09.29
There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You lie! (Boos.)
THE PRESIDENT: It’s not true. And 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. (Applause.)
–President Obama, Speech to Joint Session(9/9/09)
Another day, another reason why nobody trusts anything this man or this congress says. The above paragraph is from Obama’s highly touted speech to the joint session of congress on September 9th. But today we get this story in the NY Times:
As if it were not complicated enough, the debate over health care in Congress is becoming a battlefield in the fight over abortion.
Abortion opponents in both the House and the Senate are seeking to block the millions of middle- and lower-income people who might receive federal insurance subsidies to help them buy health coverage from using the money on plans that cover abortion. And the abortion opponents are getting enough support from moderate Democrats that both sides say the outcome is too close to call. Opponents of abortion cite as precedent a 30-year-old ban on the use of taxpayer money to pay for elective abortions.
The question looms as a test of President Obama’s campaign pledge to support abortion rights but seek middle ground with those who do not. Mr. Obama has promised for months that the health care overhaul would not provide federal money to pay for elective abortions, but White House officials have declined to spell out what he means.
–David Kirkpatrick, NY Times
Oh, so his promise in the speech actually had no basis in reality? Surprise, surprise. This is just the same ol’ song and dance’. Politicians feign adherence to public opinion, then go off and do exactly what they need to do in order to keep the campaign contributions flowing in from their biggest backers. How many times have we seen this same scenario play out at all levels of government. A politician pushes a big issue and then brings it up for a vote. Then, when it gets voted down, they go right ahead and use some loophole or something to just push it through and do it anyway.
As I said in the last post, it’s the contradictions and blatant lying that’s killing this whole thing for him. I honestly believe that if he came out and said flatly that he wants government run healthcare, federally subsidized abortion, etc. that the poll numbers would probably be about the same or even higher. It makes me sick to believe that, but I’m afraid it’s true. Maybe I’m too cynical. I hope so.
