Obama outlines health care plan for all

September 1, 2009
Obamacare: The Only Exit Strategy
by Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON - Obamacare Version 1.0 is dead. The 1,000-page monstrosity that emerged in various editions from Congress was done in by widespread national revulsion not just at its expense and intrusiveness but at the mendacity with which it is being sold. You don't need a Ph.D. to see that the promise to expand coverage and reduce costs is a crude deception, or that cutting $500 billion from Medicare without affecting care is a fiction.

But there is an exit strategy.

And a politically clever one, if the Democrats are smart enough to seize it.

1) Forget the public option. Whatever the merits, and they are few, it is political poison. It dies by the Liasson Logic, the unassailable observation by NPR's Mara Liasson that there are no liberal Democrats who will lose their seats if the public option is left out, while there are many moderate Democrats who could lose their seats if the public option is included.

2) Jettison any reference to end-of-life counseling. People see (correctly) such Medicare-paid advice as subtle encouragement to voluntarily refuse treatment. People don't want government involvement in a process they consider the private province of patient, family and doctor. The Senate is already dropping it. The House must follow.

3) Soft-pedal the idea of government committees determin-ing "best practices." President Obama's Federal Coordinat-ing Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research was sold as simply government helping doctors choose the best treatments. But there are dozens of medical journal review articles that do just that. The real purpose of FCCCERs is ultimately to establish official criteria for denying reimbursement to less favored (because presumably less effective) treatments -- precisely the triage done by the NICE committee in Britain, the Orwellian body that once blocked access to a certain expensive anti-blindness drug until you went blind in one eye.

4) More generally, abandon the whole idea of Obamacare as cost-cutting. True, it was Obama's original rationale for creating a whole new entitlement at a time of a sinking economy and a bankrupt Treasury. But, as many universal-health care liberals complain, selling pain is poor salesmanship.

5) Promise nothing but pleasure -- for now. Make health insurance universal and permanently protected. Tear up the existing bills and write a clean one -- Obamacare 2.0 -- promulgating draconian health-insurance regulation that prohibits (a) denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, (b) dropping coverage if the client gets sick, and (c) capping insurance company reimbursement.

What's not to like? If you have insurance, you'll never lose it.
Nor will your children ever be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions.

The regulated insurance companies will get two things in return. Government will impose an individual mandate that will force the purchase of health insurance on the millions of healthy young people who today forgo it. And government will subsidize all the others who are too poor to buy health insurance.

The result? Two enormous new revenue streams created by government for the insurance companies.

And here's what makes it so politically seductive: The end result is the liberal dream of universal and guaranteed coverage -- but without overt nationalization. It is all done through private insurance companies. Ostensibly private. They will, in reality, have been turned into government utilities. No longer able to control whom they can enroll, whom they can drop and how much they can limit their own liability, they will live off government largesse -- subsidized premiums from the poor; forced premiums from the young and healthy.

It's the perfect finesse -- government health care by proxy. And because it's proxy, and because it will guarantee access to (supposedly) private health insurance -- something that enjoys considerable Republican support -- it will pass with wide bipartisan backing and give Obama a resounding political victory.

Isn't there a catch?

Of course, there is.

This scheme is the ultimate bait-and-switch.

The pleasure comes now, the pain later.

Government-subsidized universal and virtually unlimited coverage will vastly compound already out-of-control government spending on health care. The financial and budgetary consequences will be catastrophic.

However, they will not appear immediately. And when they do, the only solution will be rationing. That's when the liberals will give the FCCCER regulatory power and give you end-of-life counseling.

But by then, resistance will be feeble. Why? Because at that point the only remaining option will be to give up the benefits we will have become accustomed to. Once granted, guaranteed universal health care is not relinquished.

Look at Canada. Look at Britain.

They got hooked; now they ration.

So will we.

Quote:

---

The idea of "death panels" -- hardhearted government bureaucrats who would decide when to pull the plug on terminally ill patients -- has been rather thoroughly debunked.

---

Obama Pushing Euthanasia on Veterans
September 05, 2009 08:52 PM EDT

The Wall Street Journal just published a shocking editorial written by a respected University President, confirming the Obama Administration is now using VA hospitals to order doctors to pressure all military veterans to sign "pull the plug" do-not-resuscitate orders, hastening their premature deaths through mandatory "end of life" counseling.

