No federal funds will be used to pay for abortions

[stone]

I just heard these words from the mouth of Obama. I liked what i heard, he painted a pretty picture.

I still don't trust him.

However, i think this is good news, it can't be easy to step back on something that is spoken directly to congress.

I'd be curious to know if any acting president in the past has ever said something that he will or won't do directly to congress and didn't keep his word?

 

[Michie]

Yeah I just read something about it below. Like you, I'm still leery though. Interesting takes below.

Obamas Speech: Dem Health Care Bill Now, With Or Without GOP
The American Catholic

President Obama Addresses a Joint Session of Congress on Health Care Reform

I will not support any plan which increases the taking of innocent human lives by abortion and rations care for the elderly, infirmed and disabled. I was not reassured.​

 

[AMDG]

And I was going to ask "and you believe him?" I know that I sure would feel better about it there was a statement actually put into the bill that "there will be no public funds used for abortions". I believe that some Congressmen tried to get that statement about no public funding of abortions into the House Bill, but it was rejected nine times. I also have heard the stories that once the government gets it's public option, abortions will be funded under "women's reproductive health care" (they claim that they will be able to get around the Hyde Amendment because this is a specific government entitlement.)

Thing is it was disappointing not to hear our president say "I have heard the concerns of all you people." Sad really. The people (the elderly really) have simply been dismissed by our president.

 

[JoabAnias]

NRTL disagrees.

NRLC Media Advisory:
Obama dupes news media on government-funded abortion!

Obama perpetuates abortion funding myth in joint session address

Memo: Why the Hyde Amendment won't prevent government-funded abortion under H.R. 3200

Memo: Rebutting the myth that only "private funds" will pay for elective abortions under the Obama-backed health bill (H.R. 3200)
​

 

[stone]

I'm reading in the 1st link of the 3 above this here:

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, commented: "Barack Obama needs to learn that the mere repetition of a verbal formula does not change reality. The reality is that the Obama-backed House bill would explicitly authorize the federal government insurance plan to pay for elective abortions and would explicitly authorize subsidies for private abortion insurance -- and all with federal dollars, which are the only kind of dollars that the federal government can spend."

***

Can he speak one thing and sign into law something that goes directly against what he spoke to congress?

Can someone just say something like, speculating the bill is passed, that since the president himself said that federal money can't be used for abortions that the abortions would have to cease that are paid for with tax dollars?

Can the man speak what people want to hear, and do something that he said he would not do?

I'm thinking this must be common practice for politians maybe? That is to say one thing and do another? Maybe that's where the saying come from, "you'd make a good politician", because they are a good liar or something like that?

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Pro-lifers are never satified.

"We want a clear statement that health care reform won't include public funding of abortion"

Obama says the same in front of an international televised joint session of Congress.

"Obama is lying, we want more"

What do you want ?

Really.

I'm asking.


What IS good enough ?

 

[benedictaoo]

I just heard these words from the mouth of Obama. I liked what i heard, he painted a pretty picture.

I still don't trust him.

However, i think this is good news, it can't be easy to step back on something that is spoken directly to congress.

I'd be curious to know if any acting president in the past has ever said something that he will or won't do directly to congress and didn't keep his word?

Obama said a lot of things that he has not lived up to, so why is this different?

 

[Fantine]

Obama said a lot of things that he has not lived up to, so why is this different?

No President can act unilaterally. He has to deal with Congress and the media.

In an atmosphere that wasn't governed by conservative media hysteria and hyperbole, I am sure that he would have accomplished more of his goals.

I haven't heard the whole speech, so I can't comment on it.

As far as Obama wanting to hurt old people goes, all of us know that if Republicans had been in power in 1965 Medicare would never have been passed at all.

Thirty years later, a significant number of Republicans voted in favor of the Medicare bill. The House adopted the conference report on July 27, 1965, 307-116, with 70 Republicans supporting it. And on July 28, the Senate adopted the final version of the bill by a vote of 70-24, with 13 Republicans in favor of the bill. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law on July 30, 1965.

But is Dean correct that the Republicans didn't support Medicare until the end?

Donald Ritchie, the associate historian in the U.S. Senate, told us that the Republican support wasn't just a last-minute phenomenon. During the discussion of both bills, "There were always progressive Republicans and liberal Republicans, some of whom supported Roosevelt and Johnson," Ritchie said.

Johnson had the political muscle to pass Medicare because the 1964 elections ushered in 42 new Democrats to the House of Representatives, giving the party a two-thirds majority overall and a larger majority on the Ways and Means Committee, where the legislation would originate. Up until then, many members of the committee, including its Democratic chairman, Wilbur D. Mills, opposed the idea of government-funded health care. In fact, Mills proved a tough sell in 1965 until some of his own pet proposals were added to the legislation. One of those — the addition of a voluntary, supplemental health care plan — had its roots in a Republican alternative bill.

BTW, Google had 503,000 references for George W. Bush's Medicare cuts in the past 8 years.

Here's one:

Bush Proposes Medicare Cuts in Latest Budget : NPR

 

[Mom2Alex]

He either told a bold-face lie or is misinformed by his own advisers. Either way, read what is at factcheck.org.


Which side is fabricating?

and the story on my blog.

 

[Mom2Alex]

Charlie, the truth would be nice.

Factcheck.org

 

[Mom2Alex]

Fantine, Obama won the presidency - you can stop campaigning.

Factcheck.org on Which side is fabricating (abortion in the healthcare bill)

Bush pushed the largest Medicare expansion in history. Read it at CNN.

Dems lie about Republicans nixing Medicare & of course lies about Bush cutting Medicare at Factcheck.org, again.

Stop wasting your time watching Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann and check the facts for yourself.

 

[Mom2Alex]

By the way, if we are pro-lifers, what do you consider yourself to be?

 

[CaDan]

Fantine, Obama won the presidency - you can stop campaigning.

As can you, ma'am.

 

[AMDG]

As can you, ma'am.

Doesn't sound like she's campaigning (the last administration was so bad while the present one is so good and we should fall down and worship "the one" who has been elected to public service as president). She was just giving facts to check on factcheck.org.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Charlie, the truth would be nice.

Factcheck.org

Yes, it would.

www.Pleasecutthecrap.com

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

By the way, if we are pro-lifers, what do you consider yourself to be?

I call myself anti-abortion

To claim the title pro-life is to associate oneself with a large, loose knit group of orgnaizations and people whose policies, postions, mindsets and ethical practices I wouild just as soon NOT be associated with.

 

[CaDan]

Doesn't sound like she's campaigning (the last administration was so bad while the present one is so good and we should fall down and worship "the one" who has been elected to public service as president). She was just giving facts to check on factcheck.org.

I don't see any "just" about it. Read your own post--you seem to be in full sarcastic insult mode.

The Republicans lost. It's supposed to taste like a fecal burrito.

 

[AMDG]

The Republicans lost. It's supposed to taste like a fecal burrito.

No. The fact remains that the President is supposed to represent the will of the people, not a particular party, and not to "pay off" the people who got him elected. (Oops did I type that "outloud"? No matter, in the acceptance speech, Obama even claimed that he would represent all the people--and I foolishly, it seems, assumed that he was speaking the truth.)

 

[benedictaoo]

No President can act unilaterally. He has to deal with Congress and the media.

In an atmosphere that wasn't governed by conservative media hysteria and hyperbole, I am sure that he would have accomplished more of his goals.

I haven't heard the whole speech, so I can't comment on it.

As far as Obama wanting to hurt old people goes, all of us know that if Republicans had been in power in 1965 Medicare would never have been passed at all.



BTW, Google had 503,000 references for George W. Bush's Medicare cuts in the past 8 years.

Here's one:

Bush Proposes Medicare Cuts in Latest Budget : NPR

So? Bush is no longer the man we can not trust, Bams is now, we need not worry any more over what Bush did or did not do... we need to be worried about what Bams may be lying about. Bush, Fantine, is water under the bridge, do you not agree that it is?? To bring Bush up over and over is a strawman... the republicans have not have the control for two years now, the demos have, so you can't keep blaming them, they do not have the majority anymore, your points are truly moot. *shrug*.. don't know what else to tell you, really... you keep beating the same dead horse.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

So? Bush is no longer the man we can not trust, Bams is now, we need not worry any more over what Bush did or did not do... we need to be worried about what Bams may be lying about. Bush, Fantine, is water under the bridge, do you not agree that it is?? To bring Bush up over and over is a strawman... the republicans have not have the control for two years now, the demos have, so you can't keep blaming them, they do not have the majority anymore, your points are truly moot. *shrug*.. don't know what else to tell you, really... you keep beating the same dead horse.

Oh, that's just not right.

Our lord and secular savior, the greatest who ever lived Ronald Wilson Reagan blamed everything bad he had to deal with for 8 full years on Jimmy Carter.

We can blame Bush for anything we want.