty is the defining aspect of the American character. If the president’s current actions were to stand as a precedent, the Senate may very well find that if it takes a break for lunch, the country will have a new Supreme Court Justice when it comes back.

Because we believe in the importance of that constitutional system, all of us on the Republican side insist on a full and complete debate on this issue. We will file amicus curiae briefs in all of the appropriate courts and we will take this issue to the most important court in the land and that is the court of the American people on Election Day.

Continued:

I do not suggest that the president will find, or even should find, his relationship with Congress to be easy or simple. George Washington did not. President Washington once came up here to discuss a treaty with senators and became so angry that he said, and this was Washington’s word: I’ll be “damned” if I go there again.

The separation of powers does not mean an easy distribution of powers, but it is essential to the American character. We should remember that. A short trip to Mount Vernon would remind us of that. The president’s recess appointments not only show disregard for the Constitution, they show disregard for every individual American who chooses liberty over tyranny, president over king.

© National Review Online 2012. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290093/obama-undermining-checks-and-balances-our-constitution-lamar-alexander

Furthermore:

November 12, 2011 12:00 A.M.
The President, the Constitution, and National Security
A response to Lindsey Graham
By Andrew C. McCarthy at National Review

Position One: The president has the authority to launch war unilaterally — without any authorization from Congress — in the absence of an attack, or even a threat of aggression, against the United States; and he may do so by invading a country with which the United States is not only at peace but in alliance — a counterterrorism alliance subsidized by American taxpayers

OR

Position Two (and this one is worth quoting): “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

So which is the right stance?

Read up on whether this is constitutional at the link below, the article is 4 pages long, but worth the read.

Credit:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/283018/president-constitution-and-national-security-andrew-c-mccarthy

I am not sure why the words hate mongers, operatives, radical right wingers come from, but I am unemployed for 4 years and I have nothing to do with Randy A. This is an exchange of ideas, not a food fight. I would appreciate it if we could stay on subject, stop being emotional, and stop characterizing each other. You know nothing about me to call me racist or a hater and to do so is deflecting and cowardly as you would not do the same if we were standing face to face, so dont let the keyboard between us change that. The fact is, this country is split down the middle, we are not going to agree, that is a fact, but just CONSIDER another point of view or give good reason why you feel so strongly. To me, its clear that this administration is a complete failure on many levels. That is an opinion that I can back up, an opinion that has NOTHING to do with race. Is anyone looking at Europe and Greece, is that where you want the US to be soon? Is anyone asking why were are in this situation? Why is China, a communist corrupt country manufacturing the worlds goods while pumping up its military? Research how China got accepted into the WTO. Why do jobs leave this country?, salaries, favorable taxes, less benefits? Why do we need to import engineers?, what is wrong with our education system, that we can not provide them? Bill Gates stated over 15 years ago that he had to go out of the country to get engineers, why has that not been addressed?

Why were foreign car manufacturers allowed to build plants in the south and use non union workers while the big three US firms were straddled with union labor? You all technology buffs?, are you aware that my job can now be done in India or say the Phillipines via secure servers that store all pertinent documents in PDF format by employees that make a fraction of my NEW YORK salary, benefits and overhead (Park Avenue rents). What has the IMPACT been of technology in that work can be done much more cheaply around the work rather than paying MIKE, big bucks to live on Long Island.

The problems we have are COMPLEX but the people who are in DC are not asking the right questions and responding to a changing environment and everyone is just grabbing at a shrinking pie.
I could go on and on.

Tonight my husband and I attended Ash Wed. services at St. Dominics in San Francisco. It made me forget all the "hate" stuff I have been hearing from the Patchers. There was no political message from the pulpit just words of caring for each other. I thank God for this peaceful interlude. Bless you all!

If the Constitution had been followed faithfully, we wouldn't been involved in war in Korea or anywhere else in the past sixty plus years; Obama didn't create that monster, but at least didn't create mass destruction scenarios out of whole cloth as justification. I didn't ask for further rantings of polarized opinion, I asked for specifics. If you're so sure of your position why not supply some detail rather than beating around the bush with recycled generalities from sources with such a narrow viewpoint?

Someone needs to tell Altschuler that his political operatives are out of control. Either train them or medicate them.

Marion, I want to say I am sorry for what I said above about you being in San Francisco. We all have our point of view. You seem to think that a little heated discussion between people have opinions 180 degrees out is somehow HATE, when it is knott (pun intended). I just read a bio on you and you seem to be a nice person, please understand that others have opinions that are not similar to yours and that does not make it hate. Found your bio here
http://www.jacketflap.com/profile.asp?member=sabeha

I also live in St. James. Both are wonderful places to live. I like your pun. I guess when a person retires they have time on their hands. I volunteer three days a week in a school and do exercise three days a week and I love to shop but I still need stimulation and I guess the Patch fills the bill for me. Where did you read my bio? I didn't think I rated one! Discussion is fine but really Mike some of the comments for and against have been hateful. Love you, Marion

I see you left a site for me to see my bio so I shall quickly go through it.

We have some news on the Altschuler front: Randy won the Republican, Conservative and Tea parties' support in advance of the Republican primary. Read about it here: http://southampton.patch.com/articles/altschuler-earns-party-support-in-2012-though-primary-inevitable

yup, gads of money spread about by this wonderful man to gain support of party operatives. Money works wonders for Repubs. & of course it works. It even exempts him from from letting the voters decide which Repub runs for Bishop's seat

Jennifer Maertz, a candidate for New York State Senate, has written a reply to Altschuler's Op-Ed: http://southampton.patch.com/articles/maertz-contraception-debate-echoes-of-1912-not-2012

http://thetruthaboutrandy.com/ The Truth about Randy Altschuler