Did you suffer through the Obama propaganda show the other night… you know the one where he said nothing about his health care plan and stuck his foot in his mouth regarding race. I’m not going to dissect every lie he told and there was many but we touch on some of the finer points of the propaganda show.
Keep in mind that Obama as of Saturday’s Radio Propaganda Address said and is still blaming the Republicans of stalling his precious Health Care Bill… this is total BS and partisan politics that he said he would not engage in… FACT if every Republican voted NO in the Health Care Bill he could still pass it with Democrat votes, but he doesn’t have enough Democrat votes so this whiny-ass cry-baby blames the Republicans that he doesn’t need to pass his crap bill, Obama is lying which he is very prone to do.
The one think I took special note of aside from his “stupidly” comment was a question by Steve Koff, the Cleveland Plain Dealer regarding Congress and the Dear Leader being on the same plan they are trying to force on you… short answer, NO.
Transcript: Obama’s News Conference
Q: Thank you. To follow up on Jake’s question earlier, sir, so many Americans are concerned that this plan, particularly the government insurance, the public option, would lead to reduced benefits or reduced coverage.
Two questions. One, can you guarantee that this legislation will lock in and say the government will never deny any services; that that’s going to be decided by the doctor and the patient, and the government will not deny any coverage? And secondarily, can you, as a symbolic gesture, say that you and the Congress will abide by the same benefits in that public option?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, number one, not only the public option but the insurance regulation that we want to put in place will largely match up with what members of Congress are getting through the federal employee plan. That’s a good example of what we’re trying to build for the American people — the same thing that Congress enjoys, which is they go — there is a marketplace of different plans that they can access, depending on what’s best for their families.
Now, one of the plans that we’ve talked about is a public option. And part of the reason we want to have a public option is just to help keep the insurance companies honest. If the insurance companies are providing good care — and as it is, they’re going to be more regulated so that they can’t deny you care because of a preexisting condition or because you change jobs or because they’ve decided you’re too sick and not a good risk — with regulation there’s already going to be some improvement in the insurance industry.
But having a public plan out there that also shows that maybe if you take some of the profit motive out, maybe if you are reducing some of the administrative costs, that you can get an even better deal, that’s going to incentivize the private sector to do even better. And that’s a good thing. That’s a good thing.
Now, there have been reports just over the last couple of days of insurance companies making record profits — right now. At a time when everybody is getting hammered, they’re making record profits, and premiums are going up. What’s the constraint on that? How can you ensure that those costs aren’t being passed on to employers or passed on to employees, the American people, ordinary middle-class families, in a way that over time is going to make them broke? Well, part of the way is to make sure that there’s some competition out there. So that’s the idea.
Now, to get to your original question, can I guarantee that there are going to be no changes in the health care delivery system? No. The whole point of this is to try to encourage changes that work for the American people and make them healthier. The government already is making some of these decisions. More importantly, insurance companies right now are making those decisions.
And part of what we want to do is to make sure that those decisions are being made by doctors and medical experts based on evidence, based on what works — because that’s not how it’s working right now. That’s not how it’s working right now. Right now doctors a lot of times are forced to make decisions based on the fee payment schedule that’s out there.
So if they’re looking — and you come in and you’ve got a bad sore throat, or your child has a bad sore throat or has repeated sore throats, the doctor may look at the reimbursement system and say to himself, you know what, I make a lot more money if I take this kid’s tonsils out. Now that may be the right thing to do, but I’d rather have that doctor making those decisions just based on whether you really need your kid’s tonsils out or whether it might make more sense just to change — maybe they have allergies, maybe they have something else that would make a difference.
So part of what we want to do is to free doctors, patients, hospitals to make decisions based on what’s best for patient care — and that’s the whole idea behind Mayo, that’s the whole idea behind the Cleveland Clinic. I’m going to be visiting your hometown tomorrow to go to the Cleveland Clinic to show — to show why their system works so well. And part of the reason it works well is because they’ve set up a system where patient care is the number-one concern, not bureaucracy, what forms have to be filled out, what do we get reimbursed for. Those are changes that I think the American people want to see.
Q: And what about yourself and Congress? Would you abide by the same benefits package?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I would be happy to abide by the same benefit package. I will just be honest with you — I’m the President of the United States so I’ve got a doctor following me every minute. (Laughter.) Which is why I say this is not about me. I’ve got the best health care in the world. I’m trying to make sure that everybody has good health care — and they don’t right now.
He never answered the damn question, which he rarely does. He said-and here is the money shot, I quote…
“the insurance regulation that we want to put in place will largely match up with what members of Congress are getting through the federal employee plan. That’s a good example of what we’re trying to build for the American people — the same thing that Congress enjoys,”
How is that putting Congress on the same plan as the average smuck American like you and me? Answer, it’s not and we the American people need to make real sure that if congress is going to pass a health care plan then they need to be on it too. Obama all but said THEY WILL NOT BE ON THE PLAN they are making up as they go along for you. So keep that in mind when you vote in 2010 congress or those writing the bill feel they are to good for the plan that they think is good enough for you, Obama and congress have exempted themselves from the socialized medicine they are trying to cram down your throat. Talk about elitism.
Part of this massive plan you’ll really enjoy if your are a Seasoned Citizen, Obama himself have revealed that not only watch Logan’s Run and Gattaca but they’ve incorporated it into their plan for you and not the plan for them and yes I’m speaking of euthanasia of sorts which is not about Chinese children. Obama plans talks about “End of Life counseling”
If you go over to some loony lefty sites and I don’t recommend you go there, you’ll find them rebutting this claim… let’s have a look. Politifact rejects this claim to btw so I’m not sire what they are reading… but here is the word for word and you tell me. Make special note of (F)(iii) and (IV) nothing is cut this is the complete section and they’ve written it as fuzzy as possible.
SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION.
(a) Medicare-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended–
…
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
‘Advance Care Planning Consultation’
‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
…
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include–
…
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State–
…
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that–
…
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.
‘(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that–
‘(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;
‘(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;
‘(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); and
‘(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.
‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii)[tcb: also known as "the patient's preferences"] may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items–
‘(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;
‘(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;
‘(iii) the use of antibiotics; and
‘(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.’.
The highlighted part is what the loons on the left claim as patients rights… will if you look at (F)(iii) and (IV) below it says a “coalition of stakeholders” of for “States described” that’s “States” capitalized and in The State.. as in State Controlled, State run as in Statist. You’ll also note that the “coalition of stakeholders” doesn’t include the patient for this “program for orders for life sustaining treatment” and while I’m not a lawyer nor do I play on one TV I read that is a coalition of stakeholders based on a State described program for orders for life sustaining treatment that doesn’t include the patient is nothing more than a group of government drones that decides if you live or die. It says…
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that–
…
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.
Oh they include HOSPICE but not you… anyway you slice it, it looks to me as if some government clown will decide your fate and anyway you slice it just reading it bolsters my belief that bills needs to be written in plan English.
Obama is flat out lying to you or as he seems so apt at doing… doesn’t have all the facts. Frankly, I think he is lying to that American people and if you support this socialist fibber McGee then you need to take a long look inward and think about your country first.
Obama said his plan is deficit neutral, what I want to know is what idiot believe that? He has even gone as far as saying it would say the government money… well I guess if they reinstate the death tax, kill off all the old folks and tax the snot out of everyone than it might just be possible.
This is a BAD PLAN… leave the current system in place with modification as in tort reform, cost control, administration reduction and other common sense changes. We don’t need Obama’s plan it’s destructive and dangerous. It’s just his why of taking not only your freedom but also your health away.
Only an idiot would believe Obama has the countries best interest at heart.
More evil doings of Obamacare here…
Ghoulish science + Obamacare = health hazard
CBO does it again: Key ObamaCare cost-cutting proposal probably won’t save money
Obama Pushes Health Overhaul, Citing Government Report
CBO deals new blow to health plan
