"If You Like Your Doctor..."

Of Course There Will Be Death Panels!

Not the USS Stockton

For the record, I live in Stockton, California. Yes, that Stockton, California! The largest US city ever to declare bankruptcy. After a couple of days of waving our giant foam fingers and shouting, "We're number one!", the time has come for a somewhat harder look at what's going on.

Last night, the news coverage was filled with accounts of many of the people who are going to be hurt by the city's plight. Many retirees showed up at City Hall, fearful of what was going to happen to them, on a fixed income, if their benefits were reduced and their health care costs were to increase.

Rather than dissect, at the moment, how the city and its retirees got into this mess, or how they're going to get out of it, and at what cost, I see the City of Stockton's bankruptcy as an example of what happens when the resources are inadequate for the demand, and unfortunately, a microcosm for what looms large for both the state of California and the nation as a whole.

But first, a little trip down Memory Lane. Anyone here remember "Situational ethics"? Situational ethics was a supposedly Christian theory put forth in the 1960s by an Episcopal priest Joseph Fletcher. As I recall, it started gaining favor in school curricula in the 1980's.

Situational ethics taught that what might be unethical in one situation might be perfectly acceptable, should the "situation" call for it. It is a bad thing to tell a lie, but if you were in Germany in the 1940's and Anne Frank was hiding in your attic, it was permissible to lie to the Nazis if they asked you if you were hiding any Jews. So far, so good.

And then, there was the infamous lifeboat scenario: There are fifteen of you in a lifeboat with only enough food and water for twelve. If you all stay on the boat, you are all going to die. Therefore, in this situation, wouldn't it be better to throw three people overboard so that twelve might live?

They made it easy for you, too. There was usually a rabbi or a priest on board, in his seventies or eighties, and, after all, he'd lived a good long life. Better to throw him overboard than your freckle faced fifteen year old niece, right? (The holy man always has to go first, otherwise, he might introduce some morality into your situational situation and muck up everything!*) There'd usually be at least one more elderly person in the boat, because euthanizing the elderly is not something we can teach our children soon enough! So, Granny goes over the side. In some cases, there might have been a handicapped person, or one with Downs syndrome, and since their quality of life isn't all that great, and who knows how long someone with Downs syndrome might live anyway, into the water with them, too.

At this point, having killed the elderly, the infirm and the retarded to save your own skin, may I point out the irony in a comparison between you and the Nazis you were lying to in the previous example? Perhaps here we could contrast, too, those four chaplains on the troop ship USAT Dorchester in 1943, who gave up their own life jackets when there weren't enough to go around. It is quite a different thing to volunteer to give up one's own life as opposed to having some committee decide it for you.

In bankruptcy, there isn't enough money, simply not enough resources to pay all the bills and keep all your promises. In the lifeboat, there aren't enough resources to keep everybody alive, so Father Flanagan and Granny go in the drink. In the proposed government takeover of the healthcare system, which hopefully will have a stake driven through its heart tomorrow, you cannot add millions of people to a shrinking system in a bankrupt country, full of bankrupt states, cites and towns, and expect that there will be enough resources for everyone.

Granny will have to go. Maybe she'll get a pill instead of an operation, like Obama suggested, but rationing would become a way of life in healthcare.

Unless we can get some national leadership in Washington to grow the economy again, get out of the way of mining and manufacturing, and create new wealth, new resources, rather than trying to ration what we have now, we will go the way of Greece. (And Stockton)

Our Founding Fathers were made of sterner stuff and meant us for better things. Unless you want to see the misery of those people in Stockton multiplied from coast to coast, it is time for genuine change in the White House. Vote for change this November.



*I kept thinking..."A preacher, a priest, and a rabbi go into a lifeboat..."

Cross posted at LCR.

Man Dies From Dental Infection

By now, you've probably heard about the young man who died recently, from a dental infection.

