Tag Archives: Jane Sturm

HEY, LIBERALS: Right to Healthcare Doesn’t Mean Right to Life

Screen-Shot-2016-01-20-at-8.54.16-PM-500x280Originally posted at CLASH Daily

Recently, an elderly relative had a routine procedure to screen for colon cancer. This particular relative is an active, healthy, vital 82-year-old that still works. Unfortunately, there is a family history of colon cancer, which, for prevention, requires bi-annual screening.

Two-years-ago a large pre-cancerous polyp was found and removed. Now, two years later, another pre-cancerous polyp found, which was thankfully also removed. Without the bi-annual screening, there is a good chance cancer would have developed.

This time, after the anesthesia wore off, the doctor was quick to inform her that, based on age, and despite a precarious looking growth being removed, this colonoscopy was her last. The procedure would no longer be covered nor would it be recommended.

Does this now mean that in America age now disqualifies some people from being eligible to locate pre-cancerous growths before they have a chance to turn into full-blown cancer?

The doctors reasoned that older people don’t handle chemotherapy very well. Therefore, even if malignancy were found, nothing would be done about it anyway – so why even bother to look for it?

In other words, for lack of any other fatal disease, why not embolden colon cancer cells to run wild in the lower intestines of old geezers?

The conversation between my family member and the doctor brought to mind the 2010 town hall meeting where a woman named Jane Sturm asked President Obama if he had been in charge five years prior would he have allowed her 105-year-old mother, who received a pacemaker when she was 100-years-old, to receive similar care based on zest for life?

Or would he have cut off care based on age?

Imagine, instead of healthcare decisions being a personal choice, Americans are asking a pro-choice president whether he would choose to allow an old woman who wants to live to receive treatment?

Obama, who had a virtual colonoscopy he’d deny to a WWII veteran, had an “end of life” answer for Jane Sturm. In order to cut down on waste and expense, Obama would have denied surgery, and instead of a pacemaker, would have granted “Granny Sturm a pain pill”.

Six years after that town hall meeting and my elderly relative is being told that at a certain age individuals will not only be denied the right to have cancer treatment, they’ll also be denied screening for cancer prevention.

With that in mind, as a nation, Americans are at a serious juncture.

What we have here are liberals who claim to believe in the right to healthcare proving once again that they don’t believe in the right to life.

Maybe someone should tell those meting out cancer screening approvals that being dead is unhealthy.

As for the living; our problem is that the right-to-healthcare party is deciding who has the right to healthcare, which ultimately puts those that argue there is no right to life in the position of determining who lives and who dies.

Death Panels and the WWII Veterans

AP_wwII_veteran_memorial_jef_131002_16x9_992Originally posted at American Thinker

Ever since the threat of government-run health care became a reality and ObamaCare was signed into law in 2010, clear-thinking Americans have been worried about how the legislation would ultimately affect the elderly and infirm.  Now we know.

Sarah Palin called them “death panels” and was mocked for suggesting that when the federal government ran out of money, health care would be rationed, and the elderly, the infirm, and the chronically ill would be the first to be denied.

America ignored it when Obama told Jane Q Publick, aka Jane Sturm, that he would deny her 105-year-old mother, a woman with a joy for life, a pacemaker.  It wasn’t Sarah Palin, but Barack Obama who said that at a certain point, based on their age, old people would be better off with a painkiller.

No American wants to believe that in order to cut down on costs, bureaucrats, never mind the president of the United States, would purposely allow some of us to die.

But for those who observe President Obama’s actions and refuse to compartmentalize his comments, it’s been abundantly clear that this is a man who lacks respect for the sanctity of life — anyone’s life.

After all, if a person approves of the unfettered slaughter of defenseless unborn babies and also enthusiastically funds the brutal procedure to end their lives, doesn’t it make sense that such a person is capable of just about anything?

That’s why it’s no surprise that the president recently inflicted abuse on elderly WWII heroes who congregated in Washington, D.C. to visit a memorial erected in honor of their service.

The soldiers were part of Honor Flight, a program that gifts WWII veterans with an expense-paid trip to Washington, D.C. to view the WWII Memorial.

Allegedly because of the shutdown, 80- and 90-year-old veterans were refused admittance to the site.  Now we come to find out that much like what is suspected in the “Fast and Furious,” Benghazi, and IRS scandals, the White House had direct involvement.

To keep the aged soldiers from entering the public space, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) rightly pointed out, “some idiot in government sent goons out there to set up barricades.”

Could it be that Obama is that contemptuous of men to whom our nation owes enormous gratitude for buying our freedom with their blood?

That must be the case, because the same individual strongly suspected of issuing a “stand down” directive for Benghazi felt that it was a priority to send guards to the memorial to threaten to arrest old WWII soldiers, some of whom arrived in wheelchairs.

All this is important to note, reason being that if Barack Obama can treat the Greatest Generation in such a disrespectful manner, and dismiss their value to this nation by sending a goon squad to put up physical barriers to prevent entry into their memorial, it’s probable that this incident is indicative of how older Americans will be treated when it comes to accessing government-controlled health care.

Seeing America’s finest staring from afar at a monument built to honor their sacrifices and watching them be prohibited from enjoying what freedom promises every American citizen makes the prospect of Obama-controlled health care even more chilling.

What we witnessed on the day ObamaCare was rolled out, with senior citizens being held at arm’s length by the bureaucratic arm of an overbearing government, a vindictive president, and a band of bootlicking public employees, should send shudders down the spine of every American able to comprehend reality.

For those who didn’t think it was possible, Barack Obama disallowing WWII veterans’ entry into a public park should be viewed as a moment of clarity for the entire nation.

Let’s not forget: the Obama administration’s antipathy toward patriots was already evidenced when it objected to adding FDR’s D-Day prayer to the WWII Memorial shrine.

For the rest of us, in a free country, elderly soldiers being forced to storm their own memorial could be a glimpse into a future where a man with no compassion or scruples will have zero compunction barring these and many other American citizens from entering doctors’ offices, hospitals, operating rooms, and pharmacies.  

In other words, consider what America has witnessed with the veterans an unofficial ObamaCare-denial test flight.

At the WWII Memorial, the inscription at the foot of every flagpole reads: “Americans came to liberate, not to conquer, to restore freedom and to end tyranny.”

Little did the brave Americans who stormed the beaches at Normandy know that one day they’d be fighting for their lives thanks to a different kind of tyranny — right here at home.

%d bloggers like this: