The above was the follow-up tweet from national reporter Irin Carmon in reference to Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issuing a temporary stay blocking the Obamacare contraception mandate.

Carmon had previously expressed deeper disappointment in Sotomayor’s decision worthy of Caesar, but saw fit to delete it:


The tweet shouldn’t have been deleted. It’s not as if everybody doesn’t already know which direction MSNBC “reporters” lean, and it’s not “forward.”

  • Traitors will be hung

    Stupid communist progressive liberal.

    • Kevin Gallagher

      Stupid is a redundant word when referring to Liberals.

      • NRPax

        Or communists.

      • paendragon

        If evil libs were only stupid, they’d get some things right by accident.

    • Worship Dancer

      proglodyte fits them perfectly

      • Chrissy the Hyphenated

        Stealing that one. LOL

        • Worship Dancer

          please feel free to use it anywhere and everywhere. we need to make sure it becomes common usage. 😉

      • paendragon

        Hey – that’s MY line LOL!

    • PatriotRG

      Do you mean Sotomayor or the MSNBC reporter ?

      • Clete Torres


  • Love of Country

    Liberalism is a lie.

    • Expat61

      No, it is not a lie, it is a means to an end. Cloward/Piven strategy in action.

      • paendragon

        Cloward-Piven should be arrested for conspiring to promulgate sedition.

  • Jill

    Apparently this ‘reporter’ is very concerned about the contraception needs of Catholic nuns. So much so that an injunction until Friday represents a ‘betrayal’

    • Paige Jackson

      And apparently any restriction whatsoever not only on abortion/contraception but on forcing other people to pay for same is EXACTLY the same as the Salem witch trials, to hear these halfwits tell it.

      • Mark81150 Never/Trump/Hillary

        Exactly.. this has nothing to do with contraception it’s about progressives demanding the HHS hold a gun to the head of a priest and force him to fund an abortion..

        Because someone is that in dire a need?.. no.. Because they live to crush the beliefs of others they don’t like.. There is no rational reason to destroy religious exclusions.. they do it because they’re repulsively vile and cruel..

        Classical liberals don’t exist much anymore,.. shoved out of the way by progressive thugs.. The HHS under Obama has made clear, if they had their way,.. they would force Catholic hospitals to preform abortions.. or force them to close their doors..

        This when there are too few doctors already.. and they are forcing a plan on America most doctors already have said they won’t accept.. because it would bankrupt them..

        How many people in the end will they end up killing by destroying their ability to have health insurance just to force on America what we in large majorities do not want?

        • Paige Jackson

          If you’re not even allowed an opt-out, you know it’s evil. Liberals want to shriek, “Against abortion? Then don’t have one” and “Against gay marriage? Then don’t get gay-married”, but the thing is, they never stop at that. We’re going to be forced to fund one and we’re going to be forced to support the other. And if that sounds like an exaggeration, read the news.

          • Worship Dancer

            imagine if tea party had a law that forced everyone to buy a specific car of a specific color that had only allowed unleaded gas AND they had to pay for LOTS AND LOTS OF vehicle insurance. and it does not matter if you can even drive you MUST STILL OWE A VEHICLE AND HAVE THE INSURANCE TO COVER IT. you KNOW this would have already been repealed and called unconstitutional.

          • supplyguy

            If the liberals were to pass such a law I’m not so sure it would be called unconstitutional. Roberts really disappointed me.

          • Worship Dancer

            ah but note that i said TEA PARTY. that would be the ONLY reason it would be considered UNConstitutional.

        • supplyguy

          Well if Stalin and Mao are any indication, it’ll be tens of millions.

    • beebop1952

      Right. Because a vow of chastity is like a New Year’s resolution on day 8 …

  • Hotlanta Mike

    The left’s war on wise latinas exposed…

  • Matthew Koch

    Why do liberal women think with their vaginas and not with their brains?

    • Zanshi

      Because they are extremely shallow.

      • WisconsinPatriot

        Their Vaginas????

        • Guest

          That’s never been a genuine problem for most men.

          • Michelle ✓classified

            Bwahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!! Nice one.

        • tacticomp


        • Worship Dancer

          unlikely in a proglodyte.

    • Mark81150 Never/Trump/Hillary

      Because they’ve been taught too…. thinking with their brains resulted in far fewer abortions and out of wedlock births.. it meant women made men wait until they had a bond of trust, that should the women get pregnant, the man would stand with her and not bolt like an idiot teen to escape responsibility for what they had done..

