By Daniel Greenfield
The cause of Obama's freefall in the polls can be reduced down to one simple word, "Credibility." Credibility is the board game of politics and the rules are fairly simple. Politicians begin their terms with a certain amount of credibility points that they can spend either on policies that will benefit the public or their own pet projects, hopefully both. The politician gains credibility points if things are going well for the average American, and loses credibility points when things go badly and his policies fail to make things any better…http://canadafreepress.com
FACT CHECK: PRESIDENT OBAMA REPEATS FALSEHOODS IN JOINT SESSION SPEEC
September 10, 2009
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Permalink
Last night during his address to a joint session of Congress on the topic of health care, President Obama again repeated many claims that simply aren't true. But despite the President's rhetoric, the Democrats' health care bills will force millions of Americans out of their current health care plans, add to the federal deficit, and increase Americans' health care costs. Following are some of the discredited claims the President repeated last night:
CLAIM: ".[N]othing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have."
FACT: This marked an important change in the President's language last night. He used to say, "If you like your health-care plan, you keep your health-care plan." By now using the word "require," the President's admitting that they can't guarantee Americans will keep their health plan. After both the Associated Press, ABC News and others have thoroughly debunked this claim, it's not surprising the White House has made this shift. But the point is that no one knows for sure how many employers will drop their coverage altogether if their plan goes into effect. Experts at the Lewin Group estimate the number could be more than 100 million Americans. And $500 billion in Medicare cuts will obviously reduce the quality of care America's seniors receive.
CLAIM: "The plan will not add to our deficit.I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits - either now or in the future. Period."
FACT: According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the House Democrats' bill would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And a recent study by the Lewin Group found that "[i]n the second 10 years.the proposal would add an estimated $1 trillion to the federal deficit."
CLAIM: "(I)t will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government."
FACT: As the Associated Press has reported, the Democrats' plan will increase costs, rather than lower them: "Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf warned lawmakers the legislation that he has seen so far would raise costs, not lower them."
CLAIM "If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open."
FACT: The Hill reported yesterday, that the President has not met with House Republicans since April, and when Republican Leaders asked for a meeting to discuss health care in a May 14 letter, the President ignored the request. The Politico reported on the President's response on June 5, saying, "he makes no mention of the request to meet in the letter, which he signs off by stating, "Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me and I look forward to further discussions on this critically important issue." But those "further discussions" simply didn't happen. The facts are clear: blame for the lack of bipartisanship in the current health care debate lies squarely at the feet of Washington Democrats.
CLAIM: "I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are."
FACT: This is an interesting assertion considering the President also said last night: "Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors' groups and even drug companies." So what special interests is he talking about when the White House seems to have struck back room deals with so many of them?
CLAIM: "We've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system - a system that is currently full of waste and abuse."
FACT: The massive $1.6 trillion House bill's cost is NOT mostly "paid for" through savings in the existing health care system - not by a long shot. In fact, the House bill includes more than $800 billion in new tax increases during a severe economic downturn on families and employers to "pay for" most of the massive price tag. And, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that even with these tax increases, coupled with other "pay fors" in the bill such as cuts to Medicare, the House bill still has a revenue shortfall that will add $239 billion to the federal deficit over a ten year period. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote in an open letter to Congress raising concerns about a $534 billion small business tax in July: "Even with some exemptions, this provision will kill many jobs. Market forces and employer autonomy should determine what benefits employers provide, rather than Congress."
CLAIM: "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."
FACT: During his quest for the presidency, now-President Obama declared that everyone deserves access to reproductive health care that includes abortion, and vowed that this "right" would be at the heart of his health care reform plan if elected president. President Obama has never retracted this vow, and the health care reform bill moving through the House would help him make good on it if enacted into law. As written, it would allow the U.S. Secretary of Health & Human Services (HHS) to include abortion as a benefit in the government-run health care option. Many Democrats dispute this, pointing to the recent adoption of an amendment sponsored by Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) that would prohibit federal dollars from being used to fund abortion. But under this amendment, the HHS Secretary is explicitly authorized to pay for elective abortions under the government-run insurance plan.
Some have also suggested that the government-run plan would not result in government-funded abortions because it will be subject to the "Hyde Amendment," but this argument is misleading as well. The Hyde Amendment is not a government-wide applied law, but a rather provision included in the annual HHS Appropriations bill, which bans federal funding of elective abortions. According to a memo produced by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the government-option will not be funded through the appropriations process. For this reason, it will not be subject to the Hyde Amendment. The truth of the matter is that the HHS Secretary will be allowed to include abortion as a benefit in the government-run health care plan under the legislation currently moving through the House. Moreover, FactCheck.Org has stated that "House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans."
CLAIM: "Now, there are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms I am proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."
FACT: The non-partisan Congressional Research Service confirms in a report that there is no mechanism included in the bill to verify that individuals are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants before they receive government benefits. Furthermore, Republicans offered two amendments in the Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce Committees that were rejected by Democrats. The first would have prevented illegal immigrants from being automatically enrolled into Medicaid and the second would have required better screening for applicants for federally-subsidized health care to ensure they are actually citizens or legal immigrants http://gopleader.gov/
Senate's 10-year health fix would cost $856B
Bill unveiled Wednesday but hopes dim for bipartisan compromise
Baucus plan revealed Sept. 16:
Morning Meeting’s Dylan Ratigan and Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., discuss the health care bill proposed by the Senate Finance Committee, and whether there is no hope for a bipartisan health care plan.
Morning Meeting Bayh talks health legislation, public option
Sept. 16: Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., joins the Morning Joe gang to discuss health care reform just hours before the release of Max Baucus' committee's bill.
WASHINGTON - Sen. Max Baucus on Wednesday brought out the much-awaited Finance Committee version of an American health-system remake — a landmark $856 billion, 10-year measure that starts a rough ride through Congress without visible Republican backing. The bill by Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, would make major changes to the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system, including requiring all individuals to purchase health care or pay a fine, and language prohibiting insurance company practices like charging more to people with more serious health problems...more http://msnbc.com/
EXCLUSIVE: W.H. collects Web users' data without noticeRate this story
Social-media messages go into archives
by Audrey Hudson (Contact)
Ken Boehm, a lawyer and chairman of the center, also disputed that the presidential records law applies, because the comments are pasted onto a third-party Web page and not official correspondence with the president. "If the White House has nothing to hide, why is this cloaked in secrecy? Why won't they make the dollar amount this is going to cost public?" Mr. Boehm asked. "I don't think there is an expectation that this is being captured by the government and saved." But Patrice McDermott, director of OpenTheGovernment.org, called the proposal "a positive development because it demonstrates a commitment from the Obama administration to meet its obligations under the Presidential Records Act." "Additionally, I am encouraged to see the administration recognizing that it must find a way to handle the ever-expanding amount of data generated electronically. I hope the rest of the executive branch will learn from the president's leadership on this issue," Ms. McDermott said. Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, called for congressional oversight of the practice of collecting data. "Given the administration's disappointing secrecy in other contexts, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee encourages Congress to conduct oversight to ensure compliance with the law, maximize transparency and protect individual privacy," Mr. Buttar said. According to the law, the term "presidential records" means documentary materials "created or received by the president, his immediate staff or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise and assist the president, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President." "It includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the president or members of his staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President," the law says. David Almacy, who served as President George W. Bush's Internet director, said the Bush administration did not use the then-fledgling social-networking sites in the same manner as the Obama White House, except to upload presidential speeches onto iTunes. The White House, however, did archive comments posted to its official Web site. The proposal issued Aug. 21 calls for a contractor to "crawl and archive" social-networking Web sites where the White House maintains an official presence on seven networks: Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Flickr, YouTube, Vimeo and Slideshare. The collection will include the comments, tags, graphics, audio and video posted by users who don't work for the White House.
The White House has more than 333,000 fans on Facebook, and posts updates several times a day that draw hundreds of thousands of comments, both positive and negative. The White House has more than 1 million followers on Twitter and more than 87,000 subscribers on YouTube, where more than 400 videos of the president and White House briefings are posted. http://washingtonpost.com/
Soros: Republic Enemy #1
By Jim O'Neill
"The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States."—George Soros "George Soros is an evil man. He's anti-God, anti-family, anti-American, and anti-good." —Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson
Is it possible to lay the global financial meltdown, the radicalizing of the Democratic Party, and America's moral decline, at the feet of one man? It is indeed possible. If George Soros isn't the world's preeminent "malignant messianic narcissist," he'll do until the real thing comes along. Move over, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. There's a new kid on the block. ….more http://canadafreepress.com
Obama's OSHA Pick, David Michaels, Makes Van Jones Look Tame
At a time when the unemployment rate is nearing double-digits, President Obama's OSHA nominee, David Michaels, threatens to be an occupational hazard.He's also a radical. Conservatives who were outraged by Van Jones should be apoplectic about his tenure when they consider that - according to their website - OSHA "inspected 38,579 workplaces during Fiscal Year 2006."David Michaels was behind the junk-science efforts to smear Bisphenol A (BPA) , an innovative chemical used to make plastics stronger. . . .Michaels sees even the 2nd Amendment as a work-place "regulatory" issue where he might, as head of OSHA, intervene.
Obama-czar outrage: Embryos are merely this ...
There is no moral concern regarding cloning human beings since human embryos, which develop into a baby, are "only a handful of cells," argued President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein. more… Erick.Erickson@RedState.com
Obama now has the first "Special Representative" to Muslim Communities. This is the liberals' typical approach to fighting terrorism. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/09/129209.htm
