DLA For Sunday 071711

He is a hundred percent right.

Hey folks,

Talk about applying Logic. If we had a Balanced Budget Amendment, that would mean we have to Balance the Budget. Imagine that. We would have to live within our means. You know, like YOU do. You have X amount of money coming in. You have X amount of money going out. If what you have coming in exceeds what is going out, you have extra to do extra stuff. If you are irresponsible, and you have MORE going out than you do coming in, then you MUST cut some of your Spending. It really is not Rocket Science. You may not WANT to cut something out. But you may not have the CHOICE.

The Federal Government needs to adopt this same Philosophy. They do not want to, for the very reason they SHOULD. Why do you think that Obama and Crew have NOT submitted a Budget in the past Two and A Half Years? One, they are probably too ignorant and incompetent to understand Accounting Matters, and two, they just do not care. They want to spend whatever they want and to hell with the future.

Well there IS an Adult in Congress who wants a Balanced Budget Amendment.

"Think of how different our fiscal picture would be if we'd passed one in 1997, Fourteen years later, our nation faces a debt crisis of epic proportions. Our national debt has gone from roughly $5 trillion in 1997 to over $14 trillion today.

That's more than $45,000 for every man, woman, and child in America.

While details of this debate change by the day, the fundamentals are clear, President Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress refuse to come up with a legitimate plan to confront our runaway spending that has left our country over $14 trillion in debt. He refuses to reform our near bankrupt entitlement programs -- all while pushing job-killing tax hikes."

So why does he feel Obama and Crew do not want a Balanced Budget Amendment?

"Because they want to keep spending the American people's money."

He is a hundred percent right. It will most likely never Pass, but at least we have someone speaking the truth and Logic of the Situation.

Congratulations Senator Orrin Hatch from Utah, you ARE the WINNER of the Display of Logic Award for today, Sunday, July 17, 2011. Even if you and your Colleagues continue to run up against the Idiocies and the Out of Control Liberals, keep it up. The American People are with you, and we have your back. Logic and Truth in Government? What a NOVEL Concept.
Peter

UPI - GOP Calls For Balanced Budget Amendment

Republicans Starting To Listen?

To the PEOPLE.

Hey folks,

As you know, I have been communicating with the House Republicans. I have been warning them DIRECTLY, that we did NOT send them to the House, put them in power, and enable them to obtain the Leadership, for them to play Politics as usual. HERE is just one Example of what I have been saying.

I do want to repeat to my new Republican House and Senate Members. I also want to say this to my more liberal Friends out there. The People did NOT send the Republicans to the House and Senate to WORK WITH the Liberals. They sent them, YOU, there to STOP THEM.

We have no interest in furthering an agenda that goes against the Will of the American People. We have no interest in finding common ground in the destruction of this country, it's Constitution, or giving up Freedom. We have no interest in finding a way to "Fix Obamacare," bring about "Cap and Tax." "Amnesty." Higher Taxes. Nothing that IS the Obama Progressive agenda. We have no interest in Socialism. We have no interest in redistribution of wealth. We have no interest in punishment of hard work and reward of laziness. We have no interest in continuing to spend money we do not have to spend. Like $200 MILLION a Day for a Trip to India.

It really is this simple. The Republicans were Voted in to STOP all this. Not find common ground or areas in which to agree. They want it STOPPED. They want Obama STOPPED. They want the America that they know and love BACK.

I know one area where pretty much EVERYONE agrees. STOP OBAMA! STOP THE LIBERALS! STOP THE INSANITY! Restore honor, and respect to this country. Govern FOR the People, not AGAINST the People. THAT we can all agree on. THAT is our common ground.

Make no mistake about it my new House and Senate Friends. If you are perceived to be doing ANYTHING other than attempting to stop this insanity, YOU may very well face a similar fate of Pelosi and Obama. You may very well be out as well. It really is, Just that simple.
Peter

I have send Emails, Letters, and posted Open Letters. We need to make sure they do not misunderstand their Position. Our Position. Now that the Wall {Debt Ceiling} is getting closer, We the People are getting louder.STAND YOUR GROUND GOP!

