This Is The Model For Obamacare
Jul 26, 2010 Political
Barack Obama and his Democrats lied, cheated and stole to get the health care takeover bill passed and signed into law. There were bribes to members of Congress which means that taxpayer money was used to bribe members of Congress to vote for something that a majority of Americans opposed. There were the lies about federal funding of abortion. Bart Stupak abandoned his principles and voted for the bill because Obama assured him federal funds would not be used for abortion. Obama even signed an Executive Order. That order has been promptly ignored as two states, Pennsylvania and Maryland, have already established the high risk pools required under Obamacare and those pools will pay for abortions with federal money. To make it clear, those states will pay for elective abortions. This is specifically what the EO was supposed to prevent. As an aside, New Mexico had the abortion option in place but it has been removed because of the fuss over the issue.
The Democrats, despite the folly of their health care plan, promise us it will be cost effective and will not result in rationed care. They promised us we would be able to keep our doctors and that we would have choices. They wanted us to look at the model of health care, the NHS in Britain. Obama’s head health care guy has praised this system. And what has this wonderful system done?
It has taken steps to begin rationing care. Even the most basic and routine services including hip replacements will be rationed. Terminally ill patients will have to fend for themselves should they have problems on nights and weekends. Like Obama said, just send granny home with pain pills.
Suck it up granny!
Here are a few items being reported about the NHS (the dream of the Obama regime):
- Restrictions on some of the most basic and common operations, including hip and knee replacements, cataract surgery and orthodontic procedures.
- Plans to cut hundreds of thousands of pounds from budgets for the terminally ill, with dying cancer patients to be told to manage their own symptoms if their condition worsens at evenings or weekends.
- The closure of nursing homes for the elderly.
- A reduction in acute hospital beds, including those for the mentally ill, with targets to discourage GPs from sending patients to hospitals and reduce the number of people using accident and emergency departments.
- Tighter rationing of NHS funding for IVF treatment, and for surgery for obesity.
- Thousands of job losses at NHS hospitals, including 500 staff to go at a trust where cancer patients recently suffered delays in diagnosis and treatment because of staff shortages.
- Cost-cutting programmes in paediatric and maternity services, care of the elderly and services that provide respite breaks to long-term carers.
Ironically, the cuts were found in obscure appendices of policy and strategy documents. It is ironic because there are tons of things hidden in the US health care takeover law. Hell, a lot of it does not even deal with health care as the bill addresses reporting the purchase or sale of silver and gold. That is not an isolated thing.
Yes, the Obamacare model in England is falling apart but Obama and his sock puppets are working feverishly to impose these things on us because they want to take control of our lives. It is not about health and it is not about care, it is about control. They want to control us and taking over the health care system is one thing that must be done to control us. They also need to take over the financial sector (which they have just done) and they need to take over the news media which they are working on.
Once the Socialists have taken over these things they will clamp down on us and our lives. They will tell us what to eat, how much to weigh, what we may abuse (alcohol, tobacco etc) and how much, and they will tell us whether or not we can get certain things done.
And millions more will become dependent on government thereby increasing the dependent class from the social welfare recipients to the social medicine recipients. Better be good little peons or Obama will not let your momma get a new hip…
They might think they are in charge but they should remember John Q.
My family will never do without proper health care because of rationing as long as I can be there. Should any member of my family die or suffer harm because of denial of care (of course in my absence) then the world will lose the health care provider who decided not to render treatment . Any bureaucrat involved in the decision will likely never make such a decision again. Obamacare will ration care to the detriment of those involved including those who voted for him. People will not tolerate this.
Obama once said he was the only one standing between the bankers and the people with pitchforks. Once his health care takeover begins I doubt there will be anyone to stand between Obama and the people with pitchforks.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
The New York Times And The Constitution
Jul 22, 2010 Political
The NYT has an editorial about Elena Kagan and the Republicans who oppose her. The thrust of the piece is that they do not understand the Constitution and they are angered that she would not answer the way they wanted with regard to the Commerce Clause. The NYT is convinced that the federal government can do anything it wants under the guise of the Commerce Clause and that it is settled law because of SCOTUS rulings.
So the Republicans, according to the NYT, are supposed to bow down and vote for a person who has a history of ignoring the Constitution and who believes in Socialism just like her buddy Obama.
The problem is, that while the NYT is busy saying that it is OK to do anything under the Commerce Clause including forcing people to buy health insurance, the writer demonstrates that he does not understand the Constitution. The writer’s words show a definite misunderstanding.
