Obama assures questioner there will be no government "death panels" to deny care to old people.






Huh!

I think he said... "Tough s**t, Gramma."

The arrogance of this man is appalling.

Hear, hear Richard!

More "Government knows what's best for you" bs from Obama.

I thought Lee Atwater was dead.

This really helps the health care 'debate'.

It is depressing the amount of mis information being spread.

It is unfortunate that healthcare reform is pretty much over, before it had a chance to produce. I hope I'm wrong. But it just goes to show where the money is..., and who the gullible are.

Beyond gullible. Some are doing it on purpose.

Rush today said that preventative care should be outlawed because it makes people live longer and costs him taxpayer money to keep them housed.

It is unfortunate that healthcare reform is pretty much over, before it had a chance to produce

Dill, if what is currently being proposed passes for reform then it deserves to fall by the wayside.

Dill, you can't argue with the rubes.

"Some are doing it on purpose.

Rush today said that preventative care should be outlawed because it makes people live longer and costs him taxpayer money to keep them housed."

I'd be curious to know the larger context here. Sounds like you are doing this on purpose.

Of course it's on purpose, only total schmucks (see above) actually fall for this crap. Unfortunately, the wealthy have realized the schmucks are a great pay day. Somewhere, rich guys are still shaking their heads in amazement at the lengths schmucks will go to protect them.

Right on the dot, Buck.

I'd be curious to know the larger context here. Sounds like you are doing this on purpose.

Like the "larger context" really matters ...

Now I'll be humming that song all night. I don't like the catch phrase "death pannels", I much prefer "getting Grandma shovel ready" or "inheritance expeditors". Much more politically correct.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...york_times

Excerpt: There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure. But over the course of the past few months, early, stated fears from anti-abortion conservatives that Mr. Obama would pursue a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda, combined with twisted accounts of actual legislative proposals that would provide financing for optional consultations with doctors about hospice care and other "end of life" services, fed the rumor to the point where it overcame the debate.

Just don't tell Sarah Palin. She NEEDS this to stay relevant.

You are right Brian. Obama won't put the "death board" in any legislation. He will use a czar for that function.

Because Obama is a Nazi Socialist Muslin Pirate, right Ricardo??

In terms of having a rational discussion on health care reform, when one side of the discussion is bringing up "death panels", abortion, ect, it creates an extreme environment where the middle ground is still far from middle. There can be no 'rational' discussion with the type of rhetoric that has been presented recently. It's a blatant attempt by people with power to maintain the status quo thru influencing the not so bright. It would be nice to see the fear mongering stop.

absolutely correct Dill...

The death panels rumors are all a big LY. The legislation says you have the Right to end of life counseling, Just like many insurance companies do in their better coverage. This means if at some point in your life you have questions about anything from pain management to keeping your body a live with machines, counseling from medical and religious personnel will be paid for, your choice as to who to see for this help and what decisions are made. This is to save your relatives from these hard decisions if you become enable to make them. Every time you check into Holy Rosary they offer this counseling to you. Believing these lies only plays into the hands of the people paying to spread the rumors by setting up web sites to organize the protests, drug companies and the hospital chain that was fined the largest amount in history for cheating patients and the government through billing fraud.(the people you really want to trust)

The point is there are an awful lot of dots to connect here. And if you don't want people connecting dots, you shouldn't say stuff like this...

http://www.bloomberg.com/...rKbfWkzTqc

Especially when the people connecting the dots are lying, politically self serving idiots.....think Palin.

Believing these lies only plays into the hands of the people paying to spread the rumors by setting up web sites to organize the protests

Or what about the liar that said that your doctor has a $50,000 incentive to cut off a diabetic's leg, even though in reality that reimbursement would be measured in the hundreds, and would go to another surgeon, rather than the general practice or diabetes specialist who made the referral?

No wonder they have to send Obama's Organizing for America staff around to meetings pretending to be doctors.

It's sure less convenient than having a bunch of vocal schmucks doing the work.

Speaking of lies and liars, I don't know how you commies can continue to defend Obama anymore. The guy is pathological. This Marxist will stop at nothing to get what he wants and even your favorite source, the Huffington Post won't hide it any more.

I was rather surprised to see this.


Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma


http://www.huffingtonpost...58285.html

I was not surprised to see the NYT article Brian posted being touted on State-run media; GE, NBC, MSN, MSNBC and CNN. The only purpose they serve these days is to parrot the lies coming from Obama.

Projection is sad.

Exclusive: TVNewser has learned, and a CNN spokesperson confirms, that in his morning editorial meeting today, CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein asked his show producers to avoid booking talk radio hosts. "Complex issues require world class reporting," Klein is quoted as saying, adding that talk radio hosts too often add to the noise, and that what they say is "all too predictable."

No point in dealing with questions you can't answer. No wonder their ratings are falling off the scale.

More Obama lies.




More........

http://keithhennessey.com...uth-pitch/

Quick..If you hurry up you can catch the lies live on KTVQ.com

[This message has been edited by Jim Brady (8/14/2009)]

Wow, this is worth a read
http://www.nytimes.com/20...wanted=all

THE PRESIDENT: Exactly. And I just recently went through this. I mean, I've told this story, maybe not publicly, but when my grandmother got very ill during the campaign, she got cancer; it was determined to be terminal. And about two or three weeks after her diagnosis she fell, broke her hip. It was determined that she might have had a mild stroke, which is what had precipitated the fall.

So now she's in the hospital, and the doctor says, Look, you've got about - maybe you have three months, maybe you have six months, maybe you have nine months to live. Because of the weakness of your heart, if you have an operation on your hip there are certain risks that - you know, your heart can't take it. On the other hand, if you just sit there with your hip like this, you're just going to waste away and your quality of life will be terrible.

And she elected to get the hip replacement and was fine for about two weeks after the hip replacement, and then suddenly just - you know, things fell apart.

I don't know how much that hip replacement cost. I would have paid out of pocket for that hip replacement just because she's my grandmother. Whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else's aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they're terminally ill is a sustainable model, is a very difficult question. If somebody told me that my grandmother couldn't have a hip replacement and she had to lie there in misery in the waning days of her life - that would be pretty upsetting.

And it's going to be hard for people who don't have the option of paying for it.

THE PRESIDENT: So that's where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that's also a huge driver of cost, right?

I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.

So how do you - how do we deal with it?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that's part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.



Hey, It's Not a "Death Panel" That's preposterous. It's an "Independent when to stop trying to save your life panel" Much better, right?

Oh, except it doesn't matter to Obama, cuz he's got the cash either way. Or Congress, cuz they've voted themselves exempt from Obamacare.

Fits nicely with this:



[This message has been edited by Rick Kuchynka (8/14/2009)]

At least he's being honest:

Obama Defends Health Care Plan to Town Hall Skeptic
http://www.foxnews.com/po...eads-west/

Obama agreed that he couldn't insure the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans for free.

The president said two-thirds of the cost could be covered in such ways, by "eliminating waste and inefficiencies."

If he truly wants to eliminate "Waste and Inefficiencies" he could start by not getting the Government involved in health care to begin with.

The hardest, closest thing to eternal life on the face of the Earth is a government program. - Ronald Wilson Reagan

I'm with Jimbo! The only lies I can stomach are the ones that result in wholesale carnage and death.

Jimbo, a lack of coherent thought on the listener's part does not constitute a "lie" on the speaker's part.

Bertrand Russell said it best: "A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."

More MSM coverage of the healthcare debate:

http://www.newsweek.com/i...?GT1=43002

It's not the ramblings of a hobo, so you can probably disregard it, Jimbo. Everyone else, feel free to point, click and read.

Personally, I am opposed to any form of healthcare for birthers and deathers*. Their problems cannot be fixed by any amount of medicine, counseling, bloodletting or Santeria.

* - indicates a certain degree of sarcasm.

[This message has been edited by Brian A. Reed (8/14/2009)]

I say we can cut that 47 million uninsured number by excluding the illegle aliens (12 million or so) from the program. Certainly there has to be agreement on this point. I think the first time an illegle shows up in an emergency room we patch him/her up and give him/her passage home, with a bill for services rendered that has to be settled before legal entry to the country is obtained. I guess after we do that a few times to the same alien we may have to consider "care counseling".

I truly believe reform is possible, but not with government control or administration. I also agree with Jim that President Obama needs to be a little bit more honest and open about his true agenda, Isn't that what he ran on.

"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."

To quote a famous conservative...

"There you go again.."

Quoting one avowed Socialist and Elitist, to defend another...

Pathetic.

It's a waste of time to pay any attention to what a Socialist (Marxist, Communist..whatever) is saying because they will say anything to mask their true agenda. That's why they are all pathological liars like Obama.

What you need to be paying attention to is what they are actually doing to you.

I think the recent events at the "Town Hall" meetings shows there is an increasing awareness in people across the Country to cut through the leftist bulls**t and focus on what is actually happening.

You should try it.

I have no hope for "Crotch to Gullet Jimbo", Rickenhawk, Ricardo, " Golly I Hate Mexicans Aboodipdsh*t",etc. But, Kyle, do you really agree with these idiots?

I think the recent events at the "Town Hall" meetings shows there is an increasing awareness in people across the Country to cut through the leftist bulls**t and focus on what is actually happening.

I know what's happening to me... double-digit annual increases in my health insurance premiums combined with higher annual deductibles, higher annual out-of-pocket maximums, etc. What's happening to you, Jim? What would you do to address these issues, Jim?

From all I've seen the so-called "Death Panel" has been debunked so perpetuating a falsehood makes no sense to me.

It's working perfectly, though.

It's a waste of time to pay any attention to what a Socialist (Marxist, Communist..whatever) is saying because they will say anything to mask their true agenda. That's why they are all pathological liars like Obama.

Wow. How logical of you, Brainiac. Why should anyone listen to you? Honestly, Jimbo - seek help.

This is the issue that needs to be discussed. How much are we willing to pay, as a society, for those last few days and/or hours of life? If you are in decent shape, you have nothing to worry about but if you are dying, are in agony, are gone mentally, should your family spend an extra hundred thousand to keep you from cooling off for a few days at most?

THAT question does have to asked and telling lies about death panels prevents people from having that discussion. Vast amounts of money are expended in the last few days or weeks of a life when there is no chance to save that life. Do we want our resources directed in that way? To extend a life a brief time?

I do NOT want to plugged into anything once it becomes obvious I am going. I want DNR orders when the times comes. What everyone needs to decide, however, is what they want. Do they want those last few hours and/or days, at great expense? Are those hours that important to you? If they are, how should you pay for them?

Again, lies and hysterics does not help anyone deal with these very real, very serious issues. Calm discussion does.

Fear rules, Amorette. That and Snow Leopard.

How much are we willing to pay, as a society, for those last few days and/or hours of life?

The problem is that you can't just limit it to a 'last few hours' Once you start this debate, it becomes 'last few months' or 'last couple years'

But let's boil this all down to what its about.

Obama said two things that nutshell it all for us

Whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else's aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they're terminally ill is a sustainable model, is a very difficult question.

and

I don't know how much that hip replacement cost. I would have paid out of pocket for that hip replacement just because she's my grandmother.

This seems to be a cut and dried indication that people with less money will by necessity receive inferior care. I'd argue this is a no-brainer and as inevitable as the sunset, but this seems to be THE point that lefties have the most trouble with.

Do poor people have a right to the exact same quality of care as people who can pay more?

Is that possible to enforce? (I'd argue it isn't) Would you want to enforce it?

Rick has summed it up. Poor people DO NOT have rights in regard to quality of care. Rich Gramma = SAFE. Poor Gramma = DEAD.

Being perfect, Rick, I don't suppose you'll ever be hospitalized. If you are, I pray you'll never have to gaze upon the horror of a poor person receiving quality care.

Demonize all you want, Bob.

What you're doing is avoiding the issue. What Obama says is an ethical dilemma for treating the poor is something he'll just write a check for for his own family.

How is that different from what I just said?

As a poor Gramma, I must say this discussion is a tad distasteful to me...Hopefully, I have the same rights to live as a rich counterpart has...If my life expectancy depends solely on my bank balance, I should look into the funeral arrangements immediately...

Rick said:

What you're doing is avoiding the issue. What Obama says is an ethical dilemma for treating the poor is something he'll just write a check for for his own family.

So because he can afford his own families' health care, he should automatically disregard health care for poor families? No. That's the way selfish jerks like YOU think, Rick, not the president.

What in this country depends on money?

Justice? Think OJ.

Preventative care? All those who can afford good supplements, early care before an illness gets bad, even surgeries that are considered optional (breast removal with no cancer due to family history).

Nutrition? Those with more money can buy higher quality healthy food.

The truth is money has and always will get you several levels above the general population.