President Jim Towey of Saint Vincent's College, founder of the non-profit "Aging With Dignity" and former White House Director of faith based initiatives, wrote a blistering expose entitled "The Death Book For Veterans," revealing President Obama's new Veterans Administration (VA) directive, presumably signed by VA Secretary, General (ret.) Eric Shinseki, which mandates all veterans' primary care physicians must graphically discuss "end of life planning" with all VA patients (not merely those nearing death), and must refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices," a book that openly encourages Euthanasia and was written with guidance from the group formerly known as the Hemlock Society. That same pro-suicide group now boasts on their web-site of directly leading the charge to ensure "end of life counseling" is mandated in the Obamacare bill, HR 3200.

On page 21 of the Shinseki-mandated Veteran's Euthanasia book, all military veterans are encouraged to complete a checklist of various scenarios, to decide whether their own life would be "not worth living." For example, the booklet asks veterans 7 questions pressuring veterans to sign a "living will" that authorizes doctors to terminate your life, if you are:

Living in a nursing home?
Being in a wheelchair?
Not able to "shake the blues?"
Ever heard anyone say, "If I'm a vegetable, pull the plug?"
No longer able to contribute to your family's well-being?
Are you a severe financial burden to your family?
Do you cause severe emotional burden for your family?

"This hurry-up-and-die message is clear and unconscionable," says Towey, "Worse, a July 2009 VA directive [presumably signed by Shinseki] instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to 'Your Life, Your Choices.' [the Euthanasia booklet.] Not just those of advanced age and debilitated condition-all patients. America's 24 million veterans deserve better." Towey recommends a "five wishes" living-will document that does not pressure suicide.

But instead the Hemlock Society booklet is now MANDATED for doctor referral to all patients in all VA hospitals, heaping more evidence upon the growing list of proofs that the Obama Administration is LYING TO THE PUBLIC by denying their health care plan pushes Euthanasia on the elderly. They already do it today. Just imagine if ALL hospitals become government-run like the VA.

We all gasped when the federal government seized control of General Motors, and Obama effectively fired the Chairman and replaced the board with government bureaucrats selected by Treasury Secretary Geithner. Now Obama and his liberal Democratic House allies want to replace your doctors with bureaucrats, hasten grandma's demise, abort and kill children in urban neighborhoods, cut doctors' pay and control their religion, and transform Private hospitals into government-controlled atheist bureaucracies.Does any of this remind you of Communism? I won't stand idly by to allow this. Please forward this to all your friends who care about our beloved country, especially those senior citizens who may be at greatest risk.

ObamaCare: Does the media matter?
September 15, 2009 by Karl
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives...-media-matter/

Last week, ObamaCare dominated the American mediascape: http://www.journalism.org/index_repo...ember_613_2009

Quote:

---

For the week of September 7-13, the battle over health care reform accounted for 32% of the newshole, according to the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. That equals the previous high-water mark in PEJ’s News Coverage Index, which monitors the agenda of the mainstream media. That occurred during the week of August 10-16, when angry town hall confrontations were driving the press narrative.
Last week, the event fueling media attention was President Obama’s September 9 prime time address to Congress. In much of the coverage, the speech was depicted as a crucial attempt to regain momentum after a month when Obama opponents seemed to assume the upper hand in the message/political wars. But as it turned out, Obama had to share the media’s post-speech post-mortems with Republican Congressman Joe Wilson, who heckled the President with the now famous “you lie” shout.

---

That is as favorable a media position as Pres. Obama is likely to have on the issue: the telegenic orator’s made-for-TV joint session of Congress, with the made-to-order villain who called the president a liar (or so the establishment media would report). In contrast, the prior peak week of August 10-16 featured heavy coverage of “death panels” and town hall confrontations.
Nevertheless, the weekend polling (usually favorable to Democrats) from Rasmussen, the Washington Post/ABC News, CNN and USA TODAY/Gallup failed to show support for ObamaCare more than a point or two outside the margin of error. Rasmussen, which had one of the larger pro-Obama bounces, now shows support for ObamaCare is already back to its tepid pre-speech levels.
In this context, the news that Pres. Obama is going to appear on five Sunday talk shows takes on an “I’m dancing as fast as I can” quality. The NYT’s Adam Nagourney writes, “If there’s one thing this White House doesn’t seem worried about, it is that Americans will get tired of seeing President Obama.” Maybe they should be. Pres. Obama has done roughly three times as many interviews as George W. Bush or Bill Clinton did in their first seven months as president — a period during which Pres. Obama’s approval ratings have fallen further than most presidents since World War II. Or maybe Obama’s omnipresence in the media simply does not matter, and people are simply tuning him out like a dog food commercial.

