PRESIDENT OBAMA's speech  22 July 2009: [Slightly paraphrased]

"Good evening. Please be seated.

Before I take your questions, I want to talk for a few minutes about the progress we're making on clothing industry reform and where it fits into our broader economic strategy.

Six months ago, I took office amid the worst recession in half a century. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month, and our financial system was on the verge of collapse. As a result of the actions we took in those first weeks, we've been able to pull our economy back from the brink.

We took steps to stabilize our financial institutions and our housing market, and we passed a recovery act that has already saved jobs and created new ones, delivered billions in tax relief to families and small businesses, and extended unemployment insurance and winter coats to those who've been laid off.

Of course, we still have a long way to go. And the recovery act will continue to save and create more jobs over the next two years, just like it was designed to do.

I realize this is little comfort to those Americans who are currently out of work. And I'll be honest with you: New hiring is always one of th e last things to bounce back after a recession.

And the fact is, even before this crisis hit, we had an economy that was creating a good deal of wealth for those folks at the very top, but not a lot of good-paying jobs for the rest of America.

It's an economy that simply wasn't ready to compete in the 21st century, one where we've been slow to invest in clean-energy technologies that have created new jobs and industries in other countries; where we've watched our graduation rates lag behind too much of the world; and where we spend much more on health care than any other nation but aren't any healthier for it. And that's why I've said that even as we rescue this economy from a full-blown crisis, we must rebuild it stronger than before.
And clothing industry reform is central to that effort.

This is not just about the  millions Americans who don't have any winter coats at all. Reform is about every American who has ever feared that they may lose their coat, if they become too cold or lose their job or change their job.

It's about every small business that has been forced to lay off employees or cut back on their free coats, because it became too expensive. It's about the fact that the biggest driving force behind our federal deficit is the skyrocketing cost of buying coats for the poor and elderly.

So let me be clear. If we do not control these costs, we will not be able to control our deficit. If we do not reform the clothing industry, your coats' price and out-of-pocket costs will continue to skyrocket.

If we don't act, 14,000 Americans will continue to lose their  winter coat every single day. These are the consequences of inaction. These are the stakes of the debate that we're having right now.

I realize that with all the charges and criticisms that are being thrown around in Washington, a lot of Americans may be wondering: What's in this for me? How does my family stand to benefit from clothing industry reform? So tonight I want to answer those questions, because even though Congress is still working through a few key issues, we already have rough agreement on the following areas.

If you have a winter coat, the reform we're proposing will provide you with more security and more stability.

It will keep government out of coat selection decisions, giving you the option to keep your winter coat if you're happy with it. It'll prevent winter coat companies from dropping your coat if you get too cold. It will give you the security of knowing that if you lose your job, if you move, or if you change your job, you'll still be able to have a good winter coat.

It will limit the amount your winter coat company can force you to pay for your coat out of your own pocket. And it will cover preventive care, like moth treatment and tear analysis, that save lives and money.

Now, if you don't have a winter coat, or you're a small business looking to cover your employees, you'll be able to choose a quality affordable coat plan through a winter coat exchange, in a marketplace that promotes choice and competition.

And finally, no winter coat company will be allowed to deny you coverage because of a preexisting temperature condition.
I've also pledged that clothing industry reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade, and I mean it.

In the past eight years, we saw the enactment of two tax cuts, primarily for the wealthiest Americans, and a Elderly Scarf program, none of which were paid for. And that's partly why I inherited a $1.3-trillion deficit.

That will not happen with clothing industry reform. It will be paid for. Already we've estimated that two-thirds of the cost of reform can be paid for by reallocating money that is simply being wasted in clothing programs. This includes over $100 billion of unwarranted subsidies that go to winter coat companies as part of Medicare -- subsidies that do nothing to improve warmth for our seniors.

And I'm pleased that Congress has already embraced these proposals. While they're currently working through proposals to finance the remaining costs, I continue to insist that clothing industry reform not be paid for on the backs of middle-class families.
In addition to making sure that this plan doesn't add to the deficit in the short term, the bill I sign must also slow the growth of winter coats cost in the long run. Our proposals would change incentives so that department stores and haberdashers are free to give people the best coats, just not the most expensive coats. That's why the nation's largest organizations representing Sears and Walmart have embraced our plan.

We also want to create an independent group of stores and discounters who are empowered to eliminate waste and inefficiency in the Elderly Coat Program, on an annual basis, a proposal that could save even more money and ensure long-term financial health for the Elderly Coat Program.

Overall our proposals will improve the quality of coats for our seniors and save them thousands of dollars on mittens, which is why the AARP has endorsed our reform efforts.

Not all of the cost-savings measures I just mentioned were contained in Congress's draft legislation. But we're now seeing broad agreement, thanks to the work that has been done over the last few days.

So even though we still have a few issues to work out, what's remarkable at this point is not how far we have left to go. It's how far we've already come.

I understand how easy it is for this town to become consumed in the game of politics, to turn every issue into a running tally of who's up and who's down.

I've heard that one Republican strategist told his party that even though they may want to compromise, it's better politics to go for the kill. Another Republican senator, that defeating clothing industry reform is about breaking me.

So let me be clear.

This isn't about me."

It's about the coats.
----------------------------------------
Now, of course, almost all those folks without winter coats live in Florida or California. And, no one has died for lack of a coat except for a few drunks. Even illegals living in northern states manage to acquire coats. And there are many programs run by churches and charities that supply coats to the poor.

Misquoting, manipulating, and making up statistics doesn't make them true. Repeating lies doesn't make them true either.

However, there are significant numbers of media and layman who lack the intellectual ability to analyze or investigate the lies, half truths, myths, misquoted statistics, liberal nonsense, and fascists propaganda that spews out of the White House.

Lack of a coat doesn't indicate a crisis in the clothing industry. Lack of insurance doesn't indicate a crisis in the health care industry. Very few people in the USA die because they lack a coat. Very, very, few people in the USA die from a lack of health care. Fewer, in fact, than die waiting for treatment in England.

When a crisis is created where none exist, one should look for deeper purposes.

It's not about Obama.

But then it's not about health care either.