Obama: 'This is a Health Care Bill, Not an Abortion Bill'

[onstageagain]

I don't care birth certificate or not. The way he swaggers up to the microphone and talks down to and about America erks me. I'm at the point where if he comes on TV now I'll change to something, anything else. As far as the birth certificate goes, I hope they can prove he wasn't born here. It might be the only way to get rid of him. While their at it I hope they get rid of Pelosi for vouching for him: that would probably be asking to much

[GymMonkeyAz]

You know, I dont really care much about abortion. Why should I have the right to tell someone how to live their life? I am not living their life.... no one else is living that persons life except that person. It is their choice. Not your or mine, or even Gods.

[Shadeofgrey1]

He lied. PA, & NM. taxpayer money is going to abortions

[InformedTexasVoter]

Abortion is America's Holocaust. For more info:

watch?v=BLUPpY4kBaQ

[chetohimler]

Correction, this Health Bill...is an Abortion.

Obamacare=Death to old Clunkers.

[PaulMazzotta]

I think it would be good to remember that this video clip is not about whether abortion should be illegal or legal. It is about Obamacare forcing people (regardless of their moral conviction) to pay for other people's abortions with federal (public) money. Those who seek to do that are seeking to impose their abortion morality (forcing the use of public money for abortion) on the rest of us.

[DarkLordCallMeDickC]

People say they don't want to contribute to a plan that funds abortions yet they pay private insurance companies that pay for aboritions. The argument is asinine.

[illhavemine]

I appreciate the comments on this board re abortion. However, I must disagree and leave the choice to the woman. She alone knows if she has the fortitude to care for a child. Too many stories of young children and babies dieing horrific deaths at the hands of disfunctional parent(s). True there is adoption, but some do not consider that as an option and the innocent child pays the utimate price. My thinking is against my religion. However, common sense weighs out.

[bks2754]

Abortion is against my faith as well. If you are serious about your faith then consider that 1.3 million babies are murdered every year in the USA in the spirit of choice. If a man and a woman make the CHOICE to have unprotected sex, then they have made the choice to take the chance to have a baby. If they cannot care for the baby they can CHOOSE adoption. This country is going to be judged by God. 3700 babies a day. About the same a 911 every day. Instead of being angry at me for this. Pray.

[jerrysmith29]

My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning R Regan This is the difference between a man who can see the value of sanctity of life

And a BLIND MAN =OBAMA= using the justification used by the supporters of slavery

[jerrysmith29]

Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. Ronald Regan

[jerrysmith29]

Obama a good example of Moral Relativists or double standard

Obama = hypocrite

Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth.

[PaulMazzotta]

0:12 "Subsidies", as used in this video, are federal (public) dollars. If Obama thinks the Senate "Obamacare" bill (S 1679) is not an abortion bill, he's either ignorant or lying. "S 1679" would require any "public option" and, eventually, many private insurance plans to cover "essential benefits". (Obama has called abortion-on-demand part of "essential services".) Based on past federal court decisions, such broad categories would include requiring federal dollars to pay for elective abortion.

[quizerry]

Obama is not ignorant, he can twist and turn words so you think he means one thing when he actually has hidden meaning. I would like some reporter to ask him why he isn't doing what he said and having a roundtable debate on healthcare on cspan for all Americans to see and understand. Or what happen to putting all bills on line for all the people to read and comment on before they are passed? They have rushed every major bill through, in my opinion to dupe the people.

[PaulMazzotta]

"They have rushed every major bill through..." Yes, I think that is the biggest problem. The abortion component is significant, in my opinion. But there are many other issues that should be a concern to all of us. I support health care reform (particularly as it relates to lowering costs). I think it is the morally right thing to have affordable health care for everyone. But that does not mean Obama's socialist-type approach is something I support.

[jerrysmith29]

@PaulMazzotta The American people have not had an opportunity to express their view on the sanctity of human life in the unborn. I am convinced that Americans do not want to play God with the value of human life. It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not.

