Kalifornistan Nazi

[teapartysamurai]

Same reason I want to know the education level and job of someone who can actually think that the government wants to kill Americans.

Well, you are asking the wrong person bucko. I don't think that and I never claimed any such thing.

I wasn't asking you specifically. Just agreeing with the thought process and reasoning about why I asked TeaPartySamurai my question.

Who's thought process needs to be examined.

IF YOU WILL LOOK BACK AT THE ENTIRE DEBATE you wasted my time with, THE ONLY PERSON WHO KEPT SAYING THE GOVERNMENT WANTS TO KILL PEOPLE IS YOU!!!!!!!!

Quote where I said Obama wants to kill Americans? I said he wants to ration healthcare, which will enslave Americans. I said the government wants to decide whethere you live or die.

BTW, so has the rest of liberalism, supporting Obamacare.

President Obama admitted he wants the government to decide what health care Americans receive. "There's always going to be an asymmetry of information between patient and provider," he said. "And part of what I think government can do effectively is to be an honest broker in assessing and evaluating treatment options."

EDITORIAL: Obama's health care rationing - Washington Times

Obama's Health Care Rationing Czar

Jeannie DeAngelis

The President of the United States took a Congressional recess opportunity to appoint another controversial czar. Renowned for rationing health care, Donald Berwick was appointed to the position of Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

Dare we ask: Why does Obama need a rationing expert to oversee these two programs?

While Nancy is funning and sunning, Obama placed Czar Donald Berwick, president and chief executive officer of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, in the position of deciding who lives and who dies. Obama circumvented the traditional confirmation venue because Berwick's nomination was an uncertain one. Democrats realized a permanent vacation awaited them in November if the unpopular Obamacare discussion was broached again. Let's just say Berwick was a touchy nominee.

Thus, Obama dictated and denied America the opportunity to have dastardly Donald explain comments he made in an interview last year with Biotechnology Healthcare. Berwick said "society makes decisions about rationing all the time," and that the "decision is not whether or not we will ration care -- the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing it blindly."

Obama's "blind" appointment spares Donald having to explain his praise for the UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Berwick said NICE "developed very good and very disciplined, scientifically grounded, policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments from which we ought to learn."

Emphasis on Berwick's comment: "policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments."

Obama insisted on ruining 90% of the population's health care to insure 30-million uninsured individuals. Maybe those about to be herded toward life and death social policy mandates might like clarification on Berwick's statement that "The social budget is limited -- we have a limited resource pool. It makes terribly good sense to at least know the price of an added benefit, and at some point we might say nationally, regionally, or locally that we wish we could afford it, but we can't."

Berwick believes the "degree to which the knowledge base is linked directly to policy and decision is a matter of choice," which will be Donald's choice alone. If Obama gets his way, which he always does, death panel Donald will decide by advisory, mandatory, or policy-based measures who gets to live and who makes the sacrifice for the common good and dies.

[FONT=times new roman,times]American Thinker Blog: Obama's Health Care Rationing Czar[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times][/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]

Favors Rationing, Single Payer
Berwick has attracted controversy as a strong supporter of single payer health care, particularly in an essay written with two colleagues and published in Health Affairs in 2008.
“With some risk, we note that the simplest way to establish many of these environmental conditions is a single-payer system,” Berwick and his colleagues wrote.
And in a 2009 interview on Comparative Effectiveness Research in Biotechnology Healthcare, Berwick focused on what he perceives as the benefits of the UK’s National Institute for Clinical Health and Excellence (NICE).

“NICE is extremely effective and a conscientious, valuable, and—importantly—knowledge-building system [which has] developed very good and very disciplined, scientifically grounded, policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments from which we ought to learn,” Berwick said.
The interviewer pointed out, “Critics of CER have said that it will lead to the rationing of health care.”

Berwick responded, “We can make a sensible social decision and say, ‘Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit [new drug or treatment] is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.’ The decision is not whether or not we will ration care—the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

Obama’s Health Care Rationing Czar Has Lifetime Insurance From Institute Paying Him Millions of Dollars! The Urban Grind


[/FONT]

 

[teapartysamurai]

BTW, the Klan was an arm of the DEMOCRAT PARTY.

Not quite.

