New Romney-Ryan Ads

A new ad from the Romney-Ryan campaign takes the Democrats' Medicare attacks on Paul Ryan head on. Watch the video below:

Video:  New Romney Ad: Obama Cut Medicare to Pay for Obamacare

"You paid into Medicare for years," the voiceover says. "Every paycheck. Now when you need it, Obama has cut $716 billion from Medicare. Why? To pay for ObamaCare. So now the money you paid for your guaranteed health care is going to a massive new government program that's not for you."

And Remember:  Nobody 55 or older will be affected by any Medicare changes made, but the program will be bankrupt by 2024 for people younger if nothing is done or changed!  Ryan’s plan will save the program for those under 55-years of age.

The campaign plans a large buy with this ad in important swing state media markets.

  Video: America Deserves Better

President Obama cannot run on his record, so he is committed to tearing down Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Obama’s campaign tried to use the tragedy of a woman's death for political gain. Then, Obama’s top campaign aides were caught lying about it. Doesn't America deserve better than a president who will do and say anything to stay in power, regardless of the truth?

Romney-Ryan: America’s New Dream Team and a Clear Choice – Updated

Technorati Tags: Romney-Ryan,Romney ads,Medicare,ObamaCare,Election 2012,2012 Election,America's Come Back Team,videos

DNC Chair Gets Blitzed By Wolf On False Medicare Attacks

Video: DNC Chair Gets Blitzed By Wolf On False Medicare Attacks

On "Situation Room" DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has no answers to Wolf Blitzer's questions on Medicare attacks (August 13, 2012).

Video: Paul Ryan debates Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Social Security Reform

In this clip from CNN, Paul Ryan attempts to have an adult level conversation with Congresswoman Schultz. And unfortunately fails, through no fault of his own.

Video: Ryan eviscerates Obama on Obamacare in 6 minutes

FACT:  NOBODY 55 OR OLDER WILL BE AFFECTED BY ANY MEDICARE CHANGES AND WITHOUT REFORM MEDICARE WILL BE BANKRUPT BY 2024 FOR EVERYONE… THE ROMNEY-RYAN TICKET WILL SAVE THE PROGRAM!!

Usually, when one lies their nose really grows. Debbie "Washermouthout" Schultz is one big tub of lies. 

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz | Representing the ...

Official site for U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz from Florida's 20th district, Democratic party -  wassermanschultz.house.gov/

Related:

Video:  Mr.L re: Liar Debbie Wasserman Schultz gets appointed to DNC Chair

The Return to Mediscare

Romney-Ryan: America’s New Dream Team and a Clear Choice

Technorati Tags: Debbie Wasserman Schultz,DNC Chair,Wolf Blitzer,CNN,Medicare lies,Mediscare,Progressives,ObamaCare,Paul Ryan,Paul Ryan eviscerates Obama on ObamaCare,DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz,Situation Room,Washermouthout,Progressive lies,Team Obama,media spin

KISSING OBAMACARE GOODBYE - Part 2: The State Battlefield

Video: The Black Eyed Peas - Let's Get It Started

KISSING OBAMACARE GOODBYE - Part 2: The State Battlefield

By: AJ - Hat Tip: MJ

We are going to end Obamacare at the state level by using the KISS principle - Keep It Simple, Stupid, so let’s get it started!

Using simplicity and common sense, we Americans can take this into our own hands and do what we need to do to prove that Obamacare is irrelevant and unnecessary at the state level. All we need is a simple solution, which this article provides, and one state that will pursue this by doing a little homework.

Let me start by telling you what this is NOT… this solution is not reliant on the politicians who foisted this upon us or the spineless politicians doing nothing to end it. It is not dependent upon repeal, courts, nullification, state-wide voting, Constitutional amendments, petitions or polls.

Now let me tell you what this is… it is about picking one or more states that will do some simple homework to prove beyond doubt that the Obamacare law is not applicable in their state. If we do this, we can proactively take control of the narrative to announce that Obamacare is irrelevant because the state is already compliant.

BACKGROUND:

First, Obama and his comrades established that the fundamental basis of Obamacare is to ensure that everyone has healthcare. They claimed that 12 to 30 million people are going without healthcare and these people have a right to it. Has anyone challenged this with actual data that shows who these people really are? Read on and you will find out.

Second, Obama and his comrades claim that the 12 to 30 million phantom people are our poor and disadvantaged. This enables a powerful narrative that the media and left-wing talking heads can push onto the uninformed and ignorant 26% who support Obamacare. Is anyone challenging this narrative with actual truth? Not yet. That’s why, when we convey facts and even show sections of the actual legislation to uninformed people, their bottom line response is, “Well I think everyone should have healthcare”. Again, the false narrative wins the day, the uninformed remain ignorant and they actually believe that these phantom people who want healthcare cannot get it.

Third, the Obama narrative has now advanced to “States need to expand the Medicaid rolls” and some GOP Governors are flatly saying “No”. What these Governors fail to see is where this narrative is going. Medicaid is for the poor and disabled, so the spin masters are setting the stage for their next assertion; “Republicans won’t expand the Medicaid rolls because they want poor and disabled people to die.” When are these GOP Governors going to flatly say that the poor and disabled are ALREADY covered by Medicaid? And tell the truth that expanding the Medicaid rolls is a false narrative.

GOP Governors are playing checkers while Obama and his comrades are playing chess and are a few moves away from checkmate. Instead of responding to Obama’s narrative and falling into his trap, do some homework and speak boldly to create a completely different narrative. In other words, expose the truth.

SIMPLE SOLUTION:

States can take control of the narrative by defining a clear, true and concise narrative that lets people know that, from our poor to our elderly and everyone in between, all who want healthcare can already get it without Obamacare.

Can a state prove this? Yes. I contend that all a state needs to do is gather totals… the total number of people served by each of the categories delineated below. Every provider, insurer and program know how many people they serve in a given state.

Get the totals, add them up and then compare that number with the total population of the state to see how many people are not receiving healthcare from any of these categories. The number will either be zero or a very small percentage of the state population. Then, just a little more homework will reveal that the vast majority of this small segment of the state’s population is actually young, healthy people who choose not to spend their money on it because they don’t need it, they don’t use it and they don’t want it.

Take a very close look at all these programs and healthcare-delivery vehicles (below) that have been in place without Obamacare and before Obama took the Presidency. Look at all the people covered in these categories. A majority of working Americans who already have healthcare plans actually have no idea that all these programs exist and, unfortunately, Obama’s lies sound believable to them when no one counters him with the truth.