Now I will admit that I have had my doubts. I really have. I have done all these things with the thought floating around in the back of my mind that the Republican Leadership, the Establishment Republicans we either too stupid, or too set in their ways, which is with some, "Liberal Light," that they would do what the Left does, ignore the Will of the People, no matter HOW loud and clear that Will is spoken to them. But it SEEMS that perhaps they ARE starting to listen. Not to the Establishment types. No, no, no. To the PEOPLE. Some examples of what appears to be the Republicans growing a set?

"In my view the president has presented us with three choices," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., referring to efforts to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling. "Smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default."

"Republicans choose none of the above," McConnell said. "I had hoped to do good; but I refuse to do harm."

Meanwhile, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, demanded more specifics from Obama, saying, "Where's the president's plan? When's he going to lay his cards on the table?"

"This debt limit increase is his problem," Boehner said. "I think it's time for him to lead by putting his plan on the table, something that the Congress can pass."

Then of course you have the NOW famous quote by Senator Mitch McConnell,

"After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable."

Way to go Mitch! Then we have Senator Marco Rubio on the Rush Limbaugh Radio Program yesterday saying THIS.

SENATOR RUBIO: You know, the first part about it, Rush, is something you know on this debt limit thing. I said to somebody earlier today in the hallway, one of these media types that waits out in the hallways to interview you. They wanted to talk about the debt limit. I said, "The debt limit is a symptom. It's not our problem. The core problem is our debt and the fact that our government borrows 40¢ out of every dollar and has no idea how it's gonna pay it back; and that's a combination of spending -- we just spend way too much as government -- and loss of revenues."

Again, not loss of revenues 'cause our taxes aren't high enough. Loss of revenues because we have too many people that are out of work that are not paying taxes. So the solution seems to me to be a combination of fiscal discipline on the spending side -- which you have to enforce through spending caps and a Balanced Budget Amendment and cuts starting right now -- and, at the same time, some sort of pro-growth measures that get people back at work that create not new taxes but new taxpayers: People that are working, paying their taxes, adding revenue to government so that government can use that revenue not to grow government, but to pay down the debt and put us on a sustainable path.

That just seems to me to be the commonsense approach to this, and, instead, we've got this President's obsession with raising taxes -- and what bothers me the most about it is not just that it will kill jobs and is bad for our economy. What bothers me the most is there isn't a single tax package out there that's reasonable and realistic that would even put a dent on this debt crisis. I mean, people have no idea what you'd have to raise in taxes in this country to just to begin to make a difference. Of course you never can raise it to that level because you won't be able to collect them because, you know, people aren't dumb enough to work for free. I mean, if you're gonna tax all their money, they're not gonna keep working. So these are the things I just don't get and I wish we had done a better job earlier of outlining these choices to the American people.

Imagine THAT. We need Jobs? As I keep saying more JOBS is the answer to fixing the Economy. THAT is where we have to start. So is the GOP finally LISTENING? Some of the signs seem to be saying Yes. Keep it up. Stand tough. America itself is on the line here. WE, The People, got your back.
Peter

Sources:
USA Today - McConnell, Boehner blast Obama over debt talks
Rush Limbaugh - El Rushbo Talks with Senator Marco Rubio

DeMint To The Republican Party: Listen To The People

Your Voice is being heard.

Hey folks,

Demint gets it. South Carolina’s 55th Senator, Jim DeMint is listening. DeMint was on the Hannity Show {Video} on fox when Hannity said, "Mike Castle thinks that you are very wrong about your viewpoint. That you would rather lose and have pure conservatives rather than Republicans who are more liberal or, quote, 'pragmatic.'" Jim's response?

