What Comrade Obama Is Doing Has Nothing To Do With Health Care Reform But Rather Is A Restructuring Of Our Society Into His Warped Image - Palin Firestorm Brings Fresh Scrutiny to ObamaCare "Death Panels"



There was an overflow crowd at this meeting that I tried to attend this morning but couldn't get in.  It was tough to find parking in the big lots surrounding the Penn Stater Hotel.  The meeting room only held 400, and I estimate about 1700 to 2000 people showed up. 


In talking with the people who didn't get in, I can tell you unequivocally that that those who didn't support Obama's death care plan outnumbered his supporters by 10-1 outside the hall, and a friend with the 9/12 project who made it inside the hall said the same thing in regard to the tough questions that Specter was asked, only two of which he said were in support. 


I spoke with a lot of people outside the hall before I left, and they, in a word, are unified in their outrage at what Comrade Obama and his Commie stooges Pelosi, Reid & Co. are trying to ram down our throats, and they're not going to take it anymore!  


My friend said that the one thing absolutely necessary for any bona fide health care reform, TORT REFORM, Specter wouldn't touch, repeatedly dodging questions on this issue, receiving boos in the process, and for his answers to other questions. 


The one thing that I picked up on in talking to people is that they understand that what Obama is doing has nothing to do with health care reform but is a restructuring of our society into his warped image! 


As I left the Hotel, I heard of couple of Sierra Club green goblins cackling about how the Dems all got in because they came early, i.e., the meeting was stacked with Obama supporters.  My friend, however, said that nothing could be further from the truth as Specter took a much deserved beating at this meeting with the numbers that showed up at this town hall speaking volumes as to the outrage on the part of REAL Americans at Comrade Obama’s willful destruction of our country from within!  Even formerly brain dead Democrats are now starting to wake up to this seminal truth! -  Gary L. Morella






Different backgrounds, common theme for health care protesters: No to big government


ERICA WERNER Associated Press Writer

3:41 PM EDT, August 12, 2009


The Patients First bus rolls up to a town hall meeting to be lead by Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., on health care in at Penn State University in State College, Pa, Wednesday, Aug. 12, 2009. More than 400 attended and opponents occasionally drowned out the Republican-turned-Democrat. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) (Carolyn Kaster, AP / August 12, 2009)


STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Nancy Snyder says she kept quiet when abortion was legalized and prayer in schools was eliminated. Not this time.

"They did it for prayer, they did it for abortion, and they're not going to do it for our health care," the 70-year-old nurse from Philipsburg, Pa., said Wednesday as she and her husband Robert, 74, a retired coal miner, waited in a long, snaking line for Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter's town hall meeting.

"We're not standing back this time," Snyder said.

Instead, the Snyders and many Americans like them are adding their voices to a populist backlash evident in the taunts, jeers and rants at lawmakers' health care forums around the country in the past week and a half. The contentious sessions highlight the difficulty for President Barack Obama and the Democrats as they push for a comprehensive remaking of the nation's health care system.

Many of those raising their voices and fists at the town halls have never been politically active. Their frustration was born earlier this year with government bailouts and big spending bills, then found an outlet in the anti-tax Tea Parties in April and has simmered in the punishing recession.

In some cases, it's been nurtured by talk radio and Glenn Beck's 9-12 Project, which seeks to unify Americans around nine values such as honesty, hope and sincerity and 12 principles, including, "I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable."

There is an element of organized opposition, just as on the other side unions and Obama's political organization are trying to turn out supporters to town halls and other events. The insurance industry lobby, America's Health Insurance Plans, is encouraging workers to attend town hall events to make their views known. So is the group Conservatives for Patients' Rights.

Still another group, Americans for Prosperity, has two buses emblazoned with the slogan "Hands off our Health Care!" that are traveling around the country to rallies and town halls, including Specter's. At the town halls, small groups of volunteers circulate petitions opposing any legislation allowing greater government involvement.

But it's not just about organization.

"I don't want someone else to select and say this is what you can and can't have," Nancy Snyder said.

"Nobody told us to come," she added. "I float my own boat."

The protesters have several concerns, but a unifying emotion is distrust of the government and federal intrusion into individual liberties or personal choices.

The emerging movement is almost the mirror image of the grass-roots campaign that helped sweep Obama into office by pulling in people who'd never been politically active. This time Obama is seeing the other side of what can happen when people are motivated, connect over the Internet and seemingly reach a tipping point that turns them from onlookers into activists.

"You have awakened a sleeping giant," one woman told Specter at a town hall meeting he held Tuesday in Lebanon, Pa.

Protesters interviewed at Specter's town hall events in central Pennsylvania this week were almost exclusively white, conservative and working class. But they ranged in age and their concerns went beyond health care to deficit spending, taxes, government growth and other issues. Many contradicted claims from Democratic leaders that their protest was manufactured by lobbyists or that they represented an orchestrated opposition led by Republicans or national conservative groups.

"I had it on my calendar before town halls became the big thing," said Jennifer Moeny, 32, a stay-at-home mom who attended Specter's town hall in State College on Wednesday. "I just came to voice my opposition. ... They should be open and honest instead of ramming it through."

For many opponents the health care overhaul amounts to the final straw. After seeing Obama bail out banks and car dealers, push a major energy bill and pass a $787 billion economic stimulus package that hasn't driven down unemployment, overhauling the $2.5 trillion U.S. health care system is a step too far.

"This is all being pushed way too fast. It's just being rammed down our throat," said Bette Jackson, a retiree from State College. "I agree we need health care reform, but I don't want the government taking over."

Nick Sidorick, 38, who said he owns a sports bar in Clearfield, Pa., drove an hour to attend his first town hall Wednesday after staying up until 2 a.m. the night before making signs to protest government intrusion. "I work 14 hours a day and I can't get ahead because of what the government takes from me."

"It's just exhaustion, I guess," Sidorick said of his motivation to attend.

A volunteer for Americans for Prosperity, Ron Rutigliano, 41, a high school teacher from Long Island, N.Y., said his parents grew up in Italy and he's seen firsthand the government-run system there, which he said provides poor care.

Democrats' plan would "just take away from the person that has a full-time job, that's been doing the right thing," Rutigliano said.





 The illustrated guide to Obamacare human props

August 12, 2009 12:48 AM by Michelle Malkin


The illustrated guide to Obamacare human props

By Michelle Malkin  •  August 12, 2009 12:48 AM




Little Julia Hall is just the latest in-the-tank questioner with Obama campaign/Democrat ties to turn up “randomly” at presidential health care forums.


Here’s your illustrated guide to Obamacare human props.


In July, Obama hosted a White House citizen town hall that featured three face-to-face questions. The lucky three?




*Debby Smith. You remember her. She choked back tears as she talked of her battle with kidney cancer, her joblessness, and her lack of insurance. Obama hugged the trembling woman and dubbed her “Exhibit A” for his massive entitlement program.


Debby Smith, however, is no ordinary patient. While she may be “unemployed,” she has been rather busy working for the Obama campaign – as a volunteer for the DNC’s Organizing for America. Smith also identified herself as a worker for the Virginia Organizing Project, which has been coordinating lobbying trips and health care forums with HCAN. Yes, that same HCAN. In December, Smith moderated a “a community discussion on health care issues” in Appalachia, Virginia and told her local paper that the meeting “would be reported back to former Sen. Tom Daschle, who has been directed by President Elect Barack Obama to form a committee to report on health care issues.”




*Jason Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum works for the Washington, D.C.-based Health Care for America Now (HCAN). That’s the K Street Astroturf outfit with a $40 million budget to lobby for government-run health care linked to left-wing billionaire George Soros. And yes, the same HCAN directing its mob to “drown out” opponents at town hall meetings.




*SEIU member. Yes, wonder of wonders, this randomly chosen questioner just happened to be a member of the Purple Shirt Army that poured $80 million in independent expenditures into Democrat coffers, made 4.4 million phone calls for Obama, sent out more than 2.5 million Obama mailings during the 2008 campaign, and dispatched thugs to drown out town hall protesters.


Here’s how the tough exchange went down:


Q Hi, Mr. President. I’m a member of SEIU and I’m down here in Fairfax County working on Change That Works. What can I do, as a member of the union, to help you with your reform bill?


THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate the question..



Of course he did.


In March, the White House conducted a similar health reform town hall with more human Obamacare props (full transcript here). Five lucky questioners were chosen “randomly” to talk directly with the president in the East Room about their concerns, including:




*Linda Bock. She’s a registered nurse — and a card-carrying member of the SEIU in Prince George’s County, Maryland.




*Carlos Del Toro. Via WaPo: “In 2007, Del Toro stood as a Democratic candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates, but did not win. A supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primaries, he backed Obama against McCain in the general, endorsing him in an Oct. 24, 2008 op-ed in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star.”




*Tom Sawner. I’ll let him speak for himself:


Sir, I’m Tom Sawner. I’m a service-disabled veteran, small-business owner in Arlington, Virginia. My company, Educational Options, works with public schools. We serve more than 200,000 at-risk kids within public schools, providing online content, partnering with teachers, and I was honored to serve on your education platform committee.





*Bonnee Breese. Public school teacher, prominent AFT union member, and member of the 11,626-person Pennsylvania for Obama page on Facebook.






 Wednesday, August 12, 2009


ObamaCare means rationing of health care services.

Obama dodges and weaves on that, trying to avoid admitting that care will indeed be rationed.

He, of course, doesn't want the public to understand what government-run health care would really entail.

At his alleged town hall meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire yesterday, (actually, it was more like a campaign rally), Obama extolled the wisdom of "expert health panels" and their role in government-run health care.

OBAMA: In terms of these expert health panels -- well, this goes to the point about "death panels" -- that's what folks are calling them. The idea is actually pretty straightforward, which is if we've got a panel of experts, health experts, doctors, who can provide guidelines to doctors and patients about what procedures work best in what situations, and find ways to reduce, for example, the number of tests that people take -- these aren't going to be forced on people, but they will help guide how the delivery system works so that you are getting higher-quality care.

Obama touts the judgment of these "expert health panels."

