August 6, 2009 - 10:28 AMI got a call a couple days ago from a producer with MSNBC. He wanted a hard copy of a press release I sent out entitled: "ObamaCare Likely to Mandate Free 'Sex-Change' Surgeries."
In the release I addressed the likelihood that, under Obama’s monolithic socialized health care scheme, taxpayers may well end up funding elective and entirely cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries. I was happy to oblige and asked which program he produced.
“Rachel Maddow,” he reluctantly divulged. I chuckled and joked, “Oh, I’m sure Rachel will give me a glowing review.”
I then suggested that it would be better still if Rachel actually had me on the show to defend and debate the substance of my release. He declined. Understandable, though.
Ms. Maddow – a hard-left lesbian activist who plays a pseudo-journalist on TV – certainly wouldn’t want me confusing all 242 of her wide-eyed, spoon-fed, Kool-Aid swilling viewers with the facts. (By the way, Rachel, sweetheart, if you have the guts, the offer still stands.)
In what was apparently an awkward attempt at ridicule, Maddow then focused like a laser on the title of my release. True to form, she twisted and spun like the Michelle Kwan of yellow journalism. I was disappointed. Not because she transparently distorted my words. I counted on that.
I was disappointed, because I actually expected the allegedly clever, Oxford-educated talking head to pull it off with some degree of satirical dexterity.
She did not.
Did Maddow mock me for suggesting that ObamaCare might provide taxpayer-funded “sex-change” operations? No. Did she deride me for mean-spiritedness, insensitivity and “transphobia”? No. Instead, she just lied. She dishonestly suggested that I claimed the government was going to “mandate sex-change operations.” Get it?
That, if ObamaCare becomes reality, health care officials will knock down your door, drag you away and force you to undergo a “gender reassignment” surgery. I know – silly.
Still, what Maddow didn’t say speaks volumes. She didn’t refute any of the substance of my release. She didn’t deny the real likelihood that such cosmetic procedures will be covered at taxpayer expense, and she certainly didn’t give me the opportunity to respond to her propagandist obfuscation.
But it didn’t stop with Maddow. Those adorable, patchouli-soaked little left-wing lemmings at the Daily Kos, Wonkette and elsewhere also picked up on my release. I was surprised to see that many of them, in fact, agreed with the substance of my argument.
Quite a few opined that “sex-change” surgeries should be covered at taxpayer expense, and a number of them conceded that they almost certainly will.
So what prompted me to break this story in the first place? Well, when Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) asked Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) whether President Obama’s proposed socialized healthcare plan will mandate taxpayer-funded abortion, she admitted that it will require “any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate.”
It now appears that the plan’s “medically appropriate” umbrella is far more expansive than most Americans could have imagined.
In addition to abortion on demand, the weight of the evidence indicates that, in fact, cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries for both U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants who suffer from APA recognized “Gender Identity Disorder” (GID) may indeed be provided – free of charge – courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer.
The current price tag for such a procedure can exceed $50,000.
Page 972 of the House version of the bill (H.R. 3200) provides for “standards, as appropriate, for the collection of accurate data on health and health care” based on “sex, sexual orientation [and] gender identity.”
The Senate draft indicates that the government will “detect and monitor trends in health disparities,” requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to “develop standards for the measurement of gender.” (i.e., officially recognize subjectively self-determined “transgender” or “transsexual” gender identities).
It further mandates “participation in the institutions’ programs of individuals and groups from … different genders and sexual orientations.”
So, does ObamaCare expressly stipulate that taxpayer-funded “sex-change” operations will be provided? No, but neither does it explicitly require coverage for heart bypass surgery. Don’t forget; we’re talking about what’s “medically appropriate” here, and look who gets to make that subjective determination: Your doctor?
No, it’s “Rachel Maddow-minded” bureaucrats within the Democratic Party. It’s a liberal Democrat-appointed government “Health Benefits Advisory Committee.” And if you think they’re not itching to pay back the homosexual, transgender and pro-abortion pressure groups that helped get them elected, I’ve got a house at 1600 Pennsylvania I want to sell you.
Still, there’s a gulf of difference between what Obama and liberals in Congress, and the American people deem “medically appropriate,” especially when it’s “we the people” footing the bill.
It’s unconscionable to force Americans, against their conscience, to fund abortion on demand and to facilitate gender confusion by subsidizing the elective practice of genital “sex-change” mutilation.
But don’t just take my word for it. After hearing Mikulski’s “any service deemed … medically appropriate” admission, I was prompted to dig a little deeper. I contacted the offices of Sen. Harry Reid, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Rep. Barney Frank and the House Subcommittee on Health.
I asked, very simply, for “an assurance that the proposed healthcare plan will not allow taxpayer funded ‘gender reassignment’ surgeries or hormone therapies.”
When faced with the bill’s relevant language, every staffer I spoke with either declined to answer or would neither confirm nor deny that such procedures would be covered.
Indeed it’s no wonder that – as Americans find out what’s hidden within this socialized ObamaCare monstrosity – support for the plan is plummeting faster than MSNBC’s ratings.
It’s time for the mainstream press – yes, you too Rachel Maddow – to do its job and demand straight answers. Instead of prancing around like little ObamaCare cheerleaders, journalists need to ask the same questions I did and refuse to take “no answer” for an answer.
But don’t hold your breath.
Thankfully, we don’t have to. Wanna have a little fun? Contact your congressional representative and ask the following question: “Will you personally guarantee that, under this plan, no taxpayer dollars will go to fund abortion or ‘sex-change’ operations?’”
Then sit back and watch them squirm.