Quote:

---

Forty-five percent (45%) of all voters nationwide now favor the plan while 52% are opposed. A week ago, 44% supported the proposal and 53% were opposed.

The latest figures show that 23% Strongly Favor the plan and 41% are Strongly Opposed. In late August, 23% were strongly in favor of the plan and 43% were strongly opposed.

Fifty-one percent (51%) now say that health care reform is at least somewhat likely to pass this year. That figure includes 18% who say passage is Very Likely. In a survey Sunday night, 55% said the plan was at least somewhat likely to pass this year. That was the highest total yet recorded.

If the plan passes, 27% of voters now say the quality of care will get better and 46% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.

Forty-seven percent (47%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 20% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and only 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.

Prior to the president's speech, most people with insurance said it’s likely they would be forced to change coverage if the plan passes. As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, explained in a recent Wall Street Journal column: “The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.”

Voters overwhelmingly believe that every American should be able to buy the same health insurance plan that Congress has. Most favor limits on jury awards for medical malpractice claims and think that tort reform will significantly reduce the cost of health care.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...th_care_reform




The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll is another indicator of the speech's impact, and there, too, the bounce in approval Obama has been getting since the Wednesday night speech appears to have ended. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

---

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/...er_15_2009.jpg

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/...er_15_2009.jpg

Here’s a glimpse of the grim future under Obamacare. It’s not just about patients and consumers getting screwed. It’s about the enormous disincentives government-run health care would bring to the medical profession.

Investor’s Business Daily reports on the results of its heart-stopping poll of doctors: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...aspx?id=506199

Quote:

---

Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors’ own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul.

It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration’s claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.

---

Read the whole thing — and don’t expect Obama’s health care czar’s office to report this in its “reality check” series. Doesn’t fit the Obamacare narrative.


Both my PC and GYN closed their practices shortly after Obama was elected; both cited the eclection and National Healthcare.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/15...der-obamacare/

Billionaires for Wealthcare

Quote:

---

Please read and use the DIY tools on below for the info, talking points, chants and tips you need to stage a successful action. More organizing tools will be added to the site as needed and as we are able.

Where

Billionaires can be useful at both pro and anti-health reform events. At the Teabagger’s own events, we show up and thank them for fighting so hard to protect OUR right to deny THEIR claims. Be sure to stand side-by-side with our friendly, if misinformed, teabaggers, and thank them and cheer on their manic protests! If some teabaggers get mad at you don’t fret, they often don’t understand that they are the unwitting pawns of our corporate largess. Some are convinced that our loyal foot soldier Glenn Beck is telling them the truth. Just remind them that their fight is not with us, it is FOR us. :)

With Who?

Connect with other Billionaires in your area using our Chapters page. Don’t see a yacht club in your neck of the gated community? Use our comment section at to announce yourself.

You can also visit our Facebook page to find actions and events and other billionaires near you.

How

It is difficult for many of us to admit publicly that we are extremely wealthy. It can make us feel vulnerable — worried that people will approach us to ask for money, or scorn us because we have more than they do, or merely subject us to undue scrutiny. Nonetheless, Billionaires for Wealthcare must make public appearances — as Billionaires — if we want to maintain the right to profit on illness. Billionaires should always come dressed appropriately. Wearing suitable attire is a fundamental element of how we communicate.

Remember, image is everything! We want to be taken seriously by the media, by other wealthy people, and even by the unwashed public. We recommend that you make a tasteful and elegant banner or sign with your message on it. We’ve included several xeroxable placards on this website. Black on white in clear block letters is the easiest to read from the greatest distance. Of course, a little gold embossment around the edges provides a tasteful je ne sais quoi.

Visual unity is important. Remember, we make a bigger and more powerful impression (and we are about power) when we appear unified and dignified. For tips on what to wear, please review the section on suit-able attire. If you choose to counter-demonstrate at another group’s action, be sure to stay together as a group, remaining distinct and separate from non-Billionaires. Our impact is lessened when ordinary protesters, all ratty in blue jeans and backpacks, try to mingle with our evening-gowned ladies and tuxedoed gentlemen.

To become a Billionaire, we ask only that you follow the simple instructions below on how to choose a name, dress the part, and adopt a Billionaire persona. Once you have completed these preliminaries, you and other like-minded Billionaires are ready to form your own local chapter of Billionaires for Wealthcare.

Also, check out our tips and tricks for press coverage and running effective actions here.

As a billionaire, you must make a good name for yourself (or at least borrow one from your parents). Here are some famous Billionaire names from around the country:

Bill M. Moore
Billie O’Nair
Frida Market
Lou Pole
Phil T. Rich
Z. Roe Compassion

Appearances are everything. Formal dress is required.

In order to be a billionaire, it is not merely important to sport the right attitude, but to sport the right suit as well. We really must insist that you dress the part — we do have an image to uphold. It has occasionally come to our attention that some Billionaires have tried to gather in casual garb, and to those deviant individualists, we have only this to say: Formal is Normal.

We know that there is a great wealth of diversity among the extremely rich — and therefore among our fashion choices as well. Billionaires come in all colors, shapes and sizes. We have old money and oil money and dot-com money and money at work and money on vacation and daytime money and evening money.

But as important as it is to honor the diversity of our ranks, it is even more important to preserve the traditional image of the Billionaire in America.

Visual unity is very important to us. Remember, it takes conformity, not individuality, to become a Billionaire for Wealthcare.

So don your black suits and evening gowns, and hit the streets!

For men, suit-able attire includes:
• black tux or suit, white shirt, money tie, bowtie, bowler hat, cigar, monocle, white gloves, cummerbund, suspenders, cane
For women:
• furs, diamonds, pearls, fancy scarf, opera gloves, gown, heels, cigarette holder, tiara

Below are some chants, talking points and other useful stuff that could be used at just about any Billionaire event. Others can be created and tailored to specific occasions. For best results, when drafting talking points for an action, strive for brevity, humor and specific content which shows why only wealthy people should be supporting America’s for-profit healthcare system.

Five easy tips for a successful action:

Stay POSITIVE – the more those people who don’t get it (or do) may yell the more you thank them for fighting so hard for our interests. ”You’re fight is not with us, son, it is FOR us.” is a good line.


Stay IN CHARACTER – You aren’t going to convince any teabagger that Obama is not a islamo-fascist-commie alien intent on destroying the world and enslaving Republicans. Don’t bother. They may try to engage you 1-on-1 for ‘conversation’. This is just a tactic to dillute your presence. Don’t let ‘em. Staying in character no matter what is also so vexing that they just don’t know what to do with you. Safety is a legitimate concern, however. Which is why you always want to:

Stay TOGETHER – Both safety and a better media presence is created when you are all in a tight group w/ signs, chants, smiles and waves. Stay near media cameras and/or police officers as much or as often as possible.

Stay CONSISTENT - Memorize 2 – 3 talking points and 2 -3 1-liners from below and use those over and over again when talking with media or passersby. It might seem redundant to you but it is not at all to those listening.

Stay IN TOUCH. Please post pics and media attn from your action in the comment sections (Chapters, press, etc) on this website.

Then What?

Don’t forget to inspire other billionaires with your fabulousness by posting your pics to Flickr (http://Flickr.com) using the “BforW” tag. Also post media links from your events to our comments page on the Chapters page.

And thanks! For all you do.

In Trust (funds),

Billionaires For Wealthcare (Keep scrolling for Chants, One-Liners, Talking Points and our Songs!)

---

-Cont-

Quote:

---

CHANTS:
Regular:

Bring Back Bush!
Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Keep the Profits with the CEOs
You say health gap, I say wealth gap.
Stock options, yes! Public Option, no!
Your pain, our gain.
Walk. It. Off.
Wealthcare, Not Healthcare!
Fear, Lies, Sedition! Pre-Existing-Condition!

Making fun of Tea-Partiers:

Ang-ry Yell! Ang-ry Yell!
We are louder! We are louder!
What are we saying? Rrrrrrr!
How do we say it? LOUD!
Do we know what we’re saying, Noooooo!
What are we mad about? Stuff!”
If the facts do not equate, just lie and obfuscate!