    • Worship Dancer

      they have brains?

      • drw

        They think?

    • TheOriginalDonald

      We think Phil Robertson’s comment about the vagina being more desirable than the anus is COMPLETELY DISGUSTING!-The Vagine Regime

    • TocksNedlog

      Because it’s the only organ they bother to stimulate on a dialy basis.

  • Loves2laugh

    Yeah. That Sonia is brilliant unless she decides something other than what lefty feminists think she should.

  • Maxx

    Why don’t they simply move the studios of MSNBC to the west wing and make it official?

    • Mark81150 Never/Trump/Hillary

      Is it any wonder even a majority of democrats refuse to watch them? Even in the democrat party they’re a joke..

    • drw

      Would you want to be in the same building as those people every day?

      • beebop1952

        Please define “those people …”

        • TugboatPhil ✓Mate

          If he’s referring to people in the West Wing, then “those people” would be privileged, white liberals. That’s mostly who the half-black guy has hired, even though he pays the ones with lady parts less.

        • drw

          Take your pick, would the pillagers want a bunch of unwashed slobbering sycophants at their heels all day discovering their unmitigated destruction of the Constitution? Or, would the bubble dwellers want to risk discovering the true nature of their demi-god?

          • Andrew Curlutu

            Trust me, they already know that O’Bolshevik is the Lil’ Abner of Fascism. They try to ignore it as best they can, though, as his agenda (usually) dovetails with their own. The only time they haven’t been goose-stepping down the Strazza (sp>) with him is when the NSA or FBI or DHS (I forget which) got caught bugging the lines of reporters. Other than that, they think his “Socialism or Bust!” mantra is just ducky.

          • drw

            Agreed but, its much easier to dismiss a truth you haven’t heard with your own ears.

  • YesterdayzNewz

    If I understand correctly? They’re upset that the full wrath of the law hasn’t been enacted? I don’t know? Somebody (besides JoeMyGod) explain this to me, please?

    • Mark81150 Never/Trump/Hillary

      They’re hoping mad the government isn’t holding a gun to a nun’s head to force them to fund abortions like Obama promised they would…. yet..

      Because leaning forward is all about extorting and bullying nuns into violating their beliefs apparently.

      • Michelle ✓classified

        No actually Mark, the issue is about providing insurance for birth control pills and other forms of birth control that require a Dr., it’s not about paying for abortions.

        • Worship Dancer

          actually it also includes forcing them to pay to provide the abortion pills upon demand.

          • Michelle ✓classified

            I’m not sure where you read that, please let me know? The birth control mandate falls under the preventive care portion of ACA – it does not include the abortion pill and no one is being forced to provide insurance to pay for that.

          • Curt Williamson

            If you read Hobby Lobby’s lawsuit against ACA, they had no objection to paying for birth control pills and other preventatives. They had issue with sections that required their insurance provide abortions and morning after pills. Yes ACA does require it.

          • Michelle ✓classified

            You’ve got it a bit wrong Curt. Hobby Lobby does oppose being forced to provide coverage for birth control pills and IUDs, it’s other forms of contraception they are OK with.

            ACA does not force any company to provide coverage for the abortion pill (commonly known as RU-486).

            The morning after pill is available over the counter, no insurance or Rx needed to purchase.

          • rainman

            Michelle, Some Catholics consider the IUD abortion. Many years ago, I had a doctor tell me if I used an IUD, I would be “killing a baby every month” since it did not prevent fertilization, but rather implantation. I found another doctor.

            You may not agree with their belief that the morning after pill and IUDs are a form of abortion and they don’t want to provide access to it, but they are entitled to their religious beliefs. Rather than forcing the employer to provide these services, maybe it should be provided “for free” by the doctors prescribing them.

          • Michelle ✓classified

            Hi lorraine, I understand how Christians define the IUD, birth control and morning after pills and I’m not trying to get anyone to change their belief about that, I respect it. I believe Hobby Lobby has a right to reject the mandate and if an employee doesn’t like the coverage offered, they are welcome to find another job, but at the same time I think it’s important to be accurate about how the law and medical community define this preventive service in discussions about why the mandate is being opposed.

            One person on here said Hobby Lobby is just fine providing birth control pill coverage – that’s not true, they are refusing to cover them (as is their right). Another (who has since edited their comment) said the law mandates providing the abortion pill – that’s not true. If folks want to call the morning after pill the abortion pill, this is where confusion in debate starts because they are two different pills under the law and in the medical community. I get it, I so seriously get it that Christians believe life begins at conception which is why they oppose medication or devices that prevent pregnancy – and that is their right.

            I’m not disagreeing with the opposition, I was trying to explain what the law mandates and what is being opposed. It’s not accurate to say the law mandates the abortion pill, because that is clearly understood in the law and medical community as specifically being RU-486, and that is NOT mandated coverage.

          • Chrissy the Hyphenated

            “The mandate forces coverage of sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs and devices as well as contraception. ”

          • Michelle ✓classified

            The info at the link only confirms what I’ve been saying. The abortion pill is not mandated coverage, A type of emergency contraception pill is mandated (it’s like a morning after pill, but a tad stronger – it’s what they give rape victims in the ER).

            The abortion pill is not part of ACA, it’s just not. Emergency contraception pills (like Ella) are not abortion inducing drugs…they prevent a pregnancy, in the exact same way as an IUD, in the same way birth control pills do as a secondary function.

          • Michelle ✓classified

            “The pill known as mifepristone or RU-486 (often called the “abortion pill”) is a different drug from ella or Plan B. RU-486 is not covered by the federal requirement, nor is it covered under the HealthFlex plan.”


            “Drugs, such as RU486 that cause a woman to abort a pregnancy, are not included in the law or regulations. Nothing would require a health insurance company to include this in their policy offerings and, certainly, nothing would require anyone to take such a pill.”


            “Drugs that cause abortion are not covered by this policy: Drugs like RU486 are not covered by this policy, and nothing about this policy changes the President’s firm commitment to maintaining strict limitations on Federal funding for abortions. No Federal tax dollars are used for elective abortions.”


          • Worship Dancer

            actually yes they are. that’s why all the lawsuits from hobby lobby, chik-fil-a, catholic church

          • Michelle ✓classified

            No, the lawsuits are because they do not want to provide coverage for birth control pills, IUDs or the morning after pill. The law does not require anyone to provide coverage for the abortion pill.

            “The pill known as mifepristone or RU-486 (often called the “abortion pill”) is a different drug from ella or Plan B. RU-486 is not covered by the federal requirement, nor is it covered under the HealthFlex plan.”


            “Drugs, such as RU486 that cause a woman to abort a pregnancy, are not included in the law or regulations. Nothing would require a health insurance company to include this in their policy offerings and, certainly, nothing would require anyone to take such a pill.”


            “Drugs that cause abortion are not covered by this policy: Drugs like RU486 are not covered by this policy, and nothing about this policy changes the President’s firm commitment to maintaining strict limitations on Federal funding for abortions. No Federal tax dollars are used for elective abortions.”


  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    As Leo Gorcey used to say, once again, I regurgitate:

    Stays are issued routinely. Easier not to let something start, than to try to shut something down. When everybody’s in the courtroom ready to go and argue the case, and the restraining order is either kept in place, modified or quashed, THEN you can go after the lower court judge who orders that. Not after Justice Sotomayor, who’s just doing her job here.

    But this speaks to the larger issue of people expecting judges to rule a particular way, because you know their track record from their days in law practice/politics, and you expect them to be willing hench(men/women) for your cause. (*BUZZER*) Wrongo– it’s not supposed to work that way. When it DOES– oh boy, then we’ve got a problem on our hands…

  • Wag_a_muffin

    So is it safe to assume that Obama doesn’t think Sotomayor’s such a “wise Latina” any longer?

  • H50 ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Silly Irin, tweets are forever. Not the network or their media personalities bias was a big secret or something.

  • gregl311

    I am not wasting my time on MSNBC journos anymore. This is getting exhausting.

    • beebop1952

      Just think of it as giggle inducing. It is less disturbing.

  • RD

    How dare a liberal appointee think for themselves. She must not have read the memo from Dear Leader that said you must abide by everything I say and do. No doubt every MSNBC and liberal robot’s undies are in knots over this decision.

    • Mark81150 Never/Trump/Hillary

      For a group of people so certain they’re on the side of history..

      They depend a Hell of a lot on the authoritarian method of having judges force their views on everybody else..

      You’d almost get the notion, their ideas can’t win an election… grin.