[jerrysmith29]

Ronald Reagan

[jerrysmith29]

@PaulMazzotta low cost?? we pay for Medicare, Medicaid and now also the working class will pay for this bill

[jshooper]

i like obama...but he is letting the conservative democrats run wild....and get away with everything...they have done their best to gut this bill....and now they (along with their republican allies) are injecting divisive issues like abortion and immigration into a health-care bill in an effort to sabotage it....and kill it....they've hijacked this bill and dragged it so far right it's unrecognizable....it's getting ridiculous...and it's a shame

[2010GOP]

jshooper:

Maybe that's because there are more Conservatives in this country than Liberals --- 2 to 1 in fact

Basically what you're advocating is for Congress NOT to represent their districts in order to appease the minority

[jshooper]

they're not representing their districts...THAT IS A FACT....backed up by poll data....the majority of people want the public option...including polls in their individual districts....but these "conservative" democrats oppose it because they are in the pockets of the insurance industry...who bankroll their campaigns....because most of them come from small states where it's hard to raise money.....that is what's going on....and on issues like abortion...that's just a GOP diversion tactic

[2010GOP]

jshooper:

You're obviously following only selected polls, plus it depends on how the poll question is asked.

As far as pay-offs, you may want to ask why Pelosi has to buy votes in order to get it passed.

Wow -- If Pelosi has to pay representatives to vote for it & threaten Americans who don't want to use it, how wonderful of a bill it must be.

As far as abortion, Conservatives have continually stood by their beliefs. That should be apparent by now

[ETericET]

This is very easy to solve. Find out how many of the uncovered people are republican. If it's more them democrates kill the health care plan.

[dkkght46]

Wow! Odumbo is looking rather peak-ed. Who would have thought trashing our country and being "present" as often as possible could be so stressful. Wow he needs some sleep. May as well, what else is there to do? I'm also under a LOT of stress. I went to that STRIPPER joint downtown the other day. Man...I gotta tell you. I'm thinking about going back. This is truly a stressful decision. Dang. Hope I don't SNAP

[vcshort1]

okay i ve waited long enough for the day in 100 seconds. i am am unsubscribing.

[Zakdayak]

His answer was a little all over the place for me. If abortion isn't illegal, and isn't plastic surgery (vanity), what exactly is the rationale for denying it to women? Distaste??

[awerner2007]

I doubt vasectomies will be covered by the bill either. Certain things just fall under the "other" category i guess. We liberals need to be more pragmatic about this and get the best bill passed that we can. And if that includes a public option, I'm satisfied.

[Zakdayak]

Vasectomies are not the same as abortions. Men don't get raped, or left behind with child, or suffer as second class as a result of being saddled with kids (except in some exceptional cases). Plus, covering vasectomies actually isn't such a bad idea.

I can't disagree w/ pragmatism on principle. However, I would point out it's Democrats raising the issue in the Congress, not the Republicans trying to kill it. I find no logic in denying something legal that reduces crime in the long run.

[KataVideo]

the stupak amendment is a piece of shit. I hope a real Dem takes over his district.

[scipio2009]

Have you ever even looked at Michigan's 1st District?

lol

[KataVideo]

what is it. ted nugent country?

[scipio2009]

It's definitely not loony lefty country.

Before you start calling for people's heads, it'd make more sense if you actually knew what you were talking about

[KataVideo]

A REAL Democrat ought to run against stu(pid)pak

[scipio2009]

And nonsense rhetoric, like that, is the reason why the Republicans are on the fast track to seeing the Democrats with 270 in the House of Representatives.

If you want a pure party, why don't you jump on board with what's left of the Republicans, donk.

[KataVideo]

I hope the Democrats rally and put a REAL candidate up against this anti-choice talibangelist jerkwad barf stupak

[scipio2009]

Find a candidate who "epitomizes your ideals", who can actually win a general election in Michigan's 1st, and run him. Simple as that.

Last I checked, Stupak won his last race with almost 65% of the vote in the general.

Unless you move into Michigan's 1st and find a candidate who can topple a Democrat who won a district with 65% of the vote, you should be quiet.

The more you rant and spew, the more retarded you look.

Stupak is a pro-life Democrat, who fits his district. lol

[KataVideo]

It would be great if the Democratic party gets a REAL Democratic candidate in their to beat the conserva-dem stupak and get that district right.

[scipio2009]

Now you're just being retarded.

The man won his district with near 65% of the vote!

You can go all "Club For Growth" if you want to. Just understand that there's no place for that junk in the Democratic governing caucus.

Ridiculous, with all that "REAL" Democrat nonsense. idiot.

[KataVideo]

It'd be great of the DCCC gets a real Democratic Candidate to replace this anti-Choice conservadem stupak.

[scipio2009]

Absolutely retarded.

I come here, give you the information directly linked to the district in question, and yet you still fain for the day where a "real" Democrat, whatever that shit is supposed to mean, can go in and beat a guy WHO WON HIS DISTRICT WITH 65% OF THE VOTE!

You're a fucking waste of time.

[KataVideo]

you know what would be great? It would be great if the Democratic party ran a REAL "big-D" Democrat against stupak and got rid of that anti-choice conserva-dem.

[scipio2009]

The man won his seat with 65% of the vote! How stupid can you be?

In all honesty, I could care less. If you want to go in, run a "big 'D' democrat, only to have that person lose the general election, go on ahead and indulge yourself.

The fact of the matter is the Democratic Party, the governing apparatus in Washington D.C. at the moment, could care less what retarded people like you want to push for, because it does nothing to help them govern.

simple as that. I'm done.

[KataVideo]

@scipio2009 it would be a good thing if the Democratic Party were to run a Real Democratic candidate against this turncoat conservadem stupak

[scipio2009]

lol

[KataVideo]

I'd sure like to see the national democrats take a hard look at this bart stupak, and run a Real Democrat against him.

[1234uz]

Unless a Man can carry a fetus in his balls for 9 months and then give birth SHUT the Fuck Up about abortion ! It IS a Womens Decision not ours and Abortions should be paid for by any insurance plan since Abortion is LEGAL

[scipio2009]

No matter how many caps you try to put in your post for EMPHASIS, it still doesn't do anything to make a case that the federal government should be putting money into the practice of aborting fetuses.

Yes, it is definitely a woman's decision to make; it's just the opinion of many on the "right" and "left", as well as the President of the United States, apparently, that the federal government should not be playing an active role in that decision-making process.

Simple as that

[taoofmichael]

In other words, "Poor women can eat shit."

You must be a Christian.

[scipio2009]

lol

And here comes another flamethrower, spewing nonsense without backing any of it in fact.

The Hyde Amendment has been on the books for over 30 years!

And, even beyond that, an amendment has been renewed every year, to allow for coverage in cases of rape, incest, or for the health of the mother.

It's been good legislation for years, and the fact that you try to turn this into a religious debate is disgusting.

[scipio2009]

Private insurance can still put money forward for abortions. The federal government already allows abortions to be funded, in the key cases that have already been mentioned.

What rationale is there for the federal government to go beyond that?

you're ridiculous

[onstageagain]

@1234uz I don't know where this bastard Obama, Barry Soroto , Barach is from. I do know he is NOT loyal to the United States of America. And any American who voted for him once made a mistake. Any American who votes for him twice is an idiot!

[Dudalizer]

@1234uz That's just silly. Carrying the baby doesn't give her the right to kill it on a whim. Now rape, incest, and health complications are different, but some dumb bimbo wanting to get an abortion because having a child would be "inconvienient" doesn't deserve shit. I would want to stop a mother from drowning her children in the bathtub, so why wouldn't I want to stop her from having them killed in utero? Just because it doesn't affect YOU personally doesn't mean that it is OK.

[1234uz]

@Dudalizer Are you a Woman, can you carry a Baby in your body? And as far as your knowledge of my personal situation You dont know SHIT so STFU

[Dudalizer]

@1234uz It doesnt matter. A woman doesn't have the right to kill the child based on a whim. Once that child has really developed, it is their body as much as it is the woman's. Dont get me wrong. I am not TOTALY anti-abortion. I am pro-choice when it comes to 1st trimester for all abortions and second trimester for rape, incest, etc. I am however against 3rd trimester abortion in all cases but medical necessity. Once you get to a certain stage in developement, abortion is just plain wrong.