ONE-LINERS:
What health care problem? I feel just fine.
Let them eat Advil.
Whatever happened to an apple a day?
Band-Aids are affordable.
Nothing Says “Freedom” Like Denying Claims
Don’t Tread My Freedom to Deny Your Claim
Don’t Blame Me for Your Pre-Existing Condition
Skyrocketing Premiums: What’s Not to Like?
Your fight is not with us, it’s for us. (to the teabaggers)
Ask not what your healthcare corporation can do for you…but what you can do for your healthcare corporation
For the past 8 years, health care costs have been moving in the right direction…Up!
Nobody’s forcing you to get sick, you know.
Support Our Troops: Stop Giving Them Socialized Medicine! (thru the VA)
Fight Socialism! Take Away VA Benefits from our Troops Now!
Fight Socialism! End Medicare Now!
Who needs infrastructure?
Your premiums may have doubled, but our salaries have tripled!
The system works great — for the insurance industry!
Keeping our profits healthy will require some sacrifice. Not on our part, of course.
You deserve the healthcare you can afford
Private Insurance works just fine
Walk it off.
Wealth before health. (used a la “age before beauty”)
We’re just like you — minus a few billion dollars and a butler or two. (to teabaggers)
TALKING POINTS:
You Deserve the Healthcare you can Afford:
Healthcare is a service and those who can pay more deserve better service. For instance, if a school is burning down and my cat is stuck in a tree, the fire
department should get my cat out of the tree first because I can pay a higher premium for their time and effort.

Don’t give the government your money! We are happy to keep gouging you instead.

Government efficiency. Where’s the profit in that?

The current system works… FOR US!:
We like the current system: we get to insure the healthy and offload the sick to taxpayers.

How so? When any one of the 47 million uninsured Americans need care they go to the emergency room – at 5 times the cost of a doctor’s visit! – Taxpayers are already footing that bill nice and quietly everyday. And hospitals get to charge full market rates while we only insure wealthy, healthy customers. It’s a win-win! Well, maybe not for taxpayers…

Sick people are bad for good profits.

We’re a business. We have to cut the weak links in the chain. Sick
people are those weak links.

Some people say the healthcare system is broken. But it works for us.
Just like Congress.

Just imagine all of the new businesses or creative energy people would invest their time and true talents in if they weren’t chained to a job they hated just for “healthcare benefits”. My gawd, ask anyone at the country club – there are way too many nouveau-riche already!

Pre-existing conditions:
We’re happy to accept people with pre-existing conditions: health,
wealth, and youth.

Healthcare is a commodity, not a right.

You want insurance AND a house?! And you call ME greedy?

You think YOU’RE spending a lot on healthcare? Heck, we employ 6
lobbyists for every member of Congress.

Denying Claims:
We deny more claims before 8am than Medicare does all day.

Because nothing says “freedom” like denying claims.

We believe in a free market. We should be free to deny coverage at will.

Recision:
We’re hear to stand up for Freedom of Recision.

Some people might call these the real death panels, but its merely good business: we dump customers from our rolls when they become too sick to cover. Just last year three of our health care insurance companies saved $300 million by kicking out a mere 20,000 customers! And about that woman with breast cancer that President Obama mentioned? Are you trying to tell me that acne isn’t a preexisting condition to cancer? But make no mistake, people don’t want the gov’t deciding who should get care. They are happy to leave it up to us and our legions of anonymous temps using strict cost-to-profit ratios.

SONGS:
“Let’s Save the Status Quo”
(to the tune of “Battle Hymn Of The Republic”)

Rejoice and let us glory in the profits we attain
By rationing the remedies for suffering and pain.
And no one's gonna mess with all our monetary gain.
Let's save the status quo!

Chorus:
If our healthcare corporation
Never faces regulation,
We'll be brimming with elation!
Let's save the status quo!

We bought a bunch of senators and congresspeople too.
They serve our corporate interests and we tell them what to do.
This gravy train will stop the day a healthcare bill gets through.
Let's save the status quo!

Chorus: If our healthcare corporation (etc.)

Our PR team is crackerjack. We’re framing the debate!
We’re spreading lots of lies and we’re unleashing lots of hate.
We’ll drive a stake into the bill the day it leaves the gate.
Let's save the status quo!

