Tag Archives: Health Care

Obama’s Health Care Rationing Czar – American Thinker – July 8, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

The President of the United States took a Congressional recess opportunity to appoint another controversial czar.  Renowned for rationing health care, Donald Berwick was appointed to the position of Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

Dare we ask: Why does Obama need a rationing expert to oversee these two programs?

While Nancy is funning and sunning, Obama placed Czar Donald Berwick, president and chief executive officer of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, in the position of deciding who lives and who dies.  Obama circumvented the traditional confirmation venue because Berwick’s nomination was an uncertain one. Democrats realized a permanent vacation awaited them in November if the unpopular Obamacare discussion was broached again. Let’s just say Berwick was a touchy nominee.

Thus, Obama dictated and denied America the opportunity to have dastardly Donald explain comments he made in an interview last year with Biotechnology Healthcare.  Berwick said “society makes decisions about rationing all the time,” and that the “decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing it blindly.”

Obama’s “blind” appointment spares Donald having to explain his praise for the UK’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).  Berwick said NICE “developed very good and very disciplined, scientifically grounded, policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments from which we ought to learn.”

Emphasis on Berwick’s comment: “policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments.”

Obama insisted on ruining 90% of the population’s health care to insure 30-million uninsured individuals.  Maybe those about to be herded toward life and death social policy mandates might like clarification on Berwick’s statement that “The social budget is limited — we have a limited resource pool. It makes terribly good sense to at least know the price of an added benefit, and at some point we might say nationally, regionally, or locally that we wish we could afford it, but we can’t.”

Berwick believes the “degree to which the knowledge base is linked directly to policy and decision is a matter of choice,” which will be Donald’s choice alone.  If Obama gets his way, which he always does, death panel Donald will decide by advisory, mandatory, or policy-based measures who gets to live and who makes the sacrifice for the common good and dies.

Thankfully Republican leaders are speaking up on behalf of constituents at the mercy of Barry and the soon-to-be “expert on rationing.” Like Barack, Berwick believes excellent health care includes “redistribution.” The world’s finest health care system, like everything else, is about to be redistributed by government-appointed czars whose socialistic dreams mirror Barry’s utopian nirvana.

John Barrasso (R-Wyo) called the appointment “an insult to the American people,” saying “Once again, President Obama has made a mockery of his pledge to be accountable and transparent.” Mitch McConnell (R-KY) agreed, underscoring the reality that “Americans’ worst fears about health reform are being realized every day.”

Democrat Max Baucus (D-Mont) joined the chorus from across the aisle and “blasted the Obama administration for sidestepping Congress.”  Baucus said “Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power …ensuring crucial questions are asked of the nominee – and answered.”

Maybe before Obama overturns the First Amendment, McConnell, Barrasso and Baucus still have time to hold a nightly update press conference on the steps of the Capitol.  It’s about time Americans are made aware of Obama’s covert actions, which ultimately stand poised to threaten lives.

Hybrid Health Care – American Thinker – April 4, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

Less than one year ago, the Obama administration made the decision to invest $30 billion into a bankrupt General Motors, giving government 60% ownership of a corporation fraught with financial trouble. In addition to bankrolling the car company, Obama deemed it necessary to “take control of a number of slots on the board of directors,” installing himself as Commander-in-Chief-Executive Officer.

Obama contended, “We are acting as a reluctant shareholder because this is the only way to help GM succeed.” At the time, many believed that Obama was struggling with being in the “unwelcome position” of owning GM while also being responsible for maintaining America’s “free-market capitalist tradition.”

In case a reminder is in order, an easy definition of “free trade” is “policy that allows traders to act and transact without interference from the government,” which unfortunately no longer defines the American system.

Relating to present actions and statements, careful review of past history sheds light on potential outcomes when government gets involved in businesses such as, let’s say…health care, for instance. When the government passed its monumental health care reform bill, it was sold to the public as an imperative rescue operation in the same way that bailing out GM was necessary to “prevent wider damage.”

Government bailout of GM loosely specified that “although the feds reserved a right to set conditions in advance, they intended to operate in a “hands-off and commercial manner.” Yet less than a year later, the president who claimed to be concerned about “free trade” when assuming the title of General Motors CEO announced plans to be “the first customer for the upcoming Chevrolet Volt.” Question: Will Obama forgo the armored Cadillac stagecoach for a Chevy Volt?

Just last year, a senior administration official stressed that “[t]here’s no plan of any kind, no contingency plan, anything of any kind to extend future support.” But then again, that depends on Obama’s creative definition of “future support.” Because eleven months later, Obama announced that before the year is out, the White House will “purchase the first 100 plug-in electric vehicles to roll off [General Motors] assembly lines.” Barack Obama then pledged that central control would “double its purchases of hybrid vehicles to 5,000” — can anyone say “government competition squashing the health insurance industry”?

In a stunning turn of events, the president vowed, for the first time ever, to “lead by example and practice what we preach [by] cutting waste, saving energy, and reducing reliance on foreign oil.” Not only that, but President Barack Obama set a target for Americans, too, which is to stuff SUV drivers into electric cars. Obama uncovered plans to constrain free people to such a degree that by 2015, like it or not, one million plug-in hybrid tuna fish cans on wheels will be gracing United States highways.

