Showing posts with label LIAR LIAR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIAR LIAR. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Obama Gives April Fools ObamaCare Speech

Obama's April 1st Rose Garden speech stating that 7.1 MILLION have signed up for, the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare… is the biggest April Fools joke of all!

According to a hush-hush study by the Rand Corporation… only 850,000 ‘previously uninsured’ have paid a dime

Barack Obama spoke about Affordable Care Act enrollment totals at the White House but took no questions, as Vice President Joe Biden stood by wordlessly and applauded

Barack Obama spoke about Affordable Care Act enrollment totals at the White House but took no questions, as Vice President Joe Biden stood by wordlessly and applauded.  The friendly staged audience applauded as well, but not as energetically as one might expect. And, The president took no questions from reporters.

By Marion Algier – AskMarion

An exuberant President Barack Obama declared on Tuesday, April 1st that his signature medical insurance overhaul is a success, saying it has made America's health care system 'a lot better' in a Rose Garden press conference.  He even called it ObamaCare, officially taking ownership of that handle as well as of the bill.  It will be his legacy, good or bad! 

However buried in the supposed 7.1 million enrollments that he announced in a heavily staged appearance is an even more unsettling reality.

The numbers from a RAND Corporation study that has been kept under wraps suggests that barely 858,000 ‘previously uninsured’ Americans, in whose name all this was done, have paid for their new policies and nowhere to join the ranks of the insured by Monday night.  In fact, the CBO reports that in the end after millions lose their healthcare, will be paying more and our system eventually goes to a single-payer socialized medicine system, that will include death panels and a shortage of doctors, there will still be 31 million uninsured.

In fact, many of the others who are included in the 7.1 million, include millions who lost coverage when their existing policies were suddenly cancelled because they didn't meet Obamacare's strict minimum requirements.  But the president still claimed that 'millions of people who have health insurance would not have it' without his insurance law.'

'The goal we’ve set for ourselves – that no American should go without the health care they need ... is achievable,' Obama declared.

The president celebrated the end of a rocky six-month open-enrollment period by taking pot shots at Republicans who have opposed the law from the beginning as a government-run seizure of one-seventh of the U.S. economy.  Curiously he never mentioned HHS Director Sibelius who was sitting in the front row.

Rose Garden no-show: Kathleen Sebelius appeared on an Oklahoma TV station on Monday to buck up Obamacare'€™s flagging numbers in the Sooner State, and had only a blank-stare response to the law's unpopularity -- she was nowhere to be seen as Obama took his victory lap

Rose Garden Stage no-show: Kathleen Sebelius appeared on an Oklahoma TV station on Monday to buck up Obamacare's flagging numbers in the Sooner State, and had only a blank-stare response to the law's unpopularity -- she was nowhere to be seen as Obama took his victory lap

Video: Sebelius Has No Comment After Hearing Oklahoma’s Oppostion to ObamaCare…

'The debate over repealing this law is over,' he insisted. 'The Affordable Care Act is here to stay.'

The president also chided conservatives 'who have based their entire political agenda on repealing it,' and praised congressional Democrats for their partisan passage of the law without a single GOP vote.

'In the end,' Obama warned the GOP, 'history is not kind to those who would deny Americans their basic economic security. ... That's what the Affordable Care Act represents.'

'“The bottom line is this,' said the president: 'The share of Americans with insurance is up, and the growth in the cost of insurance is down. There’s no good reason to go back.'

'We could not have done it without them, and they should be proud of what they've done,' Obama boasted, in a clear nod to November's contentious elections in which Republicans are expected to make large gains on an anti-Obamacare platform because of the law's general lack of popularity. 

We shall see who has the last the laugh when the actual facts and numbers surface.

Republican Senator Barrasso appeared on Fox saying administration has 'cooked the books' on Obama Care numbers!!!!!

Barrasso said on Sunday that the lack of details about Obama Care enrollment numbers suggests the Obama administration has “cooked the books.”;

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, made his comments just hours before the Monday deadline to enroll in the Affordable Care Act and was skeptical of the administration’s most recent enrollment figure of more than 6 million Americans.

“I don't think it means anything,” he told “Fox News Sunday.” “They are cooking the books on this.”;

Though the enrollment number now appears just a million shy of the administration’s goal of 7 million by the March 31 deadline, Barrasso said Americans who have switched to Obama Care from insurance deemed sub-standard under the Affordable Care Act still don’t know whether they can keep their same doctors. And they don’t know whether their premiums will indeed be more affordable.

Among the other questions are whether enough younger people have enrolled in Obama Care to cover the health care costs of older Americans in the program and how many of those enrolled previously were uninsured.

Maine Sen. Angus King, Independent, said on the show that the enrollment number is now at 6.5 million and that “signups are getting younger every day.”;

However, he acknowledged the administration needs to be more forthcoming about the numbers, as Americans rely on third-party analysis to get much of their information.

“I do think there’s a transparency problem,” said King, adding he would be willing to work on legislation to fix such problems.

Said Barrasso: “I’ve looked at this 10 different ways. This health care law is unfixable.”

And if everything is so grand and on the up and up, Why would Obama be ensuring high prices for Insurance Companies?  RUSH says ObamaCare Is a ‘Direct Wealth Transfer’… 

Related:

Russia Takes Back Alaska... 

Ted Cruz Shows Off Winston Churchill Tattoo While Touting Obamacare Alternative

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Examiner Editorial: Why does Nancy Pelosi fear an Obamacare inspector general?

“Now that a Democrat works in the Oval Office and is responsible for the biggest federal entitlement program ever created, Pelosi thinks an IG is unnecessary.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi: " Each of the committees of jurisdiction has oversight, so the congressional oversight is something that I support. Each of the agencies of government that are implementing the law, the Affordable Care Act, have their own inspectors general. I think that the system has enough appropriate oversight. I don't see any reason to go to that point." (AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Washington Examiner: Among the least-heralded public servants in the nation's capital are the 73 inspectors general established by Congress to root out waste, fraud and inefficiency in the executive branch. With teams of thousands of auditors and inspectors, the IGs issue hundreds of investigative and audit reports that send a steady parade of crooks to jail while saving taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars every year. Unfortunately, it's doubtful that one out of 100 Americans could name a single IG.

