Obama=Reagan??? and Other Random Thoughts

Time magazine, a leader in the Obama mania media with "thrills running up and down their legs at the mere mention of his name," as Chris Mathews would say, has as their cover, a photo shopped picture of Ronald Reagan with his arm around Obama like they are two buddies. They are trying to compare Obama with Reagan in an attempt to change his image and make him appear more to the center instead of the radical leftist he really is. This is a sacriledge, absurd and ludicrous, especially coming on the anniversary of what would have been his 100th birthday. The left has never liked Reagan and constantly berated him and Obama himself in his book "Dreams of My Father" derides Reagan and blames him for all our country's ills. Now they want us to belieeve they've always liked Reagan and their guy Obama is just like him? Don't make me laugh.
This just makes him look more like the fake, phony, fraud he is. Reagan was a free market supporter, Obama is a commmie marxist. Reagan loved his country like no other, Obama hates this country and wants to make us into a socialist state like Europe and bring us down. Check out the link below for a humorous comparison by the Washington Times replying to the Time magazine article :D

This all reminds me of the Clinton years and the media comparing him to great presidents. First they tried comparing him to Lincoln, that didn't work. Then they tried comparing him to Roosevelt. That didn't work. Then they tried comparing him to Truman. That didn't work. Then they tried comparing him to Kennedy.That almost worked, but it didn't. Now they are doing the same with Obama. First they tried comparing him to Lincoln. That didn't work now Reagan and that's not going to work either. The media doesn't dare let their candidates be themselves because they know the people don't like liberals in high office........I see the Hawaiian legislature is now offering to have a bill passed for anyone to see Obama's birth certificate for $100. What a scam that is!!!! It's obviously a fake printed one. They say it's a chance for them to get some money into their economy and settle the debate. What a croc. I call that whoreing out his birth certificate and the legislators are the pimps. Obama has never shown his birth certificate and so far has spent close to two million dollars hiding it. All he has to do is go to the registrar's office and pay something like $80 for a copy and make it public instead of the Certificate of Live Birth they keep showing. Neil Abercrombie the governor said he knew Obama as a baby and knew his parents and he was born there and he would show a true certificate, but the hospital said they would not release it. Then he told a reporter the hospitals don't have any Obama birth certificate, then he changed his story again and said he misspoke. Obama has been to Hawaii several times on his many vacations over the last two years so why dosen't he just drop in and get a copy and make it a done deal??? What's he hiding?? Even McCain had to show a long form birth certificate so why not Obama? There were over 2000 responses to the article on AOl today and I picked a few choice ones for here:

Has anyone noticed? Obama can only produce photos of his wife and children. I have never seen any extended family photos of his family , like the ones the other Presidents have. You know , like brothers, sisters, uncles, etc. Very queer and strange. It seems like we have here, a President living in a dimension of the Twilight Zone. There is no depth, there is no background dimension to this President. Obama stands alone, only a wife and two children, no brother , no sister , no uncles , no family photos and a strange dreamy world of isolation and if one can pull a sliver of reality aside and peep behind the Twilight Zone, there is no one but Obama, his wife and two children.

Obama's grandmother has stated she was present during his birth in Kenya. Who ya gonna believe? Grandma or some b.s. fake document? I believe grandma.

controlled by the British Empire and all Kenyans were British subjects.In 1963 Kenya became their own Country and all Kenyans became Kenyan citizens.......During that time, the British Empire claimed "citizenship" on all their British subjects for life nomatter where they were born. Look up the "British Nationality Act".......Obama's mother re-married to a guy named Lolo Soetoro. Lolo had to adopt Barack Obama andrenamed him Barry Soetoro. This was so that Barry could attend school in Jakarta, Indonesia.Indonesia is a "one" citizenship Sovereignty/Country. No "dual" citizenships allowed.You are right that he was most likely born in Kenya. The Kenya Parliarment says he was born their,and is a Son of the Soil. They even have a Monument in Mombassa, Kenya and a National Holidaynamed after Obama.... There is a person named Lucas Daniel Smith who has Sworn an Affidavit,that he obtained Obama's Birth Certificate at the Hospital in Mombassa. Lucas is the ONLY person toswear an affidavit under penalty of Law. The document is being used as evidence in two Court cases,however the Judge claims the Plaintiffs have "no standing". The Kenyan BC was mailed to "every"Representative and Senator in Office by registered mail....

Representative and Senator in Office by registered mail....
That's a "colb" Certification of Live Birth NOT Certificate. In 1961 "Anyone" with a "one" year residency in Hawaiicould "file" for a "colb" no matter what country a child was born in. All "adoption" records are "sealed" and canonly be opened by a Court order. Obama was adopted by his Grandparents, and later on by his stepfather Lolo Soetoro in Indonesia (so he could attend school there). Regardless of the "colb", Obama inherited his nationality and citizenship through his father Who was a British subject and never a u.s. citizen. His mother was not old enough to convey "any" citizenship onto him as she was not old enough at 18. Our Law at the time was that you must be 10 years a citizen, 5 of them over the age of 14 (19), to pass citizenship. Obama is NOT a"natural born Citizen" born to two Parents who were u.s. citizens. Note: a "colb" must be marked "accepted byregistra" not marked "filed". To date, a valid Legal Birth Certificate has never been shown that proves he was born in Hawaii. Both Hospitals will not confirm or swear an affidavit, as well as the Hawaii DoH.This proposed "Bill" will never Pass as the State would be overwhelmed with Lawsuits on fraud. I hope it does "pass" so that I can sue them on conspiracy, counterfeit, mis-use of Seal, etc...The truth will come out!We are a Nation of Laws. We cannot just "break" them when we feel like it..........

I'm not a deeply religious person or someone who stands on the street corner with a sign saying the end is near, but I was brought up in a good Christian household with strong values and morals and have a good knowledge of the bible and it is my personal opinion that we are seeing the signs pointing to the final days. Birds falling out of the sky in countries around the world by the thousands, floods in the four corners of the world, rivers in Canada turning bright green, scientists saying the magnetic north pole is shifting and now riots and violence in the middle east like in Tunesia, Greece and Egypt. The bible talks about fruits and flowers blooming out of season and we have that with all this climate change, the bible talks about wars and rumors of wars and there are currently 52 wars going on throughout the world today. You can't tell me these aren't signs. I don't know if 2012 is the date or not given the Mayan calendar ends then and everything has been predicted so far, but I have heard some arguments that say they just stopped recording at that date or that's when they got wiped out so that's why it ends. Who knows, but I just find all this happening fast and close together and is scary. Just my opinion.

