Universal Health Care - Obama Intends to Get It Done

Obama intends to get it done, no matter what he has to do, no matter what he has to say. He intends to get it done. Universal health care - socialized health care.

Here’s the tactics he uses to sway the people.

He speaks in generalities so that the public projects whatever they desire onto what he said. They interpret what he means through their own desires. He speaks in generalities so that no one can take issue with him and he can say that he didn’t say “that”.

He says what he really means to his left wing, liberal and progressive special interest groups to secure their vote and enlist their help and support. He’s at home with them and speaks the truth among friends. When speaking to the general population on the same issue, he waters down his ideas and makes them acceptable to everyone, but keeps his agenda. He brings the general public along gradually, or so he thinks.

He blames everything on the previous adminsitration and paints himself as just arriving and hands clean, all the while working furiously to strong arm everyone into compliance with his agenda. Mr. Clean does his dirty work behind closed doors.

When speaking to the American public, he drops his Ivy League speech patterns and gets down to the level of the common man. Many people fall for that one. They believe he’s one of them and they trust him. He is not your average Joe (No pun intended. Apologies to Joe the Plumber.) He lives among the rich, like the rich because he is rich. Read Michelle Malkin’s new book, Cultur of Corruption. One chapter explains all the ways Michelle Obama made hundreds of thousands of dollars every year after her husband was elected to the Illinois Senate and then more so after he became U.S. Senator from Illinois.

To ensure that his listeners trust him, he evokes their sympathy by telling a heart-wrenching story about his mother or grandmother dying. People are supposed to melt and agree with him. Once he’s back at the White House, it’s business as usual - hard line progressive, socialist or whatever category it falls into. But it’s not what the freedom-loving Americans want.
When asked about his previous controversial statements, he claims he is being taken “out of context.” However, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

A particularly disgusting tactic Obama uses routinely is to attack, mock and denigrate anyone and everyone who disagrees with or opposes him. But, when the shoe is on the other foot and he’s being mocked, Obama is indignant. How dare they?

A tactic that is particularly deceptive, but not exclusively Obamas’ is that of not calling a spade “a spade.” The killing of a living human baby in its mother’s womb is not called murder, it’s called “abortion” because that is less repugnant. The “death panels” in the health care plan are not called “death panels” because that is highly objectionable. They are there, but they are given paragraphs of soothing descriptions rather than a name that sums up what they will do. There will be lots of government appointed agencies that decide how to spend the allocated funds for health care. They will have mandates and restrictions. When money is tight, they will figure out that it is better, in their minds, to spend the money on younger, more productive people than on older retirees, the infirmed and the end of life’ers. People will decide to allow some folks to die rather than spend a lot of money on their treatment. As Obama said to a woman asking about care for the elderly, it might be better to give her mother a pain pill rather than surgery. That decision should be left to each individual, not a government appointed stranger in another state. This cannot be called “freedom” by anyone’s definition.

Lastly, Obama says one thing and does the opposite.

He may have been forced to back off for now, but don’t let your guard down. He intends to get it done. He may tack parts of universal health care on the backs of other bills that have nothing to do with health care. It may be passed in the middle of the night with little media coverage.

Don’t stop attending town hall meetings. If Obama himself comes to your town, try to go and ask him about his statements in the video presented here. Don’t accept the answer that he was taken out of context. He was not. He’s said it too often in different places. Ask him where HIS health care plan is. (He doesn’t have one.) Ask him when his discussion panel was ever on C-SPAN for the American people to watch. Ask him when any of his bills, cap and trade, bail-outs, buying General Motors, and now health care, was ever open and transparent. Ask him to list all the things that are MANDATORY in Congress’s health care plan and what the penalties are.

This man has lied to get elected, lies to get his agenda passed and lies when he’s asked about anything controversial. There is no reason to trust him now. He is saying whatever he has to say to get his agenda passed. Know this – he intends to get it done, despite the American public.

