It Was Obama Who Made The Bogus Claim

On several occasions Barack Obama has stated that his health care plan would not cover abortions. What he specifically said was that federal dollars (read taxpayer money) would not be used to pay for abortions. Obama said that the people who were saying this were making “bogus” claims:

In a one-line response to charges that taxpayers will foot the bill for abortions, Obama Wednesday night called it a “bogus” claim.

“One more misunderstanding I want to clear up — under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place,” the president said in an address to a joint session of Congress to sell health care reforms. Fox

The bill that the House passed allowed taxpayer money to pay for abortions until a Democrat worked to change the bill. The Senate bill absolutely allows for abortions to be paid for with taxpayer dollars. Representative Bart Stupak, the Democrat who introduced the amendment changing the language in the House bill has read the language in the Senate bill and he says that it is not good enough and that it allows for taxpayer money to fund abortion. He claims that he cannot vote for the bill if the language is changed to the Senate version.

Stupak also claims that he has been contacted by the White House and by House leadership telling him not to make any statements on the issue until they get a chance to sell him the language. In other words, they want to try and buy him off like they did all those Senators but Stupak said he does not need to discuss this with the White House or House leaders because he can read. He indicated that he does not need the language sold to him and that what he has read is not good enough.

Now let’s revisit the statement Obama made about taxpayer money paying for abortions. He said it was a bogus claim. It looks like Obama’s statement that it was a bogus claim was a bogus claim. Obama said that abortions would not be paid for with taxpayer money but the bill will allow that so he made the bogus claim as he has done with a lot of legislation. Remember Mr. “no earmarks” who has signed bills with earmarks totaling around 10,000? There is also no mechanism to keep illegals from getting coverage so when Joe Wilson said “you lie” he was right.

But back to abortion. If the White House wants Stupak not to talk about this it means that they know it exists, that the bill covers abortions and that it would be a problem for some in the House. The request for silence also means they are playing the kind of politics that Obama said he would put an end to. He is trying to get this through without drawing attention to his LIE. The Democrats passed this stuff in the dead of night and now the Obama thugs are trying to keep things hush-hush.

There is still a big chance that this whole thing will go down in flames because it is unlikely that the House and Senate will agree. Of course, there appears to be no such thing as truly moderate Democrats and the only real question is how much do they need to be bought off. I would like to believe that Stupak will stand his ground but recent events involving Democrats indicate that they will stand their ground until their price is reached and then they fold like a bad poker hand.

One thing is for sure. They do not have our best interests in mind. They want to pass something, anything, to make the messiah look good and they don’t care what it has in it.

Their philosophy is to pass something now and then fix it later which is no way to do anything. Would you have faith in a car company if its philosophy was to slap cars together quickly and with little regard to what is right and then worry about fixing them later? Come to think of it, you might have that now that government owns a few car companies…

This will be interesting to watch but it is important for people to remember that the Democrats do not care about getting it right, just getting it passed and Obama will sign whatever hits his desk even if it contains things he said would not be in his plan. Obama and House leaders are anxious to keep certain things quiet so they can pass them without public scrutiny.

This is the most transparent administration in history, just ask them.

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

26 Responses to “It Was Obama Who Made The Bogus Claim”

  1. Darrel says:

    Bigd: “Obama said that abortions would not be paid for with taxpayer money but the bill will allow that…”>>

    DAR
    Sloppy. What Obama actually said, in your quote:

    “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place,” the president said…”

    And the president is right:

    FACT: Senate bill prohibits health insurers from using federal subsidies “for the purposes of paying for” abortion services restricted by Hyde.

    FACT: Manager’s amendment to Senate bill establishes a separate premium to segregate funds used to pay for abortions from federal funds

    FACT: Current law allows coverage for abortions restricted by Hyde under Medicaid through similar fund segregation

    Link.

    So we see, Obama’s claim, rather than being “bogus” as you falsely assert, is exactly right.

    D.
    —————-
    “Science tells us that only 10% to 15% of fertilized eggs develop into human beings. A large percentage of fertilized eggs never attach to a woman’s uterine wall, and many others detach in the first several weeks or simply stop developing. Thus, the vast majority of fertilized eggs simply wash away.
    It seems a stretch to conclude that ending a pregnancy is somehow against the will of God when the body rejects more than half of what the Vatican considers a “pregnancy.”
    –J.M. LAWSON Jr., pastor emeritus of the Holman United Methodist Church

  2. Big Dog says:

    Fact, each person who has a plan will pay money toward abortion. No way to separate the money.

    What he said was a matter of parsed words but the fact is, people will pay for abortions.

    So one pastor makes a claim and many others make the opposite claim. Does not matter, we should not pay for something we find wrong.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “…we should not pay for something we find wrong.”>>

      DAR
      Is that for everyone or just your pet issues?

      War is something that pacifists “find wrong.” So I guess they shouldn’t have to pay for war?

      Medical intervention is something that Christian Science followers “find wrong.” So I guess they shouldn’t have to pay for anything that subsidizes our medical system?

      Etc.

      Abortion is a standard, constitutionally protected, medical treatment legally available to women. While federal funding is specifically restricted by the Hyde amendment some states deal with funding differently (“states rights”). So this appears to be nothing other than conservatives, especially religious ones, continuing their long tradition of trying to oppress the rights of women.

      D.
      ——————–
      “Martin Luther decreed: “If a woman grows weary and at last dies from childbearing, it matters not. Let her die from bearing, she is there to do it.”

      Such teachings prompted 19th-century feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton to write: “The Bible and the Church have been the greatest stumbling blocks in the way of woman’s emancipation.”

      The various Christian churches fought tooth and nail against the advancement of women, opposing everything from women’s right to speak in public, to the use of anesthesia in childbirth (since the bible says women must suffer in childbirth) and woman’s suffrage. Today the most organized and formidable opponent of women’s social, economic and sexual rights remains organized religion. Religionists defeated the Equal Rights Amendment. Religious fanatics and bullies are currently engaged in an outright war of terrorism and harassment against women who have abortions and the medical staff which serves them. Those seeking to challenge inequities and advance the status of women today are fighting a massive coalition of fundamentalist Protestant and Catholic churches and religious groups mobilized to fight women’s rights, gay rights, and secular government.”

      http://ffrf.org/nontracts/women.php

  3. Big Dog says:

    War is Constitutionally protected, abortion is interpreted. One of the issues could be overturned at anytime by another court with different views. The other issue could never be overturned because it is specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

    But let me make it easy for you, I do not want to (nor do I intend) to pay for other people’s health care. I will not do it. Let them pay for their own.

    As I wrote to some Democrat Senator who sent me an email touting what he had done:

    I do not intend to comply so F*ck You. I hope it was easy for him to understand.

    How funny you should invoke states rights when you do not believe in them and the feds do not abide by them. Soon this will change when states like Texas tell the feds 10th Amendment so pound sand and when people challenge this all in court.

    If it ever reconciles…

    We might not have enough money to bribe all the people it will take.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “War is Constitutionally protected, abortion is interpreted.>>

      DAR
      When the SCOTUS says it’s constitutionally protected, it’s by definition, constitutionally protected. You refer to the rather explicit language of “Congress declares war” in the Constitution. Yet, speaking of “interpretation,” consider how well that one gets followed:

      “On at least 125 occasions, the President has acted without prior express military authorization from Congress. [4]”

      Link

      Bigd: could be overturned at anytime by another court>>

      DAR
      Extremely unlikely. It’s considered settled law. Stare decisis.

      Bigd: “I do not want to (nor do I intend) to pay for other people’s health care.”>>

      DAR
      Too late, you already are. And you’re paying a lot. We all are. Hopefully this will change somewhat under the new system.