It really reveals who wants the big tent in the Republican Party. All of the conservatives that I've supported who have lost their primaries are supporting the Republican nominee. This is not true for the moderates who lose. They don't have room for conservatives. You see me supporting all of our Republican nominees. They may not all be the same as I am as far as how they're gonna vote, but the Republican Party is the only option we have this time. The Democrat Party is to the left of Europe, and what we're trying to do in this election is reshape the Republican Party where it began: A limited government party, less taxes, less spending.

This lead Hannity to say this.

Well, you got on board pretty early or guys like Toomey and Rubio and Buck, Rand Paul, Joe Miller, Christine O'Donnell. You took a lot of hits for going against the Republican establishment. Is that an indicator of future events and battles to come?

Then so that there was no misunderstanding his words, Jim DeMint told Hannity, that either the Republican Party was going to listen to the American People or they could kiss his, uh, keister. He was out of there.

I don't want to be in Washington another six years and watch the Republican Party betray the trust of the American people again. I mean, we had the White House, we had a majority in the House and the Senate, and we voted for more spending and more earmarks. Most of our senior members seemed to be focused on taking home the bacon. I'm not going to be in a Republican Party like that. What I've tried to do and others like Sarah Palin have tried to do is give Republicans and Americans good choices in the primaries so that on Election Day they can go out and not just vote against someone, they can vote for someone.

We need more DeMints. More people that wake up and look around and say, this is not what the People want, they want this, then go that way. It's not that we want to change anything. It's that we want America to BE America. Period. We want nothing to do with Socialism, Obamacare, or oppressive taxation. We want the Government to FOLLOW the Constitution, not IGNORE it. We want the Government to stay the Hell out of our Private Lives.

Some in the Political Circle seem to think that Obama will move to the Center when the Republicans take over the House and possibility even the Senate. I doubt that. What I see is more Executive Orders, more underhanded Politics, backroom deals, ETC. But that is not my main concern. My Main concern is not that the Democrats may attempt to JAM THROUGH as much as they can during their lame duck session. They WILL, but that can all be undone. No folks, Demint is my main concern. Well, people like him. We need more. My main concern is that of repeating 94. If we have more DeMints, people that are in power, and LISTENING to the People, then we will not. As I've been saying for years, talking the Talk is nice, "We hear the people." "The people have spoken," ETC. But you better be ready to walk the Walk as well.

Seems that DeMint is listening and trying to walk the Walk. According to Newsmax.com - DeMint to Introduce Bill to Defund NPR

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly said Thursday night that “Jim DeMint will introduce legislation to defund” NPR in the wake of Juan Williams’s firing, according to Politico. DeMint's office confirmed to the website that the senator will announce the legislation tomorrow.

The news was also confirmed by CNN’s Peter Hamby.

“This is like the ACORN deal – no more money to NPR,” O’Reilly said. “NPR has now devolved into a totalitarian outfit functioning as an arm of the far left.”

A visibly shaken Williams pointed out to O’Reilly on the show that he was the only black man on NPR.

“I didn’t fit in their box there,” he said.

Karl Rove and O’Reilly also discussed two seven-figure gifts from George Soros, or Soros-founded entities, to NPR and Media Matters this week, Politico reported.

So not only is he talking the talk, he is showing that he is trying to walk the walk. What we do not want from those that get elected into power is excuses. "We do not have enough power or control to override anything, so why bother?" As the old saying goes, it is far better to try and to fail, than it is to not try at all.
Peter

Why O'Donnell Won?

She spoke the truth, and said what many think.

Hey folks,
















Simply put, she connected.

"The conservative movement was told to curl up in a fetal position and just stay there for the next eight years, thank you very much. Well, how things have changed,"

Then she started. You can view the Video HERE.

"The small elite don't get us. They call us wacky. They call us wingnuts. We call us, 'We the people,'" she said to sustained applause. "We're loud, we're rowdy, we're passionate. … It isn't tame, but boy, it sure is good."