Obama's Health Care Advisor: Dr. Death

Just a thought. Many of these agencies and offices will be staffed by political appointees. What if ACORN, radicals, SEIU, and Chicago politicos (read that “thugs”) are appointed to run these powerful agencies? What if these positions are held by members of Jeremiah Wright’s America-hating, white-hating church? What if these positions are held by radical professors like Bill Ayers or Henry Louis Gates, both close friends of Obama?

Would you be comfortable if a powerful health care office was held by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm Emmanuel – Obama’s Chief of Staff, who has used strong tactics to force others to fall in line with Obama’s objectives? Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel has written the following:

“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” Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of Obama’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel (Lancet, Jan. 31).

Think it could never happen? Think it’s not likely? Think again!

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel has already been appointed by this administration to two KEY POSITIONS: Health Policy advisor at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

The “comparative effectiveness research” position has me worried. Is he researching how the government would decide whose treatment is cost effective and whose is not? Is he researching which treatments get the best bang for the buck? Will his research determine whether or not a citizen can have new cutting-edge treatments or drugs before they are backed up with years of success, but hold promise for those with few options?

“Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. “Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change,” he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, “as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others” (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

Emanuel, however, believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ‘96).” http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm Read the full article above for more details about Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel.

What if these kind of people have the power to decide who gets what kind of health care and who doesn’t? IT IS HIGHLY LIKELY, IF NOT CERTAIN, THAT THEY WILL!

Do some internet research on the radical, dangerous doctor of death, Ezekiel Emanuel. He and Dr. Kovorkian could be BFF’s.

Visit http://www.muckety.com/Ezekiel-Emanuel/103185.muckety to see his relationships with people and organizations and universities. He was a member of the Clinton Health Care Task Force that was killed in the 90’s. Nothing new here, like Obama promised.

To learn more about the possible effects of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel’s influence on the proposed health care reform laws read his won writings in his book, The End of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity, Printed in the United States of America Second printing, 1994 First Harvard University Press. I found his book on Amazon.com and Google Books, where I took some excerpts that we all should be aware of. They follow.

The End of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity, by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Excerpts -
(on Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Ends-Human-Life-Medical-Liberal/dp/0674253264#reader)

Page 8

In Chapter 6 I will sketch a model showing how the liberal communitarian vision might be practically implemented in the area of medical care. This model proposes thousands of community health programs (CHPs). Each individual would be given a voucher and permitted to join a CHP. Through democratic deliberations of its members, the CHP would have to define its own conception of the good life and the resultant particular health care policies. For example, a CHP would have to delineate which medical services it would pay for and which services would be left to individual payment. By considering historical precedents and accepted traditions, I will show that this model is both politically practical and justifiable.

Page 212

In Chapters 3 and 4 I suggested that by appealing to specific conceptions of the good life, it would be possible to create a framework for addressing these medical ethical issues. And within the liberal communitarian vision, CHPs are granted the financial resources and political authority to deliberate on and formulate policies over the whole range of medical ethical issues by appeal to particular conceptions of the good life. For instance, we might imagine a CHP with members committed to the relational conception of the good life. This CHP would then consider what type of specific policies to have for terminating medical care and allocating resources by appeal to this conception. The members might agree to have a strict age limit, say 72, for the provision of medical services. Those under this age would receive all medically necessary treatments, but those 72 or over would not receive hospital admissions and the provision of all acute medical services, except inexpensive ones such as antibiotics. Conversely, there would be extensive home nursing and social services and devices to assist in daily living for those over 72. All patients in a persistent vegetative state would be denied all forms of medical treatments; primitive and receptive patients (see Table 3.1) might receive nursing care, while interactive patients would be eligible for acute medical services. The CHP might also contribute to a fund for research into new devices to assist the handicapped and might offer to test such devices for companies.

