"The problem for Mr. Obama is that he lacks credibility when he asserts his plan won't add to the deficit or won't lead to rationing; that people can keep their health plans; that every family's health care will be better, not worse; and that a government run plan isn't a threat to private insurance. A large number of Americans don't believe the president on this."
     From "Obama Targets Medicare Advantage," by Karl Rove, which appears in today's Wall Street Journal.

"So, once the Secretary of HHS has ordered that all abortions be covered under the 'public option,' what would that mean? It would mean that you would not be allowed to enroll in the new government plan unless you were willing to pay an additional premium to cover the cost of elective abortions -- in effect, an abortion surcharge. The Capps Amendment explicitly requires that the federal official who runs the program must calculate the total cost of abortions and increase the premium for all enrollees enough to pay for the aggregate cost of the abortions. The amendment specifies that this 'abortion surcharge' (my term) cannot be less than $12 per enrollee per year, but the amendment does not set an upper limit.

"Again, this abortion premium is not optional: If you want to enroll in the government's public health plan, you would be required to pay the abortion surcharge. If you did not want to pay for abortions, you would not be allowed to take advantage of the government program at all."
     NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, responding to an article that ran in the Wall Street Journal and at beliefnet.com.

I could write this as a preface to almost every edition of TN&V (the saying made famous by the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan) that people are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. That more and more people understand this--that facts really are stubborn things--helps explain why support for the health care restructuring being constructed by pro-abortion President Obama and the pro-abortion congressional Democrat leadership is under siege.
My point can be reduced to three words: people aren't stupid.

Most people, including me, likely won't know (as Karl Rove pointed out this morning) that

Two weeks ago, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod said in a now legendary "viral" email that, "It's a myth that health insurance reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits." This was sent out the day before Mr. Obama told a Montana town hall that he'd pay for health-care reform by "eliminating . . . about $177 billion over 10 years" for "what's called Medicare Advantage." And it was two days before Mr. Obama told a Colorado town hall he'd cover "two-thirds" of the "roughly $900 billion" of his plan's cost by "eliminating waste," again citing Medicare Advantage.

But many have heard about the Department of Veteran Affairs' "Death Book," which I wrote about Monday (www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Aug09/nv082409.html) They put one and one and one--actually there are lots of "ones"--together and they reach the inescapable conclusion that this Administration is on a first name basis with Death.

Stephen Waldman

People who are old and/ or living with disabilities are in this Administration's cross-hairs. So no matter how much the media elite dismisses us as "poor, uneducated, and easily led" ignoramuses who buy into "lies," the truth is we know perfectly well this Administration offers a safe haven for those who believe we are spending way too much on the "wrong" people. Mr. Rove puts it politely when he says Obama "lacks credibility."

Likewise on abortion. I quoted from an excellent rebuttal by NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson to a piece written by Stephen Waldman. Mr. Waldman, one of the architects of the successfully executed plan by the Religious Left to paint then-candidate Obama as a raging moderate, is still carrying water for President Obama, still telling us that Obama is on a ceaseless quest to find common ground.

In this context, Waldman was arguing the jury is still out over the question (in his words), "does health care reform cover abortion?" Mr. Johnson methodically walks him--and all the readers who visit this blog--through the many and myriad ways it does. In the process he untangles a few of the prominent snares those who don't want to believe wrap the facts in. (See http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman.)

There are at least three other sources that document why Johnson is right and Waldman is wrong. One are words directly from the horse's mouth: Obama's pledge of fidelity to Planned Parenthood's political arm.

In 2007 he said, "Essentially, what we're doing is to say that we're gonna set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don't have health insurance. It'll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services."

The second are the many opportunities offered to pro-abortion Democrats to explicitly exclude abortion, all of which they rejected. Not some, not many. All.

The third is the emerging consensus--which includes FactCheck.org., TIME magazine, and an Associated Press report--that (as the AP put it) "Govt. insurance would allow coverage for abortion." These are not sources that have a vested interest in agreeing with us!

Keep reading TN&V and visiting www.nrlactioncenter.com. Things are constantly changing.

For those who like comment briefly, you can contact me at Tweet@daveha.

Part Two