Sarah Palin Information Blog

Sarah Palin Web Brigade

  • Upcoming Palin Events

  • Sarah Palin’s Endorsees

  • Sarah Palin Channel

  • Amazing America

  • The Undefeated

  • ‘Stars Earn Stripes’

  • ‘Game Change’ Lies Exposed

  • Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas

  • Our Sarah: Made in Alaska

  • America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag

  • Going Rogue: An American Life

  • Other Sarah Palin Info Sources

  • Login/RSS

  • Governor Palin on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinUSA

  • Governor Palin on Facebook

  • SarahPAC Notes

  • RSS SarahPAC Notes

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • SPWB on Facebook

  • SPWB on Twitter

  • @SarahPalinLinks

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Join the SPWB Twibe!

  • Posts by Date

    October 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan    
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • __________________________________________
  • Top Posts & Pages

  • __________________________________________
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • __________________________________________

Posts Tagged ‘death panels’

Must Read on Obamacare, Death Panels, and Who’s Now In Agreement

Posted by Jackie Siciliano on July 29, 2013

Fists_in_air

She warned us.  Sarah Palin warned us over, and over, and over.  The term “death panels”, which Palin brought to the forefront of the Obamacare discussion in 2009, was mocked and ridiculed.  In fact, the Breitbart  article below reminds us that it was Politifact’s “Lie of the Year” in 2009.

Okay, to be fair, the death panels are not exactly referred to as “death panels” in the Affordable Care Act but as “IPAB” (Independent Payment Advisory Board).  It should be noted that even the American Medical Association supports the repeal of IPAB.

It seems that yet again, Palin was right.

Following is a must-read article written by John Nolte over at Breitbart.  In it you just might be surprised at who is now saying essentially what Palin wrote about some four years ago.

 

In December of 2009, Politifact, a left-wing website that poses as an objective fact checker, awarded former Alaska governor Sarah Palin its “Lie of the Year.” Politifact claimed that Palin’s use of the term “death panel” to describe the rationing that will come with ObamaCare was the biggest whopper of ’09:

Of all the falsehoods and distortions in the political discourse this year, one stood out from the rest.

“Death panels.” …

[Palin’s] assertion — that the government would set up boards to determine whether seniors and the disabled were worthy of care — spread through newscasts, talk shows, blogs and town hall meetings. Opponents of health care legislation said it revealed the real goals of the Democratic proposals. Advocates for health reform said it showed the depths to which their opponents would sink. Still others scratched their heads and said, “Death panels?  Really?”

Yes, really.

And Democrat Howard Dean agrees. In a Monday Wall Street Journal op-ed, Dean writes:

One major problem [with ObamaCare] is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

Here is what Palin wrote four years ago:

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course.

If what Dean fears comes true, specifically that “IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them,” it takes no leap of logic or faith to fear which expensive and/or experimental procedures will not be covered.

Of course that kind of thinking is most likely to hurt those seen as the least desirable by bureaucrats — those unable to “contribute”: the elderly, disabled, and sick. (Palin forgot one group: the unborn.)

IPAB is what Palin directly referred to in her “death panel” post. And for spelling out the truth about the obvious human consequence of a rationing problem both she and Howard Dean agree is very real, she was awarded Politifact’s “Lie of the Year.”

What is important to remember, though, is that Palin was falsely smeared with PolitiFact’s “award” in December of 2009. At the time, ObamaCare was still four months from being signed into law and still not a sure thing to make it that far. More

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Rush Limbaugh: Sarah Palin was right – the death panels have always been in Obamacare

Posted by Dr. Fay on September 29, 2012

Video retrieved from   (h/tp C4P)

From the transcript (emphasis mine):

CALLER:  Okay.  But I was wondering if you came across an article by Steven Rattner in the New York Times called “Beyond Obamacare” where the very first line of the article is “WE need death panels”?

[…]

RUSH:  I don’t read it [New York Times]. Is that really…? Steven Rattner was the car czar.  He was the first car czar.  He’s Little Pinch Sulzberger’s best friend.

[…]

CALLER:  Yeah.  I tried to get you yesterday, ’cause you were talking about somebody bringing up how stupid Sarah Palin is, and I’m sitting here saying, “I remember how crazy the left went when she brought up death panels or Betsy McCaughey would bring it up or you would bring it up or Glenn Beck brings it up.” We’re always crazy when we bring up these things, but here we are right here in the New York Times, Steven Rattner, one of Obama’s guys puts it right out there. “WE need death panels.”  Then he goes on to say, well, maybe we should call it rationing.

RUSH:  You know, I don’t know what he’s wishing for.  They’re already there.

CALLER:  Yeah.

RUSH:  We’ve already got rationing in Obamacare.  There’s already going to be death panels. (interruption) Snerdley just found it and has confirmed your reading of the story.

CALLER:  Yeah, another quote that I think is kind of exciting is you’re talking about how Obama’s giving away cell phones and all that stuff. So I guess we’re entitled to cell phones but it says here “that elderly Americans are not entitled to every conceivable medical procedure or pharmaceutical.”  So they’ll give you phones, they’ll give you food stamps, but they won’t give you life.

RUSH:  Let me tell you what this is.  Let me tell you what this is.  Rattner just doesn’t one day decide to write this piece.

CALLER:  No!

RUSH:  Just like last November, Thomas Edsall didn’t just decide to write a piece that the Obama campaign was writing off white working-class voters.  That piece was aimed right at New York Times readers, and the purpose of that piece is to get it out there that there are going to be death panels so that when it happens, they’re ready. Particularly the death panels are gonna be judging whether or not the elderly live. It’s exactly what we’ve all said!

CALLER:  Yes.

RUSH: It’s whether or not it makes sense to spend the money to keep ’em alive.

CALLER:  Amen, and there it’s right there.

RUSH:  Obama, you remember the ABC special where the woman asked Obama about her hundred-year-old mother, whether or not she could get a pacemaker and Obama said, “No, no, no. Maybe let’s give her a pill.” The death panels have always been in there.  Palin put it out there, and the reason they jumped on her is because she was right. She revealed what was supposed to be a hidden truth.

CALLER:  Yep.  And that just goes back to what you’ve always said, Rush, that you can always tell when you hit a nerve by the way they react.  When the truth comes out, if they react really nuts then you hit ’em.

RUSH:  Yep.

CALLER:  You got ’em.

RUSH:  Stuck pigs.  I mean, it really is true.  Okay.  Well, thanks for the heads up, Rick.  So Steven Rattner, Obama’s car czar, big friend of Little Pinch Sulzberger.  It’s a piece entitled “Beyond Obamacare,” is that what it is?  “Beyond Obamacare,” by Steven Rattner. “WE need death panels.”  That’s how it starts.  Well, see, Rattner knows that there are already death panels in it.  By death panel, I mean: “As the secretary shall determine…” That’s the secretary of Health and Human Services right now, Sebelius.

So she will appoint panels that will decide.

Once Obamacare is fully implemented, folks, once it’s fully implemented, there will be rationing.  There can’t be any alternative to that once the government’s responsible for paying for everything. They don’t have an endless supply of money, either.  The question will be, “Does it make more sense to spend a lot of money on surgery or treatment or pharmaceuticals for somebody statistically close to death, or does it make sense to save that money and spend it on a young person that might end up in an accident or what have you?”

That’s gonna be the calculation.

Your life will actually come down to a dollars-and-cents value assigned to you — as a number, by the way — by the government.  It was always part of Obamacare.  Sarah Palin was right.  It was always there. We’ve all been right.  They’re lying about everything to us.  In fact, that debate next Wednesday night, you know we ought to do? Do a Lie-o-Meter.  We ought to just sit there and just scratch it up. Every time Obama lies about something, make a note. And at the end of the debate, add ’em up, ’cause it’s gonna be one lie after another.

That’s all Obama’s been doing.

That’s all he can do, if his record comes up, is lie about it.

Read more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Palin: “Death Panel” Three Years Later

Posted by Jackie Siciliano on June 25, 2012

Governor Sarah Palin has once again taken to her Facebook page to remind us that some three years ago she was speaking out against the unconstitutional “Obamacare”.  You may recall that Palin’s remarks about “death panels” were considered to be, at minimum, controversial and by some an out-and-out lie.  As time went by and we learned more about the monstrosity that is known as the Affordable Care Act, Palin was proven to be absolutely correct in her assessment of rationed care, AKA “death panels”.

