Archive for July, 2009
The weekend leading up to the election of Brother O in November, I wrote the commentary, “What Lurks over the Horizon?,” warning Americans of the danger they would face if they elected Obama and increased the power of the progressives in Congress. Although the piece was too bombastic and over-the-top for publication by any of the Web’s reputable gatekeepers, its opening, “America stands poised at the edge of a precipice; her next step could send her plummeting headlong to an untimely death” may prove to be remarkably precient.
The worst is not. So long as we can say ‘This is the worst.’ Nix the Hippocratic Oath, and make way for the new paradigm for applying health care coverage; the bad gets worse; see “Deadly Doctors” by Betsy McCaughey (McCoy). According to McCaughey at least two of Brother O’s health advisors think Americans are consuming too much health care and are planning to stop it for the social good.
The parallel with Hitler’s healthcare system is ominous for it targeted “lives not worthy to be lived,” and provided a “merciful death” for those for whom treatment would be “ineffective” or “futile.” Like the Nazis, Brother O’s advisors propose to establish a National Heath Board, modeled after the British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), to decide who should live and who should die.
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health-care advisor to the director of the Office of Management and Budget, advocates establishing an advisory board “to reduce political interference and allow the necessary tough choices to be made.” Its members will be nominated by the President, confirmed by Congress, and funded independently of Congressional appropriations.
In order to guarantee care for those who can fully participate in and give back to society, Emanuel’s proposed board will deny care to those whose age, illness, and disability drive up the collective health care costs. Although couched in euphemisms, Emanuel’s model for applying health care coverage is strikingly reminiscent of Hitler’s 1939 directive denying medical care to “useless eaters.”
“Of all tyrannies,” writes C.S. Lewis, “a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY
July 24, 2009
THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They’d decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.
Yet at least two of President Obama’s top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.
Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. “Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick‘ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change,” he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).
Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, “as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others” (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).
Yes, that’s what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.
Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they’ll tell you that a doctor’s job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
Emanuel, however, believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96).
Translation: Don’t give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).
The bills being rushed through Congress will be paid for largely by a $500 billion-plus cut in Medicare over 10 years. Knowing how unpopular the cuts will be, the president’s budget director, Peter Orszag, urged Congress this week to delegate its own authority over Medicare to a new, presidentially-appointed bureaucracy that wouldn’t be accountable to the public.
Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors’ lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too “enamored with technology” and is determined to reduce access to it.
Dr. David Blumenthal, another key Obama adviser, agrees. He recommends slowing medical innovation to control health spending.
Blumenthal has long advocated government health-spending controls, though he concedes they’re “associated with longer waits” and “reduced availability of new and expensive treatments and devices” (New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 2001). But he calls it “debatable” whether the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. (Ask a cancer patient, and you’ll get a different answer. Delay lowers your chances of survival.)
Obama appointed Blumenthal as national coordinator of health-information technology, a job that involves making sure doctors obey electronically delivered guidelines about what care the government deems appropriate and cost effective.
In the April 9 New England Journal of Medicine, Blumenthal predicted that many doctors would resist “embedded clinical decision support” — a euphemism for computers telling doctors what to do.
Americans need to know what the president’s health advisers have in mind for them. Emanuel sees even basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much: “Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy . . . physicians’ offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms” (JAMA, June 18, 2008).
No one has leveled with the public about these dangerous views. Nor have most people heard about the arm-twisting, Chicago-style tactics being used to force support. In a Nov. 16, 2008, Health Care Watch column, Emanuel explained how business should be done: “Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration’s health-reform effort.”
Do we want a “reform” that empowers people like this to decide for us?
Betsy McCaughey is founder of the Committee to Reduce Infec tion Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor.
This 6:00 youtube video shows the censorship and fascist tactics used by ACORN and its underlings. ACORN is anything but non-partisan and its minions use threats and intimidation against any who dare disagree with their positions.
The video shows how ACORN protestors block the sidewalk to intimidate people. Any bets Brother O won’t describe the actions of this black police officer as “stupid,” even though the officer obviously violates the white protesters’ constitutional rights by denying their right to free speech on a public sidewalk.
Hewo. Heh heh heh heh. Since the Massachusetts pwincess isn’t being bwought to account by the wong arm of the waw for his wole in the cowapse of the housing makwet, mockewy is not only justified, it’s demanded.
Wasically, scwewy, Wepubwicans beware his cwutches!
Bonny Fwank is secwetwy vewy, vewry powewfuh!
Alwight, something is pwenty screwy awound here!
Bonny Fwank has wepwesented Massachusetts’s 4th congressional district since 1981. He has weceived more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fwannie Mae since 1989 and was womanticwy involved wif a Fwannie Mae executive. The media weports failed to point out Bonny’s welationship wif the executive or his pwo-Fwannie Mae stances as potential confwicks of intwest.
Oh, gwacious! This is cwazy! How tewwible! I twied and I twied … zillions and twillions of dowwars all shot to pieces! And I’m a big, fat wat! Yet I’m pwetty cwafty; Amewica’s asweep and helpwess, and the media won’t bwow it to smitheweens. The bailout was vewy nicewy done, and I’m wid of all that misewy. Good widdence to bad wubbish. Be vewy, vewy qwiet now, so I can west and wewax at wast!
By Nancy Matthis
Infanticide and euthanasia for less viable paying citizens will save costs. Twelve million illegal aliens will receive coverage. Restrictive compliance laws will eventually force private insurers out of business. Within five years everyone will be dependent on the federal government for their right to live (or, in some cases, their obligation to die). The administrative and expense burden will destroy small businesses. Doctors will be too snarled in red tape to deliver good service. Hospitals will also face a bureaucratic reporting nightmare. No one can refuse to enroll: the IRS will levy a 2.5% tax on personal gross income to pay their share. That’s the bottom line in Obama’s Hitleresque socialized health care plan.
Before Obama was elected, Illinois nurse Jill Stanek exposed his support for infanticide. Several sources reported the details of his four distinct votes supporting infanticide:
Illinois Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act — Voted NO in the Senate Judiciary Committee, March 27, 2001
Illinois Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act — Voted NO in the Senate Judiciary Committee, March 5, 2002
Illinois Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act — Voted NO on the Senate floor, April 4, 2002
Illinois Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act — Voted NO in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee, March 12, 2003
But the voters of the United States elected Obama anyway.
Now the older demographic among them may have to pay an unexpected price for their folly. The health care bill provides for mandatory euthanasia counseling for senior citizens every five years AND whenever they receive a diagnosis of terminal illness (page 425, House version of the bill — H.R.3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009). First to sound the alarm was patient advocate Betsy McCaughey, founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former lieutenant governor of New York. You can listen to her interivew on the Fred Thompson Show here.
Keith A. Fournier is a Catholic Deacon of the Diocese of Richmond, Virginia, a noted human rights lawyer and long time public policy activist. He comments on the lethal potential of the health care bill:
Is Euthanasia Included in National ‘Health Care’ Reform?
….Will this National “Health Care” Plan encourage our elderly to take their own lives rather than somehow become a “drain” on the rest of us? Will it withhold medical care from them based upon a bureaucrat’s decision regarding so called “quality of life” issues? Will it encourage the rationing of medical services? Will it counsel the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration in order to expedite their death? In short, is Euthanasia included in this National ‘Health Care’ Reform?
The more I have looked at the proposals the more it seems not only possible, but probable. After all, when the foundational understanding of the dignity of every human person is removed from our approach to health care in the spring of life, with the acceptance of the killing of innocent children in the womb being considered as a “health service”, it is profanely consistent to see the same approach applied in the winter of life….
But we are not just talking about those very near the end of life. The specific wording in the bill is:
….if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.
Just a “life-limiting” disease is enough to trigger the state’s interest in you. Down’s Syndrome? Muscular dystrophy? Alzheimer’s? Senile dementia? You could be encouraged to “go home” early.