• Medicare: for everyone aged 65 and older.
• Medicaid and/or SCHIP (e.g. CA has MediCal and Healthy Families): for everyone who is poor and disabled.
• TRICARE: for service members, retirees and their families.
• Veterans Administration: for Veterans.
• Employer-based: for individuals and families covered through their employer.
• University-based: for University/College attendees (e.g. CA has a mandatory fee that all students must pay which provides healthcare coverage whether they want it or not).
• COBRA: for individuals and families who are in-between jobs/left their job for whatever reason. If they are unable to find new employment and their income remains low (e.g. unemployment), they become eligible for Medicaid, Hospital/Doctor Financial Waivers, and they can go to clinics or even private providers. One size doesn’t fit all and these people have choices.
• Tribes: for individuals and families who are members of an Indian Tribe.
• Clinics: for individuals and families who receive healthcare from community-based/free clinics.
• Private Provider: for individuals and families who choose to pay for their own healthcare through private providers.
• Religious Exemption: for individuals and families who choose to be exempt for religious reasons, which includes people such as the Amish, Muslims, Mennonites and Hutterites (because purchasing insurance violates their religious beliefs).
• Hospital/Doctor Financial Waiver: for individuals who receive free healthcare directly from doctors/hospitals because they submitted a ‘financial hardship’ form.

Don’t forget that Obama and his comrades gave the states another category:

• Obama/HHS Waiver: for millions of Obama’s lobbyists/special-interest friends/campaign contributors who received an Obamacare waiver directly from Obama’s HHS secretary.

After a state gathers the grand total of all the above categories and subtracts it from the state population, the state can create their own waiver in order to protect young peoples’ right to choose and once they are in this new category, everyone is accounted for in terms of healthcare and Obamacare is proven irrelevant and unnecessary because the state is already compliant. Everyone who wants healthcare already has it.

• *Freedom-of-Choice Waiver: this is a new category (if needed) for the majority of young people who seek to exercise their unalienable Right, as granted by our Declaration and Constitution, to choose not to spend their hard-earned money on healthcare because they do not use, want or need it while they’re young and healthy. The Freedom-of-Choice Waiver accomplishes the exact same thing as the waiver granted at the Federal level by Obama – it exempts people who want exemption; therefore, it is completely consistent with Federal precedence.

Take control of the narrative Governors! Do your homework! Don’t fall into the latest trap. Expanding Medicaid rolls is a false flag. Our poor and disabled are already on Medicaid and, in fact, many who are not poor and can afford healthcare are on the Medicaid rolls already. We don’t have $100 million a year in Medicaid fraud, waste and abuse by accident. So don’t take the bait! Medicaid rolls don’t need expanding because our poor and disabled already have Medicaid. So get out there and spread the truth!

While we’re on the subject of going on offense and getting the truth out there, notice that Obama’s campaign rhetoric includes sound-bites that give the false impression that Obamacare will give people whatever healthcare they want – for free – and up to now, his lies remain unchallenged.

Know this… Obamacare does not address the quantity or quality of healthcare; it merely asserts that once the federal government controls our healthcare, a 15-member panel and about 159 new government agencies will decide the quantity, quality and location of treatment IF they allow you to have it.

Who is challenging Obama about the federally controlled Medicare program that, by far, denies more claims for the people it serves than any other form of healthcare coverage? Quantity or quality is not even part of the debate when talking about Obamacare because Medicare already shows us what happens when the federal government controls healthcare. Get out there and spread the truth about this!

Make no mistake, Obamacare does not make healthcare a “right”, it takes away our right to choose and it forces our young people to pay into a monstrous system that destroys the best healthcare system in the world, transforms citizens into serfs, creates another massive redistributive system that seizes the fruits of our labor and gives the federal government control of our finances and our lives. As Mark Levin says, it forever changes the relationship between government and citizen.

So… which states will remain on defense and constrain their public responses to the false narratives and clichés thrown at them by Obama and his comrades?

And… which states will do their homework, gather the totals and create the media firestorm that will stop Obamacare dead in its tracks?

Which state will be the first to prove that Obamacare is irrelevant in their state because they are already compliant and everyone who wants healthcare already has it?

Which state is ready to go on offense and protect individuals and businesses in their state from Obamacare?

Let’s get it started! If states do their homework, take control of the narrative and spread the truth, we’ll be kissing Obamacare goodbye in short order.

Video:  OCCUPIED! - Obama's Un-Affordable Health Care TAXES and CONTROL ACT

Reference:

Killing Obamacare Before It Kills Us – Part 1: The Political Battlefield

Obamacare Now Estimated to Cost $2.6 Trillion in First Decade

Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare

A State Revolt Against ObamaCare Emerges

Ohio takes tough health law stance

Gov. Scott: Florida will not implement insurance exchanges or expand Medicare

Rick Perry joins Republican governors who won’t implement Obamacare

List of 27 States Suing Over Obamacare

Obamacare Bill 4872

Thanks Obamacare: 83% of Doctors Surveyed Say They May Quit

Obama Gets Civilian Army In Healthcare Bill

Obamacare Now Estimated to Cost $2.6 Trillion in First Decade

Lawyers Have Already Drafted 13,000 Pages of Regulations for New ObamaTax Law

Huckabee: GOP Sweep Needed to Repeal Obamacare

“Death Panel” Three Years Later

Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,Medicare,Medicaid,SCHIP,TRICARE,COBRA,Veterans Benefits,HHS waivers,HHS,Freedom of Choice Waiver,ObamaTax,ObamaCare Exemptions,ObamaCare Religious Exemptions,doctor shortages,Affordable Care Act,ObamaCare surprises,repeal and replace ObamaCare

The 2012 Check List for America’s Survival

Many people make resolutions to start the year, but I think a list of things that must be done to protect and preserve the Republic should be tallied…