One such "health expert" is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a top adviser to Obama.

Ezekiel Emanuel has a system for determining how to allocate health services. (Allocating, in effect, is rationing.)

Emanuel promotes the "Complete Lives System" as a way to decide who gets treatment and who is denied.

The Lancet, Volume 373, Issue 9661, Pages 423 - 431, 31 January 2009, Emanuel writes:


The complete lives system

Because none of the currently used systems satisfy all ethical requirements for just allocation, we propose an alternative: the complete lives system. This system incorporates five principles: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value. As such, it prioritises younger people who have not yet lived a complete life and will be unlikely to do so without aid. Many thinkers have accepted complete lives as the appropriate focus of distributive justice: “individual human lives, rather than individual experiences, [are] the units over which any distributive principle should operate.” Although there are important differences between these thinkers, they share a core commitment to consider entire lives rather than events or episodes, which is also the defining feature of the complete lives system.

Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritising adolescents and young adults over infants. Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. Similarly, adolescence brings with it a developed personality capable of forming and valuing long-term plans whose fulfilment requires a complete life. As the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin argues, “It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old child dies and worse still when an adolescent does”; this argument is supported by empirical surveys. Importantly, the prioritisation of adolescents and young adults considers the social and personal investment that people are morally entitled to have received at a particular age, rather than accepting the results of an unjust status quo. Consequently, poor adolescents should be treated the same as wealthy ones, even though they may have received less investment owing to social injustice.

The complete lives system also considers prognosis, since its aim is to achieve complete lives. A young person with a poor prognosis has had few life-years but lacks the potential to live a complete life. Considering prognosis forestalls the concern that disproportionately large amounts of resources will be directed to young people with poor prognoses. When the worst-off can benefit only slightly while better-off people could benefit greatly, allocating to the better-off is often justifiable. Some small benefits, such as a few weeks of life, might also be intrinsically insignificant when compared with large benefits.

Saving the most lives is also included in this system because enabling more people to live complete lives is better than enabling fewer. In a public health emergency, instrumental value could also be included to enable more people to live complete lives. Lotteries could be used when making choices between roughly equal recipients, and also potentially to ensure that no individual—irrespective of age or prognosis—is seen as beyond saving. Thus, the complete lives system is complete in another way: it incorporates each morally relevant simple principle.

When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated. It therefore superficially resembles the proposal made by DALY advocates; however, the complete lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value. Additionally, the complete lives system assumes that, although life-years are equally valuable to all, justice requires the fair distribution of them. Conversely, DALY allocation treats life-years given to elderly or disabled people as objectively less valuable.

Finally, the complete lives system is least vulnerable to corruption. Age can be established quickly and accurately from identity documents. Prognosis allocation encourages physicians to improve patients' health, unlike the perverse incentives to sicken patients or misrepresent health that the sickest-first allocation creates.


We consider several important objections to the complete lives system.

The complete lives system discriminates against older people. Age-based allocation is ageism. 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. Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not.

Age, like income, is a “non-medical criterion” inappropriate for allocation of medical resources. In contrast to income, a complete life is a health outcome. Long-term survival and life expectancy at birth are key health-care outcome variables. Delaying the age at onset of a disease is desirable.

The complete lives system is insensitive to international differences in typical lifespan. Although broad consensus favours adolescents over very young infants, and young adults over the very elderly people, implementation can reasonably differ between, even within, nation-states. Some people believe that a complete life is a universal limit founded in natural human capacities, which everyone should accept even without scarcity. By contrast, the complete lives system requires only that citizens see a complete life, however defined, as an important good, and accept that fairness gives those short of a complete life stronger claims to scarce life-saving resources.

Principles must be ordered lexically: less important principles should come into play only when more important ones are fulfilled. Rawls himself agreed that lexical priority was inappropriate when distributing specific resources in society, though appropriate for ordering the principles of basic social justice that shape the distribution of basic rights, opportunities, and income.1 As an alternative, balancing priority to the worst-off against maximising benefits has won wide support in discussions of allocative local justice. As Amartya Sen argues, justice “does not specify how much more is to be given to the deprived person, but merely that he should receive more”.

Accepting the complete lives system for health care as a whole would be premature. We must first reduce waste and increase spending. The complete lives system explicitly rejects waste and corruption, such as multiple listing for transplantation. Although it may be applicable more generally, the complete lives system has been developed to justly allocate persistently scarce life-saving interventions. Hearts for transplant and influenza vaccines, unlike money, cannot be replaced or diverted to non-health goals; denying a heart to one person makes it available to another. Ultimately, the complete lives system does not create “classes of Untermenschen whose lives and well being are deemed not worth spending money on”, but rather empowers us to decide fairly whom to save when genuine scarcity makes saving everyone impossible.


As well as recognising morally relevant values, an allocation system must be legitimate. Legitimacy requires that people see the allocation system as just and accept actual allocations as fair. Consequently, allocation systems must be publicly understandable, accessible, and subject to public discussion and revision. They must also resist corruption, since easy corruptibility undermines the public trust on which legitimacy depends. Some systems, like the UNOS points systems or QALY systems, may fail this test, because they are difficult to understand, easily corrupted, or closed to public revision. Systems that intentionally conceal their allocative principles to avoid public complaints might also fail the test.

Although procedural fairness is necessary for legitimacy, it is unable to ensure the justice of allocation decisions on its own. Although fair procedures are important, substantive, morally relevant values and principles are indispensable for just allocation.


Ultimately, none of the eight simple principles recognise all morally relevant values, and some recognise irrelevant values. QALY and DALY multiprinciple systems neglect the importance of fair distribution. UNOS points systems attempt to address distributive justice, but recognise morally irrelevant values and are vulnerable to corruption. By contrast, the complete lives system combines four morally relevant principles: youngest-first, prognosis, lottery, and saving the most lives. In pandemic situations, it also allocates scarce interventions to people instrumental in realising these four principles. Importantly, it is not an algorithm, but a framework that expresses widely affirmed values: priority to the worst-off, maximising benefits, and treating people equally. To achieve a just allocation of scarce medical interventions, society must embrace the challenge of implementing a coherent multiprinciple framework rather than relying on simple principles or retreating to the status quo.

Age-based priority for receiving scarce medical interventions under the complete lives system

Emanuel, WHITE HOUSE HEALTH CARE POLICY ADVISER, has some very scary ideas about who's fit to live and who's life has been full enough.

Look at the chart. Determining whether to permit medical intervention on a curve?

Should older Americans be concerned about this? I think so. The very young are also targeted.

At his event in Portsmouth yesterday, Obama tried to convince Americans that rationing won't occur under his single payer plan.

But we've seen how socialized medicine works. It doesn't raise the standards of care for everyone. It creates scarcity. Quality care? Forget it.

Obama mocked opponents who point out that a government-run health care system bent on trimming expenses will mean cutting services.


OBAMA: Let me just be specific about some things that I've been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for "death panels" that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that we don't -- it's too expensive to let her live anymore. And there are various -- there are some variations on this theme.

The Complete Lives System does "pull the plug on grandma."

Emanuel is an "expert" Obama admires.

As Obama said in Portsmouth, "[W]e've got a panel of experts, health experts, doctors, who can provide guidelines to doctors and patients about what procedures work best in what situations.

These same experts also will provide guidelines to doctors about what procedures will not be allowed.

Remember what Obama said on ABC during his health care infomercial in response to this question from Jane Sturm:

OBAMA: We're not going to solve every difficult problem in terms of end-of-life care. A lot of that is going to have to be we as a culture and as a society starting to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves.

But what we can do is make sure that at least some of the waste that exists in the system, that's not making anybody's mom better, that is loading up on additional tests or additional drugs, that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care, that at least we can let doctors know, and your mom know, that you know what, maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking the painkiller.

If the "expert health panel" deems certain treatments not cost effective, the government will be pulling the plug on "grandma."




Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel Restructuring the National Healthcare System




Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel


Democrats announced on Wednesday that a deal was finally reached in the house to move healthcare reform forward, clearing the way for a vote in September.


Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is one of the key players in helping the Obama administration create sweeping reforms in the health care system. His role is to make the case for reform while reassuring medical professionals that it will not lead to an unwelcome upheaval.


“You are not going to flip a switch and change our system,” he said in a recent interview. “It’s got to be an evolution, not a revolution.”


Ezekiel is the older brother of Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, whom he speaks to daily. Described as an outspoken, accomplished academic with impressive medical and policy credentials, Ezekiel has spent the past two decades writing about guaranteeing health care for all. He brings a multitude of strengths to his position, including a medical perspective which was lacking during the debates over health care reform in the Clinton presidency.



Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel (abcnews.com)


According to Vitals.com, he received his medical degree at Harvard University, completed a residency in internal medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and a fellowship in Hematology and Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.


There are those who are critical of his ability to improve the system. In a controversial editorial printed in Bloomberg, former Lieutenant Governor, Betsy McCaughey blasted Emanuel, warning Americans that provisions of the stimulus bill “are bad for your health” and discriminates against older patients.


And although he is well-respected in medical and academic circles, health care reform advocates question his experience.


But Emanuel feels he has had unique preparation.


“I can say things that other people may not be able to. It’s the perspective of having been in the trenches, having had to negotiate with insurance companies and doctors and patients and trying to get services. I think I understand the mechanics out there better than an economist or a health policy expert who has studied it from afar.”


Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who recently earned a black belt in tae kwon do, is prepared for anything as he travels the perilous bi-partisan road in pursuit of improved healthcare in America.








See the latest voter revolts

Constituents boo, jeer as lawmakers defend Democrat health 'reform' plan

Posted: August 11, 2009
9:11 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling

© 2011 WND

Sen. Specter warns angry citizen he will be forced to leave while attendee tries to physically direct him out the door


Americans are speaking up and confronting the President Obama and Democrat lawmakers with concerns about their health care "reform."

Citizens are flocking to town hall forums across the nation and letting their representatives know where they stand. Meetings are filled to capacity while thousands wait outside for their chance to be heard.

New Hampshire

At a Portsmouth, N.H., high school today, President Obama hosted a health care town hall.