"Will they attack us? Yes. Will they smear our backgrounds and distort our records? Undoubtedly. Will they lie about us, harass our families, namecall to try to intimidate us? They will. There's nothing safe about it. But is it worth it?

Well, let me ask you. Is freedom worth it?" she asked, as the crowd chanted "Yes." "Is America worth it?"

Yes it is. By the way, she is NOT just talking about Democrats here. They were not, and are not, the only ones attacking her. She is talking to the ESTABLISHMENT.

"I never had the high-paying job or the company car. It took me over a decade to pay off my student loans. I never had to worry about where to dock my yacht to reduce my taxes," she said, jabbing at Sen. John Kerry for dodging a six-figure yacht tax in his home state. '"And I'll bet most of you didn't, either."

Then she quoted ME. {Smile} Well, kinda.

"We're not trying to take back our country. We are our country," O'Donnell said, before making a subtle reference to a phrase Obama has been using on the campaign trail. "That's what's happening in America today, the grown-ups are taking away the keys."

Told you, we need ADULTS to take back control of the Government. Looks like we have one. Well, we have many running, and WINNING. She went on.

"They even want unelected panels of bureaucrats to decide who gets what life-saving medical care and who is just too old, or it's too expensive to be worth saving," she said, a nod to the fictional "death panels" that Palin first used to attack the health care bill. "They'll buy your teenage daughter an abortion but they won't let her buy a sugary soda in a school's vending machine."

"When I talk to people out on the campaign trail in Delaware, I'm hearing frustration, not only with the direction our country is headed but with the anti-Americanism that taints every outlet of the ruling class. Americans want our leaders to defend our values, our culture, our legacy of liberty and our way of life, not apologize,"

"It's no secret that there's been a rather unflattering portrait of me painted these days," she said during the forum. "I am fighting two political parties here in Delaware."

This piece in the Politico says that the Democrats have not responded yet, because they are unsure of how to attack HER, because she is a Female. What? Ask Palin. No folks, they haven't responded because they hope that the Right will attack her for them. They also hope that if they ignore her, perhaps she will go away.

Got news for ya. She will WIN. To the Republicans again, find Conservatives, get behind them, they will WIN Elections. Way to go Ms. O'Donnell. Keep it up.
Peter

Sources:
Politico - Christine O'Donnell hits the stage at Values Voter Summit

Food Cost To Go Up, SS To Stay The Same

If Cap and Tax Passes, it will be even worse.

Hey folks,

Just this past Friday, From the Emails, I posted this. Government Priorities? Yes, the Government can spend billions, bailing out, or taking over is closer to the truth, Multi-Billion dollar Private Industries, yet, for our Senior Citizens, those that have worked their whole life, contributing to society, they get nothing. No Social Security "Cost of Living" raise at all for the next two years.

Well, Irish Godfather sent me a follow up of sorts. Just because the Obama Administration doesn't care to increase SS, in some cases the only income our Seniors have, that does not mean the cost of EVERYTHING else will NOT go up. It will. According to ALL BUSINESS - USDA'S 2009 food price increase forecast at 4-5 percent.

Publication: Food & Drink Weekly

Higher meat prices, driven by escalating grain prices, will fuel an increase of 4 to 5 percent in U.S. food prices in 2009, the third consecutive year of large increases, USDA forecast last week. Food prices are estimated to rise by 5 percent this year, the largest annual increase since 1990. They rose by 4 percent in 2007.

In its first estimate for 2009, USDA said food prices would be led by red meat and poultry, which account for 10 percent of food spending. Beef prices will rise by 6.5 percent, it estimated, and pork and poultry by 5.5 percent. USDA economist Ephraim Leibtag, who prepared the forecast, said higher feed costs "will impact the meat industry, supplies and production will tighten, and prices will rise."

For this year, the biggest price increases are forecast for eggs, up 14 percent, cereals and bakery products, up 9.5 percent, and fats and oils, up 12 percent. In that group, cereals and bakery products are the largest component of the food basket, 7.4 percent of overall spending. All would moderate in 2009, rising at 4 percent or less.

