Seniors and Health Care bill

I heard on the News that 7 Senior Citizens were arrested for staking out at Dianne Feinstien's LA office yesterday for 6 hours. They demanded to see the senator to state their feelings about the upcoming Health Care Bill. Socialized Medical care in Brittan and Canada regularly neglect the old. Why would US Socialized Health care take care of our older citizens. They are upset that in the current bill reductions in care for the elderly. Here is a blurb from John Boehner's blog here:

Seniors Concerned About Medicare Cuts, Believe Dem Bill Will Worsen Health Care. A new Gallup poll this morning says: “By a margin of three to one, 36% to 12%, adults 65 and older are more likely to believe healthcare reform will reduce rather than expand their access to healthcare. And by 39% to 20%, they are more likely to say their own medical care will worsen rather than improve.” Who can blame them? Among the chief concerns many Americans – particularly seniors – have about the Democrats’ government takeover is its Medicare cuts. The Associated Press reported yesterday that “Democrats are pushing for Medicare cuts on a scale not seen in years to underwrite health care for all. Many seniors now covered under the program don’t like that one bit.” An independent analysis of the House Democrats’ government-run plan shows the legislation slashes Medicare to the tune of $361.9 billion. That means fewer choices and lower health care quality for our nation’s seniors.

Pelosi is Stupidly accuses Insurance companies

I think Madame Speaker has it the other way around. The people do not want the "Public Option."

"It's almost immoral what they are doing," Pelosi said to reporters, referring to insurance companies. "Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure," she said, adding, "They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."

I have no problem on how insurance companies have treated me. I've always got the care I needed and paid when they did not. It's called "responsibility" Nancy!

Blue Dogs agreement with Health Care

From Capt'n Ed at Hot Air:

If they’re right, this is a tremendously stupid move by Democrats. It gives the Republicans a fixed target for the next few weeks, with an ability to cite the actual legislation and pick it apart, while painting moderate Democrats as fools who haven’t bothered to read it. Having no final version of the bill would have allowed Democrats to dodge questions about it. This makes them stand on the bill for weeks without getting moved out of way. Call it political target practice, practically akin to shooting ducks in a barrel, for the GOP.

I hope this recess will be productive for the constituents to give the Blue Dogs an Ear full. It also lets the GOP go on the offense and hope to kill Health Care Legislation.

The Should Nots

Ever since I first dated my husband I have gotten much grief and aggregation from his family, especially his mom. My MIL has mental problems to begin with. She also is from a European county and has a thick accent. I can hardly understand a word she says. She can speak English but I'm at a loss at what she is saying half the time. So I can't really speak to her without half the time saying, "Can you please say that again?" Anyway here are the list of "Should Nots" I have gotten from his Mother and family over the years;

1. You should not wear that skirt. (You are not a lady!)
2. You should not wear Jeans. (Same thing)
3. You should not date him anymore.
4. You should not live together VS. Married.
5. You should not marry him. (oh please!)
6. You should not have any children. (ASD in family)
7. You should not give up your career (to raise the children).
8. You should not read the book but see the movie. (SIL problem!)

I'm happy to be married for 15 years and have two healthy girls. They do have Autism with learning problems. But I'm willing to love them and take care of them. God willing I will get thought this. The solution for me is not to attend family gatherings on his side. I know they don't like it, but he and the kids can still attend. I can't share anything with them, like reading a book first before going to see a Movie. I got the "You Should go see the movie, YOU don't have to read the BOOK!" I am not going to be attacked from them anymore. You want me around you be nice and say nice things and don't do the "Should NOTS" to me anymore. (Isn't that being Chastised enough?)

The Deadly Doctors (Chef of Staff Emanuel's Brother)

Basically, Our Chef of Staff's Emanuel's Brother is a doctor who promotes "Social Justice" rather than the Hippocratic Oath. He is a health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He looks at the costs of extending care and not about saving the life of the patient no matter what. The age of "Soylent Green" is here. This bill has to be stopped!

But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).

Please read and copy and post! From NYPOST here.

HT from Kevin James at KRLA 870 AM here.

When I heard this last night on Kevin James' show I thought instantly about The Nazi Dr. Mengele. The difference between Mengele and Emanuel is that the Nazi inflicted pain and suffering. Emanuel suggests withholding treatment if the cost of the treatment outweighs the quality of life of the patient. So if you are disabled, too old, too young, etc. if your sickness is too severe to treat then you are denied the treatment because of the cost. And that medical procedure will not be available to you even if you were able to pay out of your pocket! I take it as if you are denied the treatment it is still torture! Welcome the new "Angel of Death" Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel.

Cronkite and the Killing Fields

From Big Hollywood here:

It was a Golden Age, all right - a Golden Age of enforced unanimity and bogus consensus hidden behind the strained-serious face and stentorian oration of St. Walter. It was an age of media liberalism unchallenged by anything like a conservative alternative. And it was all encompassing. In recent days, many have watched the footage of Cronkite announcing the death of John F. Kennedy. But if you watch the footage for a few minutes before his genuinely moving final bulletin, you’ll hear his innuendo hinting that Kennedy has been shot by disgruntled right-wingers. It must have broken his heart to find out that JFK had been murdered by a commie loner with an affinity for Castro.

Think of the proudest moments of the heroes of the media’s “Golden Age” - the McCarthy expose, the Watergate hearings, Cronkite’s own infamous thrust of the rhetorical dagger into the back of the fighting men in Vietnam (and of the Vietnamese who hoped for freedom) that was his Tet Offensive editorial. It’s like a liberal greatest hits album. There’s nothing, nothing even remotely conservative in the pantheon - because nothing conservative would have ever even occurred to the media heroes like Cronkite, Edward R. Murrow and the rest. Their prized objectivity was really only a tool that justified their own biases and opinions - if they did it, by definition, it was “objective.”