An estimated 2,000 proponents and opponents of his plan gathered in the streets with signs and bullhorns, ready to greet the president's motorcade. While groups opposed to the health "reform" arrived in small groups with hand-made signs, supporters from pro-Obama organizations, such as Organizing for America and Health Care for America Now, spilled out of buses.

"Let's get this done," Obama shouted to a crowd of 1,800 inside Portsmouth High School.

Critics remained calm and polite when the president solicited responses from "skeptical" attendees, according to the Associated Press. 


Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Penn., held a town hall meeting this morning in Lebanon, Pa., where constituents booed and jeered him for at least an hour. One man began shouting because he was not given an opportunity to speak. He complained that Specter, a long-time Republican who switched over to the Democratic Party this year, would not listen because he's "not a lobbyist with all kind of money to stuff in your pocket."

"One day, God's going to stand before you," he told the senator to his face. "And he's going to judge you and the rest of your damn cronies up on the Hill – and then you will get your just desserts."

Other attendees complained about Democrats plans for health "reform." CBS News reported that one woman wore a "member of the mob" T-shirt – referencing Democrat claims that insurance companies and the Republican Party had enlisted "angry mobs" to disrupt town hall meetings.

"I don't believe this is just health care. This is about the systematic dismantling of this country," a woman told Specter. "You have awakened a sleeping giant. I don't want this country turning into Russia, turning into a socialized country. What are you going to do to restore this country back to what our founders created, according to the Constitution?"

Her question prompted a standing ovation. Several members of the crowd shouted, "You work for us!" Meanwhile, a large crowd gathered outside with signs warning of socialism.

The following video shows the exchange:


At an Aug. 6 forum sponsored by Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo., many protesters were turned away at the door while SEIU members were allowed in. A video of the St. Louis, Mo., incident can be seen below:

The event resulted in six arrests. Afterward, town hall attendee Kenneth Gladney, 38, was beaten, kicked and called racist names outside the meeting. He was at the forum to sell "Don't tread on me" flags, but he said he found himself with a Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, member in his face, calling him the "N"-word and asking what he was doing peddling his message.

Gladney claims he was punched in the face and two other SEIU members jumped on top of him, yelled racial epithets and kicked and punched him. He said he sought treatment for injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face.

Also in Missouri, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., faced "shouts and jeers" even in "friendly territory" at her town hall forum on Aug. 10.

At Poplar Bluff, Mo., the report said, an audience of 500 applauded the loudest when Obama was called a socialist.

Another audience member asked, "Where's the birth certificate?" alluding to the dispute over Obama's still-unreleased eligibility documentation.

AP reported McCaskill was visibly frustrated and at one point said, "You guys are so mean."  


Rep. Kathy Castor's Aug. 6 town hall meeting in Tampa, Fla., ended abruptly after 1,500 citizens attempted to enter an event intended to hold approximately 250 people.

Hundreds of people remained outside, many of whom had been waiting for hours to attend the meeting. Meanwhile, seats remained empty inside while SEIU workers and other attendees distributed flyers and signs for the Democrat health care plan to audience members.

One woman outside shouted, "This was supposed to be a town hall meeting. Last time I checked, those were open to the public."

Finally, some attendees were allowed in, but hundreds waited in line with signs outside.

Castor left 15 minutes into the meeting. Just outside the meeting room, constituents chanted, "You work for us," "Tyranny, tyranny'' and "Read the bill."

A businessman with a shredded shirt reported to police that staffers attacked him, twisting his arm and tearing his watch off. Another, he claims, grabbed him by the neck and tore his shirt.

"I just came to listen and see what I'm missing about this health care thing because it doesn't make sense to me," he told a reporter.

Castor later said the event has strengthened her resolve to promote health care reform.

"It has strengthened my resolve to stand up for families and seniors," Castor told reporters for Tampa Bay Online. "Floridians are bearing a great burden in health care costs, more than almost any other state."

A video of the crowd outside the event can be seen below:


Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., hosted an Aug. 10 town hall meeting at the Georgia Perimeter College campus in Clarkston. At least 500 citizens showed up in an auditorium while between 1,000 and 1,500 watched the discussion on closed circuit television screens in the gymnasium. Hundreds of citizens stood in an exceedingly long line to have their voices heard while as many as 500 people left the event. Though there was a mix of booing and cheering, attendees stayed calm during the discussion

The following video by a group called Secular Stupidest shows the length of the line:


In Maryland, Sen. Ben Cardin faced booing and jeering constituents at his Aug. 10 forum as he attempted to defend the health care legislation. According to Fox News, when Cardin said details of how the plan will be funded have not been worked out, attendees shouted, "Taxes!" and "Spend, Ben, spend!"

When one person asked Cardin for a single example of a government-run program that provided services to citizens at a lower cost, Cardin cited national parks system and Medicare.

The crowd booed and jeered in disapproval.

Earlier, Cardin admitted to receiving nearly 1,600 RSVP's for a town hall meeting at a concert hall that only seated only 500. When an estimated 1,500 showed up for the meeting, protesters lined the streets outside with signs and shouts.


More than 200 citizens shared their thoughts on government-run health care with Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, today. On several occasions, he was challenged by the crowd after he declared the current health care system unsustainable.

During an Aug 8 event, one man yelled: "This is not health reform, this is control, control over our lives."

Harkin accused the man of being part of "a nationally coordinated effort to disrupt these meetings," but the man said no one sent him to the forum.

There were no violent incidents


As WND reported, an irate Michigan father worried over what Obamacare would do to his handicapped adult son said he was threatened after trying to get a direct answer from Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich, on Aug 6. In an interview with Fox, Sola explained how he took his wheelchair-bound adult son to the front of the room to confront Dingell, 83.

Sola said he demanded information about what Obamacare would provide for his son, and Dingell responded with a statement that there is an amendment to address the needs of the handicapped.

However, Sola said that amendment doesn't exist.

Dingell tried to explain at a town hall that people "don't know" how much they're already paying to cover the uninsured, but his reasoning was drowned out by protesters.

In an MSNBC interview, Dingell later said the town hall protests remind him of Ku Klux Klan protests.

"Well, the last time I had to confront something like this was when I voted for the civil rights bill and my opponent voted against it," he said. "At that time, we had a lot of Ku Klux Klan folks and white supremacists and folks in white sheets and other things running around causing trouble."


As WND reported, legislators coming to their home districts in attempt to sell the health care plan to constituents are being met with fierce opposition and huge crowds:

·        Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., was confronted by self-described Democrats who accused their representative of lying about health reform and protested, "Why would you try to stuff a health care plan down our throats in a couple days when the president took six months to pick a dog for his kids?"

  • Rep. Tim Bishop, D-N.Y., has called off further events after a June 22 event he held in Setauket, N.Y., in which protesters dominated the meeting by shouting criticisms at the congressman for his positions on energy policy, health care and the bailout of the auto industry.
  • Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., got an earful, too – especially on the health-care issue.
  • House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., visited a Denver, Colo., clinic for the homeless to raise support for Obama's health care plan, only to be met by streets lined with protesters opposed to the measure.
  • Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-TX, went out to meet constituents, only to be met with protesters shouting in opposition to the health care bill, "Just say no!"
  • At a health care town hall event in Syracuse, N.Y., in July, police were called in to restore order, and at least one heckler was taken away by local police.
  • Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Fla., at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Fla.
  • Danville, Va., anti-tax tea party activists claimed they were "refused an opportunity" to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello, D-Va., a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs.
  • Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., was chased by a crowd saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
  • The constituents of Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn., unable to access their representative through a town hall meeting, created a video charging that Tanner has met with Michael Moore and Fidel Castro, "But he won't meet his constituents in the 8th District to talk about health care."

The biggest source of protests are the health-care bill, the $787 billion economic stimulus package and the cap-and-trade legislation. They're also angry about Barack Obama's refusal to release his birth certificate to prove he is a "natural born citizen" and constitutionally eligible to serve in the White House.

According to an Associated Press report, Obama's top political adviser, David Axelrod, showed Senators in D.C. video of some of the boisterous town-hall meetings and discussed how to respond to disruptions.

"It's a challenge, no question about it, and you've got to get out there and make the case," Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said afterward. "This is not the time for the faint-hearted."

Read more: See the latest voter revolts http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=106595#ixzz1YuxFWee2











Hey Prez – You’re Living in an Alternate Reality


President Obama has made another attempt at Deception, Distortion, and Distraction, or the Three Ds, by unveiling his RealityChecks site within a site on whitehouse.gov.  I couldn’t help but realize as I went through this site of the Three Ds just how out of touch the President and Company really are.


Here we have a site that further insults the intelligence of the American people by telling them that we don’t know what we are talking about.  If you have read the bill like I have, then you’ll quickly realize it’s not about Health Care Reform.  So the new tactic the Administration and their cronies use is to talk about Health Insurance Reform. Well, it’s not about that either.  This Administration is doing one thing and one thing only – taking Americans’ freedoms and liberties away from them once and for all.


Let’s go straight to the President’s FAQ on his Three Ds RealityCheck site and you’ll see that’s exactly what they are doing:


“Health Insurance Reform will end current forms of rationing, not expand it.”Let’s pay particular attention to “end current forms of rationing”. The government will end current forms of rationing…. and replace it with their own rationing.  They will accomplish this through mandating the types of health care plans delivered in the Government Health Insurance Exchange and the Government Public Option Plan. You can see for yourself right in the House HC Bill starting on page 84 Section 203.


Obama also talks about insurance companies denying coverage. You can find how Obama plans to deny coverage by reading many places in the bill about how the Government will deny coverage. One place in the Health Care bill starts on page 801 Section 1751.   Starting to get the picture of how Obama and Company use the Three Ds of Deception, Distortion and Distraction?


“Burdening Government” This is quite amusing. The President and Company seem to believe that the Government is burdened. Prez – don’t tell anyone but it is the government that always burdens the people. The President goes on to cite a report from the Council of Economic Advisors that shows what happens if we don’t do anything. First, Mr. President, no one has suggested we do nothing. This is just a distraction and a straw man of yours that is frankly, worn out and overused.  Do you also expect us to believe something from the Council of Economic Advisors? The very ones who misread our economy? Really?