PAPER: Obama channeling Reagan? Hardly...

Just Words. Just Speeches-Obama's State of the Union

Just Words. Just speeches is how Obama described past presidents' policies and republicans. Now his State of the Union has proven to be just that. Just words, just speeches. He talked about how the economy will be helped thanks to the tax cuts they passed. The tax cuts he was against until he took a shelacking in the election. He talked about investing in bio-medical research and technology (which means more spending). He talked about closing the deficit (which he helped cause with his four trillion dollars in spending). He asked congress to eliminate billions of dollars to oil companies so we'll have a million electric cars by 2050 and clean energy by 2035. In the meantime he put a moratorium on drilling in the gulf and now gas is going up and predicted to reach $5 a gallon soon. We need to deal with the gas situation now and re-open those oil rigs in the gulf and drill here where there is more oil under us than in the middle east and not worry about 50 years from now.

He talked about education and more than half don't finish high school and give every child a chance to succeed. He talked about creating 100,000 new teachers for schools and asked congress to give a $10,000 tax credit for students attending colleges. Shades of Bush's No Child Left Behind act. It was purely all emotion and little facts which is indicative of most liberals. Overall he was good at what he does best, giving a speech and rousing the crowds with emotional appeal, but what he says and what he does are too different things. He mentioned about repairing our infrastructure and roads and education building,etc. These are things he talked about in his last State of the Union so what has he been doing for the past two years? He criticized lobbyists,9000 which he appointed, after saying in the campaign he wouldn't have any.

I found it interesting that he talked about enforcing our borders and dealing with illegals and stop expelling them back to compete against us. He has been lax on that for the past two years too. He came across as pro business and simplifying the tax cuts while being for the people.

He mentioned about the new health care law which drew laughs from the audience and said he was willing to change mistakes and work with others. He doesn't want to go back to the days when insurance denied a patient coverage because of a pre-existing condition. Republicans have plans like being able to purchase across state lines,but democrats have always opposed their ideas when they submitted them. The dems are the party of "no" not republicans. He denied it would increase spending and costs like the critics say which is an outright lie and he knows it.

I found it interesting he said he was willing to make cuts in spending after he spent more than all the presidents put together from Washington to Bush. This is all part of his appearing to move to the center. Of course he still wants millionaires to give up their tax breaks. He mentioned about being able to go to a website to see where your tax money is being spent. He said that last time too. Transparency??? Just words, just speeches.

He mentioned about the war being over in Iraq and starting a transition in Afghanistan and bring our troops home by July. When he told the taliban we will not waver and we will defeat you reminded me of Bush's 911 speech saying we will not falter and will not waver. He seemed very militaristic and jingoistic in his move to appear to move to the center supporting Tunisa and democratic asperations of all people everwhere. It all sounded conservative and nice especially when he told colleges they should allow recruiters on their campuses and put these battles behind us, but these are things he and his base always opposed. It will be interesting to see how they react. Will they accuse their messiah of selling out or do they know he just has to say these things to get elected again. Only time will tell.

I did like his references to Biden and Boehner as working class kids who made it with the American dream. He knows he has to put the idea of him being a radical socialist behind him and give the impression he is the all American tax cutting, smaller government president. It didn't work for me.
.
I liked what Rep.Paul Ryan said in the Republican rebuttal that faith in the government is at an all time low and government itself at an all time high and talked about limited government and free enterprise making this country succeed.

In the end Obama didn't offer much. His speech fell flat and was redundant and phoney. Just words. Just speeches.

ObamaNet-Gov't Issued Internet ID Card

Liberals used to love to compare Bush and republicans to Hitler, but now their guy Obama is more like Hitler and Nazi Germany with his wanting us to be a socialist state like the former Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. Just read his book "Dreams of My Father" It's his version of Hitler's "Mein Kamf." The latest is an internt ID card required for all Americans so they can keep track of us. Liberals will one day wake up and find they have met the enemy and it is them!!!! Check out this article from the Washington Times about it. Also check out the song below by my favorite duo The Rivoli Revue called The U.S. S. of A.

ObamaNet - Government issued Internet ID card required for all Americans
The government will be able to track every web site you visit, every keystroke you send, every purchase you make, every blog comment, and every Facebook and Twitter post.January 20,

The Washington Times is warning that the White House cybersecurity adviser and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke are drawing up "ObamaNet," President Obama's mandate for what amounts to a national ID card for the Internet.
President Obama wants to establish passwords for every citizen to centralize your personal information. Instead of logging onto Facebook or one's bank using separate passwords established with each individual company or web site, you will be required to use the government-issued password.
According to the Washington Times, here are the problems with "ObamaNet":

The government will be able to track every web site you visit and every keystroke you send on your home computer.

The government will be able to track every purchase you make and every deposit and withdrawal, and gain access to your electronic health care records.

The government will be able to track every blog comment you make, along with every Facebook and Twitter post.

The government will be able to create lists of your friends and acquaintances and lists of all your political affiliations, political donations, club memberships, hobbies and interests.

It's impossible for the government to make this system 100% secure (remember Wikileaks?), meaning criminals would need to steal only one key to unlock a vast amount of your personal and financial information.

Although the White House will tell you it is a voluntary program, the government "voluntary" programs too often end up becoming mandatory. See Web I.D. = more gov't control.

YouTube - U.S.S. of A.

Born in the U.S.A.?

I ran an article last year about Obama not being born here and I got a few interesting reponses. Here is another article from World Net Daily that shows other mainstream media finally getting on the birth certificate band wagon. The Governor of Hawaii. Neil Abercrombie, claims he knew Obama's parents and that he was born here, but so far has failed to show a birth certificate. He says it's in the Hawaiian archives yet neither hospital there has any record of a birth certificate. Read the article and judge for yourself. Like Fox News says, I report. You decide.


BORN IN THE USA?
Old media now asking where is birth certificate

An interview with newly elected Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie that addressed Barack Obama's presidential eligibility has prompted two opposing interpretations by legacy media – one insisting the governor has resolved the issue and the other concluding he effectively has admitted he can't find the long-form birth certificate that would help put the controversy to rest.
The New York Daily News apparently found the interview published Tuesday by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reason to declare final victory over "conspiracy theorists," but ABC News featured a story on its website pointing out Abercrombie has not delivered the promised proof.

