Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Terry Jeffrey :: Townhall.com Columnist
Obama: "There Are Countries Where a Single-Payer System Works Pretty Well"
by Terry Jeffrey
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The Washington Post reported it this way: "In his speech, Obama said, 'Let me also address an illegitimate concern that's being put forward by those who are claiming that a public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system. … When you hear the naysayers claim that I'm trying to bring about government-run health care, know this: They're not telling the truth."

The Post artfully replaced Obama's statement that "I'll be honest, there are countries where a single-payer system works pretty well" with three dots.

The New York Times reported it this way: "'The public option is not your enemy,' Mr. Obama said. 'It is your friend, I believe.' Saying it would 'keep insurance companies honest,' the president dismissed as 'illegitimate' the claims of critics that a public insurance option amounts to 'Trojan horse for a single-payer system' run by the government."

Artfully using broken phrases, the Times was able to report Obama's attack on his critics while avoiding his statement that single-payer systems work "pretty well."

It was the Los Angeles Times, however, that struck upon the cleverest tactic. It reported what Obama said this way:

"'Let me also address an illegitimate concern that's being put forward by those who are claiming that a public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system,' Obama said. 'But I believe, and I've taken some flak from members of my own party for this belief, that it's important for our reform efforts to build on our traditions here in the United States."

Just as Obama was about to say he believes single-payer systems work "pretty well," the Times broke off the quote and inserted the words "Obama said." It then resumed the quote with the words "but I believe," which come after Obama said he believes single-payer systems work "pretty well."

The Washington Post, The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times are not part of an adversarial press asking tough questions of a president trying to radically reorganize the health care system. They are his accomplices.

In his AMA speech, Obama again said he supports creating a "public option" government-run health insurance company and mandating that every American buy health insurance. The only thing he isn't calling for now is mandating that everyone buy their mandatory insurance from the government company.

Once the "public option" is in place, slight changes in regulations and taxes can make it the only option. When that happens, don't expect to see it reported plainly in a major paper.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor-in-chief of CNSNews

Be the first to read Terence Jeffrey's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
Joel I stand by my position PT 2
You make GREAT points about the mixing of men from various states with differing loyalties for the all volunteer army of today. However, that in and of itself doesn't make a standing army lawful under the constitution. Today the appropriations for the military are jammed into the budget and thereby, the two year rule is de facto ruled upon. However, when speaking to expenditures of Congress, the writers of the constitution were VERY clear on not only a need for a SPECIFIC appropriation but also for a LIMITED amount of time. This is something you don't see anywhere else in the listed powers of Congress. Of course, the third amendment to the constitution again had admonitions about an army possibly being a threat to the people. Even Eisenhower warned of this upon leaving office.

Please do not misunderstand my respect for and belief in the need for a strong military. My Dad, brother, and many friends are U.S. Marines (inactive now). Semper fi was the rallying cry for our family of seven. We stuck together through thick and thin. However, when we have a nationalized army, marine corps, and air force (not capped as I speak in general terms as all branches have some of the other) we then have a powerful force that can be ruled by only one man and today that man happens to be as unlikely a commander as I have ever seen. This power must be controlled and balanced by the states to keep BO in line.

Joel I stand by my position PT 1
You said "In your reading, did you catch the debate over the size limit for the standing army? Several delegates wanted to include language setting the size of the U.S. Army at 5000 men. George Washington stood up, and stated that he would only support that provision so long as there was also a provision limiting the size of enemy armies to 3000 men. The delegates realized their absurdity, laughed, and they dropped the idea of limiting the size of the standing army." Again, the new nation needed a "federal" army at this time in history. This did not negate the Constitutional call for limits of 2 years; the army was to be called into service when it was needed.

You asked a loaded question with the next one: "Again, if the Founding Fathers considered a standing Army to be such a threat, why was the U.S. Army never disbanded?" Come on Joel--- since when has gubmint EVER disolved any department it has created? Do you also believe the myth that Washington was "unamimously" elected to the presidency? Actually he was not. New York did not exercise its eight electoral votes in the first election! Violations and blatant ignoring of the constitution began at the outset.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.