Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Obama Death Panels

Is the claim that the Affordable Care Act contains a provision for death panels true? My reading of the law, Section 3403: Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IPAB) confirms that it is true. All of those people who derided Sarah Palin for making this claim were wrong, and one in particular, Howard Dean, now acknowledges the truth of her claim.

The law assembles a board of fifteen appointees to help manage the costs of Medicare. Now, no matter what the screamers on the left are saying, managing Medicare costs means denying health care to some. No matter how loudly the left is hollering, no matter how much spittle erupts from their rabidly contorted lips, a board of appointees who decide on a pay cap for medical procedures will have the effect of having physicians refusing to perform it. And what is the effect of either of these circumstances? Someone is not going to receive the treatment they need to continue living. Someone is going to die—and in that sense, the IPAB is a death panel.

Is this what Congress intended? Not the Republican side, but it is exactly what the Democrats wanted. Remember, not a single Republican voted in favor of Obama Care. But I do recall one member of the House by the name of Alan Grayson who warned seniors, the Republicans are not interested in health care reform—they want you to die. When he uttered those words on the floor of the House, Alan Grayson (a rabid communist if ever there was one), voted for Obama Care. He voted for the death panels.

Nancy Pelosi said, “We have to pass the pass the bill so that you can, uh … find out what’s in it … away from the fog of the controversy.” Now we understand the secrecy and mystery of the Affordable Care Act. Nancy Pelosi and every Democrat serving in Congress voted for the Affordable Care Act. They voted for death panels. There was not a single Republican in the House or Senate voted for the passage of Obama Care; not one.

The news only gets worse, however. Thanks to Harry Reid, it will now take a full sixty senators to over-ride any decision made by Obama’s Death Panel and if the congress is gridlocked on this item, the law says that the final decision thereafter rests with the Secretary of Heath and Human Services ... an unelected bureaucrat.  We need more bureaucrats in charge of our lives, right?

Now would be a good time to think back upon the America we used to have: it was an America that had the best health care system in the world. It was not perfect, but it also did not have a government board of non-elected partisans deciding who lives and who dies. Moreover, make no mistake; the federal government is now collecting information from your doctor about the state of your health. If you smoke cigarettes, cigars, or a pipe; if you drink alcohol; if you are overweight, obese, or exceed the recommend body mass index for your height, then do not expect the government to spend any of its money to save you. It simply is not going to happen.

The good news about this is that there are going to be many democrats who will expire as the result of decisions made by the IPAB. I know that sounds unfair and cruel, but the fact is that Democrats favor this program; they should suffer the consequences along with everyone else. Furthermore, they will. Which segment of our society is it that has the most problem with obesity? According to Gallup, the answer is blacks: the people who overwhelmingly voted for Barack the Communist Obama.

All of this should remind us that elections do have consequences. How is that hope and change thing working out for you so far?

~Mustang Sends


Ed Bonderenka said...

There is this Fox News report on the subject: .
You need to enact it to find out what's in it. Or will be in it.

Always On Watch said...

Patients and their families should be making decisions about health care instead of the surrogates (health insurance companies) making the decisions.

If necessary, can patients and their families bypass insurance coverage and pay for certain medical procedures out of pocket? To my knowledge, we patients can do so. I've done so -- that is, stepped outside my insurance policy's parameters (for prolotherapy) and to hire a home health aide for 10 days following my recent surgery for detached retina. That caregiver cost me $5000 for 10 days of 24/7 care and monitoring.

Teddy Kennedy did the same when he had brain cancer.

Americans have come to believe that they shouldn't or won't have any medical procedures that their insurance doesn't cover.

Always On Watch said...

Something to consider...

If premiums soar to the moon, will people be able to self-pay for anything?

The main reason that I could afford self-pay in the first place (See my comment above) is that I had low monthly premiums and hoarded the dollars saved -- "for a rainy day."

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Wonderful. And the older you are, the more readily you will be sacrificed for the "common good."


Rottweiler said...

Excellent post Mustang and so very, very true. You're absolutely correct.
This will definitely make Ms. Witchy go twitchey.
How embarrassing that the federal government now has to use tax dollars on commercials to promote their catastrophic failures as being a "good" thing...And even the Dumbocrats know this is a miserable failure!
We all recall how the Progressive bunch vilified that awful Sarah Palin when she spoke about death panels as a necessary part of BarryCare, sort of like what goes on in England and elsewhere when it comes to things like who gets that replacement hip and who doesn't.. The truth about Obamacare is coming out and the Progressive spins are over it's now realities turn!
But don’t hold your breath it won’t be to long before until the Dumbocrats start claiming that this didn't happen and that it is "right-wing misinformation"! It’s always the case, they’ll call us names and say that it’s all hysterical nonsense.
The federal government is now forcing you to make a purchase. How is that not losing freedom in your mind? I can't wait to hear their absurd explanation. Oh well, ignorance is bliss I guess...

By the way - "death panels" are a 100% certainty and now that they've passed Obamacare, the left has even admitted as much. Perhaps you need to wake up to reality? When the federal government has limited funds and unlimited health issues to address, they will have to decide who gets treatment and who doesn't (just like the do in Canada, just like they do in England.
That's the problem with these ignorant Dumbocrats. They don't realize that here in America the federal government is supposed to answers to me., and serve me. I do not answer to the federal government. These Obama sheep were born believing that they are slaves and they are happy to continue playing the serf in exchange for their pathetic ptesident’s table scraps!!

Robert Sinclair said...

We can at least say that the Democrats are consistent. Any segment of society that can, with a straight face argue for the wanton murder of unborn children can easily extrapolate that into an argument for getting rid of the dead wood—those old farts who no longer contribute to society or produce anything and demand social security and Medicare benefits. It sounds to me as though we are approaching Logan’s Run ….

Yes indeed, the Democrats sure have a reason to be proud of themselves; fine Americans, they.

Rottweiler said...