[AnneOnAMoose]

This country needs a little more abortion.

[WKaliberr]

I love abortion

[JOHNINCOLUMBUS]

Too bad the Republican's weren't all aborted.

[aznfootwork]

AMEN to thaT!

[scipio2009]

Dude, that's not even funny.

[KataVideo]

yes it is

[bleunt]

imo, federal dollars should pay for abortions.

[scipio2009]

Federal money should be put forth, in a case where the life of someone is being decided outside of the control of federal jurisprudence, with an actor who has no voice in the matter.

That is a precedent, IMO, that should never be set, for the simple fact that it opens a Pandora's box of other issues that changes the scope of what the government controls. It also makes no sense.

While being pro-choice, I don't see the positives in the federal government throwing their head in this mess

[bleunt]

I dunno how much an abortion costs, but I've heard that in some states rape victims have to pay for their own abortions. That's wrong. Also, the government pays for killing fully developed human beings, sooo...

[scipio2009]

First and foremost, I am under the impression that funding in cases where rape, incest, or the mother's health is at risk, are already available, so I don't know where your point is coming from.

Secondly, fully developed human beings have access to a judicial process, before they are "killed", while fetuses do not, so......

[clubfloozy]

so STFU, jack-ass. it iz a religious debate, you fockin moron. the catholic church iz all over this one.. read before you open your ignorant woman-hating mouth, you fucking pig.

[scipio2009]

Another idiot, spouting about topics that they have no idea about. All you have to do is look at the actual federal legislation on the books!

No one here is debating whether or not abortion should be legal.

The questions being asked, and have been asked, are whether federal money should be used to finance abortions.

As long as you fail to see this simple point, you'll continue to look absolutely retarded. donk

[clubfloozy]

and az long az fucking idiotz like you fail to recognize that abortion IZ health care (for women) you will continue to spout your ignorant nonsense. i don't see you screaming because VIAGRA iz paid for with tax payer dollarz, you piece of trash. i might be a "donk," whatever that iz but i'd rather be anything other than a miserable woman-hating LOZER like you.

[scipio2009]

I put forth a substantive point, addressing the point being argues and you, in that face of not having any facts to support your position, spew and rant on about whatever comes to your mind, without acknowledging my point, which you have no info to refute it with. Add in the fact that you seem to not even have a grasp of the English language and it gets funnier.

truly sad

[bleunt]

Nope, some states will even have the rape victim pay for her own examination (which will be used as evidence in court).

Yeah, it's "OK" for the government to kill a fully developed human beings with thoughts, feeling, loved ones, rights. I don't like the idea of a government killing its citizens. I think that's way more disturbing than aborting a pregnancy.

[scipio2009]

Then take that up with the individual states. People across the country, in some cases, want the ability to smoke marijuana if they see fit, yet you don't see people crying out for a national standard; they are going state by state and settling the matter. Why would abortion be different.

And, honestly, I don't even want to get into arguing killing a fetus vs. killing a person who, a court and a jury, has been found to warrant death. Not even with a ten foot pole.

[bleunt]

I won't take it up with the individual states. I live in Sweden, I'm just calling it as I see it.

America should join the rest of the developed world in abolishing the practice of government sponsored murder.

[scipio2009]

And finally the truth comes out. The U.S. is not Sweden, and probably will never be.

In no offense to you, how would you feel if outside forces tried to dictate Swedish policy?

According to a quick Wiki search, it appears that Sweden, compared to other EU countries, has high rates for instances of sexual assault and hate crimes against its citizens.

What is stopping Sweden from lessening those rate with stiffer punishments, like countries like the U.S. and the dev. world have imposed?

[bleunt]

What do you mean "finally the truth"? Now you're not making ANY sense. Who talked about US being Sweden? Are you high?

And I "try to dictate" US policy? How? By stating opinions in YouTube comments? Are you freaking serious?

And why do you bring up hate crimes and sexual assault? Are we changing the subject all of a sudden? Wanna talk about turtles next?

You really want to compare Swedish crime rates with American ones? Really? Reeeally? No, I don't think you do.