At time of writing, we the people are awaiting the decision of the United States Supreme Court with regards to the future of this law.

Posted to Facebook by Palin earlier today:

As we wait for the impending Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, I reiterate what I wrote in my first post on this topic nearly three years ago. I stand by everything I wrote in that warning to my fellow Americans because what was true then is true now, and it will remain true as we hear what the Supreme Court has to say.

It was a pretty long post, but a lot of people seem to have only read two words of it: “death panel.” Though I was called a liar for calling it like it is, many of these accusers finally saw that Obamacare did in fact create a panel of faceless bureaucrats who have the power to make life and death decisions about health care funding. It’s called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and its purpose all along has been to “keep costs down” by actually denying care via price controls and typically inefficient bureaucracy. This subjective rationing of care is what I was writing about in that first post:

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.

We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.

If the Supreme Court doesn’t strike down Obamacare entirely, then Congress must act to repeal IPAB and Obamacare before it is indeed “too late.” All of Obamacare must go one way or another.

– Sarah Palin

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ten Must-Have Apps for Sarah Palin Followers

Posted by ehvogel on March 6, 2011

I keep reading about this must-have app and that must-have app, so I decided to create a list for some creative entrepreneur that understands apps (my preference being Android). Here are my suggestions for 10 must-have apps for Sarah Palin followers:

1. Real time notices of Sarah Palin Facebook or Twitter postings. Sarah Palin followers just have to be the first to know about a new post.

2. Upcoming Sarah Palin media appearances. Whether it be Fox News or a simple radio appearance, real-time updates of coming appearances would be most helpful.

3. A register of new online polls regarding Sarah Palin. We like to vote for positive things regarding Sarah and need to know where to go to support her in any online poll.

4. Red Alerts for countering media bias regarding Sarah Palin and her family. We like to voice our opinions regarding Sarah to help counter any negative “hit piece” that is published about Sarah or her family. Links to comment pages would be a welcome thing.

5. Video archives of Sarah Palin appearances. We would like a depository of Sarah Palin videos that we could link to on our smart-phones to help counter real-time Sarah critics that we come across in our daily lives.

6. Sarah Palin’s favorite wild-game recipes. After all, you can only make Moose stew once in a while.

7. Sarah Palin quotes. She has coined or re-invented such fabulous terms as “death panels”, “going rogue”, “mama grizzlies”, “blood libel”, “a servant’s heart”, “lamestream media”, “refudiate” and others. We want to use these terms and would like instant access to new and existing ones, for whatever purpose. It would also be helpful to have links to the source where where she first used them.

8. Shoes. Okay, I throw this one out for all those wonderful ladies that notice another woman’s shoes. I suspect they might like to know what latest fashion Sarah is wearing on her feet, whether they be pumps or sloggers.

9. Sarah Palin media smack-downs. Okay, I know this could be included in #4 above, but it deserves its own app because we like Sarah’s feistiness and want to be the first to applaud it.

10. Smiles. Sarah Palin has one of the most magnificent smiles that has ever existed in a politician. We want to see every single one that comes across whatever media source runs it for a collective glimpse into her heart.

I could probably go on, but you get the idea. App-makers?

Cross-posted on Generational Dysfunction

Posted in 2012, Sarah Palin | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What Sarah Palin Means to the World

Posted by ehvogel on February 27, 2011

I’ve been contemplating all that it means for Sarah Palin to run for the presidency of the United States. Yes, she’s fiscally conservative, so check one off for the Wisconsin debate to end the grip of unions on our government budgets. Yes, she’s pro-life and pro-marriage, as defined by DOMA, so check one off for social conservatives. She’s also against the ground-zero mosque, so check one off for our Christian heritage. She was also spot-on regarding enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya, so check one off for foreign affairs.

My thoughts then drifted to energy. Score another one for Sarah from the outset, as she’s been saying “drill, baby, drill” since drilling was cool. Now it’s been halted, thanks to Obama. I then thought about Obamacare. Yep, check one off there as well. Her “death panels” comment started the bill on its path to destruction, God willing.

Now I’m left with a different thought. What does Sarah Palin mean to the world?

Sarah Palin is the only politician in the world who can calm it. She doesn’t have to do much, she only has to convey a sense of resolve. I haven’t seen any resolve from Washington regarding all the events that are unfolding in the Mideast and elsewhere. I haven’t seen anyone step up on the world stage and say that this is NOT the end of times. (I’ve heard that….have you?) I don’t believe it, however, because I know how resilient the American economy is. And, after all, isn’t that what all the unrest is about: the economy?

Sarah Palin could announce that she will run for President of the United States, but it won’t be a simple announcement that will make a difference. It will be her personality and resolve to champion all things that make this country great that will have an impact. Hers is an understanding of this country’s greatness that mirrors the majority of Americans. The majority of Americans just don’t yet know that. They still only know the crap that’s being fed them by the left-wing, lamestream media. But that will change.

Ronald Reagan captured our sense of resolve and evoked a “can do” attitude when he began his campaign, which we sorely need right now. Barack Obama has done his level best to subvert our lofty expectations of the future and why? It’s quite simple, really. Barack Obama believes that government is the end-all, be-all of the American experience, which is as far from the truth as possible. Without the understanding that it’s the American people that make this country great, he is doomed. And without a strong America leading the way, our world is doomed to experience more unrest like we see today in the Mideast, northern Africa and elsewhere.

When the world senses a fading American dream, it loses its bearings and rightly so. We have to lead by example, not words. We have to lead by doing, not hoping. Moreover, we can only return to greatness if our leaders in Washington believe the same things that we do and get out of our way to prove it.

Sarah Palin oozes confidence in the American dream. She knows what will inspire us and it isn’t some government program. She has confidence in us and, so far, she’s the only politician that seems to understand that and has understood it from the beginning.

The minute that Ronald Reagan was elected President, the Iran hostage situation was over. The hostage takers knew their days were numbered with Reagan in office and they were right. The minute that Sarah Palin is elected President, the world will know that the United States has resurrected itself and act accordingly, deferring to principled leadership. That, my friends, is what Sarah Palin means to the world.

Cross-posted on Generational Dysfunction.

Posted in 2012, Sarah Palin | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

The Palin Patch; She Wins Again

Posted by Adrienne Ross on January 5, 2011

By Adrienne Ross – http://www.motivationtruth.com

Today, Ben Smith of Politico states, “Palin wins again.” True, and with this new development, so does everyone else–at least for now.

I reported last week here, here, and here about the recent awareness that those “death panels” that had been removed from legislation once Governor Palin sounded the alarm had roared back to life through sneaky regulation. Out they go again. In an article called “The Palin Patch,” The New York Sun reports:

Hats off to President Obama for what the New York Times reports this morning is a reversal of course by which the administration will drop the use of a regulation to cover under Obamacare end-of-life planning that the Congress had specifically declined to provide via the legislative process. One could call it the “Palin Patch,” after the former governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, whose warning that this kind of planning, when funded by the government, could lead to what amount to “death panels.”

It happens that we are not against end-of-life planning. We will never forget, as one of our own parents lay near death, facing a question in respect of treatment where we suddenly realized we didn’t know what was permissible. We raced out of the hospital to a portico where we could use a cell phone and reached a rabbi (he happened to be at a wedding several states inland), who told us that the sages had long since reasoned out the correct course and that it was clear. Having had that counsel was a great relief and having been able to have it in advance would have been better.

It also happens , however, that we share Mrs. Palin’s concern, particularly when the counseling is coming from doctors rather than sages. Covering such counseling via a government program that is also paying for the medical treatment seems all too likely to lead to the kind of death panels of which Mrs. Palin warned, which is no doubt why congress took the funding out of the Obamacare bill in the first place. Better to leave such matters, which involve the nexus of medicine and religion and ethics, in private hands.

That wasn’t what moved the Obama administration to make the Palin patch. According to the Times report — in a story by Robert Pear, who also broke the story of administration’s attempt to sneak end-of-life counseling into use by regulation after Congress had refused to do it by legislation — the administration had come to recognize the procedural error and “political concerns were also a factor.”

Read the rest here.

(h/t Josh Painter)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bart Stupak: ObamaCare Is A Death Panel For Children

Posted by Gary P Jackson on March 12, 2010

If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is LIFE we’re talking about.”

If was any doubt that Sarah Palin’s warning about the death cult the democrat party has become since the ultra-radical progressive movement wrested control of the party from it’s more reasonable members, the above quotes should end that debate for all time.

Those words come from democrat Congressman Bart Stupak. Congressman Stupak is one of just a handful of principled democrats left in government, and a real hero.

Stupak, of course, is talking about abortion funding here. You see, like most Americans, Congressman Stupak believes in the sanctity of life. He is leading a small group of like minded democrats who oppose tax payer funded abortion.

When Sarah Palin wrote her famous blog post pointing out the reality that her beautiful son, because of his disability, and her parents, because of their age, would not fare well when they went before ObamaCare’s “death panels” she was dead on.

Of course, the radical progressives lost their minds, and tried to discredit Sarah with all kinds of caterwauling and slight of hand, but at the end of the day, all Americans will face ObamaCare’s “death panels” each and every time they need health care.

Look, I won’t rehash all of this over and over. Long time readers as well as newcomers can search my blog archives for complete analysis. But here are the highlights:

First of all, yes, there will be “death panels” and no, they won’t be called that. As we have talked about, ad nauseam, there will be “comparative medicine boards” where a group of faceless, nameless bureaucrats will decide who gets care and who doesn’t. This won’t be based on what will be best for the patient, these people won’t be weighing on the best medical practices for an individual.

You see, these “comparative medicine boards” will be made up of accountants, bean counters. Their only goal will be saving the government, which will be in complete control of health care, money. The easiest way to cut costs is to deny, or limit, coverage to those deemed “unworthy.”

The ramifications from this twisted thinking are enormous.

Even worse, we all know that it is all but impossible to fire a government worker, once they are entrenched, and there will be almost no way to meaningfully appeal one of the poor decisions made by these government drones.

The bottom line is this: Once ObamaCare becomes law, the only thing that will matter to the government is shaving costs. Let’s face it, the government, because of entitlements already promised, is broke. Adding a couple of trillion dollars more, just to start, isn’t going to help matters a whole lot.

How will the government save money? By only treating the “productive” members of society, of course!

Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama’s health care advisor, literally wrote the book that sets up, not only the “death panels” but the guidelines for who should be allowed to live, and who can be left to die.

Emanuel, vying for the title of “America’s Josef Mengele” wrote about the “complete lives system.” This lays out the argument that only the most productive deserve the best health care. Every American should read this. It comes from a truly diseased mind, and represents the progressive movement that controls the democrat party completely. Read it all here.

Here is a chart that explains the thinking of the radical left:

As you see, once you get past 30 years of age, the government won’t think very much of your ability to be productive. How insane is that?

What is so glaring to me though, is just how vile and cold these progressive democrats are. Of course, progressives have pushed the mass murder of babies since the turn of the last century. Ever since Margaret Sanger worked to make abortion acceptable, to “cleanse” the earth of blacks and other “human weeds” (her words) progressives have been on board. Sanger’s Planned Parenthood is the holy church of the progressive movement. The right to murder babies is one thing this bunch will actually go to war over.

Even so, for the death cult to openly admit they want massive tax payer funded abortions, and less babies…LESS AMERICANS… to save money for this unconstitutional ObamaCare boondoggle is simply breathtaking.

Quite simply, fewer babies means fewer people ObamaCare will have to cover.

There is something inherently evil in this sort of thinking.

Congressman Stupack made the above comments as part of a lengthy interview with National Review Online. The interview paints a horrific picture of what is happening with the health care debate is a must read. Here’s some more:

Sitting in an airport, on his way home to Michigan, Rep. Bart Stupak, a pro-life Democrat, is chagrined. “They’re ignoring me,” he says, in a phone interview with National Review Online. “That’s their strategy now. The House Democratic leaders think they have the votes to pass the Senate’s health-care bill without us. At this point, there is no doubt that they’ve been able to peel off one or two of my twelve. And even if they don’t have the votes, it’s been made clear to us that they won’t insert our language on the abortion issue.”

According to Stupak, that group of twelve pro-life House Democrats — the “Stupak dozen” — has privately agreed for months to vote ‘no’ on the Senate’s health-care bill if federal funding for abortion is included in the final legislative language. Now, in the debate’s final hours, Stupak says the other eleven are coming under “enormous” political pressure from both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). “I am a definite ‘no’ vote,” he says. “I didn’t cave. The others are having both of their arms twisted, and we’re all getting pounded by our traditional Democratic supporters, like unions.”

Read it all here.

The sanctity of life, the protection of the innocent, is what sets us apart from the lower species. It should alarm all people, worldwide, that this President and his Congress not only want to promote the destruction of human life, in a crass attempt to save money for a health care overhaul that the American people don’t even want, but want the American people to pay for it too!

It’s fantastically evil.

It’s also one more reason that ObamaCare must be defeated and the progressives run completely out of government for all time.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: Midnight Votes, Backroom Deals, and a Death Panel: The Continuing Constitutional Crisis

Posted by Gary P Jackson on December 23, 2009

More like Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil with this bunch!

At what should be the happiest, most wonderfully magical time of the year, a great evil has gripped the nation. The most corrupt Congress in our nation’s history in lockstep with the most corrupt and evil man to ever step foot in the Oval Office are committing acts that amount to no less than treason.

As we wrote earlier, in a piece entitled Death of the Republic, some serious maneuvering by Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid slipped some language into the already grossly unconstitutional Obamacare fiasco that would prohibit future Congresses from making changes or repealing key measures of this legislation.

As you can imagine, the outrage over this is through the roof nationwide.

Ironically, and well…even laughably, this provision that Reid and the other communists want to make sure is never, ever modified, or repealed, is the very death panel that the communists and their lap dogs in the corrupt, Obamacentric media have been working night and day, with almost superhuman effort, to convince the public that it never existed!!

It was even deemed “lie of the year” by the radical left wing media!

Sarah has now weighed in on the subject:

Midnight Votes, Backroom Deals, and a Death Panel

Last weekend while you were preparing for the holidays with your family, Harry Reid’s Senate was making shady backroom deals to ram through the Democrat health care take-over. The Senate ended debate on this bill without even reading it. That and midnight weekend votes seem to be standard operating procedures in D.C. No one is certain of what’s in the bill, but Senator Jim DeMint spotted one shocking revelation regarding the section in the bill describing the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (now called the Independent Payment Advisory Board), which is a panel of bureaucrats charged with cutting health care costs on the backs of patients – also known as rationing. Apparently Reid and friends have changed the rules of the Senate so that the section of the bill dealing with this board can’t be repealed or amended without a 2/3 supermajority vote. Senator DeMint said:

This is a rule change. It’s a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. I’m not even sure that it’s constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don’t see why the majority party wouldn’t put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates. I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future congresses.

In other words, Democrats are protecting this rationing “death panel” from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they’re so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to “bend the cost curve” and keep health care spending down?

The Congressional Budget Office seems to think that such rationing has something to do with cost. In a letter to Harry Reid last week, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf noted (with a number of caveats) that the bill’s calculations call for a reduction in Medicare’s spending rate by about 2 percent in the next two decades, but then he writes the kicker:

It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.

Though Nancy Pelosi and friends have tried to call “death panels” the “lie of the year,” this type of rationing – what the CBO calls “reduc[ed] access to care” and “diminish[ed] quality of care” – is precisely what I meant when I used that metaphor.

This health care bill is one of the most far-reaching and expensive expansions of the role of government into our lives. We’re talking about putting one-seventh of our economy under the government’s thumb. We’re also talking about something as intimate to our personal well-being as medical care.

This bill is so unpopular that people on the right and the left hate it. So why go through with it? The Senate is planning to vote on this on Christmas Eve. Why the rush? Though we will begin paying for this bill immediately, we will see no benefits for years. (That’s the trick that allowed the CBO to state that the bill won’t grow the deficit for the next ten years.)