A 24-year-old Cincinnati father died from a tooth infection this week because he couldn't afford his medication, offering a sobering reminder of the importance of oral health and the number of people without access to dental or health care.

I figured the usual chorus of "See? This proves we need universal healthcare!" would start forming, and sure enough, the blogosphere is resounding with the charges of heartless conservatives and "See? I told you so!"

A couple things have struck me about this. As I commented in another place,

It was tragic and unnecessary, given the remedies available to him, but look too, at the choice that he made.

"When his face started swelling and his head began to ache, Willis went to the emergency room, where he received prescriptions for antibiotics and pain medications. Willis couldn't afford both, so he chose the pain medications."

Had he chosen the antibiotics, the pain would have probably subsided in 24 hours. He chose to treat the symptom rather than the cause. Pain is nature's way of telling you you need to do something right away. Pull your hand OFF the woodstove. Take the nail out of your shoe. Being 24, he probably figured he was "10 feet tall and bulletproof", so he took the painkillers, which in turn, caused him to ignore how serious it was that his body was screaming at him to do something.

When in doubt, cure the cause, not the symptom.

Do you remember Jim Henson, creator of the Muppets? Not exactly homeless or destitute, Jim Henson died from pneumonia and a strep infection. Both easily treated, if you catch them in time. Hell, he probably had good health insurance, too. But neither he or the doctors he saw, saw anything past "flu like symptoms" until it was too late.

I have said, half jokingly that there are only three reasons a guy ever goes to the hospital:

One, is uncontrollable bleeding. Two, is bones protruding through the skin (may be accompanied by #1). Three, is failure to regain consciousness, although technically, this is a reason your buddies would take you to the hospital, so there are really only two.

That this man in Cincinnati died, is tragic. It's tragic that he was unemployed. It was tragic the he was uninsured and it's tragic that he failed to make the choices that would have saved his life. But to say that his death was the result of not having insurance is a stretch. If he didn't have twenty seven bucks for the medicine, would he have had twenty seven bucks for the co-pay? Or might he have deferred that medicine purchase for the exact same reason? We'll never know.

Life is about choices. We can't always see their consequences. He almost certain didn't see his. This was sad, but hardly the cause for a cause célèbre.

'Robamacare'

Last week, presidential contender Tim Pawlenty called the health reform law “Obamneycare.” On Tuesday, he called it “Robamacare.”

The names may switch, but there’s one thing Pawlenty says he won’t change: He won’t let up his attacks tying opponent Mitt Romney’s health reforms to those signed by President Barack Obama.

Robamacare. Has a nice ring to it! (And gave me the chance to recycle one of my favorite photoshops!)

H/T Memeorandum

Klaven on the Culture

A humorous look at some of the economic differences between Congressman Paul Ryan and President Barack Obama.

H/T Flopping Aces

Bill Would Require All S.D. Citizens to Buy a Gun

Legislation as political theater?

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.”

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.

Sounds like some "sauce for the goose" legislation, no?

Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.

“Do I or the other cosponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms? Of course not. But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance,” he said.

Ah. So you're writing legislation you know is un-Constitutional and will not pass to illustrate how other legislation is un-Constitutional? Is this really how we want our elected officials to act? Though I agree with his point, surely there must be a better way to make your point rather than clogging the legislative schedule with show and tell?

..and don't call me Shirley!

H/T Memeorandum

WikiLeaks: Cuba Banned Sicko for Depicting 'Mythical' Healthcare System

By Proof

Folks, you just can't make this stuff up!


From the Guardian UK:

Cuba banned Michael Moore's 2007 documentary, Sicko, because it painted such a "mythically" favourable picture of Cuba's healthcare system that the authorities feared it could lead to a "popular backlash", according to US diplomats in Havana.

