My original post was going to be a slam against our Mobster in Chief, the puppet master of SEIU thugs and a slew of special interests groups. I liken our current nation to a mob state, living in fear, not of those who are the face of government, but of the hit men behind the scenes sent to kneecap dissidents. The SS, the gestapo... you get it...
Then, I thought about discussing eugenics, its history and what I believe is coming. I have a son who is disabled with an incurable illness which will steer his life. This topic along with the health care discussion make me paranoid and anxious. It's not that I believe that anyone will emerge and start preaching a case for a master race- even Hitler wasn't that bold. He started talking about regaining the greatness of the country, patriotism and saving the Germans spirit and will. Sound familiar? It spiraled into a sea of debt which inevitably meant cuts in supplies which led to the rationing of care to the euthanization [see "murder" in Webster's Dictionary] of the mentally infirm, handicapped, criminally deviant and THEN it moved on to sponging out races which the government had deemed as having traits undesirable. Yes, it all started as a budgetary issue.
Now, if Cash For Clunkers has taught us anything, it's that the federal government is completely incapable of formulating a responsible, accurate or even reasonable estimate as to the costs of running even the simplest of programs. Even a slight miscalculation, given the magnitude of the undertaking of reforming healthcare, would lead instantly to rationed resources. Now those Obama is surrounding himself with, the so-called academics [i.e. lacking in practical knowledge], not only agree with but also condone forced sterilizations [Holdren], preferential treatment of those in age classes of the most utility in society [Emmanuel], and forcing abortions on unwed or unfit parents [Holdren].
Now, proponents for the version of health care reform currently being pondered in the House argue that there is nothing about abortion in this. This is both true and misleading. There is no language in the current Bill regarding abortion. Absolutely none. That in itself is telling. Any procedures not specifically excluded from coverage are automatically covered, so by not mentioning abortions, they are shielding the discussion. When your Congressman tells you that there is nothing in the Bill about abortion, they are not lying, but they are deceiving.
In addition, the topic of so-called "death panels" so highly contested [and rightly so] create another fog of vagary. The section of the Bill dealing with end of life care seems to have drawn the most criticism for its provision to "make available" end of life counseling for all persons once they reach 65 and also once they are diagnosed with a major illness. My father is 54 years of age. He has already had quintuple bypass surgery. The last thing I want is some government lackey discussing with my father how he can slowly malnourish himself to death instead of suffering through more years of procedures and medications. Yes, I know, it's not mandatory [yet], but when doctors all become government employees and are paid based only on how happy the government is with their work [read the bill, it's in there] what's the likelihood that they are going to skip over it when it makes their patients uncomfortable? Had this simply been a matter of covering it, that's all that would need to be said. Instead, the nearly one dozen pages that deal with this spell out in painful clarity the method, tone and topics that are to be covered in the conversation.
When my [step]mother was diagnosed with cancer, she and my father were both distraught. The argument that this would be the appropriate time to start setting affairs in order shows how simply out of touch the administration is with reality. She could barely function for her fear, let alone make good, rational choices. Instead, her doctors focus was on treating her- he left the end of life details to my parents to deal with in privacy. Somehow, everything worked out just fine without Big Brother.
Are Liberals so damned and determined to see universal health care passed that they will sign onto anything just to be the party to get it done regardless of how recklessly irresponsible it is done? The answer, I fear, is yes.
Stop for a second and use some insight. Look beyond the next step and consider the off chance that everything may not go seamlessly. Doesn't the health of 300+ million people and 1/6th of our economy warrant more than a dopey, cursory look?