      You like to say having the US government involved in health care is “unconstitutional,” but as Randy has mentioned, it won’t be a stretch for the court to see it here:

      From Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution, section 8:

      Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence *and general Welfare* of the United States…
      …And…To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,…”

      DAR
      Providing for affordable health insurance so that tens of thousands don’t die every single year is certainly part of providing for the “general welfare.”

      D.

  4. Big Dog says:

    Darrel, I don’t care what they do, I don’t have to honor it or obey it. If I don’t think gay marriage is right and they allow it I will not recognize it.

    That issue is a state right issue not a federal one. Each time a state votes to NOT have gay marriage the homos riot but when states vote to have it then it is all lollipops and rainbows.

    And if you are so worried about religion bothering women then go talk to the muzzies. I am tired of hearing your mindless prattle in a country where women have the MOST freedom in the world.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “If I don’t think gay marriage is right and they allow it I will not recognize it.>>

      DAR
      It matters not in the least what a single individual (or church) “recognizes.” No one cares in the least about that. What matters is what the government decides. The right of gay marriage is a right granted by the state and support for this is advancing at a rate of 1-2% in every state, every year. Tick, tock. It’ll be over in a decade or so. Then, a few years after that, when those who were (or are) against it will look like the conservative fools who were against minority rights and women’s rights, you can say you were all for it just like everyone else.

      Bigd: when states vote to have it then it is all lollipops and rainbows.>>

      DAR
      You’re right. Based upon this undeniable trend, there is going to be a lot of demand for lollipops and rainbows in the future. Invest accordingly.

      Bigd: “…a country [US] where women have the MOST freedom in the world.>>

      DAR
      Interesting. Do you have any basis for such a claim? No I didn’t think so. You do realize that believing nice things about your country doesn’t actually make them so?

      But it’s an interesting question. In what country DO women have the most freedom?

      Here is a sensible analysis which examines several normal components of female empowerment (you’re not free if your not empowered).

      http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2009_EN_Table_K.pdf

      The US comes in 18th.

      Happy day, learned something new.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        It also matters just as much if each state says NO. That means people should shut up and move on. We are allowed to say NO as much as we are to say yes and not to be harassed by morons like you over our decision.

        Nothing in your charts has anything to do with freedom. It deals with the number of women in government leadership positions and there are any number of reasons as to why one country would have fewer like they do not want to run for office or some countries do not have free elections where the people decide. A free people voting against a women is no indication of the rights of women in the country except they all had the right to vote.

        Women in the US have the most freedom in the world.

        And once again, you point to irrelevant information that has nothing to do with the subject in order to obfuscate the issue. You do that a lot. Keep cutting and pasting to nonsense that is not relevant or linking to something that has no bearing and then acting like it is important or relevant.

        You need a new way to cloud issues.

        • Big Dog says:

          Yes Darrel, I said have the most rights and not the most freedom but holding elected office is not the indication of freedom anyway. American women have the most freedom as well.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “people should shut up and move on. [Gay marriage]”

          DAR
          Nope. Those who want their equal rights will keep fighting for them tooth and nail, and your side, full of narrow minded hateful bigots, will tire and wane. You have no arguments for why these people shouldn’t have full and equal rights just as your side had no good arguments for why women and minorities shouldn’t have their full and equal rights. You lost then and you will lose this one. And you will lose badly, and quickly. One hundred percent certainty.

          Bigd: “Nothing in your charts has anything to do with freedom.”>>

          DAR
          It measures empowerment of women. A very good measurement of freedom women enjoy in a given society. What have you got to support your claim, faith? Patriotism? It makes you feel good?

          Bigd: “[your reference] deals with the number of women in government leadership positions… you point to irrelevant information”>>

          DAR
          I trusted you could read and didn’t type it out for you. A mistake. What it actually measured (and you would know if you glanced at the first line of the first page):

          –Seats in parliament held by women

          –Female legislators, senior officials and managers

          –Female professional and technical workers

          –Ratio of estimated female to male earned income

          –Year women received right to
          a) vote
          b) stand for election

          –Year a woman became Presiding Officer of parliament or of one of its houses for the first time

          –Women in ministerial positions

          These seem to be normative and reasonable components to measure when trying to determine gender empowerment, or the level of freedom women enjoy in a country.