Let’s go to Mr. Elmendorf, Director of CBO, for some actual reality:




“Cost” – The President again uses his straw man of “if we do nothing”. As you can see from the Director of CBO the Government will expand spending and will not reduce spending to a corresponding degree.  Additionally the Government tries the old misdirection of only using a 10 year projection.


Let’s take a look beyond 10 years shall we?  If this HC Monstrosity Bill is passed then we can be assured it will be around a lot longer than 10 years.  It turns out that the Joint Economic Committee found that the President’s Health Care Obamanation will be insufficient in funds to the tune of $9.2 Trillion. You can read all about that here – House Health Care Bill yields $9.2 trillion in New Debt.


As for the Government being accurate in any of their projections you merely look at how many times they’ve failed miserably and came way under what it actually did cost.  Don’t take my word though, see for yourself – Health Care Reform Cost Estimates: What is the Track Record?


When CBO director Doug Elmendorf has said the House health plan will increase the budget deficit by $239 billion over ten years, and “generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.” , it’s no wonder that 72% of Americans believe that Obama’s Health Care plan will add to the deficit of this country exponentially.


“Uninsured vs. Costs” - Let’s look at the deceptive words that the President wants you to believe:


“American families with insurance pay a hidden tax of roughly $1000 for the cost of caring for people without insurance. As more Americans become insured, that hidden tax will begin to disappear. In addition, covering everyone will put downward pressure on costs. Bringing younger, healthier people into the system will spread the risk.


So Prez, the American people are not going to be paying a hidden tax anymore, you just bring the hidden tax out into the open. Additionally as your government HC plan insures more Americans, the open tax is now going to become much larger.  Again, we can see how much downward pressure will be brought on costs from the above section on costs.  You’re also telling the younger generation, who is typically healthier, that by making them pay for health insurance they might not want, it will spread the risk which is code for cost. So younger Americans, thanks for paying the high oppressive debt of the Obama Administration for the rest of us.


Mr. President – a little education on the uninsured:



“Medicare for Seniors” – Mr. President, the Medicare Trust Fund is currently $38 TRILLION in the hole.  The only thing your health care bill does for Medicare is kick the can down the road so that someone else can deal with it.  Your only goal for Medicare is to use it for political purposes – Medicare Payment Rules: Looking Behind the Curtain.


Additionally, when Government starts to cut the Medicare Advantage Program that a lot of Seniors enjoy, they will have to go and seek additional supplemental insurance thus increasing their out of pocket expenses.  Perhaps that’s why AARP is behind the President’s Health Care Monstrosity.  They stand to gain on the backs of Senior Citizens.  Nice huh?


“End of Life Counseling” – Mr. President, I guess you think Americans are too stupid to do this on their own.  Why, after all these years that Americans have been able to do these very things without your assistance, you decide that you just know better. Shhh- Mr. President, the Government can NEVER do better that which an individual can do for himself. You’re not empowering anyone. Your guiding them to how you see fit according to your selfish needs.


The President again deceives by saying it is not mandatory. It seems, Mr. President that you have not read the bill.  You merely have to read pages 425-429 of the House Health Care bill to see that the Government mandates the counseling every 5 years or even more frequently should the patient have a significant change in their health condition.  The Government dictates what is an order in end of life counseling, what treatments are made available, how the treatments are limited, who gets to decide what those treatments are (it’s not just the patient and doctor), and the Government standardizes all orders, treatments and guidance how they want it and when they want it.


Mr. President, perhaps we should just ask Dr. Zeke Emmanuel, your Health Care Policy Advisor,  what he thinks of Seniors – Complete Lives System.  OOPs!! As we can see from the good doctor, he really thinks that Seniors are a waste of time.  He thinks that Seniors count less than other citizens. Nice person to have around Mr. President.   Isn’t it great that AARP endorses End of Life Counseling too!


“The Health Insurance Exchange” – The President and his buddies would like you to believe that they are creating an Exchange that has never been there and to “Come on in! It’s so warm and fuzzy here!”  Well, it’s simple folks, the Health Insurance Exchange is a Government run exchange that corrals all the private insurance plans into the ranch of Government control. It’s a take over of market based solutions by Obama.  You can read all about it starting on page 72 of the House Health Care Bill.


“The Public Option” – Folks, plain and simple, the public option is President Obama’s and his cronies’ way of getting to the Single Payer Government Takeover of your health and lives.  Don’t take my word though – The President and his cronies will tell you straight up –








So, Mr. President, you and your cronies have repeatedly tried the Three Ds, Deception, Distortion, and Distraction.  They are not working.  They haven’t been working.  They will fail repeatedly if you continue to use them.


Your Reality Check site is a teachable moment:


Mr. President, you and your buddies, live in an alternate reality far far away from the actual reality that Americans are living daily.





Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:57:02 -0700
From: kreitzr1@shentel.net
Subject: [LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH] Turns Out the Hitler Poster (that Illustrates Conser...

BUSTED!: "Obama As Hitler" Poster Was A Democrat/Union Plant At John Dingell Townhall! UPDATED with video interview!

One more example of liberals using Alinsky tactics to demonize and "freeze" the opposition. It's a game folks, but only one side knows it. And they are playing honest folks for patsies and fool. This is liberalism at its corrupt and dishonest best!

Posted By Mary Ann Kreitzer to LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH at 8/12/2009 12:44:00 PM











'Big brother-care' looms large

Matt Barber - Guest Columnist - 8/12/2009 1:20:00 PM

Matt BarberIt's socialized medicine vs. the private sector. How does the former match-up to the latter? Well, by way of an ill-advised postal services analogy, our inspired physician-in-chief has gaffed upon the answer: "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine," he observed, "It's the post office that's always having problems."
Priceless – From the mouths of libs...


Speaking of "Federal Express:" Was there ever any doubt as to why the left's government takeover of healthcare absolutely, positively had to be there overnight? Dr. Obama, Nurse Nancy and the rest of the congressional candy-stripers recognized that if Americans had a chance to actually vet this medical monstrosity, they'd rise-up against it.
Oops. We have -- and we have.
But despite a nose-dive in support, the Democratic Party's ObamaCare Kamikazes refuse to pull-up. Instead, they're unloading both barrels, hell-bent on sinking the U.S.S. Free Market and taking our liberties, quality of care, and American exceptionalism down with it.
Pelosi has disgracefully implied that town-hall goers who question this radical experiment in socialized medicine are Nazis. And in an August 10 USA Today op-ed, she and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) shamelessly labeled those same heartland patriots – many of whom are senior citizens – as "un-American."
But what is "un-American" is this socialist piece of Euro-trash being peddled as "healthcare reform." This is not the "hope and change" America envisioned while punching Obama's chad last November. He and liberals in Congress have betrayed their nation's trust.
At nearly 1,100 pages, even the president admits he hasn't read H.R. 3200 – the House version of the bill – and supporters like Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) have ridiculed the very idea that anyone would.
Well, some of us are reading it – silly as we may be.
Liberty Counsel's Washington, DC, staff has compiled a comprehensive bullet-point summary of the bill. It's gone viral and Americans are arming themselves with the information it provides. They're taking it to town-hall meetings around the country and are respectfully, but firmly holding their representatives' feet to the fire.
"What Americans Need to Know About the Healthcare Takeover" provides a link to both an overview of H.R. 3200 and the full text of the bill so that people can verify for themselves the overview's accuracy. This is democracy in action and it's making the left mouth-foaming furious.
ObamaCare is fatally flawed on numerous levels, but, for now, let's focus on just a few:
First, despite ludicrous denials by both an increasingly partisan AARP and a "snitch on your comrade" White House, pages 424, 425, and 426 of the plan do, in fact, mandate compulsory government "end-of-life" consultations for seniors who have "not had such a consultation within the last 5 years."
According to the bill, these consultations "shall include...an explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice." (Or, as President Kevorkian put it, instruct you that: "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller.")
Again, these are mandatory consultations. The word "shall" is a legal term of art that means – for lack of a better word – "shall." Notwithstanding White House and AARP claims to the contrary, "shall" does not mean "may," "can" or "have the option to."
So, in the interest of candor and for the sake of clarity, let's call ObamaCare's mandatory "end-of-life counseling" what it truly is: "End-your-life" counseling. Better yet, let's call it the "Useless-Eaters-Get-Out-of-the-Way-and-Just-Die-Already" provision.
Next, we have Sec. 163, pages 58–60, which – whether you like it or not – grants federal bureaucrats full access to both your private medical records and personal bank account for automatic fund withdrawals. You read that right...
Here's how it works: In order to "standardize electronic administrative transactions," the government issues you a handy-dandy "machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card" to "enable electronic funds transfers" from your private bank account.
But lest you worry about having to deal with any of those pesky "choices" or confusing "decisions," Uncle Sam promises to "be authoritative, permitting no additions or constraints for electronic transactions."
Got that? Our "authoritative" federal government will not permit you to place any "constraints" on its access to your bank account. (Yea! Big Brother's got your back! How could anyone be opposed this kind of government coddling? One question, though: Will Uncle Sam pick-up our "non-sufficient funds" fees?)
And then there's the "Health Benefits Advisory Committee." This lovely government-appointed panel of bureaucrats is to consist of "medical and other experts" who get to "recommend covered benefits."
Other experts? What in the Rahm Emanuel is that supposed to mean?
Grandma neither wants – nor can she survive – a liberal Democrat-appointed, "one-size-fits-all" panel of distinguished experts in the field of "other" deciding what medical services she will or will not be allowed to receive. We're not numbers on a page, Mr. President. We're people.
But this brings us back to the aforementioned threat of "standardization." As with every socialist nation that has adopted its own version of ObamaCare, standardized, universal healthcare, is – and always will be – an abysmal "healthcare rationing" failure. It's no longer you and your doctor deciding what's best for you and your family; it's Big Brother.
Keep in mind; we've only covered three provisions here. H.R. 3200 is nearly 1,100 pages of wonderfully ambiguous little nuggets just like these, which grant the government unlimited loopholes to do whatever it pleases with your life and well-being.
Where's my America?