The USDA also sees the food-inflation rate slowing slightly from this year. The agency expects the food consumer-price index to climb between 4.5 percent and 5.5 percent in 2008, which would be the highest food-inflation rate since 1990. That is despite the Bureau of Labor Statistics report last week that its food-price index jumped 6.8 percent during the first six months of this year at a seasonally adjusted annualized rate.

While prices have been rising in the United Stats and Europe, the biggest increases are being felt in Asia, and countries like India and Vietnam already have to deal with double-digit inflation. Sharp rises in global food and oil prices are now spilling over into wages and broader measures of inflation across Asia, as the Asian Development Bank noted in a report released Tuesday.

Higher inflation in Asia is also starting to contribute to higher prices in the United States. According to the Labor Department, prices for imports from Pacific Rim countries--mostly Asian goods--rose 2.7 percent in the 12 months through June, after falling 1.4 percent in the preceding 12 months.

Asia's central bankers, who are preparing for their annual gathering July 28 in Shanghai, have been unable to develop a united response to deal with the worst inflation threat in at least a decade. That is because most central banks in Asia have been reluctant to give up any of their economic independence or challenge the United States by coordinating their monetary and currency policies, even as they fret about rising prices

Then of course if you throw in there, Cap and Tax, all the Global Warming Bunk, and the continued out of control Spending by the Looney Leadership, you will see energy costs, Food Prises, and EVERYTHING else climb in costs that are out of reach of some folks in this country.

This is NOT just Politics. This is NOT just Obama Bashing Rhetoric. This is FACT. Look at what happened when Gas Prices rose to over $4.00 a gallon. Remember that? The cost of EVERYTHING ELSE went up as well. If it cost more for your local Supermarket or Big Box Stores to get things delivered to them, they will charge YOU more to get the items. If it costs the Energy Companies more to produce the Energy, they will charge YOU more to receive it.

It really is simple to understand folks. They do NOT CARE about older people. They said so. They do NOT CARE about the poor or the Middle Class. Those are the ones that will be hurt the most. They only attack the Rich, because THEY are a cash cow for them. Not for you. Contrary to what they may want you to believe, they are NOT going to take from Peter to give to Paul. They are going to take from Peter, and KEEP IT. Paul will pay even MORE than Peter, because Paul has much less to spend.

This is why I keep telling you folks, just like the GWBS and the Carbon Credit Scam, it does not effect those with the resources to PAY for it. But it DOES effect you. Let me try to explain this again.

Cap and Tax = Carbon Credits, Higher Energy costs that will effect all prices.

1 - The Rich? They do not care. If they have Millions or Billions, what do they care if they have to pay a few grand or even a few hundred grand? They will continue to live as they chose.

2- Those that live paycheck to paycheck? The Poor? Those that have very little left over at the end of the month? They can NOT Pay to play, so THEY will be forced to change there lifestyles, become dependant on Government, or just go away and die.

Higher Food Prices? Inflation?

1- The Rich? So what. If I have to pay $20 to $30 bucks for a steak, I'm still going to eat it.

2- EVERYONE Else? Can you say Food Riots? Can you say Food Stamps?

Obamacare?

1- The Rich? Such as those in Congress? Get whatever medical treatment they want.

2- Everyone else? The Government will decide who gets what and they will make that decision based solely on cost. Old people, just take a pill and die. Poor people? Stop having babies. Or we will STOP you from having babies.

The FACTS are really pretty clear folks. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE OLD OR THE POOR! They WANT you dependant on the Government for EVERYTHING. They WANT power and control over every aspect of your lives. They WANT an America that THEY control and YOU are nothing but pawns. Old folks do not contribute all that much anymore, so in their view, they need to go away. It really is JUST that simple.
Peter

Government Priorities?

I agree this is "messed up."