Yes, the evidence is mounting that Obamacare is catastrophic failure.
So lets be clear, Obama and the Dumbocrat administration have penalized us for having the best healthcare imaginable in the ACA?
I would like to breathe whatever I choose to believe because I'm a free man and the federal government has zero authority to tell me what to breathe.
But not you sheeple No sir - you are all goooood little obedient slaves to the messiah . I'm not at all amazed that you’d trade your freedom for such pitiful little government table scraps. But I guess that's what you parasites do. Mooch off of others, no matter how pitiful the table scraps are.
Me, I am not willing to give in to communism. I won't even accept a little communism. We've been doing that now and what have we received in exchange is a massive erosion to our rights, a shit-hole of an economy, and $17 trillion in debt to myself, my children, and my grandchildren.
And if you like, I’d be happy to explain it further, if it’s too difficult for you to understand ? Just remember though, ignorance is bliss.

JonBerg said...

"there are going to be many democrats who will expire as the result of decisions made by the IPAB. I know that sounds unfair and cruel"

Well, that doesn't sound "unfair" to me. Today's post raises at least a couple of questions:

1) If all of this happens will those responsible for electing these reprobates realize what [they] have actually done?

2) Will the American Public, at large, rise-up against this outrage or will those nefarious "frog boilers", responsible, be successful in the implementation of compliancy?

OK. here's a third:

3) Given the direction that this Country is headed, will the "Death Panels" actually be doing their victims a favor?

This entire mess needs to be repealed, forthwith!

sue hanes said...

Z - Have a very Happy Thanksiving - to you and your commenters. I know you will be spending it with your family - and that there will be delicious food to eat.

Sam Huntington said...


I don’t think the question is “can patients pay out of pocket,” I think the question is “can patients afford to pay the cost of life-saving procedures.” A friend told me some time ago that his cost share of chemotherapy was $6,500/week. It drives one to the point of trying to decide, “Do I put my surviving spouse into the poor house over this, or do I let nature take its course?”

None of us will know what course to follow until that moment arrives that demands a decision. It should be an easy decision for the government panel, though. Stage 4, let 'em go.

JonBerg said...


"Logan’s Run"

Yeah, I wish that I'd thought of that! Orwellian [type] prognostications are now becoming reality!

Always On Watch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Divine Theatre said...

Just wanted to let you guys know that I thank God for each and every one of you.
Your passion, your intellect, the gifted, thoughtful ways in which you express your opinions give me peace in knowing that I am on the right side of history. I am often overwhelmed by the current state of affairs but I find peace in knowing that such awesome people are fighting for what is right.
Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours!


Always On Watch said...

Let me try that comment again. I addressed it to the wrong person!

Affordability and prognosis (outcome) are serious considerations -- or should be, in my view.

A friend told me some time ago that his cost share of chemotherapy was $6,500/week.

Let's talk about money for a minute.

If his cost is so high, what is his surrogate (health insurance/Medicare) paying as its share? And just where does that money come from?

For a minute, let's take the discussion out of life-saving medical treatments....

This is blunt, but let me say it: If I shouldn't have to pay for some other woman's birth control, then why should I be paying for a 93-year-old woman (incontinent, blind, respiratory system severely compromised, not ambulatory to speak of) to have tubes placed into her ears? She underwent general anesthesia, and Medicare paid for the surgery. Once out of the anesthesia, she was demented and remained so for the next few months, at which point she died. Oh, and she was still deaf. To no avail, the woman's daughter argued with the doctor about the wisdom of subjecting her mother to such surgery, and the response was "Medicare is paying for all of this."

I absolutely agree with something that Mustang stated:

None of us will know what course to follow until that moment arrives that demands a decision. It should be an easy decision for the government panel, though. Stage 4, let 'em go.

Such decisions should be made with the advice of doctors, the wishes of the patient and the family. Families should have "the discussion" before the moment ever arrives. My father did so some 10 years before his final illness arrived -- and had papers with specific parameters drawn up. Before the ambulance arrived the last night that Dad was at home, he said to me: "You've got the papers. Use 'em!"

Today, in the 21st Century, Americans are going to reap the harvest of ever allowing the government such a large role in their lives.

So, yes, as Mustang stated: Someone is going to die—and in that sense, the IPAB is a death panel.

Our aging population -- a tsunami!

Waylon said...

Funny how the "progressive" thinkers of the world always identify a problem (real or imagined) and then immediately offer a solution involving government involvement. Always and forever the more the government gets involved in solving any problem they create even bigger problems than existed before their involvement.

Not that there aren't many examples around the world which would show even the most dense of ideologues that all that the government is capable of creating is more stifling bureaucracy. And that will happen with Obamacare just as it has happened wherever government has "solved" the health care issue by becoming the nations health care nanny.

There's a good reason for the complete pretense that government can solve any problem: It's in the genetic makeup of the indoctrinated communists, just following the blueprint of one of their revered leaders: V. I. Lenin(circa 1905).

“Socialized medicine is the keystone of the arch to the Socialist State.” Lenin.

Mustang said...

@ Ed

Thank you for the link. Have a Happy Thanksgiving!


Your several comments ring true; we have seemingly accepted the notion (from the left) that everyone has a right to immortality. There is no constitutional right to life for all eternity. Neither will we find any notion that it is the federal government’s business what my doctor uncovers during his routine examinations. Reagan was correct when he suggested that our worry should begin whenever the government shows up and says, “Hi … I’m here to help.” But it is also interesting that on the one hand, government wants to prolong our live, and on the other the government complains about having to pay benefits to the elderly.

@ BZ

My view is a bit more cynical, I’m afraid. All of these “common good” ideas are for one purpose only: the advancement of the careers of politicians.

@ Rottweiler

Thank you for the compliment. I think the solution to our problems in this country is really pig simple. We need smaller government. One that is so small that it is incapable of setting citizen against citizen, state against state, and region against region. I have to say that a bank of Cray computers would be every bit as useful as two houses full of politicians.

@ Robert

Logan’s run … exactly. Well, I suppose we can say that the left has managed to transform our country from one “of the people” to “one of the bureaucrats” because, well … they know what’s best. Actually, it makes me want to puke.

Mustang said...

@ JonBerg

I wonder if Dr. Kevorkian is turning over in his grave. Both he and Bernie Madoff went to jail for doing no more, no less than what the government does on a daily basis.