I don't believe that this country has any idea what hit it with the election of Comrade Obama who very well could be a usurper.  We're talking about a diabolic rouge administration working in lockstep with a rouge Congress under Pelosi and Reid that couldn't care less about the common good, per the will of the people, in favor of promoting a culture-of-eternal-death agenda straight from the bowels of hell for one purpose and one purpose only, to stay in power in perpetuity.

Don't believe for a moment that the Obamunists are going to go quietly into the night if they lose at the polls.  This group will drum up any trumped excuse to declare martial law to stay in power.  I believe that it will ultimately take a direct court order from SCOTUS with military enforcement to physically remove Obama who right now deserves impeachment and prosecution many times over, per his being forsworn in regard to his oath of office in trashing the Constitution on a daily basis!

If you think this is an exaggeration, better check recent history in regard to the lies of the most heinous legislation ever foisted upon an American public ASAP!  Why do you think that there is such a push by the Obamunists for health care for illegals, and amnesty soon to follow?  It's no accident that illegals are going to be counted by corrupt ACORN types for the upcoming census!  As soon as amnesty is granted, voting rights come next with Obama assured of a majority voting block whom he takes care of via the money of Soros, and more importantly, our hard earned redistributed tax monies, for the purpose of buying votes.  "It's free money," said one of Obama's drones in a news report today, which matters not to the Obamunists who are turning the American dream for our children and grandchildren into an American nightmare!

Obama has to be stopped politically, and it must start with an outcry against his horrendous cap&tax and death care bills with the understanding that people of faith and right reason are not obliged to obey laws that are counter to God's in the moral order; else anarchy exists!  We’re talking civil disobedience to a tyrant for the sake of an America fit to live in for our children and grandchildren if it comes to that.  And we must not shirk from our duty as God fearing Americans in that regard! - Gary L. Morella

How Pelosi sees America

Posted: August 12, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

By Joel Barbee
© 2009 


Obama's Chicago-style intimidation
Phyllis Schlafly decries 'coordinated smear on those who oppose socialized medicine'

Obama's Chicago-style intimidation

Posted: August 12, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009 


Obama's staff and retreads from the Clinton administration are using Chicago-style intimidation to rescue his extravagant health care bill from its decline in public opinion polls.

A congressional town hall meeting on Aug. 6 reminds us of a memorable political moment when Bill Clinton and his chief aides were in Little Rock celebrating his 1992 election. Heady with victory, Chicago staffer Rahm Emanuel demonstrated how he planned to punish political enemies by plunging his steak knife into the table and screaming, "Dead!" as he named each target.

At Rep. Russ Carnahan's, D-Mo., town hall meeting on Aug. 6, SEIU (Service Employees International Union) thugs, clad in purple shirts, punched in the face, brutally beat and kicked in the head when he was down an African-American named Kenneth Gladney, while hurling a torrent of racial slurs. The SEIU goons were following White House advice: "Don't do a lot of talking," and if they encounter resistance, "punch back twice as hard."

The Purple Shirt Brigade picked on Gladney because he was passing out historical American flags with the inscription "Don't Tread on Me," and the left won't tolerate African-Americans as conservatives. Gladney was taken to the hospital, and six people were arrested.

We are seeing a coordinated smear on those who oppose socialized medicine. Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse mislabeled them as "angry mobs of rabid right-wing extremists."

The Obama supporters are trying to make it appear that those opposing socialism in health care are "manufactured" protesters, as falsely alleged by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, and in MSNBC's Chris Matthews' words, a "Brooks Brothers Brigade." Majority Leader Harry Reid calls them "Astroturf" to pretend that those opposing Obama's health care bill are artificial grass roots.

The opponents of socialized medicine are just ordinary citizens, many of whom (like Gladney) had never before attended a political meeting, and many who are alumni of the spontaneous tea parties. There is no evidence that they are organized and financed by the insurance companies, or even by the Republican Party.

On the other hand, there is evidence that Obama's "punch back" tactics are organized. MoveOn.org sent out a "Dear MoveOn member" e-mail stating: "We've got a plan to fight back against these radical right-wingers. We've hired skilled grass-roots organizers who are working with thousands of local volunteers to show Congress that ordinary Americans continue to support President Obama's agenda for change. And we're building new online tools to track events across the country and make sure MoveOn members turn out at each one."

Emanuel is also using intimidation to make the public believe that the stimulus spending is solving the unemployment problem. He orchestrated four letters to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer from four Cabinet secretaries threatening to cut off Arizona's federal funding because of Sen. Jon Kyl's, R-Ariz., criticism of the stimulus.

A letter to Emanuel from Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, described the threat, which Issa called "Chicago-style tactics." Issa wrote, "While this type of scare tactic may work in Chicago, it will not work to intimidate me or other members of the United States Congress."

Since Emanuel's "punch back" tactics are now becoming nationally known, it's no wonder Americans are apprehensive about the White House plan to build a database of citizens who oppose Obama's health care legislation. The database will be secret, but the fact that the White House is building it has leaked out.
On Aug. 3, Obama's media people posted on the White House website a notice complaining that "disinformation about health insurance reform" may be spread "via chain e-mails or through casual conversation." The word goes out to Obamaites: "Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help."

What kind of help is the White House requesting? The instruction to Obama devotees states: "If you get an e-mail or see something on the Web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

As Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said, "It is inevitable that the names, e-mail address, IP addresses and private speech of U.S. citizens will be reported to the White House" (where Emanuel is director-in-chief of Chicago-style retaliation and intimidation).

No doubt Emanuel knows that the White House is not covered by the Freedom of Information Act, which means he can keep the names on the database secret for political purposes and that the Presidential Records Act requires the White House to preserve its records without having to release them to the public for more than 10 years.

Late breaking news: Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., just announced that at her next town hall meeting, she will answer only selected written questions and not allow anyone to speak.
Obama on abortion: Unclear now, quite clear then
Exclusive: Jill Stanek highlights changing comments about coverage in health care plan

Obama on abortion: Unclear now, quite clear then

Posted: August 12, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009 

The White House unveiled its new Reality Check webpage Monday morning, attempting to realign facts in its favor about the proposed nationalized health care plan.


I noted on my blog that noticeably missing was any mention of the A-word, even though the topic has taken center stage in the national debate. Baptist Press picked up the story from there:


There is a reason behind the White House's refusal to label abortion coverage in health care reform as a rumor. ... "The bills President Obama is pushing in Congress could create the biggest expansion of abortion in America since Roe v. Wade," said Douglas Johnson, the National Right to Life Committee's legislative director. …. "The president is evading questions on the issue because he does not want to draw public attention to the sweeping pro-abortion provisions that are in the bills.

"Both Senate and House bills would, for example, create a nationwide federal insurance plan, the 'public option,' that would pay for all abortions," Johnson said. "Also, both bills would create a huge new program that would subsidize private plans that cover elective abortion.

"Unfortunately, much of the institutional news media is helping Obama hide these provisions," he said, "by disseminating unsophisticated and often flatly inaccurate descriptions of what the bills contain."


The Associated Press would be an exception, acknowledging Aug. 5:


Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.


In fact, the White House's silence on abortion on a webpage attempting to put out fires on all these other fronts – rationing, euthanasia, veterans, Medicare, small business and private insurance – is deafening.


Open your eyes to the ugliness inside the abortion industry with "Lime 5: Exploited by Choice"


But there was a time when Obama was quite clear about his intention to include abortion in taxpayer financed health care as well as force private insurance coverage.


On July 17, 2007, Obama was speaking to Planned Parenthood supporters, and Bryan Howard, CEO of Planned Parenthood Arizona, asked a question on health care (abortionspeak translation: "reproductive healthcare" means "abortion"):


Could you talk – give us some specifics about how reproductive health care … is going to fit into and be a part of primary care for women in your health care reform plans and how Planned Parenthood … will continue to be a part of the health care safety net for women and families across the country?


Obama responded quite clearly he planned for abortion not only to be part of taxpayer-funded health care but also forcibly covered by private insurers. He added he thought it "important" for the United States' largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, to be part of his plan (emphasis mine):


Well, look, in my mind reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care. And so it is at the center and at the heart of the plan that I propose. Essentially … we're gonna set up a public plan … that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services. We also will subsidize those who prefer to stay in the private insurance market – except the insurers are going to have to abide by the same rules in terms of providing comprehensive care, including reproductive care. ...

I just want to expand on the second part of your question which is the role that organizations like Planned Parenthood play.
I still believe that it is important for Planned Parenthood to be part of that system.


See the clip at YouTube.


Flash forward two years and Obama isn't quite so clear. In fact, he has equivocated so much recently that at one point he appeared to reverse himself altogether, implying abortion should not be part of nationalized health care (although press secretary Robert Gibbs quickly remuddied the waters).


On July 21, CBS's Katie Couric could not have asked Obama more directly: "Do you favor a government option that would cover abortions?"


Obama's response (emphasis mine):


You know, what I think is important at this stage is not trying to micromanage what benefits are covered. ... As you know, I'm pro-choice, but I think we also have a tradition in this town historically of not financing abortions as part of government, you know, funded health care. And rather than wade into the issue at this point, I think it is appropriate for us to figure out how to deliver on the cost savings and not get distracted on the abortion debate at this stage.


See the clip at at YouTube.


The reason Obama's new Reality Check website did not attempt to dispute that abortion is a part of Obama's health care plan is because it really is "at the center and at the heart of the plan," as he honestly stated only two years ago.

In other words, if abortion goes, the plan sinks. It's that important to Obama.




Obama's diversions no longer work
Ben Shapiro: President's usual tactics are ugly, stupid and ineffective




Always slothful

Rich Sabatini names just two federal programs that ever worked


Defy America? Obama will find out the "hard way"

Posted by thekeenobserver on Monday, August 10, 2009 11:12:08 PM

Here's a pertinent observation one might find interesting: Comparing government employees with workers in the private sector.
When the St. Anthony Bridge (I-35 West) collapsed in Minneapolis, killing 13 people, it had severed a major artery into Minneapolis


Experts feared that it would take at LEAST three years to rebuild at an astronomical cost.  When Governor Tim Pawlenty announced he wanted it

completed within 17 months, everyone scoffed at such improbability.
But Pawlenty had guessed incorrectly.

It took but 13 months to rebuild the bridge. And it came in UNDER budget. Why? The job was turned over to the private sector.


The team of FIGG Engineering, Flatiron Constructors, and Manson Construction, won the bids for the project and delivered a new bridge in an

unprecedented time frame.

But how? Pure motivation.
Construction began well before the final design was completed. Teams of contractors worked 12-hour shifts in brutal subzero temperatures. By shaving

off more than 12 weeks from the 17-month deadline, FIGG, Flatiron and Mason earned themselves hefty bonuses, which no doubt played a part in the

project's early completion.
Now let's shift our story to Boston- home to the infamous "Big Dig."
When excavation began in 1991, it was heralded as a jewel of engineering and vision. Then after years of cost overruns, delays, and myriad

construction-related problems, the most expensive highway project in U.S. history was finally completed, save for an array of nettlesome side projects.
One big source of its delay-- faulty bolts throughout. Tests showed more than 1,100 bolt assemblies in the 300 areas in each connector-tunnel were

unreliable. All had to be retrofitted-- flaws typical in EVERY government project.

Throughout its lengthy construction, the Big Dig was symbolic of government's incompetence - for its delays, faulty design, and horrid cost overruns.

And of course, when it comes to anything involving government, "competence"  becomes a foreign word.
The $14.6 billion Big Dig took 14 years to construct-- the most expensive highway project in U.S. history. And the Dig's overall cost exceeded double

the Panama Canal's price in today's dollars.
And can you guess why? Of course; 60 percent of the project's tab was federal-- meaning the "sloth factor" was involved--and nearly every American

taxpayer has felt the impact of the Big-Dig's price tag.
So what is this mysterious government "sloth" factor? Simple; it all boils down to one thing--motivation (or lack thereof )-- the essence behind all

human behavior.

Motivation is central to our nature: if one is not challenged to take things to a "higher level", a person will oftentimes slack off into mediocrity. And this

is the evil lesson of big government - it does nothing other than create a culture of worker-sloths (not the tree- hanging kind).

If there's a behavioral-political lesson to be gleaned from all this, it can be summed up in a nutshell- the basic reason why government programs never

work-- there is nothing to truly motivate anyone to do anything properly, except "hose the company."

Example: let’s use the dreaded state auto bureau registrar as your typical government sloth agency.

Let's say your job is to mail license plates, and it’s Friday at 2pm, and you're not interested in working any longer. What would happen if you just left

at 3:15, citing the excuse, "I'm not feeling too chipper". What would be the consequences? In all probability, nothing!

Example #2: let's say you work at a privately-owned UPS franchise store, and your job is to wrap and ship customer packages promptly. What if you

decided to walk out at 3:15 on a Friday, citing the same "I don't feel good" excuse? Would you...

a) be questioned by the manager.
b) be told by the mgr. "to tough it out" till closing
c) be threatened by the manager, saying he'll tell the owner "you left early"
d) be fired

Answer=All the above

Here's the salient point: without consequences there can be no rule - no order of any kind. And without order there can be no discipline. And without

discipline, there can be no accomplishment.

So analyze just about any government position. You just show up. You can be mediocre; you can slack off... watch the clock... do a crossword...surf

the net. Who cares? There's really no urgency to get anything done, because there are NO consequences, other than a murmur from your supervisor.

But the supervisor isn't the owner; the supervisor isn't the one PAYING you. It's the government, which is a faceless, paper-shuffling bureaucracy,

running on the taxpayer's time and money.

This is why big government has never been (and will never be) the answer to our nation's problems. Can anything positive ever be accomplished if

mediocrity is the norm, incompetence is tolerated, and excellence is non-existent?

There have been ONLY two greatly successful government programs in our modern history:

First-- the 1942 national transformation from peacetime to wartime economy. This was because Americans had the most powerful motivator of

all--survival; America was united under president Roosevelt. Factories ran 24/7. Inspired people worked 12-hour shifts. We out-produced our enemies

and won the war.

Second - In the 1960's, we achieved what seemed impossible at that time ...we landed on the moon, and safely returned our men. Once again our

nation was united under President Kennedy who had set one goal--win the space race over the Soviet Union.

Big-government Socialism all harkens back to the Marx-Engels concept -- The State vs. The Individual. The individual exists for the State.

Under socialism, everyone in effect, becomes "government employees"...either the sloths (workers)  and leeches (dependents), each being subservient

to the State. The same old Marxist theory: tax the rich to support the poor. Class distinction. Class envy. Remove all incentive; crush all entrepreneurs;

set income limits with the ceiling of taxation.

And in the blink of an historical eye, we are sudenly faced with the survival of our representative republic, and the most arrogant unconscionable gang of

socialists ever to ascend Capitol Hill.


But now - with the national emergency of socialism about to be foisted upon us -Americans are suddenly united in a fashion similar to the old days, 

like those of the 1960's during the space race with Russians, or like the befginning of 1942, when the entire nation came together to fight the tyranny

of the Axis.


The point is this: real Americans never take their freedom for granted; they will stop at nothing - be it a a one-hour drive to a townhall meeting, or

enlisting in the armed forces - to keep it; that's how much the so-called average American deeply loves his/her country,


But our upstart, phony Marxist anti-president - who's about as unpatriotic as they come -is about to find it out the hard way...an angry America will

follow this Socialist demagogue no longer.


Let Barack Obama return to whatever foreign place he came from. The man may be president of the United States, but he is not an American.





Questions for Health Care Townhall Meetings

The details of the latest health care plan don’t match the rhetoric of the Administration and Congress. And Americans are beginning to notice. Many of the

concerns expressed at some of the townhall meetings sweeping the country are legitimate and demand a response from our elected officials. Here are a few

simple questions constituents should think about asking their elected officials over the August recess:


·        Will I lose my current plan and doctor? The vast majority of Americans get their health insurance through their place of work. The Lewin Group estimates

that about 88.1 million people would lose their employer-based coverage if the House bill became law. Moreover, new regulations and mandates will likely

change existing coverage. Reps. Barney Frank (D- MA) and Janice Schakowsky (D-IL) along with Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman have all

admitted the public option will inevitably lead to government-run health care.

·        Can you promise that you and your family will enroll in the public plan? Recently, a House committee voted down a measure that would require lawmakers to

enroll in the same public health plan that nearly 104 million other Americans could be a part of. If the public plan isn’t good enough for our public servants, why
should it be thrust upon the rest of us?

·        Who’s going to pay for the plan? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius demands that health care reform has “Got to be paid for. And we all

have a shared responsibility that we all need to play a role.” Yet Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY)’s surtax plan falls disproportionately on families and small
businesses making more than $350,000 ($280,000 for individuals). His plan would levy an additional income tax of 1-5.4% on America’s high income earners.

·        Is taxing the rich for health care a responsible and effective plan? The top 20% of U.S. income earners currently pay almost 70% of all federal taxes, and more

than 86% of all income taxes. In fact, the bottom 40 percent of tax filers pay a net negative income tax rate (they receive money instead of paying out). High
earners already have a vast majority of the federal income tax burden, and the proposed tax hikes will badly damage the economy at a time when it cannot
absorb any new negative shocks. Increasing the tax burden on the wealthy would lead to larger future deficits. Hence, a surtax plan will unduly burden the
rich without benefiting the public’s fiscal or real-life health.
These questions are important, and details do matter. Americans should demand real solutions that put individuals and families in charge of their health care
dollars and decisions.


Key Provisions in House, Senate Bills

There has been much discussion lately about health care reform, and sometimes it can get quite complex and confusing. In hopes of simplifying

the major policy initiatives, The Heritage Foundation has highlighted key provisions in both the House and Senate bills, including the public plan,

the exchange, new federal regulations and employer mandates, Medicaid expansion, and new health care subsides.

A Federal Health Insurance Exchange Combined with a Public Plan: The House and Senate Bills
Micromanaging Americans' Health Insurance: The Impact of House and Senate Bills
Employer Health Care Mandates: Taxing Low-Income Workers to Pay for Health Care
Medicaid Expansion: The Impact of the House and Senate Health Bills
New Taxpayer Subsidies: The Impact of the House and Senate Health Bills

>> For more information about health care, visit FixHealthCarePolicy.com

The total cost of the Waxman-Markey global warming bill works out to an average of $2,979 annually from 2012-2035 for a household of four.

An Energy Tax in Disguise Cap and Trade Research




None dare call it

Exclusive: Joseph Farah to Americans:
Don't think serfdom can't happen here


None dare call it totalitarianism

Posted: August 12, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009 


I'm not going to make the case that America under Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress has become a totalitarian police state.

But, I will make the case that Washington is leading us in that direction.
What do you call it when the government asks its supporters to "snitch" on opponents of its policies?

What do you call it when the government wants to monitor broadcasts and establish itself as the guardian of "fairness" on the airwaves?

What do you call it when the government seeks to take over the private and personal health-care decisions of the people – establishing bureaucracies to make life-and-death decisions and banning unapproved transactions between doctors and patients?

What do you call it when the government hires and fires the top executives of major corporations and redirects their corporate policies?

What do you call it when government officials refuse to turn over documents necessary to establishing whether they are constitutionally eligible to hold office?

What do you call it when the government funds political extremist groups that have broken the law in successful efforts to empower leaders?

What do you call it when the government turns the Census, designed as a tool to ensure representative government, into a weapon designed to spy on the most personal aspects of the life of citizens?

What do you call it when the government becomes the sole arbiter of whether you can keep some of any of the wealth you accumulated legally?

What do you call it when the government ignores the laws of the land and replaces them with the arbitrary whims of men?

What do you call it when the government picks and chooses winners and losers in the business marketplace?

What do you call it when the government strikes fear into the hearts of the sovereign citizens it is supposed to serve?

What do you call it when the government metes out punishment not just for criminal actions, but for "criminal thoughts"?

