Harrolds.Blogspot.com
ABC NEWS VIDEO: John Stossel destroys Obamacare by explaining Socialism.
Be sure to watch the last minute of this short video...Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) this week to negotiate a possible compromise on abortion-funding, and surprisingly expressed optimism that a deal could be reached to pass President Obama's "health" care bill. Stupak's statements appeared to contradict his previous promises, that he and 12 Democrats would vote against the Senate bill, on which Obama demands a March 18 vote.
"It would have to be a separate bill, you could sidebar it to the final bill," Stupak told MSNBC. "One bill doesn't pass without the other. They walk down the aisle together." Then Stupak told The National Review, that he will not settle for an agreement to pass the Senate bill now and fix the bill's problems on abortion later: "If they say 'we’ll give you a letter saying we'll take care of this later,' that’s not acceptable because later never comes."
But Stupak's surprise meeting with Pelosi confirms the shocking Washington Post report by Marc A. Thiessen entitled "How Pelosi Will Game the Stupak 12," detailing how Pelosi is trying to fool the 12 moderates into passing the current version of the Senate bill with empty promises. "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi must win their votes to pass her bill," Thiessen reports. "The problem for Stupak and his allies is that [Pelosi's] guarantee [to add Stupak's anti-abortion language] is not enough to ensure their position prevails -- because Senate Republicans are gearing up to use something called the 'Byrd rule' to blow up any deal Pelosi cuts to pass health care in the House." So Pelosi cannot keep any promises she makes.
The Senate 'Byrd rule' would sink Stupak's compromise, since it empowers any one Senator to voice an objection to any non-fiscal verbiage in a 'Reconciliation' side-by-side bill, such as Stupak's proposed amendment to reduce abortion coverage. If the Senate Chairman recognizes any voice objection, then 60 pro-life Senate votes would be required to reinstate Stupak's language, when only 45 Senators supported similar language last fall. Pro-abortion Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has 55 solid votes to flush any side-bill passed by Stupak and Pelosi, causing the Washington Post to rightly conclude:
"The bottom line: Stupak and the blue dog Democrats in the House have no leverage if they go along with Pelosi in a reconciliation strategy. The only way they can ensure that the abortion language and other provisions they oppose are eliminated is to reject reconciliation entirely -- and demand that the House and Senate start over with clean legislation." To this we say, "Amen," but will Stupak cave-in like Sen. Nelson did? Let's encourage the Stupak 12 to "Hold Firm."
Meanwhile pro-abortion Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO), the co-chairwoman of the abortion-rights-supporting caucus, predicted the abortion issue won't stop Obamacare. "I don't think Congressman Stupak has the votes to kill healthcare legislation over his language not being in there," DeGette told The Hill newspaper.
She believes that even if Stupak's 12 moderates hold firm, the vote count is too close to call, because some of the extreme liberals who voted against Pelosi-care the first time (for lacking a clear 'public option') could switch and vote for the Senate version of Obamacare this time around. If DeGette is right, then conservatives will need more than just 12 of the 37 undecided Democrats to defeat Obamacare now.
We're the only ones reporting the names of the 25 undecideds in red below and 12 pro-Stupak swing votes in blue below (37 total undecided Dems and 1 Republican, Cao) who voted WITH STUPAK to reduce abortion funding, but then also voted WITH PELOSI to pass socialism in H.R. 3692. We need just a handful of these 37 to switch votes and stand firm against President Obama and Harry Reid's pro-abortion amendments. If they stand firm against abortion, we can stop the entire socialist "health" bill in its tracks.
Please make time today to call the 37 Congressmen listed below at 202-225-3121 or 202-224-3121 and tell each "you are not pro-life unless you oppose entirely President Obama and Harry Reid's pro-abortion amendments, and we are watching your vote."
WE NEED JUST A HANDFUL OF THESE 37 CONGRESSMEN TO SWITCH. PLEASE CALL ALL 37 TODAY: Baca, Berry, Bishop (GA), Cao, Cardoza, Carney, Cooper, Costa, Costello, Cuellar, Dahlkemper, Davis (IL), Donnelly (IN), Doyle, Driehaus, Ellsworth, Etheridge, Kanjorski, Kaptur, Kildee, Langevin, Lipinski, Lynch, Oberstar, Obey, Ortiz, Perriello, Pomeroy, Rahall, Reyes, Rodriguez, Ryan (OH), Salazar, Snyder, Space, Spratt, Stupak, Wilson (OH) ...Call 202-225-3121 (or 224-3121) asking for each, 37 times, and tell them to vote against Harry Reid's "health" amendment to H.R.3590.