1. President Obama must be defeated in 2012 and the obstructionist Democratic Party must lose power in the Senate to ensure both houses of Congress will be Republican and in a position to initiate real change.
2. The Environmental Protection Agency must be reined in with increased Congressional oversight and legislative limits on its rule-making capacity. Having fulfilled its 1970 mandate to clean the nation’s air and water, it should be scaled back to the maintenance of these functions.
3. Americans, despite the administration’s efforts to redefine and distract us, must keep clearly in mind the threat of Islam to the nation and the world. A Middle East in turmoil lays ahead for 2012.
4. To jump-start the economy, taxes and spending must be reduced across the board. A tax on consumption, rather than income would be a good start. Only 49% of Americans currently pay income taxes, the lowest in decades.
5. Obamacare must be repealed should the Supreme Court fail to rule that the Commerce Clause takes precedence over its requirement that Americans must purchase health insurance or be fined for not doing so.
6. A serious restructuring of Social Security and Medicare must be undertaken. Older Americans who have paid into the system—it is involuntary—must be ensured their benefits will be paid, but younger citizens should have the freedom and responsibility to structure their own retirement and health plans.
7. Access to the nation’s vast reserves of coal, natural gas, and oil should be increased and encouraged. Oil companies should be encouraged to build more refineries via tax credits and removal of “environmental” obstacles.
8. Congress needs to identify and fund the repair to the nation’s aging infrastructure.
9. Utilities should be encouraged via tax credits and other incentives to expand the national “grid” for the distribution of electricity.
10. Term limits for Senators and Representatives should be added to the U.S. Constitution in the same fashion the presidency is limited. Salaries, pensions, and perks should be capped. A permanent political class is a danger to citizens.
11. The Federal government should be downsized with the elimination of the Departments of Education, Labor, and Energy, along with the Environmental Protection Agency. These powers should be returned to the individual States. (10th Amendment)
12. The nation’s military which has been significantly reduced in size and structure should be expanded with attention to the upgrade and increase of its naval fleet and aircraft.
13. Congress should reject and rescind all legislation based on “global warming” or “climate change” as the former has been demonstrated to be a hoax and the latter is meaningless insofar as the climate is beyond the control of humans.
14. The United States should significantly reduce its contribution to the United Nations and refuse to ratify any of its treaties.
15. Tort reform should be instituted to reduce the costs of health care.
16. The corporate tax rate should be significantly reduced from its present rate, one of the highest in the world, to increase expansion, new jobs, and competitiveness.
17. Public service unions should be illegal. The federal government does not permit such unionization and neither should states.
18. National Public Radio should no longer be funded. The “government entities” of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be eliminated.
19. The federal government should be restricted or significantly limited from the acquisition of more of the nation’s landmass.
20. Strenuous efforts must be undertaken to reduce the national debt and deficit. A devalued dollar impoverishes everyone.

These are just a few changes which, if implemented, would go a long way to reducing the ills associated with a federal government grown too large, subject to crony capitalism, and corruption.

As John Adams said, “Let us disappoint the men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country.”

© Alan Caruba, 2012

Alan Caruba  -  Most recent columns

Alan has a daily blog called Warning Signs. His latest book is Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy.

Alan can be reached at acaruba@aol.com  -  Canada Free Press
Older articles by Alan Caruba

And prepare yourself for the worst and to help others!! – Preparedness and Survival

In True Alinsky Fashion… the Left Accuses the GOP of What They Are Planning

If you are not familiar with Saul Alinsky and his book that is a Bible to our present administration,  Rules for Radicals, its time…  The Obama White House and election committee will use Alinsky Methods, Cloward and Piven’s blueprint, Cass Sunstein’s Nudging and if necessary the tactics of their friends, like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn of the Weather Underground to promote their globalism, their Progressive goals and to steal the 2012 election if America does not wake up!!

It is ObamaCare that will through the Grandma over the cliff and in front of the death panel through rationing, but one of the Rules for Radicals is to turn the focus from yourself and from what you plan to do onto your adversary or opponent.

AARP is in the bag for the administration, but they are using their power and database to scare seniors into voting the opposite of what will save them and their healthcare… Medicaid and Medicare.  ObamaCare is big money for AARP!

Video:  Commercial shows Paul Ryan "Throwing Grandma over the cliff" commercial

How moral is it to create an anti-GOP political ad showing "Grandma thrown off a cliff" asks Neil Cavuto, today, interviewing  progressive advocate and creator of that ad, Erica Payne, Agenda Project Founder, "when you know that the plan being discussed exempts those  55 and older?"  Cavuto's outrage was enough to make him resurrect the "Death Panels".  Read Rest of Article Here

Dirty Little Secret: Rationing is at Heart of ObamaCare

There is a dirty secret about health care that President Obama hopes will escape the headlines. In his newly released plan to “reform” Medicare as part of overall deficit reduction, Obama has punted actual cost-cutting and instead proposed a panel – the Independent Payment Advisory Board – to recommend savings for the financially doomed program. Translation: Welcome to the world of rationing.

The board, which was an original part of Obamacare (remember the death panel debate?), consists of 15 unelected bureaucrats who will have unchecked, binding power in the interest of supposedly greater efficiency and lower costs. That means that instead of you or your doctor making decisions about your care, a group of Washington micromanagers will do it for you.

Oh, and the rationing panel will be immune to lawsuits. According to The New York Times, “In general, federal courts could not review actions to carry out the board’s recommendations.”

The panel is one of the scariest policy moves made by this administration and is the epitome of government interference in our lives at the most personal of levels. If you’re not eligible for Medicare, you will be one day, which is why everyone should be very afraid of what’s to come when the panel starts its work in 2014 with a report to the President. Though defenders claim that Obamacare bars rationing, the panel will do just that.  (Full Story Below)

There is a dirty secret about health care that President Obama hopes will escape the headlines. In his newly released plan to “reform” Medicare as part of overall deficit reduction, Obama has punted actual cost-cutting and instead proposed a panel – the Independent Payment Advisory Board  – to recommend savings for the financially doomed program. Translation: Welcome to the world of rationing.

The board, which was an original part of Obamacare (remember the death panel debate?), consists of 15 unelected bureaucrats who will have unchecked, binding power in the interest of supposedly greater efficiency and lower costs. That means that instead of you or your doctor making decisions about your care, a group of Washington micromanagers will do it for you.

They will do this by cutting reimbursements to doctors and hospitals and restricting patients from costly end-of-life care by enforcing caps on how much a patient can spend to stay alive. Most at risk will be the disabled, who require special and often expensive care. Cancer patients will be at risk, as well, since chemotherapy and other oncological treatments are some of the priciest.

In fact, there is very little Congress will be able to do to stop the panel. It will only be able to block its rulings with a two-thirds vote to override an expected presidential veto.

In the past, Obama has hinted that we'll need a way to address these patients. "The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80% of the total health care bill out here," he said shortly after taking office. "There is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place."

But there was no real conversation. Democrats inserted the rationing panel into the Affordable Care Act (i.e., Obamacare), and when the opposition tried to draw attention to the risks involved by invoking rationing, they were branded by the left and the mainstream media as crazies.

But this is far from fantasy. In fact, it's already reality across the pond.

In many ways, Obama and congressional Democrats copied the British, who have a similar model called the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE. According to The Wall Street Journal, the acronym is quite the oxymoron when one looks at what passes for standard practice: "NICE has rejected a number of pricey drugs for cancer and other diseases in the past. . . .

Sometimes NICE rejects drugs for all patients with the disease, and sometimes just for patients with a specific form of the disease, where the efficacy doesn't appear to justify the price. NICE's decisions often anger patients, their families and drug companies."

Most recently, NICE made the decision to deny the use of several new drugs to treat chronic leukemia patients. This showcases how deficit savings will be achieved under Obama's plan.