What do you call it when honest and open expressions of dissent are characterized as the expressions of "angry mobs"?

What do you call it when government-created joblessness is used to promote policies of government control?

What do you call it when the government exceeds its authority under the Constitution and ignores any limits on its power?

I don't know about you, but I call those questions harbingers of totalitarianism.
That's where America is headed – maybe not today, tomorrow or next week, but soon, if this trend continues.

Everything for which America has stood for the last 230 years is under attack – not by angry mobs, not citizen lawlessness, not from threats by external enemies, but from those in charge of government.

A top-down revolution is under way – and far too many in the "watchdog media," the courts, the opposition party, the churches, the military, the local and state government and the citizenry are just standing around doing nothing, saying nothing.

That's how it begins. That's how it always begins.

Americans tend to think "it can't happen here." In truth, America's unique experiment with freedom has been brief. It not only can happen here, it
will happen here, unless the American public once again becomes vigilant about protecting liberty, unless it rediscovers the principles upon which this great nation was founded and unless it turns to God as its rightful and only king rather than submit to servitude by earthly masters.

It's really that simple.

Profound changes are under way. They are on fast-forward. Americans are being seduced into a serfdom and slavery.

The specter of totalitarianism hovers like a dark cloud dressed up in euphemisms that would make Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Mao Zedong proud.


Recognize what is on the horizon. Recognize what is around the corner. Recognize what is surely coming our way.

Pray that America is worthy of escaping, for a time, the fate of every previous empire in the history of the world.








WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Analyst: Obama just wrong on health plan 
Other nations 'absolutely do ration care at the end of life'





'No He Can't'
suddenly hot

Trinkets sticking it to Obama
become popular merchandise

--Washington Times








WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Hugo Chavez 'slamming door on broadcasters' 
'The message is that any criticism of his regime is going to be stamped out'
- Obama has to be envious, as this is coming for the USSA!






WorldNetDaily Exclusive

Numbers USA: Immigration reform 'callous' 
'In the middle of a jobs depression they think we need more foreign workers'







"It's free money!" said Alecia Rumph, 26, who waited in a Morris Park, Bronx, line 300 people deep for the cash to buy uniforms and book bags for her two kids.

"Thank God for Obama. He's looking out for us." - This is shamelessly BUYING VOTES, which is the name of the game for the Obamunists funded by Soros!






UN CLIMATE WARNING: 'WE HAVE 4 MONTHS TO SECURE FUTURE OF PLANET'... - This is PURE UNADULTERATED DRIVEL as attested to by over 31,000 scientists.  The truth is that we have less than that to save the country from the Communist environmental Nazis who have it by the jugular by ensuring the burial of Comrade Obama's cap&tax and death care bills!

Disaster plans leave disabled behind...









Lead Story

Little girl at Obama town hall has not-so-random political connections

By Michelle Malkin  •  August 11, 2009 10:17 PM


Scroll down for updates…

As we always like to point out: There are no coincidences in Obama world.

Via the Boston Globe: Surprise!


A girl from Malden asked President Obama a question at Tuesday’s town hall meeting in New Hampshire about the signs outside “saying mean things” about his health care proposal.

Eleven-year-old Julia Hall asked: “How do kids know what is true, and why do people want a new system that can — that help more of us?”

The question opened the door for the president to respond to what he called an “underlying fear” among the public “that people somehow won’t get the care they need.”

The girl later told the Globe that picking the president’s brain was “incredible.”

“It was like a once in a lifetime experience,” she said.

Julia’s mother was an early Obama supporter in Massachusetts during the presidential election, so she had previously met First Lady Michelle Obama, the Obama daughters Sasha and Malia, and Vice President Joe Biden.

“This was my first time meeting Barack Obama, and he’s a very nice man,” Julia said. “I’m glad I voted for him.”

She said Obama won a mock presidential election at the Cheverus School in 2008. And on Tuesday, he approached her after the town meeting.

“He said ‘great question,’” Julia said. “I shook his hand and got his picture.”

Kathleen Manning Hall, Julia’s mother, was shocked when her daughter said she wanted to ask a question. They wrote it down beforehand, and Julia didn’t miss a beat when Obama called on her.

“It was surreal,” said Manning Hall, a coordinator of Massachusetts Women for Obama during the election.


Tons of readers point to this AR15.com post tracking Hall’s political footprint, including this Facebook page and photo:

Manning Hall has donated thousands of dollars to Obama, as has her law firm.
But, you know, um, like Obama said: “I don’t want people saying I just have a bunch of plants in here.”
Oh, goodness. Of course not.

Now, look for Dems to play the kiddie human shield card to the hilt. Anyone who mentions Hall’s political pedigree will be attacked as a vicious meanie stalker. Graeme Frost redux!

Democrats now taking refuge at SEIU offices

August 12, 2009 08:54 AM by Michelle Malkin

Democrats now taking refuge at SEIU offices

By Michelle Malkin  •  August 12, 2009 08:54 AM


My syndicated column today recaps the thug history of the SEIU while Democrats continue to attack peaceful town hall protesters and Tea Party activists as “Brown Shirts.”

You’ll love this: Via Moe Lane, Democrat lawmakers are now running for cover and taking refuge inside SEIU offices:

Tim Bishop (D, NY-01) is having something called a “health care reform rally” on Thursday, at (of all things) SEIU’s Hicksville NY offices (1199 Duffy Ave, starts at 1 PM). This is otherwise known as “over twenty miles outside the borders of NY-01.” Bishop is of course one of the first Democrats holding down a Red district (NY-01 is a R+0) to discover that his constituents are paying attention to his votes: he rather famously canceled his future in-district meetings. Presumably he assumes that his constituents won’t drive twenty miles to complain.


When you can’t stand the heat, hide behind the Purple Shirts.








Palin Firestorm Brings Fresh Scrutiny to ObamaCare “Death Panels”


by LifeSiteNews.com


·        Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:15 EST



·        By Peter J. Smith


WASILLA, Alaska, August 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin ignited a firestorm over the weekend by calling the health-care reforms pushed by President Barack Obama "downright evil" for proposals that could usher in rationing, and turn federal health boards into "death panels" that would decide whether the elderly and the disabled, like her infant Down's syndrome son, Trig, were "worthy of health-care." Palin's provocative statements, however, have brought fresh scrutiny of the dangers of the proposed "Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission," if it were to adopt guidelines of a "Complete Lives System" advocated by Obama's policy advisor on health care reform, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel.


Many Americans have flocked to town-hall meetings to protest what they see as the imminent government-takeover of the health-care industry, which makes up one-sixth of the total American economy. But more and more Americans revolting at Congress's health-care reforms have expressed fears for the health-care of the elderly and disabled, whom they fear will be victims of rationing and even passive euthanasia by way of the "advance care planning consultation" provisions featured on pages 424 - 443 of HR 3200, "the American Affordable Health Choices Act."


"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil," said Palin communicating through her Facebook page, which has over 715,000 subscribers.


Although the White House and members of the mainstream media rushed to dismiss Palin's statement as "nuts," the threat of the government insurance plan becoming a "death panel" for the weakest members of society may not be far off the mark. ABC News recently reported that the Oregon Health Plan refused to cover cancer drugs that cost $4000 per a month for Barbara Wagner, a 64 year-old terminally ill patient with lung cancer. Instead they offered to give her a one-time prescription for lethal drugs to end her life, which would cost the state health provider only $50.


Palin attacked the promise of Congressional Democrats that the government plan would reduce the cost of health care, saying "as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost."


"Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion," concluded Palin.


But Palin pointed out the enormous danger for federal health boards becoming "death panels" through a policy of rationing, esp. by following the policy proposed by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an issue first raised by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) 


http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/Persons2/DrEzekielEmanuel.jpgEmanuel is a key advisor of Obama's health care reform as health-policy adviser at the White House's Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. A member of the National Institutes of Health's Clinical Bioethics Council and brother to Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, he advocates "The Complete Lives System," which as he described in a Jan. 31, 2009 article, "prioritizes younger people who have not yet lived a complete life."


Emanuel's approach has five principles which he lays out in "Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions" published on January 31, 2009: "youngest first, prognosis, save most lives, lottery, instrumental value."


"When the worst-off can benefit only slightly, while the better-off could benefit greatly, allocating to the better off is often justifiable," wrote Emanuel.


He continued that the CLS discrimination based on age is not "invidious discrimination" because "everyone who is 65 years now was once 25 years." But in the CLS, care would also be rationed away from young people with a "poor prognoses" because they lack "the potential to live a complete life." (Read here)


Emanuel has also stated that doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, and stated that "Savings [in the medical industry] will require changing how doctors think about their patients" in a 2008 article written for the Journal of the American Medical Association. In a separate 1996 article for the Hastings Center Report, Emanuel spoke about rationing care away from those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens" to the non-disabled, adding "An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."


Approximately 33 percent of medical spending occurs in the final year of a patient's life, and throughout the legislation (HR 3200), enormous pressures are put upon on physicians and medical professionals to incentivize them to cut costs.

While Emanuel’s approach, as published in the Lancet, is a theoretical approach to rationing, a practical concern is raised when one considers that either private insurers or the public option could integrate CLS into their rationing practices, if they are included among treatment protocols developed and promoted through the proposed Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research and the Commission that oversees its work (sec. 1401 of HR 3200), under the Executive Branch.


The Center’s duties would be “to conduct, support, and synthesize research … with respect to the outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care services and procedures in order to identify the manner in which diseases, disorders, and other health conditions can most effectively and appropriately be prevented, diagnosed, treated, and managed clinically.”


Opponents, especially at tumultuous town-halls, have expressed fears that current provisions in the bill for government-run health-care could lead to doctors thinking of the bottom line first, could end up pressuring patients through "advanced care planning consultations" (sec. 1233) into accepting lower-quality care or care they do not want, out of a feeling that they pose some kind of burden on their families or society. Under that section in the version under discussion by the House Ways and Means Committee, doctors would formulate with patients end-of-life orders, regarding their desire to continue or discontinue antibiotic treatments or nutrition and hydration under particular circumstances.


