Nat Hentoff: "I am finally scared of a White House administration"

[CrusaderFrank]

I got chills when I read this!

Obama and the Dems have TERRIFIED NAT HENTOFF!

Nat laughed off Cheney, Reagan, and the FBI, but Obama's Fascist policies and programs has rightly terrified Hentoff and anyone not face deep in Obama Kool Aid!

"I was not intimidated during J. Edgar Hoover's FBI hunt for reporters like me who criticized him. I railed against the Bush-Cheney war on the Bill of Rights without blinking. But now I am finally scared of a White House administration. President Obama's desired health care reform intends that a federal board (similar to the British model) — as in the Center for Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation in a current Democratic bill — decides whether your quality of life, regardless of your political party, merits government-controlled funds to keep you alive. Watch for that life-decider in the final bill. It's already in the stimulus bill signed into law."

Nat Hentoff

Holy Crap!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Condemning the furor at town-hall meetings around the country as "un-American," Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are blind to truly participatory democracy — as many individual Americans believe they are fighting, quite literally, for their lives.

I wonder whether Obama would be so willing to promote such health care initiatives if, say, it were 60 years from now, when his children will — as some of the current bills seem to imply — have lived their fill of life years, and the health care resources will then be going to the younger Americans?"

Nat too sees the Obama Health Care Pogrom and is terrified by it

 

[rightwinger]

Its an issue worth discussing.

Health care costs are escallating. We can't afford to continue dumping our declining healthcare dollars into unnecessary procedures or procedures that have little hope of succeeding. Currently, your insurance company decides whether you will receive funds to receive a potentially life saving procedure. That company has a fiduciary obligation to its stockholders and is not primarilly concerned with the well being of the patient.
Republicans can rail about this process, as well as end of life councilling being included in health care reform. But can we really ignore the fact that this process will take place whether it is from public or private healthcare?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Its an issue worth discussing.

Health care costs are escallating. We can't afford to continue dumping our declining healthcare dollars into unnecessary procedures or procedures that have little hope of succeeding. Currently, your insurance company decides whether you will receive funds to receive a potentially life saving procedure. That company has a fiduciary obligation to its stockholders and is not primarilly concerned with the well being of the patient.
Republicans can rail about this process, as well as end of life councilling being included in health care reform. But can we really ignore the fact that this process will take place whether it is from public or private healthcare?

Soooooo, are you saying that we're not spending enough on healthcare because people are dying unnecessarily?

 

[rightwinger]

Its an issue worth discussing.

Health care costs are escallating. We can't afford to continue dumping our declining healthcare dollars into unnecessary procedures or procedures that have little hope of succeeding. Currently, your insurance company decides whether you will receive funds to receive a potentially life saving procedure. That company has a fiduciary obligation to its stockholders and is not primarilly concerned with the well being of the patient.
Republicans can rail about this process, as well as end of life councilling being included in health care reform. But can we really ignore the fact that this process will take place whether it is from public or private healthcare?

Soooooo, are you saying that we're not spending enough on healthcare because people are dying unnecessarily?

I'm asking you specifically Frank, to address the issue of how healthcare decisions of this magnitude should be made. How do you decide which procedures should be authorized to potentially extend the life of a 94 year old?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Its an issue worth discussing.

Health care costs are escallating. We can't afford to continue dumping our declining healthcare dollars into unnecessary procedures or procedures that have little hope of succeeding. Currently, your insurance company decides whether you will receive funds to receive a potentially life saving procedure. That company has a fiduciary obligation to its stockholders and is not primarilly concerned with the well being of the patient.
Republicans can rail about this process, as well as end of life councilling being included in health care reform. But can we really ignore the fact that this process will take place whether it is from public or private healthcare?

Soooooo, are you saying that we're not spending enough on healthcare because people are dying unnecessarily?

I'm asking you specifically Frank, to address the issue of how healthcare decisions of this magnitude should be made. How do you decide which procedures should be authorized to potentially extentd the life of a 94 year old?

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

 

[rightwinger]

Soooooo, are you saying that we're not spending enough on healthcare because people are dying unnecessarily?

I'm asking you specifically Frank, to address the issue of how healthcare decisions of this magnitude should be made. How do you decide which procedures should be authorized to potentially extentd the life of a 94 year old?

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

You are still ducking the very issue you brought up Frank. Healthcare decisions need to be made for 94 year olds. These decisions have always been made and are now made by insurance companies. How do you propose we decide what healthcare for a 94 year old should be funded?

 

[VaYank5150]

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

And you are basing this OPINION, on what, exactly? Sarah Palin sqealing about non-existent death panels?