    • Andrew Curlutu

      She might not broadcast the fact, but Sotomayor (sp?) MAY be Catholic. A good deal of Latinos are. It would explain her ruling, perhaps.

  • Gregg

    I guess she doesn’t know that “Twitchy is Forever!”

  • JMigyanka

    MSNBC. Go figure.

    • Perry

      57 MILLION abortions in the US since Roe v. Wade. And Baracko says we need tougher gun laws if it will save “just one life”. The commie just wants to disarm the populace so they can’t fight back. Good luck with that.

  • gregl311

    MSNBC said it themselves. They are not in the news business. They are an opinion network. That opinion is one sided. Even their “conservatives” lean left.

  • Al’s Not So Sad Grampa

    I can’t take seriously anyone employed by MSNBC, let alone a woman who can’t spell her name correctly.

  • Oilfart1

    who is this person, never heard of her.

  • tops116 ✓Quipper

    Irin strikes me as the kind of person that thinks it’s necessary for a grandfather to have maternity coverage.

  • PeterP

    Note to the “Intellectual” Left: Because you don’t agree with a Supreme Court ruling doesn’t mean that the ruling is wrong. Unless, of course, you are a constitutional scholar, in which case it still doesn’t.

    • Andrew Curlutu

      Supreme Court rulings don’t come down from Sinai on clay tablets. The Dred Scott and Kelo decisions come to mind, for example. I happen to agree though that religious folks shouldn’t be required to violate their beliefs because of petty bureaucratic crap. The first amendment was put in the Bill of Rights for a reason, and I doubt it was JUST to protect people from an activist Congress.

  • ashknothole

    MSNBC is pit toilet inside a cesspool inside a swamp inside a tidal flat.
    In other words, it just plain reeks.

  • GaryTheBrave

    Interesting. Now both the Left and the Right have problems with rulings on the ACA. Pass the popcorn.

  • TheOriginalDonald

    Something else everybody doesn’t already know-TWITCHY IS FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • rennyangel2

    If it weren’t for the cons. press repeating MSNBC idiocies and inanities and other outrages, we would never know it existed.

  • SturJen

    Here’s my opinion on this one:
    The whole Phil Robertson brou-ha-ha was initiated by the White House to gauge the Christian temperature of the US. How far could they take their Non-Christian rhetoric before the Americans revolt? Their answer was: not far. The reasoning why they chose to perform this test in the media and not with the Government is double-fold: 1. They needed an immediate response. The media can give this quickly. and 2. They wanted to be able to rescind any action taken quickly. Government works glacially slow on things. They could be in the midst of a revolt before any law was rescinded.

    It’s no surprise to me that they issued this injunction. They’ve been sitting on this case for months. Now that they know that there would be immense pushback on the side of the Christians about such issues, they’ll still be forcing that mandate…but only in steps. They’re still cranking up the heat under the froggies in the tub…they just want to see how fast they can turn it up to 11.

    Now this may be conjecture, it might be true. I watched a lot of X-files as a young adult. I see conspiracies everywhere………

    • $56231069

      So far they seem to be perfectly content to completely trample Christian feelings and opinions. Why should they start caring now?

      • Andrew Curlutu

        It is reasonable to expect them to be Unreasonable. Anti-God fanatics foam at the mouth when anybody does anything they don’t like, and want them suppressed ASAP. That anybody would stand up against a government ordinance and say NO sticks in their craw big time. While I couldn’t care less if people use birth control, as it would seem an excellent way to avoid children people don’t really want and wouldn’t care for properly if they did have the child, it’s not right to force people to pay for something they won’t use, either. For Heaven’s sake, why on earth would NUNS need birth control in the first place?

      • objectivefactsmatter

        It’s a question of velocity.

  • Expat61

    They lean so far left that their foot steps in the snow look like their ideological punditry, wandering around in circles, lost in a forest of idiocy.

  • NickGranite

    Well, this is just one of many lefties that the “news” is filtered through there. I’m kind of over the griping about their bias. MSNBC doesn’t really pretend to be anything other than a political arm of Obama and the democrat party so Irin is just another operative we contend with as far as I’m concerned.

  • One Thirsty Bear

    Since our minds cannot predict their own advance, civilization’s progress depends upon making the most of the circumstances we face.

  • Fresh Mountain Air

    If our decision making is to be free of external interference, boundaries must be set to establish limits inside which the agents and dictates of the state cannot meddle.