Read H.R. 3200 "American Affordable Choices Act


Read more on Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel in New York Post "Deadly Doctors"


Read Ezekiel Emanuel's article on Complete Lives System

Read related coverage by LifeSiteNews.com:


Communities Organize Against Health Care, While Professional Protestors Organize at White House Behest 


Obama Healthcare Reform Bound to Include "Largest Expansion of Abortion Since Roe v. Wade": NRLC, Chris Smith 


Proposed Health Care Bill is an "Abortion Industry Bailout" Warns Congressman








Obama Sells Health Care “Public Option” with Bankrupt Post Office Analogy


by LifeSiteNews.com


·        Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:15 EST 



·        By Peter J. Smith


PORTSMOUTH, New Hampshire, August 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - President Barack Obama reassured Americans gathered at a town-hall style gathering in New Hampshire on Tuesday that a public-option in health care would not lead to the death of private insurance and rationing by telling them that private mail carriers, like UPS and Fed-Ex, have done just fine against the US Post Office. But comparing the government plan to a bankrupt postal service may not help a President who just slipped today under 50 percent approval in one poll.


http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/2009f/ObamaPortsmouth.jpg"If you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems," Obama told a questioner, who expressed concern that the public option would run private insurers out of business. Obama said that the public option would have to pay for itself and not through tax-increases leveled on the middle-class.


However, the US Post Office is having serious problems lately and that analogy could raise alarms about the future of government run health-care. The Post Office, which does not raise revenue through taxes, faces a $7 billion loss for this fiscal year, and is slated to close approximately 700 or more offices across the country.


"If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan," said Obama. "You will not be waiting in any lines, this is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance."


"Insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people for the simple crime of being sick," said Obama, who warned that 14,000 people a day would continue to lose health coverage without action. Obama stated a public option would keep insurance providers "honest."


But one man complained that with Medicaid, "I'm dealing with the same thing that the insurance companies are giving me." His doctor had prescribed him Lipitor for years, but when Medicaid got involved, they refused to pay for it, and would only pay for it after he was forced to try two other drugs. Obama responded that he assumed Medicaid was trying to put him on generic drug, because "there may be nine out of ten cases where the generic will work just as well as the brand name."


Another questioner asked how the government can avoid rationing care by adding 50 million uninsured, when the supply of doctors and nurses will remain the same.


"My concern is for where are we going to get the doctors and nurses to cover this," she stated, adding that she knows doctors who are changing to administrative positions because of their caseload. She also stated that she was worried that a "Federal health board will sit in judgment over medical procedures."


Obama corrected her by saying the government estimates 47 million are uninsured, but realistically only approximately 38 million will actually get covered. Obama insisted that "expert health panels" would provide guidelines about what procedures work best, and that would lead to higher quality of care.


"Higher quality care costs less," he responded. "We are paying six thousand dollars more than any other country."


As to the shortages of nurses and doctors, Obama had no solutions except to change reimbursement rates and assistance in medical education to encourage more primary care physicians and nurses.


Compared with other town hall meetings, the Obama event at the Portsmouth high school looked more like a Potemkin-village with an overwhelmingly friendly crowd clapping vigorously and chanting shouts of "Yes We Can."  Elsewhere today Democratic Senators Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) were facing a grilling peppered with boos, jeers, and difficult questions from massive turnouts of informed voters demanding answers, and reading aloud sections of the legislation that supported their concerns.


Specter faced 300 people in Lebanon, Pennsylvania at a packed community college auditorium with hundreds more rallied outside. The Senator responded to 30 questions, with only one of them in favor of the health-care reform.


"It's not about left and right. This is about the systematic dismantling of this country. I am only 35 years old, I have never been interested in politics you have awakened the sleeping giant," said one Pennsylvania woman. "We are tired of this, this is why everybody in this room is so ticked off. I don't want this country turning into Russia or a socialized country. My question for you is, what are you going to do to restore this country back to what our founders created according to the Constitution."


The crowd erupted in a standing ovation. Questioner number eight, thanked Sen. Specter for representing the Republicans who sent him to Congress, which elicited laughter from the crowd, as Specter had abandoned the Republicans to caucus with the Democratic majority in the Senate. The questioner demanded to know how government could be trusted when Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the Post Office face bankruptcy.


"You are taking our kids future, and driving it right into the toilet. We cannot afford this. Period. Keep the government out of it. We are doing just fine."


Rasmussen's daily presidential tracking poll shows that President Obama has a 50 percent disapproval rating, with only 49 percent approving at least somewhat. Rasmussen also shows that 51 percent also fear the federal government more than private health insurance companies.








Catholic Charities Refuses to Oppose Obama Health Care Bill


by LifeSiteNews.com


·        Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:15 EST 



·        Commentary by Kathleen Gilbert


http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/Staff/KathleenGilbert.jpgWASHINGTON, D.C., August 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As Catholic groups issue conflicting statements on whether to join the push for health care reform, the answers to once-simple questions may appear to be growing increasingly muddled: what is the pro-life Catholic response to President Obama's push for a health care overhaul?  And can we acknowledge a need for reform while actively opposing a plan that, by promoting abortion and other troublesome aspects, threatens to undermine the very essence of health care?


The Catholic organizations that have joined this recent push for "health care reform" - without actually opposing the current abortion-promoting bills - have replied to dismayed pro-lifers by only pledging not to specifically support legislation that promotes or provides for abortion. 


Pro-life Catholic leaders have argued that, while endorsing good health care is central to Catholic social teaching, Catholics responding to the debate ought to give priority to guarding against the current legislation's explicit expansion of abortion - as well as its potential to promote other evils such as contraception, sterilization, euthanasia, and health care rationing. 


And because Congress has already rejected dozens of pro-life amendments, pro-life critics argue: by failing to explicitly oppose the vast dangers of the current bill, groups such as Catholic Charities USA and the Catholic Health Association may end up pushing health reform at the expense of unborn lives.


Pope Benedict XVI addressed the crux of the matter in his July encyclical Caritas in Veritate ("Charity in Truth"), where he pointed out that any attempt at social progress is undermined without openness to life.


"When a society moves towards the denial or suppression of life, it ends up no longer finding the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man's true good," he wrote.  "If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of a new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away."


http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/Logos/USCCB.jpgIn keeping with the Pope's call for life-centered reform, the USCCB Pro-Life Office has also expressed eagerness for genuine health care reform, but hit hard against the current bills for their mandated abortion coverage and funding.  Bishops William Murphy and Cardinal Rigali issued letters to lawmakers in recent weeks with strong warnings against the danger of abortion expansion in the bills. 


"One thing is certain," wrote Pro-Life Office Executive Director Tom Grenchik last week.  "The bills approved so far by House and Senate committees include mandated abortion coverage and abortion funding, and that is a line we can never cross." 


The USCCB's action alert encouraged Catholics to tell legislators that any bill "must exclude mandated coverage for abortion." 


In contrast, a Catholic Charities USA joint action alert that called for Catholics to push for health care reform "immediately" included no mention of the danger to the unborn embedded in the current bills.  LifeSiteNews.com reported that, while the group did not specifically support Obama's legislation, the sudden call to action reinforced the simultaneous White House pressure on lawmakers to pass the bills.


Catholic Charities then issued a statement against "inaccurate media reports," and asserted that it "unequivocally" does not support legislation failing to uphold the sanctity of human life.  It also states that it "will continue to work with the Catholic Health Association and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to ensure that any health care reform legislation will not include such provisions." 


However, multiple attempts at amending the bill in committee to protect against abortion expansion have all failed, while an amendment sponsored by pro-abortion Rep. Lois Capps explicitly opening the public plan to abortion was accepted.  

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/Logos/CathCharitiesUSA.jpgWhen LifeSiteNews.com sought clarification from the groups on whether they opposed Obama's health care legislation, only Catholic Charities USA responded to LSN's calls.  In a telephone interview today, CCUSA spokesman Roger Conner steadfastly refused to explicitly state that his organization would oppose the Obama legislation. Conner also would not agree that health care reform should wait until the Obama legislation was amended or struck down. The complete text  of the interview is available on LifeSiteNews.


Evidence from a LifeSiteNews.com investigation points to CCUSA playing a central role in gathering support among Catholic organizations for immediate health care reform, despite the current bill's abortion mandate and other problems.  St. Vincent de Paul Society Executive Director Roger Playwin told LSN last week that Catholic Charities told him that the claim that the current bills include a mandate for abortion coverage was "inaccurate." 


A follow-up statement disavowing "any legislation, provision or amendment that fails to uphold the sanctity and dignity of life," similar to that of CCUSA, was also issued by the Catholic Health Association as they push for health care reform. 


http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/images/Persons2/SrCarolKeehan.jpgCHA president Sister Carol Keehan said the group has "written letters to members of Congress and the White House - often in conjunction with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops - calling for legislation that does not include an expansion of abortion," and that it "continues to work to ensure that public policies reflect the importance of religious freedom and conscience clause protections in the delivery of health and social services."


Yet CHA has already thrown its weight behind Obama's plans for health care legislation. 


In a visit to the White House on July 8, Keehan represented CHA among a group of hospital associations committing $155 billion in Medicare and Medicaid savings over several years to help cover the cost of the pro-abortion president's health care reform.


The Obama administration has also recently shown favor towards Catholic Charities: on July 20, CCUSA annonced that the administration granted the group its first-ever federal grant to the tune of $100 million, for the purpose of aid relief.  in February, President Obama appointed CCUSA president Fr. Larry Snyder as among the first to join the newly-formed Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.


American Life League president Judie Brown said that her position in the debate over health care reform, as a pro-life Catholic, was simple.


"They can make all the nuanced statements they want about health care reform," said Brown, "but the two questions I have for them are: number one, why, all of a sudden, is it required that the Catholic Church succumb to the federal government and support national health care reform? That is not the only answer."


"And secondly," she continued, "no Catholic entity, including the USCCB, should be doing anything but requiring and demanding that any health care reform proposal considered by the federal government have a total ban on abortion, euthanasia, health care rationing, sterilization, and birth control. That's all Catholics should be doing."