@ Andie

Thank you so much for your kind wishes. My best to you and yours over this holiday, and I hope you will remember to keep a prayer in your heart, and a smile on your face.

@ Waylon

I detest this government, and not just this particular government but what the US federal government has become. It is tyranny, plain and simple. But more than this, I detest the people living here who call themselves American, but who aren’t … and who support MORE government in their lives. Idiots and traitors, every damn one of them. Welcome to Animal Farm.

Always On Watch said...

There is no constitutional right to life for all eternity.

Neither is there any Constitutional right to health insurance, a product that one purchases.

Always On Watch said...

The history of health insurance and something to consider, IMO:

In the late 19th century, "accident insurance" began to be available, which operated much like modern disability insurance. This payment model continued until the start of the 20th century in some jurisdictions (like California), where all laws regulating health insurance actually referred to disability insurance.

Accident insurance was first offered in the United States by the Franklin Health Assurance Company of Massachusetts. This firm, founded in 1850, offered insurance against injuries arising from railroad and steamboat accidents. Sixty organizations were offering accident insurance in the U.S. by 1866, but the industry consolidated rapidly soon thereafter. While there were earlier experiments, the origins of sickness coverage in the U.S. effectively date from 1890. The first employer-sponsored group disability policy was issued in 1911.

Before the development of medical expense insurance, patients were expected to pay health care costs out of their own pockets, under what is known as the fee-for-service business model. During the middle-to-late 20th century, traditional disability insurance evolved into modern health insurance programs. One major obstacle to this development was that early forms of comprehensive health insurance were enjoined by courts for violating the traditional ban on corporate practice of the professions by for-profit corporations. State legislatures had to intervene and expressly legalize health insurance as an exception to that traditional rule. Today, most comprehensive private health insurance programs cover the cost of routine, preventive, and emergency health care procedures, and most prescription drugs (but this is not always the case).

Hospital and medical expense policies were introduced during the first half of the 20th century. During the 1920s, individual hospitals began offering services to individuals on a pre-paid basis, eventually leading to the development of Blue Cross organizations. The predecessors of today's Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) originated beginning in 1929, through the 1930s and on during World War II.

Always On Watch said...

In other words, until quite recently, health insurance was of the catastrophic type.

Z said...

AOW, your point about the elderly lady is a good one. and a sad one. DO we literally do too much to keep people alive when that 'alive' doesn't really represent LIFE? On the other hand, as religious people, we know it's not our determination for who dies and who doesn't die.

I do think, however, that there's a difference of paying for someone's birth control (and/or abortion) and keeping someone alive.
If a child-bearing aged woman needs to keep from getting pregnant, let her pay for it. If she has decided her fetus must die because it's an inconvenience, let her pay for it. Not me.

I will, however, help someone who needs a hip replacement or a heart surgery for another couple of health years.


I was at the bedside of a 93 year old man while the family (and I) was told that without heart surgery, he'd live 2 weeks. This was an otherwise extremely healthy man, physically and mentally.
Great lungs, kidneys, BP,etc.

He never really recovered from that surgery, folks...he had setbacks, anesthesia did him in, and absolutely no quality of life. And very high bills with in-home care, etc. And he lived almost 3 years after a wheel chair, head dangling, barely, if ever, speaking.

Should he have had that surgery?
His wife thinks so. I'm not so sure he did.

Tough situations happen every day.

My own dear husband was nearly dead that morning I realized he was unconscious...they worked on him for at least 45 minutes here, then ambulanced him off to the ER...and worked what felt like more than an hour there. I thought he was gone while he was still at home, and he was so gone that he'd have probably been vegetative had they kept him alive. He'd NEVER EVER EVER have wanted that. And I wouldn't want that for him, either.
But they worked and worked on him at the hospital before he was pronounced dead. I'll always be curious about that. When you know a brain has been oxygen deprived for a long period of time, should we resuscitate?

SAM...who the heck can spend $6500 a week for very long!? What a horrid place to be. I believe the answer is trying to keep costs DOWN....Why aren't we concentrating on that when I know for a fact that one can get the same treatments in Europe for so much less? And, I was not covered by insurance when I had a very bad cut and had hand surgery in Paris. Know what it cost, in total? Surgery and check ups afterwards?$800. No subsidization...that's what it COSTS. Here, it would have run me, easily, $12,000. Easily.

DIVINE...I feel the same about you and your many talents. Happy Thanksgiving! Thanks for those wonderful words.

Waylon...Interesting quote; Reagan pretty much said the same thing.
And they were right!

Lurker...I'm leaving your comment there because people need to see how unthinking the left can be. Have you ever even CONSIDERED that the Republican healthcare ideas could have worked better than this MESS Obama's got us in now? Oh, that's right! You've been told the Reps 'have no plan' :-)
don't come back until you've got something beneficial to say. Thanks!

Z said...

Let me just add something else about COSTS after having just read AOW's comment/pasting...which is excellent info.

in Paris during my surgery, I was head to feet with strangers all lined up for minor hand surgeries...3" from the person on each side's FEET. All of us had thin blankets on. If you had to pee before your surgery, they came and put a pan under you, you lifted your hips and did your thing with complete strangers all around you...3" all around!

We're so spoiled and antiseptic we wouldn't DREAM of that here...yet look at the difference in COST.

just thought I'd mention that...we so very seldom mention COSTS. The Republicans are getting to that, but the left seems really against even discussions on that. And we're supposed to be the mean old greedy ones, right?

Jim at Asylum Watch said...

ObamaCaremay be an utter disaster. And, the government's record at runing the postal service and Amtrack does not bode well. But I would bet that they will probably be very proficient at killing peopleoff with their Death Panels.

Jack Whyte said...

I think we are serious about forming a long-term relationship with our primary care physician, then we will have no choice than to join a medical concierge group. These are beginning to spring up now all over the US …

Robert Sinclair said...

All of the great movies are coming true: 1984, Logan’s Run, Soylent Green, Planet of the Apes …. With the communists in charge, it’s like being at a matinee that never ends.

JonBerg said...


"Lurker...I'm leaving your comment there because people need to see how unthinking the left can be"

Does that mean that I can still find it somewhere? When I came back to comment on it, it was gone.

Waylon said...

Happy Thanksgiving to you and your readers, Z. I hadn't seen that quote from Lenin before either. I saw it quoted and it was even used recently by Dr. Ben Carson in an interview. Says a lot about so-called progressive thought, IMO.

Mustang: After 8 years of Obama's "progress" I'm thinking there will be a lot of barns out there on the Animal Farm that will need some new slogans painted on them.

Liberalmann said...

Simple solution, deny any coverage or care to all the RepubliKlans. Then there will be plenty available for all the right people.

Z said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Z said...

Waylon, he was so right!
And Happy Thanksgiving to you, too! open-minded liberal :-)
"the right people?"
WHY are liberals so elitist?
And, don't look now, but without ..naa...I just saw how you typed Republicans and I'm deleting you.

you know, a very dear friend once said about someone in the news "there's no lower level to stupid"

Now I know there IS.

Z said...

Interesting point; and I've got one for you:

What movies do you WISH we were emulating now? :-)

A. Lurker said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JonBerg said...


OK, as long as the "RepubliKlans" are exempt from paying for it, fine! Then watch how long your pipe dream lasts.

Z said...

Lurker, I'm never quite sure why a blog that's so little read has people come here to mention it so often, but please don't.
And as for Palin, if she hadn't mentioned DEATH PANELS back when she did, perhaps people wouldn't have been so averse to the truth NOW.
In other words, she was TOTALLY ABSOLUTELY RIGHT,but it was too soon..the term seemed so ridiculous the leftwingers ran with it and got a LOT of mileage from it.

Yes, she was right. Everybody SHOULD know that now, if they're paying attention, but it wasn't right at the moment. Too much diversion from the bill. The left was looking to kill a messenger and make the Right look wrong, and it worked.

Sadly, we know now that we conservatives were right all along.

I don't admire, and can't even watch, the way. You'll get no argument here..can't draw me into anything, sorry.

Z said...

Jon, I had that same thought! (sorry, I deleted Libmann for that spelling of Republican, but oh, well!) No problem.

My point was the same...without people WHO WORK paying into it, the dems are going to be in trouble.
And, no, I'm not suggesting no Dems work (most of us know that Wall St is mostly Dems no matter HOW the leftwingers try to paint it as Republican GREEDY CAPITALISTS!)...but have you ever seen a mug shot with BUSH or REAGAN on the perp's T shirt like we see OBAMA on them?
How many Reps were in Occupy Wall St, full of people who depend on their entitlements..?
We could go on and on, right, JB??

Z said...

By the way, I've noticed more and more leftwing blogs are on comment moderation. Can't they argue the facts with conservatives?
kinda sad.

I've been known to go on from time to time because of leftwing profanity and threats, but....not often.

I find that interesting...

Liberalmann said...

I don't apoligize for wanting to eliminate all republicans. There's plenty of nationalism to go along with my socialism.

A. Lurker said...

Most Americans believe Obamacare's current problems will be solved. 54 percent say they believe current problems will be fixed, compared with 43 percent who say they won't be.
Most Americans believe it's too early to judge whether Obamacare is a success or failure. A total of 53 percent think it is too early to say whether Obamacare is a success or failure. A total of 39 percent think it's a failure and 8 percent already think it is a success.
Most Americans do not support conservative critiques of Obamacare. According to the poll, 41 percent of Americans think Obamacare is too liberal, slightly more than 40 percent who support Obamacare. But 14 percent think it's not liberal enough.
The bottom line is that we voted for him twice.
That's our story and we (the American People) are sticking with it.
Your attempt to chip away at Obam is not working, so instead of using your propaganda ridden blogsite towards influencing people, why not go and have a Turkey sandwich.

Wake me up when it's over, please.

Alexander T. Morgantrotter said...

I guess they only allow the comments that kiss up to them. And we all know who thy are, don't we RN!

Impertinent said...


Slight correction...

NO ONE Here voted for the turkey once...let alone twice. Those who did now regret it as the most recent polls show.

Even among the low info kumquats who now find they have to pay for it.

Now...go choke on your own turkey, sonny.

Impertinent said...


What are you surprised? They have their fingers in their ears while shouting Racist, bigot, bagger and like what Bashir has to say. May their own mothers be so reviled.

Z said...

Lib..nobody needs an apology or anything else from you.
I'm leaving this comment because people need to know there are people like you.Too bad we don't hear PATRIOTISM in your ridiculous screed. Nationalism, though, does suit you's more a socialist thing. The NAZIS were the NATIONALIST party, remember.
Google NAZI...or early Thirties in Germany; you'll be surprised at the similarities there and how this WH is secretive, stopping free speech, etc.
Quite something, really.

Alexander.. I only delete for profanity and insult. and your point is..?

Imp......imagine? This type of thinking happens when leftwingers never listen to anything BUT leftwing info. It's damaging and even oppressive.
Good comment.

Impertinent said...


" don't apoligize for wanting to eliminate all republicans.."

And just how are you going to do that eggplant? You're saying your neighbors, coworkers, associates, "friends"...even relatives? Half of all really are a POS, aren't you?

You don't have the firepower moron.

Z said...

Imp! I just saw your comment you were typing as I typed mine.
We're in agreement; when people only listen to one side, they get unbalanced in more ways than one.
I'm grateful that I'm curious enough to read it ALL and make my own decisions.

Imagine if a Conservative had EVER said anything close to what Bashir said? Now let's get the lefties trying to compete with any Republican's criticisms as if ANY of them are hideous enough to suggest someone should defecate in anybody else's MOUTH.

Z said...

imp...don't you find it telling that leftwingers want to RID people of other opinions and values?
WHY can't they discuss things without the insults and death wishes? it's amazing.

Impertinent said...


Like I said:

For those that don't watch MSNBC or CNN for fear of losing their sanity, these networks are now just a conservative hate machine.
Meaning...they despise your morality, your religion, your devotion to family, your God, your Churches, your Sundays, your Bible, your holidays, your insistence on a good education for your children free of liberalism and lies, your patriotism, your flag, your prayers, your anthems...for veterans, your service. And most especially, your right to vote your well as those people whom you trust and believe in.

The Liberal, tolerant credo:

"If I don't like it, you can't either...if I don't think you should have can't....if you don't like my opinion...I'll force you to or call you a bigot or a racist."

Robert Sinclair said...

My favorite film and this is where I wish we still were, Z.

I don't think we have to worry about the puny little communists, Impertinent ... here's what would happen. First, you rush 'em, see. Then, they piss themselves and in their fright, they pull out their weapon and accidentally shoot themselves.

I was thinking that if we let these rotten little twerps alone, eventually they'd all go away because there's not an ounce of productive sperm among them. I think they're importing it from somewhere. Maybe Russia.

Impertinent said...


Great plan....thanks.

Z said...

Imp; my questions are often rhetorical...sorry about that!
Yes, as you know, I agree and have said all of that myself.

Robert...I watched a little of the trailer; I didn't know there WAS a movie I hadn't heard of and I hadn't heard of that one! :-) Had to laugh at them making Indians look BAD: they can't make films today like that.
They can make any WHITE guy look REALLY REALLY bad, but don't let anybody know Indians killed or there's hell to pay.

Z said...


God bless you all!


Impertinent said...


Thanks Ms. Z.

Always On Watch said...

Something to think about:

...Insurance is probably the most complex, costly, and distortional method of financing any activity; that’s why it is otherwise used to fund only rare, unexpected, and large costs. Imagine sending your weekly grocery bill to an insurance clerk for review, and having the grocer reimbursed by the insurer to whom you’ve paid your share. An expensive and wasteful absurdity, no?

Is this really a big problem for our health-care system? Well, for every two doctors in the U.S., there is now one health-insurance employee—more than 470,000 in total. In 2006, it cost almost $500 per person just to administer health insurance. Much of this enormous cost would simply disappear if we paid routine and predictable health-care expenditures the way we pay for everything else—by ourselves.

The Moral-Hazard Economy

Society’s excess cost from health insurance’s administrative expense pales next to the damage caused by “moral hazard”—the tendency we all have to change our behavior, becoming spendthrifts and otherwise taking less care with our decisions, when someone else is covering the costs. Needless to say, much medical care is unavoidable; we don’t choose to become sick, nor do we seek more treatment than we think we need. Still, hospitals, drug companies, health insurers, and medical-device manufacturers now spend roughly $6 billion a year on advertising. If the demand for health care is purely a response to unavoidable medical need, why do these companies do so much advertising?

Medical ads on TV typically inform the viewer that a specific treatment—a drug, device, surgical procedure—is available for a chronic condition. Many also note that the product or treatment is eligible for Medicare or private-insurance reimbursement. In some cases, the advertiser will offer to help the patient obtain that reimbursement. The key message: you can benefit from this product and pass the bill on to someone else.

Every time you walk into a doctor’s office, it’s implicit that someone else will be paying most or all of your bill; for most of us, that means we give less attention to prices for medical services than we do to prices for anything else....

Always On Watch said...

You asked me: DO we literally do too much to keep people alive when that 'alive' doesn't really represent LIFE?

Sometimes, yes, too much is spent.

The question I'm asking is this: Whose money is being spent when the insurance company is actually ponying up the bulk of the bucks?

This, of course, is a major issue in all this:

On the other hand, as religious people, we know it's not our determination for who dies and who doesn't die.

Could anyone here have stepped outside insurance and pursued the kind of treatment that Teddy Kennedy did when he had terminal brain cancer? I know that I couldn't do so!

Are we then going to say that those who are prevented from doing what Teddy Kennedy did are murderers or "suiciders"? I don't think so.

Thus, there are very real financial limits as to what we buy to prevent/delay our own deaths.

Medical care is a product we buy, is it not?

Always On Watch said...

BTW, I'm not condemning Teddy Kennedy for doing what he did. I know of at least one other person, unknown to any here, who did the same thing. He was a multi-billionaire and bought an extension of his own life. Not much quality of life the last several months, though. Brain cancer is a horrible thing!

Z said...

AOW, if you can't afford THE VERY BEST, how is that considered suicide?
But, what DID Ted Kennedy do?? He just had the best money could buy, right?
I like to think my Blue SHield would have provided the same thing. It did for Mr. Z; I never saw one bill for his treatment or very pricey meds.

By the way, someone above mentioned 'concierge'..was it Mustang? Anyway, my own doctor accepts no insurance, though some insurance companies will pay for tests he runs, etc.
I am HAPPY to pay my GP his 'per visit fee' because he's EXCELLENT and because it's the specialists who rack up the BIG bills, and the hospital, of course.

There are few docs in the WEst LA or Santa Monica area anymore who do take insurance, believe it or not. They were prophets!

Always On Watch said...

You also asked:


I say:

The family and the patient decide. That decision could well be predicted on financial resources that don't stem solely from insurance.

You said:

When you know a brain has been oxygen deprived for a long period of time, should we resuscitate?

I say: NO -- for myself. I have so stipulated.

Mr. AOW decided the same in 1993, when he drew up a living will prior to brain surgery for acoustic neuroma. In fact, when Mr. AOW had his stroke in 2009, I forbade a ventilator. Outcomes post-ventilator, post-stroke are quite poor most of the time; besides, Mr. AOW's oxygen levels were fine. "But health insurance will pay." THAT was not the point as far as I was concerned; that health insurance would or would not pay shouldn't even have entered into the decision, IMO.

When my father-in-law had a massive heart attack in 1979, he was resuscitated over and over again because his wife refused to say "No code" or "Chemical code only." One night, the cardiologist spoke privately with Mr. AOW and me -- and laid out in detail what survival for my father-in-law would be like if any subsequent resuscitation were successful. At that point, we spoke with Mr. AOW's mother -- in a calm moment, of course. Once she understood the outcome -- a hideous one that would drag on for years and year, a vegetative state -- she said, "He wouldn't want that! No more resuscitation."

