Time for a Truth Bomb for Pelosi

This is inconvenient, for a lady who claims to be a stalwart Catholic, familiar with Catholic doctrine, who also often finds herself out of step with traditional teachings on life or other cultural issues.

But in this episode, in San Fran Nan’s zeal to attack the Republicans’ alternative plan to Obamacare that passed the house, and her rush to defend Obamacare — Affordable Healthcare Act — she really muddies the water on religion and politics.

Pelosi made her remarks at her press conference shortly after the passing of the latest Obamacare alternative in the House. But it was a repeated lie she had already used against the former Republican bill, which was pulled and did not get passed.

She rattles off a list of organizations opposed to the Republican plan (many of which originally supported Obamacare) She then lists churches or faith-based institutions along with the United Methodist Church.

First let’s start with the previous bill, on 3/09/17, at her press conference, Pelosi said:

So again, on three fronts, of course, the Affordable Care Act and all that it means to families is very important. The United Methodist Church, in their statement, said people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care. AARP, the American Medical Association, the hospital association, nurses and physicians, patients, insurers, and consumer groups all oppose the GOP bill.

Again, last week on 5/4/17 Pelosi says: (at an open press conference)

“Sister Simone Campbell said, ‘this is not the faithful way forward and must be rejected.’ The Catholic Health Association wrote, ‘we strongly encourage the full house to reject this replacement bill.’ And the United Methodist Church said, ‘opposing Trumpcare, this is what they said, people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.

Lutheran services of America said, ‘Trumpcare will jeopardize the health care and long-term service and support of millions of Americans.’ The Episcopal Church said, ‘Trumpcare falls woefully short of our spiritual calling to care for the least of these, as well as the noble values upon which our great nation was founded.’ End of quote. And all that was said before the Republicans decided to destroy the protections of Americans with pre-existing conditions. — [Pelosi- press conference on 5/4/17]

Below is apparently the UMC statement from the article Pelosi was referring to:
Note the author says she is the General Secretary [excerpt]

Health Care is a Basic Human Right

The General Secretary’s statement on Congressional Efforts to rollback health care

by Rev. Dr. Susan Henry-Crowe on March 07, 2017

“We must not allow our leaders to take away affordable and accessible health care from the communities who need it to live and live abundantly.

This bill has been promoted as a “fix” to the health care system in the United States but will do nothing to improve access and affordability. Instead, it will harm many in the congregations and communities in which we live and serve. People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.”

That is basically marked as the General Secretary’s personal statement. How could it be conferred as the statement from the national conference board of the UMC? It s one member’s personal position, though it is posted on the GBCS.org website.

It was one member of the UMC church, as influential as she may be. It does not speak for the entire church itself, as Pelosi suggested. No, she insisted on two separate occasions that it was a statement on behalf of the United Methodist Church.

Dr. Henry-Crowe stated in conclusion: (note the pronoun I)

“I will be calling my members of Congress to urge them to vote no on the bill, and I encourage United Methodists in the United States to join me in advocating for a health care system that leaves no person behind.”

She encourages other members to take that action……on behalf of herself, as the Secretary. But she does not speak for the entire church. Again, she has it posted on the GBCS website. Henry-Crowe, not a medical doctor, also offers no proof for the claim that “people will die”.

Another UM news outlet disected Pelosi’s dilemma: [excerpt]
Good News – Walter Fenton- [*GBCS is General Board & Church Society]

“We were confident no such [“people wiill die”] statement existed. The UM Church, thankfully, does not make a habit of pontificating on every bill that comes before Congress. Only the General Conference, which meets every four years, can pronounce authoritatively for the UM Church. What we suspected was that Rep. Pelosi had read something a UM bishop or the General Secretary of GBCS had said about the bill. And sure enough, Henry-Crowe had recently opined, “People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.” Pelosi gladly took Henry-Crowe’s personal prognostication that “people will die,” as the UM Church’s official word on the bill. It is not.

Henry-Crowe, who holds two degrees in theological studies, and for 22 years served as the dean of the chapel and religious life at Emory University before her role at GBCS, offered no evidence to support her hyperbolic claim. Her remark is particularly interesting in light of a recent column by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. To be sure, like Henry-Crowe, Douthat is not a health care expert. But unlike her, he actually references reputable studies that find claims about how many lives this or that insurance plan will save to be overblown. As Douthat notes, since the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA, Americans have not become healthier or experienced lower mortality rates (they’re actually higher in some of the states and counties where Medicaid was expanded).

It is hard to understand why, in a church with rank-and-file members from across the political spectrum, GBCS has felt compelled to march almost uniformly to the left on most issues. And it often seems incapable of even acknowledging people of good faith and good will might find alternative prescriptions to be reasonable, responsible, and compassionate. GBCS has a propensity to close off options and stifle conversation before it gets started. So if you don’t stand with Henry-Crowe and GBCS on the recent bill before Congress, you’re evidently comfortable with a plan that will allow “people [to] die. (read full article here) ”

Listen to two more excerpts in the same article which make the point:

“GBCS [General Board] seems to have no dialogue partners in a church that desperately needs them.”

“This is odd and even unhelpful coming from an organization appointed to serve and represent the whole church, not just its left wing.”

“Progressives often style themselves as community organizers for social justice, but you seldom get the impression that GBCS folks are actually out organizing among the grassroots. Instead, they are more often found provoking laity and pastors with progressive pronouncements issued from their Capitol Hill offices in Washington D.C.”

“In the future, we hope Henry-Crowe can find the good in other proposals and refrain from conversation stoppers like, “people will die.”

So, in the end, Pelosi was duped or lied. Though she should have at least looked at the statement — it is not a UMC dicta. Maybe other Methodists were even hoodwinked by Pelosi’s careless public assertion about a specious commentary, coming from one member who happens to be a Secretary.

Though if Pelosi is going to go out and make a proclamation representing an entire organization, or church, she should have confirmed it first.

It’s also interesting in light of President Trump’s executive order over the Johnson Amendment. For years, there have been threats to churches about taking part in politics, yet, as the author above states, some members freely associate the church with left-wing politics on current issues. That political activism is celebrated, just as this was by Pelosi, as a formal church position on progressive, liberal political issues. That is no problem at all.

Funny how whenever it is abortion or other cultural, traditional issues then people claim it is over the line, off bounds for the church. There are plenty of examples.

When churches or clergy sign a petition to Congress to investigate aid to Israel, no problem with that lobbying. But there is never any dialogue, criticism of left wing positions the UMC adopts…. even taking advocacy positions on sanctuary cities or sanctuary status for UM churches — I’ll call them Sanctuary Sanctuaries. No harm or foul in that.

Ref: http://goodnewsmag.org/2017/04/people-will-die-2/
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/3917/
http://umc-gbcs.org/faith-in-action/health-care-is-a-basic-human-right
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/5417-6/
Advertisements

Pelosi repeals history

The great thing is Gruber gives the opposition the way to personalize Obamacare. We heard Dems claim there were so many designers in the system, and of course behind closed doors, that they don’t want anyone responsible or tied to it. The beauty of group think is no one is accountable or blamed. But Gruber gave us the perfect opportunity.

The progressive Left lives and breathes to personalize their attack on an issue. (per Alinsky) And you know how important it is when San Fran Nan comes out deny even knowing who Gruber is. It was the one thing O-care lacked by its nature.

Nancy Pelosi at a House Speaker News Conference on November 5, 2009:
‘I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis…’

November 13, 2014:

“Well, you gave an interesting set of observations, but one that you skipped is Mr. Gruber’s comments were a year old, and he has backtracked from most of them. He’s not even advocating the position that he was at some conference. So I don’t know who he is. He didn’t help write our bill. With all due respect to your question, you have a person who wasn’t writing our bill, commenting on what was going on when we were writing our bill, who has withdrawn some of the statements that he made. So let’s put him aside.”

Yea, let’s put no shove Gruber aside…off a cliff. “So I don’t know who he is.” And how will she deny all the money he was paid to be influential on it? What happened to that analysis she promoted? It’s the tax, stupid.

And how about a great shout out to that “hero, John Kerry”? This thing has more personalization on it than they would like. “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it” — and then no one is held responsible… away from the fog of accountability.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary under fire

Victim Hillary at your service.

All available resources to the rescue.

 

Clinton allies pressured Dems on Benghazi

By JAKE SHERMAN and ANNA PALMER | 5/21/14 | Politico

Hillary Clinton’s world was so worried about a Republican investigation of the Benghazi attacks, they sent a message to House Democrats: We need backup.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) publicly considered boycotting the panel, an idea that Clinton supporters feared would leave the potential 2016 candidate exposed to the enemy fire of House Republicans.

So Clinton emissaries launched a back channel campaign, contacting several House Democratic lawmakers and aides to say they’d prefer Democrats participate, according to sources familiar with the conversations. Pelosi’s staff said they have not heard from Clinton’s camp.

On Wednesday, Pelosi appointed five Democrats to the committee, giving Democrats another crucial mission in the months ahead of what was already a tough election year: act as Clinton’s first line of defense.