Obama’s business acumen has been recently showcased by the plan to pass the largest tax increase in American history in the form of cap-and-trade legislation, which promises to hike gasoline prices 74%. Cap-and-trade is another Obamaid chock-full of potential to increase GM profits by nudging Americans toward electric cars, while failing to acknowledge the strain of increased electricity costs attached to future legislation. Capping carbon dioxide emissions could assist in making President Obama’s foray into the private-sector automobile industry another smashing policy success.

When Obama bailed out GM, it was a test run as to whether the “federal government [could] restrain itself from meddling in the company’s day-to-day business.” At the time of the rescue, a senior government official said that as 60% owner, the government retained the right to tell GM what to do. The administration’s spokesperson did indicate that the way the government handles issues like interfering in the manufacturing of “fuel-efficient cars, labor negotiations, and overseas operations” will be indicative of how we can “expect the government to act as a common shareholder, in this and other cases.”

Truer words were never spoken! Unelected pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg is due to release the 2010 compensation decisions on the five largest U.S. companies “that are under pay restrictions as part of their government bailouts.” Translation: Selling your soul to Beelzebub has a price. A pay czar that answers directly to Barack Obama slashed salaries of top General Motors Company executives making more than $500,000 a year.

Maybe present consultant and former GM CEO Fritz Henderson would like to rethink the statement, “The government has not been heavy-handed so far”…emphasis on so far!

Obama is pushing hybrid-PC GM cars and is on the brink of finding a way to foist CO2 restriction legislation on America.  GM salaries have been capped and electric car ownership targets have been set.  All this from a President who, from the White House Grand Foyer less than a year ago said that the only way to help GM thrive was through an endeavor Obama defined as a “hands off approach” coupled with plans to “get out quickly.”

Moreover, the same government claiming to be “reluctant” and “cautious” about maintaining free-market principles failed in its own effort by promoting and buying cars from a company it largely controls. An administration initially interested in taking a “hands-off approach” is now deeply embedded in dictating everything from salaries to green technology at GM, as well as moving beyond the factory walls to taking the liberty to choose the mode of transportation Americans will eventually be forced to take.

Americans should take heed as CEO Barack Obama’s “credible plans … full of promise” for GM present foreboding possibilities for America’s health care. Take for example the president’s auto task force findings for development of the Chevy Volt which Obama himself heartily endorses. Based on the commission’s findings, the Volt “will likely be too expensive to be commercially successful in the short term.” If the government business of health care is also found to be too expensive in the short term…who and what suffers in the interim?

The benevolent bureaucracy running General Motors is now in full charge of a health care system and is hovering over America masquerading as a kindly lactating mother. The nation has one year’s worth of false rhetoric and heavy-handed government control of private sector industry to review. Obama’s behavior running GM illuminates clearly what lies ahead when the federal government runs businesses that impact more than who drives a hybrid car.

Special thanks to Hassan Nurullah: Digital Publius

INVESCO II Healthcare Summit

President Obama has scheduled a health care summit for later this month. The purpose? To offer the public promised transparency after refusal to do so until pesky Scott Brown put the kibosh on the Democratic health care overthrow.

Obama desires to, “resolve remaining differences between the House and Senate versions of their own legislation in advance of the meeting.”  Which translated means Obama, through persuasive rhetoric, will attempt to convince “uncooperative” Republicans to accept a “final bill” they were supposedly called there to discuss.

Obama will host a “Lights, camera action” thrashing out of a bill, but the whole scenario will lack genuine, productive debate.  Sort of like Obama employing fruitless tea and crumpet negotiation techniques to convince Mahmoud Ahmadinejad relinquish the march toward nuclear weapons.

Beforehand Barry, Harry and Nancy will decide what and how it’s going to go.  The trio will shuffle the Senate and Congressional bill like a deck of cards into an unbending, final version.  Then a transparent Obama will summon Republicans to Summit House, offer them the limited choice of accepting what has already been decided upon, or be portrayed as “uncooperative” and lacking concern for the struggles of the American people.

Collaborative Democrats contend, “Starting from scratch is not an option.”  Republicans [thank God] refuse to budge because they say they, the House and Senate Democratic bill is not a launching off point because both bills include tax increases, which economically would be a disastrous thing to do.

While the master of Greek column special effects positions himself as being open to discussion.  The real goal will be to present a conciliatory President strapped with the burden of immature politicians.  The hope is to again “turn the tide” and convince the public obstinate Republicans need to, “participate like mature adults, and not just say ‘no’ to everything.”

The Summit holds zero promise of compromise based on the numerous proposals Republican’s have presented to the health care debate, all have which have been ignored. Reading the teleprompter as Republicans wave varying proposals in his face Obama looks right and left purposely ignoring suggestions like those offered by Jim DeMint.

Obama discounts the smart kid in the first row raising his hand to answer every question and than penalizes the child for lacking class participation.

At the Republican retreat a frustrated Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) challenged the President saying, “Mr. President, multiple times from your administration there have come statements that Republicans have no ideas and no solutions, in spite of the fact that we’ve offered, as demonstrated today, positive solutions to all of the challenges we face.”  Security, oh security could you see this guy to the door please?

The Summit ruse has the potential to be nothing more than “political theatre” with Obama luring Republicans into a trap.  Once at Blair House Obama will present a bad and worse finalized health care bill. Republicans will be asked to concur, as to whether America should be tied to the tracks in the path of an oncoming train, hurled over a cliff or immolated?  When Republicans refuse to accept any of the three a teary-eyed Obama can turn to the camera, amidst soaring violins, and confirm the opposing party uncaring contrarians and Democrats tireless workers on behalf of the American people.