Again I emphasize something: HAVE "THE CONVERSATION"! With family members and the family doctor. Get papers drawn up -- with specifics. And don't wait until feebleness sets in. Anything can happen to anyone at any time!

Always On Watch said...

I believe the answer is trying to keep costs DOWN....


And one way is to have catastrophic health insurance only -- or something along those lines. It is a fact that ever since "major medical" came along, medical prices have soared.


I'll tell you why -- in the words spoken to me at the nursing home when they wanted to keep him permanently, yet the family doctor and I said that he should be discharged to home.

Note these words!

"Isn't there a pool of money we can get?"

Liberalmann said...

I never said republicans had no use. They make great fertilizer. LOL!

Always On Watch said...

what DID Ted Kennedy do?? He just had the best money could buy, right?

He paid out of pocket.

I like to think my Blue SHield would have provided the same thing.

Not likely. Teddy Kennedy went to Duke University and accessed some experimental treatment, which did, in fact, extend his days on this earth.

My BCBS HMO would not pay for prolotherapy (recognized by the Mayo Clinic as not experimental); so, I paid out of pocket ($8400, I think, and the prolo made all the difference in the world. Prolo kept me out of a wheelchair, and the money I spent was money well spent.

But the next policy I got with BCBS, a PPO, would have.

Sam Huntington said...

I saw a nurse at the gym the other day. You could tell she was a nurse by the T-shirt she was wearing, and besides that, she confirmed that she works at a local hospital. The T-shirt had a message: I don’t work for you; I work for the hospital.

The message is hardly anything we might have associated with Clara Barton, but I understand that people go to hospitals and doctors offices and they demand treatments and cures that go beyond what is ethical, practical, or legal. I have known doctors that ordered hospitalization several hundred miles away because their patient stood a better chance of survival at the far-distant hospital, than one closer to home.

I spoke to a physician about this and he told me that poorly trained nurses and low standards in hospitals is the number one threat to health in the US today. He told me that universities are so afraid to fail anyone, particularly someone who is a minority that they are producing hundreds upon hundreds of nurses that are utterly incompetent. They are death waiting to happen. This is so hard to imagine, but then … maybe not if you look around at what has happened to America in the past fifty years.

Everyone needs to read the article linked for us by AOW.

Anonymous said...

I believe Liberalman's father was so disappointed by how his son turned out that he castrated himself. Now if we can only convince Librealman that it is a worthy tradition.


Z said...

TOM...I'm not deleting Libmann.

He's just confirming for us all the mind of a liberal. It's VERY sad.

SAM: Most L.A. nurses are from the Philippines. I don't know how good they are but I've heard some awful things about competition between them, etc. And, they tell us here to have a patient advocate with the patient at ALL times; check what meds they're giving, check they wash their hands when the nurse comes in, etc. Sad, isn't it?

But, people took PRIDE IN THEIR WORK in the old days and without that, we're like the animal kingdom.
That is NOT TO SAY that MANY MANY caregivers do care and DO take pride in good work but.........
when we apply the slovenly work ethic of so many other people now to health care workers, that's scary!

AOW; what I meant was when people ARE insured, how do we decide who gets the very high end surgery? I know that millionaires can pay, but...

And I mean the actual COST OF HEALTHCARE, not costs to US.
When it costs me $800 for a hand surgery in France, compared to probably $12K here, you know costs are WAY out of hand.

Jan said...

Last year, I asked my primary doctor if it was fact or rumor, concerning end of life counseling in the new health bill, and he said it was fact.

He said that anyone who is seventy-five years of age will be required to participate in that.

I asked him, jokingly, what they'd do if one decided not to attend, if they would come after them, and arrest them. He laughed, and said he didn't think so, but who knew what would happen if you were non-compliant?

He was joking, too, I'm sure, but who knows whether or not future access might be determined by whether or not you were compliant?

I asked him what end of life counseling would consist of, and he said it would be to discuss the patient's treatment "options," such as whether or not they would want to be sustained on life support,etc.

But, isn't that what most people do, anyway, with a living will, and naming a family member to make a decision should the need arise?

Why should the government demand that one has end of life counseling?

BTW, Mustang....great post!

Happy Thanksgiving, Z, and everyone!

Marine4Ever said...

Along with the Death Panels, may I share why ObamaCare is a fantastic success with you?

Impertinent said...


"how do we decide who gets the very high end surgery?" know that royalty comes first...after all they are irreplaceable.

Z said...

Off Topic:

Did you know there are Americans who think our deficit is really slashed in HALF under Obama, though it's up to SEVENTEEN TRILLLLLLLLLLLION DOLLARS because HE SAYS so?

What does one do when the truth is so different?

I mean, would the deficit have been THIRTY FOUR TRILLION if we hadn't Obama in charge? :-)

Z said...


There are people who still can't get insurance on the website, though they lost the insurance they liked. They have no insurance.

Obama's people are telling folks to not go to the site quite yet; it's apparently had problems again and can't take high volume.

Can a family, God forbid it has to, SUE Obama's gov't in case something happens between the time they were dropped by their healthcare company and when they can finally get this obama care thing?

Impertinent said...


A resounding NO....the government always has immunity. Besides Z..who has the enormous wealth to take it all the way to the supremes?

Impertinent said...

Here it comes....

Moving past gay marriage, ABC News on Monday pushed the "gospel" of polyamory, having multiple romantic and sexual partners in an open relationship. Co-anchor Dan Harris hyped, "More couples opting to become triples or fourples. Live-in lovers spicing up the marital bed, even helping raise the children."

Kid said...

This is no where near how far the gov is going to insert itself into your colon and your life.
Wait until you file your next tax returns year after year and what will have to be reported about your personal physical details. As in a form from our doctor about whether your smoke or any of another myriad of things. BMI, risks, etc. This is a Target Rich Environment for tax collecting maniacs. My prediction.

Say hello to your little IRS friend.

There is a Ton I could say, but my final solution here is to cancel the insurance -unless you have a current known expensive problem- and just pay the fine, the doctor visits, and the prescription cost.

The doctor won't have to file paperwork with the fed so should give you a break on price. And if you have the right doctor, he/she might give you the civil disobedience discount (CDD).