First, it's baffling to me that with countless government health officials on the federal payroll, nobody has been able to definitively figure out how to save Medicare from fiscal ruin. But somehow, these 15 Independent Payment Advisory Board pencil pushers will do the trick? Unless Superman, Wonder Woman and the Flash are entering the world of public service, there is no reason to believe that the same bureaucrats who got us into this mess will be able to solve the problem simply because they've joined a newly created panel.

It does, however, give Washington air cover. Just like in England, when the panel makes a controversial decision, lawmakers will be cleared of any direct involvement, claiming they aren't responsible for cutting your mother's cancer treatments.

In fact, there is very little Congress will be able to do to stop the panel. It will only be able to block its rulings with a two-thirds vote to override an expected presidential veto.

Oh, and the rationing panel will be immune to lawsuits. According to The New York Times, "In general, federal courts could not review actions to carry out the board's recommendations."

So, to break it down: Democrats are against limits on private-sector lawsuits but are in favor of preventing patients from suing government bureaucrats. But if this rationing panel has been designed to be so efficient and good at its job, as the President and his administration claim, then why do Democrats fear litigation in the first place?

Even some on the left are unsettled about Obama's solution to lowering the deficit through a medical panel with frighteningly unchecked powers. Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), a notorious liberal, said this of Independent Payment Advisory Board-style rationing: "In its effort to limit the growth of Medicare spending, the board is likely to set inadequate payment rates for health care providers, which could endanger patient care."

It could also lead to a doctor shortage. If the panel cuts reimbursements to physicians, they will simply stop treating Medicare patients, thus forcing patients to purchase their own health care. Already, "Obamacare's passage has led as many as two-thirds of physicians to drop out of government-run health programs," reports the Senate Republican Policy Committee.

The panel is one of the scariest policy moves made by this administration and is the epitome of government interference in our lives at the most personal of levels. If you're not eligible for Medicare, you will be one day, which is why everyone should be very afraid of what's to come when the panel starts its work in 2014 with a report to the President. Though defenders claim that Obamacare bars rationing, the panel will do just that.

Donald Berwick, the President's controversial Medicare administrator, already stated that "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care - the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."

Although Obama and many congressional Democrats are hoping the complexity of the Independent Payment Advisory Board will keep people from paying attention, our eyes must be open, too. The fate of the elderly, the sick and the disabled depends on it.
andrea@andreatantaros.com

Andrea Tantaros, whose column appears on Thursdays on NYDailyNews.com and often in the print edition of the newspaper, is a political commentator as well as a corporate communications executive. She previously served as a senior adviser on a number of political campaigns and as communications director for former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld and Rep. Thomas Reynolds (R-N.Y.) and on Capitol Hill as press secretary for Republican leadership. Tantaros lives in New York City.

By ANDREA TANTAROS

The Dems, the White House and the media are trying to scare seniors about the Ryan Plan.  It is another diversion.  The real issue is the rationing or death panel headed by Donald Berwick that Sarah Palin and a few others warned us about and then were demonized by the same people who are hiding true facts of ObamaCare from you, until it is too late! Take it from someone who read as much of every version as possible during the ObamaCare battle… the panel and rationing are in there along with many other scary provisions.  And a vote to re-elect Obama is a final vote to destroy America’s healthcare as well as freedom!

Obama Embraces 'Death Panel' Concept in Medicare Rule

Sunday, 26 Dec 2010 06:41 PM

During the stormy debate over his healthcare plan, President Barack Obama promised his program would not "pull the plug on grandma" and Congress dropped plans for death panels and "end of life" counseling that would encourage aged patients from partaking in costly medical procedures.

Opponents of Obama's plan, including former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, dubbed such efforts as "death panels" that would encourage euthanasia.

But on December 3rd, the Obama administration seemingly flouted the will of Congress by issuing a new Medicare regulation detailing -- "voluntary advance care planning" that is to be included during patients' annual checkups. The regulation aimed at the aged "may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment," The New York Times reported.

The new provision goes into effect Jan. 1, 2011 and allows Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling to help beneficiaries deal with the complex and decisions families face when a loved one is approaching death. Critics say it is another attempt to limit healthcare options for the elderly as they face serious illness.

Incoming House Speaker John Boehner said during the healthcare debate that, “This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.”

Specifically, the measure was known as Section 1233 of the bill passed by the House in November 2009. It was not included in the final legislation, however. It allowed Medicare to pay for consultations about advance care planning every five years. In contrast, the new rule allows annual discussions as part of the wellness visit.

Elizabeth D. Wickham, executive director of LifeTree, a pro-life Christian educational ministry, told the Times was concerned that end-of-life counseling would encourage patients to forgo or curtail care, thus hastening death.

“The infamous Section 1233 is still alive and kicking,” Ms. Wickham said. “Patients will lose the ability to control treatments at the end of life.”

The rule was issued by Dr. Donald M. Berwick, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, according to The New York Times. He is a longtime advocate for rationing medical procedures for the elderly.

Before being tapped by Obama to his Medicare post, Berwick had long applauded Britain's National Health Service, which uses an algorithm to determine if the aged are worthy of additional expenditure for medical care and advanced treatments.

Berwick has argued that rationing will have to eventually be implemented in the U.S, stating, “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care. The decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

Seniors appear to be a major target for precious resources under the Obama healthcare plan. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Obama plan cuts nearly $500 million in Medicare benefits to seniors as the federal government adds 30 million uninsured Americans to private and public health care systems.

The cost of caring for the elderly has not been lost on Berwick.
“The chronically ill and those towards the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here… there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place,” he said.

During the heated healthcare debate, supporters of the Obama vigorously denied rationing for seniors would take place and scoffed at "death panel" critics like Palin.

Last month, however, economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman told ABC News that rising Medicare costs could only be dealt with by "death panels and sales taxes."

He added: "Medicare is going to have to decide what it's going to pay for. And at least for starters, it's going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, it should have endorsed the [death] panel that was part of the healthcare reform.’"

Read more: Obama Embraces 'Death Panel' Concept in Medicare Rule

The NY Times Concedes Governor Palin “Forced [Obama] Onto the Defensive.”

The NY Times concedes that Governor Palin put Obama “onto the defensive” with “death panels” (emphasis added):

Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate, and Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, led the criticism in the summer of 2009. Ms. Palin said “Obama’s death panel” would decide who was worthy of health care. Mr. Boehner, who is in line to become speaker, said, “This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.” Forced onto the defensive, Mr. Obama said that nothing in the bill would “pull the plug on grandma.”

Has any other potential Republican presidential candidate other than Palin been able to force the New York Times to concede that he or she put Obama on the defensive? Has any other potential Republican presidential candidate other than Palin destroyed a liberal policy to such an extent that the Democrat Party is afraid to publicize what it is doing and can only get it implemented through channels outside of the legislative arena?

“Death Panels” Regulation Begins Obama’s Rule by Fiat

by Ben Johnson – Posted at

In a foretaste of outrages to come, the Obama administration managed to sneak out a federal regulation paying doctors to provide “end of life counseling” to those covered by ObamaCare. The Medicare rule, which Congress never voted on, may encourage thousands to forego lifesaving treatment. This move is a voluntary precursor to the inevitable rationing engendered by socialized medicine. Many conservative media outlets have objected to the pro-death aspects of this decision. However, they have ignored a vital aspect of this story: the way he implemented the policy. This federal regulation inaugurates Obama’s two-year strategy to rule by executive order. The New York Times reports:

When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.

Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

Although the NYT just discovered this, Steven Ertelt at LifeNews.com reported the regulation nearly a month ago. (We covered it at the time.) For once, the Times included some salient facts along with its whitewash of the administration’s activities.

This program will be overseen by the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Donald Berwick, a fanatical believer in limiting (read: denying) care. The paper quotes Berwick as saying, “Using unwanted procedures in terminal illness is a form of assault. In economic terms, it is waste.” Berwick added advanced directives were one of “several techniques” that led “to both lower cost and more humane care.” There is no question they lead to lower costs, in addition to providing an economic stimulus to tombstone carvers, morticians, and cemetery plot salesmen.

The Times reports the regulation was pushed by two Congressional Democrats: Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon and Sen. Jay Rockefeller IV of West Virginia. This backing unintentionally reveals the measure’s greater significance: The liberals could not ram a death panels provision through even the Democratic-controlled 111th Congress, so Obama is imposing it with the stroke of a pen, without a single vote. The New York Times admits this is the wave of the future:

While the new law does not mention advance care planning, the Obama administration has been able to achieve its policy goal through the regulation-writing process, a strategy that could become more prevalent in the next two years as the president deals with a strengthened Republican opposition in Congress.

This author first exposed Obama’s plan to rule by executive order, in October. The following month, the Center for American Progress released a lengthy report compiled by Sarah Rosen Wartell calling for the president to implement a “progressive” agenda by fiat over the next two years. In its foreword, CAP president and CEO John Podesta called on Obama to rule through:

• Executive orders
• Rulemaking
• Agency management
• Convening and creating public-private partnerships
• Commanding the armed forces
• Diplomacy

Just last week, the inside-the-Beltway Bible Politico featured an article by John F. Harris and James Hohmann which concluded, “Republican gains in Congress make it essential for [Obama] to use new avenues of power,” including regulations and executive orders.

The Left is irresistibly drawn to collecting as much unbridled power as possible, because its agenda is so unpopular it could never receive sufficient popular support to pass an election. Since the November election, Obama, Reid, and company have followed the authoritarian path I predicted. I wrote in November, “Look for an aggressive agenda in the lame duck session of Congress, focused especially on passing the DREAM Act and repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’” Harry Reid unleashed precisely these two measures (and passed one of them) in his lame duck power grab, cramming in a bid to pass a $1.27 trillion budget besides. Next, I wrote, “After January, Cabinet agencies will issue regulations at a faster clip.” This follows that prediction. Finally, I wrote, “Obama will rule increasingly through executive orders and appeals to the United Nations.” If this regulation means anything, it means we have not seen anything yet.

How fitting one of the first expressions of Obama’s new strategy was a measure to let people die. He seems to have the same fate planned for the U.S. Constitution.

Update on HC Debate - Latest Compromise: Public Option on Steroids, Death Spirol for Medicare and Thumbs Down From Hospitals

I am watching the Senate Healthcare Debate. Senators Wyden, Bayh and Collins are offering a bipartisan amendment to allow people who are not getting subsidies from the government to purchase insurance with a high deductible in order to keep costs down. They actually admitted during the debate that premiums would increase for these people without this amendment. We keep saying WE DON"T WANT THIS BILL and they are saying to us, "this will make it better". They are treating us like children who don't want to take our medicine.

This morning on the Senate floor Senator Mitch McConnell said the recent CNN poll showed that 61% of Americans oppose this bill. I wonder if any of the Democratic Senators care?
It was announced on the Senate floor by Senator Enzi this morning that the CMS (Center for Medicare Services) announced that the Reid bill bends the cost curve up and is unsustainable. I hope the Democrats hear this.

I also just heard Senators McConnell and Johannis on Fox News state that this bill will definitely cost everyone more... as we know the entire premise of reform and cutting costs was a big fat lie. The GOP had the CMS go over the bill and the actuary verified that cost would be much higher than the CBO and Congress are saying and that the cost will continue on an upward curve.

Cavuto (FNC) had a surgeon that said there is also a provision in the new Medicare provision of the HC bill that will only someone 90-days in the hospital in one year. So if you have been in perfect health all your life and never collect a dime from insurance, but all of a sudden come down with a major illness, accident or condition, you will have to pay out of pocket for your hospital stay beyond 90-days, if it all falls into one year.
And the bad news just keeps on coming....

At one point the GOP explored the option of expanding Medicare and they were told that it would cause an immediate death spiral to this already ailing program… yet now the Dems are selling this as their Public Option.

Add the above to:

John Thune & The Senate Health Care Bill – New Compromise is Public Option on Steroids

There is a crisis, and it appears to be located in the U.S. Senate. My esteemed Keloland colleague and colleague Emeritus, David Newquist, has this:

John Thune has become the voice of the GOP–Groundless Obstinence and Petulance–according to the Huffington Post. He says his party will unanimously oppose any health care reform, no matter what is proposed.

For someone who complains a lot when he thinks that others have distorted his words, he seems very careless in describing what Senator Thune said or what the Huffington Post said he said. The Huffington Post article he links to makes it clear in the title that Thune was only speaking about "the Newest Heath Care Compromise," and hardly ruling out GOP support for any bill.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) told the Huffington Post that he did not think the dropping of a public option for insurance coverage from the bill would be enough for Democrats to win even the support of moderate Republican Senators Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins, both of Maine.

"I just think that our side believes that it is a really bad idea to take a program that is already sinking and put more people into it."

Here is how the Washington Post describes the "newest" idea that Reid is floating:

The 11th-hour "compromise" on health-care reform and the public option supposedly includes an expansion of Medicare to let people ages 55 to 64 buy into the program.

This deal, which the WaPo dates back to the Clinton Administration, seems designed to get something like a "public option" into the bill without calling it a public option. Republican opposition may be obstinate and petulant, or maybe not; however, it is hardly groundless. The WaPo points out that it is difficult to tell what effect this "buy in" would have on the reform scheme.

Presumably, the expanded Medicare program would pay Medicare rates to providers, raising the question of the spillover effects on a health-care system already stressed by a dramatic expansion of Medicaid. Will providers cut costs -- or will they shift them to private insurers, driving up premiums? Will they stop taking Medicare patients or go to Congress demanding higher rates? Once 55-year-olds are in, they are not likely to be kicked out, and the pressure will be on to expand the program to make more people eligible. The irony of this late-breaking Medicare proposal is that it could be a bigger step toward a single-payer system than the milquetoast public option plans rejected by Senate moderates as too disruptive of the private market.

As the perhaps obstinate and petulant, but hardly Republican WaPo presents it, there is no way to predict what unintended consequences may follow.

But Republican opposition is based on broader considerations. Expanding Medicare would be a step towards a single payer plan. But it was also mean expanding a program that is on schedule to go broke in only a few years. It also looks like more sleight of hand on the Democrat's part. They are already counting on dramatic cuts in Medicare to make other parts of the bill look more affordable. As the WaPo points out, Medicare reimbursement rates are already too low to sustain hospital and doctor care, which results in a shift of costs to private insurance. The medical establishment is vehemently criticizing the idea.

This looks like a big mess. Rumors that a deal has been reached appear to be greatly exaggerated. I am not even certain that there is a coherent idea here. Meanwhile the petulant and obstinate public continues to oppose the bill by wide margins. Quinnipiac and Rasmussen put the 52% opposed/38% in favor, and 51/41 respectively. Worse news for reform is the CNN poll, which has 61% opposed and only 36% in favor. That's the first time to my knowledge that opposition has risen above 60%. If it's on track, the CNN poll is disastrous news for Harry Reid.

In opposing the Senate reform bill, Senator Thune is not only exercising common sense. He is standing on behalf of the majority of the American people.

Posted by Ken Blanchard

New Compromise… Bet That Makes You Feel Better?!? – Video

Democrats: Medicare Expansion the Ultimate Public Option - Video

WASHINGTON - -- The unexpected new proposal for breaking the impasse over the so-called public option won President Barack Obama's endorsement Wednesday and sent hopes surging among a wide array of Democrats that the way may be clearing to pass their massive Senate health care bill by Christmas.
The deal, which emerged late Tuesday night after days of secret negotiations, would eliminate the new government-run insurance plan that many liberals had seen as the linchpin of meaningful reform.

But paradoxically, what lies at the heart of the compromise may be a more durable, if initially smaller, form of the public option: an expansion of Medicare, the huge federal health insurance program for seniors, to include millions of Americans ages 55 through 64.

And by enlarging Medicare eligibility, the compromise could sharply expand the base of political support, giving ordinary Americans a concrete stake in what many may have seen as a distant battle among drug companies, doctors and other interests.
Under the deal hammered out by 10 Democratic negotiators, potentially millions of Americans 55 to 64 could sign up for a program that has become a vital safety net for the country's retirees since it was created more than four decades ago.
That prospect has excited some proponents of creating a single-payer system, who saw even the weak government program in the original bill as a "camel's nose under the tent" in their drive to ensure that all Americans get a government-provided insurance plan.

"Expanding Medicare is an unvarnished, complete victory for people like me," said Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y. "It's the mother of all public options. We've taken something people know and expanded it. ... Never mind the camel's nose, we've got his head and neck under the tent."

Todd Swim, a partner with the health benefits consulting firm Mercer, said a Medicare expansion could also have profound effects on employers and their workers.

"Access to medical care is one of the biggest inhibitors to retiring early, and a lot of people are going to be looking at that as an option," he said.

Although Americans in this age group are more likely to have insurance than those in their 20s or 30s, they often have a very difficult time getting coverage because many have pre-existing medical conditions.

Next year, most Medicare beneficiaries will pay a monthly premium of $110.50.

"The price point will be much more affordable than any option they have," Swim said.

Chicago Tribune

**Everyone I have heard talk about this today has said that this new Medicare enlargement will absolutely bring us to a single payer system much much sooner than any of the other options in any of the other bills. They took out the "Public Option" wording and intend to roll over us and pass this regardless of what we want. The GOP has been standing up but the Dems are not listening to anything they say. We absolutely need to keep up the pressure and hammer the possible fence sitters letting them know that if they vote for this this are out, even if they are not up for election in 2010.

I heard Lieberman earlier today blabbering on about he didn't know what was in this new version/compromise. Who cares what is in it.... We don't want the whole thing and we know whatever is in it, it is full of lies and bad things. Lieberman needs to vote no and we really need to pressure him!!!!!!!!!!!

The Mayo Clinic has come out absolutely against this bill and the latest compromise!!!

20% of hospitals and convalescent homes announce that they will close their doors under the latest Medicare Compromise measure and many others will not take the coverage!!

HEALTH CARE SHOCKER: SPECIAL DEMOCRATIC VOTING COUNTIES WOULD GET PROTECTED MEDICARE BENEFITS - Video

A True Tale of Canadian (Socialized) Healthcare - Video

ALSO:

Gleeful Begala: Expanding Medicare is the 'Ultimate Public Option'
Medicare Sausage?
House Democrat: Senate Public Option 'Compromise' Is a Total Victory for Fans of ... Single-Payer

This could finally be the nail in the coffin of ObamaCare. 61% of the American people are absolutely against an form of ObamaCare; and another 20% are unhappy about the present reform. So the Dems in and Congress the White House are planning to ignore 81% of the American people and cram a bill that will increase costs, reduce services, invade your privacy, takeaway your choices and decision making, and in the opinion of more and more doctors reduce lifespans and increase early death due to rationing and the decrease of early detection.

Please call/Contact your senator!! Several additional Senators appear to be, at least waffling, and then there are the 17 initial Fence Sitters that Harry Reid and the White House are frantically trying to buy off and threaten to vote their way. Please stand up America~

17 Senators
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 202-224-4843, Fax: (202) 228-1371
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202-224-5623
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) 202-224-2551
Sen. Michael Bennett (D-CO) 202-224-5852
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) 202-224-4041, Fax: (202) 224-9750
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551, Fax: (202) 228-0012
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) 202-224-2043
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) 202-224-6154
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) 202-224-5274
Sen. John Tester (D-MT) 202-224-2644
Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) 202-224-3004
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) 202-224-2023
Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) 202-224-6324
Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) 202-224-4024

and Republican:

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME),((202)224-5344, Fax: (202) 224-1946

Info for all Senators (from your State) etc.

Full Contact Info Just Sent Me by the MOM’s patriot group out of Texas

Alaska
Begich, Mark - (D - AK)
144 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3004
F(202) 224-2354
Toll Free: (877) 501 - 6275*
Email
Begich Website
Arkansas
Lincoln, Blanche L. - (D - AR)
255 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2353
F(202) 228-1371
Email
Lincoln Website
Colorado
Bennet, Michael F. - (D - CO)
702 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5852
F(202) 228-5036
Email
Bennet Website
Connecticut
Lieberman, Joseph I. - (ID - CT)
706 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4041
F(202) 224-9750
Email
Lieberman Website
Florida
Nelson, Bill - (D - FL)
716 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5274
F(202)228-2183
Email
Nelson Website
Indiana
Bayh, Evan - (D - IN) Class III
131 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5623
F(202) 228-1377
Email
Bayh Website
Louisiana
Landrieu, Mary L. - (D - LA) Class II
328 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5824
F(202) 224-9735
Email
Landrieu Website
Maine
Snowe, Olympia J. - (R - ME) Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
F(202) 224-1946
Toll Free: (800) 432-1599
Email
Snowe Website
Missouri
McCaskill, Claire - (D - MO) Class I
717 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6154
F(202) 228-6326
Email
McCaskill Website
Montana
Tester, Jon - (D - MT) Class I
724 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2644
F(202) 224-8594
Email
Tester Website
Nebraska
Nelson, Ben - (D - NE) Class I
720 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6551
F(202)228-0012
Email
Nelson Website
North Dakota
Conrad, Kent - (D - ND) Class I
530 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2043
F(202) 224-7776
Email
Conrad Website

Dorgan, Byron L. - (D - ND) Class III
322 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2551
F(202) 224-1193
Email
Dorgan Website
Pennsylvania
Casey, Robert P., Jr. - (D - PA) Class I
393 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6324
F(202) 228-0604
Toll Free: (866) 802-2833
Email
Casey Website
Virginia
Warner, Mark R. - (D - VA) Class II
459A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2023
F(202)224-6295
Toll free: 877-676-2759 (VA Residents only)
Email
Warner Website
Webb, Jim - (D - VA) Class I
248 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4024
F(202)228-6363
Toll Free: 866-507-1570
Email
Webb Website

The New Healthcare Compromise… Feel Better???

The New Healthcare Compromise… Feel Better???

Why Won’t ABC and NBC Run This Ad?

ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June hosted at the White House

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.

"It's a powerful ad," said Bob Adams, executive director of the League of American Voters, a national nonprofit group with 15,000 members who advocate individual liberty and government accountability. "It tells the truth and it really highlights one of the biggest vulnerabilities and problems with this proposed legislation, which is it rations health care and disproportionately will decimate the quality of health care for seniors."

Adams said the advertisement is running on local network affiliates in states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Maine and Pennsylvania. But although CBS has approved the ad for national distribution and talks are ongoing with FOX, NBC has questioned some of the ad's facts while ABC has labeled it "partisan."

"The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue," spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. "Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News."

NBC, meanwhile, said it has not turned down the ad and will reconsider it with some revisions.

"We have not rejected the ad," spokeswoman Liz Fischer told FOXNews.com. "We have communicated with the media agency about some factual claims that require additional substantiation. As always, we are happy to reconsider the ad once these issues are addressed."

Adams objects to ABC's assertion that his group's position is partisan.

"It's a position that we would argue a vast majority of Americans stand behind," he said. "Obviously, it's a message that ABC and the Obama administration haven't received yet."

Dick Morris, a FOX News political analyst and the League of American Voters' chief strategist, conceptualized the advertisement and said its purpose was to "refocus" the debate on health care reform.

"I feel the whole debate on health care reform needed to be refocused on the issue of Medicare," he told FOXNews.com. "Most of the debate had been on issues of socialized medicine and cost. I felt that the impact of the legislation in cutting the Medicare program and enforcing rationing needed to be addressed."

Morris, a onetime advisor to former President Bill Clinton, said he was particularly troubled by ABC's decision not to air the spot.

"It's the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform," he said. "For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue."

By Joshua Rhett Miller - FOXNews.com

Posted: Knowledge Creates Power – Cross Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Related Resources:

• ObamaCare and me – Doctor Zane F. Pollard, MD
• Prescription for Truth – Daniel Hannan From England: HealthCare Worse for Elderly
• Unease in Britain Following Assisted Suicides
• Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors
• Healthcare: Does Canada Do It Better?
• Canadian Health Officials: Our Universal Health Care Is 'Sick,' Private Insurance Should Be Welcomed
• Outcry Over Vets’ ‘End of Life Care’
• Click here to read the "Your Life, Your Choices" guide.
• Woman in Oregon Told Healthcare Would Not Pay for Cancer Treatment But Would Pay for Assisted Suicide… Welcome to Government Controlled Healthcare
• Video: Oregon says no to chemotherapy, offers assisted suicide instead
• Dr. & Rep Tom Price: Americans Need Patient-Centered Reform, Not Democrats’ Costly Government Takeover of Health Care
• Senator Lieberman: Postpone Universal Healthcare
• Rep. Tom Price (former physician) Admonishes Government Takeover of Healthcare
• Kristol: Kill It, And Start Over
• Obamacare: Beware the Rhetoric
• No Turning Back from Obamacare
• Catastrophe

HEALTHCARE DEBATE: 10 Questions Politicians Won't Answer

1. Why do we need to increase spending on health care by at least $1.6 trillion and steal prosperity from our children and grandchildren when we spend nearly twice per person what other industrialized nations spend on health care?

2. What programs will you cut and whose taxes will you raise to pay for health-care reform?

3. What earmarks or pet projects that you have sponsored will you sacrifice to help finance the cost of health-care reform?

4. Will you vote for a public option that requires taxpayer-funded abortion?

5. If the public option is so wonderful, will you lead by example and vote for a plan to enroll you and your family in the public option?

6. Will you vote for a plan that will allow a board of politicians and bureaucrats to override decisions made by you and your doctor?

7. If you support a “comparative effectiveness” board, what qualifies you, as a politician, to practice medicine? Have you delivered health care to a single person, much less entire classes of people you claim to represent, such as the poor, the uninsured, or children?

8. How will a government-run public option perform better than other failing government programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Indian Health Care?

9. If increasing spending on health care was the solution, why hasn’t it worked yet?

10. Are you more committed to doing reform right or quickly? Would you consider backing a thoughtful alternative to the public option? If so, which one?

READ THE FULL ARTICLE BY SENATOR TOM COBURN HERE:

Go to this link and you can contact your representative directly; that way you can tell them to stop this MADNESS! Make sure they know YOU vote!

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/officials/congress/

There will be a place to enter your zip code, then a place to click to write your representatives directly; it is all free..