          If you have better list of components to measure, let’s see it.

          When you use the ones above, the US doesn’t come in 1st, it comes in 18th.

          And I have more data if you desire to further pursue this line of BS.

          Bigd: “Women in the US have the most freedom in the world.”

          DAR
          Why should anyone believe that? Let’s see your evidence.

          D.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “I said have the most rights and not the most freedom…”

          DAR
          Actually, you said above, in black and white, “most freedom” and not “most rights.” Sigh.

          D.

  5. Big Dog says:

    Providing for the general welfare is part of the introduction and does not mean provide welfare. You and many others have misinterpreted it. As our Founders said, if they were to use this statement in this kind of meaning there is nothing that Congress would not be able to do and the idea is for them to have limited powers.

    While I dispute the notion that thousands of people die each year because they have no health insurance (bogus claim) the reality is, people are going to die. It is not toe purview of government to provide for this care.

    We pay very little for other people. About $200 per year for the uninsured. Most losses go to the hospital or the doctors (which they get under Medicare reimbursement as well). We will pay a lot more under this plan. You “hoping” that it will change is an indication that it will probably cost more. And millions will still not be covered. There are plenty of better ways to do this and government takeover is not one of them.

    As I stated, I won’t buy any mandated insurance and will not pay for others. I see a black market of us health care providers cropping up.

    I also see a complete overthrow of this government in the next election.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “I dispute the notion that thousands of people die each year because they have no health insurance (bogus claim)”>>

      DAR
      The National Academy of Science says 18,000 die per year.

      But what do they know? They’re only the most prestigious science organization in the nation (and for you that means world).

      Bigd: “We pay very little for other people. About $200 per year for the uninsured.”>>

      DAR
      U.S. Uninsured Health Care Cost Put at $125 Billion

      “The cost of providing health care for U.S. citizens who have no insurance will total $125 billion this year [2004], with taxpayers and private entities footing most of the bill, a report issued on Monday said.”

      $200 per person would be over 9 billion per year, but you provide no reference for you claim. It’s probably a guess.

      This study shows “this cost-shift amounts to
      $1,100 per average family premium in 2009 and
      $410 per average individual premium.”
      Link

      As I said, we are paying for them now. And paying a lot. In lives and cash.

      D.

  6. Big Dog says:

    Sorry dumbass, it was your side that denied the right to women and minorities. As for gays, they have 100% equal rights.

    And who are you to decide what right is equal in any event?

    I want minority consideration when I apply for things but do not get it. Homos are a protected species along with others that the liberals have abused for a long time.

    No, they have 100% equal rights already. That is enough.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “it was your side that denied the right to women and minorities.”>>

      DAR
      Right, it was the conservatives fighting for progress, and the progressives were fighting for the status quo. You actually believe that?

      Bigd: “gays, they have 100% equal rights.”>>

      DAR
      In a few states and several of our peer countries (Canada did it in 2005). They’ll have it here too, when they can marry the one they love.

      Bigd: “who are you to decide what right is equal in any event?”>>

      DAR
      It’s really pretty obvious. Just try and construct a good argument AGAINST allowing a class of humans having equal rights.

      Try it and see.

      You can’t do it. You’ve got nothing. You can’t write anything that isn’t transparently absurd. That’s because there is no good reason for denying this class, or any class, full and equal rights. It’s just emotion, blind hatred and bigotry, no reason, no logic, no fairness, no empathy.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        Sorry, don’t see it that way. Conservatives fought for equality and we obtained it for others. Liberals (progressives is a phony name) have stood in the way. That is why there are so many people dependent on government, liberal plans.

        Gays have 100% the rights of others. We have laws defining marriage and those laws are followed.