I've always said that liberals were irony impaired, but can you see the irony in banning a film that was supposedly a "documentary", (Redundancy alert!) a film which supposedly, honestly depicts things as they really are, being banned because the subjects of the documentary might react negatively to the fact that it simply wasn't true? In fact, it was so far from true as to be described as "mythical"? That such care was NOT available to them?

The revelation, contained in a confidential US embassy cable released by WikiLeaks , is surprising, given that the film attempted to discredit the US healthcare system by highlighting what it claimed was the excellence of the Cuban system.

But the memo reveals that when the film was shown to a group of Cuban doctors, some became so "disturbed at the blatant misrepresentation of healthcare in Cuba that they left the room".

Castro's government apparently went on to ban the film because, the leaked cable claims, it "knows the film is a myth and does not want to risk a popular backlash by showing to Cubans facilities that are clearly not available to the vast majority of them."

Wow. Aren't documentary makers supposed to, I don't know, document stuff? When you start making stuff up to make a point, don't you slip over into becoming a propagandist?

The cable describes a visit made by the FSHP to the Hermanos Ameijeiras hospital in October 2007. Built in 1982, the newly renovated hospital was used in Michael Moore's film as evidence of the high-quality of healthcare available to all Cubans.

But according to the FSHP, the only way a Cuban can get access to the hospital is through a bribe or contacts inside the hospital administration. "Cubans are reportedly very resentful that the best hospital in Havana is 'off-limits' to them," the memo reveals.

According to the FSHP, a more "accurate" view of the healthcare experience of Cubans can be seen at the Calixto Garcia Hospital. "FSHP believes that if Michael Moore really wanted the 'same care as local Cubans', this is where he should have gone," the cable states.

A 2007 visit by the FSHP to this "dilapidated" hospital, built in the 1800s, was "reminiscent of a scene from some of the poorest countries in the world," the cable adds.

Conservatives have known for a long time that Moore was a big, fat liar, er, a large, dietary and factually challenged individual. His dishonest editing of his earlier work should have gotten him kicked out of Hollywood.

The irony becomes complete, when you consider that Michel Moore has offered to go the bail on the wikileaker himself, Julian Assange. Well, before this latest "leak" he was!

On his website today Michael Moore has said that Cuba did not ban his documentary,

Because, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Update: Moore claims: "The entire nation of Cuba was shown the film on national television"

Unfortunately, The entire nation of Cuba does not own television sets. 75-80% of the population does not. I would imagine that the top 20-25% of income earners have both TVs and access to better health care than the populace at large.

ownership tv-sets: 200 - 246 per 1000
http://www.populstat.info/Americas/cubag.htm


I'll have to look into that statistic, and see if it is households with (a) TV set or just the number of TVs per capita. If it is the latter, then, anyone with multiple sets would mean an even smaller percentage of the populace would have access to anything broadcast.


H/T Memeorandum

Cross posted at Say Anything, LCR.

Obama Turns Down IBM Offer to Eliminate Fraud and Waste...for Free

Getting rid of waste and fraud in health care is not the President's first priority. Control is.


Mort Zuckerman, a Democrat, can hardly be accused of being partisan in his criticism of Barry O. It's almost as if having the government take control of the health care system was more important to Obama than reforming it! Of course, reducing fraud and waste would alleviate some of the "crisis" that caused the government to intervene in the first place.

H/T John Lott

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel, Say Anything, Lady Cincinnatus

Was Obama Lying Then, Or is He Lying Now?

Remember Bill Clinton's linguistic sleight of hand in answering whether or not he was alone with Monica Lewinsky?

"It all depends on what your definition of "is" is."

I think I have discovered Obama's "Is" is moment. On September 20, 2009 Obama was interviewed by George Stephanopoulos:



Obama keeps dancing around the cost of insurance and insurance "affordability", but denies it is a tax. At 3:17, George Stephanopoulos asks him point blank: “How is that not a tax?”

“Absolutely NOT a tax increase.” - BHO

Then, he makes the false analogy with car insurance, though the government compels no one to buy insurance if they elect not to buy a car!