Hey folks,

HAPPY FRIDAY! Glad you could make it today. Since it is Friday, it's time to go to the Emails. This one is sent in by our friend Irish Godfather who included this note.

"We can spend billions in bailout money but not one red cent for a cost of living increase for the next two years for our people on social security.
Our gov has it's priorities messed up."

It is from the Moderate Voice and it is by KATHY KATTENBURG. Here it is.

No Cost-of-Living Increase for Social Security Recipients This Year, Or Next

In effect, many seniors’ checks will shrink:

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

“I will promise you, they count on that COLA,” said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. “To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal.”

The decision to freeze Social Security payments is being justified by the fact that yearly cost-of-living increases are pegged to inflation, and inflation this year is below zero — but that is largely due to lower energy prices, and that’s not where seniors spend most of their income:

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

The wise folks at conservative headquarters central (aka the American Enterprise Institute) say those silly old people are just getting themselves all in a tizzy over nothing:

“Seniors may perceive that they are being hurt because there is no COLA, but they are in fact not getting hurt,” said Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. “Congress has to be able to tell people they are not getting everything they want.”

But we already know that this Administration DOES NOT CARE ABOUT OLD PEOPLE! Unless they are on their side and in Congress. Cutting funding for those on Social Security is NOTHING. They want LESS people on SS.

I agree with you Godfather, and Kathy. It is messed up. But Obama came right out and said, maybe old people should just take a pill and go away. One of the founders of the Obamacare wrote that Old People should just DEAL WITH IT! Talking about sickness and the things we all face as we age. Now we learn, Thanks to Betsy McCaughey, that the number one guy, the Health Adviser for the President, and Brother to Rahm Emanuel, wants to change the very Hippocratic Oath that Doctors take to "Do no Harm."

I'm not kidding. He actually said this.

"However, other things are rarely equal—whether to save one 20-year-old, who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who could only live for another 10 years each—is unclear."

Well, here is the whole piece by the WSJ.

According to the Wall Street Journal- Obama's Health Rationer-in-Chief

White House health-care adviser Ezekiel Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the 'overuse' of medical care.

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, {Brother to Rahm Emanuel, yeah, NO conflict of interest there} health adviser to President Barack Obama, is under scrutiny. As a bioethicist, he has written extensively about who should get medical care, who should decide, and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs. Many physicians find that view dangerous, and most Americans are likely to agree.

The health bills being pushed through Congress put important decisions in the hands of presidential appointees like Dr. Emanuel. They will decide what insurance plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have, and what seniors get under Medicare. Dr. Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He clearly will play a role guiding the White House's health initiative.

Dr. Emanuel says that health reform will not be pain free, and that the usual recommendations for cutting medical spending (often urged by the president) are mere window dressing. As he wrote in the Feb. 27, 2008, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change."

True reform, he argues, must include redefining doctors' ethical obligations. In the June 18, 2008, issue of JAMA, Dr. Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he writes. "This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others."

In numerous writings, Dr. Emanuel chastises physicians for thinking only about their own patient's needs. He describes it as an intractable problem: "Patients were to receive whatever services they needed, regardless of its cost. Reasoning based on cost has been strenuously resisted; it violated the Hippocratic Oath, was associated with rationing, and derided as putting a price on life. . . . Indeed, many physicians were willing to lie to get patients what they needed from insurance companies that were trying to hold down costs." (JAMA, May 16, 2007).

Of course, patients hope their doctors will have that single-minded devotion. But Dr. Emanuel believes doctors should serve two masters, the patient and society, and that medical students should be trained "to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care." One sign of progress he sees: "the progression in end-of-life care mentality from 'do everything' to more palliative care shows that change in physician norms and practices is possible." (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

"In the next decade every country will face very hard choices about how to allocate scarce medical resources. There is no consensus about what substantive principles should be used to establish priorities for allocations," he wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 19, 2002. Yet Dr. Emanuel writes at length about who should set the rules, who should get care, and who should be at the back of the line.