[scipio2009]

The U.S. has a system, already in place, to deal with the affairs in our country. You may not like the way the U.S. system works, whether it comes down to opposing the death penalty or how abortion rights are presented, but that is the way the U.S. system works.

In the U.S., if the judicial process determines that your crime, after due process and court trials, warrants death as your punishment, you die.

In the U.S., if legislation says that the federal government doesn't fund abortions ...

[scipio2009]

then the federal doesn't fund abortion, leaving that decision to the individual states to make.

That's it. No one says that the U.S. system is perfect; still, it is the U.S. system, and until this country changes any of this, it will stay the U.S. system.

What the Swedish decide as the rules to govern their country, are the rules that Sweden utilizes, regardless of what Americans think about the laws of Sweden. That's the point I was making.

[scipio2009]

Regardless of your opinion, I don't mind the fact that a person, convicted of raping and killing 11 women, will likely face the death penalty in this country.

And, regardless of your opinion, I don't mind the fact that my federal government has decided that they are not "in the business" of providing funds for abortion, in cases that go beyond, rape, incest, or situations where the mother's health is at risk.

Deal with it.

[bleunt]

"The U.S. has a system, already in place"

Captain Obvious, to the rescue!!

Also, the sky is blue. And water is wet.

"I don't mind the fact that a person, convicted of raping and killing 11 women"

I like how you wrote "convicted of", and not "guilty of".

Too bad you avoided ALL of my questions. Too bad.

[scipio2009]

lol Simply put, a waste of time.

[scipio2009]

Crime is crime; no one is comparing criminal rates. Still, based on a quick info search, it appears that Sweden has a problem with sexual assaults and hate crimes in its' country, and yet whatever Sweden is currently doing isn't affecting this number, compared to the rates of its neighbors.

As an American, I feel Sweden should be doing more to address this issue, probably with stiffer punishments.

And in the same breath, you apparently feel that the U.S. should federally fund abortions.

lol

[bleunt]

Could you offer me a link to this information about Sweden's sky high sexual assault stats? It's very bad manners to refer to statistics without a source.

I wonder why you keep ignoring my questions. No good answers, I reckon.

[scipio2009]

what question did I avoid?

And the link is in your inbox, since youtube won't let me post it here and embarrass you.

[bleunt]

Please point to the material in your 118 pages long source.

And please explain why you're not willing to compare Sweden's crime rate with America's.

If death penalty heavily reduces the crimes, then America should have way lower murder rates than any European country, right?

[scipio2009]

lol

You, being a claimed Swedish national, jump on Youtube, spewing about the affairs of a country that is not your own.

In retort, I follow your lead, and comment on the internal machinations of a country that is not mine, either.

It's simple stuff to see.

Comparing criminal rates has nothing to do with the point I am making.

The fact of the matter is you are on here commenting on the internal affairs of another country, yet get all "butt hurt" when the same is done to you.

lol

[iwillspyonyou]

it also cover illegal aliens. how is that change working for you?

[imnodog]

how is that brainwashing working for you?

[aznfootwork]

lul you're an idiot. "illegal aliens" can already buy insurance. already. they can go and buy insurance. how is that going to change? it's not. they'll still be able to buy insurance. with their own money. like they already can. good job being an idiot.

[capriconss]

if they pay their premiums, why not?

[crtnyevans]

Immigrants can already get healthcare smart guy, and if they couldn't i would hope we would give them the option to get it

[scipio2009]

-iwillspyonyou

Another sad "mark" for the far-right. It's still funny to me that people, like this person, still believe nonsense like "illegals are going to steal federal money" and "the government is going to have people deciding how the elderly die", when these points have been disproven by every credible source of reporting out there.

hilarious

[EmpathyWorks]

Im against abortion, even though Im a democrat....

I TOTALLY agree w/ him on this subject. Abortion is just wrong outside of rape and incest.

It should never be used as a substitute for restraint and protection.

[WKaliberr]

fuck off

[robinvan1983]

i think obama invented inertia... that guy sure doesn't push for anything hard

[r3onkadena]

My goodness, would you people please calm down? Playing in the politics to please everyone is tough, so when you're way too blunt about pushing issues the other side would be right on the person's tail, if that's not already the case it would be more so.

[robinvan1983]

well he never really saidd that he was for the public option or even gave support to any of the bills. he likes to be vage. that is very annoying

[scipio2009]

The simple fact of the matter, when it comes to President Obama and the team that he's assembled is that he likes to win, proving that government can actually work.

On a host of issues and topics, from healthcare to the economy to education to immigration, and everything else, Obama's positions have been written about in great detail. People should know this by now.

[scipio2009]

The beauty of how he legislates, in my opinion, is that he sets what he wants, and then lets Congress going about and getting the votes to pass something as close to what he would want to see that the caucus can live with.

On healthcare, IMO, it's been beyond clear that he was never a "Medicare-for-all" kind of Democrat.

From what I've read, Obama's healthcare vision falls a lot more in line with where Wyden(D)/Bennet(R)(look it up) and Baucus(D)/Conrad(D) want healthcare to be.

[scipio2009]

A system where the federal government sets clear and defined rules for what insurance coverage should look like, with a host of other measures to protect consumers, where the government competes, on a level playing field, with private insurance companies, to provide the most effective and cost-effective health coverage for every family, small business, and person in this country.

Still, he understood that he probably couldn't get all of this.

[scipio2009]

He knew that insurers, drug makers, and a host of other direct players would fight any kind of new rules/regulations put on them.

He knew that the Republicans would probably offer little to know support for anything he would put forth, regardless of what was in the proposal.

He knew that the Chamber, as well as the labor unions, would fight every effort to circumvent their control, in make every individual and family a consumer in the insurance market.

He knew that AARP would be fearful.

[scipio2009]

So he sat back, laid out key objectives, for what he needed to see in the bill and the cost levels that would be acceptable to him, and he left the "sausage making" of the legislative process to the Congress, allowing them to put together legislation that would be able to pass their houses.

IMO, that's example of a president truly working to govern.

[terpis]

...then calmly lifts up slightly from the chair and, leaning forward slightly, with an almost casual coolness, delivers 3 quick, savage kicks to the face of human-douchebag Jake Tapper...

[...All I have to dooo is dreeeeeam/ Dream dream dream dream...]

[Ed76638]

You should've told that to the Blue Bitches 6 months ago.

[kelseywall]

It's too bad Obama's letting Republicans dictate how the game is played.

[ChunAsperEndao]

Hey, he's the leader of the Democratic party. That's what Democrats do.

[kelseywall]

Yeah, but you'd think they would have learned their lesson by now.

[scipio2009]

So now, a president, standing out and saying, in essence, that the federal government should follow precedent, continuing a practice of federal funds not being used to finance abortions, is a Democrat letting Republicans dictate policy?

Because that's all he's calling for, point blank.

Get over yourself.

[kelseywall]

Yeah, but why is he calling for it? Because Republicans were bitching and moaning about federal money being used to fund abortions.

And I'm not sure why you said, "Get over yourself". What was it that I said that made you think I'm full of myself?

[scipio2009]

lol

40 Democrats in the House of Representatives. Simple as that.

A sizable chunk of members, in his own party, had qualms about supporting legislation that they felt left an opening in the bill that they weren't easy with. That's it.

If Republicans held the sway that you presume, why did only one Republican sign onto the legislation?

Even more so, if the Democrats could've passed something without the change, why go through the hassle of upsetting the rank-and-file?

try thinking.

[kelseywall]

I am trying thinking. It's just so hard when you contradict yourself to the point of idiocracy. "Try thinking"? Ok. I think your mother's a whore.

[scipio2009]

lol

Another person who either has no understanding of the legislative process, or is just a dolt.

You need 218 votes to pass legislation in the House of Representatives. If the votes were there without the amendment, it wouldn't have been put in.

Where's the contradiction, idiot. Before the amendment, there were 204-207 votes for the bill, with 40 Democrats saying the lack of abortion language was an issue for them.

After the language, there were 219 Democrat votes.

simple as that.

[scipio2009]

Why are people so retarded?