Chorus: If our healthcare corporation (etc.)

A decent public option is an option we won’t bear.
And Medicare for Everyone would kill our market share.
We’ll never win the game if all the rules are just and fair.
Let's save the status quo!

Chorus: If our healthcare corporation (etc.)

In every other wealthy nation healthcare is a right.
But not here in America, no not without a fight!
We’re fighting for the right to monstrous profits day and night.
Let's save the status quo!

Chorus: If our healthcare corporation (etc.)Lyrics by Felonius Ax
Minister of Musical Manipulation
(TheBillionaires.org)

“Your Healthcare Company”
(To the tune of “America The Beautiful”)

Insurance for the uninsured
we've got just what you need:
A really high deductible
You never can exceed.

Our customers, we're there for you
Your healthcare company.
You're just the folks we love to screw
From sea to shining sea!

That swelling in your abdomen,
That throbbing in your wrist,
We treat none of your symptoms 'cause
They clearly preexist!

Our customers, we're there for you
Your healthcare company.
You're just the folks we love to screw
From sea to shining sea!

You're filing your claim and you hope
We're paying for your cure.
We're canceling your policy.
You're too sick to insure!

Our customers, we're there for you
Your healthcare company.
You're just the folks we love to screw
From sea to shining sea!Lyrics by Felonius Ax
Minister of Musical Manipulation

“We Are On Your Side”
(to the tune of “My Country ‘Tis Of Thee”)

Raising your premiums
Raking in ghastly sums
Coverage denied!
Canceling policies
Causing your bankruptcies
Leaving you on your knees
We are on your side!
Lyrics by Felonius Ax
Minister of Musical Manipulation

---

http://www.billionairesforwealthcare...a-billionaire/

Baucus Introduces $856 Billion Health Care Bill
William Branigin and Lori Montgomery - Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:19 AM

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus unveiled an $856 billion health-care reform plan Wednesday that would require nearly all Americans to carry health insurance while barring insurance companies from discriminating against people based on their health status or denying coverage because of preexisting conditions.

The plan does not call for a government-run insurance option, as advocated by President Obama and most Democrats, but would set up a system of nonprofit consumer-owned cooperatives to compete with private insurers -- a provision intended to appeal to Republicans who have railed against the "public option" in recent weeks.

Baucus (D-Mont.) released the plan aimed at overhauling America's $2.5 trillion health care system ahead of a vote scheduled in the Finance Committee for next week.

"The cost of America's broken health care system has stretched families, businesses and the economy too far for too long," he said in a statement. "For too many, quality, affordable health care is simply out of reach. This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long."

He said the "common-sense package" would work for patients, health-care providers and the economy and would not "add a dime to the deficit." He also pledged that it would rein in soaring health-care costs.

Republicans vowed to oppose what they view as a government "takeover" of the health-care system.

In a floor speech Wednesday before the Baucus plan was released, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) charged that at every turn, "Democrats in Washington are pushing another trillion-dollar bill or calling for more spending, more taxes, and more debt."

He said: "The American people want health care reform -- not with more government, but with less. They don't want a new government-run system; they want us to repair the system we've got."

Under the Baucus plan, new Web-based insurance exchanges would be established to allow consumers to shop for and compare insurance plans. The package would also expand Medicaid and place caps on patients' annual health-care costs. It would be paid for with $349 billion in new taxes and fees and $507 billion in cuts to government health programs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091601151.html

READ THE BILL : http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/...Future_Act.pdf

Doctors Threaten to Go Galt if ObamaCare Passes
Posted on September 16, 2009

It would be a miracle of biblical proportions if Big Government’s minions could decrease costs while increasing coverage, as Democrats have been promising to do when they seize control of the healthcare industry. What will make cost savings even more improbable is that they will have to do it with a radically reduced supply — because doctors unwilling to labor as government slaves have promised to go Galt:

Quote:

---

Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement” if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, the government says. Projecting the poll’s finding onto that population, 360,000 doctors would consider quitting.

---

The IBD/TIPP poll also found that 2/3 of doctors oppose ObamaCare, despite the lies being spewed on your dime by NPR.

Quote:

---

The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors’ own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul. …

It also differs with findings of a poll released Monday by National Public Radio that suggests a “majority of physicians want public and private insurance options,” and clashes with media reports such as Tuesday’s front-page story in the Los Angeles Times with the headline “Doctors Go For Obama’s Reform.”

---

Surprisingly, only 71% of doctors answered “no” when asked whether they could swallow that “the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better.” The rest must be Democrats, like they all will be after ObamaCare is rammed through and hospitals turn into the DMV.

Becoming a doctor isn’t easy. Who is going to do it in the future, when our socialist rulers have destroyed every incentive? It will make more sense just to apply for a job at the post office than endure the rigors of medical school and residency. This is yet another reason that socialism simply does not work. But at least we’ll have no shortage of useless bureauweenies telling us how to live and when to die.

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/09/1...macare-passes/

O’Reilly endorses the public option, which he previously called ‘socialism.’

Quote:

---

Last night on Fox News, Bill O’Reilly actually told a Heritage Foundation scholar who was fear-mongering government-backed health care that he favors a public option:

NINA OWCHARENKO: Well, it has massive new federal regulation. So you don’t necessarily need a public option if the federal government is going to control and regulate the type of health insurance that Americans can buy.

O’REILLY: But you know, I want that, Ms. Owcharenko. I want that. I want, not for personally for me, but for working Americans, to have a option, that if they don’t like their health insurance, if it’s too expensive, they can’t afford it, if the government can cobble together a cheaper insurance policy that gives the same benefits, I see that as a plus for the folks.

As recently as last month, O’Reilly was still saying that progressives want “the government to run the nation’s health care system. That’s because the Feds can then redistribute income much easier, shifting resources to the poor and away from corporations and the affluent. … It’s not really about health care. It’s about socialism.”

---

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/17/...public-option/

Michelle Obama on ObamaCare: This is very much a women’s issue

“The status quo is unacceptable,” she says, ignoring the fact that a near-majority thinks the status quo is very much acceptable indeed when the alternative is ObamaCare. Ah well. This is, as predicted, the “soccer-mom sell,” aimed squarely at women who might otherwise balk at the plan’s pricetag and/or their suspicions that their families will do worse with universal health care than without it.

And yes, before you ask, of course there was a heartwarming anecdote about children to cement the emotional appeal. JSONLINK=/video/politics/2009/09/18/michelle.bts.cnn Less heartwarming is her prior involvement in “patient dumping” when she advised a hospital in Chicago. America’s forgotten but the boss hasn’t:

Quote:

---

While a top executive at the hospital, Mrs. Obama helped engineer the plan to offload low-income patients with non-urgent health needs. Under the Orwellian banner of an “Urban Health Initiative,” Mrs. Obama sold the scheme to outsource low-income care to other facilities as a way to “dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents.” The program guaranteed “free” shuttle rides to and from the outside clinics.

In truth, it was old-fashioned cost-cutting and favor-trading repackaged as minority aid. Clearing out the poor freed up room for insured (i.e., more lucrative) patients. If a Republican had proposed the very same program and recruited black civic leaders to front it, Michelle Obama and her grievance-mongering friends would be screaming “RAAAAAAAAACISM!” at the top of their lungs…
Following the Adams incident, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) blasted Mrs. Obama and Mr. Axelrod’s grand plan. The group released a statement expressing “grave concerns that the University of Chicago’s policy toward emergency patients is dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,’ a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act (EMTALA)” – signed by President Reagan, by the way – “and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick’ wealthy patients over poor.”

---

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/1...-womens-issue/

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aTUFlFQHNlEI

Yes, First Lady Michelle Obama is now aggressively crusading for her husband’s health care takeover under the guise of championing woman who have been “crushed” by the system.

One woman Mrs. Obama won’t be spotlighting?

The mother of Dontae Adams.

I’m re-printing my June 19, 2009 blog post and column again here in its entirety to get the message out about Michelle Obama’s role in creating a health care horror story she won’t be publicizing. I repeat: What have you done for Dontae Adams, lately, Mr. and Mrs. O?

***

Quote:

---

I blogged about Michelle Obama’s role in creating a patient-dumping scheme for the University of Chicago Medical Center back in March. With her husband and the Democrats unleashing health care horror story anecdotes to gin up public fear and build support for the beleaguered Obamacare plan, my syndicated column today revisits the kind of “reform” the Obamas and their Chicago cronies champion — and who benefits.

Here’s a challenge to the ABC News Obamacare infomercial producers. I dare you to ask President Obama this question: What have you done for Dontae Adams, lately?

***

The Obamacare horror story you won’t hear
by Michelle Malkin
June 19, 2009

The White House, Democrats, and MoveOn liberals are spreading health care sob stories to sell a government takeover. But there’s one health care policy nightmare you won’t hear the Obamas hyping. It’s a tale of poor, minority patient-dumping in Chicago — with First Lady Michelle Obama’s fingerprints all over it.

Both Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Democrat Rep. Bobby Rush of Chicago have raised red flags about the outsourcing program, run by the University of Chicago Medical Center. The hospital has non-profit status and receives lucrative tax breaks in exchange for providing charity care. Yet, it spent a measly $10 million on charity care for the poor in fiscal 2007 when Mrs. Obama was employed there—1.3 percent of its total hospital expenses, according to an analysis performed for The Washington Post by the non-partisan Center for Tax and Budget Accountability. The figure is below the 2.1 percent average for nonprofit hospitals in surrounding Cook County.

Rep. Rush called for a House investigation last week in response to months of patient-dumping complaints, noting: “Congress has a duty to expend its power to mitigate and prevent this despicable practice from continuing in centers that receive federal funds.”

Don’t expect the president to support a probe. While a top executive at the hospital, Mrs. Obama helped engineer the plan to offload low-income patients with non-urgent health needs. Under the Orwellian banner of an “Urban Health Initiative,” Mrs. Obama sold the scheme to outsource low-income care to other facilities as a way to “dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents.” The program guaranteed “free” shuttle rides to and from the outside clinics.

In truth, it was old-fashioned cost-cutting and favor-trading repackaged as minority aid. Clearing out the poor freed up room for insured (i.e., more lucrative) patients. If a Republican had proposed the very same program and recruited black civic leaders to front it, Michelle Obama and her grievance-mongering friends would be screaming “RAAAAAAAAACISM!” at the top of their lungs.

Joe Stephens of the Washington Post wrote: “To ensure community support, Michelle Obama and others in late 2006 recommended that the hospital hire the firm of David Axelrod, who a few months later became the chief strategist for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Axelrod’s firm recommended an aggressive promotional effort modeled on a political campaign—appoint a campaign manager, conduct focus groups, target messages to specific constituencies, then recruit religious leaders and other third-party ‘validators.’ They, in turn, would write and submit opinion pieces to Chicago publications.”

Some health care experts saw through Mrs. Obama and her public relations man, David Axelrod—yes, the same David Axelrod who is now Mr. Obama’s senior adviser at the White House. The University of Chicago Medical Center hired Axelrod’s public relations firm, ASK Public Strategies, to promote Mrs. Obama’s Urban Health Initiative. Axelrod had the blessing of Chicago political guru Valerie Jarrett – now White House senior adviser.

Axelrod’s great contribution: Re-branding! His firm recommended re-naming the initiative after “[i]nternal and external respondents expressed the opinion that the word ‘urban’ is code for ‘black’ or ‘black and poor’….Based on the research, consideration should be given to re-branding the initiative.” Axelrod and the Obama campaign refused to disclose how much his firm received for its genius re-branding services.

In February 2009, outrage in the Obamas’ community exploded after a young boy covered by Medicaid was turned away from the University of Chicago Medical Center. Dontae Adams’ mother, Angela, had sought emergency treatment for him after a pit bull tore off his upper lip. Mrs. Obama’s hospital gave the boy a tetanus shot, antibiotics, and Tylenol and shoved him out the door. The mother and son took an hour-long bus ride to another hospital for surgery.

I’ll guarantee you this: You’ll never see the Adams family featured at an Obama policy summit or seated next to the First Lady at a joint session of Congress to illustrate the failures of the health care system.

Following the Adams incident, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) blasted Mrs. Obama and Mr. Axelrod’s grand plan. The group released a statement expressing “grave concerns that the University of Chicago’s policy toward emergency patients is dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,’ a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act (EMTALA)” – signed by President Reagan, by the way – “and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick’ wealthy patients over poor.”

Rewarding political cronies at the expense of the poor while posing as guardians of the downtrodden?

Welcome to Obamacare.

---

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/18...l-not-mention/