Barack And Michelle Disagree On Health Care Reform

The following is an update to an article we did a while ago, before the debate about health care reform started to heat up.
The “free everything for everybody” propaganda that Barack Obama is spouting is a far different scenario than the plan Michelle Obama and David Axelrod put into place at the University of Chicago Medical Center.
Yes, this is the same David Axelrod who sent out all those “fishy” e-mails to folks who had never contacted the White House.
The same ones that Major Garrett of Fox News asked Robert “I’m a know-nothing blithering idiot” Gibbs about.

 

Michelle Obama  is on unpaid leave from her $317,000 a year job as a vice-president of the University Of Chicago Medical Center.

She was making a mere $122,000 a year just before her husband got elected to the Senate.
Before she went on leave, Mrs. Obama was instrumental in having the hospital adopt a program known as the Urban Health Initiative.

The purpose of the plan is to steer people who don’t have adequate health insurance to other care facilities.
Opinion polls taken among Chicago area medical professionals at the time the plan was put into effect were highly critical, calling the plan a break with the medical center’s commitment to the community.

Many doctors also noted that the treatment the people turned away would receive would be inadequate, stating that the level of care at local medical clinics left much to be desired.

Barack Obama’s top political strategist, David Axelrod, co-owns the firm, ASK Public Strategies, who, after some urging from Michelle Obama, was hired by the hospital to try and sell the plan to the community as a better alternative.
Another Obama adviser and close friend, Dr. Eric Whitaker, took over the Urban Health Initiative when he was hired by the hospital.

So the man who is going to see to it that we all have access to top-notch health care is married to a woman who advocated a plan for the hospital she worked at to deny first-class health care to those who need it the most.

Can someone reading this please explain this to me?
Who will judge what level of health care someone receives?

Doctors, Barack Obama, government bureaucrats, Michelle Obama, David Axelrod, Nancy “you’re a bunch of Nazis” Pelosi, who??

And which combination of their third-rate medical plans will we end up with?

Vote For Your Favorite Barack Obama Theme Song

Little ditties have long been a part of Presidential campaigns, but I don’t think there has ever been a actual theme song for a President before.

We HOPE to CHANGE that.

After all, a man who is dedicating his term of office to vastly increasing the federal defecit, increasing the taxes we pay for utilities, providing planned euthansia under the guise of health care, and generally is working as hard as he can to turn the United States into his vision of a Socialist utopia, it seems that the least we can do is honor the man with his own song.

And in the spirit of democracy, (while it still exists), we are going to ask our readers to pick the winner.

Our first nominee is from early in the Barack administration:

We owe a hat tip to our friend The Pencil Minstrel for the second choice.
This song is also a nominee for the Domestic Tranquility Act.

It is only fitting that our last nominee comes to us courtesy of our good friend, the Doctor of Democracy, Rush Limbaugh.

So there you have it, we have tried to include every point of view.

If you are a fan of Obama’s tactics of trying to discredit or destroy anyone who stands in his way, vote for number one.

If you are a member of the Kool-Aid Brigade, still delusional enough to think that Obama has your best interests at heart, vote for number two.

Finally, if you are what Nancy Pelosi calls a Nazi because you are arrogant enough to ask questions, and demand answers about the health care reform bill, vote for number three.

Don’t Be Fooled By Obamacare 2.0

There is an old trick that suggests that if you want something, to ask for something totally outrageous first.
When you are told the thing you are asking for is absolutely out of the question, you simply scale back or re-name your request, and chances are you will get what you are asking for.

The White House has put that tactic to good use over the last few days.

Under mounting public opposition to the health care reform bill now before Congress, Barack Obama has backed off on both the “end of life counseling” provision as well as changing his tune on the “public option” section of the bill.

And if the American public falls for this ploy, it will prove to be a disaster.

No matter what phrasing Obama cares to use, this bill as it is written will STILL leave the government and federal bureaucrats in charge of overseeing the quality of health care that you receive.

Your health care will still be rationed, as there is simply no realistic way to provide medical coverage to upwards of 50 million people who are not covered now (many of them non-taxpaying illegal immigrants) without cutting back on services.

By cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare reimbursement spending, doctors and hospitals will simply perform less procedures such as EKG testing, MRI’s, etc.

And it only stands to reason that once the government sees that it is spending less on Medicare treatment, this policy will trickle down to all aspects of health care, regardless of a person’s age.

And if cutting Medicare spending doesn’t work, Obama still has a plan in place to help Grandma and Grandpa shuffle off of this earth a little sooner.

Under the Quality-Adjusted-Remaining-Years provision, the elderly, the disabled and the mentally challenged will still die a little sooner, but the method of bumping them off will seem to be more charitable.

QARY will analyze the cost of a procedure and weigh that cost against the possible “quality remaning years of life” expected out of the person who needs the procedure.

So when doctors have to make a choice between open-heart surgery for a man in his 30’s and chemotherapy for a cancer patient in her 60’s, take a guess as to who moves to the front of the line.