That anonymity is a key to their success, however, because it helps keep the focus on the job at hand and away from political considerations that can derail the pursuit of justice. So it's particularly disappointing to see House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi blatantly playing politics with the imminently reasonable proposal of Rep. Peter Roskam to create an IG for Obamacare. The Illinois Republican announced his proposal Thursday, and no sooner had he done so that Pelosi made clear her opposition to it.

Asked about the Roskam proposal at her daily news conference, Pelosi said: “No. Each of the committees of jurisdiction has oversight, so the congressional oversight is something that I support. Each of the agencies of government that are implementing the law, the Affordable Care Act, have their own inspectors general. I think that the system has enough appropriate oversight. I don't see any reason to go to that point.”

Of course, there are oversight committees of Congress for all 73 of the departments and agencies that presently have IGs, but none of those federal entities control one-sixth of the U.S. economy or trillions of dollars in federal spending. So why would Pelosi be opposed to an Obamacare IG?

Roskam found the likely answer in Pelosi's position on previous proposals to create IGs. He noted that Pelosi enthusiastically supported creation of IGs for the U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well for the Toxic Asset Recovery Program, the federal relief effort to victims of Hurricane Katrina and the intelligence community. Perhaps its merely coincidental, but every one of those IG proposals came when a Republican president was in the White House. Now that a Democrat works in the Oval Office and is responsible for the biggest federal entitlement program ever created, Pelosi thinks an IG is unnecessary.

Pelosi was speaker of the House when Congress approved the $700 billion Wall Street bailout in 2008 with a Special Inspector General for TARP. As Roskam pointed out last week, the SIGTARP has since “identified $5.3 billion in restitution and savings, including $533 million in direct taxpayer savings. In comparison, the healthcare law is estimated to cost $1.8 trillion when fully implemented, dwarfing TARP's cost to taxpayers.”

It was also Pelosi who famously said of Obamacare that “we have to pass it so you can see what’s in it.” Remember, too, that Obamacare was written behind the closed doors of Pelosi’s office. Could it be there’s something in Obamacare that she fears an Obamacare IG will expose?

Saturday, March 1, 2014

A Dose of Reality… As Harry Reid Calls Terminally Ill Americans Liars - Updated

The only major news outlet that covered Harry Reid calling Americans who have lost their health insurance liars was Fox News… so many Americans haven’t heard anything about this.

NewsBusters: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid insulted victims of ObamaCare on Wednesday – and the three major networks didn’t seem to care. [Video below. MP3 audio here.]

Then today in another blatant political move, the administration has moved the date for the effectiveness of most of those losses or any further loses until after the 2014 Election in the hope that the low-informed won’t catch on… Please spread the word.

 

Video: A Dose of Reality 

By Marion Algier  -  Cross-Posted at AskMarion

Harry Reid Calls Terminally Ill Americans “Liars”

“The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.” – Stephen King

Video: Reid Calls All Americans Saying That They Have Been Hurt By ObamaCare "Liars"

Last Resistance:

--#-- 

Are there a disproportionate number of liars in politics than anywhere else? Possible, but I’d wager that liars abound everywhere, regardless of occupation.

The frightening thing about liars in positions of power, rather than just liars in general, is that those in power can use their lies to persuade large groups of people. Those for whom lying is a gift can use politics as a means of mass destruction. One of the most gifted liars in politics is Senator Harry Reid. Harry Reid can always be counted on to spin a tale whenever Obama needs him to. Most recently, Reid has tried to discredit all of the Obamacare horror stories we’ve been hearing. But rather than make implications, or claim that the stories are embellished, Reid is simply calling them lies.

“Despite all that good news, there’s plenty of horror stories being told. All of them are untrue, but they’re being told all over America…The leukemia patient whose insurance policy was canceled [and] could die without her medication, Mr. President, that’s an ad being paid for by two billionaire brothers. It’s absolutely false. Or the woman whose insurance policy went up $700 a month–ads paid for around America by the multibillionaire Koch brothers, and the ad is false….We heard about the evils of Obamacare, about the lives it’s ruining in Republicans’ stump speeches and in ads paid for by oil magnates, the Koch brothers.”

Wait a minute. Let’s think about this for a second. Harry Reid’s accusations are logically flawed. Out of hand, he discounts stories simply because they’ve been made into attack ads. He claims that because of the involvement of money from the evil Koch brothers, the stories of those negatively impacted by Obamacare are lies. He is arguing that correlation proves causation, which is a well known fallacy.

Harry Reid is not only being ridiculous, and an idiot, he is being extremely cruel. Can you imagine being called a liar in front of millions of people simply because you shared your story? These people, some of whom are terminally ill, decided to speak up, and they are now being shamed by the Senator from Nevada.

The worst part of this story is that Harry Reid’s acolytes will help spread his lies. Harry Reid’s outright lies will be repeated by liberal pundits everywhere, and there will be many Americans who fall for it, because they are uninformed, and completely uninterested in doing their own research.

Harry Reid just lied to all of us. He used fallacious arguments to persuade Americans that Obamacare is just so darn great, and that we should all ignore those cancer-stricken jerks who are slandering our wondrous president. In one paragraph, Harry Reid insulted numerous terminally ill Americans, and defended a healthcare system that was conceived as a means to accrue power, rather than help anybody.

Harry Reid doesn’t deserve to serve the American people. #FireHarry 

Video: Senator Reid On Obamacare Horror Stories . All Of Them Are Untrue All Liars The Kelly File – Unfortunately the Obama Gremlins have once again scrubbed the Internet of this video and other related videos…

Emilie’s Story: ObamaCare is hurting people like me

GOP Senators’ Obamacare Replacement Beneficial to Young People says Senator Colborn as He Loses His Own Cancer Doctor in the Midst of His Cancer Fight

Cancelled – Stories Behind HC Policy Cancellations Because of ObamaCare 

Cancer and Obamacare Survivor, plus His Hero Audited – Interview 

Pray For Jim Hoft Over At Gateway Pundit

Related: 

Obamacare: The Final Nail In The Coffin For The Middle Class

Attention Main Stream Media. Regarding Obamacare… I Told You So!