After WND's report of the interview Wednesday – emphasizing Abercrombie tacitly has admitted an investigation he first mentioned in December has failed to produce a birth certificate –
the New York Daily News declared in its headline, "Record of President Obama's birth in 1961 is 'in the archives': Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie."
The Daily News lead paragraph stated: "Officials in Hawaii have tracked down papers indicating that President Obama was indeed born in their state, according to its new governor."
But the New York paper acknowledged that Abercrombie has not yet presented the proof to the public, stating "he again promised he would do 'what I can do' to publicly verify that records show Obama was born in Hawaii and is a citizen of the United States, making him eligible to be President."
The ABC News report, meanwhile, noted, "Despite his assurance to end the controversy, the governor has yet to present the document."


ABC led its story with, "Officials in Hawaii say they have located President Obama's birth certificate indicating that he was born in the state, but have yet to produce the document at the heart of a long-simmering conspiracy theory."
Other reports noted, however, that Abercrombie referred only to having found an unspecified notation of the birth, not a long-form birth certificate.
The wire service United Press International ran a story largely based on the ABC News account that stated, "Hawaii's governor says President Obama's birth certificate is 'written down' in state archives, but conspiracy theorists say they have yet to see it."
WND has reported that according to Hawaii law at the time, a notation made in the archives and newspaper announcements in Honolulu's two biggest newspapers could have been triggered simply by grandparents Stanley and Madelyn Dunham appearing in-person to register Obama as a Hawaiian birth, even if he was born elsewhere.
WND also has reported that Tim Adams, a former senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu in 2008 has maintained that there is no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate on file with the Hawaii Department of Health and that neither of Honolulu's hospitals, Queens Medical Center or Kapiolani Medical Center, have any record that Obama was born in their facility.
WND has asked Abercrombie's spokeswoman in Honolulu, Donalyn Dela Cruz, for an interview with the governor, but she has not responded.
On the eve of the 2008 presidential election, the then-director of Hawaii's Department of Health, Chiyome Fukino, issued a statement that she had "personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
In a separate statement, Fukino said, "I and Dr. Alvin Onaka have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
But as WND reported, neither statement specified what the "record" or "certificate" says or answered questions raised over the issue. Also, the Hawaii Department of Health has refused to authenticate the short-form Certification of Live Birth posted on the Internet initially by Snopes.com and FactCheck.org.
'Can't produce the vital document'
Across the Atlantic, the Daily Mail of London adopted the storyline reported first by WND and followed by ABC News.
The London paper's headline said: "Hawaii governor claims record of Obama's birth 'exists in archives' but can't produce the vital document."
"Pressure was mounting on Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie today amid increasing confusion over whether President Obama was born there," the paper reported.
The Daily Mail pointed out that while Abercrombie stated evidence of Obama's birth "actually exists in the archives, written down," it nevertheless "became apparent that what had been discovered was an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives and not a birth certificate."
In the Star-Advertiser interview, the London paper said, Abercrombie "suggested that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health."
Back in Hawaii, a columnist writing in an award-winning, independent online news and opinion journal founded by veteran Hawaii reporters asserted Abercrombie "has utterly failed to prove Obama was born in Hawaii."

Obama's been to Hawaii several times now for vacation. Why doesn't he just go to the state seat and ask for a copy and show it to stop the controversey instead of spending a million and a half dollars trying to keep it hidden? Hmmmmm?

The Real Merchants of Hate-Liberals

Recently Roberet F.Kennedy jr. called radio talk show host Sean Hannity a "merchant of hate" and likened him to his uncle's assasin Lee Harvey Oswald. I think the real purveyor of hate is the left and RFK jr. demonstrates that with his rhetoric to Sean. I would remind RFK jr. that his uncle's assasin was a left wing idealogue and avowed marxist.

The left wing lamestream media is attacking conservatives and blaming them for causing hate rhetoric that influenced Jared Loughner in the shooting in Tucson. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jared took drugs like marijuana and mushoom psychedelic drugs. I never heard conservatives doing that, but liberals I have. Jared burned American flags in his videos while playing a song that says "Let the bodies fall". I never heard of conservatives doing that, liberals do that. Jared became enraged and welled up when he heard Bush's name. I never heard conservatives doing that ,but liberals I have known of do that. Jared's favorite movie was the documentary that said Bankers rule everything we do and 9/11 was the government's fault. That's liberal thinking. He worshipped skulls in his backyard. I never heard of a conservative doing that. Jared's friend said he never watched the news or listened to talk radio so how could they have influenced him? He was just a paranoid, schizophrenic nut case whose favorite books were Mein Kempf and The Communist Manifesto. I never heard of a conservative having those as their favorites.

In Michelle Obama's speech she makes referance to kids asking parents why do these things happen. Just tell them that there are crazy people in this world that do crazy things for no apparent reason.

If you google" Sarah Palin and the shooting in Tucson" 10,000 references come up. That's how bad it's gotten out there. It was liberals who made movies about Bush's assasination, it was liberals who carried signs showing his head being chopped off, it was liberals comparing him to Hitler, it was liberals calling him every name in the book and then some. It was Chris Mathews who pointed the finger at Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Mark Levin and Sean Hannity. On her website, conservative columnist Michelle Malkin sites 30 pages of liberal hate listed. It was Obama who told his followers "if they bring a knife, you bring a gun." It was Obama who said Republicans can sit in the back of the bus. So I ask you. Who are the real merchants of hate?

Obama Lectures About Civility?

At the Tucson memorial service for the victims of Saturday's shooting which turned into an event with T-shirts and rowdiness, Obama told everyone to stop the rhetoric and be civil? He has a lot of gall lecturing about civility when he and his co-horts in the lamestream media have benn acting uncivil for years now. It was Obama who urged his followers during the campaign to get in their neighbors faces, it was Obama who said he was going to send Mr.Burgess to tear up Sean Hannity, it was Obama who told his followers that if they bring a knife,you bring a gun, it was Obama who said Republicans can sit in the back. It was Sheriff Dupnik who went around blasting Rush Limbaugh saying he was to blame for the shootings to coverup for his own incompetance of not nailing this cretin earlier. It was Chris Mathews who attacked Mark Levin and Michael Savage blaming them for the shootings. It was liberals who made movies about Bush's assasination and called for his head. So now Obama calls for civility? I hardly think he was addressing his own people when he said that. To liberals civility means for the opposition to shut up. Why just the next day after his call for civility the media was attacking Sarah Palin for her You Tube statements. So much for listening to their annointed one.