"You can't avoid these questions," Dr. Emanuel said in an Aug. 16 Washington Post interview. "We had a big controversy in the United States when there was a limited number of dialysis machines. In Seattle, they appointed what they called a 'God committee' to choose who should get it, and that committee was eventually abandoned. Society ended up paying the whole bill for dialysis instead of having people make those decisions."

Dr. Emanuel argues that to make such decisions, the focus cannot be only on the worth of the individual. He proposes adding the communitarian perspective to ensure that medical resources will be allocated in a way that keeps society going: "Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity—those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations—are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Covering services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia." (Hastings Center Report, November-December, 1996)

In the Lancet, Jan. 31, 2009, Dr. Emanuel and co-authors presented a "complete lives system" for the allocation of very scarce resources, such as kidneys, vaccines, dialysis machines, intensive care beds, and others. "One maximizing strategy involves saving the most individual lives, and it has motivated policies on allocation of influenza vaccines and responses to bioterrorism. . . . Other things being equal, we should always save five lives rather than one.

"However, other things are rarely equal—whether to save one 20-year-old, who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who could only live for another 10 years each—is unclear." In fact, Dr. Emanuel makes a clear choice: "When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get changes that are attenuated (see Dr. Emanuel's chart nearby).

Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older people, but he explains: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination. . . . Treating 65 year olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not."

The youngest are also put at the back of the line: "Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. . . . As the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin argues, 'It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old dies and worse still when an adolescent does,' this argument is supported by empirical surveys." (thelancet.com, Jan. 31, 2009).

To reduce health-insurance costs, Dr. Emanuel argues that insurance companies should pay for new treatments only when the evidence demonstrates that the drug will work for most patients. He says the "major contributor" to rapid increases in health spending is "the constant introduction of new medical technologies, including new drugs, devices, and procedures. . . . With very few exceptions, both public and private insurers in the United States cover and pay for any beneficial new technology without considering its cost. . . ." He writes that one drug "used to treat metastatic colon cancer, extends medial survival for an additional two to five months, at a cost of approximately $50,000 for an average course of therapy." (JAMA, June 13, 2007).

Medians, of course, obscure the individual cases where the drug significantly extended or saved a life. Dr. Emanuel says the United States should erect a decision-making body similar to the United Kingdom's rationing body—the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)—to slow the adoption of new medications and set limits on how much will be paid to lengthen a life.

Dr. Emanuel's assessment of American medical care is summed up in a Nov. 23, 2008, Washington Post op-ed he co-authored: "The United States is No. 1 in only one sense: the amount we shell out for health care. We have the most expensive system in the world per capita, but we lag behind many developed nations on virtually every health statistic you can name."

This is untrue, though sadly it's parroted at town-hall meetings across the country. Moreover, it's an odd factual error coming from an oncologist. According to an August 2009 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research, patients diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. have a better chance of surviving the disease than anywhere else. The World Health Organization also rates the U.S. No. 1 out of 191 countries for responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient. That attention to the individual is imperiled by Dr. Emanuel's views.

Dr. Emanuel has fought for a government takeover of health care for over a decade. In 1993, he urged that President Bill Clinton impose a wage and price freeze on health care to force parties to the table. "The desire to be rid of the freeze will do much to concentrate the mind," he wrote with another author in a Feb. 8, 1993, Washington Post op-ed. Now he recommends arm-twisting Chicago style. "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda," he wrote last Nov. 16 in the Health Care Watch Blog. "If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

Is this what Americans want?

So you see, cutting SS or Medicare and Medicaid is NOTHING compared to what they WANT to, and WILL do, if they are able to shove Obamacare down our throats.
Peter

Note: From The Emails is a weekly Segment every Friday, or occasionally anytime, that appears here at the OPNTalk Blog. Please feel free to Email any Articles, Comments, Thoughts, Whatever, that you may like to share to opntalk@gmail.com As always, you never know what you may see here.