“You can’t just make up that language” -BHO

Then compares increases in private insurance company premiums to taxes mandated by the government and enforced by the I.R.S.

Five minutes in, George gives him the definition of tax increase. Obama says defining it is “proof” somehow that it means something else. (Who writes this guy’s material, anyway?)

"You reject that it is a tax increase?" -GS
“I absolutely reject that notion. “ -BHO

Was he lying then, or is he lying now?

Obama Administration Admits Health Care Initiative is a Tax

After campaigning extensively on no tax increase for anyone making under $250,000 a year, then insisting the money paying for health care wouldn’t be paid for by a tax increase, it seems the president finally admits to lying. This came in the New York Times, on July 18, 2010, buried on page 18 in an article by Robert Pear, “Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax.”

When Barack Obama was running for president and insisting health care would not be paid for by a tax increase some Republicans, including Senator John McCain, called him on it. It was all denial, denial, denial. In September 2009, when President Obama was interviewed by George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News show “This Week”, Obama said, “for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.”

By declaring the insurance mandate a "tax", BHO has guaranteed that he will not raise the taxes of any one who makes less than $250,000 a year, but every one who makes that little.

George Orwell would have been proud!

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Government Requires an Arm and a Leg for Taxes

Artificial ones, that is!

Model not included
Wounded Warriors Face New Tax This Independence Day

As the nation prepares to celebrate Independence Day with parades and barbecues, America’s veterans face a new tax on prosthetic limbs and other vital medical devices.

The health care overhaul passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama earlier this year contains a new tax on medical devices such as prosthetic limbs, pacemakers, and wheelchairs. This tax, which its proponents claim will raise $20 billion over the next ten years, contains no exemption for the nation’s 22 million veterans. In fact, Senate Democrats specifically refused to exempt veterans from the tax.

Wow. You'd think a grateful nation could at least exempt the veterans who needed the prosthetic because they were injured while serving their country! Apparently, the Democrats in the Obama administration are less than grateful!

“On March 24, Senate Democrats had the opportunity to exempt our veterans from Obamacare’s new tax on medical devices such as prosthetic limbs. But 54 Democrats voted against the measure. They chose to side with the tax-and-spend crowd in Washington over our wounded warriors,”said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. “This is one of the many reasons Harry Reid and the Democrats did not want Americans to read the 2,500 page health care bill before it was passed.”

As we get ready to contemplate the birth of our nation this July 4th, many of us will stop to thank and honor the brave men at Valley Forge and their brothers at Normandy and Iwo Jima, and the men who today wear body armor in 130 degree heat so that this nation could be born, survive and be a beacon for democracy around the world. Perhaps, if someone more grateful were to take the place of these louts in Congress in November, some of the mischief could be undone?

H/T Rob Port

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Person of Pallor Penalty StartsToday

I'd like mine "over easy"!

The Person of Pallor Penalty, the discriminatory tax against pale Americans takes hold today, in anticipation of funding Obamacare when it finally kicks in in 2013, as was noted before in "I Have a Dream, that Someday We Will be Taxed by the Color of our Skin!"

"Larry King is a Racist"

...according to the logic of Rachel Harris!



It's "Laziness When it Comes to Knowing the Facts" according to Seth MacFarlane, creator of The Family Guy, who says 60% of the people wanted the "public option", when in fact more than 60% of the people wanted the government to stay out of the health care take over. Project much Seth?

Libertarian Penn Jillette to the rescue: "A distrust in the government is the healthiest thing Americans can have."

Rachel Harris reinforces the "dumb blonde" stereotype, by insisting that the tea partiers are "racist" because they are, in her opinion, predominantly of one race.
Hmm. I see four white people on that show. No persons of color. Therefore, according to what passes for logic with Rachel Harris, Larry King must be a racist! Is that blonde enough for you Rachel? Sheesh!

H/T American Glob
Cross posted at Say Anything

ObamaCare "Pop Up" Video

Starting to look like "Video Sunday" around here! Here's another good one on the ObamaCare "Reform" bill:



H/T Gina Cobb

Doctors Refuse to Fix Smoker's Broken Ankle (10:09am on 09/20/2007)

A little foreshadowing of ObamaCare to come!

Need more proof that the nanny-state of socialized medicine doesn't want to regulate your entire life? Here's John Nuttall:

A man with a broken ankle is facing a lifetime of pain because a Health Service hospital has refused to treat him unless he gives up smoking.

John Nuttall, 57, needs surgery to set the ankle which he broke in three places two years ago because it did not mend naturally with a plaster cast.

Doctors at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro have refused to operate because they say his heavy smoking would reduce the chance of healing, and there is a risk of complications which could lead to amputation.

Not an alcoholic who refuses to give up drinking to get a new liver, a smoker with a broken ankle that the government run healthcare system doesn't want to treat unless he knuckles under to their coercion!

They have told him they will treat him only if he gives up smoking. But the former builder has been unable to break his habit and is now resigned to coping with the injury as he cannot afford private treatment.

He is in constant pain from the grating of the broken bones against each other and has been prescribed daily doses of morphine.

Mr Nuttall, of Newlyn, Cornwall, broke the ankle in a fall in 2005. Initially he refused surgery because he had caught MRSA at a different hospital four years earlier, and was terrified of history repeating itself.

He hoped the fractured bones would knit together with a standard plaster cast to immobilise his ankle.

But six months and three plaster casts later, it became clear that an operation to pin the bones was the only solution.

Oh, they'll give him all the morphine he wants, but nothing to eliminate the cause of the pain!Two years later and this guy ain't even on a waiting list yet! Sheesh!

RomneyCare Writ Large

One of the current, and soon to be retired, Congress Critters said in defense of the massive health care takeover:

the bill will improve the public's health and save money by providing care to 32 million uninsured people, many of whom would otherwise seek expensive care in emergency rooms.

Is that a fact? How is that working out for you over in Massachusetts, where a similar plan was launched in 2006, under the leadership of Mitt Romney? Massachusetts now, incidentally, has the highest insurance costs of any state in the nation and its own health care initiative is kept solvent only by massive infusions of cash from the Federal Government.

And they still use the emergency room!

Massachusetts residents are frequent users of emergency department (ED) care, continuing despite significant improvement in access to care as a result of the state's 2006 health care initiative.

So much for your savings! Any more blue sky, smoke and mirrors you'd like to sell us?

Massachusetts’ 2006 health reform legislation sought to move the state to near universal health insurance coverage and to improve access to high quality care. The available research evidence shows that the state has achieved near universal health insurance coverage and has made significant gains in access to care. As of fall 2008, nearly all (92%) working-age adults in the state had a usual source of care for when they were sick or needed advice about their health and most (85%) had had at least one doctor visit in the past 12 months. Despite significant gains in access to care under health reform, high levels of emergency department (ED) use have persisted in Massachusetts. Specifically, ED use was high in Massachusetts prior to health reform and has stayed high under health reform.

There are no savings from a reduction in ED (or ER) usage, because there will still be illegals, uninsured and under insured, and old habits don't die easily either!
Was high and stayed high. Got it? Apparently not the Congress Critters we sent to Washington. They still don't get it.

And why do I feature Mr. Romney so prominently in this post? He's a good business man. Nice looking. He seems like a good guy. He's clean. He only talks with a Boston dialect when he wants to...

And he seems to be wanting to throw his hat back into the ring in 2012.

No.

Hell, no.

(Insert more emphatic "NO" here )

Mr. Romney: support the strongest candidate we have in 2012, whomever that might be, and get out of the way. Whether you were the primary architect of RomneyCare in Massachusetts or simply made a deal with the devil to let it pass, you let it pass. Hell, you even used to take credit for it!

Well, I'm a strong believer in giving credit where credit is due. And you sir, deserve the credit for the RomneyCare debacle in MA which so closely resembles the debacle that threatens to envelope our entire nation's health care system. The one that has to be rolled back. The one that you unfortunately lack the credentials or the credibility to do so.

Get a job. Get a life. Anywhere but 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!

Oh, and say hello to Donny and Marie for me!

Cross posted at Say Anything

Breast Fed is Best Fed

There's a story making the rounds about a marvelous new, old way to help children become healthier...it's called breastfeeding!
Nine hundred lives and supposedly billions of dollars could be saved if infants' immune systems were fortified by that which they receive from their mother's milk.

Now, I'm a big fan of breast feeding. I've studied the benefits and each of my five children was breast fed. (You dads out there will know that when the baby's food is preheated, there's no need for you to offer to get up in the middle of the night and warm it for them!)

Still, at a time when Obamacare is threatening to bust the budget, the timing of this study, though welcome, is a bit suspect.

But, from a political standpoint, it's a marvelous precursor for the multitudes soon to be sucking at the government's teat!

Hare Brained on the Constitution

"I don't worry about the Constitution to be honest with you..." -Congressman Phil Hare, (D-IL)
...or anything else he's not familiar with!



I am sure glad that this boneheaded weasel is a white guy, because maybe we can criticize all the stupid and un-Constitutional things he says about Obamacare without being called a "racist" for a change?

This guy cares very little about the Constitution that he has sworn to uphold, can't tell the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, truth be told, and cares little about his ignorance as well! He claims to have read the health care bill three times!!! Too funny! He claims to have read and understood 2000+ pages of Obamacare three times, but can't seem to find time to read the Constitution even once? Yeah. Right!

What is it about Illinois that attracts such low caliber men to public office? I take that back. What is it about Illinois that elects such low caliber men to public office?

H/T Wizbang
Cross posted at Say Anything

Reason's Three Reasons "Obama Care" Won't Cut the Deficit

H/T Nice Deb

Obamacare Taxes Sick People

We know that the massive Government Care, er, Health care bill recently passed by Congress and signed by President Obama has provisions for tax increases. Lots of tax increases.
One of the most insidious of these increases is the tax on "medical devices".
The blog prof has a column today dealing with the economic impact on smaller medical device companies (it may put them out of business, further increasing unemployment).

And as to what constitutes a "medical device", it could range from that tampon you ladies use for your "treatment" every month, to possibly even the toothbrush you use for your daily prophylaxis!
(For you folks in Port St. Lucie, that's "brushing your teeth"!)

But, since Obama wants to include free preventative visits in his plan, who better to pay for them than those who are already sick or injured? If you need a wheelchair, or crutches or catheters, a pacemaker or a CPAP machine, hell, even a bedpan could be subject to a 2.3% excise tax to feed the government beast!

Consequently, those who require the most medical devices will end up paying for those who don't. Gosh. That certainly sounds liberal and fair, doesn't it? Not at all like those nasty insurance companies who took money from a large pool of perfectly healthy people and distributed it to those specifically who were sick or injured!

Glad this administration has its priorities straight! /sarcasm

I just thought of something else: Think about all those non-profit hospitals. The price of nearly everything they buy just went up over 2%! That should help them keep the doors open! Who utilize those hospitals? Sick and injured people. Go figure!

Cross posted at Say Anything

Green Advisory Council in Health Care Bill?

Tilting at windbags

According to George Will, the "health care reform" bill that just passed:

...creates an Advisory Council on Green, High-Performing Public School Facilities, and grants for "retrofitting necessary to increase the energy efficiency and water efficiency of public school facilities."

If that is true, and it certainly seems too implausible to be a lie, could someone please tell me what in the bloody blue blazes "energy efficiency and water efficiency of public schools" has to do with health care???