Black conservative columnist Larry Elder has an excellent commentary on all the liberals who are anything but civil:
Editor’s Note: – The following column contains language from liberals that some will find offensive.—
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik took time from gathering the facts about the Tucson, Ariz., shooting to denounce the “vitriolic rhetoric” that he claims played a role in the carnage. He insisted, without any evidence, that Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ support for ObamaCare helped trigger the shooter’s wrath, resulting in six dead and 13 wounded, including Rep. Giffords, who was shot point-blank in the head.
“I think it’s time as a country,” said Dupnik, “that we … do a little soul-searching, because I think it’s the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business, and what we see on TV and how our youngsters are being raised, that this has not become the nice United States of America that most of us grew up in, and I think it’s time that we do the soul-searching.”
Would the “vitriolic rhetoric” requiring “soul-searching” include Dupnik’s pronouncements that the popular Arizona immigration law is “stupid” and “disgusting” and “racist”?
Would the “vitriolic rhetoric” include former President Jimmy Carter’s ugly assertion that “an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American”?
Would it include former Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean’s description of the contest between Democrats and Republicans as “a struggle between good and evil — and we’re the good”?
Would it include Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s characterization of then-President George W. Bush as “a loser and a liar”?
Would it include Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow’s denunciation of President Bush as “dangerously incompetent”?
Would it include the late Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy’s assertion that the Bush administration fabricated a case for war in Iraq, or, as Kennedy put it, “week after week after week, we were told lie after lie after lie”?
Would the “vitriolic rhetoric” include Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel’s referring to Bush as “our Bull Connor,” the infamous Southern lawman who, in the 1960s, turned police dogs and water hoses on black civil rights protesters?
Would it include the declaration by Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart — a man astonishingly described as a modern Edward R. Murrow — that former President Harry Truman was “a war criminal”?
Would it include then-presidential candidate Barack Obama’s declaration made at a fundraiser that “if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun”?
Would it include the false accusation that the N-word was yelled at black congressmen as they walked across the Capitol grounds, a still unproven charge stated as fact numerous times by the “mainstream” media?
Would it include Hillary Clinton’s telling a black audience that the then-Republican majority Congress was “run like a plantation”?
Would it include Democratic Sen. John Kerry’s demonstrably false claim that he lost the 2004 presidential election because Ohio was “stolen”?
Would it include the Rev. Al Sharpton, who, long before meeting with the FCC and demanding broadcasting decency standards, called the then mayor of New York a “nigger whore”?
Would it include the chairwoman of the California chapter of NOW who, after the female Republican gubernatorial candidate was called a “whore,” said that yes, “Meg Whitman could be described as ‘a political whore’”?
Would it include then-Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., who attacked a black political opponent: “He’s married to a white woman. He wants to be white. He wants a colorless society. He has no ethnic pride. He doesn’t want to be black. I said that”?
Would it include the way then-President Bill Clinton, according to aide Dick Morris, described his 1996 Republican opponent: “Bob Dole is not a nice man. Bob Dole is evil. The things he wants to do to children are evil. The things he wants to do to poor people and old people and sick people are evil. Let’s get that straight”?
Would it include the editor of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations who, in explaining why Ronald Reagan had so few entries, said, “I’m not going to disguise the fact that I despise Ronald Reagan”?
Would it include the British director who made an assassination-of-President-Bush “documentary” called “Death of a President”? Or the British columnist who reviewed it and said, “You will never, ever be able to overestimate the degree to which the British people loathe George Bush. It will be a free round of drinks in every pub for the person who plays the assassin”?
Would it include the unhinged MSNBC host Ed Schultz, who, days before the Tucson shooting, said:
“This is an ideological war. … I will fight these bastards every night at 6 o’clock because I know what they’re up against. I know what they want to do. They want to take down American workers. … They want to destroy the American dream, concentrate the wealth to the top and control minorities”?
Would the “vitriolic rhetoric” include … oh, never mind.
—
Larry Elder is a radio talk show host and best-selling author. His latest book, “What’s Race Got to Do with It?”, is available now. To find out more about Larry Elder, visit his Web page at www.LarryElder.com.
COPYRIGHT 2011 LAURENCE A. ELDER

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2011/01/13/elder-dupnik-denounces-vitriolic-r

10 Examples of Liberal Hate

I received this article from a friend of mine that appeared in Human Events. Loghner was just a nut case,paranoid schizophrenic, drug user and left wing whacko who had a shrine with skulls and candles in his back yard and intimidated his professors and classmates until police came five times and was obsessed with concise dreaming, but according to the left it's all conservative's fault. I think it's an abomination that the left politicized this in just a matter of 12 hours.


Even before details were clear about the Arizona shooting, Left-wingers tried to assess blame for the tragedy to Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the Second Amendment. When it became clear that the gunman was a deranged lunatic whose political philosophy was more in tune with the loony Left than the Tea Party, liberals continued to cry out against a so-called climate of hate perpetuated by Right-wingers. Perhaps those making that charge have forgotten the hatefulness and violent words coming from their own. Here are the Top 10 Examples of Liberal Hate.

(1) Palin Derangement Syndrome: The Left’s obsessive hatred of Sarah Palin is well-chronicled and is often accompanied by violent rhetoric. Let these three examples suffice: (1) Keith Halloran, a New Hampshire Democratic candidate, said on a Facebook thread that he wished Palin had been aboard the Alaska plane that crashed, killing five including Sen. Ted Stevens; (2) Another New Hampshire Democrat, Timothy Horrigan resigned from the state legislature after writing this gem on Facebook: "Well a dead Palin wd be even more dangerous than a live one . . . she is all about her myth & if she was dead she cldn't commit any more gaffes"; and (3) foul-mouthed comedian Sandra Bernhard warned Palin she would be "gang-raped by my big black brothers" if she tried coming to New York.

(2) Obama packing heat: Barack Obama has repeatedly sprinkled his political campaigning with words more appropriate to a street thug than the President of the United States. During his 2008 campaign he said in June, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” and in September, “I want you to go out and talk to your neighbors. . . . I want you to argue with them, get in their faces.” He kept it up during the recent midterm election with this comment: “If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends . . . .”

(3) Courtland Milloy’s spit wish: Washington Post columnist Courtland Milloy said that after the health care vote he wanted to spit on and assault Tea Party members: “I know how the ‘tea party’ people feel, the anger, venom and bile that many of them showed during the recent House vote on health care reform. I know because I want to spit on them, take one of their ‘Obama Plan White Slavery’ signs and knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.”

(4) Krugman’s flip flop: New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was first out of the box connecting the Arizona shooting to Right-wing speech that created a climate of hate, intoning, “the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the GOP establishment.” He must have forgotten his own words in December 2009 during the health care debate when he wrote, “A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy.”

(5) Bush Derangement Syndrome: Before it fades into history, the liberal hatred of President Bush should be recalled. Codepink, Michael Moore, rap stars and Hollywood comedians hurled vitriol against the President. A movie was made about his assassination. But as an example of violent rhetoric, special attention should be given to remarks made by New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi, who later apologized for describing fellow Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer as "the man who, how do I phrase this diplomatically, who will put a bullet between the President's eyes if he could get away with it."

(6) Daily Kos’ hypocrisy: Markos Moulitsas, of the liberal Daily Kos, was also quick to indict the Right for the Arizona tragedy, tweeting that Sarah Palin had “accomplished her mission,” a reference to her midterm elections bulls-eye target of politicians that included Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. However, his Daily Kos website blog also included Gifford's district on a list of congressional districts "bulls-eyed" for primary challenges. And just last week, the website included a post declaring that Giffords was “dead to him” after she voted against Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House.

(7) Exterminate Republicans: This is what passes for a theater review in the Village Voice: Michale Feingold, while reviewing the play "King Cowboy Rufus Rules the Universe," wrote: "Republicans don't believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don't give a hoot about human beings, either can't or won't. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they cause any more harm."

(8) Hang Drudge: Liberal talk radio host Mike Malloy suggested stringing up Internet king Matt Drudge, saying, "Drudge? Aw, Drudge, somebody ought to wrap a strong Republican entrail around his neck and hoist him up about 6 feet in the air and watch him bounce.”

(9) Outright assaults: Sometimes the hatred on the Left exceeds talk and escalates to violent assaults. Cases in point: In August 2009, members of the Service Employees International Union beat up Kenneth Gladney for distributing "Don't Tread On Me" flags at a Missouri town hall meeting. In June 2010, Nathan Tabor was punched in the face by a Democrat during a Tea Party protest in North Carolina. Last October, Human Events reporter Emily Miller was physically assaulted while interviewing Rep. Charlie Rangel during the “One Nation Working Together” rally at the National Mall in Washington.

(10) Greenpeace "knows where you live": Greenpeace advocated mass civil disobedience last April with this blog item on its website:“The proper channels have failed. It's time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism. . . . If you're one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically elected governments into submission, then hear this: We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.”

Arizona Tragedy Pt. 2. Who Really is to Blame? It's Impossible That It's Him (sic)

Now that the left is out of power they can't believe they lost the election and they are going on a rampage and pulling out all the stops blaming conservatives and Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for this shooting. Never mind that this was the act of a deranged individual whose college classmates and professors feared he might bring a gun to class and referred to him as a "left wing pot head." Never mind that this kid was obsessed with books such as "the Communist Manifesto" and Hitler's "Mein Kamph" and into mind control. Never mind that there were red flags going up about this kid's psychotic behavior, no it was Sarah Palin's fault for drawing targets on a map where democratic congress people are. It was talk radio's fault. Tucson's democratic sherriff Clarence Dupnik took pot shots at Rush Limbaugh saying,"The kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment he is irresponsible, uses partial information, sometimes wrong information," "[Limbaugh] attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials and that kind of behavior in my opinion is not without consequences."

Hey Sheriff Dupnik, did you ever hear Obama's comment to republicans saying, "If they bring a knife,we bring a gun?" Isn't that comment (which he took from the movie The Untouchables by the way. It was Sean Connery talking to Kevin Costner ) Isn't that kind of talk irresponsible? I guess not as long as you're a democrat.

Hey Sheriff Dupnik, how do you know if this guy even listened to talk radio or Rush Limbaugh or even saw the map on Sarah Palin's page. If you look at his website like I did you'll see he was too busy burning American flags while wearing a death mask and writting his jibberish about mind control. In the video of him burning the flag, he has a sound track by a heavy metal band that says over and over "Let the bodies drop. Let the bodies drop" so why doesn't the sheriff blame heavy metal music. People said this kid had earphones on all the time. This is probably what he listened to. Listening to that kind of music over and over was bound to make indelable impressions in his already disturbed mind.

Bob Eberle in The Loft had this excellent commentary:

We knew it was coming, and sure enough, the left wing zealots in this country are turning a national tragedy into a reason to attack conservative values. As you may have heard, on Saturday, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) was shot in the head by a deranged individual who was so focused on ending her life that he killed several more people in the process, including a federal judge and a nine-year-old girl. Now, the blame game begins as the media and liberal politicians point the finger, not at the man who pulled the trigger, but at talk radio, the Internet, and any conservative source of information.

The Atlantic’s Andrew Sullivan immediately tied in former Republican Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin to the Arizona shooter’s motive. In a Saturday 2:46 PM post, he writes: When a congresswoman is shot in the head in the very act of democracy, we should all pause. This is fundamentally not a partisan issue and should not be. Acts of violence against political figures destroy democracy itself, for both parties. We don’t know who tried to kill congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (she appears to be still alive) and we should be very cautious in drawing any conclusions yet about why. But we can know that, whoever tried to kill her and for whatever reason, political rhetoric involving words like “target” and “gun-sights” is inherently irresponsible.


What??? We can’t say the word “target” any more? Is he serious? It’s just a perfect example of free speech under attack. Liberals can and do say anything, but given the opportunity to stifle what they perceive as contrary thought, they will. The Times’ author notes that Democrats have used similar terms, but apparently it’s ok for them to do so. Check out this link to a page on the Democratic Leadership Council’s web site in which certain “targeted” districts were marked with, guess what? Yep… targets.

Not surprised at all that the Congressman who wanted legislation to make it the word crosshairs and bullseye illegal, is a Democrat, “never to let a crisis go to waste”, that must be their motto!!!! It's irrelevant that the shooter is a deranged man, let's just smear Tea Partiers and Gov Paliin. The liberals are not going to keep quiet, cos to them, to smear and defame someone is, “free speech”, but when you try to speak the truth, the cry foul!!!

Meanwhile with all the media blame and hate speech going on from people who claim to have the corner on civility where is all the attention to the vet who tackled the shooter or the woman who took the magazine from his hand and gun or the young intern who attended Giffords' wounds and others in the area.? Where are the interviews with them the real heroes of Tucson that day? Everyone blames everyone else except the real culprit, this deranged young man who opened fire on a crowd that day. As Bob Dylan once said, "And who really is responsible for any one man carrying a gun? Surely it is impossible that it's him."

The Tragedy in Arizona

Like everyone else in this nation, I was shocked and appalled at the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the federal judge John Roll and some of Giffords aides as well as a nine year old girl born sept.11, 2001, six people murdered and 15 wounded. The shooter is a 22 year old disturbed young man named Jared Loughner. He was obsessed with books like the Communist Manifesto, Brave New World, The Republic and Mein kamph among others as well as mind control. His You Tube video and rants and facebook rants are bizarre to say the leaset. I couldn't make heads or tales out of them other than this is an extremely mentally ill person. His friends referred to him as a left winger and pothead and he was pretty much a loner and weird in college. He tried to enlist in the army, but was rejected. Army officials haven't said why he was rejected. Gunman ID'ed as Jared Loughner, 22... YOUTUBE...PHOTOS...Obsessed With Mind Control... Radio talk show host, John Batchelor compared him to a Lee Harvery Oswald type and said on most days Tucson is a beautiful city, but today it was Dallas, 1963.

Gabrielle Gibbons was a centrist democrat known as a blue dog democrat who got along with everyone on both sides. She was in favor of stronger border control, voted against Nancy Pelosi and was in favor o f the healthcare bill and was scheduled to vote for it in the repeal coming up this week which has since been postponed. She was also in favor of Congress taking a pay cut since everyone else was suffering in this economy. Bill Hemmer on FOX News interviewed her the day before and said she sounded like a conservative to which she replied she used to be a republican, but switched over. So far she is still alive and fighting for her life. Her husband is an astronaut and his twin brother is one too currently serving on the space station.

Already the finger pointing is starting like in any tragedy. Ms. Gibbons father is blaming the Tea Party because they had her on a list of enemies and Sarah Palin had a map on her facebook page with crosshairs like a gunsight over places where dem congress people were from. She had since taken it off before this happened. The right wing is blaming the left saying this guy read books like Mein Kamph and the Communist Manifesto and his friends called him a left winger and a pothead. I just happen to think this guy is a demented soul and only he is responsible for this horrendous act not anyone else. Police say they are looking for an accomplice, a man in his 50's. In any event this is not the time for finger pointing and our prayers should be with the family of the victims.

I am including a link here to a song by the Rivoli Revue recorded live showing their suppport for Arizona.

"Stand With Arizona" Anthem by Ron and Kay Rivoli, The Rivoli Revue

Pelosi Blames Bush for The Dems Loss.

Now nutty Nancy Pelosi is still blaming Bush for everything like Obama and the other dems are still doing even though Bush has been out of office for two years now and they've had plenty of time to do something about it and haven't. Now she is saying the economy is bad and unemployment is up because of Bush's policies which is why they lost. I saw some great comments to her statement I thought I'd list here for all to enjoy. I particuly like the last one. :D



michaelsummers 0 minutes ago
I think this sick woman has lost it. She is very sick. Not demo sick but mentally, in mind. This woman needs to go to some doctors.

Rabid_Koala 1 minute ago
Nancy is hallucinating, but you kind of have to do that to be a leftist anyway.

mc_escher 1 minute ago
Most. Delusional. Person. Alive.

brybor 2 minutes ago
When Nancy's mother gave birth, she actually took the afterbirth home instead of the child because it was visually more appealing.

grayzel 2 minutes ago in reply to brybor
She had a mother?


barry1817 3 minutes ago
This is simply amazing.Did anyone notice that Nancy did a God Bless you, when introducing the new speaker and nobody said boo, and the world didn't end. Adding 5 Trillion dollars to the deficit, under her watch, is Bush's fault. Passing a bill, in the dead of night, so we can find out what is in it, is Bush's fault. Claiming that tea party members are racists, is Bush's fault. Being asked where in the Constitution is the power to enact her legislation, "are you serious", being her reply, is Bush's fault. I'm embarassed to say that years ago I had met her at a private party in Los Angeles, and thought she was charming.

darrell7887 4 minutes ago
Pelosi is a typical ignorant liberal. She controlled the house for 4 years and has no clue that she controlled the purse strings. Why is she in congress when she does not even understand how the government works. She is either stupid or a liar.

libwithIQ 4 minutes ago
Yes Nancy....Bush caused the Dems to lose the election. He also caused the fall of the Roman Empire, Humpty Dumpty to fall from the wall, Oprah to regain her weight, the secret of the Grassy Knoll, Area 51, Bigfoot, Elvis's death, Simon to leave American Idol, Lou Gehrig to lose his iron streak and the Jets to win Super Bowl 3. Yes Bush has caused a lot of things.........NOT! But you're so lost in your own little lib world that you don't know reality.

Congress Must Repeal the Health Care Bill

Recently conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh stated that the healthcare bill is actually the "trojan Horse" for complete power and take over of the United States and people's lives. How right he was. Obama wants to take half a trillion dollars from medicare and transfer it over to pay for his healthcare bill. This bill also would instruct doctors to advise senior citizens not to have life saving procedures ,but instead go for end of life counseling and medicare would pay for that.This is not some Sci-Fi horror movie, but reality. This will destroy America as we know it and destroy medicare which is what these socialists want and have complete control over our lives. These are the so called "death panels" Sarah palin warned us about that dems said they took out after people complained, but now they are sneaking them back in. They are now trying to blame George Bush for it saying he had them in his government plan too. That he did, but his administration took them out of his plan,but it goes farther than that. Clinton had them in his healthcare plan which was written by Hillary and Ira Magaziner and thank God his plan went down in flames

They want one big insurance plan run by the government for us all to have. They even tried to have it in there that if you didn't subscribe to their plan they would fine you until you did and if you didn't pay your fine after a reasonable time they would throw you in jail.. Does this sound like the America you want to live in? This is what they are shoving down our throats even though 61% of the American people oppose it.