The administration’s promises of transparency and bipartisanship have been broken one by one. This entire process has been defined by midnight votes on weekends, closed-door meetings with industry lobbyists, and payoffs to politicians willing to sell their principles for sweetheart deals. Is it any wonder that Americans are so disillusioned with their leaders in Washington?

This is about politics, not health care. Americans don’t want this bill. Americans don’t like this bill. Washington has stopped listening to us. But we’re paying attention, and 2010 is coming.

I love this woman! The radical communist scumbags in the media, Congress, and the White House keep saying she’s crazy with the death panel talk, trying to intimidate her, and she comes right back and shoves it up their @sses!

BOOM, taste my nightstick!

Sarah, of course, is correct here. This is all about politics and nothing about health care. This is an evil, wicked thing that is being visited on the American people as we get ready to celebrate the birth of Christ, our Lord and Savior.

At the end of her note, Sarah references an opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal that must be read:

Change Nobody Believes In

A bill so reckless that it has to be rammed through on a partisan vote on Christmas eve.
And tidings of comfort and joy from Harry Reid too. The Senate Majority Leader has decided that the last few days before Christmas are the opportune moment for a narrow majority of Democrats to stuff ObamaCare through the Senate to meet an arbitrary White House deadline. Barring some extraordinary reversal, it now seems as if they have the 60 votes they need to jump off this cliff, with one-seventh of the economy in tow.

Mr. Obama promised a new era of transparent good government, yet on Saturday morning Mr. Reid threw out the 2,100-page bill that the world’s greatest deliberative body spent just 17 days debating and replaced it with a new “manager’s amendment” that was stapled together in covert partisan negotiations. Democrats are barely even bothering to pretend to care what’s in it, not that any Senator had the chance to digest it in the 38 hours before the first cloture vote at 1 a.m. this morning. After procedural motions that allow for no amendments, the final vote could come at 9 p.m. on December 24.

Even in World War I there was a Christmas truce.

The rushed, secretive way that a bill this destructive and unpopular is being forced on the country shows that “reform” has devolved into the raw exercise of political power for the single purpose of permanently expanding the American entitlement state. An increasing roll of leaders in health care and business are looking on aghast at a bill that is so large and convoluted that no one can truly understand it, as Finance Chairman Max Baucus admitted on the floor last week. The only goal is to ram it into law while the political window is still open, and clean up the mess later.

***

• Health costs. From the outset, the White House’s core claim was that reform would reduce health costs for individuals and businesses, and they’re sticking to that story. “Anyone who says otherwise simply hasn’t read the bills,” Mr. Obama said over the weekend. This is so utterly disingenuous that we doubt the President really believes it.

The best and most rigorous cost analysis was recently released by the insurer WellPoint, which mined its actuarial data in various regional markets to model the Senate bill. WellPoint found that a healthy 25-year-old in Milwaukee buying coverage on the individual market will see his costs rise by 178%. A small business based in Richmond with eight employees in average health will see a 23% increase. Insurance costs for a 40-year-old family with two kids living in Indianapolis will pay 106% more. And on and on.

These increases are solely the result of ObamaCare—above and far beyond the status quo—because its strict restrictions on underwriting and risk-pooling would distort insurance markets. All but a handful of states have rejected regulations like “community rating” because they encourage younger and healthier buyers to wait until they need expensive care, increasing costs for everyone. Benefits and pricing will now be determined by politics.

As for the White House’s line about cutting costs by eliminating supposed “waste,” even Victor Fuchs, an eminent economist generally supportive of ObamaCare, warned last week that these political theories are overly simplistic. “The oft-heard promise ‘we will find out what works and what does not’ scarcely does justice to the complexity of medical practice,” the Stanford professor wrote.

• Steep declines in choice and quality. This is all of a piece with the hubris of an Administration that thinks it can substitute government planning for market forces in determining where the $33 trillion the U.S. will spend on medicine over the next decade should go.

This centralized system means above all fewer choices; what works for the political class must work for everyone. With formerly private insurers converted into public utilities, for instance, they’ll inevitably be banned from selling products like health savings accounts that encourage more cost-conscious decisions.

Unnoticed by the press corps, the Congressional Budget Office argued recently that the Senate bill would so “substantially reduce flexibility in terms of the types, prices, and number of private sellers of health insurance” that companies like WellPoint might need to “be considered part of the federal budget.

With so large a chunk of the economy and medical practice itself in Washington’s hands, quality will decline. Ultimately, “our capacity to innovate and develop new therapies would suffer most of all,” as Harvard Medical School Dean Jeffrey Flier recently wrote in our pages. Take the $2 billion annual tax—rising to $3 billion in 2018—that will be leveled against medical device makers, among the most innovative U.S. industries. Democrats believe that more advanced health technologies like MRI machines and drug-coated stents are driving costs too high, though patients and their physicians might disagree.

The Senate isn’t hearing those of us who are closest to the patient and work in the system every day,” Brent Eastman, the chairman of the American College of Surgeons, said in a statement for his organization and 18 other speciality societies opposing ObamaCare. For no other reason than ideological animus, doctor-owned hospitals will face harsh new limits on their growth and who they’re allowed to treat. Physician Hospitals of America says that ObamaCare will “destroy over 200 of America’s best and safest hospitals.

• Blowing up the federal fisc. Even though Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are already about 2.6 times larger than the entire U.S. economy in 2008, Democrats are crowing that ObamaCare will cost “only” $871 billion over the next decade while fantastically reducing the deficit by $132 billion, according to CBO.

Yet some 98% of the total cost comes after 2014—remind us why there must absolutely be a vote this week—and most of the taxes start in 2010. That includes the payroll tax increase for individuals earning more than $200,000 that rose to 0.9 from 0.5 percentage points in Mr. Reid’s final machinations. Job creation, here we come.

Other deceptions include a new entitlement for long-term care that starts collecting premiums tomorrow but doesn’t start paying benefits until late in the decade. But the worst is not accounting for a formula that automatically slashes Medicare payments to doctors by 21.5% next year and deeper after that. Everyone knows the payment cuts won’t happen but they remain in the bill to make the cost look lower. The American Medical Association’s priority was eliminating this “sustainable growth rate” but all they got in return for their year of ObamaCare cheerleading was a two-month patch snuck into the defense bill that passed over the weekend.

The truth is that no one really knows how much ObamaCare will cost because its assumptions on paper are so unrealistic. To hide the cost increases created by other parts of the bill and transfer them onto the federal balance sheet, the Senate sets up government-run “exchanges” that will subsidize insurance for those earning up to 400% of the poverty level, or $96,000 for a family of four in 2016. Supposedly they would only be offered to those whose employers don’t provide insurance or work for small businesses.

As Eugene Steuerle of the left-leaning Urban Institute points out, this system would treat two workers with the same total compensation—whatever the mix of cash wages and benefits—very differently. Under the Senate bill, someone who earned $42,000 would get $5,749 from the current tax exclusion for employer-sponsored coverage but $12,750 in the exchange. A worker making $60,000 would get $8,310 in the exchanges but only $3,758 in the current system.

For this reason Mr. Steuerle concludes that the Senate bill is not just a new health system but also “a new welfare and tax system” that will warp the labor market. Given the incentives of these two-tier subsidies, employers with large numbers of lower-wage workers like Wal-Mart may well convert them into “contractors” or do more outsourcing. As more and more people flood into “free” health care, taxpayer costs will explode.

• Political intimidation. The experts who have pointed out such complications have been ignored or dismissed as “ideologues” by the White House. Those parts of the health-care industry that couldn’t be bribed outright, like Big Pharma, were coerced into acceding to this agenda. The White House was able to, er, persuade the likes of the AMA and the hospital lobbies because the federal government will control 55% of total U.S. health spending under ObamaCare, according to the Administration’s own Medicare actuaries.

Others got hush money, namely Nebraska’s Ben Nelson. Even liberal Governors have been howling for months about ObamaCare’s unfunded spending mandates: Other budget priorities like education will be crowded out when about 21% of the U.S. population is on Medicaid, the joint state-federal program intended for the poor. Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman calculates that ObamaCare will result in $2.5 billion in new costs for his state that “will be passed on to citizens through direct or indirect taxes and fees,” as he put it in a letter to his state’s junior Senator.