Dick Morris, the author of Catastrophe, who spends several chapters on Obamacare in his book, says to keep up the pressure. Call them, email them, and write them a snail mail letter and then both fax it and put a stamp on it and mail it. Do it all and do it more than once… and then to go a Town Hall or ObamaCare Tea Party and both speak out and be seen. Talk to and email your friends. Organize a local meeting. And remind your Congressman, Senator, and the White House that you vote and will remember how they vote and listen to the American people on Obamacare, stimulus, uncontrolled spending, Cap and Tax, illegal immigration, and the list goes on!!

Call the United States Capitol switchboard today... everyday at

1-(202) 224-3121

or

1-(202_-225-3121

(202) 225-0100 - Speaker of the House Pelosi

Speaker Nancy Pelosi
http://speaker.house.gov/contact or http://www.speaker.gov/contact

and visit: www.house.gov/writerep

Senators from your State.

Call the White House at 202-456-1111 and tell President Obama you have had enough!

Enlarge Chart: Republicans unveil chart depicting bureaucratic nightmare of Dem government-run health care... Developing...

HR-3200 - full report

Breakdown Articles of HR-3200

• DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE 1000 PAGE HEALTH CARE PLAN BY AND ATTORNEY & DEAN AND PROFESSOR OF LAW
• *Letter to Your Congress Person on Health Care (Obamacare) HR3200
• *A Look at What is Really in the Health Care Bill (HR 3200): Chilling!

Click Here To Find A Town Hall Near You!

Source: True Health and True Wealth

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Socialized Medicine Update – From Congressman John Campbell’s Laptop to Yours (8/5/09)

Wednesday, August 5, 2009:

Socialized Medicine: The final committee mark-up in the House for the socialized medicine bill finished late Friday evening with the bill passing by a vote of 31-28. Five of the "Blue Dog" Democrats (Gordon, Hill, Harman, Ross, and Space) who had previously opposed the bill, voted in favor of it, with the announcement of some minor modifications. Three other "Blue Dogs" (Matheson, Barrow, Melancon) voted ‘No.’ In essence, the bill is the same as it was before. What’s interesting here is that Committee Chairman Henry Waxman called for the vote on the bill when there were still 52 amendments pending that had neither been debated nor voted upon. The Chairman provided a vague promise that those amendments would be heard in September.

So why take a vote on a bill that supposedly isn't done yet? This is pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that those who are pushing this mess (including the President and the Speaker) want to show momentum before the August recess. That’s to be expected, but the Republicans in Congress and the majority of Americans, who oppose this increase in taxes, costs, deficit, debt, and the incumbent reduction in the quality of care and competency of caregivers, will not be silent during these next 5 weeks either. I intend to tell the truth about this government-run healthcare plan every chance I get in every medium.

In all practicality, I believe that there will be a healthcare reform bill passed at some point this Congress, and It will likely be directionally opposite from where I think we ought to go. We should be moving further away from the government run systems we have now, and instead be moving toward a true open market where everyone buys the plan they want. Those who cannot afford it are subsidized, and pre-existing conditions are handled through a high-risk pool. The best we can probably hope for in this Pelosi-led Congress, is legislation that will not completely destroy private medicine in this country. With this Congress and this President, this is the new standard for the definition of winning.

Here is an article I wrote for last Sunday's Washington Times which explores some of the deeper consequences of the push for socialized medicine. I hope you enjoy it.

Cost-benefit analysis vs. American citizens' lives
Sunday August 2, 2009
By Rep. John Campbell

Click here to go to WashingtonTimes.com
Prior to the founding of the United States, political theorist and philosopher John Locke developed the theory that government derives its power and authority from the consent of the governed. Benjamin Franklin once wrote that "in free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns."

These are the principles that are fundamental to the American system and have helped shape the nation we know and love today.
Flash forward to the current setting and context. President Obama has made his intent clear on health care: Medical decisions will no longer be made by doctors and patients, but by the omnipotent prowess of the federal government. By proposing creation of a bureaucracy to ration care and determine the cost-effectiveness of care for individuals, he has violated at least one fundamental tenet of America's founding.

The House version of the bill creates fifty-three new departments, agencies and commissions, but one stands out: the ‘National Institute of Comparative Effectiveness.’ Though it may sound benign, this bureaucracy will be used to ration care.

A similar institution exists in Britain, called the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, given the curious acronym of N.I.C.E. Rulings on whether people live or die are made frequently in Britain and Canada, and if an individual has a pre-existing condition, is elderly, or for some reason deemed "unfit" for a lifesaving procedure, his chances of being granted that lifesaving procedure become uncertain. With health care rationing, lives will literally hang in the balance, subject to the whims of government.
In fact, it is documented that in countries where socialized medicine is in place, citizens suffer from drastically lower survival rates from ailments such as cancer and heart disease. On balance, survival rates range from around 30 percent to 50 percent below that of countries with private medicine.

This socialized-medicine package is a giant leap in a direction that changes the dynamic of government as a servant to the people, violating the widely acknowledged precept of democratic government, that it derives its power from those which it governs. Mr. Obama and other big-government advocates are now effectively forcing a shift in how the government views those it serves. The American government will begin to view its citizens as liabilities rather than assets.

By definition, a liability is an item to be categorized, managed, and ultimately dispensed with. If government views its citizens through the prism of structured assets and liabilities, a terrible precedent has been set.

I and my Republican colleagues view the American people as assets with the intelligence and power to decide for themselves what is best for them and their families. This is something we are committed to fight for, and we continue to do so.

Our grand republic was founded on the premise that the government derives its power from the "consent of the governed." If Mr. Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have their way and this bill passes, perhaps we should change that to "consent of the governed, unless they represent too high of a liability."

Until next time, I remain respectfully,

Congressman John Campbell
Member of Congress

The only way to stop socialized medicine which will include loss of control and choice over your health care decisions, rationing, more government control in our lives, and tax increases for less services and worse care is to stand up.

Morris (author of Catastrophe and former advisor to President Clinton) notes that senior citizens will pay the biggest price under the overhaul.

SEE THE NEW TV AD DICK SAYS CAN DEFEAT OBAMA'S HEALTH CARE TAKEOVER -- CLICK HERE!

Read Dick Morris’s suggestions Here

Related Posts:

• Dick Morris Says Obamacare Will Replace Medicare
• Grass-roots revolts in Texas and Pennsylvania Against Obamacare
• Obama in 2007 Said He Wanted to Eliminate Private Health Insurance
• Safeway’s Health Care Program Gets Attention
• Kristol: Kill It, And Start Over
• ObamaCare For Seniors: Sorry, You’re Just Not Worth It
• *Letter to Your Congress Person on Healthcare (Obamacare) HR 3200
• *Look at What It Really in the Health Care Bill (HR3200): Chilling!
• Useless Eaters
• Catastrophe

Posted: Daily Thought Pad