Cronkite was supposed to be the voice of the people of Middle America, but he was really just a loud voice speaking at them. And soon after they turned and rejected the man Cronkite dubbed the smartest of presidents - Jimmy Carter!?! - and elected Ronald Reagan, he threw in the towel. He passed the torch to Dan Rather, and the sun set upon the Golden Age of Media Liberalism. For all his faults, at least Cronkite maintained a certain dignity, but Crazy Dan is a catastrophe. When Rather dies, the quickest way to find his obits will be to Google the terms “Texas Air National Guard fraud” or “What’s the frequency, Kenneth?”

Yes, I remember the Reagan years without Cronkite. It was filled with screaming about the missiles Reagan wanted to put into Europe to protect them from the USSR. We had our fill of Rather and now of Katie C. I don't know anyone who watches the News on the networks anymore. They are dinosaurs. Just like Cronkite. But he knew when Reagan won, the winds had changed and he got out. God Rest his soul.

Cronkite's comment on Karl Rove

I remember the comment that Walter Cronkite said about Karl Rove on Larry King, "inclined to think that Karl Rove, the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he probably set up bin Laden to this thing.” HT from Little Green Footballs here.

Here is the CNN transcript here.

KING: We're back with Walter Cronkite. Why has this campaign (2004)-- and you've been through a lot of them -- been so vituperative?

CRONKITE: I think partly because of the nature of the administration. It has offended a large number of people quite seriously, right down to their souls, apparently. The war has not supported fully, certainly by all the people. The economy has touched a lot of our people. And they feel very strongly about it. So there is a very definite body there in opposition to the administration, as we know. And the administration itself has a lot of support. I think that mostly it's really locked into the Iraqi situation.

More on Cronkite's passing here from Commentary Magazine article by John Podhoretz.

Cronkite was a key figure in many ways, but foremost among them, perhaps, was the fact that he cleared the way for the mainstream media and the Establishment to join what Lionel Trilling called “the adversary culture.” Cronkite, the gravelly voice of accepted American wisdom, whose comportment suggested he kept his money in bonds and would never even have considered exceeding the speed limit, devastated President Lyndon Johnson in the wake of the 1968 Tet Offensive by declaring that the United States “was mired in stalemate” in Vietnam—when Johnson knew that Tet had been a military triumph.

At the time Cronkite had 30 million viewers compared to about 7 million Dan Rather had. Cable News and the Internet has made the viewer numbers dwindle. Before Cronkite's 1968 "opinion" on the Vietnam war the poll ratings were in the 70% in favor of us winning the Vietnam war. After that broadcast it went down to 49% in favor of the war. Not that Cronkite lost the war for us. It's just the war was not won. The Johnston administration micro managed the war and the Army was not allowed to fight the war properly. (They did not do the "surge" like in Iraq).

Breitbart.tv Exclusive Interview with President/CEO Harry Alford on Energy Hearing

Breitbart.tv Exclusive Interview with President/CEO Harry Alford on Energy Hearing

Posted using ShareThis

Sarah on "Cap N Trade"

I am a bit saddened that Sarah will leave the Governorship of Alaska. But with the rising cost of the stupid ethics suits going on I couldn't imagine Sarah staying in office. And still the political nuts are giving her a hard time. She can't do anything with out the media and Dems getting there bit 'n piece of Sarah. (Letterman in included).

I loved reading her WSJ op-ed article yesterday.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

Coming form a Gov. that knows about ENERGY and was on a state ENERGY Board for AK. This lady knows what she is talking about.Sen. Kerry had to get his two cents in on Sarah. (He knows the MSM will publish his comments and bury Sarah's) here:

"The global climate change crisis threatens our economy and our national security in profound ways," writes Kerry.

"Governor Palin need no look further than the view from her front porch in Alaska to see how destructive this crisis can be," says Kerry, pointing to a two-year-old New York Times report about a small Alaskan village facing destruction because of melting permafrost.

Kerry's Huff 'n Puff article is here.

I have to find the article about what the Native Alaskans plan for Global Warming. If the permafrost melted and they had to provide food what would they do? Grow gardens (with 12 hours of sun light they would be very plentiful.) And raise dogs with short hair. The native Alaskans look forward to Global Warming. They would not have to go out to sea and capture seals. That's hard work!
Here is an blurb from the NYT article Kerry was quoting from:

Amid the uncertainty, the residents of Newtok hear the skeptics, who question the price tag for moving such a small, seemingly inconsequential place. But residents here emphasize that they are a federally recognized American Indian tribe, and they shudder when asked why they cannot just move to an existing village or a city like Fairbanks.

They say their identity is rooted in their isolation, however qualified it has become over the last century by outside influences. It was the government, they say, that insisted decades ago that they and so many other villages abandon their nomadic ways and pick a place to call home. The current village site was once only a winter camp, and the people of Newtok say they are not to blame just because they are now among the first climate refugees in the United States.

“The federal government, they’re the ones who came into our lives and took away some of our values,” said Nick Tom Jr., 49, the former Newtok tribal administrator. “They came in and said, ‘You aren’t civilized. We’re going to educate you.’ That was hard for our grandparents.”

The federal government is the problem. If the tribe moved from winter to summer to different camps the tribe would not be facing this problem. Sen. Kerry over looked this in quoting this NYT article.