What Transparency? Obamacare’s Dirty Little Abortion Secret

Published on December 11, 2013

by Jeff Mullen
Clash Daily Guest Contributor

Maybe you’ve seen the edgy ad for Obamacare: Nate is smirking, confident that he’s about to “score” with Susie, while a slyly exuberant Susie flashes a serious blister pack of pills. “OMG, he’s hot!” she says to herself. “My health insurance covers the pill, which means all I have to worry about is getting him between the covers. I got insurance. Now you can too. Thanks, Obamacare!”

That’s outrageous enough, but what the ad doesn’t say is that even if that fails, she’s also covered for the morning-after pill. And if all else fails, there’s always a visit to those wonderful folks at Planned Parenthood, who will gladly remove that inconvenient “product of conception.” And in many cases you and I are going to help pay for it — through Obamacare.

It may depend on which state Susie and Nate call home, as different state exchanges are handling things differently. Obamacare has wrought so much havoc that the health care industry is becoming like the Wild West, where virtually anything goes.

New Jersey GOP Congressman Chris Smith alleges that the Affordable Care Act entails an “abortion surcharge” for all Obamacare policyholders. “[M]any pro-life Americans may unwittingly purchase pro-abortion plans because of a marketing secrecy clause embedded in Obamacare, which stipulates that the surcharge be minimally disclosed only at the time of enrollment,” Smith said in an interview. “In other words, bury it in the fine print.” Smith and other conservative congressmen are sponsoring legislation to force transparency and full disclosure of information about abortion coverage and notify enrollees of the existence of an abortion surcharge.

This is the kind of stuff that keeps conspiracy theorists in business. And now the rest of us may have to start giving them a little more respect.

Remember last year when George Stephanopoulos befuddled GOP candidate Mitt
Romney in the presidential debates with a question about the right of states to ban contraception? While Romney and the rest of us figuratively scratched our heads over such an off-the-wall question, it seems there was some real method to this apparent madness: Stephanopoulos, a long-time Democrat operative now masquerading as a journalist for ABC, was clearly marching to a tune straight out of the Oval Office.

This nationally televised spectacle occurred just prior to the Dems’ rollout of one of their major attack pieces: The alleged Republican War on Women. And that in turn was part and parcel from the liberal playbook called Reproductive Freedom. In this calculus there is no real distinction between birth control and abortion, despite all the formal assertions to the contrary from the Pro-Choice panderers when they’re speaking for the record.

Bottom line: You stand between Nate and Susie at your own political peril. And for folks with any morals at all, that’s what you call a lose-lose proposition.

Image: Courtesy of: http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/gotinsurance.asp