Also, I see you didn't see fit to mention that the Know Nothings became Republicans almost to the man when the various American Nativist Republican parties broke up

Excuse me, but that's HISTORICAL FACT!

KKK Terrorist Arm of the Democratic Party

By Frances Rice

History shows that the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. This ugly fact about the Democrat Party is detailed in the book, A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1990) by Dr. Eric Foner, the renown liberal historian who is the DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University. As a further testament to his impeccable credentials, Professor Foner is only the second person to serve as president of the three major professional organizations: the Organization of American Historians, American Historical Association, and Society of American Historians.

Democrats in the last century did not hide their connections to the Ku Klux Klan. Georgia-born Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan wrote on page 21 of the September 1928 edition of the Klan’s “The Kourier Magazine”: “I have never voted for any man who was not a regular Democrat. My father … never voted for any man who was not a Democrat. My grandfather was …the head of the Ku Klux Klan in reconstruction days…. My great-grandfather was a life-long Democrat…. My great-great-grandfather was…one of the founders of the Democratic party.”​

KKK Terrorist Arm of the Democratic Party | National Black Republican Association

As for the fiction that Democrats throw around that all "racist" Democrats became Republicans.

That, is total fiction.

George Wallace didn't change parties. He was a Democrat his entire life.

Connolly, didn't change parties. He that filibustered against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 didn't change parties.

Robert Byrd who also filibustered against the Civil Rights Act AND was in the KKK was a proud Democrat, and remained in the Senate the rest of his life, AS A DEMOCRAT.

Al Gore Sr. didn't change parties, and he too, filibustered against the Civil Rights Act.

IN FACT, the only Republican you can name is Strom Thurmond, and he wasn't involved in fighting to keep Jim Crowe, stopping black kids from going to white schools in Arkansas, OR filibustering against the Civil Rights Act.

No! From Jim Crowe, to Bull Connor, to George Wallace, to Roberty Byrd, they were all either policies of, or Democrats themselves AND THEY NEVER CHANGED PARTIES.

That little bit of Democrat myth only works with kiddies too young to remember the actual events. Those of us older, just laugh because we remember these racist Democrats.



​

 

[topspin]

Thanks for the ancient history lesson.

 

[daveman]

I was born pretty poor, I'll wave my financial sophistication you wave your machine gun.

I don't own any weapons. And if your financial sophistication is anything like your writing sophistication, you don't have much to wave.

 

[topspin]

You don't have much common sense either cause I was talking to the gun nuts waving their guns as if it scared somebody.

 

[teapartysamurai]

HAHA! Here we go again. Show me which part of the bill that the government will be making decisions on whether someone lives or dies. Just link me to the page.



Try reading the Health Care bill sometime.

Honey! Do you get it! When the government decides on your healthcare they DO have the power of life and death over you.

ObamaCare’s Rationing Blueprint: Associated Press and Left Wing Bloggers Complete the Circle - Big Government

Obamacare: The Government's rationing toolbox exposed

The FDA attempt to de-label Avastin for breast cancer patients is the first skirmish of the rationing wars. The battle must be fought and won. This isn’t an issue of government paying the cost of these late stage drugs. This is an issue of the government manipulating data to deny care to late stage cancer patients—even those with private insurance.

The issue at hand is whether or not the drug Avastin should be used to treat late stage terminal cancer patients. The FDA is seeking to de-label Avastin for breast cancer patients. Labeling is the FDA’s method of approval for using certain drugs for certain illnesses. Like Medicare, private insurance companies use these labels to determine whether or not they will cover the use of that drug to treat a certain illness.

Fair enough, right? But what’s particularly scurrilous about the FDA’s attempted actions with Avastin is not that they are attempting to de-label it for use with late stage breast cancer patients its how and why they are doing it.

Standard practice for evaluating drugs is to use data-driven objective endpoints to evaluate effectiveness and safety. In the case of Avastin, the FDA has arbitrarily and unilaterally stopped using this objective criterion and are applying a highly subjective criterion of “clinically meaningful”—to cut costs.

No one disputes that the drug helps extends life for terminal patients. The FDA is arguing that it just doesn’t do it for long enough to be worth the cost. So now the FDA is deciding how much life is “meaningful” and what it is worth? This should be a decision for patients, doctors and family members and the FDA should not be replacing their own value judgments about how much time is ‘meaningful’. While six months might not be significant to a statistician or a bureaucrat, for the families of a loved one or a dying patient, it’s a lifetime.