On Fox News last Thursday, Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) warned the White House that at least 12 of the 37 Democrats (who had previously voted for Pelosi-care) may now switch and vote against the Senate version of Obama-care, because of its massive abortion funding increases. "My intent is not to hold up this legislation," Stupak said, "My intent is to keep current law. Eight different pieces of legislation currently say no public funding for abortion. That's all we’re saying...There's a principle and a belief that the American people agree with which says no public funding for abortion, and that's a principle and a belief I'll continue to fight for...In my eyes [President Obama] has to be a little more flexible, especially on this issue of no public funding for abortion." Stupak demands President Obama be flexible, but does anyone really believe Obama is "flexible" enough to reverse his recent demands for increased abortion funding?
On CBS News, Stupak reminded the White House of President Obama's broken promise. "I heard the President say, when he addressed the nation on September 9th, there would be no federal dollars for abortion. We're going to [require him to] honor that pledge. And as long as he has no federal dollars for abortion, we're in pretty good shape." But since the Senate version of the bill massively funds abortion, Stupak and a dozen friends may vote against it. If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) can bribe or twist enough arms, we could still lose.
Stupak and babies need help to defeat Obamacare.
Pelosi said last Tuesday that the abortion dispute in the "health" care bill cannot be resolved in the companion bill Democrats plan to use to settle the main differences between the House and Senate. In other words, she now admits her plan to ram the massive Harry Reid Senate amended version of H.R. 3590 (which already passed with 60 votes) through the House without any changes, then use "reconciliation" only in a later companion bill to amend minor budgetary items, leaving the vast Senate abortion funding untouched. Bypassing efforts by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) with her arm-twisting of moderate Democrats, Pelosi will first try to pass Reid's plan as-is, and only then try reconciliation for minor amendments to everything except its massive abortion funding.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) rebuked President Obama over abortion at the "health" care summit last Thursday, saying "for 30 years we've had a law that says there will be no taxpayer funding of abortion. This bill, that we have before us, for the first time in 30 years allows for the taxpayer funding of abortions." Obama's new version 2.0 actually increases abortion funding above and beyond the massive increase already in Harry Reid's Senate version of the bill. Boehner also issued a written request to include Stupak in the discussions, but Obama refused to include Stupak, or even speak to him since September, as punishment for how Stupak led a House amendment last fall that would have significantly reduced Obama's abortion funding. Obama bristled that he and Boehner/Stupak "profoundly disagree" about whether tax-dollars should fund child-killing.
Now Obama thinks even more abortion funds are needed. The National Right To Life Committee revealed Obama's hidden "reconciliation" abortion fund-increase in their analysis of the new White House proposal, which will become Pelosi's companion bill: "None of President Obama's proposed changes diminish any of the sweeping pro-abortion problems in the Senate bill. And he actually proposes to increase the funds that would be available to directly subsidize abortion procedures [with $11 Billion for Community Health Centers like Planned Parenthood] and to subsidize private health insurance that covers abortion (through the premium- subsidy tax credits program)."
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council also condemned Obama's new plan: "It also calls for $11 billion for community health centers with no restrictions on funding abortions, [can you say Planned Parenthood?] mandates so-called 'preventative' services for women including abortion, reauthorizes the Indian Health Act without abortion funding restrictions, and creates a national plan run by the Office of Personnel Management to contract with plans that include abortion."
But the good news was confirmed by Newsweek.com's analysis (repeating what I've been saying for three months), that a handful of the 37 moderate House Democrats led by Stupak can stop the entire Obamacare bill, because it funds massive increases abortion with our tax-dollars. "What matters now is how large that 'unclear number of Democrats' is, how many representatives will oppose the Democrat's compromise bill because of softer abortion language," said Newsweek.com. "If we're talking Stupak and one or two other members of Congress, then the Democrats are probably safe. But if the ranks of Stupak-followers reach into low double digits, Pelosi may have a serious threat on her hands. When we know more of the numbers, we'll better understand whether they will pose a threat to health-care reform moving forward."
Despite Scott Brown's (R-MA) victory as Senator-elect from Massachusetts, leading Democrats were quick to dismiss the voice of the people and promised to push ahead by funding abortion with our tax dollars. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who forced her pro-abortion funding scheme with Senator Ben-Nelson (D-NE) into H.R. 3590, defended her own victory over pro-life advocates, stating "it's only an ‘accounting procedure' that will do nothing to restrict [abortion] coverage." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi likewise thumbed her nose at the voters' strong anti-Obamacare rebuke in Massachusetts. "Let's remove all doubt," Pelosi told reporters in San Francisco the week of Brown's election. "We will have health care – one way or another. Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happen[ed] in Massachusetts, just the question about how we would proceed," Pelosi added. "But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill." Make no mistake, pro-abortion forces still control Congress, the Senate, and the White House, and vow to aggressively ram their "tax-and-kill" agenda against the voters will.
Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) caved in to pressure from the White House, and broke his pledge to "draw a line in the sand" against abortion funding, by instead reaching a compromise with pro-abortion Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) to fund some elective abortions with our tax-dollars. According to the Washington Post, Nelson bargained for extra Medicaid money for Nebraskans, and an accounting-scheme that citizens choosing the abortion option in their subsidized "health" care plans must write separate checks for abortion co-pays. Senator Boxer admits not getting the total abortion funding she wanted, but Boxer claimed victory over the more conservative Stupak-Pitts version of the house bill that would prohibit tax-funding for all abortions except life of the mother, or familial or forced impregnation.
Congressman Bart Stupak issued the following statement about the Nelson-Boxer compromise: "While I appreciate the efforts of all the parties involved, especially Senator Ben Nelson, the Senate abortion language is not acceptable. A review of the Senate language indicates a dramatic shift in federal policy that would allow the federal government to subsidize insurance policies with abortion coverage. Further, the segregation of funds to pay for abortion is another departure from current policy prohibiting federal subsidy of abortion coverage." Stupak is now asking for help to lobby his fellow Blue-Dog Democrats in the House to stop the bill entirely.
Please call both your Senators and your Congressman today at 202-224-3121 today and tell them "You are not pro-life unless you filibuster abortion, and oppose and filibuster the entire Obama-Reid plan to kill children with our tax-dollars. Abortion isn't health care."
Last year the full Senate voted down 54-45 on Senator Nelson (D-NE) and Hatch (R-UT)'s proposed "long-shot" amendment to prohibit most abortion funding in the Harry Reid "Obamacare" Health Care Bill, but it required 60 votes to overcome Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)'s filibuster. Boxer refused, and bullied Sen. Nelson into a compromise that was not close to the Stupak language adopted by the House of Representatives on November 7 by a vote of 240 to 194. Although I do not personally endorse the Stupak legislation because it still funds child-killing in the rare cases of familial or forced impregnation, the Nelson-Boxer compromise is far worse, and would fund elective abortions by gutting the Hyde Amendment which has barred federal funding for abortion in Medicaid and all other federally funded health-care programs since 1977. Yet aggressive pro-abortion Democrats remain eager to kill even the old Hyde Amendment, which no longer fully applies to the proposed "Obamacare" plan offered by Harry Reid.
Time Magazine confirmed: "Under the [Senate] plan, like the House plan, certain individuals would get government subsidies to help buy private insurance in a publicly-established exchanges. There would be a guaranteed choice in each health insurance exchange between at least one plan that does not offer abortion services beyond life [of the mother, or familial or forced impregnation], and at least one plan that does, allowing consumers to choose their preference." Senator Nelson's compromise did not significantly change this.
In other words, if you couldn't afford an abortion yesterday, it will be free tomorrow, so long as you simply choose the right plan and $12 co-pay, tax-payers will fund your abortion, even elective abortions of convenience, above and beyond the also-funded cases of familial or forced impregnation. Ironically President Obama will sign a bill that fulfills Margaret Sanger's racist vision to exterminate poor children, many of whom will be African-American, through abortion.
By creating an "accounting scheme" child-killing providers must pretend "to segregate funds internally, so that only private dues, and not federal subsidies, pay for actual abortion services," but they are not required to increase the co-pay, so the abortion is essentially free to the young woman who receives federal dollars to electively kill her child, or costs the same as any other doctor's office visit.
Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) issued an apology after his outburst, "you lie," toward President Obama during his health care speech to Congress on Wednesday. "I let my emotions get the best of me," Wilson said in a statement. "I extend sincere apologies to the president." We commend Wilson for his quick humility. But questions remain:
Did Obama tell lies during the speech? Was Wilson right after all? And why doesn't Obama apologize just as quickly for calling conservatives liars? In their fact-checking, the press confirmed FIVE WHOPPERS told by the President himself:
OBAMA LIE #1: "No federal dollars will be used to fund abortions."
THE TRUTH: Obama's plan mirrors Harry Reid's amendment to HR 3590 which has a Section that reads: "Abortions for Which Public Funding Is Allowed. -- The services described in this subparagraph are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted." The Washington Times reported: "You can't get more explicit than that." And FactCheck.org exposed Obama's lie too: "Despite what Obama said, the House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans." So President Obama lied, plain and simple.
OBAMA LIE #2: "I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period."
THE TRUTH: The Democrat controlled Congressional Budget Office said Obamacare would add $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years, but will not succeed at shrinking the overall costs of our nation's health care. Republicans claim it's more like $600 billion increased deficit spending. (Confirmed by Associated Press, 9 Sep 09.) Either way, Obama lied.
OBAMA LIE #3: "Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut...That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare."
THE TRUTH: The Washington Post reports Obama proposes "to squeeze more than $500 billion out of the growth of Medicare over the next decade....[which has] fueled fears that his effort to expand coverage to millions of younger, uninsured Americans will damage elder care. As a result, barely one-third of seniors support a health-care overhaul, several polls found." (Washington Post, 9 Aug 09) Even the Post admits, Obama lied.
OBAMA LIE #4: "If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage."
THE TRUTH: Whether working or not, rich or poor, you will be ordered to get mandatory government-run health-care coverage, or pay a fine a $3800 fine per family, under the new Senate plan being railroaded through the finance committee by Max Baucus (D-MT). (New York Times, 9 Sep 09). Obama pretends you're "able" to get coverage, when he knows it's mandatory (with a big tax increase or "fine" penalty). Obama lied. But the biggest of all...
OBAMA LIE #5: "The claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens, such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple." [Note that Obama accused us of lying, first.]
THE TRUTH: Money incentives for "end of life" counseling in Pelosi's HR 3962 included pressuring counseling to the elderly, giving doctors a monetary incentive to persuade you to sign a "do not resuscitate" (DNR) order to pull the plug on Grandma, just like the Obama administration already pressures all Veterans to sign them. (Confirmed by the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, read extensive details at www.prayinjesusname.org.) And under the British NHS government-run health plan, "Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors have warned." (The Daily Telegraph, 2 Sep 09). Dr. Ewing Cook just admitted intentionally killing patients who signed DNR authorizations during Hurricane Katrina. "I gave her medicine so I could get rid of her faster...there's no question I hastened her demise." Bottom line: Grandma, don't sign Obama's DNR order, even if your doctor gets a bonus check from the President for talking you into that.
Obama lied at least five times during his speech. Congressman Wilson was right after all.
ABC NEWS VIDEO: John Stossel destroys Obamacare by explaining Socialism.
Be sure to watch the last minute of this short video... or select here to watch video....it would be hilarious if it weren't so sadly true. This video is going viral, watched 1,000,000 times in just over two months. Forward this video to your friends!
SELECT HERE TO SIGN PETITION, AND WE WILL FAX ALL 37 UNDECIDED DEMS, ALL 52 "BLUE-DOG" HOUSE DEMOCRATS, AND ALL 100 SENATORS, TO COMPLETELY REMOVE ABORTION FUNDING FROM THE HEALTH CARE BILL
Friends, our nation stands in the midst of a spiritual war to save or destroy unborn babies. You and I stand in this battle together. We must stand strong!
God Bless you, in Jesus' name,
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt
P.S. Time is urgent! Only days remain until the FINAL HOUSE VOTE on this dangerous "health" care bill. Please don't delay, but sign our petition today!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please, avoid posting advertisements. Content comments are welcomed, including anonymous. Posts with profanity will not be published.