 

[rightwinger]

I'm still waiting on Frank to provide his position on the issue he raised in this thread.
If a 94 year old needs a heart transplant and a 42 year old needs that same heart, who decides who gets it? These decisions are made every day. Are they "Death Panels"???

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

I dont support government run healthcare but, now, this is fear mongering at its finest.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm asking you specifically Frank, to address the issue of how healthcare decisions of this magnitude should be made. How do you decide which procedures should be authorized to potentially extentd the life of a 94 year old?

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

You are still ducking the very issue you brought up Frank. Healthcare decisions need to be made for 94 year olds. These decisions have always been made and are now made by insurance companies. How do you propose we decide what healthcare for a 94 year old should be funded?

You sound like Ezekiel Emanuel, since when did this become your decision?

How are you going to pay out all the money promised by Social Security to retiring baby boomers?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

And you are basing this OPINION, on what, exactly? Sarah Palin sqealing about non-existent death panels?

Try to stay on topic because you just terrified Nat Hentoff.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

I dont support government run healthcare but, now, this is fear mongering at its finest.

Have you read anything at all by Ezekiel Emanuel John Holdren or Cass Sunstein?

 

[VaYank5150]

You sound like Ezekiel Emanuel, since when did this become your decision?

How are you going to pay out all the money promised by Social Security to retiring baby boomers?

Rather than dogding and deflecting, why don't you try ANSWERING rightwinger's question, instead?

 

[jillian]

I got chills when I read this!

Obama and the Dems have TERRIFIED NAT HENTOFF!

Nat laughed off Cheney, Reagan, and the FBI, but Obama's Fascist policies and programs has rightly terrified Hentoff and anyone not face deep in Obama Kool Aid!

is this more of that already proven BS garbage?

you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I got chills when I read this!

Obama and the Dems have TERRIFIED NAT HENTOFF!

Nat laughed off Cheney, Reagan, and the FBI, but Obama's Fascist policies and programs has rightly terrified Hentoff and anyone not face deep in Obama Kool Aid!

is this more of that already proven BS garbage?

you should be ashamed of yourself.

Wait a fucking second, I didn't write Nat Hentoff's article!

Let's deal with the topic: Obama has terrified Nat Hentoff!

 

[jillian]

Wait a fucking second, I didn't write Nat Hentoff's article!

Let's deal with the topic: Obama has terrified Nat Hentoff!

yeah, i'm sure he's quaking in his boots....

you didn't write the article... but you're spreading the stench of it's lies. and you know it's lies.

so yes, when you knowingly spread misinformation, you should be embarrassed.

nat hentoff's ideology:

Hentoff is known as a civil libertarian, free speech activist, anti-death penalty advocate, pro-life advocate, and he is often critical of the ideological left. He also supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

While once a longtime supporter of the American Civil Liberties Union, Hentoff has become a vocal critic of the organization for its advocacy of government-enforced university and workplace speech codes.[6] He serves on the board of advisors for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, another civil liberties group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Hentoff

you act like you're surprised he doesn't agree with this admin....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wait a fucking second, I didn't write Nat Hentoff's article!

Let's deal with the topic: Obama has terrified Nat Hentoff!

yeah, i'm sure he's quaking in his boots....

you didn't write the article... but you're spreading the stench of it's lies. and you know it's lies.

so yes, when you knowingly spread misinformation, you should be embarrassed.

Excuse me?????????

Read the fucking article!

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHO NAT HENTOFF IS?????

 

[paperview]

You sound like Ezekiel Emanuel, since when did this become your decision?

How are you going to pay out all the money promised by Social Security to retiring baby boomers?

Rather than dogding and deflecting, why don't you try ANSWERING rightwinger's question, instead?

When faced with actually answering, Frank usually does his flauntingly flaming duck, spin and twirl routine.

Watch it.

 

[rightwinger]

First thing, within 5 years of the Government allocating resources, there will no longer be any 94 year olds.

You are still ducking the very issue you brought up Frank. Healthcare decisions need to be made for 94 year olds. These decisions have always been made and are now made by insurance companies. How do you propose we decide what healthcare for a 94 year old should be funded?

You sound like Ezekiel Emanuel, since when did this become your decision?

How are you going to pay out all the money promised by Social Security to retiring baby boomers?

You are still ducking this very important issue you brought up in order to fearmonger. This is a decision being made every day. Right now, the decision to fund procedures on a 94 year old are made by insurance company "death panels". In a revised healthcare system, how would you propose we decide which procedures will be funded for a 94 year old?