Reading excerpts from this book on Google books at http://books.google.com/books?id=jfSlJWNeuK4C&dq=Ezekiel++Emanuel+%2B+the+Ends+of+Human+Life&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=IK3YL2sqRS&sig=jkEKTUu3qEVjCZW2MYC1xUhZq68&hl=en&ei=FUOEStSZLc-Stgeb_PWuCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Page 102

While many people have no insurance and are not receiving needed medical care, many others are receiving extremely “high technology” interventions which, in the opinion of many, have questionable benefits. Consider some interventions: Recently attempts to save very small infants, those weighing less than 750 grams (less than 1 pound 10 oz.), with neonatal intensive care interventions have resulted in the fact that “60 to 80 percent of infants died during the initial hospitalization, and the developmental outcome reflects a handicap rate approaching one third of all survivors.” Yet for infants between 500 and 999 grams, the cost per surviving child was in excess of $100,000 in 1978 dollars.” A similar phenomenon is occurring with AIDS patients for whom there is no cure, or prospects for a cure, only palliative treatments of secondary infections and tumors. On average, AIDS patients will consume approximately $50,000 in medical care services from the time of diagnosis to death. The Public Health Service estimates that in 1991 medical care for AIDS patients will cost between $10 billion and $25 billion, accounting for 1.2 to 2.4 percent of the total U.S. health care budget, for fewer than 0.1 percent of the population.”

And the future appears worse. Costs continue to rise, nearly 10 percent per year. Many complain that health care costs are an important factor in compromising American industrial competitiveness….

His writings discuss policy making and he’s been appointed “Health Policy Advisor” at the OMB. His writings deal with cost effectiveness of treatment to the elderly, newborn infants of different birth weights, AIDS patients, etc. and he’s been appointed to the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. Obama chose this doctor whose opinions seem to be putting a price tag on people and deciding if they are worth saving.

Help spread the word before Obama and the Democrats ram this through in September. Do your own research so that you can speak intelligently on this subject.

HILLARY DEMANDS INDIA DO MORE THAN U.S.

Hillary Clinton, as Sec. of State representing the U.S., went to India last week and said the following:

“Yesterday’s bombings in Jakarta, Indonesia, provide a painful reminder that the threat of such violent extremism is still very real. It is global. It is ruthless. It is nihilistic and it must be stopped,” she said.

“We have a great sense of solidarity and sympathy, having gone through what we did on 9/11,” she added.

Her voice rising, Clinton insisted that the U.S. demand for international action against terrorist should not be taken lightly.

“We know how important (it is). We are fighting wars to end the threat of terrorism against us, our friends and allies around the world.”

She said India can choose its own way of contributing but must be part of a broader effort to defeat the threat.

“We expect everyone” who shares the U.S. goal of a more stable world “to take strong action to prevent terrorism from taking root on their soil and making sure that terrorists are not trained and deployed” from their territory to carry out attacks elsewhere, she added.”

Just exactly what is the current Obama administration doing to prevent terrorism from taking root here on American soil? Exactly what strong action is Obama taking to make sure that terrorists are not trained and deployed to carry out their attacks right here in the U.S.?

All I can find is that Obama is releasing them, ordering that they be read the Miranda rights of American citizens (which they are not entitled to because they are not U.S. citizens and have not paid taxes for any privileges here), is closing Gitmo as soon as he finds a place to release the terrorists to, is giving some of them trials in U.S. courts which requires their lawyers be given secret information and they can’t be convicted because the crime scene was not processed at the time of their arrest (battle field in war), apologizing around the world for America’s wrong-doing, giving fuel to terrorist recruitment groups, releasing photos and documents of U.S. military torturing terrorists (true or not), cozying up to dictators and America-hating leaders, reducing the military budget while giving trillions to everything else, befriending Muslim activists and supporters of Islam – the very religion that attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, doing nothing about Khalifah Conferences in American cities (which recruit activists/terrorists), doing nothing about Muslim schools brainwashing generations of children to hate America and Israel.

The Obama administration is allowing – even making easy, terrorist recruiting, training and funding in this country.

What has Hillary Clinton said to Obama regarding this hypocrosy? What is she doing in America to comply with her demands of India? Nothing that I can find!

And let’s not forget that while Hillary is in India saying, We are fighting wars to end the threat of terrorism…” , Obama changed the name “War on Terrorism” to “Overseas Contingency Operation!!!!!!!!!” How absurd!!!!!

It’s “do as I say, not as I do.” It’s talk for the cameras and sound-bytes, not for U.S. policy and actions. Remember these things when it’s time to vote again. Throw out the double-talkers and deceivers. Put America on the right track.