Wednesday, August 12, 2009

TOWN HALL MEETINGS BRING OUT THE NUT JOBS


I don't get it. One is a madman who orchestrated mass genocide on the Jews, and aspired towards world domination. The other is a man who wants to make sure everyone in America can afford to go the doctor without declaring bankruptcy. Could it be that you have drank the kool-aid and actually believe the scare tactics of an Obama death panel, a modern day Hitler T4 program (see the destruction of lives unworthy of life). Preposterous. It's preposterous to think the Obama administration is seeking a modern day genocide of the elderly through "mercy deaths." And equally preposterous that our government actually values the almighty dollar over human life.

Also strange is the caption "I've changed"...it's not like his desire to change our broken healthcare system wasn't a major focus in every single stump speech he delivered for over a full calendar year....so how has he changed? It is estimated that over 38 million Americans have no health insurance, a minimum of 9 million of those being children. So how can you not want to find an afforable program to cover them?

6 comments:

Papa Giorgio, M.A.T.S. said...

.

I agree... somewhat. I think all depictions of mass murderers hurts the message more than it helps. On both sides. However, national socialism was a dream that is identical to socialism. it is a "cradle to grave" mentality. Just as in Sweden, Canada, and Britain... the elderly are ignored by the health care system and no care is provided (bringing death sooner) or euthanized:

Surprisingly, Dr. Fenigsen agrees with these optimists that the Dutch are not on a
slippery slope, but for a different reason. "Dutch doctors who practice euthanasia
are not on a slope. From the very beginning they have been at the bottom." This
is because in his research he has found "involuntary euthanasia…is rampant."
He found that "a staggering 62% of all newborns' and infants' deaths resulted
from 'medical decisions,'" and that in 1995 alone there were 900 lethal injections
given to patients who had not requested euthanasia. [4] Among that group, an
amazing189 were fully competent and could have been consulted about their
consent but were not. He concludes that "those who contend that it is possible to
accept and practice ‘voluntary’ euthanasia and not allow involuntary totally
disregard the Dutch reality.”


http://www.thefishersofmenministries.com/Ethics-The%20Dutch%20Legalization%20Euthanasia.pdf

The PC politics of Canada will pay for with tax-payer money for sex-change operations but not for simple bladder infections in the elderly and they end up pissing into a bag the rest of their life because they only allow four procedures a year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXZaTXDu3Os

http://religiopoliticaltalk.blogspot.com/2007/07/conversation-from-break-room-part-1.html

In Holland the elderly are afraid to go to the hospitals. They will be soon enough if ObamaCare passes. Can you tell me one country where socialized medicine doesn't frighten the elderly? Germany did the same with their socialized medicine. Abortion and euthanasia was legalized, killing rats inhumanly was made illegal. Soon you will see pot legalized in California, and cigarettes and hamburgers made illegal. Crazy if you ask me... scary as well.

.

Papa Giorgio, M.A.T.S. said...

.

AP:
Senators exclude end-of-life provision from bill
WASHINGTON – Key senators are excluding a provision on end-of-life care from health overhaul legislation after language in a House bill caused a furor.

Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly.

A health care bill passed by three House committees allows Medicare to reimburse doctors for voluntary counseling sessions about end-of-life decisions. But critics have claimed the provision could lead to death panels and euthanasia for seniors.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kim said...

Very interesting comments. I watched a C-Span town hall meeting from Iowa conducted by Grassley, and he seemed to be fumbling mentally (and verbally as well). He is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Papa Giorgio, M.A.T.S. said...

.

And the point is this... there are panels to discuss what benefits the persons get in the health-care system. In Canada the wait isn't just "wallah" -- 6-months to get an MRI if your physician suspects brain cancer, after you waited 4-months to see your specialist. There are committees of people (politicians) saying that resources are scarce and x-y-z must happen to spread out the burden.

In Oregon (or Washington?) a woman is given pills for ending her life rather than the new chemo drug that is promising. Is there a panel of people that dictate which cancer drug is paid for or not Kimba? Do you want to move these decisions into a bureaucrat area/field... really Kimba -- honestly now. You trust Nancy Pelosi Dick Army (or whomever) to make wise medical choices for YOU? Honestly.

I love Michael Steele, I hope Palin runs. Do I trust them with decisions about my Multiple Sclerosis and what care I need? Hell No!

Watch this Kimba... do you think that some political panel decided this action?

http://www.katu.com/news/26119539.html

.

Kim said...

Whether a government panel, or insurance company panel, decisions will be made...decisions are being made over instances such as this. You throw out names that fortunately will not be a part of this process. This is not about mandating who will control your health care. It is about giving you one more viable option, at least that is how I want the one package that will eventually come together down the road. No matter who sits on the panel, the panel will exist, and the elephant in the room will be the almighty American dollar. Is it time to offer a not for profit, single payer health care option?

The insurance company is out of control. The banking community is out of control. Financial institutions gave us a pretty good beat down recently. Does this mean ratcheting up governmental oversight? I can't see a scenario where leaving them to their own accord any longer results in a bright future. Free markets is a great idea...if you are a third year economics major, but this is real life and greed kills.

You also touched on a tremendous problem in our country....the critical lack of health care professionals, nurses and doctors especially. If we are to answer to the needs of our vast country, I foresee an explosion of Physician assistants answering the call, supervised by one or two full pledged doctors. It is inevitable. From what I have seen, 80% of all people going to the doctor is for benign, routine maladies (flu, allergies, etc.). Unfortunately for the health insurance deprived, they have no choice by go to an emergency room who cannot turn them away.

Papa Giorgio, M.A.T.S. said...

.

But you can choose which insurance you want right now. There is a part of "ObamaCare" that makes having government care mandatory, and limits your choosing. You can choose catastrophic care if one desires, or no insurance at all. Not with the Democrat plans.

So this is the point. You can choose what "panels" you will accept. Hand it over to goverment, no more choice of which panel... you bow have to be a number at the DMV and hope a new drug doesn't come out that may be better than the one approved a decade prior. I will pass on the Pelosi/Army panel, thanks.

.