The clause was the legal basis for any number of statutes of enormous benefit to society. It is why we have the Clean Air Act. The Clean Water Act. The Endangered Species Act. The Fair Labor Standards Act, setting a minimum wage and limiting child labor. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing segregation in the workplace and in public accommodations. In cases like these, the Supreme Court has said Congress can regulate activities that have a “substantial effect” on interstate commerce, even if they are not directly business-related. NYT
I will not comment on the enumerated acts because I do not know how Commerce fits in and it is not important to the debate. What is important is the sentence; “In cases like these, the Supreme Court has said Congress can regulate activities that have a “substantial effect” on interstate commerce, even if they are not directly business-related.” [emphasis added]
The SCOTUS has ruled Congress can regulate ACTIVITIES. NOT buying health insurance is NOT an activity. The health care law punishes people for INACTIVITY.
The SCOTUS has never ruled that Congress can regulate INACTIVITY under the Commerce Clause (or any other as far as I know). All of the cited items are reported to be results of the imposition of the Commerce Clause and are stipulated as activities.
Even if one buys the argument that the Commerce Clause is unencumbered and allows politicians to regulate any activity whatsoever, no one can make the case that it allows Congress to regulate INACTIVITY. Never in our history has Congress been able to force people to purchase a product.
What will be next? Will we be required to buy a GM in order to help out that car company and its union employees?
The writer is obviously a “Journolist” Socialist who loves the liberal/progressive agenda and that is all well and good. Everyone is entitled to make mistakes.
But let us not take this editorial as some authority on the Constitution.
The writer went after Republicans for their supposed lack of understanding of the Constitution but the writer demonstrates limited knowledge as well.
Not to mention the NYT seems to ignore the Democrats and their leader and the way they trample the Constitution on a daily basis.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: commerce clause, elena kagan, health care, lies, new york times
Round Up Of The Liberal’s Madness
Jul 18, 2010 Political
The elites want you to bathe in the oil while they eat lobster in Maine
Michelle Obama told people that there were plenty of clean beaches in the Gulf and that people should vacation there. She told them to take their kids with them, you know to enjoy the place.
But that did not apply to Michelle and her husband. Perhaps you have heard of him. He is the Socialist who is currently in charge of the country and who spends most of his time playing one sport or another or being on vacation. But his vacation is not in the Gulf, no, no, no. The Obamas are in Maine, the place Bill Clinton liked to vacation. They are hobnobbing, interrupting the real Americans who are trying to enjoy a vacation, and ignoring the Gulf, the very place Michelle told people to visit.
The Gulf, where one could potentially be contaminated, is for the peons among us and not the elitists who spend their time in places like Martha’s Vineyard.
I bet if it was called the GOLF Coast he would vacation there…
ABC News Jake Tapper
Elena Kagan is another Socialist who hates the military
She hates the military. There is no other way to look at her ban of recruiters on the Harvard Campus because of the policy against open homosexuality. One might think that she took a principled stance but she allowed the Saudi recruiters on campus to discuss and promote Sharia Law. Sharia Law calls for murdering homosexuals. Kagan is not so much in favor of homosexual rights as she is against the military. Here is the transcript from this video:
As Dean of Harvard Law School, Elena Kagan banned military recruiters from campus because US law said they couldn’t enlist homosexuals. Well, she invited the Saudi’s “recruiters” to promote their legal code — Shariah — which calls for homosexuals to be murdered and women to be treated like animals. If Kagan tolerates promoting the injustice of Shariah law on the campus of Harvard, what kind of injustice will she tolerate in America during a lifetime on the Supreme Court?
Big Dog Salute to American Power
How is that universal health care in Massachusetts working out?
The Unites States contains 50 pitri dishes that allow for things to take place and be worked out. The states can try things and if they are good the country can adopt them and if they are bad the country can reject them. This is good in theory but the federal government and the individual states, by and large, continue doing the things that cause problems.
In any event, Massachusetts enacted a health care law much like the one the federal government imposed on the rest of us earlier this year. Despite the failings of the MA health care plan, the federal government pushed forward (against a majority of people in the country) and forced their plan on us. Opponents of the law warned that it will lead to rationing, it will lead to bureaucrats making medical decisions, will force businesses to drop their employees (dump them on the taxpayer), and will cost a lot more than government predictions. The model was there in MA but it was ignored because the law is not about health and it is not about care.
It is about control.
Here is what is now taking place in Massachusetts.
The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget. boston.com
The Massachusetts law was supposed to reduce costs. It was supposed to make health care more affordable. It was supposed to allow people to keep their current insurance. It was designed to make it affordable for employers so they could cover their employees.
Sounds just like what the liberals told us about Obamacare.
And it too will cost more than they said, will lead to rationing, will lead to death panels (denied care that leads to death is a death panel), and will force businesses to drop employees and dump them on the government plan. Just ask Massachusetts how it all worked out…
Everyone on the government plan is what the progressives have wanted all along but this is not what we were told.
Looks like it is November or never.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: death panels, elena kagan, golf vacation, gulf vacation, health care, homosexuals, lies, maine, Massachusetts, Obama, obamacare, Sharia Law
Germany Raises Health Insurance Premiums
Jul 6, 2010 Political
Government run health care is the ultimate goal of Barack Hussein Obama (mmm mmm mmm) and his progressive base. They want cradle to grave dependence on government and government controlled health care will do just that.
Don’t worry, they tell us, the costs will come down and they will be able to afford it. Their idea of affording anything is to tax the producers in our society and redistribute that money to those who do not. What happens when there is not enough money? Easy, just tax the rich a little more.
Hell, they can afford it and who are they to decide how their money is spent? They have an obligation to take care of everyone else.
In Germany, the insurance premiums are going up to 15.5% of gross pay to cover a huge deficit in the state run health care system:
The measure is part of an overhaul of health care intended to plug an 11-billion euro ($13.8 billion) deficit in the public health-insurance system in 2011. It follows Cabinet agreement on June 29 to cuts in spending on drugs to reduce soaring costs to public health-insurance funds. Bloomberg
Is there any doubt that once the health care takeover kicks into full swing in 2011 we will run huge deficits? The government can’t even run a small $5 billion high risk program without discussing rationing and denial of care so what makes anyone think this country, which has shown absolute fiscal irresponsibility, will be able to actually run things on budget?
And what happens when the cost exceeds the budget? Tax the rich, of course. But the rich can’t pay for it all. They pay most of the taxes in this country and foot the bill for those who pay little or no taxes at all. Since the rich can’t afford it all, what will be next?
A national tax on our gross pay, just like in Germany. Once government is in the health care business it can decide how to pay for it and it will extort money from people. They already do it. Social Security and Medicare deductions from our gross pay are not voluntary. We have NO say in the matter so they just take the money.
They will also take money to pay for the health care system that is sure to have more gallons of red ink than gallons of oil in the Gulf.
But don’t worry, they have it covered.
With more of our money.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: germany, health care, lies, Obama, taxes
Health Care Rationing In The US?
Jul 5, 2010 Political
When the Democrats rammed the health care takeover down the collective throats of Americans we were promised that the program would bend the cost curve, cost less and save money. When people like Sarah Palin raised the issue of “death panels” we were told she was out of her mind and that the government would not turn people away or deny care to those who were in bad health.
The health care takeover will not be fully instituted until 2014 (after Obama runs for a second term) but some parts of it have taken effect or will shortly. One of those programs is for the high risk patients. It was fronted $5 BILLION and the program is designed to provide health care to the high risk folks, those who cannot get insurance and who have risky health conditions. It looks like the government will not be able to cover everyone and is considering denying health care to people who need it. It also looks like benefits will be reduced:
The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured.
Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.
Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people. Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility. [emphasis mine] The Hill
Denying health care to high risk patients amounts to a death panel. Government bureaucrats will determine who will best benefit from the available funds and those who are not deemed viable will be turned away. This sounds like what Palin described as “death panels.”
Additionally, the care could be rationed as a method of providing some care to more people.
While it is early and the regime could procure more funding we are left with a snapshot of what health care will look like once the government program goes into effect.
We were assured that this would be paid for and that it would save money. We are already seeing that this is not the case. The relatively small high risk program is in financial trouble so what makes anyone think the entire program will do any better?
We were also assured that care would not be rationed and that a bureaucrat would not get between us and our doctors. Looks like this small program has put this lie to bed. People will have care rationed or denied and this will be decided by government bureaucrats. If they have not ruled it out then it means they are at least considering that which they said they would not do.
The small program portends badly for the entire program where millions more people will be affected and where money will not be available.
The government will certainly ration or deny care and will have severe cost overruns.
This is all contrary to the line of BS that we were sold when they decided to ram it through against the will of the public.
Those of you who support this regime and think they are wonderful can take solace in knowing that they will not be denied care and will do quite well.
You didn’t think that the rulers would be hampered by such problems, now did you?
They knew this when they sold it to us because they only provided the CBO with what was needed to get the numbers to sell it. It is expected to cost at least $2.5 TRILLION. The CBO expects it to cost more than advertised now that it has been able to look at the entire package.
They lied to us and now the early warning signs are present in the relatively small high risk program. There will be “death panels” and there will be rationing and denial of care.
This has been the case from the start and we all knew it.
So did those who decided that we should have it.
Vote everyone of them out of office in November.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: bureaucrats, death panels, denial of care, health care, lies, Obama, rationing