And as far as someone who is disabled, don’t even bother to ask.

As Ezekiel “Doctor Death” Emanuel says, why waste resources on people who have little chance of becoming productive citizens?

The White House is manuvering to dress up one of the worst pieces of legislation in American history in new clothes so that we all want to take it out to dinner.

President Obama, you said it yourself and you should keep it in mind:

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.

WHO Says Our Healthcare System is 37th?

The World Health Organization (WHO), that’s who. A report released in 2000 by the WHO that ranks the United States healthcare system at 37th in the world is responsibe for the current misinformation being spread by the President and congressional Democrats.

In the World Health Report 2000 the WHO set out to rank the healthcare systems of 191 countries from best to worst. For many, myself excluded, the first time the results of the WHO report gained their attention was during Michael Moore’s propaganda film SiCKO. Moore used the US’s ranking of 37th on the WHO index to try and convince viewers that Cuba has a far superior healthcare system to the United States. Some people actually believed it.

What Michael Moore, President Obama, and congressional Democrats fail to provide along with the rank number when promoting government-run healthcare is what the WHO used to arrive at these numbers. In 2008 Glen Whitman of the Cato Institute released a paper that explains the WHO’s methodology in terms that average Americans can understand found here: http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp101.pdf.

The explanation of the WHO’s report is not very difficult to understand. Think “redistribution of health”. The index uses five factors to come up with an “Overall Attainment” rank for the countries: Health Level, Responsiveness, Health Distribution, Responsiveness Distribution, and Financial Fairness. The first two factors are legitimate, but the last three make no sense in measuring quality of healthcare.

Notice that I highlighted the word Distribution in two of the above factors. These two factors are included to measure how healthcare is distributed to the population of a given country. That’s right, they don’t measure the quality of the healthcare, they measure if poor people have the same health level and responsiveness as the rich.

The example used in the Cato paper is as follows:

Suppose, for instance, that Country A has health responsiveness that is “excellent” for most citizens but merely “good” for some disadvantaged groups, while Country B has responsiveness that is uniformly “poor” for everyone. Country B would score higher than Country A in terms of responsiveness distribution, despite Country A having better responsiveness than Country B for even its worst-off citizens. The same point applies
to the distribution of health level.

So how exactly does measuring a country’s distribution of healthcare help when measuring healthcare quality? And how does this show that the United States has inferior healthcare to Costa Rica? Your guess is as good as anyone’s.

The next factor is Financial Fairness which attempts to determine what a “fair” level of healthcare expenditures is for households based on their income. This factor is also tied to distribution because if there is a wide diversity of income levels and healthcare expense levels distributed throughout a country (as is the case in the United States) then the Financial Fairness grade is worse. The Financial Fairness grade (25% of the overall grade) of the ideal country would be one where the percentage of household income spent on healthcare would be the same for all income levels. This can only happen when “the rich” pay more for healthcare even when they use the same amount or less than the poor. An outcome like this is more easily attained when a country’s government distributes payments for healthcare using tax dollars. Tax dollars which come from the country’s rich citizens, not the poor. The global bureaucrats behind the WHO have essentially tipped the scales of their index to favor countries with a single-payer healthcare system because of their  definition of what “fairness” is. Again there is no measurement of the quality of healthcare received, just the equality or inequality of healthcare distribution. So much for shifting “from an ideological discourse on health policy to a more [scientific] one,” as the WHO has claimed to have done with this index.

The final aspect of the WHO ranking that gets the US to 37th is the performance of our healthcare system based on how much money is spent.  One more time here, the quality of healthcare is not measured, the performance of the healthcare system based on the amount spent is what is measured. Glen Whitman uses the following example:

When Costa Rica ranks higher than the United States in the OP ranking (36 versus 37), that does not mean Costa Ricans get better health care than Americans. Americans most likely get better health care—just not as much better as could be expected given how much more America spends.

Anyone paying attention has heard President Obama or some other Democrat say that we pay more in this country for healthcare than any other country and yet we are still ranked 37th in the world. However, when looking at how the rankings were determined, it becomes clear that the global bureaucrats at the WHO are telling the United States our ranking did not suffer in spite of the amount spent on healthcare expenses, rather it suffered because we spend so much and they think our system should still be better. This is Obama’s basis for pushing to overhaul our entire healthcare system?

It is pretty bad when the Democrat party and the President of the United States start using the same points as an America-hating propagandist to try and move their agenda forward. The World Health Organization’s rankings are clearly ideologically based and were intended to be embarrassing to the United States, yet the WHO index is cited by leading Democrats and the President all the time. Still Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have the nerve to call people questioning them unamerican!

Obama Slams TV Over Health Care Ruckus

Obama Says:

Free Speech!

What the hell is that?

You can’t question me, I’m the Messiah, I mean the President!!

 

US President Barack Obama on Friday blamed headline-hungry television networks for enflaming an ugly backlash by foes of his top priority effort to offer health care to all Americans.

A combative Obama also accused health insurance firms of holding sick Americans “hostage” as he launched a weekend tour of mountain west states Montana, Colorado and Arizona where suspicion of Washington runs deep.

“I know there’s been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially when tempers flare,” Obama said, at his own event with 1,300 people in an airport hangar.

“TV loves a ruckus,” said Obama and then joked: “you’ve got to be careful about those cable networks.”

US news channels have been looping ferocious confrontations at town hall meetings held by lawmakers during their summer recess where voters have accused Obama of plotting a “socialized” takeover of the private health system.

But the president argued…Read the rest of this entry

From ‘Yes, We Can’ to ‘No! Don’t!’

You really thought that Obama meant everything he said on the campaign trail?

Come on now!

Even the people in ACORN aren’t that gullible.

 

Don’t strain the system. Don’t add to the national stress level. Don’t pierce when you can envelop. Don’t show even understandable indignation when you can show legitimate regard. Realize that the ties that bind still bind but have grown dryer and more worn with time. They need to be strengthened, not strained.

Govern knowing we are a big, strong, mighty nation, a colossus that is, however, like all highly complex, highly wired organisms, fragile, even at places quite delicate. Don’t overburden or overexcite the system. America used to have fringes, one over here and the other over there. The fringes are growing. The fringes have their own networks. All sorts of forces exist to divide us. Try always to unite.

These are things one always wants people currently rising in government to know deep in their heads and hearts. They are the things the young, fierce staffers in any new White House, and the self-proclaimed ruthless pragmatists in this one, need to hear, be told or be reminded of.

The big, complicated, obscure, abstruse, unsettling and ultimately unhelpful health-care plans, proposals and ideas keep rolling out of Washington. Five bills, thousands of pages, “as it says on page 346, paragraph 3, subsection D.” No one knows what will be passed, what will make its way through House-Senate “conference.” They don’t even know what the president wants, what his true agenda is. He never seems to be leveling, only talking. Everything’s open to misdirection and exaggeration, and everything, people fear, will come down to some future bureaucrat’s interpretation of paragraph 3, subsection D, part 22.

What a disaster this health-care debate is. It strains…Read the rest of this entry

The Cost Of Killing People Proves To Be Too High

Lawmakers are starting to fold under pressure from everyday Americans.
They are now planning to drop the euthanasia provisions from the health care reform bill.
Now is not the time to ease up, however, keep the pressure on and we can send this entire bill down to defeat.

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.

The Senate Finance Committee is still …Read the rest of this entry

Newly Elected Democrats Are Afraid Of Health Care

As well they, as well as anyone else who supports this travety should be.
To all of you lawmakers that plan on voting in favor of this thing, keep one thing in mind.
Elections for a lot of you are coming up next year.
Do you really want to give up the health care you have now and wind up being covered by Obamacare?

Two freshly elected Democrats are wavering in their support of healthcare reform, as a rancorous summer series of “town hall” debates appears to be ­hardening opposition against the Obama administration.

Frank Kratovil and Tom Perriello, who as freshmen congressmen would be expected to back the party leadership, both say proposals for expanding coverage to the uninsured are un­acceptable in their current form and should focus more on cost savings.

Mr Kratovil, who was hanged in effigy by a healthcare protester at a town hall meeting in his state of Maryland, said he would have voted against legislation if it had come to a vote last month.

Tom Perriello, another new representative from neighbouring Virginia, also says he is not…Read the rest of this entry

The Etiquette Czar’s Rules for Patriotic Protest

Don’t be impolite.

Don’t raise your voice.

And whatever you do, don’t ask legitimate questions.

The White House press office is now Miss Manners’ office. President Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs took to the television airwaves this week to criticize congressional town hall protesters for “yelling.” Gibbs’ underling, Bill Barton, chastised voters not to “disrupt” and “scream.” Instead, he advised America to engage in a “spirited debate about health care, a real vigorous conversation about it.”

What constitutes “spirited?” How do they define “vigorous?” When does forceful dissent become intolerable disruption? Herewith, the Obama Etiquette Czar’s Official Rules for Patriotic Protest. Keep this guide with you at all times to avoid being flagged by the Democrat politeness monitors.

*No shouting. Congressional representatives cannot sell Obamacare with mobs of unruly senior citizens and small business owners interrupting to press them on specific sections of the bill. Limit your objections to a library whisper (30dB or less) and only…Read the rest of this entry

The Health Care Video Obama Doesn’t Want You To See

Astroturfers?

Brooks Brothers Brigades?

Nazis?

UnAmerican?

These are just a few of the terms that have been directed at people who have the courage to voice their opposition to Barack Obama’s health care reform package.

Now the Obama camp has taken things to the next level.

In Obama’s America, if you exercise your Constitutional rights, you are subject to arrest:

« Previous Page — Next Page »