On Wednesday, Obama met with religious leaders to discuss his plans for government-run health care.
Pro-abortion Obama actually had the audacity to speak of morality.
From the New York Times:
President Obama sought Wednesday to reframe the health care debate as “a core ethical and moral obligation,” imploring a coalition of religious leaders to help promote the plan to lower costs and expand insurance coverage for all Americans.
“I know there’s been a lot of misinformation in this debate, and there are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness,” Mr. Obama told a multidenominational group of pastors, rabbis and other religious leaders who support his goal to remake the nation’s health care system.
How dare Obama cast stones and chastise people for "bearing false witness"!
Speaking of bearing false witness, as he struggles to find support for his government takeover of health care, Obama has taken up lying. He is flat-out lying about the government funding of abortion under his "reform" plans.
From Wisconsin Right to Life, August 20, 2009, here's a "factcheck" of some recent claims by Obama:
In a conference call with supporters yesterday, President Obama said that it is a "fabrication" to say that the legislation backed by the White House would result in "government funding of abortions" and that this is "untrue."
In response to Obama's false claim, National Right to Life Committee's Legislative Director Douglas Johnson issued the following statement yesterday:"Emboldened by the recently demonstrated superficiality of some organs of the news media, President Obama brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component of the health care legislation that his congressional allies and staff have crafted. As amended by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on July 30 (the Capps-Waxman Amendment), the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions. Obama apparently seeks to hide behind a technical distinction between tax funds and government-collected premiums. But these are merely two types of public funds, collected and spent by government agencies. The Obama-backed legislation makes it explicitly clear that no citizen would be allowed to enroll in the government plan unless he or she is willing to give the federal agency an extra amount calculated to cover the cost of all elective abortions -- this would not be optional. The abortionists would bill the federal government and would be paid by the federal government. These are public funds, and this is government funding of abortion."
Johnson continued, "In 2007 Obama explicitly pledged to Planned Parenthood that the public plan will cover abortions (see the video clip here). Some journalists have reported that Obama "backed off" of this commitment in an interview with Katie Couric of CBS News, broadcast July 21, but Obama actually carefully avoided stating his intentions -- instead, he simply made an artful observation that "we also have a tradition of, in this town, historically, of not financing abortions as part of government funded health care."
"It is true that there is such a tradition -- which Obama has always opposed, and which the Obama-backed bill would shatter," said Johnson.
On August 13, NRLC released a detailed memo explaining the provisions of the pending bills that would affect abortion policy, with citations to primary sources. Many of the "factcheck" articles that have appeared in the news media in recent weeks reflect, at best, unsophisticated understandings of the provisions they purport to be explaining, and also give evidence of a weak understanding of Obama's history on the policy issues involved. Wisconsin Right to Life urges members of the media and other interested individuals to download the memo which is in PDF format here:
http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/HR3200NRLCfactsheet.pdf
Obama should be honest rather than playing games and hiding behind phony distinctions of what constitutes the government funding of abortions.
Federal dollars, meaning our dollars, would be used to pay for the killing of the unborn under H.R. 3200.
________________
Video: Obama addresses Planned Parenthood, July 17th, 2007.
8 comments:
The public plan covers abortions--a legal medical procedure, whether you like it or not--but the public plan under HR3200 is funded entirely by member premiums. To say it's "government funded" is a misnomer, as no tax dollars will be used to pay for them.
I'm curious: Does the insurance plan you have now cover abortion? If so, it's the same thing; member premiums cover the cost of that procedure for your private plan now the way member premiums will under the public option.
No tax dollars?
Yeah, right.
Obama and his minions claim that many of the people currently without health insurance can't afford it, yet all their care will be funded entirely by member premiums in the government plan?
Really? That will be quite a trick to pull off.
I have no idea if my insurance plan covers abortion.
You might be interested in this article:
Associated Press Falsely Claims 90 Percent of Insurance Plans Cover Abortion
Mary, you obviously have not read the bill.
HR3200 says, clearly, that the public option must be funded fully by its premiums.
HR3200 also offer subsidies to individuals who cannot afford to buy into the insurance market, but those who receive a subsidy are not restricted in what insurance plan they purchase. In other words, a subsidized individual can by a private plan just as easily as she could the public option--it's her choice.
The subsidy and the public option are two completely different parts of the bill, and are not related.
Regarding abortion and ObamaCare: I find it interesting that you argue about the funding of private health care v. government-run health care.
The real point of my original post is that Obama is LYING about abortion being covered by his government funded public "option."
Regarding the public "option" and subsidies, etc.: You suggest that people won't be forced into the government plan. Not true.
Furthermore, the goal of Obama's plan is a single payer system.
The bill provides incentives and penalties to drive employers to drop private insurance and go with Obama's government-run health care. It's loaded against competition and the private sector.
It's disingenuous to pretend that ObamaCare encourages choice, when, in fact, millions will be forced out of their current plans and won't be able to keep their doctors -- another Obama lie.
People forced into government-run ObamaCare will be forced to fund abortions.
Regarding the public "option" and subsidies, etc.: You suggest that people won't be forced into the government plan. Not true. [. . .]
The bill provides incentives and penalties to drive employers to drop private insurance and go with Obama's government-run health care.
This is ridiculous. It is wrong in so many ways I don't know where to start.
For one, HR3200 encourages more competition in the individual market as well as in the employer-based market than exists now. In some states, Mary, better than 90% of policies are written by two or three companies. The Insurance Exchange outlined in the bill is designed to encourage more private companies to enter the marketplace.
For two, right now, today, there exists no penalty at all for dropping employee coverage. None! And yet most employers are trying to hang on to their plans. HR3200 institutes a penalty (not, as you claim "incentives") for dropping coverage. Why would they drop coverage with a penalty and not now without? This makes no sense.
For three, there is no means in HR3200 to force anyone onto the public option. The bill makes it clear that it must be priced in the same way, and meet the same minimum standards, as the private plans it competes with. If by some misfortune you are dropped from your current plan, the public plan is just one choice--and maybe not even the cheapest or most appealing choice--among many in the Exchange.
Semantics.
It's the word games that have really hurt Obama's credibility on this issue and others, causing support for his policies to plummet.
You insist that ObamaCare increases choices for consumers and encourages the private sector, but that's not the reality.
Obama and the Dems have been demonizing private insurance companies. They've also been very clear about their goals for health care. They are on the record. You can't run away from their statements.
The endgame is a single payer system. Socialized medicine isn't about choice.
Apparently, there is no room on your planet for facts. Carry on.
You say there's no room on my planet for facts.
Well, apparently there's no room for the comprehension of cause and effect on your planet.
Carrying on....
Post a Comment