So in addition to abortion restrictions, Mr. Nelson won the concession that Congress will pay for 100% of Nebraska Medicaid expansions into perpetuity. His capitulation ought to cost him his political career, but more to the point, what about the other states that don’t have a Senator who’s the 60th vote for ObamaCare?

***

After a nearly century-long struggle we are on the cusp of making health-care reform a reality in the United States of America,” Mr. Obama said on Saturday. He’s forced to claim the mandate of “history” because he can’t claim the mandate of voters. Some 51% of the public is now opposed, according to National Journal’s composite of all health polling. The more people know about ObamaCare, the more unpopular it becomes.

The tragedy is that Mr. Obama inherited a consensus that the health-care status quo needs serious reform, and a popular President might have crafted a durable compromise that blended the best ideas from both parties. A more honest and more thoughtful approach might have even done some good. But as Mr. Obama suggested, the Democratic old guard sees this plan as the culmination of 20th-century liberalism.

So instead we have this vast expansion of federal control. Never in our memory has so unpopular a bill been on the verge of passing Congress, never has social and economic legislation of this magnitude been forced through on a purely partisan vote, and never has a party exhibited more sheer political willfulness that is reckless even for Washington or had more warning about the consequences of its actions.

These 60 Democrats are creating a future of epic increases in spending, taxes and command-and-control regulation, in which bureaucracy trumps innovation and transfer payments are more important than private investment and individual decisions. In short, the Obama Democrats have chosen change nobody believes in—outside of themselves—and when it passes America will be paying for it for decades to come.

This health care bill is a complete and total disaster for the nation. It destroys the Republic forever. In this writer’s opinion, anyone who puts their name to this legislation is guilty of treason and deserves the harshest penalties allowed by law.

One last thing, as both Sarah and myself mentioned death panels here, I just got an e-mail linking to a nice piece from the CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank, that backs up what we’ve been writing about here, and Sarah has been saying from the start:

Death Panels? Sarah Palin Was Right

Posted by Alan Reynolds

PolitiFact.com gave Sarah Palin their “Lie of the Year” award for warning on August 7 that the Democrat’s idea of “cost containment” implied rationing by “death panels.”

The self-described fact-checking web site of the St. Petersburg Times claimed Palin was criticizing a provision in the House bill under which “Medicare would pay for doctors’ appointments for patients to discuss living wills, health care directives and other end-of-life issues.”

The claim that Governor Palin confused one-on-one counseling between doctors and patients with any sort of “panel” was always ridiculous on its face. Indeed, that claim should itself have been a leading candidate for “Lie of the Year.” Yet Palin’s critics kept on equating death panels with counseling throughout the year, as though they could not even begin to understand plain English.

In a column called “Reporting the Lies,” Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein wrote, “Before Sarah Palin talked about death panels, no one knew about Sen. Johnny Isakson’s quiet crusade to persuade Medicare beneficiaries to adopt living wills.”

Adopting a living will requires a lawyer, not a doctor, so there must have been more to the crusade than just that. There is some reason to wonder if the crusaders intended to promote penny-pinching advice like President Obama’s famous suggestion that perhaps grandma should skip the expensive operation and take a cheap pain pill instead (generic, of course).

In any case, no single physician’s advice involves any panel, deathly or otherwise. Palin was clearly worried about rationing by some government-appointed group, panel or board of experts — such the (currently) powerless panel that recently suggested fewer and later breast exams, or the Senate bill’s potentially more lethal Independent Payment Advisory Board

The shameless hoax that Palin had confused individual consulting with rationing by a panel was repeated endlessly. By November, the Washington Post was treating this obvious canard as an established fact: “Proposed health-care reform legislation includes a provision that allows Medicare to pay for “end-of-life” counseling for seniors and their families who request it. The provision — which Sarah Palin erroneously described as “death panels” for seniors — nearly derailed President Obama’s health-care initiative.

What Palin wrote about death panels clearly had nothing to do with counseling or with any other specifics in seminal House bill. What she wrote was: “Government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course.

How could anyone believe Palin’s sensible comment about rationing was, in reality, a senseless fear of counseling? To say so was no mistake; it was an oft-repeated big lie.

Rather than even mentioning the House bill, Palin linked to an interesting speech by “Rep. Michele Bachmann [which] highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff.

Dr. Emmanuel’s varied and murky remarks about using panels of experts (like himself) to ration health care are less clear or less candid than those of another bioethicist, Peter Singer of Princeton. Singer’s article, “Why We Must Ration Health Care,” was a cover feature in The New York Times Magazine on July 15 — shortly before Palin took the opposing side of this issue.

Singer’s argument (about an expensive anti-cancer drug) is that, “If there is any point at which you say, ‘No, an extra six months [of life] isn’t worth that much,’ then you think that health care should be rationed.” But the question itself is rhetorical trickery, sophistry. Even if there was certain knowledge about life expectancy with or without some treatment (which is never true), Singer has no right to any opinion about how much an extra six months of my life is worth (and vice-versa) unless he’s paying the bills.

But that, of course, is what makes the proposed expansion of insurance subsidies and Medicaid so ominous. Just as federal politicians imagine that a small minority stake in some bank entitles them to override all other stockholders when it comes to executive pay, federal politicians would surely claim that even small subsidies for anyone’s health insurance entitle them to, as Singer put it, set “limits on which treatments should be paid for.” And those politicians would surely appoint panels of experts as cover when some life-saving procedure, device or drug was ruled-out for those with insufficient quality-adjusted years left to live.

Singer wrote, quite correctly, that in “Medicare, Medicaid and hospital emergency rooms, health care is rationed by long waits. . . [and] low payments to doctors that discourage some from serving public patients.” [emphasis added]

Pending health care bills would make such government-mandated scarcity of health care much worse. There would be massive shifting of money away from Medicare toward Medicaid. But the extra Medicaid money would be spread around more thinly. States would cut benefits to the poor in order to accommodate millions of new, less-poor people lured into Medicaid, at least half of whom (7 or 8 million by my estimate) currently have employer-provided health insurance.

The Senate health bill supposedly intends to slash Medicare payment rates for physicians by 21% next year and more in future years, with permanent reductions in payments to other medical services too. It would also establish an Independent Payment Advisory Board which would be empowered to make deeper cuts which Congress could reject only with considerable difficulty. If that’s not quite a “death panel” it would surely not be pro-life in its impact.

The Congressional Budget Office says, “It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would . . . reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.

Actually, it’s clear enough that the proposed Medicare cuts won’t be achieved, but that efforts in that direction will nonetheless reduce access to care and diminish its quality. The government can’t boost demand and cut prices without creating excess demand. And that, in turn, means rationing by longer waiting lines and by panels (rationing boards) making life-or death decisions for other people.

As Sarah Palin predicted, “Government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course.

As the CATO Institute points out so well, Sarah is right, as usual. The chronically ill, old folks, and, of course, the disabled are royally screwed here. Evil men like Dr Ezekiel Emanuel have already written the book on these death panels, and it’s all based on who is deemed “productive to society.” This is as evil as it gets. This is a few psychopaths playing God with Americans’ lives.

Below is the original poster the modified one above came from. In Nazi Germany, the government worked overtime to convince it’s people that some lives just weren’t worth living and should be extinguished. They even went so far as to point out how much keeping what they termed “useless eaters” alive cost each and every German. They got this thinking from the American “progressive” movement, by the way.

Sarah Palin brings this home to me, through her beautiful son Trig. Thanks to the American “progressive” (liberal) movement and immoral groups like Planned Parenthood, a group started by Klu Klux Klanner Margaret Sanger, as a way of Negro population control…she called blacks “human weeds“…,we now abort fully 90 percent of all Downs Syndrome babies.

As our friend Adrienne Ross points out: “Trig is a testimony to the beauty and value of all God’s children.” There is simply no way you can look at this beautiful boy and not see that he is a blessing and a true gift. He brings much joy to his family, and inspiration to other families with Downs Syndrome children.

It breaks one’s heart that so many children like Trig never are allowed to experience life because the “progressives” are carrying out a jihad against all children with disabilities. They are attempting to desensitize and dehumanize all of mankind.

Kim Priestap has a very revealing piece on Dr Death, entitled Ezekiel Emanuel: Deny Coverage to Elderly and Disabled for the Greater Good that is a must read.

Sorry to be so long winded here, but lets face it, this is the most sweeping, and the most dangerous legislation ever proposed by Congress and a President. This is pure and absolute evil. Nothing less. The men and women who have signed on to this destruction of America, and her peoples need to be dealt with in the harshest manner humanly possible. They are all traitors.

There was one bit of sanity in Congress though as freshman Alabama Congressman Parker Griffith did something very rare, he switched parties. From Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air:

Usually one does not see Congressmen or Senators flipping parties to join the minority. However, Politico’s Josh Kraushaar has a scoop that Blue Dog Democrat Parker Griffith of Alabama, a freshman in Congress, has seen enough of Nancy Pelosi’s leadership. He will join Republicans in a move that has far more symbolic than substantive impact — for now.

This is a fascinating story. It is rare to see folks switch parties, and switching to the minority party is virtually unheard of. This is a very strong statement about the state of the democrat/communist party.

Congressman Griffith is a doctor BTW. I imagine that had a lot to do with his switching parties and fighting so hard against all of this. I know from speaking with my doctors and their staff, that this pending evil is not wanted in any way, shape, or form.

Sarah was quick to welcome Congressman Griffith aboard via Twitter:

Congratulations Alabama!And all Americans concerned about Capitol Hill’s current agenda;Rep Parker Griffith just did the right thing.Welcome

We are proud to welcome him to the fight as well.

I want to leave everyone with this reminder from the Great Ronald Reagan on the dangers of allowing government to take over health care and what their real end game is:

Posted in abortion, Barracuda, big government, Blue Dogs, Christmas, Congress, Down Syndrome, Facebook, Facebook note, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, healthcare bill, Medicare, Michelle Bachmann, Obama, Obamacare, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, Sarah Palin's faith, special needs, special needs children, terrorist, Todd Palin, Tweet, twitter | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin’s Cancer Screening Concerns, Death Panels Alive And Doing Fine In The UK

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 20, 2009

Cancer is a vicious killer, and one that hits home for me, having lost my dad at an early age, and several close friends to the dreaded disease. The good news about cancer though, is through innovation and research, by top scientists, survival rates have soared.

One of the really important developments that have lead directly to more cancer survivors is early detection through screenings. But if the communists in Congress, and Obama have their way, this will come to a grinding halt.

You see, screening costs money. Not only do those tests cost money, but so do the follow up tests as well treatments. Many cancer treatments are highly successful, but highly expensive, as well.

One thing we know, for sure, when the federal government unconstitutionally takes over health care, there will be a finite amount of money to be spent on caring for the sick. To make these dollars stretch, expensive treatments and many tests will have to be stopped, or postponed. Decisions to do this will be made by unelected and unaccountable boards of so-called experts, or as Sarah Palin has labeled them, death panels.

These “experts” won’t necessarily all be doctors, but they will be bean counters.

We’re seeing a couple of issues already, and ObamaCare hasn’t even passed. The first is in breast cancer screening. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force has made the recommendation that we no longer do mammograms at age 40. It is their idea that 50 is the proper age to start, and those self exams? Forget about ‘em!

From Breast Cancer.com:

The standard schedule of starting screening mammograms at age 40 may soon change, and breast cancer prevention strategies would be improved, according to the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Women may not begin to have screening mammograms until they are 50, and they may cease doing breast self-exams altogether, if the newest guidelines for breast cancer screening from the USPSTF are widely adopted. In Canada and the United Kingdom, 50 is already the age at which screening mammography is begun. These new guidelines may have an impact on what health insurance providers will pay for.

The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force, a branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has updated its recommendations for breast cancer screening. After using computer simulation models to project the results of different screening strategies, the task force said that they recommend the changes because they want to cut down on the “harms” and risks of testing, which they believe do not outweigh the benefits. They cite too many false positives, unnecessary biopsies, anxiety, or in short, overdiagnosis. Their November 2009 guidelines suggest:

* Women between 40 and 49 years old should not be having routine screening mammograms. Instead, they say that women should make an informed decision about screening mammography before 50, and weigh their potential risks and benefits with their doctors.

* Women who are 50 to 74 years old should be having a screening mammogram every other year, because the risk for breast cancer increases as you age.

* Women over 74 years old are not given specific guidelines about routine screening mammography – as their risk of death from heart disease and other ailments is greater than from breast cancer.

* Women of any age should not be taught to do breast self-exams, but BSE is not forbidden.

* Clinical breast exams will not be required before screening mammograms, because CBE appears to add no benefit to the information gained from a mammogram.

In 2002, the USPSTF guidelines for breast cancer screening stated that women 40 and older should have annual mammograms to screen for breast cancer. The American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute have also agreed on screening mammograms for women ages 40 to 70. The The American Cancer Society will maintain their recommendation to start screening mammograms at age 40.

Mammography is not a perfect tool and neither is a breast self-exam. But it seems odd to take away these two tools, which we have been told are important, for women aged 40 – 49. This same battle has been fought before, in the mid-1990s. It was resolved by 1997, when the National Cancer Institute agreed to support mammograms for women in their forties.

In an editorial published in Annals of Internal Medicine, Dr. Karla Kerlikowske says that the focus should shift from screening and early detection to breast cancer prevention interventions. But for this to be effective, Dr. Kerlikowske says that we need a better risk model, more research on prevention, and standards “for routinely assessing risk factors, calculating breast cancer risk, and reporting risk to women and providers in an easily understandable format.” Couldn’t we wait, until more research has been done, before we change screening guidelines? Won’t women be more at risk for ten years of their lives, if they are not having a mammogram and doing their self-exams?

This sentence hit me like a ton of bricks, just because of the wording:

Women of any age should not be taught to do breast self-exams, but BSE is not forbidden.

Are you kidding me? “BSE” stands for breast self examination. And this government death panel is telling women they shouldn’t learn how to do them, but are not “forbidden” from learning how and doing them. How generous of them.

That one word, “forbidden,” when talking about what one can and cannot do with their own body, in the privacy of their own home, tells you all you need to know about the entire process that is coming down the pike, and the mentality of those who will sit in judgement on these death panels.

You will notice too, that in making this recommendation, this death panel references the UK and Canada as their model of inspiration. Two counties that have such great health care, because of government control, that those who can, leave the country for treatment of anything more complex than a head cold.

From Deroy Murdock at National Review Online:

Compare America’s system with Canada’s and Great Britain’s. The latter are single-payer, universal health-care programs in which medical treatment is free at the point of service (Yay!), although citizens eventually pay for it through higher taxes (Boo!).

According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data, there were 26.6 MRI machines in the U.S. per million people in 2004. In Canada, there were 4.9 such devices, while Britain enjoyed 5. For every 100,000 Americans, 2006 saw 436.8 receive angioplasties. Among Canadians, that figure was 135.9, while only 93.2 Britons per 100,000 got that cardiac procedure.

Maybe that’s why, among American men, heart-attack deaths in 2004 stood at 53.8 per 100,000. In Canada, 58.3 men per 100,000 died of cardiac arrest, while coronaries buried 69.5 of every 100,000 British males.

The fatality rate for breast cancer, according to the National Center for Policy Analysis and Lancet Oncology, is 25 percent in the U.S., 28 percent in Canada, and 46 percent in Great Britain.

Among those diagnosed with prostate cancer, 19 percent die of the disease in America. In Canada, 25 percent of such patients succumb to this disease. And in Great Britain — an Anglophone NATO member and America’s closest ally — prostate cancer kills 57 percent of those who contract it. That is triple the American fatality rate.

Here’s an interesting chart, for those who like charts:

………………………………………….US……… Canada………..UK…………..

CT Scanners.(per 1MIL)……………………32.2………..10.7…….…….7

MRI machhine(per 1MIL)…………………..26.6………….4.9……….….5

Angioplasties(per100K)……………………..436.8………135.9……….93.2

Bypasses(per100K)……………………………84.5………..72.7…..…..43.4

Male Heart MI death(per 100K)………………53.8…..…..58.3………..96.5

Female Heart MI death(per100K)……………29.5……….28.1.…..…..33.4

Breast Cancer fatality%)……………………..25…………28……………46

Prostate Cancer fatality(%)………………….19…..…….25….………..57

Male all cancer fatality(%)……………………33.7………47…………..56

Female all cancer fatality(%)…………………37.1……..42……………44.2

Notice, there is a serious lack of medical equipment in Canada and the UK, specifically, MRI machines and CT scanners, equipment that American hospitals use extensively on a daily basis to save lives.

You will also notice that breast cancer is slightly more likely to kill you in Canada, and probably will kill you in jolly old England. And if you are a guy, you really don’t want to live in either Canada or the UK. In the UK prostate cancer is death sentence for most.

Sarah has weighed in again on this craziness, as now the death panels are recommending changes in other screenings:

Cancer Screenings – Rational Advice or Rationed Care?

Today at 1:10am

It was a breath of fresh air to finally hear the Democrats admit to their health care bill as “a lot of show and tell and razzmatazz,” (see Democrat talking points, in reference to my book). At least now we’re all on the same page when discussing the problems with their monstrous government health care “reform” plan.

Now, tonight, more disconcerting news – the New York Times reports of new guidelines to scale back cervical cancer screenings. The recommendation from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists comes on the heels of another recommendation to limit breast cancer screenings with mammograms. There are many questions unanswered for me, but one which immediately comes to mind is whether costs have anything to do with these recommendations. The current health care debate elicits great concern because of its introduction of socialized medicine in America and the inevitable rationed care. We need to carefully watch this debate as it coincides with Capitol Hill’s debate and determine whether we are witnessing the early stages of that rationed care before the Senate bill is rushed through as well.

Another question is why these women-focused cancers are seemingly receiving substandard attention at a time when proactive health and fitness should be the message. Every woman should encourage rigorous debate to ensure that our collective voices are heard. We are paying attention to Washington’s health care proposals, and we want to hear what helps patients the most.

We need answers: Is early screening not saving lives? Why do doctors’ groups disagree? Did costs play any role in these decisions to change the recommendations on breast and cervical cancer screenings? We need assurances that everything we’ve heard this week about fewer tests for women’s cancers is a result of patient-focused research and providing the best care for the right reasons, and not because of bureaucratic pressure to control costs.

Obviously the first thought that comes to mind when hearing of these new recommendations from bureaucratic panels is “rationed care.” It’s fair – and healthy – to ask if that’s what Washington has in mind with a government-controlled takeover of a health care system.

– Sarah Palin

The rationing of health care is the only way ObamaCare will work. Again, there will be a finite amount of money budgeted to the nation’s health care. Our “benevolent leaders” will “generously allow” only a certain amount of the money they confiscate from us to actually be used to keep us in good health.

I mean, look, some of this money is desperately needed for more important projects, like keeping ACORN and SEIU in the “community organizing” business. How else will the

democrat/communists keep the glorious people’s revolution alive?

I promised you more still on death panels. (Like this ain’t enough!) Here’s an alarming report from the BBC:

Liver cancer drug ‘too expensive’

A drug that can prolong the lives of patients with advanced liver cancer has been rejected for use in the NHS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) said the cost of Nexavar – about £3,000 a month – was “simply too high”.

But Macmillan Cancer Support said the decision was “a scandal”.

More than 3,000 people are diagnosed with liver cancer every year in the UK and their prognosis is generally poor.

Only about 20% of patients are alive one year after diagnosis, dropping to just 5% after five years.

‘Disappointed’

Campaigner Kate Spall, who won the right to have two months of treatment for her mother, Pamela Northcott, in 2007, said it had prolonged her life by four-and-a-half “precious” months.

It had allowed her 58-year-old mother, from Dyserth in Denbighshire, “closure” and “peace”, she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“The problem in Mum’s case is it took a year for me to fight for the treatment, so we’ll never know how well she could have done,” she said.

Prof Jonathan Waxman: “I’m very unhappy about the way these decisions are made”

“We had extra time, which was very precious to us all, her symptoms were helped greatly. And, more importantly, for Mum it was a case of getting some closure and peace.

“The psychological feeling when a group of people decide that you cannot have a treatment that can help you is really devastating.”

Cancer Research UK’s chief clinician Peter Johnson said the decision was “enormously frustrating” because there was no doubt about the drug’s effectiveness.

He said: “There’s no alternative treatment and there are no other places for people to go. It is expensive, but the only issue is cost and the number of patients affected are quite few – there’s probably only six or seven hundred patients a year.”

Nexavar – also known as sorafenib – had already been rejected in Scotland, despite studies showing it could extend the life of a liver cancer patient by up to six months.

‘Devastating disease’

The Scottish Medicines Consortium ruled that “the manufacturer’s justification of the treatment’s cost in relation to its benefit was not sufficient to gain acceptance”.

Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, agreed: “The price being asked by [the manufacturer] Bayer is simply too high to justify using NHS money which could be spent on better value cancer treatments.”

And the group’s clinical and public health director, Peter Littlejohns, added the drug was considered “just too expensive” by its advisory committees.

Nexavar is routinely offered to cancer patients elsewhere in the world, and Mike Hobday, head of campaigns at Macmillan Cancer Support, said he was “extremely disappointed” at NICE’s decision.

“It is a scandal that the only licensed drug proven to significantly prolong the lives of people with this devastating disease has been rejected, leaving them with no treatment options,” he said.

Alison Rogers, chief executive of the British Liver Trust, said: “The decision to reject a treatment for advanced liver cancer is a huge blow for patients.

“This is a treatment to extend life for people where all other options have run out.

“It is particularly hard for people with liver cancer given that treatments for many other advanced cancers have been given the green light by NICE.

“People with liver disease often face stigma and discrimination and sadly this decision feels like a further disadvantage to them.”

Earlier this year, a government review of end-of-life treatment said NICE should give extra weight to drugs that could extend a patient’s life.

The Department of Health said NICE was not ignoring that recommendation, but the NHS could not just pay for any drug at any cost.

The UK is a very totalitarian system when it comes to patient care. The system also strips it’s citizens of many basic liberties and freedoms we take for granted in America. As I wrote in an earlier piece, not only do they have death panels in the UK, these government monstrosities have evolved into what I am calling “lifestyle panels.”

I had included this from the Brussels Journal:

Kerry Robertson, 17, and Mark McDougall, 25, haven’t broken any law. But they are on the run from the authorities, and from their home in Dunfermline, Scotland.

Less than eight weeks ago the couple were excitedly planning their wedding. They had booked church ceremony for the 5th of September, a Saturday. She had already chosen and bought her wedding dress. They had bought the rings, and invited 20 guests. Two days before the big day, however, social services told them that their wedding would have to be cancelled. Fife Council wrote a letter, objecting to the marriage, to Dunfermline Register Office, who consequently refused to marry the couple.

Social services claim Kerry cannot understand what marriage means, because she has learning difficulties. They are mild, it seems. She is able to read and write, and is going to college to “catch up.” Her partner Mark told the Daily Mail: “‘I didn’t even know she had learning difficulties until we’d been dating for two months.”

Kerry is 29 weeks pregnant – with a boy they have named Ben. “Although Ben isn’t born yet,” Kerry says, “I already love my baby and know I will be a good mum. Mark and I talk to him inside me every day and tell him we love him. We’ve already bought him clothes and my cousin, who recently had a baby, has handed down a beautiful crib for him.”

Social services say that Kerry – a college student – isn’t intelligent enough to bring up her child with Mark. They plan to allow the couple only a few hours with Ben after he is born. Then Ben will be taken from Kerry and Mark, and placed with foster parents.

I went on to add:

Let’s think about this for a minute.

Here are a couple of young kids in love. They were excited and planning a nice wedding, when all of a sudden, a Big Government drone steps in and through their own “expertise” decides they are not fit to be parents because the girl is a little “slow.”

Under those guidelines, if adopted in America, would Barack Obama be allowed to keep his kids? I mean this is the guy that thought he had traveled to 57 states on the campaign, and had 1 or 2 to go. Would that make Obama a little “slow” in the eyes of the almighty bureaucrat?

Can you imagine?

My point? Allowing the government control over anything can be dangerous, even for the most noble of reasons. It’s why our founders wrote a Constitution that was design to allow the several states and all citizens, great freedoms, while restraining the federal government. In the past 100 years we have seen a rapid shift to the exact opposite, as “progressives” both democrat/communists and Republicans have grabbed more control, and wrestled many freedoms from the several states, and the American citizen.

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

____Ronald Reagan

All of these new “recommendations” that are suddenly coming down from these faceless panels are the canary in the coal mine for what is to come if we allow Obama and his radical communist agenda to succeed., if we allow ObamaCare to become law.

This is can all be stopped, but you must be willing to put every single ounce of effort you can muster to achieve that goal. We are at war in this nation. Oh, it’s not a shooting war, but it is a war nonetheless. We are war with radical communists who want to “fundamentally change” America into something it was never meant to be.

It’s a failed prescription. Communism, socialism, Statism, whatever “ism” you want to call this evil, has destroyed nations world wide every time it has been tried. Just because this group of radicals think they are the ones smart enough to make it work doesn’t make it so!

The surest way to lose most, if not all, of your most fundamental freedoms and rights is to allow the Obama regime to continue along this path of certain destruction.

As I write this on an early Friday afternoon, I realize the U.S. Senate is about to vote on a 2000 plus page piece of liberty destroying garbage that absolutely no one has read, or understands.

This multi-trillion dollar affair will raise taxes, destroy our quality of health care, and give the government powers that will, for all practical purposes, void our Constitution, completely usurp it.

Speaking of the Constitution, it only took four sheets of paper to write the most significant and enduring political document in the history all mankind. Our Constitution is the envy of the world, and the absolute blueprint for the freedom of all mankind. Four sheets of paper.

By contrast, the lunacy that is our current radical communist controlled Congress, has produced bills in the House and Senate of a combined total of nearly 4100 pages. Incredible.

Here’s a good time to remind everyone the words of the Great Ronald Reagan on the dangers of allowing these radicals to take over our lives through health care. This is from the successful Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against socialized medicine in 1961:

Isn’t it time that all of America listens to one of our greatest leaders in history?

You can read more about the horrors in Canada and the United Kingdom here and here.

Posted in Barracuda, big government, ECONOMY, Family, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, healthcare bill, Medicare, Obama, Obamacare, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade, special needs, special needs children, Woman | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Worried About Death Panels? How about Marriage Panels!

Posted by Gary P Jackson on November 8, 2009

Sarah Palin has made the phrase “death panels” part of the national lexicon. Sarah brought to light the fact that any time you have a government take over of health care, you will have rationing of services, and someone in government, a nameless, faceless drone, will decide who gets life saving treatments and who is deemed “unworthy.” Sarah has called this “downright evil,” and we agree.

The new 2000 page PelosiCare fiasco takes 22 pages to set up the structure for these “death panels.” (Pages 739-760) The “Comparative Effectiveness Panels” will be made up of doctors, bureaucrats, and experts on “health economics.”

It doesn’t explicitly give government the power to dictate treatments. In fact, it does explicitly say that federal officers cannot dictate them, but findings by this panel will be used as baselines for payment by insurers, including the federal government, when it comes to deciding what options for treatment are available to whom. After all, comparative effectiveness is explicitly a rationing process.

Rationing, by definition, will lead to certain people who are deemed “past their usefulness to society” being denied life saving health care. Those coming up with the criteria for this are indeed “death panels.”

Read the whole 2000 page bill here.

As frightening as “death panels” are, this is just the start of what a run away Big Government nanny state can do to you. Once you let the Statist in, you are stuck with him, and he is not a nice guest.

This story comes from the United Kingdom, which has some of the poorest health care in the civilized world. The people are at their wit’s end, and the country is trying to figure out how to get away from their public system, their government controlled behemoth, and revert back to a system that makes sense.

Just how bad is the Big Government mess over there? Well, now their “death panels” are determining who is allowed to marry, and who is not. Who is allowed to have children, and who is not.

Hitler and Mengele would be proud. So would Chairman Mao.

From the Brussels Journal:

Kerry Robertson, 17, and Mark McDougall, 25, haven’t broken any law. But they are on the run from the authorities, and from their home in Dunfermline, Scotland.

Less than eight weeks ago the couple were excitedly planning their wedding. They had booked church ceremony for the 5th of September, a Saturday. She had already chosen and bought her wedding dress. They had bought the rings, and invited 20 guests. Two days before the big day, however, social services told them that their wedding would have to be cancelled. Fife Council wrote a letter, objecting to the marriage, to Dunfermline Register Office, who consequently refused to marry the couple.

Social services claim Kerry cannot understand what marriage means, because she has learning difficulties. They are mild, it seems. She is able to read and write, and is going to college to “catch up.” Her partner Mark told the Daily Mail: “‘I didn’t even know she had learning difficulties until we’d been dating for two months.”

Kerry is 29 weeks pregnant – with a boy they have named Ben. “Although Ben isn’t born yet,” Kerry says, “I already love my baby and know I will be a good mum. Mark and I talk to him inside me every day and tell him we love him. We’ve already bought him clothes and my cousin, who recently had a baby, has handed down a beautiful crib for him.”

Social services say that Kerry – a college student – isn’t intelligent enough to bring up her child with Mark. They plan to allow the couple only a few hours with Ben after he is born. Then Ben will be taken from Kerry and Mark, and placed with foster parents.

Let’s think about this for a minute.

Here are a couple of young kids in love. They were excited and planning a nice wedding, when all of a sudden, a Big Government drone steps in and through their own “expertise” decides they are not fit to be parents because the girl is a little “slow.”

Under those guidelines, if adopted in America, would Barack Obama be allowed to keep his kids? I mean this is the guy that thought he had traveled to 57 states on the campaign, and had 1 or 2 to go. Would that make Obama a little “slow” in the eyes of the almighty bureaucrat?

Can you imagine?

This story isn’t something that happened in Hitler’s Nazi Germany or Chairman Mao’s Red China, this is happening right now in Scotland, a supposed free nation.

These aren’t mentally defective kids. The girl, Kerry, is in college for goodness sake!

Now I realize having a college “education” doesn’t equal smart, and certainly doesn’t guarantee common sense or ability, I mean look at the Ivy League buffoons who we have in charge of things now. Educated well above their intelligence, that’s for damned sure!

With that being said, just how “slow” could Kerry be if she managed to get herself in college?

Now I know, you are saying: “This is America, it can’t happen here.” Uh huh, we were saying the same thing about ObamaCare and PelosiCare just a day ago!

The same people who are bringing you “death panels” here in America, and who knows what else are EXACTLY the people who will tell you who to marry and whether or not you will be allowed to keep your child.

Remember, Obama’s “Science Czar,” John Holdren, thinks our Constitution gives the government the right to force you to have an abortion! Margaret Sanger is probably looking up from her Klu Klux Klan or Planned Parenthood meeting in hell, with great approval.

These people who will bring you “death panels” are the same people who have forced trans fats out of restaurants “for our own good.” These purveyors of tyranny are the ones who have forced people to stop smoking cigarettes, a legal product, almost everywhere, including in some cases, their own homes.

These nanny staters who will run you “health care” are the people who are trying to tax soda water and other soft drinks and juices in order to get you to “modify your habits,” you know, “for your own good.” They also want to tax fast food, and even regulate where these eatin’ joints are allowed, again, for your own good, because well, you didn’t go to Harvard, and you are obviously too “slow.” to get it!

Wait a minute, didn’t our “president” go to Harvard? Not a ringing endorsement for higher education, is it?

As Thomas Jefferson once said: “Any government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take away everything you have.” That includes all of your liberties and freedoms. You know, like the freedom to get married and have a baby.

One should also reflect long and hard these words by Benjamin Franklin: “Those who would sacrifice their freedom for temporary security deserve neither.”

You have a choice to make, right here, right now. Are you going to allow this government to pass this unconstitutional monstrosity known as Obama/Pelosi care, and lose every single ounce of your liberty and freedom, or are you going to fight these maniacal communists with your dying breath to retain your freedom and liberty, and the liberty of all of the future generations to follow?

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

____Ronald Reagan

Posted in 2012, abortion, Barracuda, big government, freedom of speech, Going Rogue, government control, Governor Palin, Governor Sarah Palin, healthcare, healthcare bill, nationalization, Obama, Obamacare, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin Web Brigade | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »