Thoughts From A Conservative Mom

Posts Tagged ‘ObamaCare’

Democrats in Congress are no longer asking themselves whether this is going to be a bad election year for them and their party. They are asking whether it is going to be a disaster. The GOP pushed deep into Democratic-held territory over the summer, to the point where the party is well within range of picking up the 39 seats it would need to take control of the House. Overall, as many as 80 House seats could be at risk, and fewer than a dozen of these are held by Republicans.Political handicappers now say it is conceivable that the Republicans could also win the 10 seats they need to take back the Senate. Not since 1930 has the House changed hands without the Senate following suit.

Is this a piece from National Review, The Weekly Standard, The Wall Street Journal or Fox News.com, all major conservative news outlets in the United States? No. It’s a direct quote from yesterday’s Washington Post, usually viewed by conservatives as a flagship of the liberal establishment inside the Beltway. The fact The Post is reporting that not only could Republicans sweep the House of Representatives this November, but may even take the Senate as well, is a reflection of just how far the mainstream, overwhelmingly left-of-centre US media has moved in the last month towards acknowledging the scale of the crisis facing the White House.

To its credit, The Washington Post has generally been ahead of the curve compared to its main competitors such as The New York Times in reporting President Obama’s travails, but its striking front page coverage of the “Democrats’ plight” and talk of a possible GOP Senate win (regarded as fantasy just a fortnight ago) was a bold step for a publication that is probably read in every office of the Obama administration.

Read more at the Telegraph

The Left is in Full Retreat: Time to Step Up the Pressure

Rasmussen: Understanding Tea Party Essential To Predicting America’s Future Political Scene

The Tea Party Rescues America

Numerous opinion polls show that after the November elections, the Republican Party will have regained enough seats in the House to take back the majority position and the Speakership. Results for the Senate are less amenable to forecast, but even so, gains up to and including a remote chance for a majority are possible there as well.

It is necessary to remind Republicans of one salient fact about this predicted shift in political strength as a result of the 2010 midterm elections, and it is a fact that can be expressed in just a few words:

You may have a majority, but you do not have a mandate to govern in any way that you choose.

Read more at American Thinker

Memo to Republicans: It’s Big Government, Stupid!

Midterms Not Just Toxic for Democrats

We’ve become a culture both welcoming and deadly to people with disabilities. On the one hand, the law requires that they have access to buildings and employment opportunities, and children with disabilities are mainstreamed in our schools.

As a country, we’re more sensitive about the words we use (think of the deserved uproar when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel called opponents of his health care plan “retarded.”) It’s wonderful to see changes in our laws and attitudes that inspire compassion and respect for people like Michael. While he doesn’t fit the imagined mold of a “perfect” child, he still has rights that are protected by law.

But only if he’s lucky enough to be born.

For preborn children with disabilities, our culture’s desire for perfect children too often proves deadly. Prenatal testing, now routine, spots markers of future disability or disease. Sometimes that testing saves lives. Most often, however, a prenatal diagnosis of disability such as Down syndrome spells death.

Read more at the Washington Times

Be Not Afraid: Every Life is Precious

We’re glad we chose life

War Against The Weak

Got Disabilities? Beware Obama health plan

Justice Ginsburg: I thought Roe was to rid undesirables

For class warfare types who just want to “stick it to the rich”, here’s what they end up doing: hurting everyone, including the poor. You can’t attack one group and insulate the rest – it’s a symbiotic relationship, just like an ecosystem.  Economics 101.

Wealthy Americans aren’t spending so freely anymore. And the rest of us are feeling the squeeze.
 
The question is whether the rich will cut back so much as to tip the economy back into recession — or if they will spend at least enough to sustain the recovery.
 
The answer may not be clear for months. But their cutbacks help explain why the rebound could be stalling. The economy grew at just a 2.4 percent rate in the April-June quarter, the government said Friday, much slower than the 3.7 percent rate for the first quarter.
 
Economists say overall consumer spending has slowed mainly because the richest 5 percent of Americans — those earning at least $207,000 — are buying less. They account for about 14 percent of total spending. These shoppers have retrenched as their investment values have sunk and home values have languished.

In addition, the most sweeping tax cuts in a generation are due to expire in January, and lawmakers are divided over whether the government can afford to make any of them permanent as the federal budget deficit continues to balloon. President Barack Obama wants to allow the top rates to increase next year for individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000. The wealthy may be keeping some money on the sidelines due to uncertainty over whether or not they will soon face higher taxes.

Think of the wealthy as the main engine of the economy: When they buy more, the economy hums. When they cut back, it sputters. The rest of us mainly go along for the ride.

Read more at CNS News

The Soak-the-Rich Catch-22

Paul Ryan: Class warfare makes good politics, but terrible economics

Many have charged that President Obama’s decision to begin withdrawing from Afghanistan 10 months from now is hampering our war effort. But now it’s official. In a stunning statement last week, Marine Corps Commandant James Conway admitted that the July 2011 date is “probably giving our enemy sustenance.”

A remarkably bold charge for an active military officer. It stops just short of suggesting aiding and abetting the enemy. Yet the observation is obvious: It is surely harder to prevail in a war that hinges on the allegiance of the locals when they hear the U.S. president talk of beginning a withdrawal that will ultimately leave them to the mercies of the Taliban.

How did Obama come to this decision? “Our Afghan policy was focused as much as anything on domestic politics,” an Obama adviser told the New York Times’ Peter Baker. “He would not risk losing the moderate to centrist Democrats in the middle of health insurance reform and he viewed that legislation as the make-or-break legislation for his administration.”

If this is true, then Obama’s military leadership can only be called scandalous. During the past week, 22 Americans were killed over a four-day period in Afghanistan. This is not a place about which decisions should be made in order to placate members of Congress, pass health care and thereby maintain a president’s political standing. This is a place about which a president should make decisions to best succeed in the military mission he himself has set out.

But Obama sees his wartime duties as a threat to his domestic agenda. These wars are a distraction, unwanted interference with his true vocation — transforming America.

Read more at the Washington Post

Almost Half of U.S. Fatalities in Afghan War Took Place Since Obama Took Office

Afghanistan: The Anatomy of Defeat

News Wednesday afternoon that an armed gunman had entered the cable TV headquarters of Discovery Communications in Silver Spring, Maryland and begun taking hostages alarmed people throughout the Washington, D.C. area and around the country. As law enforcement officials negotiated with the suspect, posts on social media outlets inevitably began arguing over the ideological motivations of the hostage-taker, James J. Lee. Conservatives were quick to point out the suspect’s radical environmentalist manifesto, while left-leaning sources disclaimed any connection. News a few hours later that the suspect had been shot and killed by police spawned a round of smug black humor, concluding that he had been successful in accomplishing one of his chief demands, a smaller world population.

The immediate verdict from the online world seems to be that Lee was simply insane, even as differently motivated voices tried to pin the source of his insanity on each other. If we take a step back, though, we can look at the demands he made — which law enforcement officials said “mirrored” those in his online manifesto — and see the wider context of Lee’s beliefs.

His focus on population control is clear from the beginning. Lee demands that the Discovery Channel and its affiliates must “Focus…on how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution.” On the topic of immigration, he recommends that we “find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that” and in order to safeguard the future of wildlife, he writes that doing so “means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies!”

While his rhetoric is crude and offensive, that doesn’t mean his ideas don’t have wider currency. From the time of Paul Ehrlich’s infamous 1968 manifesto The Population Bomb to the work of groups like Zero Population Growth (first re-branded as simply “ZPG” and currently known as “Population Connection”), the specter of unsupportable population growth has been one of the environmental movement’s greatest scare stories. It’s the kind of all-encompassing disaster that was supposed to be hard to ignore — even if you didn’t care about the environment, the pitch goes, you have to be worried about overpopulation! You don’t want millions of people to starve to death or see wars spawned by a fight over food and scarce natural resources, do you?

But how does a concern over famines and resources depletion translate into the vicious anti-human ideology of a James Lee? The answer is clear — combine one old theory about the inherent limitations of mankind with one new theory about the alienation of human beings from the rest of the natural world. Lee provides us with all of the leads we need when he demands that the Discovery Channel “develop shows that mention the Malthusian sciences.”

Read more at American Spectator

The Malthusian Delusion and the Origins of Population Control

James Lee Discovery Channel bomber – Al Gore disciple

My Ishmael by Daniel Quinn – James Jay Lee’s bible

John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet

Call for two-child limit on families from the Government’s leading green adviser

Fewer Children to Save the Planet?

Environmentalism Is the New Religion

Inhofe: Some Senators Share Holdren’s View That Born Babies Are Not ‘Human Beings’

People asks: How many kids are too many?

When Congress returns from its summer recess, members will face a pivotal decision about the expiring Bush tax cuts. President Barack Obama has called for their permanent extension for singles with incomes below $200,000 and married couples with incomes below $250,000, but has proposed that most of the tax cuts for households with higher incomes be allowed to expire.

To buttress this position, the president and his supporters have repeatedly asserted that the expiration of these cuts will have little impact, because they affect only a tiny fraction of the wealthiest Americans, people who “can afford it.”

The numbers are clear. According to IRS data, fully 48% of the net income of sole proprietorships, partnerships, and S corporations reported on tax returns went to households with incomes above $200,000 in 2007.  Would Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Biden deny that the more successful firms owned by individuals in the top income-tax bracket are disproportionately responsible for investment and job creation?

Read more at the Wall Street Journal

More Dems buck plan to let taxes increase for rich

The Facts About the 2003 Tax Cuts

The Soak-the-Rich Catch-22

The Business of America Is Business

From the Constitutionalist Today:

I got asked yesterday, “What happens to the Tea Party after Election Day?” It’s a great question as the loudest drum beat has been leading us to 2 November, 2010. The first reaction is to say it depends on who wins and it is becoming clear the Progressives will lose on many fronts. For the thousands in Colorado who have come to meetings, gone to rallies, town halls, written countless letters and made calls to elected officials on issues ranging from health care to out of control spending, it has been a long road. Many will look at 2 November as the culmination of all their efforts, but it’s a dangerous conclusion to reach as the real work begins the morning after no matter who we send to Washington or Denver.

If the GOP takes over the US House, possibly the Senate, and makes major gains in Denver you’ll see those who really haven’t been active beyond the lure of a few rallies go back to sleep. Even some hard core Tea Party members will want to take a breather. After two years of fighting it’s not a bad thing, but that rest will be short lived.

Tea Party members understand an unchallenged GOP will not seriously carry the fight of limited government. It won’t be the Lindsey Grahams displaying the political courage to defend what will be described as draconian spending cuts. That will be left to the true conservatives. Bad things are coming from Washington and they can not be stopped unless those we elect are truly prepared to make the political sacrifices needed to reverse the damage of the last 18 months. Politicians taking the hard stands will be under enormous pressure from a defeated Progressive Party and the propaganda driven press who paint their efforts as destructive and extreme. Where does the political courage to fight come from? It comes from those that send politicians to Washington and Denver. The first time a conservative stands up with a meaningful reduction they better see a field of Gadsden flags behind them or it will be our failure, not theirs, if they never try it again.

It will take the Tea Party having the courage to defend those who we demand make the hard choices because with real cuts comes real pain. We must be willing to not just educate the public on why this pain is required, but we must be willing to endure the pain ourselves. It’s one thing to just tell government to cut programs; it’s another to actually do without what they provide.

After Election Day, the People must retake the reins of government. That requires active involvement at all levels. It involves making the effort to actively support and hold accountable those we elect in November. No one can do this alone and, thankfully, we are not alone. The working Tea Party groups, The 9-12 Project, CCM, AFP, Liberty on the Rocks and the many other liberty groups are the business end of the Tea Party movement. Join them. Work to advance the victories of Election Day or they will be lost forever. Americans stood up to an out of control government and are on the verge of victory. What we do with it will set the course of the nation for decades. Our involvement has given the Republic a second chance, we may not get another.

A Tea Party Manifesto: Take Over The GOP

GOP needs to move beyond ‘Default Mode’

Last Thursday, a who’s who of the progressive movement met for a conference call organized by Families USA and hosted by the advocacy group for government-run health care, The Herndon Alliance. The Alliance’s partners include AARP, AFL-CIO, SEIU, MoveOn and La Raza, among many others. Democratic pollsters John Anzalone, Celinda Lake and Stan Greenberg were the call’s main event, and they were there to deliver some bad news.  Politico reports:

“Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. … The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.”

Health care is not the only issue where the left is retreating in the face of strong disapproval from the American people. Versionista, a Portland, Oregon-based company that tracks changes to the White House website, reported last week that the Obama administration had made “whole-cloth” changes to its “Energy & Environment” issues page. Out are any references to a cap on carbon emissions and a campaign pledge to spend $150 billion on clean energy technologies. In its place the new White House site includes a three-minute Earth Day-themed video from President Barack Obama. And across the country, leftist Senate candidates in Missouri, Kentucky and Indiana have all come out against President Obama’s impending trillion dollar tax hike, due in January.

As satisfying as it is to see Obamacare’s supporters come to terms with the failure of their grand plan, it is not enough for conservatives to just say “no.” Conservatives must have real plans for reform if the American people choose to empower them. The Heritage Foundation’s Solutions for America chapter on Getting Health Care Reform Right recommends:

Repeal Obamacare: There is a precedent for repealing highly unpopular and misguided laws: the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988. Recently, over 70% of Missouri residents rejected a key provision of Obamacare­—the requirement that individuals purchase a health insurance plan designed and approved by government bureaucrats. The House of Representatives even voted recently to repeal one provision of Obamacare that will impose draconian paperwork requirements on millions of small businesses. The easiest way to address all these grievances: repeal Obamacare.

Promote Personal Control Through Tax Equity: Today, workers who purchase coverage through their employer receive an unlimited tax break on the value of their health care benefits. However, those who purchase coverage on their own receive no comparable tax break. Ideally, the current tax exclusion should be replaced (or at the very least capped) with a system of universal tax credits for taxpayers. Medicaid and SCHIP spending should also be redirected to help low-income individuals and families purchase private health insurance

Read more at the Heritage Foundation

Warning for Republicans: Don’t underestimate Barack Obama

Half-Measures Won’t Work Against Tyranny

It’s widely acknowledged that in 2010, the Democrats are on the ropes. But just about the same could be said for the Republicans.

A few weeks ago, John Cornyn and John Boehner revealed this election’s GOP platform. In a year of massive unrest, public disgust with government, and large-scale rejection of interventionist policies, the GOP will emphasize…deficits. An issue to warm an economist’s heart — and the occasional accountant’s, too. Top that one, Obama.

In the wake of Scott Brown’s stunning upset in Massachusetts last February, with the entire New England region open to exploitation, the GOP is doing nothing. There are no plans to challenge incumbents in New England. No money, no candidates, no program. Historical moment? Wuzzat mean?

No effort is being made to emphasize the achievements of the nation’s Republican governors. Jan Brewer, Chris Christie, and Mitch Daniels, among others, are steering their states through the worst economy since the Carter ’70s, pressing critical policy changes, and most important, defying Washington while they’re at it. Yet the RNC knows them not.

We will merely allude to Michael Steele’s perennial circus act to look beyond to 2012, where we have one announced candidate, the immortal Mr. Newt Gingrich, whose most recent sojourn is a national tour with the most Rev. Al Sharpton.

It can’t be denied that the GOP is sweeping toward a historic victory, one that may even overshadow the legendary events of 1994, the Salamis of the modern Republican Party (that is, if the current party leadership doesn’t throw the opportunity away at the last minute, a possibility never to be overlooked). But this owes very little to the GOP itself. It is instead due to the efforts of the individual candidates and outside parties, above all the Tea Parties, one of the most remarkable popular upsurges in American history. While the TPs are dead serious and out for blood, the Republican Party is tootling along in low gear, its slogan the soul-stirring “Business as usual!”

Read more at American Thinker

Republicans Need to Make 2010 Elections a Referendum on Liberalism, Not Just Obama

How A GOP November Victory Could Bring Its Death

A Tea Party Manifesto: Take Over The GOP

You can tell it’s a volatile political year when a balding, middle-aged pollster gets a standing ovation from hundreds of state legislators after delivering the news that only 23% of the people in this country believe today’s federal government has the consent of the governed.

“Americans don’t want to be governed from the left or the right,” Scott Rasmussen tells the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conference of 1,500 conservative and moderate legislators. “They want, like the Founding Fathers, to largely govern themselves with Washington in a supporting—but not dominant—role. The tea party movement is today’s updated expression of that sentiment.”

Mr. Rasmussen tells the crowd gathered around him after his speech that the political and media elites have misread the tea party. He believes this strongly enough that he’s teamed up with Doug Schoen—a pollster for both President Bill Clinton and New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg—to publish a new book that will seek to explain the movement’s significance. “Mad as Hell” will be out early next month.

Thanks to the shifting tectonic plates of American society, polls have come to dominate our politics as never before, and Mr. Rasmussen is today’s leading insurgent pollster.

Early this year, Mr. Rasmussen delivered the first early-warning sign that Scott Brown would change the direction of American politics. A Rasmussen poll showing Mr. Brown surging and only nine points down with two weeks left to go before January’s special Senate election in Massachusetts attracted the instant attention of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. “How had this happened? What the bleep was going on?” is how the New York Times characterized his reaction. A Boston Globe poll taken about the same time showed Democrat Martha Coakley with a safe 15-point lead.

Mr. Rasmussen has a partial answer for Mr. Emanuel’s question, and it lies in a significant division among the American public that he has tracked for the past few years—a division between what he calls the Mainstream Public and the Political Class.

To figure out where people are, he asks three questions: Whose judgment do you trust more: that of the American people or America’s political leaders? Has the federal government become its own special interest group? Do government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors? Those who identify with the government on two or more questions are defined as the political class.

His recent polls show huge gaps between the two groups. While 67% of the political class believes the U.S. is moving in the right direction, a full 84% of mainstream voters believe the nation is moving in the wrong one. The political class overwhelmingly supported the bailouts of the financial and auto industries, the health-care bill, and the Justice Department’s decision to sue Arizona over its new immigration law. Those in the mainstream public just as intensely opposed those moves.

The division of Americans into these groups has real significance for the way polls are conducted and how their results are interpreted, according to Mr. Rasmussen.

Read more at the Wall Street Journal

Every day from Jan 1st until today, hard-working Americans have been slaving to pay taxes to support our local, state and federal governments. Everything from today until Dec 31st is ours. That’s 231 days for government, 134 for us. There is something very, VERY wrong with this picture!

Whether by design or incompetence, the Cloward-Piven Strategy lives. Named after two leftist professors at Columbia University, the scheme calls for overwhelming government obligations to the point of collapse, therefore providing an excuse for a radical government takeover of the whole economy. Three news stories yesterday show the Cloward-Piven day of reckoning is creeping perilously closer.

First came word that new jobless claims last week jumped above half a million, a number so large that one economist said “it looks like the economy ran into a wall.” Second came a Congressional Budget Office estimate that this year’s federal deficit will be well above $1.3 trillion for a second straight year and remain above $1 trillion next year as well – causing as much debt in three years as government built up in the previous 219.

Third came the announcement by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) that yesterday was the 2010 “Cost of Government Day,” which is “the day on which the average American has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of the spending and regulatory burdens imposed by government at the federal, state and local levels.” Just two years ago, Cost of Government Day fell an astonishing 34 days earlier. This year, the average American worked 231 days just to support government, which consumes 63.41 percent of national income.

Read more at the Washington Times

When Will the U.S. Go the Way of Rome?

Happy “Cost of Government Day!”

Obama’s agenda: Overwhelm the system

“If we move in mass, be it ever so circuitously, we shall attain our object; but if we break into squads, everyone pursuing the path he thinks most direct, we become an easy conquest to those who can now barely hold us in check.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

For too long, constitutionalists have been fractured into Independents, Libertarians, and other third parties like the Constitution Party.   By defecting from the Republican party, we left it to the “progressive” RINOs who prefer the “Third Way“, and robbed ourselves of the opportunity to steer the party towards true conservative principles.  No more. 

It’s time for constitutionalists to register Republican and take over the party from within.  Not just by voting in primaries, but by assuming leadership roles and working through the ranks until only true constitutionalists are left.  If we can’t take over a political party, what makes us think we can take back the country?

While the tea party is not a formal political party, local networks across the nation have moved beyond protests and turned to more practical matters of political accountability. Already, particularly in Republican primaries, fed-up Americans are turning out at the polls to vote out the big spenders. They are supporting candidates who have signed the Contract From America, a statement of policy principles generated online by hundreds of thousands of grass-roots activists.