        But gays have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “Gays have 100% the rights of others. We have laws defining marriage and those laws are followed.
          But gays have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex.>>

          DAR
          Let’s do a little flashback translation of Bigd’s modern bigotry to an earlier time when conservatives were using this same junk in a slightly different way:

          Blacks have 100% of the rights of others… they can drink water but they just need to use a fountain that’s not reserved for whites. We have laws about fountains and those laws are followed.

          Blacks have 100% of the rights of others… they can eat, but they must use that little room in the back of the restaurant. We have laws.

          Blacks have 100% of the rights of others… they can ride the bus, they just need to ride at the back. We have laws.

          Blacks have 100% of the rights of others… they can go to school, they just can’t go to our white schools. We have laws.

          Women have 100% of the rights of others… it’s just that they mustn’t be allowed to vote, own land, wear pants, marry a different race, etc.

          Etc.

          Bigd is just continuing the long tradition of keeping others down, keeping others oppressed for no other reason than pure bigotry. And he is going to lose this battle just as conservatives lost EVERY single one of those battles mentioned above. And they lost those civil rights battles SO BAD and their hateful positions have been now shown to be SO WRONG and morally bankrupt that today, some conservatives even try to get away with pretending we don’t know which side they were on now in these battles.

          But that’s laughable.

          Why did they lose those battles? The same reason they are going to lose the gays rights battle (and already have).

          Two reasons:

          1) Because there is no good reason to oppress people just because they are different. No good reason to deny people equal rights. It’s just mean.

          2) This is America, and the good guy wins in the end. Always a happy ending. Just watch the movies and see.

          D.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Darrel, I am tired of the condescension from you. If you are on the rag take it someplace else. I read the report and the headings and NONE of it deals with freedoms or rights of women. NONE OF IT.

    I am not going to tolerate much more of your insulting my intelligence or ability. Let me be clear, I have had enough of you. Is that clear?

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “NONE of it deals with freedoms or rights of women. NONE OF IT.”>>

      DAR
      You can’t comprehend even when I type it out for you?

      –Year women received right to
      a) vote
      b) stand for election

      That doesn’t “deal with” a measurement of rights? Of Freedom?

      Okay, the dear wife is watching and she asks… where’s your measurement of “freedom” or “rights” showing that American women have the greatest level of these things? Let’s see it.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        Are we talking about years past or today? No one can deny our past injustices but we are talking about today and American women are the most free.

        All American women can vote and they can stand for election (provided they meet the legal requirements).

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “we are talking about today and American women are the most free.”>>

          DAR
          Okay, let’s see your evidence.

          D.
          ————–
          Updated 2008, Gender Empowerment Index, using five components and only current data, historical considerations not included.

          US still comes in 18th.

          According to this 2002 chart, the US came in 10th that year (Germany and New Zealand tied). Thus only being beaten by:

          # 1 Norway:

          # 2 Sweden:

          # 3 Denmark:

          # 4 Finland:

          # 5 Netherlands:

          # 6 Canada:

          = 7 Germany:

          = 7 New Zealand:

          # 9 Australia:

          # 10 United States:

        • Darrel says:

          My boo, that makes the US 11th.

  8. Big Dog says:

    By that arbitrary measurement.

    • Darrel says:

      Perhaps you missed this question (I asked several times):

      Where’s your measurement of “freedom” or “rights” showing that American women have the greatest level of these things? Let’s see it.

      You know a difference between you and I?

      I’m not afraid of a question. Ever.

      D.

      • Big Dog says:

        It would be “between you and ME” Object of the preposition use the objective case form.

        No one is afraid of a question. You just never answer any. Instead, you cut and paste pablum.

      • Darrel says:

        Thanks for the grammar correction. My grammar has always been poor. I get by.

        I do answer questions, all of them, and if I ever miss one, please be kind enough to point it out and I will promptly answer it.

        Bigd: “No one is afraid of a question.”

        DAR
        Excellent, then:

        Where’s your measurement of “freedom” or “rights” showing that American women have the greatest level of these things?

        D.
        —————-
        Don’t miss this post above. I think it’s a doosey and my son was wondering if you have a response.