One problem Obama may also be overlooking. The nation is tuned into Obama’s INVESCO field theatrics and are sick of smoke and mirror subterfuge that benefits only Barack and hurts the American people—let’s hope Obama’s wily Summit stunt backfires.

Obvious Opacity – American Thinker – January 25, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

According to Nancy Pelosi campaign promises have one purpose—getting a candidate elected.  After voting, a candidate’s word can be shelved like a magician’s prop.  If the Speaker is to be taken seriously nothing Barack Obama said during the presidential campaign holds weight and should be disregarded as roadside rhetoric.

If Pelosi’s ruling versus rhetoric conjecture is correct it explains the last twelve months. Nancy Pelosi insisting on defining clandestine conferences as transparency brings clarity to what America deals with every time Obama speaks. Since January of 2009 black is white, right is wrong and open is shut.  Overarching debt is economic stimulus, job loss is growth, socialists are capitalists, enemies are friends and despair and despotism is defined as hope and change.

Lest America forget, before the Democrats lost a filibuster proof Senate, though unsolicited, Obama repeatedly volunteered to “broadcast [health care] negotiations on C-Span.” Lofty promises were made because Barack Obama was falsely convinced the country would kowtow to every policy whim he proposed.  Obama thought wrong.  What the President didn’t anticipate was 49% of the American public being against socialized health care reform, as well as a united Republican Party standing in opposition to overhauling the entire system. Above all, this imperious president didn’t expect an unknown Republican from Massachusetts to wrest the Teddy Kennedy Memorial scepter from the late liberal icon’s  hand.

Yet in a distorted way, transparency truly does exist on Capitol Hill because liberals have been crystal clear about the desire to “fundamentally transform” America. For instance, Obama, together with the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, made no secret the intention to singlehandedly revamp 1/6th of the American economy.  Before health care expired, “guiding an honest process,” meant holding surreptitious negotiations, in the dead of night, sans public or opposition party participation.  Democrats are likely unaware of it, but skulking around in the shadows accomplished the opposite and made underhanded motives more transparent.

While debating Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential race Obama said he would broadcast health care negotiations on C-Span, “bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors.” After taking office, “broadcast,” “bringing” and “behind” were redefined Obama-style and backdoor negotiations and dishonest agreements became common practice. America patiently observed a non-transparent health care reform process abounding with “hidden agendas” where over the last year, deliberations became, “a breeding ground for more of the kickbacks, shady deals and special-interest provision that have become business as usual in Washington.”

Its no wonder Scott Brown, who seemed to appear out of thin air, won the special senatorial election. Obama’s repeated campaign pledge to “enlist the American people in the [health care] process,” and then doing the opposite was the final nail in the one-party-rule coffin.  With an election for Teddy’s seat on the horizon, America watched as C-Span CEO Brian Lamb sent correspondence to Pelosi and Reid beseeching Congress to open up health care reform deliberations to the public. The frustrated CEO’s requests were met with a half-hearted concession to open the negotiations to the public for one hour–a much shorter period than most Americans would be waiting for a throat culture if health care passed.

For weeks the nation, including voters heading for the polls in Massachusetts, observed Nancy Pelosi responding to C-Span’s request like a critical care nurse tightly pulling closed the privacy curtain. Pelosi’s contention that, “[t]here has never been a more open process for any legislation in anyone who’s served here’s experience,” prompts the question as to whether the Speaker should be rushed to the top slot in a psychological triage.

Brian Lamb spoke for American when he “urged Congress in his letter to fling open the doors in the final stretch of negotiations.”  Instead, the CEO was met with a sign above the double doors of the health care debate, which read, “Restricted Beyond This Area Authorized Personnel Only!” Denying C-Span right of entry to the health care dialogue put the Senate majority in hospice care.

Yet the left forged ahead with a plan to circumvent the usual Conference Committee procedure to reconcile the two chamber’s versions of the bill.  In the process, Democratic doctors Barry, Harry and Nancy, failed to take the pulse of the American electorate. The tragic trio made the fatal mistake of continuing on with the ruse allowing access to only a “few negotiators concocting the final version out of sight, without formal rules governing the process.” The Democrat leadership was convinced socialistic purposes would be better served without C-Span cameras in the room documenting the organ harvest.

Democrats pushed for secret deliberations to thwart “having to cut deals with problematic House Democrats like Michigan’s Bart Stupak, who promised to do what he could to scuttle the final bill if it provided for federal funding of abortion.” Aware an audience desiring the bill’s demise seeing one “party working on behalf of constituents,” would be detrimental to the left’s righteous cause, Democrats continued to connive behind closed doors, and while they did, America watched.

The nation obviously viewed the conduct as fraudulent and undeniably voiced a reproving opinion on a snowy Tuesday in Massachusetts.  The Speaker of the House, as well as America’s lucent President, were reminded by Blue State voters that, “[m]inimum disclosure to which agreements, dealings, practices, and transactions are open to all for verification,” is defined as lack of transparency.

If something is transparent it lacks hidden agendas and conditions.  Transparency is accompanied by the availability of full information required for collaboration, cooperation, and collective decision-making.  Essential to transparency is the condition for a free and open exchange whereby the rules and reasons behind regulatory measures are fair and clear to all participants.

So, in light of the constant barrage of mixed messages coming from power elites like Pelosi and Obama, its good to know that before entering the voting booth, Massachusetts voters brushed up on the literal meaning of transparency casting a vote for and sending a message from the entire nation.

Truth is, the people of this country are patient and forgiving.  But as Obama is finding out, messing around with the American psyche results in political ramifications like being flattened by a GMC Canyon . Little did Pelosi, Reid and company know, but  unabashed lack of transparency not only ensured the election of Scott Brown, but it also sealed a Stupak condemned, rare late term, political abortion of Democrat rule in Obama’s fourth trimester.

Welcome to the Political Pissfest

Territory is defined as an area, which an animal will defend against intruders of the same species. According to Robert Ardrey, “A territorial species of animals, therefore, is one in which all males, and sometimes females too, bear an inherent drive to gain and defend an exclusive property.”  As it is for animals, so it is for politicians, especially Barack Obama whose words and aggressive actions indicate an “inherent drive to gain and defend,” what the President perceives to be, “exclusive property.”

For twelve months, Barack Obama has acted like a male alpha dog rhetorically spraying every past, present and future policy issue he comes in contact with.    The President sycophantically practices placing socialist scents at nose level to alert conservative and moderate dogs, looking to claim a portion of the political prefecture, to back off.

Incessantly reiterating a liberal schema for America, the President may as well get it over with and mandate Obamaroma be crop dusted  over North America, and while he’s at it, if possible, spritz the whole planet.

Canines and other mammals mark territory for one purpose, to “limit competition within a niche or habitat,” for Obama that niche includes totalitarian power exercised, without obstruction, within Washington DC’s halls of power.  The yard Obama guards includes a liberal pack of canids from a Democratic carnivorous pit bull family.

In order to claim as much land mass as possible, African wild dogs are known to “…scramble as high up the trunk of a tree before squirting their message,” which is–step over the boundary and the area will be ruthlessly defended.

In Barack Obama’s case, not only are other politicians considered interlopers, but also based on the President’s blatant disregard for the electorate, apparently so are the American people.  If the voices of a representative democracy speak out in opposition to Obama’s policies, the President swiftly responds with a well-positioned leg lift followed by a prime time uncovering of saliva dripping premolars, issuing a bone-crushing warning to the defiant.

Although a president cannot literally mark large swatches of political territory by employing the “natural method,” pushing back against critics flouting Obama’s edicts and sanctions, in essence, is Barack marking territory.

Take for example, the majority of Americans opposing health care reform.    Alpha-Obama lifted his left-leg and “pushed back against opponents of his health care initiatives…again target[ing] insurance companies in the second of three town hall meetings aimed at winning support for legislation.”

Dogs sneaking through the barbed wire fence into Obama’s yard were met at a Joint Session of Congress by Obama spraying his critics, as well as, witnessing the President spew all over the entire chamber.  Once again, Obama pushed back–bared teeth and snarling, “The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action.” No discussion, no compromise.  Obama laid territorial claims and might as well have put a sign out saying, “Stay off the grounds this country belongs to me!”

Obama, together with the pack, have growled and marked the boundaries around the health care issue. Every time the opposition drew near Obama and his leftist minions charged the opposition imposing a health care bill on a nation that roundly rejects governmental kibble.

Hey, Republican Rover don’t you know well-trained pit bulls don’t back down and let what they consider scruffy stray dogs mark territory where top dogs rule?

Shockingly, unlikely cat lovers in liberal Massachusetts snapped the choke chain and took control of the situation by wresting control from trash heap dogs. Realizing the tail was wagging the dog, Americans rose up and sent the message, “Dogs don’t run the yard – owners do!”

Massachusetts voters targeted tail wagging hounds like Nancy Pelosi who mists Capitol Hill with left-wing political pheromones, bats her bitchy eyelashes and gnarrs, “Democrats will charge ahead with health care reform regardless of what happens in the Massachusetts Senate race.” Or, tyke’s like Charlie Rangel who mocked the Bay State’s attempt to claim territory as a non-starter, yipping out the retort “We will have health reform regardless of what happens in Massachusetts… We have alternatives to this cockamamie 60 votes in the Senate.”

Either way, Scott Brown’s election to the US Senate is a liberal electorate’s stunning message to the 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue alpha dog commanding him to back off. As a result, the whole situation holds potential to become a national piss-off.  Because “When one male detects the scent of another, (particularly an unknown male), it could cause a perhaps low-level stress reaction, which would then increase the need to urinate.”  Scott Brown representing “We the people” in a seat vacated by liquored-up liberal paladin is sure to have alpha Obama’s bladder over stimulated to the point where a territory-marking flood is forthcoming like water crashing through a dam.

America can expect a public hydrant drenching in the days immediately following the election – just to remind everyone who’s in charge because,

Male dogs, on reaching a previously urine-marked landmark, will often attempt to cover over the urine marks of previous canine visitors with their own urine.  In so doing, they sometimes engage in some quite amusing acrobatics, including the reverse handstand sometimes displayed by little dogs when attempting to over-mark lofty scent marks left by larger dogs.”

After Scott Brown’s win Obama, a toy poodle believing he’s a pit bull, will exhibit political gymnastics to win back ground lost spinning a loss into a win like Jonathan Horton working the high bar.

As America has witnessed over the last year, some dogs have an obsession about marking territory. The best way to prevent a male dog from urine marking is to neuter the canine before territorial behavior is exhibited, with Obama already in office, its too late for that.   However, if the animal is already established, neutering may not help and wherever the male canid sprays the odor needs to be neutralized, which is what Massachusetts voters did tonight.