The TRUTH about Preexisting Conditions

Wake-Up… ObamaCare Eliminates Your Plan by Design

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One’s Talking About 

Report: Cancer patient critical of Obamacare targeted by IRS for audit

Megyn Kelly - Did Obama win election by lying about Keeping your Healthcare; Still Lying 2 Cover up

Dr. Ben Carson, family and friends target of IRS harassment for criticizing Obama

In the Meantime Read: Beating Obamacare

Thursday, January 9, 2014

ISSA Warns Sebelius That She Could Face Perjury Charges Over Obamacare Testimony - Rep Trey Gowdy

 

Video: ISSA Warns Sebelius That She Could Face Perjury Charges Over Obamacare Testimony - Rep Trey Gowdy

Washington Examiner: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius could face perjury charges over her congressional testimony on Obamacare, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., warned in a letter calling for Sebelius to correct the record.

“Witnesses who purposely give false or misleading testimony during a congressional hearing may be subject to criminal liability under Section 1001 of Title of 18 of the U.S. Code, which prohibits ‘knowingly and willfully’ making materially false statements to Congress,” Issa wrote in a Wednesday letter. “With that in mind, I write to request that you correct the record and to implore you to be truthful with the American public about matters related to Obamacare going forward."

Issa focused on Sebelius' testimony about launching the healthcare.gov federal exchange website despite the existence of technical problems that marred the Obamacare rollout.

“Providing false or misleading testimony to Congress is a serious matter,” Issa writes. “Documents and testimony obtained by the Committee, including information provided by Teresa Fryer, the Chief Information Security Officer at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and the MITRE Corporation, a contractor hired by HHS to conduct security assessments of healthcare.gov, show that your testimony was false and misleading.”

HHS promised to respond to the letter. "Regarding the issues raised in the partial transcript excerpts referenced in the letter—as we have said repeatedly, including when these issues were first reported several weeks ago—the HealthCare.gov components that are operational have been determined to be compliant with the Federal Information Security Management Act, based on standards promulgated by the National Institutes of Standards and Technology," Joanne Peters, the national press secretary for health care at HHS, told the Washington Examiner in an email.

Sebelius' claim that MITRE conducted "ongoing testing" of the Obamacare website was false, Issa said, citing Fryer's testimony to committee staff that the company only did testing by rounds, with the last pre-launch round taking place on Sep. 20. The next round did not begin until Dec. 10.

Issa also said that Sebelius' claim that MITRE recommended HHS proceed with the launch of the website was also false, because MITRE says it was never consulted.

The Republican investigator also disputes Sebelius' statement that “no one… suggested that the risks outweighed the importance of moving forward."

"[Fryer] was very concerned about the problems raised by MITRE during its security testing of the system," the letter states.

Issa also quotes from a Sep. 24 memo written by Fryer, who concluded that the health care website "does not reasonably meet the CMS security requirements," adding that "there is also no confidence that Personal Identifiable Information will be protected."

"There have been no successful security attacks on Healthcare.gov and no person or group has maliciously accessed personally identifiable information," Peters countered in her email. "An independent security control assessor tested each piece of the Healthcare.gov system that went live Oct. 1 prior to that date with no open high findings. All high, moderate and low security risk findings listed on the SCAs for the portions of the website that launched Oct. 1 were either fixed, or have strategies and plans in place to fix the findings that meet industry standards."

Related:

Is This the Alarming Reason Kathleen Sebelius Hasn’t Been Fired?

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Kathleen Sebelius Senate Hearing Obamacare 11.6.2013, Sebelius Admits: It Is possible for convicted felons to become Obamacare navigators

Greg GutFeld: “There have now been more hearings on ObamaCare than people who have signed up for the program”

Below is the full hearing 3 hours - skip to 25 min 55 sec and that’s when the hearing beings.

Enzi questions are shortly before Cronyn.

Cornyn is speaking at 1:53 asking about the navigators possibly being convicted felons. Sherrod Brown follows.   At 1:59:40 is Thune ‘ who explains it is flawed legislation based on the outcome so far.  Predicated on promises which are broken.

She goes into a response that is evasive and misdirecting his question.

Most Americans would forgive it if you said you didn’t tell the truth.Just before 2:05 minutes you see her sitting there very thoughtful looking at her hands. This is a response not seen before – whether someone was talking in her ear or she had a small dose of conscience who knows?

Senator Roberts from Kansas, Sebelius’ home state, asked her to resign.

Video: Kathleen Sebelius Senate Hearing Obamacare 11.6.2013

That’s right folks… ObamaCare navigators could be convicted felons who would access to your personal information…

Video:  Kathleen Sebelius: It's possible for convicted felons to become Obamacare navigators

Video: Kathleen Sebelius Refuses To Answer Whether Obama's Keep Your Plan Promise Was True Or False

Video: Thune at Finance to Sebelius: You've Been Misleading the American People

Video: Senator Roberts Calls For Secretary Sebelius' Resignation in Finance Committee Hearing

Obama Now "Lying About Lies”

Obamacare, Deconstructed [video] 

The Dirty Secret Behind ObamaCare No One's Talking About

Friday, February 22, 2013

Stunner: ObamaCare-supporting Congressman suddenly not so sure you can keep your insurance after all

HotAir/Cross-posted at AskMarion:  Are you as shocked as Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)? Somehow, I rather doubt it, and I don’t think Jason Mattera is as surprised as the front-page pic suggests, either. Confronted with the new CBO analysis that shows more than seven million Americans will lose their present health-insurance coverage from ObamaCare despite his repeated assertions that no one would lose their coverage, Rep. Engel tells Jason in this Andrea Tantaros Show video debuting exclusively at Hot Air that Congress can always go back and fix what’s not working.

Funny — Jason doesn’t recall that being mentioned as an option, and neither do I:

Video: Surprise!  Rep. Eliot Engel Not So Sure About Oba…

Of course, Nancy Pelosi did tell us that we needed to pass the bill to see what was in it. How’s that working out for us? Not so hot, as it turns out, and it’s about to get worse for seniors in Medicare Advantage plans. Avik Roy reminds us that CMS helpfully postponed the deep cuts to the program until after the election so as to remove all of that messy accountability that politicians despise, and “the boom” is coming:

Though Democrats denied it during the 2012 campaign, Obamacare cut Medicare by $716 billion in order to partially fund $1.9 trillion in new entitlement spending over the next ten years. A big chunk of those Medicare cuts came from the market-oriented Medicare Advantage program. Cleverly, the Obama administration postponed the Medicare Advantage cuts until after the election, so as to persuade seniors that everything would be just fine. But the election is over. On Friday, the administration announced that it would be significantly reducing funding for the popular program. Obama’s proposal, according to one analyst, “would turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable.”

Democrats have long been hostile to the Medicare Advantage program, which allows seniors to get their Medicare coverage through plans administered by private insurers. Today, more than a quarter of retirees get their coverage through Medicare Advantage, and the program has experienced rapid growth over the past decade. Richard Foster, the recently-retired chief actuary of the Medicare program, has projected that Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare Advantage would force half of its current enrollees to switch back to the old, 1965-vintage Medicare program. Robert Book and James Capretta estimate that this will cost enrollees an average of $3,714 in 2017 alone.

The new rates proposed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a.k.a. CMS, will have the net effect of reducing payments to Medicare Advantage plans by 7 to 8 percent in 2014, according to Citi managed care analyst Carl McDonald. “This includes the 2.3% reduction in per capita growth rate announced by CMS on Friday, and estimated 2-3% drop as rates move to parity with fee for service…a 1.5% reduction associated with the change in coding intensity adjustment” and the 2% health insurance premium tax. “These negatives are partially offset by an estimated 1% benefit from improved Star quality ratings, re-basing, better risk scores, and fee for service normalization, resulting in an overall decline of 7-8%,” wrote McDonald yesterday in a note to clients.

Because the typical for-profit managed care plan targets profit margins of only 5 percent, and non-profits even less, the net consequence would “turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable,” according to McDonald, unless CMS changes its proposal. “If implemented, these rates and the program changes CMS is suggesting would be enormously disruptive to Medicare Advantage, likely forcing a number of smaller plans out of the business and creating disarray for many seniors.”

B-b-b-b-but if you like your plan, you can keep your plan! That’s what Obama and Democrats like Engel told Americans for months, and even years … until Obama was safely re-elected. Eliot Engel has this message for his constituents (NSFW):

Video:  Animal House – “You F’ed up, you trusted us”

Related:

Senator Rand Paul Speaks Out Against Senators Voting without Reading the Bills

Obama’s Stealth Move Towards Single Payer Healthcare

Senate Conservatives Update

HC Cramdown

Senator Grassley (and Others): Democrats' Want to Nationalize Healthcare

Obama in 2007 Said He Wanted to Eliminate Private Health Insurance

Woman in Oregon Told Healthcare Would Not Pay for Cancer Treatment But Would Pay for Assisted Suicide… Welcome to Government Controlled Healthcare

Review: The New World of ObamaCare

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Strassel: Axelrod's ObamaCare Dollars

Emails suggest the White House pushed business to the presidential adviser's former firm to sell the health-care law

WSJ: Rewind to 2009. The fight over ObamaCare is raging, and a few news outlets report that something looks ethically rotten in the White House. An outside group funded by industry is paying the former firm of senior presidential adviser David Axelrod to run ads in favor of the bill. That firm, AKPD Message and Media, still owes Mr. Axelrod money and employs his son.

The story quickly died, but emails recently released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee ought to resurrect it. The emails suggest the White House was intimately involved both in creating this lobby and hiring Mr. Axelrod's firm — which is as big an ethical no-no as it gets.

Mr. Axelrod—who left the White House last year—started AKPD in 1985. The firm earned millions helping run Barack Obama's 2008 campaign. Mr. Axelrod moved to the White House in 2009 and agreed to have AKPD buy him out for $2 million. But AKPD chose to pay Mr. Axelrod in annual installments—even as he worked in the West Wing. This agreement somehow passed muster with the Office of Government Ethics, though the situation at the very least should have walled off AKPD from working on White-House priorities.

It didn't. The White House and industry were working hand-in-glove to pass ObamaCare in 2009, and among the vehicles supplying ad support was an outfit named Healthy Economy Now (HEN). News stories at the time described this as a "coalition" that included the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the American Medical Association, and labor groups—suggesting these entities had started and controlled it.

House emails show HEN was in fact born at an April 15, 2009 meeting arranged by then-White House aide Jim Messina and a chief of staff for Democratic Sen. Max Baucus. The two politicos met at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and invited representatives of business and labor.

image

Reuters:  Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod

A Service Employees International Union attendee sent an email to colleagues noting she'd been invited by the Baucus staffer, explaining: "Also present was Jim Messina. . . . They basically want to see adds linking HC reform to the economy. . . . there were not a lot of details, but we were told that we wd be getting a phone call. well that call came today."

The call was from Nick Baldick, a Democratic consultant who had worked on the Obama campaign and for the DSCC. Mr. Baldick started HEN. The only job of PhRMA and others was to fund it.

Meanwhile, Mr. Axelrod's old firm was hired to run the ads promoting ObamaCare. At the time, a HEN spokesman said HEN had done the hiring. But the emails suggest otherwise. In email after email, the contributors to HEN refer to four men as the "White House" team running health care. They included John Del Cecato and Larry Grisolano (partners at AKPD), as well as Andy Grossman (who once ran the DSCC) and Erik Smith, who had been a paid adviser to the Obama presidential campaign.

In one email, PhRMA consultant Steve McMahon calls these four the "WH-designated folks." He explains to colleagues that Messrs. Grossman, Grisolano and Del Cecato "are very close to Axelrod," and that "they have been put in charge of the campaign to pass health reform." Ron Pollack, whose Families USA was part of the HEN coalition, explained to colleagues that "the team that is working with the White House on health-care reform. . . . [Grossman, Smith, Del Cecato, Grisolano] . . . would like to get together with us." This would provide "guidance from the White House about their messaging."

According to White House visitor logs, Mr. Smith had 28 appointments scheduled between May and August—17 made through Mr. Messina or his assistant. Mr. Grossman appears in the logs at least 19 times. Messrs. Del Cecato and Grisolano of AKPD also visited in the spring and summer, at least twice with Mr. Axelrod, who was deep in the health-care fight.

A 2009 PhRMA memo also makes clear that AKPD had been chosen before PhRMA joined HEN. It's also clear that some contributors didn't like the conflict of interest. When, in July 2009, a media outlet prepared to report AKPD's hiring, a PhRMA participant said: "This is a big problem." Mr. Baldick advises: "just say, AKPD is not working for PhRMA." AKPD and another firm, GMMB, would handle $12 million in ad business from HEN and work for a successor 501(c)4.