As tragic as it is for breast cancer patients today, this arbitrary shift is a preview of one of the tools in the government health care rationing toolbox. The government is not just saying outright that they won’t cover the cost of this, they are hiding their financial decisions behind language like “clinically meaningful” to lead people to believe the drug doesn’t work. The Avantis case is setting the precedent for the government to arbitrarily deny coverage to millions of American’s based on cost alone.

ObamaCare: The Government?s Rationing Toolbox Exposed - Big Government

My sister is a breast cancer survivor.

WITHOUT THESE DRUGS THEIR CHANCES OF SURVIVAL GO DOWN!!!!!!!!

She's lived for more than five years now.

My father died of cancer. Medications helped his survival go from three weeks to FOUR MONTHS.

That's called RATIONING. That's called the government deciding life and death OVER YOU!

This is EXACTLY what we warned about Obamacare and it's ALREADY COMING TO FRUITION.

Now try your BS.

Your insurance company has that power over you right now.

I CAN CHANGE INSURANCE COMPANIES, HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How absolutel mindless do you have to be to think that works!!!!!!!!

Did it ever occur to you, the difference between a private insurance company and the government?

WHERE DO YOU GO IF HEALTHCARE BECOMES SINGLE PAYER????????

That's why people are DYING IN BRITIAN AND CANADA.

1,200 Needless Deaths

By Fay Schlesinger, Andy Dolan and Tim Shipman
Last updated at 1:45 PM on 25th February 2010

• Up to 1,200 patients died unnecessarily because of appalling care
• Labour’s obsession with targets and box ticking blamed for scandal
• Patients were ‘routinely neglected’ at hospital
• Report calls for FOURTH investigation into scandal

Not a single official has been disciplined over the worst-ever NHS hospital scandal, it emerged last night.
Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care.
But none of the doctors, nurses and managers who failed them has suffered any formal sanction.
Indeed, some have either retired on lucrative pensions or have swiftly found new jobs.
Former chief executive Martin Yeates, who has since left with a £1million pension pot, six months’ salary and a reported £400,000 payoff, did not even give evidence to the inquiry which detailed the scale of the scandal yesterday.
He was said to be medically unfit to do so, though he sent some information to chairman Robert Francis through his solicitor.
The devastating-report into the Stafford Hospital-shambles’ laid waste to Labour’s decade-long obsession with box-ticking and league tables.
The independent inquiry headed by Robert Francis QC found the safety of sick and dying patients was ‘routinely neglected’. Others were subjected to ‘ inhumane treatment’, ‘bullying’, ‘abuse’ and ‘rudeness’.
The shocking estimated death toll, three times the previous figure of 400, has prompted calls for a full public inquiry.
Bosses at the Trust – officially an ’elite’ NHS institution – were condemned for their fixation with cutting waiting times to hit Labour targets and leaving neglected patients to die.
But after a probe that was controversially held in secret, not a single individual has been publicly blamed.
The inquiry found that:

• Patients were left unwashed in their own filth for up to a month as nurses ignored their requests to use the toilet or change their sheets;
• Four members of one family. including a new-born baby girl. died within 18 months after of blunders at the hospital;
• Medics discharged patients hastily out of fear they risked being sacked for delaying;
• Wards were left filthy with blood, discarded needles and used dressings while bullying managers made whistleblowers too frightened to come forward.

Last night the General Medical Council announced it was investigating several doctors. The Nursing and Midwifery Council is investigating at least one nurse and is considering other cases.

Ministers suggested the report highlighted a dreadful ‘local’ scandal, but its overall conclusions are a blistering condemnation of Labour’s approach to the NHS.

It found that hospital were so preoccupied with saving money and pursuit of elite foundation trust status that they ‘lost sight of its fundamental responsibility to provide safe care’.

Health Secretary Andy Burnham accepted 18 recommendations from Mr Francis and immediately announced plans for a new inquiry, to be held in public, into how Department of Health and NHS regulators failed to spot the disaster.

But Julie Bailey, head of the campaign group Cure the NHS, condemned his response as ‘outrageous’ and backed Tory and Liberal Democrat demands for a full public inquiry into what went wrong.