Published in April, the Contract amounts to a tea party “seal of approval.” It demands fiscal policies that limit government, restrain spending, promote market reforms in health care—and oppose ObamaCare, tax hikes and cap-and-trade restrictions that will kill job creation and stunt economic growth. Candidates who have signed the Contract—including Marco Rubio in Florida, Mike Lee in Utah and Tim Scott in South Carolina—have defeated Republican big spenders in primary elections all across the nation.

These young legislative entrepreneurs will shift the balance in the next Congress, bringing with them a more serious, adult commitment to responsible, restrained government.

But let us be clear about one thing: The tea party movement is not seeking a junior partnership with the Republican Party, but a hostile takeover of it.

The American values of individual freedom, fiscal responsibility and limited government bind the ranks of our movement. That makes the tea party better than a political party. It is a growing community that can sustain itself after November, ensuring a better means of holding a new generation of elected officials accountable.

Read more at the Wall Street Journal

Midterms Not Just Toxic for Democrats

Can The Tea Party Deliver On Election Day?

Next time Democrats call you extreme, show them this video:

View on YouTube

Death panels?  What death panels? 

From the Doug Ross Journal:

Just days after the recess appointment of Donald Berwick, the controversial new head of Medicare and Medicaid, the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance posted the following grim news: for the first time in history, an FDA-approved anti-cancer therapy may not be covered by Medicare.

Provenge, a vaccine to treat the recurrence of prostate cancer, has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)… Medicare usually covers the cost of FDA-approved anti-cancer therapies. However, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is still reviewing whether it will cover Provenge, and at what rate.

The CMS statute states that Medicare must cover therapies that are reasonable and necessary, while the FDA is instructed to approve drugs that are safe and effective. Because of the conflicting Federal coverage and approval requirements, there are some non-FDA approved drugs (called off-label drugs) that are paid for by CMS. However, with respect to Provenge, it appears that CMS is arguing that while the treatment is safe and effective, it may not be reasonable and necessary. For the first time, an FDA approved anti-cancer therapy may not be covered by Medicare.

A life-saving cancer treatment “may not be reasonable and necessary”? Gee, that kind of decision-making by an unelected federal bureaucracy certainly sounds like a death panel to me.

Say, I thought the President said that pre-existing conditions would always be covered. Isn’t cancer a pre-existing condition?

Oh. What’s this?

Susan G. Komen for the Cure and Ovarian Cancer National Alliance Appeal to FDA and Key Lawmakers on Avastin Issue

Patient Access and the Impact on Development of New Treatments at the Heart of Komen for the Cure’s Concerns

Susan G. Komen for the Cure® and the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance (OCNA) today urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to continue to allow the use of the drug bevacizumab, commonly known as Avastin, for metastatic breast cancer patients, noting that it is effective for some patients and warning of a chilling effect on new drug development if approval is withdrawn…

…In a joint letter sent to the FDA and key Congressional lawmakers Thursday, Komen for the Cure and the OCNA wrote, “We are particularly concerned about patients who are presently receiving bevacizumab and the message that this decision sends about drug development for women with advanced breast cancer.”

…According to Komen, the decision to use Avastin should be made between a woman and her doctor after a thoughtful conversation that carefully considers the drug’s benefits and risks. Komen does not want to see access limited by Medicare and Medicaid.

Gee, and I thought no one would be denied coverage by ObamaCare.

Didn’t the President himself say, “I want seniors to know, despite what some have said, these reforms will not cut your guaranteed benefits.”

That’s what President Obama told us, endlessly and repeatedly, for months on end.

Do you mean to say he was lying?

Folks, this is precisely why the cancer survival rate for the U.K. is so much lower than that of the U.S. — and, in some cases, lower than Eastern Europe’s. And why Donald Berwick’s nickname is Dr. Death.

America’s seniors are about to find out that having coverage is not the same thing as receiving care. And our seniors are about to pay the piper.

This is eerily similar to an incident last year, where the state-run Oregon Health Plan offered to pay for a woman’s physician-assisted suicide, but not life-saving cancer drugs.

I’m getting flashbacks of Monty Python: “I’m not dead yet!”

View on YouTube

Rationing health care is now official Obama policy

Administration comes clean, explains death panels