Since people can get messages easier by music, I am enclosing a link (after this description of what's in the plan) by a favorite singing duo of mine, The Rivoli Revue doing their song, "A Big Fat No" about the dangers of Obama Universal healthcare. I'm also including a song by a young girl named Christina Houston which tells the truth about Obama and his gang. She mentions for Obama to leave healthcare alone. It's sung to the tune of the Richie Valens song "Oh Donna"


The House Bill contains important elements that would greatly impact the ability of patients to receive unrationed medical care. These elements, combined with inadequate funding – a scheme of “robbing Peter to pay Paul” wherein half of the funding comes from cuts in Medicare spending, would result in rationing life-saving treatment for senior citizens.On November 7th, the House passed the “Affordable Healthcare for America Act,” (available herei) by a vote of 220 -215. National Right to Life sent a letter on the night of the vote to members of the House prior to passage of the House Health Restructuring Bill. The full letter is available hereii. Now, with members of Congress back to work, Democratic leadership is considering bypassing a formal conference committee in resolving health care legislation differences between the House and Senate.
Limiting Senior Citizens’ Right to Use Their Own Money to Save Their Own LivesLimiting Exchange Users’ Right to Use Their Own Money to Save Their Own LivesUtilizing Comparative Effectiveness to Deny CoverageAdvance Care PlanningFunding Assisted Suicide
Limiting Senior Citizens’ Right to Use Their Own Money to Save Their Own Lives
The House bill would effectively allow federal bureaucrats at the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) to bar senior citizens from adding their own money, if they choose, to the government contribution in order to get private-fee-for-service Medicare Advantage (MA) plans less likely to ration life-saving treatment.Medicare—the government program that provides health insurance to older people in the United States—faces grave fiscal problems as the baby boom generation ages. Medicare is financed by payroll taxes, which means that those now working are paying for the health care of those now retired. As the baby boom generation moves from middle into old age, the proportion of the retired population will increase, while the proportion of the working population will decrease. The consequence is that the amount of money available for each Medicare beneficiary, when adjusted for health care inflation, will shrink.Three alternatives exist.In theory, taxes could be increased dramatically to make up the shortfall – an unlikely and politically difficult proposition. The second alternative—to put it bluntly but accurately—is rationing. Less money available per senior citizen would mean less treatment, including less of the treatments necessary to prevent death. For want of treatment, many people whose lives could have been saved by medical treatment would perish against their will. The third alternative is that, as the government contribution decreases, the shortfall could be made up by payments from older people themselves, so that their Medicare health insurance premium could voluntarily be financed partly by the government and partly from their own income and savings.
What most people do not realize is that, as a result of legislative changes in 1997 and 2003 undertaken at the instance of the National Right to Life Committee, this third alternative is now law. Under the title of “private fee-for-service plans,” there is an option in Medicare under which senior citizens can choose health insurance whose value is not limited by what the government may pay toward it. These plans can set premiums and reimbursement rates for providers without upward limits imposed by government regulation.This means that such plans will not be forced to ration treatment, as long as senior citizens are free to choose to pay more for them. For more on the background of this program see hereiii.Dangerously, H.R. 3962 limits the right of seniors to spend their own money to save their own lives. Presently, the Medicare statute prevents the government from second-guessing or imposing limits on the premiums for private fee-for-service plans, allowing beneficiaries to balance cost, benefit, and affordability in making their own decisions whether to purchase such plans. Section 1175 amends that provision so as to empower the federal government to exclude from competing in Medicare Advantage those plans whose bids it does not like.iv
The consequence is to give the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) the discretion to deny older Americans the choice of plans whose premiums CMS deems too high. This amounts to the imposition of price controls, thus limiting what older Americans are permitted to spend for health insurance. Again, being prohibited from paying what may be needed to obtain unrationed health insurance amounts to government-imposed health care rationing.
In addition, Section 1165v effectively ends the ability of unions and employers to offer such plans nationwide – or on anything other than a local basis. Since a given company’s or industry’s retirees are likely to be spread around the country, this greatly undermines, if it does not effectively eliminate, the ability of unions and business to offer to their retirees plans that allow them to add their own money to the government Medicare contribution in order to reduce the prospect of being denied needed treatment.
Limiting Exchange Users’ Right to Use Their Own Money to Save Their Own Lives
There is a similar provision which allows an exchange to exclude “particular health insurance issuers ... based on a pattern or practice of excessive or unjustified premium increases.”vi Originally, state-based "exchanges" were designed to allow comparison shopping among all insurance plans that provided the basic benefits. Under Section 104, however, exchanges would be authorized, in effect, to limit the value of the insurance policies that Americans using the exchanges may purchase.
Not only will the exchanges be allowed to exclude policies when government authorities do not agree with the premiums, but they will be able to look at any increases plans charge, outside the exchange – and remove those insurers from the exchange. This would create a “chilling effect,” deterring insurers who hope to be able to compete within the exchange from offering adequately funded plans even outside of it, limiting consumers’ access to adequate and unrationed health care.
When the government limits by law what can be charged for health insurance, it limits what people are allowed to pay for medical treatment. While everyone would prefer to pay less – or nothing – for health care (as for anything else), government price controls in fact prevent access to lifesaving medical treatment that costs more to supply than the price set by the government.Under a scheme of premium price controls, health insurance companies will ration lifesaving medical treatment as they are squeezed more and more tightly each year by the declining “real” (that is, adjusted for health care inflation ) value of the premiums they take in. These day-to-day rationing decisions will have the most direct and visible impact on the lives – and deaths – of people with a poor “quality of life.”
For those eligible to participate in the insurance exchange, H.R. 3962 limits their right to spend their own money to save their own lives. Section 104 empowers the Commissioner of the Health Insurance Exchange to exclude from the exchange plans offered by health insurance issuers the Commissioner considers have “excessive or unjustified premium increases.” This essentially grants to one federal official the discretion to impose price controls on insurance premiums. While no one wants to pay more for anything, including health care, being prohibited from paying what may be needed to obtain unrationed health insurance amounts to government-imposed health care rationing.
Utilizing Comparative Effectiveness to Deny Coverage
There is language in the Reid bill that protects against discriminatory use of comparative effectiveness research on the basis of age, disability or terminal illness.vii However, this important language is not in the House version.
Consequently, provisions in H.R. 3962 could be used to establish standards that would result in the denial of lifesaving medical care based upon degree of disability, age, or “quality of life.” Section 2401viii creates a “Center for Quality Improvement” which is to promote “best practices” in health care by doing four things: 1) identify existing best practices, 2) develop new ones, 3) evaluate both, and 4) implement them. It contains a provision that states the Center “shall not develop quality-adjusted life year measures or any other methodologies that can be used to deny benefits to a beneficiary against the beneficiary’s wishes on the basis of the beneficiary’s age, life expectancy, present or predicted disability, or expected quality of life.” (Emphasis added.)
As far as this goes, it provides a critically important protection against the widespread emphasis in the comparative effectiveness scholarly literature on the use of discriminatory criteria in standards of medical practice, an approach unapologetically employed in Great Britain by that nation’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). For more on this see hereix. Unfortunately, this protection applies only to one of the Center’s four missions – the development of “best practices.” It leaves a gaping loophole with regard to the Center’s identification, evaluation, and implementation of existing “best practices.”
Anything like this anti-discriminatory protective language is missing entirely from Section 1401x, which creates a Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research, and from Section 1159'sxi provisions commissioning the Institute of Medicine to develop new Medicare reimbursement standards to create incentives for “high value care” which will be implemented automatically unless vetoed by Congress.
Advance Care Planning
Advance care planning provisions could be used to “nudge” patients toward accepting denial of treatment as a means of cost control, and despite apparent prohibitions, could include assisted suicide.Section 240 requires health insurers participating in the exchange to provide beneficiaries with the option to establish advance directives and disseminate information about “end-of-life” planningxii, while Section 1233xiii reimburses Medicare providers for “advance care planning consultations” with senior citizens. While the National Right to Life Committee supports advance directives and indeed promotes its own version, the “Will to Live,”xiv the author and blogger Lee Siegel, a strong advocate of universal health care coverage, points out an important danger in these provisions:
“For those of us who believe that the absence of universal health care is America’s burning shame, the spectacle of opposition to Obama’s health-care plan is Alice-in-Wonderland bewildering and also enraging but on one point the plan’s critics are absolutely correct. One of the key ideas under end-of-life care is morally revolting. . . .
[Section 1233] . . . offers to pay once every five years for a voluntary, not mandatory, consultation with a doctor, who will not blatantly tell the patient how to end his or her life sooner, but will explain to the patient the set of options available at the end of life, including living wills, palliative care and hospice, life sustaining treatment, and all aspects of advance care planning, including, presumably, the decision to end one’s life.
The shading in of human particulars is what makes this so unsettling. A doctor guided by a panel of experts who have decided that some treatments are futile will, in subtle ways, advance that point of view. Cass Sunstein [who is the Obama Administration’s regulatory czar] calls this “nudging,” which he characterizes as using various types of reinforcement techniques to “nudge” people’s behavior in one direction or another. An elderly or sick person would be especially vulnerable to the sophisticated nudging of an authority figure like a doctor. Bad enough for such people who are lucky enough to be supported by family and friends. But what about the dying person who is all alone in the world and who has only the “consultant” to turn to and rely on? The heartlessness of such a scene is chilling.” xv
What gives weight to Siegel’s concerns is the focus by advocates on the money such “nudging” is expected to save. For example, Holly Prigerson of Boston’s Dana Farber Cancer Institute has been quoted as saying, “We refer to the end-of-life discussion as the multimillion-dollar conversation because it is associated with shifting costs away from expensive . . . care like being on a ventilator in an ICU, to less costly comfort care….”xvi
Indeed, a medical journal article of which Priegerson was lead author concluded that the mean cost of care was 35.7% less for patients who reported having end-of-life discussions, compared with patients who did not.xvii A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association similarly concluded, "[P]atients who reported having end-of-life discussions received less aggressive medical care and were more likely to receive hospice services for more than a week."xviii
Myra Christopher, a friend of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, heads a major "bioethics" think tank - Center for Practical Bioethics - that has long pushed for advance directives. In an October speech, she left no doubt of the economic motive for promoting advance care consultations.
"The reality is that 9% to 11% of the entire health care budget is spent on end of life care – nearly 27 to 30% depending on whose data you want to believe of the Medicare budget is spent on end of life care," she said. "Conservatively, conservatively, $6.1 billion every year of Medicare is wasted on what we refer to as futile care . . . ." [emphasis added]xix
What is particularly disturbing about this “cost-savings” rationale for this provision of the bill is that it appears to follow President Obama’s call this past spring for “a very difficult democratic conversation” about “those toward the end of their lives [who] are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.”xx
Funding Assisted Suicide
Moreover, these provisions could lead to federal facilitation of direct killing. While both sections state that they do not authorize “promotion” of “suicide” or “assisted suicide,” providing information about its availability in states where it is legal could well be described as not “promoting” it, only making patients aware of legal options – and while Section 240 states that it does not require health insurers participating in the exchange to inform beneficiaries about advance directives that include assisted suicide in states where it is legal, Section 1233 contains no such limitation on the “advance care planning consultations” with Medicare patients that it finances.xxi
What is more, a section in the statutes of both Oregon and Washington State pertaining to what most people recognize as the legalization of assisted suicide explicitly provides that what these state laws authorize “shall not, for any purpose, constitute suicide, assisted suicide, mercy killing or homicide, under the law.”xxii In light of this, it is troubling that the final drafters of Sections 240 and 1233 rejected the inclusion of a federal definition of “suicide” and “assisted suicide” based the existing federal Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act, opening the possibility that provision of information about the option of obtaining lethal prescriptions in these states would be construed not to constitute the excluded provision of information about “suicide” or “assisted suicide.”
Note: Since its inception, the pro-life movement has been just as committed to protecting older people and people with disabilities from euthanasia as to protecting unborn children from abortion. We have long recognized that denial of treatment, food and fluids necessary to sustain life against the will of the patient is a form of involuntary euthanasia, and thus have fought to protect the vulnerable from rationing of health care, whether by health care providers such as hospital ethics committees or by the government. For these reasons NRLC opposed the Clinton Health Care Rationing Plan of 1993-94, and has fought rationing in Medicare restructuring (see herexxiii), as well as today (seeherexxiv).

Here is the link to the Rivoli Revue's song "Big fat No"

YouTube - Tea Party Express - Rivoli Revue - Big Fat No


Click here: YouTube - Obummer! by Christina Houston