Truth is, Obama fancies himself an alpha male.  “The alpha makes and enforces the rules. Alpha dogs enforce their authority by the use of stern eye contact, growling, dominant body postures and if that fails, biting and fighting. If you watch your dogs closely, you’ll see examples of this eye contact and posture in their daily activities.”  Since day one, dominant body posture, lack of sincere eye contact and haughty posture has been on full display from the occupant of the Oval Office.

The President’s “bark may be in equal proportion to his bite,” and Obama can drench the political landscape all he likes with the stench of socialistic policy.  In the meantime, while an out-of-control Obama circles the fire hydrant continuing to believe “no leash can hold him and his tail wags for no one,”  in one day, Massachusetts voters neutralized and counteracted the leader of the pack and in the process set about retraining the unruly horde of junkyard dogs he runs with.

Hey, Obama, “Sit, roll over and beg,” the American people own you!

Barry the Big Boob


During the campaign Obama didn’t flinch one iota when women screamed, “I love you Obama.  In response, self-assured candidate Obama would respond to professions of love by yelling, and “I love you back.”  Girls love Barack Obama.

According to Christopher Anderson in his book entitled, Barack and Michelle a Portrait of an American Marriage, during the campaign and while and pressing flesh on reception lines, “women were constantly rubbing up against Barack, slipping him their digits, and whispering suggestive comments in his ear…Barack tried not to look startled when some random woman in the crowd would grasp him firmly by the derriere—and sometimes try to hold on.”

Not only do woman admire Obama’s bum, but the ladies also trust him, like his values and believe he “honors the feminine value of caring for all.”  Sharing heart wrenching stories chronicling his mother’s untimely death from ovarian cancer provided Obama 56% of the female vote needed to put him over the top during the 2008 election. According to the Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP), if not for estrogen, Obama would still be residing on South Greenwood Avenue in Chicago.

In Part II of a Youtube film entitled, Women for Obama then candidate Obama sat across a kitchen table listening intently to a young African-American woman tell the story of her mother ‘s premature death from breast cancer.  During that conversation Obama gazed deeply into the woman’s grieving eyes and softly asked, “How old was she?” She replied, “Thirty-eight.” Obama retorted tenderly saying, “I’m so sorry” extending a palpable verbal hug, which is just one of the many reasons women love Barack Obama.

Hooting, hollering and filling out an Obama T-shirt in a way only a woman can, how could female voters have known that the body part, leaning out of the “Yes We Can” bus window, would be the first to suffer under the scalpel of the Obama hope and change health care initiative?

In order to slowly introduce the realities of routine testing being rationed under a single payer system, a trial balloon was launched in the form of new guidelines for preventative care.  The objective of the study was to access public feedback to new U.S. breast cancer screening standards, which happen to, “… look a lot like Canada’s, “ and claim that for forty and fifty year old women, “…every other year is good enough.”

Based on his empathetic concern during the campaign, it may surprise ardent female fans of President Obama that politics trump the health of mammary glands. In Obama’s world, breast cancer is a concern only when it delivers 56% of the vote, after that, passing health care reform takes precedence. Whatever gets in the way; even breasts, promptly receive low priority. And so, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, headed up by Obama appointee Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius–has new money saving guidelines that put women’s well being in jeopardy.

Under the tutelage and direction of Barack Obama, Kathleen’s area of expertise has expanded from pandemic control to putting at peril 10 percent of women, 45 or younger, diagnosed yearly with both invasive and in situ breast cancer. In the works is a reprehensible promotional campaign to convince women that screening wastes money, is unnecessary and can even be harmful to individuals other than those attempting to curtail the health care bottom line.

Yet, expert Debbie Saslow, PhD, director of breast and gynecologic cancers for the American Cancer Society insists, “Women and doctors need to understand that we are more confident than ever in the benefits of mammography.  The benefit is particularly clear for women in their 40s. We have much more evidence, and much more convincing evidence, that those women benefit.” Such sentiments are precisely why Dr. Debbie, an expert in her field, wasn’t tapped as a contributor to the task force.

When confronted, Obama appointee Sebelius rejected the notion that cost containment and health care reform drove the changes.  She said that the, “task force does not set federal policy, and they don’t determine what services are covered by the Federal Government.” Are American women now supposed to believe that a federal task force is established for reasons other government decision-making?  Sebelius then went on to say, “The task force has presented some new evidence for consideration, but our policies remain unchanged.”  Following that up with, “…indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.”  Surprise works!

Are American women also supposed to buy the story that a task force was established to provide evidence to be considered for policies that will remain unaffected?  Exquisitely parsing her words, the Secretary carefully stated “private insurance company” standards would remain unchanged.  However, the key issue not referenced in Sebelius’s answer was how, if single-payer were to be enacted, would the government task force influence decisions about breast cancer prevention?

Earlier this year, lover of women extraordinaire Barack Obama instituted a White House Council’s on Women and Girls in an effort to provide, “a coordinated federal response to the challenges confronted by women and girls and to ensure that all Cabinet and Cabinet-level agencies consider how their policies and programs impact women and families.” Following the task force findings American women should be querying the President as to why the Department of Health and Human Services was excluded from the grouping of Cabinet-level agencies addressing how early prevention saves lives and spares families.

