Recall the moment Barack Obama, seeking to position himself as being the champion of the middle-class, notoriously lamented with regards to the increasing cost of arugula from among the nation’s most sumptuous food markets?

Quoting the faux arugula-muncher-in-chief: “Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula?” the Illinois senator stated in 2007. “I mean, they’re charging a lot of money for this stuff.”

This was Obama almost five-years back when looking for his Party’s nomination, prior to pulling off his unforeseen triumph from the Democrat Iowa Caucus. He subsequently guaranteed that an Obama administration would definitely reduce explosive food expenses, that, indeed, had been less formidable compared to his various other pledges associated with healing the earth and blocking glaciers from melting.

And guess what, he essentially achieved a campaign promise. No, the cost of food is not more affordable currently compared to what it had been before Obama acquiring office. In reality, the food index is actually significantly greater. That satisfied promise to Iowans originates through ObamaCare, which in turn funneled $327,500 in “grants” to “help the Scott County Health Department market well being and great health lifestyle in the region,” noted the Quad-City Times prior to the beginning of 2012.

The huge taxpayer “slush fund” which is ObamaCare carves away this sort of financing for “wellness” activity beneath the rubric associated with “preventative care.” As the White House’s distinctive line of thinking goes, bureaucrats inside the Beltway provide the sagacity as well as competence to assist 300 million US citizens try to make wholesome lifestyle choices concerning their day-to-day lives superior to those individuals do. Therefore, when it comes to Iowa, Scott County is now bequeathed with taxpayer dollars to produce “roads and paths more amenable to bike riding and walking” in addition to promoting “community gardens and the wide availability of locally grown fruits and vegetables.”

While we all consider this, we’ve got no clue whether it may reduce the price of wholesome foods, in addition to contemplating Obama’s terminated assurances to date, anticipate the cost of leafy greens to sky rocket. Far more ’08 discussion continues to be in limbo.

Yet, Whole Foods is subsequently launching a store in Iowa, hence Michelle Obama at any rate boasts a destination to purchase high-priced fresh fruits and nuts somewhere between flying about the nation on board her carbon-spewing campaign aircraft.

As one Republican operative comments, “So at a time when the federal government is running trillion-dollar deficits, ObamaCare is using taxpayer dollars to fund projects to help reduce the price of arugula and other vegetables in Iowa.”

Essentially!

Preventative solutions, incidentally, had been precisely the protection Democrats hid behind in order to place tens of millions of dollars directly into ObamaCare in an effort to construct jungle gyms about play grounds throughout America.

Additionally, the Liberals ponder exactly why health care expenses are ascending north. It’s actually reached the level in which the Administration is actually hyping the belief that that they’ve had the capacity to push insurance providers to reduce the cost of increases when it surpasses ten percent. Call to mind it had been candidate Obama who promised that getting the federal government to take control of one-sixth of the US economy which is health care would definitely reduce insurance premiums by $2,500.

Today the White House boasts whenever insurance premiums don’t rise beyond ten percent. This is nothing less than Obama conveniently shifting the goal posts.

As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation, insurance premiums with regard to households and individuals currently have increased by 9 and 8%, respectively. “The 9% growth rate in family premiums for 2011,” estimates Kaiser, “is significantly higher than the 3% growth rate in 2010.”

Prepare for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to claim if it weren’t for Obama “The One”, expenses for health care may very well be 25 % greater. Due to the fact Liberals under no circumstances wish themselves evaluated relating to the measures ensuing from their own policies. Not a chance. They wish to be assessed based for their motives exclusively.

Take pleasure in the extravagant vegetables following Iowa Caucus night, beloved Iowans. All things considered, we’re all assisting to finance them!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Barack Obama is undecided on allowing an exemption to the Catholic Church concerning his health care law and abortion. In case anyone is wondering the Catholic church and all pro-life institutions and individuals believe taking a life is murder. Leftists, Marxist, Democrats, NARAL and other ilk believe taking the life of an unborn child is pro-choice.

In August, Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius proposed a regulation–that would take affect next fall–that would require all health care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including abortifacients. The proposed regulation includes a very narrow religious exemption that does not cover individual Catholics, or Catholic universities, hospitals or charitable institutions.

First off, this is discriminatory because the exemption only includes Catholics not other religions or institutions who have a problem with murdering an unborn child. Despite what the courts have said, mainly nine people in black robes, the United States Constitution does not cover abortion. This is a feminist concept near and dear to women who have unprotected sex and then whine at the consequences. OK, you’re going to ask me what about rape and incest. I might answer think – about adoption.

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops have called the regulation an “unprecedented attack on religious liberty” and have called on American Catholics to contact HHS and demand that the regulation be rescinded. I would call on the whole health care law to be rescinded but the US Supreme Court is going to have a go at that in March 2012. If they decide in the affirmative than we need the law repealed by Congress in 2013.

What we have is religious freedom as set down in the Constitution vs. feminists, liberals, Marxists, radical leftists (fill in the blank) who want something unconscionable to stand while erasing one of the principle portions of the Constitution and one of the main reasons people fled to America to avoid religious persecution. Feminists and their ilk are now persecuting religion.

Obama, surprisingly enough, may let the exemption stand. This would be remarkable as he enjoys funding abortion at the taxpayers expense and is all for infanticide. Obama spokesman Jay Carney has the following remarkable statement: (Emphasis LCs)

“The President has–this decision has not yet been made,” Carney continue. ”You can be sure that we want to strike the right balance between expanding coverage of preventive services and respecting religious beliefs.  And that’s the balance that will be sought as this decision is made.”

Whoa! Health care and preventive services are NOT a right but religious freedom is. By the way, murder is against the law in all fifty states. It’s also a federal crime.

The Catholic Bishops are spot on in their comments:

“Indeed, such nationwide government coercion of religious people and groups to sell, broker, or purchase ‘services’ to which they have a moral or religious objection represents an unprecedented attack on religious liberty.”

Many believe abortion aka murdering an unborn child is a Constitutional right, it isn’t. If you can find it in the Constitution I will pay you $1,000 no questions asked. However, religious freedom is a right in the Untied States and if you find that to be untrue I will pay you $5,000.

Obama will make his decision based on politics and votes. He has no use for religion or the Constitution but he may be counting on Catholics to vote for him again. Have they learned their lesson yet?

If you’re on the side of abortion than do us all a favor – abort yourself!

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines:

Last week I wrote about Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s Conflict of Interest concerning Obama’s health care law and challenges that will appear before the Supreme Court in March 2012.

Eric Holder gave Senate hearing testimony that has been called into question and the Department of Justice is refusing to cooperate with requests for information from Senate Judiciary Committee members on the Republican side.

Senators are urging Attorney General Holder to comply with requests that have been submitted to the Justice Department by Congress seeking information about Kagan’s involvement in the matter and expressed their view that Kagan’s activities as solicitor general may have triggered two different provisions of a federal law that governs when a Supreme Court justice must recuse from a case.

“Unfortunately, your Department has rejected all Congressional oversight requests for information about her role in the Obama Administration’s defense of this law,” said the letter to Holder, which was signed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.), Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R.-Ariz.), Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Charles Grassley (R.-Iowa) and Sen. Mike Lee (R.-Utah), who is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“You recently told the Senate, incredibly, that you were not even aware of Congressional requests on this topic, and that your Department handled her duties as relates to such matters in a way that is belied by the facts, namely that you physically removed her from all meetings discussing litigation,” the senators told Holder.

The plot thickens as Holder is caught in his own law to the committee.

In a July 6 letter to Holder, House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R.-Texas) had requested Kagan-related documents and witness interviews so that the committee could “properly understand any involvement by Justice Kagan in matters relating to health care legislation or litigation while she was Solicitor General.”

On Oct. 27, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich sent a letter to Smith informing him that DOJ would not comply with the committee’s request. Weich said in the letter that the committee’s request was “unseemly.”

The next day, on Oct. 28, Chairman Smith sent a second letter directly to Attorney General Eric Holder. This letter repeated the House Judiciary Committee’s July 6 request for the Kagan-related documents and witness interviews. Here Smith told Holder that he wanted DOJ to either comply with the request by Nov. 4 or assert what legal privilege DOJ was invoking in refusing to comply with the request. DOJ has failed to respond to this request also.

On Nov. 8, Holder testified at an oversight hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee. At this hearing, Sen. Lee asked the attorney general if the Justice Department was going to comply with the House Judiciary Committee’s request for the Kagan-related information. Despite the fact that the request had twice been sent to Holder in writing by the chairman of the House committee, and despite the fact that Holder’s assistant attorney general had formally rejected the request in a letter sent to the House committee the previous week, Holder testified that he was unaware of the request.

“I’m not familiar with that request. I’d have to look at it,” said Holder. “I’m just not familiar with the request that has been made or what materials have been sought in that regard.”

In response to additional follow-up questions by Sen. Lee, Holder repeated his testimony that he was unaware of the requests from the House Judiciary Committee.

“Again, I don’t know what the nature of the request is,” said Holder. “I can certainly look at it.”

The full story is at CNSNews with a short video of Holder testifying.

There is a disturbing pattern with Eric Holder and his Department of Justice where they feel compliance with Senate and House requests aren’t required to be answered. They believe stonewalling will buy them time while Elena Kagan remains a part of the healthcare reform debate and rulings from SCOTUS.

What we have is a runaway DOJ being led buy Eric Holder, a terrorists best friend.

Liberally Conservative appreciates your comments that abide by our guidelines: