Are You Watching?

[Bfgrn]

btw, are you able to post anything without naming calling and insults?

you pea brained corporate koolaid guzzlers

You are an obtuse mouth piece for corporate interests...You really don't DESERVE citizenship... give it to someone with a brain...

A simple 'No' would have sufficed . . . but I didn't expect you had the balls to reply to me without insults.

From your link "The fundamental danger is that the American people are being asked to delegate all these life-influencing decisions". This is where you fail to see the bigger picture.

In an April 28 New York Times interview, the president spoke of having government guide a "very difficult democratic conversation" about "those toward the end of their lives [who] are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here." Those statements sounded a little creepy to us. Deciding who gets denied care at the end of life should not be dependent on government cost controls.

Presidential health care adviser Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and chairman of the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center at the National Institutes of Health, has argued that independent government boards should decide policy on end-of-life care. He also has defended rationing care more strictly for older people because "allocation [of medical care] by age is not invidious discrimination."

If that fear sounds far-fetched, consider that similar things already are happening in several states. As Jeff Emanuel (no relation to the Obama officials) explains on the facing page, a panel of the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals this spring ruled that Georgia can override a doctor's decision about how much care is warranted for a handicapped child because the state is "the final arbiter" of medical decisions.

The situation is even worse in Oregon, which has legalized "assisted suicide." As radio host and author Mark Levin has publicized in his best-seller "Liberty and Tyranny," the Oregon health plan last year refused to pay for a recognized drug to prolong the life of lung cancer patient Barbara Wagner even after her oncologist prescribed it. Yet the same bureaucrats told Ms. Wagner that the plan would indeed cover doctor-assisted suicide if she chose that option.

Saving her life was deemed too expensive, but paying her to die was just fine.

EDITORIAL: A euthanasia mandate - Washington Times

Here is the "bigger picture"...there are VERY powerful groups of lobbyists, corporations, and our government that want to push through health care reform - oops, I mean health insurance reform - as a piece of the puzzle that is an even bigger government. More government control over your life, your decisions, your personal choices. It is a simple matter of dollars...BILLIONS of DOLLARS. They will lie, cheat and discredit anyone if they see them as an obstacle. I'm not against health care or health insurance reform. It's needed. I am against the government running health care.

Thanks for playing and enjoy your government-run health care. Let me know how it works out for you down the road.

I have PROVEN the sources you post as "gospel" have LIED to you; but you overlook that FACT and still believe that they are the protectors of your freedom and liberty...

So what you're really saying Zoom-boing is: in American, there's a group of citizens that are so evil, cold-hearted and diabolical that they want to kill elderly Americans...this SAME group pushed through free medical coverage FOR the elderly they NOW want to kill... these evil Americans call themselves Democrats...

AND the MUCH BIGGER PICTURE Zoom-boing, YOU are calling for the end of the Thomas Jefferson's "experiment"...our founding fathers created a representative GOVERNMENT, but now THAT is a really BAD idea...

Instead, YOU want us to follow the ideology of Benito Mussolini's fascism; "the corporate state", so now, let's TRUST corporations that are not living and breathing entities, that can't die because of an untreated disease, are not ELECTED by the people, are amoral, have NO soul, NO heart and shares NONE of the aspirations of We, the People...their flag, their Bill of Rights and their Constitution is an ALL ONE... PROFIT...


The first thing to understand is the difference between the natural person and the fictitious person called a corporation. They differ in the purpose for which they are created, in the strength which they possess, and in the restraints under which they act.

Man is the handiwork of God and was placed upon earth to carry out a Divine purpose; the corporation is the handiwork of man and created to carry out a money-making policy.

There is comparatively little difference in the strength of men; a corporation may be one hundred, one thousand, or even one million times stronger than the average man. Man acts under the restraints of conscience, and is influenced also by a belief in a future life. A corporation has no soul and cares nothing about the hereafter. …

A corporation has no rights except those given it by law. It can exercise no power except that conferred upon it by the people through legislation, and the people should be as free to withhold as to give, public interest and not private advantage being the end in view.

– William Jennings Bryan
address to the Ohio 1912 Constitutional Convention

 

[Zoom-boing]

I have PROVEN the sources you post as "gospel" have LIED to you; but you overlook that FACT and still believe that they are the protectors of your freedom and liberty...

You haven't proven anything.

So what you're really saying Zoom-boing is: in American, there's a group of citizens that are so evil, cold-hearted and diabolical that they want to kill elderly Americans...this SAME group pushed through free medical coverage FOR the elderly they NOW want to kill... these evil Americans call themselves Democrats...

AND the MUCH BIGGER PICTURE Zoom-boing, YOU are calling for the end of the Thomas Jefferson's "experiment"...our founding fathers created a representative GOVERNMENT, but now THAT is a really BAD idea...

Instead, YOU want us to follow the ideology of Benito Mussolini's fascism; "the corporate state", so now, let's TRUST corporations that are not living and breathing entities, that can't die because of an untreated disease, are not ELECTED by the people, are amoral, have NO soul, NO heart and shares NONE of the aspirations of We, the People...their flag, their Bill of Rights and their Constitution is an ALL ONE... PROFIT...

No, that's just you rambling and putting words in my mouth.

 

[Bfgrn]

I have PROVEN the sources you post as "gospel" have LIED to you; but you overlook that FACT and still believe that they are the protectors of your freedom and liberty...

You haven't proven anything.

So what you're really saying Zoom-boing is: in American, there's a group of citizens that are so evil, cold-hearted and diabolical that they want to kill elderly Americans...this SAME group pushed through free medical coverage FOR the elderly they NOW want to kill... these evil Americans call themselves Democrats...

AND the MUCH BIGGER PICTURE Zoom-boing, YOU are calling for the end of the Thomas Jefferson's "experiment"...our founding fathers created a representative GOVERNMENT, but now THAT is a really BAD idea...

Instead, YOU want us to follow the ideology of Benito Mussolini's fascism; "the corporate state", so now, let's TRUST corporations that are not living and breathing entities, that can't die because of an untreated disease, are not ELECTED by the people, are amoral, have NO soul, NO heart and shares NONE of the aspirations of We, the People...their flag, their Bill of Rights and their Constitution is an ALL ONE... PROFIT...

No, that's just you rambling and putting words in my mouth.

I HAVE proven they are lying...do with it as you choose...

Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD
Title:
Chair of the Department of Bioethics at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health

Position:
Con to the question "Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?"

Reasoning:
"The proper policy, in my view, should be to affirm the status of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as illegal. In so doing we would affirm that as a society we condemn ending a patient's life and do not consider that to have one's life ended by a doctor is a right. This does not mean we deny that in exceptional cases interventions are appropriate, as acts of desperation when all other elements of treatment- all medications, surgical procedures, psychotherapy, spiritual care, and so on- have been tried. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should not be performed simply because a patient is depressed, tired of life, worried about being a burden, or worried about being dependent. All these may be signs that not every effort has yet been made.

By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life."
"Whose Right to Die?," The Atlantic, Mar. 1997