But even if you are in fairly good shape, and you are past middle age, you have cause for concern. See TITLE IV–QUALITY: Subtitle A–Comparative Effectiveness Research. “Comparative Effectiveness Research” means that they will take the cost of your proposed treatment and divide that by the remaining years of your statistical life expectancy. If your per-year life cost exceeds the state-mandated threshhold, you won’t get the health care. Are you a military veteran over 59 who risked everything for your country? No heart by-pass surgery for you, you expensive old goat!
That will save big bucks for little Pedro, whose parents came here illegally to partake of your largesse. And as for the 12 million illegals who will be getting the services you are forfeiting, the health care bill also provides for using more of your tax money for translation services, so that those who speak no English can be fully informed how to take maximum advantage of the system that they did not pay for.
At the end of the film Soylent Green, the hero discovers that the corpses of government assisted suicides are being recycled into food wafers for the remaining viable population. His last words at the end of the film are appropriate for this pending legislation:
“We’ve got to stop them somehow!”
Dr. Janda’s speech is a bottom of the ninth walk-off game winning Bill Mazerosk type homerun into Aunt Minnie’s room. For the past few days, I’ve been reading articles and commentaries on Brother O’s plan for socialized medicine, and Janda’s speech outlines the plan’s problems most succinctly. So raise the window, Aunt Minnie, Janda’s blast is a genuine mind-changer!
Dr. Dave Janda, MD,
Thursday, 23 July 2009
As a physician who has authored books on preventative health care, I was given the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at a Congressional Dinner at The Capitol Building in Washington last Friday, July 17.
In preparation for the presentation, I read the latest version of “reform” as authored by The Obama Administration and supported by Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid. The Obama Care Plan titled, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, is a 1,018 page document.
Let me summarize just a few salient points of the above plan. First, however, it should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on The ObamaCare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.
The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventing health care need whatever. The plan’s method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.
The rationing of care is implemented through The National Health Care Board, according to the plan. This illustrious Board “will approve or reject treatment for patients based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment.”
Translation…..if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer…..dream on if you think you will get treated…..pick out your coffin.
Oh, you say this could never happen? Sorry…. this is the same model they use in Britain.
The plan mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. It creates The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research, the purpose of which is “to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs.” Yes, this is to be the law.
The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator For Health Information and Technology.
This “coordinator” will “monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate.” It goes on to say…..”Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties.”
According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment.
So according to The ObamaCare Plan….if your doctor saves your life you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow-up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.
Section 102 has the Orwellian title, “Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage.” What this section really mandates is that it is illegal to keep your private insurance if your status changes – e.g., if you lose or change your job, retire from your job and become a senior, graduate from college and get your first job. Yes, illegal.
When Mr. Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible, a blogger from Maine referenced an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance.
He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” Mr. Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”
Then there is Section 1233 of The ObamaCare Plan, devoted to “Advanced Care Planning.” After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner.
This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this session will include, “how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care.” It is no wonder The Obama Administration does not like my emphasis on Prevention. For Mr. Obama, prevention is the “enemy” as people would live longer.
I rest my case. The ObamaCare Plan is hazardous to the health of every American.
After I finished my Capitol Hill presentation, I was asked by a Congressman in the question-answer session: “I’ll be doing a number of network interviews on the Obama Health Care Plan. If I am asked what is the one word to describe the plan what should I answer.”
The answer is simple, honest, direct, analytical, sad but truthful. I told him that one word is FASCIST.
Then I added, “I hope you’ll have the courage to use that word, Congressman. No other word is more appropriate.”
Dr. Dave Janda, MD, is an orthopedic surgeon, and a world-recognized expert on the prevention of sports injuries, particularly in children. His website is noinjury.com.
Today’s terrifying look into what might happen tomorrow
They walk! They talk! And for a modest campaign contribution, they’ll crawl on their belly like a reptile! Catch them before the next noosphere expansion and they merge with the godhead at the omega point.