Some lies are so absurd, they make my blood boil. A good example of this would be "death panels will pull the plug on grandma." However, some lies are slightly less absurd, making them even more insidious. A prime example occurred in the current op ed from NYTimes columnist Douthat.
Perhaps I'm mistaken. If so, it is up to the NYTimes or my fellow Kossacks to correct me.
The quote in question is this:
"... expanding access to medical care — through a system that seems likely, in its present design, to subsidize abortion."
This seems far fetched to me, for some reason. So I sent this to the editors at the NYTimes:
Dear Editor...
Today, your new conservative columnist Douthat, made the following statement:
"...expanding access to medical care — through a system that seems likely, in its present design, to subsidize abortion."
Now, perhaps I misunderstand the plan, but as far as I know, federal law prohibits taxpayer funds from subsidizing abortion. I have not seen any evidence that any plans being currently debated revoke this law. Perhaps I missed it, maybe a provision of an obscure liberal plan being discussed in the House that slipped by me.
I kindly request that Douthat name which version of the bill attempts to nullify the federal statute against funding abortions with taxpayer revenue, name the provision, page number and quote the text for his readers.
Please don't insult my intelligence by quoting any amendments that have already been voted down.
Respectfully, Mannabass
Fort Collins, CO