Bottom line. There was a time, and not that long ago, that health insurance didn't even exist. Were those people's lives horrible ? I don't think so, or if they were because of the poor general conditions it had nothing to do with HC insurance not being in existence.

Done to enough of a percentage of the population, ocare will cease to exist because we don't want to play.

And you know with certain serious illnesses some people only end up being lab rats anyway and the treatments don't add quality to their life. I've personally known some of these folks who are gone now. Their Decision Of Course Always but..

Let's collectively send the big bird back to obama that he's been giving America the last 8 years or all his life actually.

Kid said...

AOW, I'm with you obviously.

Kid said...

I'm reading thru the comments. WOW AOW, I Really agree with you.

We need to make government effectively Impotent on this issue.

Kid said...

M4E, I believe everything in your ocare 'success' link. Great Link. Also got in an email a little bit ago. Ahyep.

Z, libtards really ARE sociopath. The worst kind. They don't care about 'women's rights', 'the planet', 'health care' or any other thing unless it serves as a political talking point or more to the point serves them in some way. They don't give a * about Anything but their own fill in the blank.

I'll exclude the kids that are still so stupid they think liberal idealism is a good thing to solve problems with.

Z said...

Imp, check out that's been the top article on Yahoo for four days and has moved down to #4 or something today.
Oh, yes..Conservatives warned, when gay marriage was accepted, that it would lead to more. And, with our miserable immoral culture as it is, how could polyamory be far?
How DISGUSTING. And as if our kids aren't SCREWED UP enough?

Kid, the problem is ONE SURGERY could ruin your future ENTIRELY financially. ENTIRELY. Then what?
Otherwise, that's what I do; I pay my GP and much of my prescriptions and let insurance pay the rest.

Kid said...

Z, Well, if they can't turn away people with preexisting conditions, then you can wait until something happens where you think you might need -or have a doc tell you during a checkup- a more serious illness.

Sign up at that point. ?

Kid said...

And who is to say, the death panel, aka 'review board of A...' isn't going to put you on the forever waiting list anyway.

JonBerg said...

Have any of you been hassled to take a 'Satin Drug' by your Doctor? This is, moreover, a scam. It's all about Big Pharama, profits and nothing about you! OH yes, your wonderful Doctor may be getting some good override, as well. If that Dr. says that you need it, make damn sure that you do because you probably don't!!! That shit is full of poison
that causes more problems than what it ever thought to fix. BIG PHARAMA, BIG PROFIT- SMALL YOU !!!

Z said...

JonBerg...ever tried to significantly lower cholesterol on your own?

Kid said...

JonBerg. Z. I'm mixed.

I took statins for a couple years.
According to blood tests, my levels are down considerably, but there were side effects that caused me to stop taking them about a year ago.

I told the doc I had some problems, and in talking to him about it, he said, well, it takes a long time for that stuff to buildup in your arteries which I read as I don't see a big need to take them anymore. Also, you can, (for an unknown to me cost) have a camera inserted into your major arteries and have them cleaned out if necessary too. I won't be taking statins anymore.

Also, I read where it takes a Long time to develop the kinds of problems a colonoscopy is intended to head off and people should probably stop getting them after the age of about 65 as it's unlikely you'll develop something that that this procedure could fix before you're going to die of something else anyway. I'm kind of down with that analysis.

Yea, I do believe the health industry tends to lead us around by the nose for profit. Let no one read that as support for oblammycare in any form. PS- throttle the trial lawyers, all of em.

Kid said...

JonBerg, great comments all btw.

Z said...

JB, I disagree about the statins. I think they've saved a heck of a lot of lives, though you are right about muscle ache, etc ..side effects can be difficult, then you have to stop taking that particular one.

I TOTALLY agree with you about colonoscopies after 65..TOTALLY. It takes a long time to grow something lethal and, if a colonoscopy at 65 shows no polyps, growths, tumors, etc., you're not going to die of colon cancer !

JonBerg said...

"JonBerg...ever tried to significantly lower cholesterol on your own?"

Absolutely, I watch saturated fat and take Niacin 1000 mg, non flush, @ 90 for >$ 9.00 for a 3 month supply. My last check was, for the big number, 146 and the LDL&HDL numbers were well within the range that they should
be. MY Doctor, however, is part of the scam which I've exposed on this site, once before. He is among many, from what I understand! I'm on Medicare and I suppose that makes me lucky just to have a Doctor. I guess it won't get better.

Always On Watch said...

When it costs me $800 for a hand surgery in France, compared to probably $12K here, you know costs are WAY out of hand.

Something I've learned from reading David Goldhill's book Catastrophic Care: Shouldn't we be talking about prices, not costs? The word cost(s) somehow implies inevitability.

What is driving up those prices?

In part:

1. Medicare, which sets rates and diagnostic codes. Those rates and codes are then adopted in some form all across the healthcare industry.

2. The very idea that "something that is good idea for me should be paid by my health insurance."

3. Lack of actual competition in the health insurance market.

ObamaCare will make the latter worse! There is nothing wrong with bare-bones insurance (catastrophic, etc.).

BTW, yesterday I read in the WaPo's "Federal Diary" that federal government employees have plans with only $1000 annual premium. Please see this.

Always On Watch said...

David Goldhill's book Catastrophic Care is even better than the article he wrote. I highly recommend it!

And he doesn't recommend single payer either!

Always On Watch said...

the problem is ONE SURGERY could ruin your future ENTIRELY financially. ENTIRELY. Then what?

"Ay! There's the rub!"

It used to be that one could negotiate down the bill by 40% if one was self-pay. Georgetown University Medical Center dropped my friend's bill from %100,000 to $60,000 back in 1993.

Sometimes the discount is even more.

For example, when I needed YAG laser surgery in 1986, the price of the procedure went from $1200 to $300. The surgeon had the power to finalize that price because the hospital was one owned by doctors: Doctors Hospital of Northern Virginia. Now, there is not a single hospital here owned by groups of doctors; instead, we have university hospitals (where negotiation is still possible) and county hospitals (no negotiation allowed except via a doctor who doesn't accept any medical insurance whatsoever). At the county hospitals, patients and families are not allowed to negotiate. What the hell?