“Republicans are making it clear they plan to use the power of the Benghazi Select Committee to continue to politicize the tragedy that occurred in Benghazi, which is exactly why Democratic participation in the committee is vital,” a Democrat close to Clinton world said. “Inevitably, witnesses ranging from Secretary Clinton to Secretary [John] Kerry will be subpoenaed to testify, and the Democrats appointed to the committee will help restore a level of sanity to the hearings, which would otherwise exist solely as a political witch hunt.”

As Republicans continue their high-profile probe into the deadly attacks in Benghazi, Clinton is center stage. Over the next few months, Republicans on the committee will work to build a case against her, and they will attempt to haul her to Capitol Hill to testify.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/benghazi-democrats-hillary-clinton-106978.html#ixzz32T5e41g7

Obfuscating they will go. Well, if Republicans are not out to make the investigation about Hillary, then Democrats are more than willing to make it all about her defense, whatever they say. So they didn’t want it to be about Hillary, but it can be about her defense.

Hillary’s testimony:

“I have to confess here in public, going on the Sunday shows is not my favorite thing to do. There are other things I prefer to do on Sunday mornings and, you know, I haven’t been on a Sunday show in way over a year. So, it just isn’t something I normally jump to do.” — why Rice not her did the talk circuit after Benghazi.

Elijah Cummings now: “someone has to be the defender of the truth.”

Of course, it depends what you call the truth, doesn’t it? And when has he defended the truth about Benghazi? The truth is he defends politics.(and the politics that created Benghazi)

Now we can expect Democrats to make it about the defense of Hillary, whatever it takes. They are in to protect Hillary Clinton. They wouldn’t participate to discover the truth on Benghazi, but they will get involved to defend Hillary.

An elite power-hungry politician versus 4 dead Americans. Who wins? But that is what Benghazi was about.

RightRing | Bullright

America gets The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award

Congratulations America, after Nancy Pelosi told you we have to pass the law before we know what’s in it, now you know. Or do you?

Since the passage we have seen Obama amend it himself and HHS work its magic on regulations, however they choose. In the past month, Obama made how many changes in it? I am having a hard time counting.

He said insurers could ignore the law and then continue to write those so-called crappy policies. That they could extend them another year. That people do not have to be terminated, after the law abolished their policies. Then he moved the sign-up deadline, then he altered the payment deadline. And he moved it again. Now “bare bones” plans.

All this despite the complaints of insurers. There is a lesson for the insurers on how the game works, uh? It’s practically a daily task knowing what the law is or isn’t.

All that is just icing on the two biggest lies they’ve been repeating for the last couple years. Then insurers were told they will be compensated for any losses they claim. (whoopee)

Get the idea? The law means what they say it means, as long as they mean it, or until they mean something else, or until they change it by fiat again. Now you know what this bodes for healthcare, besides mass chaos. So how do you like your new healthcare.gov, people? You have what even Nancy hadn’t dreamed of when they passed it. They’re still making it up. Can anyone know, based on all this, what ObamaCare will be next year? We don’t even know what the regs will be 3 months from now.

Still the all time quote of the year from libs was “it’s the law of the land”. The law until they change it, that is. So now that you know what is in it – or not – whatever they say. It might as well have been a blank law and said “to be filled in later: whatever, whenever you want it, as long as you want it – or not”.

 

The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award, saluting actual dubious achievements by the government or famous people, such as the announcement of a new Veterans Administration hospital to be erected in Southern California shortly after another such facility was destroyed in the Sylmar earthquake of 1971. The trophy was a gilt, outstretched finger atop a square base. “The flying, fickle finger of fate” was already a familiar catchphrase on the show.

RightRing | Bullright

Pelosi sends out signal flares, “Stay Tuned”

Fox: At a White House forum on Thursday, Rep. Nancy Pelosi suggested that President Obama will offer a proposal today on what the administration will do to accommodate Americans whose existing policies have been impacted by the Affordable Care Act. (Fox News)

Stay tuned … and just see what — it could be an administrative fix, it could be a legislative fix. I would rather it be done administratively because that can be done much more quickly without any accompanying agendas,” she said.

Naturally, Nancy prefers an “administrative fix”. She loves that executive power. Funny how during the ballyhooed “shutdown” they saw no need for changes, delays, or fixes of any sort. They were full speed ahead, icebergs be damned.

Actually, a delay would have been the biggest life preserver to Obama and his cohorts. Never mind that. Now Nan has everyone sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for some sort of “fix”.

Did someone inform her that the word fix is used when something is broken? “Stay tuned for the fix”… but I thought the fix was already in. I guess this is what happens when they have to pass something before we know what’s in it.

But the law is doing just what it was supposed to do, according to design and intent. So what she’s looking for is a political fix. (and you Demonoids thought it was about healthcare…yea, right)