The former Congressman Bart Stupak feels double-crossed because, somehow, the totalitarian phantasmagoria alternately called Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, or whatever, is being used to violate what he calls “…our most cherished beliefs that we, as American citizens, should not be required to relinquish our conscience and moral convictions in order to implement the Affordable Care Act.” (h/t Hot Air)
He said that he and others had received an “…ironclad commitment that our conscience would remain free and our principles would be honored” by means of “an executive order directing federal agencies to respect America’s longstanding prohibitions on government funding of abortion and most relevant here, to respect longstanding protections for individuals and organizations conscientiously opposed to participating in or facilitating abortions.”
And…it did not turn out that way, and Stupak therefore became “…deeply concerned and objected to the HHS mandate that required all health plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptives, including four drugs and devices that could terminate human life at its earliest stages by preventing an embryo’s implantation in the womb.”
What did the guy think was going to happen? Did he not know anything about the character of the main players? (Just look at who is standing around Obama in the signing pic!) And so he now claims to stand with Hobby Lobby and other organizations and individuals who oppose the HHS contraception mandate.
And yet, he “…continue[s] to believe the Affordable Care Act is critical to reforming our health care markets and providing a critical safety net for millions, such as those who qualify for the Medicaid expansion, or for the seriously ill who will no longer see their benefits capped by annual limits.”
Now, this reaffirmation of Stupak’s faith in Obamacare dates to March 11, 2014, when one failure after another, one lie after other on the part of the Obama administration had been exposed to public view and ridicule.
Which makes me wonder if Stupak is really serious in his disclaimer, or whether he had imbibed so deeply of Party ideology that he has no independent reasoning ability left. I keep hoping he is serious,; but either way, his non-disclaimer disclaimer reminds me of the hundreds – nay, untold thousands! – of Party faithful whose minds had been so twisted by blind faith that, despite being innocent, they had willingly gone to their deaths at the hands of murderous regimes just to prove that their Party was always right.
To help understand this phenomenon, I heartily recommend The Invisible Writing, the second volume of Arthur Koestler’s autobiography.