Ever since Reagan swept the land, the Democrats have done their best to hide their agenda. This has included trying to disguise their agenda behind false market economics, trying to create new labels for failed ideas, and sometimes flat out lying about what they believe. One trick of which they are quite fond is a trick that Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska just pulled on his voters. . . the old, “I really am against what I’m supporting” trick.The backdrop: As you know, the Democrats are struggling to get the Baucus bill out of the Senate. They need sixty votes and they are stuck on two issues: abortion and the public option. The reason these two issues are presenting such a problem is not that the Democrats don’t overwhelmingly agree on both issues, it’s that they need the support of 60 Senators to move the bill forward for a vote. With Republican opposition firm, and Joe Lieberman joining the Republicans in opposing a public option, the Democrats cannot pass the bill if it includes a public option. At the same time, since the Democrats literally cannot afford to lose one vote, the opposition of any Democrat would prove disastrous. That’s where abortion comes in.
Sen. Ben Nelson claims to be an opponent of abortion. Thus, he introduced a bill that would impose the same limits on abortion under the Baucus bill that currently exist under PelosiCare. Basically, he introduced his version of the Stupak Amendment. The Stupak Amendment (or in this case the Nelson Amendment) would prevent insurers from indirectly paying for abortions through the use of accounting fictions whereby money is separated into supposedly separate pools. Said Nelson: “Segregation of funds is an accounting gimmick. The reality is federal funds would help buy coverage that includes abortion.”
This was a make or break issue Sen. Nelson told the people of Nebraska -- though few intelligent people believed him because he’s a Democrat and they will sacrifice their deepest held beliefs without a second thought whenever those beliefs stand in the way of “progress.” The doubters were right.
When he introduced this amendment, Sen. Nelson made it clear on several occasions that he would not support any bill that did not include this language.
The amendment lost 54-45. So here comes his statement of conscience, his principled stand right? What? Why are you laughing? You think a Democrat can’t take a stand on principle? Well. . . apparently, you’re right. Right after the vote, Nelson (as predicted) did not reaffirm that he would oppose the bill, no. . . he only stated that this “makes it harder” for him to support the bill. He added, “We’ll just have to see what develops.”“As written, the Senate health care bill allows taxpayer dollars, directly and indirectly, to pay for insurance plans that cover abortion. Most Nebraskans, and Americans, do not favor using public funds to cover abortion and as a result this bill shouldn’t open the door to do so.”
Translation: “People of Nebraska, I will never compromise my principles until they are actually put to a vote.”
This, by the way, is after Nelson participated in a huge fraud to begin with. He let the Democrats threaten the insurance industry with the loss of their anti-trust exemption (Nelson is partially owned by the Nebraska-based insurance industry and partially owned by the ethanol lobby). He then graciously accepted a withdrawal of that threat in exchange for his vote on Baucus -- allowing him to sell his “reluctant support” to the people of Nebraska as being in their own interest. Shameless.
But Nelson wasn’t the only one to be exposed. Harry Reid too lies to his constituents. He claims to be anti-abortion, but he said this of this health care bill:
Translation: “People of Nevada, I really am anti-abortion, just like I’ve been telling you. . . I just think we should allow public funding of abortion.”“This is not the right place for this debate. . . No one should use the issue of abortion to rob millions of the opportunity to get good health care.”
Of course, they aren't the only ones who have exposed themselves. You know about Landrieu accepting a $300 billion pay off for her vote. Blanche Lincoln has made it clear she will act against the overwhelming interests of her constituents, as have many others like fellow Arkansas Sen. David Pryor. The AMA was exposed. It supported this monster, despite two-to-one opposition from doctors. AARP supported this even though the elderly overwhelmingly oppose it -- they were bought off with a promise to eliminate Medicare Advantage, which will lead to nine million more elderly needing AARP-sponsored insurance. In fact, the entire left-wing lobby has been exposed. . . the list goes on and on.
The issue of the public option also took a strange turn yesterday, and may have exposed more senators. Supposedly moderate Democrats like David Pryor agreed to "drop" the public option in exchange for non-profit plans administered by the Office of Personnel Management. Hmm. That sounds a lot like a public option to me. . . and it does to Harry Reid too:
The cries of the little socialists as Huffpo not withstanding, it's clear that the public option still exists. So can you name a senator who swore that he would never support any plan that included a public option or could lead to a public option? That's right, it was Joe Lieberman. Guess what Joe said this morning? Joe indicated this morning that he may be willing to support this new public option: "I am encouraged by the progress toward a consensus."“It is a consensus that includes a public option and will help ensure the American people win in two ways. One, insurance companies will face more competition, and two, the American people will have more choices."
Why am I not surprised.
Andrew: Great expansion on what little we're hearing from our friends in the MSM. It's nice to know that even in the midwest (outside of Chicago) there are clever crooks in Congress. Nelson's peregrinations around the truth would make my own Boxer, Feinstein and Pelosi proud. But--a crook is a crook is a crook. You didn't mention when Nelson is up for election next.
ReplyDeleteAs for Joe Liberman, he's not the worst we've ever encountered, but when he, as an orthodox Jew absolutely opposed to abortion suddenly became pro-choice solely to secure the vice-presidential nomination, I decided I would never trust him again. I was right.
Lawhawk, I just hope his electorate remembers this when they lose their health insurance.
ReplyDeleteThey've still got a chance to prove me wrong, but I'm not holding out hope for Nelson or the rest. We'll see about Joe.
AndrewPrice--Thanks for clearing that up. My guts told me that something was rotten about Nelson's deal, but your article 'splains it all. I hope the national electorate has a huge broom, 'cause we have a whole lot of sweeping to do eleven months from now.
ReplyDeleteThanks Hamilton, I agree. I'd like to see every one of these Democrats who voted for the bill (at any phase) tossed out of office.
ReplyDeleteThe left is indeed, fully exposed, this is a good thing. You have to know, that the Washington weasels are going to get something through - - their well spoken, clean Messiah’s ass is on the line. I too worry about burn out of the electorate, then I get in my office flick on the TV, and there’s Obozo accepting the Nobel, …burn out cured. There should be a law that Barry can’t speak before 8:00 AM ET - - forget the law, how about a gentleman’s agreement, …that’s right, we’re dealing with an infantile narcissist, whose ego must be fed. The bottom line for me, “If” the RNC plays this right, and I mean right, starting in 2010, we can begin to contain, then vanquish left once and for all : ) However, if we stomp onto the political field with a blithering herd of RINOs, …well : (
ReplyDeleteStan, There really are only a handful of RINOs out there right now -- you could actually name them all there are so few. They're just high profile in the media.
ReplyDeleteThe party is really hitting its stride. They are in full attack mode. They are finally making the right noises, they are voting (almost unanimously) in the right direction. And they're coming up with an agenda that, while I'm not fully thrilled, is at least heading in the right direction.
What they need now is an intelligent, charismatic pointman to become the face of the party on television.
Andrew - politicians are the greatest bullshitters on the planet. Of course, they undoubtedly do it on both sides of the aisle, but it does remind one why the founding fathers wanted to keep government small.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Jed. The smaller the government, the smaller the opportunity these guys have to practice their "craft."
ReplyDeleteHey Jed! How did you like Thomasville, that’s where I was borne. Neat little town, I still have lots of family down there. Did you play golf at Glen Arvin?
ReplyDeleteAnother translation is "Never mind the man behind the curtain."
ReplyDeleteHypocrites, all. I've kind of been out of the loop a little bit, but I did see a headline on Drudge that warmed my (freezing) heart. Something like: More people (now) would vote for Bush than Obama.
Thanks for the post, Andrew! I needed a reality check after picking up a Chicago Tribune today.
Writer X, PUT DOWN THE TRIBUNE. . . STEP AWAY FROM THE TRIBUNE. . .
ReplyDeleteDon't make us send a deprogrammer! LOL!
yesterday i was wondering why the dems weren't hollering that their beloved public option was no longer as was reported by the msm (even tho i knew the answer), but that joe has followed (or more accurately, never left) infuriates me. someone deserves a kick to the nuts on this one. my hunting-booted foot is at the ready...
ReplyDeletePatti,
ReplyDeleteIf you get the chance, kick away! It really angers me that they're doing this. And I will have nothing but contempt for anyone who helps them make this happen.