Women who fainted during the Obama campaign are now passing out from shock that such a women-issue sensitive President would allow breast cancer screening to receive a budgetary mastectomy.  The slow boil of acclimating America to rationing begins, harkening back to fellow woman Michelle Obama exhorting America by saying, “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care…someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”  Such as what Michelle — limiting options for thirty and forty year old women by forcing them to wait for a baseline mammography? Or, maybe denying elderly women breast cancer treatment and instead offering counseling on end of life options?

Why hasn’t the President stepped forward and reassured the 56% of the female electorate that health care reform does not touch breasts? Instead of grabbing Obama’s butt girls who love Obama, ought to be touting the Breast Cancer Awareness chant “Squeeze a Boob Save a Life,” and waving “Ta-Ta” to a President who, based on his policies, “udderly” may be the biggest boob of all!

A Reflective Indictment

obama mirror

The Bible says in Proverbs 27:19 “As water reflects a face, so a man’s heart reflects the man.” Not so with President Obama who fails to recognize his image in those he condemns and whose reflection reveals the high and mighty heart of a self-affected politician.

Take for example the President campaigning for health care reform by claiming, “Spiraling health care costs could bankrupt the American economy.” Now, as the bill in the Senate is on the cusp of being enacted, Republicans informing the public about details in the legislation are being accused by the harbinger of doom and gloom, Barack Obama, of dissuading public support by “frightening the American people.”  Obama’s perpetual fear mongering makes his reprimand of the GOP analogous to Freddy Krueger, admonishing Tinkerbell for terrifying children.

Every time the President steps up to the podium to address the nation about anything from health care to the economy, Americans involuntarily flinch anticipating the same reaction they get when subjected to a civil defense emergency siren.  And Obama thinks Republicans terrify people?

President Obama began his term by warning America that failing to act swiftly on the economy would guarantee a crisis “unlike any we have seen in our lifetime.” Furthermore, it was Obama who cautioned that a “recession could linger for years” along with double-digit unemployment rates.  To avoid impending calamity, a futile $787 billion bill was passed, resulting in a lingering recession and the double-digit unemployment numbers stimulus promised to avert.

Obama was the one who sounded the alarm on “dire and long-lasting consequences” if government failed to pump billions of dollars into the national economy.  According to Barack, the nation was a fiscal Titanic and fear strategy was at work when he said, “I don’t believe it’s too late to change course, but it will be if we don’t take dramatic action as soon as possible.” Since then, Obama has steered the stimulus ship right into an economic iceberg submerging America in an ocean of economic ruin.

Dire warnings, cataclysmic cautions and urgent emergencies are what propelled an inexperienced three-term Senator from Illinois into the White House. Commencing with the inauguration, misfortune and crisis replaced hope and change. Freshly sworn in, and standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the President segwayed from heartening Americans to forewarning of the rough road that lay ahead by saying, “In the course of our history only a handful of generations have been asked to confront challenges as serious as the ones we face right now.”

Obama also warned that, “…urgent dangers to our national and economic security are compounded by the long-term threat of climate change, which if left unchecked, could result in violent conflict, terrible storms, shrinking coastlines, and irreversible catastrophe.”  Ever vigilant, Obama stressed stabilizing the climate, “throughout the campaign and several times in his inaugural speech…in the same breath as preventing nuclear conflict.” The President’s ominous predictions left Americans wondering whether they should board up windows or build a subterranean bomb shelter.

Reserving the right to tamp down panic in the American community and in anticipation of imminent tragedy and wide spread epidemics, a President who accuses political opponents of using “scare tactics” declared a National Emergency for H1N1. Obama quelled fear by reassuring the country that, “As a nation, we have prepared at all levels of government, and as individuals and communities, taking unprecedented steps to counter the emerging pandemic.”  When Obama speaks, Americans visualize facemasks, quarantines, and life support yet, to date,  predicted pandemics fail to materialize.

Obama even played the death card in an effort to urge skeptical legislators to save people destined to expire without health care reform. The President cultivated visions of dead bodies whose blood would be on the hands of Congress by saying, “…more Americans would die if it did not act now on health care.” Yet, Obama continues to chide political opposition for being doomsayers in one breath, while in the next Obama warns America that without health care in a short time the richest, most powerful nation in the world, will go bankrupt.

Accusing Republicans of using “scare tactics” to trick Americans into rejecting his health care proposal, did not curtail Obama from venting ire toward chairman of the Judiciary Committee, John Conyers Jr.  Obama, a master of disparagement, admonished Conyers for what the President defined as “demeaning” statements that openly disagreed with administration policy on US involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as controversy surrounding the single-payer system option in the health care debate.

In the whiny world Obama lives in even a modicum of political unease is considered hostility personally directed toward the Oval Office.  What John Conyers fails to comprehend is Obama alone reserves the right to humiliate adversaries, while demanding exemption from criticism himself. If there is belittling to be done, Barry single-handedly drives the process.  And why not, as Leader of the free world, the Nobel Peace Prize winner has had two years experience attempting to mortify G.W. Bush in every possible venue on the global stage.

Obama’s imperious mind appears firmly convinced that humiliating other politicians equals truth telling and exploiting anxiety to strong-arm policy remains solely an Executive right to exercise.  Scare tactics and degrading accusations are clearly reflected in Washington DC.  However, the guilty parties are neither Republicans, nor Democratic lawmakers who oppose the Leader of the Pack.  The fear based politics and demeaning character assassinations are evident in a President who condemns others, while failing to identify his own image in those he censures.

American Thinker: December 7, 2009 ‘Absolutely!’ Wrong


Originally posted at American Thinker

Watching reality TV is a guilty pleasure.  It can also be a cultural and political learning experience.  Take for instance, when Jason Mesnick was the lucky man on The Bachelor.  It was during that season that a star was born.  No, not the adorable little Ty Mesnick—it was the word “absolutely.”

On the show, former Dallas Cowboy cheerleader and Bachelorette Melissa Rycroft, incessantly used the word “absolutely.”  Jason would ask her, “Will you accept this rose?” Melissa would reply, “Absolutely.” Jason would grab her hand and ask, “Can I steal you?” Melissa’s response, “Absolutely!”

Melissa said the word absolutely so often that she became known at our house as “The Absolutely Girl!”  After awhile it was obvious that it was absolutely impossible for Melissa to get through a sentence without saying the word absolutely, which became absolutely annoying on many levels.

Yet, in the wider world, if you paid attention it was obvious that “absolutely” had become the new “totally.”   It was the word of the day making its way into the vernacular, replacing old favorites like “I hear ya,” “awesome,” and “dude!”  Everyone from the IT guy at work to the girl behind the deli counter became “absolutely” positive about everything from running a database to putting cream cheese on bagels.

Absolutely is such an emphatic statement that who can argue with it?  The word smacks of surety, self-confidence, assurance and control.  However, in a world where no one is sure whether the future holds nuclear annihilation or whether they’ll be handed a pink slip next week — absolutely, quite frankly, seems inappropriate and out of place.

One has to wonder how something so small and simple can become so pervasive that every question asked is answered with “absolutely.”  It’s a pandemic.   Absolutely has become an H1N1-style national vocabulary emergency where a vaccine is needed to get people to stop or at least stop it from spreading any further.

What is it that makes people mimic other people to the point where they become mindless androids? If it’s so easy to get millions to use a word just by saying it over and over again isn’t it also a simple task to manipulate minds to believe what is false?  That is how politicians work their way into the brain.  They say same thing over and over again until the public accepts a lie in place of the truth.

Take for example the last election where what started as innuendo morphed into full-blown brainwashing. Obama and his minions wormed their way into the America brain.  They “absolutely” used the repetitive method to get into the electorates head to the point that people are now convinced George W. Bush is dumb and Barack Obama is a genius. Indoctrination was in full display on websites like Kid’s IQ Test Center – who realized if you say something, even if you can’t prove it, there is the hope it will absolutely go viral and infect the culture.

Barack Obama’s estimated IQ score range is 130 to 148 and quite possibly higher. However, nowhere on the Internet can anyone locate Obama’s IQ score. His college transcript from Harvard is not available and I cannot locate his college GPA, his SAT score, or his LSAT score, or any other tangible evidence of his IQ score.

Barack Obama is a genius all right! During the election hope and change became buzzwords.  Obama managed to inspire a nation to the point of being absolutely convinced we needed something no one even understood – it was absolutely brilliant! Everyone stormed the cattle car clamoring to get onboard having no idea where they were headed or what to expect upon arrival.

And lets not forget the ever faithful left-wing media using repetition to catapult someone with absolutely no experience whatsoever into the highest office in the land.  Say, “Polly wants a cracker” long enough and before you know it…even Polly thinks she wants a cracker. Now America has elected someone so unqualified that his presence in the position of Commander-in-Chief is as out of place as the word “absolutely” is at the end of a sentence uttered from the newspaper boy when asked if he has change of a dollar.

Nevertheless, the President is smart enough to know the drill.  He has undertaken the herculean effort of mentioning himself thousands of times in speeches. In due time, every question formerly answered with “absolutely” will be henceforth answered with “Obama” whether applicable or not.

This monotonous method has proven so successful America has been transformed into a nation absolutely persuaded. Take for instance the claim that the stimulus worked and jobs were saved.   Pundits repeated the lie as the unemployment rate dropped to its lowest level in 40 years.  Did the stimulus work? Absolutely!

Or, how about the one that the majority of Americans favor the public option– while 87% claim they are happy with what they have?  Huh?  Will we have a public option in a bill by the end of the year? According to the Melissa Rycroft’s in the Democratic Party, absolutely!

Obama and his policies are decimating the economy, the private sector, our standing in the world community and our national security.  The appointment of his czars can be likened to an unadulterated shredding of Constitutional balance of power.  Yet, Obama remains absolutely committed to razing health care, denying troops in Afghanistan reinforcements and making short work of capitalism, free enterprise and democracy.  The Absolute Leader of the Free World is presently the proprietor of political and social pandemonium.  We might as well have the indecisive, befuddled Jason Mesnick in the Oval Office.

When The Bachelor asked Melissa to marry him she was absolutely enthralled and replied, “Absolutely!”  Two weeks later he dumped her.  How could Melissa have missed the fact that Jason was absolutely in love with Molly Malaney?

Even though we are on the precipice of absolute disaster — there are still those unlikely suspects who are absolutely convinced Obama is doing a great job. The truth is Obama’s popularity is dropping, faster than Jason Mesnick jettisoning Melissa from a sordid love triangle.

Miss Rycroft ecstatically accepted the final rose, slipped the ring on her finger and said, “Yes” to a marriage proposal.  The whole time she remained absolutely oblivious to the fact that Jason wasn’t the man she thought he was. Absolute chaos, humiliation and turmoil followed a devastated “Absolutely Girl” for weeks afterward…sort of like a nation that finds out too late that Barack Obama was absolutely the wrong person for the job.

The Vitameatavegamin Bill


Congressional Democrats are committed to overhauling the healthcare system and while doing so obviously do not intend to let the public know what the legislation contains for fear Americans will reject the QVC sales pitch.  Instead they are embarking on a successful method employed during the 2008 election of false advertising and selling a bag of goods without revealing the ingredients or the affect.

In a hurried effort to pass a bogus health care bill it is imperative that the merchandise’s contents be hidden from those it’s being sold to.  Instead, Democrats have dragged out a conceptual Vitameatavegamin health care bill for public consumption void of legislative language and whose obscure costs and implications no one bothers to consider.

Anyone over the age of forty remembers Lucille Ball playing the part of a woman auditioning for a Vitameatavegamin commercial where a tonic is presented as the, “…answer to all your problems.” In the episode, the director of the Lucy’s foray into commercials is unaware that the “healthful” concoction of “…vitamins, meat, vegetables and minerals,” also has listed in the fine print a 23% alcohol content.  The Democrats might as well be holding up a bottle of Vitameatavegamin every time they speak on behalf of the health care proposal.  However, unlike Lucy’s director, Democrats are well aware of sinister particulars residing in the legislative proposals, but continue to resist posting ingredients online in an attempt to present a benign product that ultimately delivers a punch.


For all intents and purposes, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is our very own Lucy convincing America to sign onto a product she knows nothing about.  Smiling a forced, phony grin Nancy continually auditions to retain her seat of power. The only thing missing from the Speaker’s head is a lovely, little retro-lace Lucy-style bonnet.  Nancy, like Lucy, assures America that the Vitameatavegamin health care bill is a panacea that will be the ultimate, “…answer to all our problems,” especially if it includes a high-potency vitamin packed public option she guarantees it will include.

In the episode clip, Lucy auditions for the part of Vitameatavegamin girl beaming widely into the camera.   The director tells her to recite the script.  After citing the ingredients, the director tells Lucy to take a big mouthful, smile and wink saying what Speaker Pelosi alleges today about health care, “…it’s so tasty too…just like candy!”  However, after Lucy lifts the swill to her mouth the look on her face tells the whole story.  Yuck!  Her lips invert, the two muscles in her neck pop as she attempts to down the ghastly medicine. A similar situation could pose a problem for Pelosi’s sales pitch as personal commitment to a product ultimately clinches the sale.

After Lucy’s adverse reaction to the liquid remedy her director tells her, “No, no, no…you’re supposed to like the stuff. You’ve got to smile and be happy,” which was even difficult for someone determined to win the title of Vitameatavegamin girl.  The content of what Lucy was forced to swig was not fit for human consumption, which is precisely why, unlike a compliant Miss MaGillicutty, Democrats repudiate for their own consumption a product they are pushing on us.

Barack Obama disregards the vomitacious nature of the proposal and perseveres repeating, “OK, take it from…It’s so tasty too!” And, despite national rejection of the proposed fix, the Director-in-Chief personally holds our nation’s nose while dictatorially insisting we say “Ah.” According to studies, ninety-three percent of the American population feel a remedy is unnecessary for a condition that doesn’t exist.  Yet, the Vitameatavegamin health care sales team continues to drone on asking the wary, “Why don’t you join the thousands of happy, peppy people?”

In the fifty-year-old episode, Lucy slowly becomes desensitized to the questionable ingredients in the bottle as her ability to focus diminishes.  Her reaction to the product presents a potential ruse that Democrats could employ in their quixotic quest to control life and death. Bleary eyed and inebriated Lucy smacks her lips and says, “This stuff tastes pretty good…after you get used to it!”  Thus, if Democrats have their way, they will continue to force a tonic of half-truths and obfuscations on the public.  With any luck the effort will result in an America, so disorientated by lies that without question, the majority will guzzle down a Vitameatavegamin health care bill—consigning even the sober to endure its influence.

Speaking on behalf of the Director-in-Chief, our very own little Vitameatavegamin girl, Nancy Pelosi, has gotten to the point where she is encouraging, “Everybody to get a bottle of this stuff!”  What began as a coherent attempt to convince America to sign onto sane cost and competition directed health care reform has now been reduced to statements about public options that are on par with Lucy asking, “Do you pop out at parties…are you unpoopular?”

Nancy, Harry and Barry – are modern day snake oil salesmen.  Their medicine show consists of constant hawking to step right up and join the millions of Americans who have yet to read the ingredients, have no idea what it tastes like, or how it will affect them–but look to government to provide them with a healing elixir.

Yet, the Democratic sales pitch appears to be breaking down with every slam of the clapboard. As Pelosi, Reid and Obama work together to preserve their bottle of bureaucratic belladonna it becomes apparent they are the ones intoxicated with power. Presently, what we are witnessing is a desperate coalition of Democrats reduced into a desperate band of marketing mavens attempting to convince dubious consumers to invest in Handy Brushes.

In the famous Lucille Ball Vitameatavegamin episode the more she persisted in promoting her product the clearer it became what it actually was.  Hope endures that just as Lucy buckled under the influence of a shoddy product, the American public will recognize that like  a bottle of Vitameatavegamin, the bill the Democrats in Washington DC swear will surely be as easy as “spooning our way to health,” has neither our health, nor our well being in mind.

%d bloggers like this: