When the News Isn't Fit to Print ... Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Nancy Pelosi’

‘Death Panels’: Here’s the Deal

In Can You Hear Me Now?, Obamacare, Obamarama on 22/03/2011 at 18:55

That little ditz Sarah Palin was right again. Just when you were convinced he didn’t want to give granny an early sendoff to the Big Sayonara, Barack’s other shoe drops. Death panels are here.

Whether you call it an end-of-life counseling contingency or a mandatory Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), death panels are a cleverly hidden reality within the trillion-dollar government snafu we all affectionately know as ObamaCare. In fact, end of life counseling—perhaps a better term is “end-of-life lotto”—isn’t the half of it.

Even some Democrats are jumping ship on this one.

The Daily Caller:

An often-overlooked portion of President Barack Obama’s prized health care law, the creation of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), will face heat in the coming months from Congress and from the courts. Congressman Phil Roe, Tennessee Republican, told The Daily Caller the IPAB is the “real death panel” in the health care law, as compared to “end-of-life counseling” provisions in Obamacare that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin once deemed “death panels.”

“This one is the real baby right here – and most people missed this,” Roe told TheDC. “What everybody was talking about, when you saw Sarah Palin and so forth, what they were talking about these advanced directives where you sit down and there’s sort of mandatory counseling – and Medicare paid for it. This IPAB got missed – and it’s the real death panel.”

In his exclusive interview in today’s DC, Congressman Coe, who is a medical doctor, goes onto say that the IPAB will cap total sums Medicare recipients can receive for care, and thus make decisions based purely on cost rather than need options.

Palin has been lambasted in the media for months on end since 2009 when she warned the nation that the President’s takeover of national health care would result in what essentially amounts to death panels. The blogosphere is still loaded with slanderous lies.

Palin was speaking of the so-called “end of life counseling” panels, but the congressman is talking about another board that will essentially accomplish the same end; i.e. kill off seniors and others with “low quality of life” prospects by denying essential care.

Both schemes are still embedded within the bowels of ObamaCare.

The intent here is self-evident. While Democrats in Congress would like you to believe that Nanny State governance will put you on the road to cheaper insurance rates, it in fact will put you on the gurney to a Margaret Sanger-style liquidation mill. What’s next, “Soylent Green”?

Be assured, this is not the end of it. When the lid finally comes off ObamaCare it will be rife with “quality of life” panels and boards, all designed to give you a quick sendoff in your twilight years.

Where is Charlton Heston when we need him!


A Question of Strategy

In Civil Lefts, Obamarama, Strategery on 26/02/2011 at 20:28

Editor’s Note: Join us on FaceBook for a our daily and weekly summaries.

“Hence the import of the current moment – its blinding clarity. Here stand the Democrats, avatars of reactionary liberalism, desperately trying to hang on to the gains of their glory years – from unsustainable federal entitlements for the elderly enacted when life expectancy was 62 to the massive promissory notes issued to government unions when state coffers were full and no one was looking.”

How do you top a line like that? Charles Krauthammer is brilliant.

It is no longer that clear to me, however, that the Democrats in Wisconsin or anywhere else are simply trying to hang on to their glorious past. At this pivotal moment—and if ever America faced a pivotal moment this is one—one must be tempted to at least entertain suggestions by Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh that this group of miscreants is deliberately trying to collapse the government, ala Cloward-Piven-Alinsky.

Here is truly blinding clarity for you. The recent labor unrest—and I use the term ‘labor’ loosely when referring to teachers—in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio is clearly being orchestrated by the White House. What we are witnessing is unequivocally classical radical organization, from the top down.

Neither am I as keenly optimistic as Charles that the public in Wisconsin or across the country understands what is at stake. Tip O’Neill was not being condescending when he said, ‘All politics is local.’ Yes the Democrats are taking bad press but they have also, as Charles points out, been masterful at changing the focus of the debate.

The question is whether or not the denizens of urban Madison and Milwaukee will take up tea party signs and join the march when the weather warms this spring and teachers in the inner city schools are being laid off in droves. Will they appropriately blame the Obama administration and Democrats when gas and food prices skyrocket? Or will they accept the party-line shuck ‘n’ jive the Left has so successfully used on them for decades?

Because layoffs and skyrocketing prices are coming.

For the past week and a half I have been severe on Scott Walker and Mitch Daniels, but I am not ignorant of the fact that the nation is soft on collective bargaining, whether in the private or public sectors. The public has not yet felt the sting of the price tag in their pocketbooks, or at least it has not associated that sting with the enormous costs of school teachers’ and firefighters’ benefits packages.

Government unions will survive, that is a given. We can neither afford them nor do they fit into any rationale of a free society, but the Democrats slipped them in, in the early 1960s, and we are stuck with most of them.

What is far more disconcerting is how the Democrats have chosen to approach the same kind of defeat that the GOP faced in the Pelosi House during the ObamaCare fiasco. Instead of standing their ground and taking up the debate they have walked away and deliberately crippled the government. That is just about as radical a move as we have seen in the 230-plus years of this nation.

Are we to expect the same behavior when the GOP retakes the Senate in 2012? Will the elected Democrats in the House and Senate simply disappear and allow the opposition to stew in its juices?

Charles concludes:

“We have heard everyone – from Obama’s own debt commission to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – call the looming debt a mortal threat to the nation. We have watched Greece self-immolate. We can see the future. The only question has been: When will the country finally rouse itself?

“Amazingly, the answer is: now. Led by famously progressive Wisconsin – Scott Walker at the state level and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan at the congressional level – a new generation of Republicans has looked at the debt and is crossing the Rubicon. Recklessly principled, they are putting the question to the nation: Are we a serious people?”

I sincerely hope that Charles is right in his optimism; we need to turn this corner fast if we are to stabilize the economy. But I am more than mildly concerned that the Democrats are simply better chess players than the Republicans and that they are still thinking two moves ahead.

Barack Makes A Case For Matt Damon

In Obamarama on 18/03/2010 at 05:04

Barack Obama’s responses to Fox News anchor Bret Baier’s questions today were so last year that they made a Matt Damon sound bite seem relevant. Any American who doesn’t know this guy by now deserves a round on the Gitmo waterboard.

I felt sorry for Baier. He’s catching it left and right for being too soft on the President. Charles Krauthammer called Obama’s performance a rope-a-dope and Bill O’Reilly told us he could have done better. Of course, Bill’s the only guy on the planet with a bigger mouth than Barack.

Baier clearly did all he could do.

The Democrats need to swear Babu in and send him to the floor for their next filibuster. Obama’s responses were a priceless teaching aid for kids struggling with civics courses. How To Flim Flam Chicago Style. Educated the heck out of me: I learned how to stretch a half trillion bucks: spend it twice!

Then …

Excuse Me While I’m Interrupting, Bret:

BAIER: So how can you —
OBAMA: — the notion that —
BAIER: — guarantee that they’re not going to —
OBAMA: — so but —
BAIER: — they’re going to be able to keep their doctor —
OBAMA: Bret, you’ve got to let me finish my answers
BAIER: Sir, I know you don’t like to filibuster, but —
OBAMA: Well, I’m trying to answer your question and you keep on interrupting. So let me be clear.
Now, you keep on repeating the notion that it’s one-sixth of the economy. Yes, it’s one-sixth of the economy, but we’re not transforming one-sixth of the economy all in one fell swoop. What we’re saying is that for the vast majority of people who have health care, they’re going to be able to keep it. But what we are saying is that we should have some basic protections from insurance company abuses and that in order for us to do that, we are going to have to make some changes in the status quo that we’ve been debating for a year.
This notion that this has been not transparent, that people don’t know what’s in the bill, everybody knows what’s in the bill. I sat for seven hours with —

BAIER: So you don’t buy —
OBAMA: — and in the meantime —
BAIER: — the CBO or the actuary that you can’t have it both ways?
BAIER: That you can’t spend the money twice?
OBAMA: — no, what is absolutely true and what I do agree with is that you can’t say that you are saving on Medicare and then spend the money twice. What you can say is that we are going to take these savings, put them back to make sure that seniors are getting help on the prescription drug bill instead of that money going to, for example, insurance reform, and —
BAIER: And you call this deficit neutral, but you also set aside the doctor fix, more than $200 billion. People look at this and say, how can it be deficit neutral?
OBAMA: But the — as you well know, the doctors problem, as you mentioned, the “doctors fix,” is one that has been there four years now. That wasn’t of our making, and that has nothing to do with my health care bill. If I was not proposing a health care bill, right — let’s assume that I had never proposed health care.
BAIER: But you wanted to change Washington, Mr. President. And now you’re doing it the same way.
OBAMA: Bret, let me finish my — my answers here.

Well we’re down to the line now. More than likely, by this weekend the Democrats will either have a law or Michelle can start picking out retirement furniture, because failure for Obama sticks the fork in what remains of his presidency. For me the question is, Was it worth it?