The very fact that so many have health insurance is driving up the prices of medical care. And ObamaCare will make the problem even worse! Just a few years from now, most Americans will come to that realization. But it will be too late by then: people will be clamoring for single payer because they won't know any better.

Kid is correct that we SHOULD all cancel our policies. The problem with that strategy: people will not stick together.

The Gallantwarrior said...

Kid said...
libtards really ARE sociopath. The worst kind


Always On Watch said...

Meanwhile from the CPUSA we reading this: Obamacare: Grumbling is not enough.


...[G]rumbling about the problems of the health care rollout heard in some progressive and left circles needs to give way to actively resisting the right wing's campaign to kill Obamacare and regain the initiative leading into the midterm and 2016 elections.

With all its shortcomings, Obamacare is a step in the right direction; it extends health care - a social right - to millions who up to now have none, and partially curbs the power of the health care industry, while its defeat would set back the struggle for health care for all much longer than I would care to think. That's why the far right is fighting it so hard!

Thus, energizing, uniting, and raising the understanding of ever more people to oppose right-wing extremism in every arena of struggle - not least of which is defense of the Affordable Health Care Act - is the order of the day.

Of critical importance in this regard is the fight against racism in its material and ideological forms. Racism was the main vehicle used to bust up the New Deal coalition and fuel the ascendancy of the right wing over the past three or more decades. By the same token, the struggle against it is at the core of building a movement with the ideological, political, and organizational capacity and unity to dislodge the right and usher in an era of deep going progressive, even radical, change.

Z said...'re lucky! it's very rare to be able to get numbers to go down without drugs, sadly.
I have so many friends who ate no fat, etc etc..and NOTHING.
I wish I could do niacin; the hot flush is awful!!

AOW; I rest my case. Getting PRICES down is the key, in my opinion. The problem with that is it's almost impossible to drive that horse back into the barn.

Interesting stuff from the CPUSA..
WHY can't the LEFT learn this stuff? They're just blindly believing Republicans hate the sick and are only fighting Obamacare because we're racists :-)

They forget some of us ARE black and all of us DO need healthcare and MANY of us are NOT RICH.

Go figure. Wouldn't that wake a liberal UP??

Always On Watch said...

Getting PRICES down is the key, in my opinion. The problem with that is it's almost impossible to drive that horse back into the barn.

There is a way, but it's not a short-term remedy and would require taking more personal financial responsibility than paying a monthly premium.

People think nothing of taking an extravagant vacation -- instead of socking away money for a rainy day (medical catastrophe).

The elephant in the room: health insurance does not prevent medical bankruptcy. Most medical bankruptcies happen to people who have health insurance -- even major medical (as opposed to bare bones policies).

Ah, well. David Goldhill has written an extremely important article followed by a book. Who is paying attention? Certainly not our policy makers!

JonBerg said...




Always On Watch said...

I can't read the NYT article because I've maxed out on my number of free accesses there.

However, I did find this via a Google search:

New cholesterol treatment recommendations released by two heart organizations last week have come under fierce criticism for overestimating the number of people who should be prescribed cholesterol-lowering statins, prompting the groups to launch a review of the treatment guide.

Two heart researchers from Brigham and Women’s hospital tested a risk assessment tool a few days after it was published in the new guideline and found that it greatly overestimates the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and may result in millions of people being unnecessarily given statins to prevent heart attacks and strokes....

Statins do entail risks. Rarely do complications follow, but they did occur for my cousin. He died as a result.

Something similar has happened with diabetic thresholds.

All the "preventive" care included in ObamaCare is going to send premiums soaring!

America, you have been scammed BIG TIME when it comes to health insurance and what you want it to pay for! It is not financially feasible for health insurance to pay for so much! Premiums must be raised!

Always On Watch said...

Oh, and one more thing:

New guidelines would double the number of Americans on cholesterol-lowering drugs.


The lower threshold for statin prescriptions is certainly welcome news for their manufacturers; the drugs have been among the most prescribed class in the U.S. in recent years, and in 2013, rosuvastatin (Crestor) topped the list, earning AstraZeneca $5.4 billion in sales, according to IMS Health.

But the dramatic shift also has some heart experts nervous about how the guidelines will translate in doctors’ offices around the country. For those with a history of heart disease, there is little debate about how beneficial statins can be in preventing second events; studies show that the drugs can significantly lower risk of death from heart events. But for healthy individuals who may have some risk factors for future heart trouble, doctors have always been reluctant to prescribe medications when so much of heart disease is preventable, with proper diet and exercise. “For people with no history of heart disease, but who are trying to prevent heart disease, there is already a tremendous amount of overuse of statins in my view in this country,” says Topol. “So my concern is that the new guidelines will lead to potentially even more promiscuous use of these statins than already exists.”...

Why am I reminded of soma in Brave New World?

Always On Watch said...

Statins and pancreatitis:

...Pancreatitis is a rare adverse effect of statin therapy, but it has been documented in several case reports involving most of the statins. Continued reporting is necessary to increase awareness of this rare adverse effect of simvastatin so that it may be promptly managed or avoided in the future....

Z said...

AOW and Jon..I get it!
Statistics do show, however, that high cholesterol can be a culprit of stroke of heart attack.

Waylon said...

There's merit to the idea that by always promoting lower cholesterol levels and also suggesting strongly that ever lower blood pressure readings, coming from studies that are often funded by the drug companies, that will result in a much bigger market of potential future users of statin drugs.

Some of the latest research is interesting because it doesn't accept the commonly accepted medical dogma raised cholesterol levels strictly diet related but instead an internal reaction of the body as a protection mechanism against some internal inflammation occurring within the body itself.

Specifically, tiny lesions occur with the blood vessels of the body. And the body reacts to protect itself from these invasive foreign particles by creating plaque within the blood vessels that accumulates in some areas of the circulatory system. Statin drugs don't solve this problem but treat the symptom.

More information is needed but this is an intriguing idea that seems to be worth considering;