|Welcome to the warped, shaded world of politics, Obama style.|
Bait and switchBy Sarge Tuesday, March 13, 2012
My father absolutely loved to dine on Hash. It was an agglomeration of not always recognizable meat by-products. It may well have been definable as leftover chopped meat and vegetables, cooked in a skillet, sometimes with gravy. I called it a mess more reminiscent of previously eaten and digested foods rather than a coherent, recognizable dinner. After rejecting the meal on a regular basis and after being told to eat what was placed before me or leave the table, I scavenged leftovers in the refrigerator when nobody was looking. (It beat getting a spanking and/or losing TV privileges.)
My mother was more diplomatic. While Dad and I tested each other’s resolve in the matter, Mom acted. Dad got the slop he loved. I got the glop; a dollop of the same thing Dad had, but mine was smothered in ketchup. I shut up. Dad’s blood pressure went down and Mom didn’t have to testify against a loved one when the homicide was committed.
This is Bait and Switch; the ability to coax compliance from a principled participant in the drama: to cause them to cross the lines of conscience and accept what’s been offered. It’s dishonest, it’s deceitful and it’s cruel because it betrays the trust of the individual innocently crossing over.
In other words: welcome to the warped, shaded world of politics, Obama style.
Obama offered the Catholic Bishops a plateful of hash slathered with ketchup when they offered the following in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; all insurers will be required to provide the undefined “preventive health services” to their employees as a matter of course with few exceptions. The Bishops saw the ketchup and never suspected the hash.
They accepted the ketchup of ill-defined and poorly perceived mass placed on the plate and accepted a sitting President wouldn’t outright lie to a major percentage of voters who supported him in his election. But he did just that: he lied and concealed his direct purpose to achieve his goals. Obama came back to the Catholic Bishops later and defined “Preventive health services” as: contraceptives, morning after pills, female sterilization and potentially by extension: abortion. All these violate Catholic doctrine.
Catholics are up in arms concerning the blatant duplicity of the process. I call it a lie and it was a lie deliberately plotted and set into action as a tactic to coerce the Bishops into believing the slop wasn’t under the ketchup. The Bishops are outraged. Obama’s described as political. He’s really a liar more interested in political agendas than in the health and safety of all Americans; born and unborn.
These procedures are justified by hacks like Obama and his Secretary of Health (?) and Human Services(??!!) Kathleen Sibelius as they read and spout the drivel flowing from something called a BIO-ETHICIST. Bioethicists have gone so boldly over the edge of reality as to decide an abortion is justified and acceptable because it causes a financial hardship on a parent. Some will say “so what – they already allow this excuse”.
Two recognized (I won’t attribute the term respected to them) Bioethicists; Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva published, in the Journal of Medical Ethics, a justification for the “deliberate, premeditated murder of NEWBORN babies days and weeks after birth”. (Washington Times 3-12-2012)
Obama’s nakedly deliberate ability to lie to religious leaders (with the expectation those leaders will advise their congregations to go along with the travesty) is emblematic of the disdain this administration has for the morals, scruples and conscience of congregations and ministries. It shows there’s reason to distrust a liar of this caliber at the pinnacle of responsibility in American government.
If Obama can selectively understate, and later define the procedure completely opposite to his original statement, he can leave out specifics en pointe, to later allow Giubilini and Minerva’s post-birth abortions when he sees fit to do so. Catholics are right to reject his glibly spouted speech. He steals the trust of the people and dares them to call him on the theft.
Obama speaks out of one side of his mouth and defines his words from the other. He’s not worthy of our trust.
Thanks for listening