Government-Run Health Care Kills Thousands | The Daily Capitalist

Where do you go when your only recourse becomes the government?

DUH!

 

[daveman]

You don't have much common sense either cause I was talking to the gun nuts waving their guns as if it scared somebody.

An honest mistake, given your astounding inability to click on the Quote button.

 

[daveman]

Where do you go when your only recourse becomes the government?

DUH!

The morgue, apparently.

 

[topspin]

It's a klanfest

 

[Father Time]

In other words actual results don't count. It's only liberal speak that counts.

Please run away. Like I said. You lost the debate and are now hopping on one leg with your fingers in your ears.

In other words, you have no link to the part of the health care bill stating what you claim. Thanks for proving my point.

How about this......just link me to the healthcare bill, let's start with that. I'm sure you have it bookmarked since you seem to be so in tune with everything that it says.

See what I mean?

That you can't cite any part of the healthcare bill to back-up what you claim and can only mindlessly parrot how much you've won?

Yeah that's pretty clear.

 

[sparky]

it's not the federal government we need to fear

it's who's pulling it's strings

corporatism is the problem

corporatism , or the accumulation of wealth & power corrupts

that's why we have fasict health care

~S~

 

[dvinman]

THIS??? THIS is your proof??? You already made a thread about this and were shot down by multiple people. So the FDA wanting to prevent the use of a drug from being used for something it isn't indicated for is Obama rationing healthcare? I thought you were going to present a legitimate point.

I guess I should have known better then to expect more from you.

Show down?

How in the world is it NOT rationing when the FDA renames it in the name of cost and NOT leaving the decision to the doctor???????

And for what IT ISN'T INDICATED??????

Where is it NOT indicated for breast cancer patients???????

So, you are a medical doctor and know this???????

And like I still say. NOTICE THE LAST THING THIS GUY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IS THE ARROGANCE OF DEMOCRATS WHO THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN DO ANYTHING!

I ask for proof in the healthcare bill that you claim to shows slavery and you post something from the FDA that has nothing to do with the healthcare bill. Talk about answering the way you want and ignoring the question. LOL.

You can make all the wild connections you want but reality is that you have no proof and are probably just a hysterical, unemployed, uneducated redneck with nothing better to do then bash the government all day and act as if something is being taken from you. Cry me a river.

You seem to be just another loser minority looking for a handout.

 

[RDD_1210]

Show down?

How in the world is it NOT rationing when the FDA renames it in the name of cost and NOT leaving the decision to the doctor???????

And for what IT ISN'T INDICATED??????

Where is it NOT indicated for breast cancer patients???????

So, you are a medical doctor and know this???????

And like I still say. NOTICE THE LAST THING THIS GUY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IS THE ARROGANCE OF DEMOCRATS WHO THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN DO ANYTHING!

I ask for proof in the healthcare bill that you claim to shows slavery and you post something from the FDA that has nothing to do with the healthcare bill. Talk about answering the way you want and ignoring the question. LOL.

You can make all the wild connections you want but reality is that you have no proof and are probably just a hysterical, unemployed, uneducated redneck with nothing better to do then bash the government all day and act as if something is being taken from you. Cry me a river.

You seem to be just another loser minority looking for a handout.

Solid analysis, totally profiled me perfectly.

I'm white, male and make plenty to not need a handout, but you were close.

 

[RDD_1210]

In other words, you have no link to the part of the health care bill stating what you claim. Thanks for proving my point.

How about this......just link me to the healthcare bill, let's start with that. I'm sure you have it bookmarked since you seem to be so in tune with everything that it says.

See what I mean?

That you can't cite any part of the healthcare bill to back-up what you claim and can only mindlessly parrot how much you've won?

Yeah that's pretty clear.

Yeah, notice that she has time to keep touting her supposed "victory" but has yet to post the actual health care bill section that supports what she is claiming. We all know it doesn't exist, but she thinks maybe if she posts enough articles, that will be sufficient.

I even asked her to link not to the specific page but to ANY page of the healthcare bill, yeah haven't seen that from here either. Ya know why? Because, she's never read it, not one page and she doesn't even know where to go to be able to read it. Yet, she knows exactly what's in it. Funny how that works.