Do we really want to pay for kidney dialysis for a 400 pound 80 year old man with terminal cancer who refuses to manage his diabetes or a kidney transplant for an alcoholic who has been through treatment 15 times and still drinks daily? Decisions must be made and we must be allowed to discuss these things without Sarah Palin shouting that Obama wants to murder her baby.

Sorry, Howdy, your life expectancy is very much determined by your bank account. That's what needs to be reformed. Choices should be made on other criteria than "I'm rich, I want it all" and "I"m poor. I'll take a cheap funeral," which is the current system.

Translation:

Force those who have the means to pay for those who do not, regardless if they want to pay for them.

If memory serves, I think this "Forced Collective" was tried once before.

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (8/16/2009)]

"perpetuating a falsehood makes no sense to me"

Kyle we are ALREADY paying for education for those who could not afford tuition in our k-12 system. Do you object to that too?

You can only drive on the part of the road YOU paid for?

"perpetuating a falsehood makes no sense to me"

And Buck?

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (8/16/2009)]

Wow. How logical of you, Brainiac. Why should anyone listen to you? Honestly, Jimbo - seek help.

Bob and weave, Brian....Bob and weave.

I don't really give two s**ts whether anybody listens to me or not but when it comes to socialism, I do know a thing or two.

After all, I was instructed by the finest cadre of Marxists, socialists and communists the University of Montana had to offer, back in the day this script was being written.

There are a lot of innuendos and false propaganda going around concerning the Health reforms.

The link below is a summation of the debate and what is true and what is false. I would encourage everyone to watch this then perhaps we can have a meaningful conversation regarding health care.

http://www.cbsnews.com/vi...ontentBody

Whoa! Jimbo is a closet commie!

good summary..thanks for posting that...and yeah Bob, isn't the opposite of socialist a communist?? Hmmm...Jim, are you a card carrying one??

http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html

[This message has been edited by howdy (8/16/2009)]

"perpetuating a falsehood makes no sense to me"

And Buck?

...

You must have been in the middle of editing out the part about the "Eastern Bloc" when I hit submit

And Jim, that's my new all-time favorite post.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (8/16/2009)]

Jim - You make it sound as if UM grads come out of there like something from "The Manchurian Candidate".

" isn't the opposite of socialist a communist??"

No, Communism is nothing more than socialism at gun-point.

Richard, you need to read up on Communism vs Socialism...You are wrong..they are complete opposite theories IMO..To me Socialism is simply an economic theory, and communism is controlled by a precious few sometimes just one person...like a dictatorship..

[This message has been edited by howdy (8/16/2009)]

So because he can afford his own families' health care, he should automatically disregard health care for poor families? No. That's the way selfish jerks like YOU think, Rick, not the president.

Thanks Bob, I really appreciate that. But writing utopia down on a piece of paper does not bring it about. And it's clear you're not grasping what Obama was saying. His grandmother was a Medicare patient (just like 90% of hip replacement candidates) He's saying he's not sure government paying for that kind of surgery after a terminal diagnosis makes sense, even though they did so in her case.. He's weighing denial of care (which is a necessity in a socialized system), while you give him credit for the opposite.

Choices should be made on other criteria than "I'm rich, I want it all" and "I"m poor. I'll take a cheap funeral," which is the current system.

The only choices that can really be made are what services to deny the masses, and whether to force rich people to leave the country to get them. And ironically, the more tightly you try to control, the more miserable it is for everyone.

Like in Britain, Rick?

http://www.politicsdaily....ight-back/

another article about it in the New York Times....

http://thelede.blogs.nyti...h-service/

Wow, politicians talking about what a wonderful job they do.

Then again, their system does a lot of the stuff our system is considered evil because of.

http://www.dailymail.co.u...ation.html

or maybe they like it so much because they make sure they vote themselves the best of the best.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/h...319911.stm

The one thing you can't get away from... more money = better care.

If you can accept that, you might find a solution. Otherwise, you're just looking for unicorns.

Do poor people have a right to the exact same quality of care as people who can pay more?

I don't think this is the right question. The real question is "Do poor people have a right to a basic level of quality medical care?" To me the answer is "yes". Will this affect the ability of the rich to obtain better care? I don't think there is anything that will do that. Money buys anything and the rich will always be able to get premium services. This happens in socialized countries as well.