A basic rule of White House ethics is to avoid even the appearance of self-dealing or nepotism. If Mr. Axelrod or his West Wing chums pushed political business toward Mr. Axelrod's former firm, they contributed to his son's salary as well as to the ability of the firm to pay Mr. Axelrod what it still owed him. Could you imagine the press frenzy if Karl Rove had done the same after he joined the White House?

Messrs. Axelrod and Messina are now in Chicago running Mr. Obama's campaign. Mr. Axelrod, the White House and a partner for AKPD didn't respond to requests for comment on their role in HEN, the tapping of Mr. Baldick, and the redolent hiring of AKPD. Until the White House explains all this, voters can fairly conclude that the President's political team took their Chicago brand of ethics into the White House.

Write to kim@wsj.com

A version of this article appeared June 22, 2012, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Axelrod's ObamaCare Dollars.

Related:

ObamaCare Disarray as 2013 Nears… Beware!

Ryan to Newsmax: Obama Turning Medicare into 'Piggybank' for Obamacare

What Are The Chances? Obama, Jarrett, and Axelrod, All Connected to Communist Frank Marshall Davis

The 1997 speech that launched Obama – Chapter III

Friday, March 16, 2012

Obama Admin Finalizes Rules: $1 Abortions in ObamaCare

Remember Nancy Pelosi: “Well, we have to pass the ‘ObamaCare’ Bill so you can find out what is in it.”

Well… for those who didn’t read the bill in advance, trusted Washington and doubted those who did read the bill… We are now finding out:

The Cost of ObamaCare Has Doubled… From What They Told Us

There are Rationing Boards (Death Panels…. A Mandate Committee) and people/seniors over 76 and special needs patients will get few major services. once ObamaCare takes affect.

And Yes… Abortion ‘Will’ not only be covered, but murder will be wholesaled at $1 for an abortion under ObamaCare.

And that is only the beginning of the ugly!!!  Guess Sarah Palin and those dang Conservatives were right after all…

Obama Admin Finalizes Rules: $1 Abortions in ObamaCare

It’s official. The concern pro-life organizations had about the ObamaCare legislation funding abortions has been confirmed, as the Obama administration has issued the final rules on abortion funding governing the controversial health care law.

Nestled within the “individual mandate” in the Obamacare act — that portion of the Act requiring every American to purchase government — approved insurance or pay a penalty — is an “abortion premium mandate.” This mandate requires all persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund abortion. As a result, many pro-life Americans will have to decide between a plan that violates their consciences by funding abortion, or a plan that may not meet their health needs.

The Department of Health and Human Services has issued a final rule regarding establishment of the state health care exchanges required under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

As a knowledgeable pro-life source on Capitol Hill informed LifeNews, as authorized by Obamacare, “The final rule provides for taxpayer funding of insurance coverage that includes elective abortion” and the change to longstanding law prohibiting virtually all direct taxpayer funding of abortions (the Hyde Amendment) is accomplished through an accounting arrangement described in the Affordable Care Act and reiterated in the final rule issued today.

“To comply with the accounting requirement, plans will collect a $1 abortion surcharge from each premium payer,” the pro-life source informed LifeNews. “The enrollee will make two payments, $1 per month for abortion and another payment for the rest of the services covered. As described in the rule, the surcharge can only be disclosed to the enrollee at the time of enrollment. Furthermore, insurance plans may only advertise the total cost of the premiums without disclosing that enrollees will be charged a $1 per month fee to pay directly subsidize abortions.”

The pro-life advocate told LifeNews that the final HHS rule mentions, but does not address concerns about abortion coverage in “multi-state” plans administered by the Federal Government’s Office of Personell Management (OPM).

“There is nothing in the Affordable Care Act to prevent some OPM (government administered) plans from covering elective abortion, and questions remain about whether OPM multi-state plans will include elective abortion,” the pro-life source said. “If such plans do include abortion, there are concerns that the abortion coverage will even be offered in states that have prohibited abortion coverage in their state exchanges.”

The final rule indicates: “Specific standards for multi-state plans will be described in future rulemaking published by OPM…”

Set to go into effect in 2014, the unconstitutional provisions found in Section 1303 of the Obamacare Act compel enrollees in certain health plans to pay a separate abortion premium from their own pocket, without the ability to decline abortion coverage based on religious or moral objection.

That provision was the subject of a legal document that Bioethics Defense Fund’s Dorinda C. Bordlee, lead counsel for the group, submitted to the Supreme Court in February.

“This violates the Free Exercise Clause because religious exemptions are made for groups such as the Amish who morally object to purchasing any insurance, but no exemptions are made for Americans who have religious or moral objections to abortion,” Bordlee said.

“President Obama’s healthcare overhaul includes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that blatantly violates the conscience rights and First Amendment religious rights of millions of Americans,” AUL president Charmaine Yoest said. “Nowhere in the Constitution does it require Americans to violate their beliefs and pay for abortions.”

ADF Senior Counsel Steven Aden says Americans should not be compelled to pay for other people’s elective abortions.

“No one should be forced to violate their conscience by paying for abortions, but that’s precisely what ObamaCare does,” he explained. “ObamaCare requires that employees enrolled in certain health plans pay a separate insurance premium specifically to pay for other people’s elective abortions and offers no opt-out for religious or moral reasons. Such a mandate cannot survive constitutional scrutiny.”

BDF president and general counsel Nikolas Nikas said the individual mandate not only forces individuals into private purchases, it also effectively mandates personal payments for surgical abortion coverage, without exemption for an individual’s religious or moral objections.

He told LifeNews in an email, “Like a Russian nesting doll, the individual mandate has nestled within it a hidden, but equally unconstitutional scheme that effectively imposes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that violates the free exercise rights of millions of Americans who have religious objections to abortion.”

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 3/12/12 7:11 PM

Friday, September 23, 2011

Rick Perry - Lies About Dying Woman and His HPV Decisions

rick_perry_gardisil_lies_fox

In the latest GOP debate Rick Perry offered up yet ANOTHER lie to justify his Gardasil mandate. I had to shake my head when I heard this…

First, remember the LAST time he lied about this? At the CNN *debate*.

Last night, when asked about the Gardasil mandate, Perry said he was *lobbied* on HPV vaccine, by a woman with cancer.

from the Fox transcript:

Congresswoman Bachmann, in the last debate you criticized Governor Perry for his executive order mandating that 6th graders get the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer. Then afterward, you suggested that the vaccine was linked to mental retardation and you said that it could be, quote, "potentially be a very dangerous drug."

But the American Academy of Pediatrics has looked at it and says that the HPV vaccine has an excellent safety record. So my question to you is, do you stand by your statement that the HPV vaccine is potentially dangerous? And if not, should you be more careful when you're talking about public health issue?

BACHMANN: Well, first I didn't make that claim nor did I make that statement. Immediately after the debate, a mother came up to me and she was visibly shaken and heart broken because of what her daughter had gone through. I so I only related what her story was.

But here's the real issue, Governor Perry mandated a health care decision on all 12-year-old little girls in the state of Texas. And by that mandate, those girls had to have a shot for a sexually transmitted disease. That is not appropriate to be a decision that a governor makes.

It is appropriate that parents make that decision in consultation with their doctor.

But here's the even more important point, because Governor Perry made a decision where he gave parental rights to a big drug company.

That big drug company gave him campaign contributions and hired his former chief of staff to lobby him to benefit the big drug company.

That's what was wrong with that picture.

(APPLAUSE)

WALLACE: Governor Perry, obviously 30 seconds to respond.

PERRY: Thank you.

I got lobbied on this issue. I got lobbied by a 31-year-old young lady who had stage 4 cervical cancer. I spent a lot of time with her.

She came by my office talked to me about in program.

I readily admitted we should have had an opt-in, in this program.

But, I don't know what part of opt-out most parents don't get. And the fact is, I erred on the side of life and I will always err on the side of life as a governor as the president of the United States.

No.  he befriended that dying woman AFTER his mandate.

Perry and Burcham, a teacher from Houston, Texas, struck up an unusual friendship in the months after he issued his executive order. While the Texas legislature was working to revoke the mandate, Burcham traveled to Austin to testify about her personal experience with cervical cancer and how the HPV vaccine might help spare other young women from suffering a fate similar to her own.

And have to say, trying to shift this to opt-in versus opt-out is simply NOT the issue. It is that Rick Perry, to suck up to Merck, issued an EXECUTIVE ORDER to force this shot on 12 year old girls, side-stepping the Texas legislature. He did not do it because of a 31 year old woman with cancer, whom he didn't meet until AFTER he had been STOPPED and was trying to do save face PR.

It's like Rick Perry is trying to float which excuse to use today that people may buy.

h/t to scsalon.org

ABC News Report

ht rick perry heather burcham bed thg 110915 wblog Fact Check: Perry Met Dying Woman After Vaccine Order

Photo Courtesy of the Wilson family 

Although Rick Perry said at a debate on Thursday that he was “lobbied” by a 31-year-old woman suffering from cervical cancer to require young girls to receive the HPV vaccine, he did not meet the cancer patient until after he had already issued his executive order mandating the vaccine.

It was a rhetorical high point for Perry at the debate in Florida, when he put a personal face on the story and pointed to his friendship with a woman who later died of cervical cancer.

“I got lobbied on this issue. I got lobbied by a 31 year old young lady who had stage 4 cervical cancer,” said Perry. “I spent a lot of time with her.  She came by my office  She talked to me about this program.   I readily admitted we should have had an opt-in but I don’t know what part of opt out most parents don’t get and the fact is I erred on the side of life and I will always err on the side of life as a governor as a president of the United States.”

The woman Rick Perry mentioned in the Republican debate Thursday was Heather Burcham, a thirty one year old woman dying from cervical cancer. But what Perry left out in his answer was that he met her after he issued his executive order.

Perry issued the executive order requiring sixth grade girls receive the HPV vaccine in early February of 2007, and he met Burcham while she was lobbying the Texas legislature to uphold the governor’s executive order. The legislature ultimately ruled against Burcham and Perry and did away with the vaccine mandate.

As first reported by KTRK’s Ted Oberg, the pair struck up a friendship despite the Texas legislature revoking the governor’s mandate.  Perry invited Burcham to a ranch, rode motorcycles with her and even sat at her bed during her final days.  Burcham died in July 2007.

Read more about Heather Burcham.

Perry has often referred to Burcham on the campaign trail, saying recently he sat at the bedside of a dying woman with cervical cancer.

The Texas governor spoke at her memorial service in July 2007, saying it was a missed opportunity for the Texas legislature to not uphold his executive order.

“Though some could not see the benefits of the HPV vaccine through the prism of politics, some day they will,” Perry said in July 2007. “Someday they will recognize that this could happen to anyone’s daughter, even their own. Someday they will respond with compassion when they once responded with ignorance. And, someday, they will come to a place where they recognize the paramount issue is whether we will choose life, and protect life, without regard to what mistakes, if any, have been made in the past.”

Perry has endured a lot of criticism from fellow Republicans on the issue, particularly Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who have argued the government should not force parents to inoculate their children against what is essentially a sexually transmitted disease, even if it cuts down on instances of cervical cancer.

Related:

Gardasil – If A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words, Then A Video Report, Or Two, Or Three, or SEVEN…

On H.P.V Vaccine, Palin’s First Overt Attach on Perry

Merck Vaccine Scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman Admitted Presence of SV40, AIDS and Cancer Viruses in Vaccines

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Whoops: Just-Discovered “Error” Indicates Obamacare Will Cost Half A Trillion More

I guess this is another one of those “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it” moments.

The latest cost overrun associated with ObamaCare? A $500 billion “error” associated with insuring the spouses and children of new entitlement recipients. That’s $500 billion in additional deficit spending — although it didn’t stem from an “error” so much as it was the result of a deliberate miscalculation.

As it attempted to calculate ObamaCare’s true fiscal impact, the Congressional Budget Office was explicitly instructed to ignore the cost of covering family members under new eligibility requirements for low-income private sector employees.

“The Congressional Budget Office has never done a cost-estimate of this (because) they were expressly told to do their modeling on single coverage,” researcher Richard Burkhauser told the Daily Caller this month.

Documents obtained from the Democratic-controlled Joint Committee on Taxation confirm Burkhauser’s account — and demonstrate the lengths to which Obama supporters went in an effort to hide these costs from the taxpayers.

Hey, remember when the Democrat party line was that Obamacare would reduce the budget deficit? Remember when they claimed that repealing Obamacare would add to the national debt?  … Say Anything Blog 

 

500 Billion New Reasons To Invalidate ObamaCare

By HOWARD RICH Posted 08/10/2011 06:52 PM ET

A few hundred billion dollars here, a few hundred billion dollars there — sooner or later we're talking about the real cost of Barack Obama's new socialized medicine monstrosity.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi once said that "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." Apparently, passing the legislation was also a prerequisite to determining its actual price tag — which as it turns out is much higher than anyone fathomed.

The latest cost overrun associated with ObamaCare? A $500 billion "error" associated with insuring the spouses and children of new entitlement recipients. That's $500 billion in additional deficit spending — although it didn't stem from an "error" so much as it was the result of a deliberate miscalculation.

As it attempted to calculate ObamaCare's true fiscal impact, the Congressional Budget Office was explicitly instructed to ignore the cost of covering family members under new eligibility requirements for low-income private sector employees.

"The Congressional Budget Office has never done a cost-estimate of this (because) they were expressly told to do their modeling on single coverage," researcher Richard Burkhauser told the Daily Caller this month.

Documents obtained from the Democratic-controlled Joint Committee on Taxation confirm Burkhauser's account — and demonstrate the lengths to which Obama supporters went in an effort to hide these costs from the taxpayers.

Obviously this isn't the first "oversight" associated with this unconstitutional abomination. In March of 2011, Obama's heath care czarina Kathleen Sebelius was forced to acknowledge under oath that the government double-counted $529 billion in "savings" associated with the implementation of the legislation.

Numerous other errors and omissions have been uncovered within ObamaCare's fuzzy math — including a $52 billion raid of Social Security and a $72 billion repayment obligation for a new "long-term care trust fund."

According to Congressional Budget Office estimates released on the eve of its passage in March 2010, ObamaCare was originally projected to add $109 billion to the federal deficit over 10 years.

We can now add more than $1 trillion to that total (and counting), shredding once and for all Obama's ridiculous claim that his signature legislation is "one of the biggest deficit-reduction plans in history."

It's also critical to remember that all of this deficit spending comes after the imposition of new tax hikes totaling hundreds of billions of dollars — a double whammy for taxpayers.

In addition to its infamous (and unconstitutional) individual mandate, ObamaCare also includes a new employer mandate tax, a new tax on "Cadillac" health insurance plans, the creation of a new 3.8% surtax on investment income for households that earn more than $250,000, increases in Medicaid payroll taxes, a new tax on medical device manufacturers, a new tanning tax, a tax hike on drug companies and at least a dozen other new "revenue enhancements."

Many of these tax hikes have already been implemented — siphoning money away from our economy at the worst possible time. They're also being collected even after a federal judge struck down ObamaCare in its entirety.

Also — and this is a critical point — the official cost projections for ObamaCare factor in a decade's worth of tax hikes and deficit spending and only six years of programmatic "benefits." Obviously, that discrepancy vastly understates the long-term impact of ObamaCare on federal deficits.

During the recent debt-ceiling debate, Republican leaders proved unwilling to make major inroads in reducing the federal government's mushrooming debt. They also abandoned key long-term fiscal restraints aimed at lowering future deficits.

As a new "supercommittee" convenes to take another stab at these long-overdue reforms, it's clear that gutting ObamaCare must be its first order of business.

• Rich is chairman of Americans for Limited Government.

Source:  Investors Daily

Friday, July 15, 2011

The Expanding Catalogue of Obamacare Fables

Is there a health insurance horror story disseminated by the White House and its allies that ever turned out to be true? Obamacare advocates have exercised more artistic license than a convention of Photoshoppers. Now, a prominent sob story shilled by President Obama himself about his own mother is in doubt. It's high past time to call their bluffs.

The tall-tale-teller-in-chief cited mom Stanley Ann Dunham's deathbed fight with her insurer several times over the years to support his successful push to ban pre-existing condition exclusions by insurers. In a typical recounting, Obama shared his personalized trauma during a 2008 debate: "For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they're saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don't have to pay her treatment, there's something fundamentally wrong about that."

But there was something fundamentally wrong with Obama's story. In a recently published biography of Obama's mother, author and New York Times reporter Janny Scott discovered that Dunham's health insurer had in fact reimbursed her medical expenses with nary an objection. The actual coverage dispute centered on a separate disability insurance policy.

Channeling document forger Dan Rather's "fake, but accurate" defense, a White House spokesman insisted to the Times that the anecdote somehow still "speaks powerfully to the impact of pre-existing condition limits on insurance protection from health care costs" -- even though Dunham's primary health insurer did everything it was supposed to do and met all its contractual obligations.

No matter. Expanding government control over health care means never having to say you're sorry for impugning private insurers. Democrats have dragged every available human shield into the contentious debate over Obama's federal takeover of health care. Personal anecdotes of dying family members battling evil insurance execs deflect attention from the cost, constitutionality and liberty-curtailing consequences of the law. The president's Dunham sham-ecdote is just the latest entry in an ever-expanding catalogue of Obamacare fables:

-- Otto Raddatz. In 2009, Obama publicized the plight of this Illinois cancer patient, who supposedly died after he was dropped from his Fortis/Assurant Health insurance plan when his insurer discovered an unreported gallstone the patient hadn't known about. The truth? He got the treatment he needed in 2005 and lived for nearly four more years.

-- Robin Beaton. Also in 2009, Obama claimed Beaton -- a breast cancer patient -- lost her insurance after "she forgot to declare a case of acne." In fact, she failed to disclose a previous heart condition and did not list her weight accurately, but had her insurance restored anyway after intense public lobbying.

-- John Brodniak. A 23-year-old unemployed Oregon sawmill worker, Brodniak's health woes were spotlighted by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof as a textbook argument for Obamacare. Brodniak was reportedly diagnosed with cavernous hemangioma, a neurological condition, and was allegedly turned away by emergency room doctors. Kristof called the case "monstrous" and decried opponents of Democrats' health care proposals as heartless murderers. The truth? Brodniak not only had coverage through Oregon's Medicaid program, but was also a neurology patient at the prestigious Oregon Health and Science University in Portland (a safety-net institution that accepts all Medicaid patients). Kristof never retracted the legend.

-- Marcelas Owens. An 11-year-old boy from Seattle, Owens took a coveted spot next to the president in March 2010 when Obamacare was signed into law. Owens' 27-year-old mother, Tiffany, died of pulmonary hypertension. The family said the single mother of three lost her job as a fast-food manager and lost her insurance. She died in 2007 after receiving emergency care and treatment throughout her illness. Progressive groups (for whom Marcelas' relatives worked) dubbed Marcelas an "insurance abuse survivor." But there wasn't a shred of evidence that any insurer had "abused" the boy or his mom. Further, Washington State already offered a plethora of existing government assistance programs to laid-off and unemployed workers like Marcelas' mom. The family and its p.r. agents never explained why she didn't enroll.

-- Natoma Canfield. The White House made the Ohio cancer patient a poster child for Obamacare in 2010 after she wrote a letter complaining about skyrocketing premiums and the prospect of losing her home. After Obama gave Canfield a shout-out at a health care rally in Strongsville, Ohio, and promised to control costs, officials at the renowned Cleveland Clinic, which is treating her, made clear that they would "not put a lien on her home" and that she was eligible for a wide variety of state aid and private charity care.

Since Obamacare passed, the amount workers pay in health care premiums has soared an average of nearly 14 percent; thousands of businesses have sought waivers in search of relief from the law's onerous mandates; medical device makers have slashed jobs and research; and the private individual health insurance market is in critical condition. Post-Obamacare truth is bloodier than pro-Obamacare fiction.

By Michelle Malkin Posted on TownHall

Related:

Turns Out Obama’s Story About His Mother’s HealthCare Struggle Is Inaccurate

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

TURNS OUT OBAMA‘S STORY ABOUT HIS MOTHER’S HEALTHCARE STRUGGLE IS INACCURATE

A new book by New York Times reporter Janny Scott sheds new light on the life of Barack Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, including her final years. Scott found while assembling information for “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mother,” that Dunham in fact did have health coverage for her ovarian cancer, based off Dunham’s own past correspondence.Washington Examiner’s Byron York:

“Dunham decided to stay in Jakarta, where she underwent an appendectomy. But the pain did not go away, and Dunham feared, correctly, that she was terribly ill. In January 1995 she left Indonesia to go home to Honolulu, where she was diagnosed with advanced uterine and ovarian cancer. She began a regime of surgery and chemotherapy.

That is the time during which Obama says his mother battled insurance companies to cover her illness. But Scott, who had access to Dunham’s correspondence from the time, reveals that Dunham unquestionably had health coverage. ‘Ann’s compensation for her job in Jakarta had included health insurance, which covered most of the costs of her medical treatment,’ Scott writes. ‘Once she was back in Hawaii, the hospital billed her insurance company directly, leaving Ann to pay only the deductible and any uncovered expenses, which, she said, came to several hundred dollars a month.”

Often in his 2008 campaign and throughout his push for national healthcare reform, Barack Obama retold a compelling story of his mother’s struggle against non-budging insurance companies for care in the final years of her life before the cancer over took her.

Additional Discussion today on Radio:

Obama caught in a massive lie

So has the President been caught in a massive lie? Apparently author Scott Wright has been doing some research on stories he told on the campaign trail, and he has found some contradictory information – primarily that a story he told on the campaign trail about his mother’s cancer coverage was exaggerated, to say the least.

“For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in a hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a preexisting condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.

“There is something fundamentally wrong about that.  It’s a lie,” Pat said. “Her insurance company covered her completely for the problem that she was suffering.”

“That is weird.  According now to the records in January 1995, she left Indonesia to go to Honolulu where she was diagnosed with an advanced uterine and ovarian cancer.  She began a regimen of surgery and chemotherapy.  This is the time which womb says his mother battled the insurance companies to cover her illness.  But Scott, an author of a new book who has access to Dunham’s correspondence from the time reveals that she unquestionably had health coverage.  Ann’s compensation for her job in Jakarta had included health insurance which covered most of the cost of her medical treatment,” Glenn read.

Glenn emphasized that she came from another country to the United States and received her medical care. Pat added that she was actually misdiagnosed in Indonesia, where she was said to have appendicitis.

“ Once she was back in Hawaii, the hospital billed her insurance company directly leaving Ann only to pay the deductible and any uncovered expenses, which she said claimed to be several hundred dollars a month.  Scott Wright said Dunham, who wanted to be compensated for those costs as well as for her living expenses.  She filed a separate claim under her employer’s disability insurance policy.  It was that claim with the insurance company Cigna that was declined in August 1995 because as Cigna investigators said, her condition was known before she was covered by the policy.  Dunham protested the decision and informed Cigna that she was turning the case over to my son, an attorney, Barack Obama.  Cigna did not budge,” Glenn continued.

“September 1995 Dunham traveled to New York for an evaluation at renowned Memorial Sloan‑Kettering.  She returned to Hawaii, began a new course of treatment.  She died in November.  A dozen years later her son turned ordeal into a campaign pitch for national healthcare.  But the story Obama told Scott Wright was abbreviated.  The abbreviation was to leave out the fact that she had health insurance and it paid for her treatment.  Though he often suggested that she was denied health coverage because of a preexisting condition.  It appears from her correspondence in her own writing that she was only denied disability coverage.  That’s a different story altogether but one that nobody in the press seems to care.”

What are some other Obama healthcare related lies that have been exposed?

“One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about.  They delayed his treatment and he died because of it.”

But as Pat pointed out, it has been revealed that the man received treatment, his coverage was paid for, but he passed away anyway.

Glenn and Pat then went through a series of hyperbolic statements wherein the President implied that doctors were removing amputating feet from diabetics or needlessly removing tonsils for money. Obama, of course, did not provide concrete examples.

Video Discussion:  Beck on Radio – Obama Caught in a Massive Lie

But maybe O just comes by it naturally: Evidence of Deception Reaches White House  as Well as New Book on Obama Senior

h/t to the Blaze  -  Cross-Posted at True Health Is True Wealth