Obamacare is going to kill you. Or one of your kids. Or one of your parents. Someone in your family is going to die from Obamacare. You can bet on it. You can bet your life on it.
There are many things in medicine that are in a state of flux because of Obamacare. Obamacare is the name given to the most inappropriately termed “Affordable Care Act.” There is nothing about Obamacare that makes care affordable. Obamacare has made care much more unaffordable. What it has done is make healthcare appear to be affordable because of subsidized premiums. The problem is that liberals – and especially democrat voters- do not comprehend that coverage is not the same thing as care. People are forgoing medical care because they cannot afford the large deductibles needed to keep premiums at even marginally affordable rates. Deductibles are especially high for seniors:
Patricia Wanderlich got insurance through the Affordable Care Act this year, and with good reason: She suffered a brain hemorrhage in 2011, spending weeks in a hospital intensive care unit, and has a second, smaller aneurysm that needs monitoring.
But her new plan has a $6,000 annual deductible, meaning that Ms. Wanderlich, who works part time at a landscaping company outside Chicago, has to pay for most of her medical services up to that amount. She is skipping this year’s brain scan and hoping for the best.
Hospital emergency room utilization is up, not down as they promised. That means a strong possibility of delay should you ever be the one wheeled in.
Obamacare is not reducing costs as promised either. The notion that millions could be added to the rolls of health care and pre-existing condition restrictions done away with and see costs lowered was absurd.
Those who do seek care are discovering that it isn’t a simple matter to even obtain it. Rural hospitals are dying because of Obamacare:
Since the beginning of 2010, 43 rural hospitals — with a total of more than 1,500 beds — have closed, according to data from the North Carolina Rural Health Research Program. The pace of closures has quickened: from 3 in 2010 to 13 in 2013, and 12 already this year. Georgia alone has lost five rural hospitals since 2012, and at least six more are teetering on the brink of collapse. Each of the state’s closed hospitals served about 10,000 people — a lot for remaining area hospitals to absorb.
As they close, patients will see lengthened transport times for critical care:
Peanut and cotton farmer Buren “Bill” Jones, 52, died of a heart attack a month after Stewart-Webster closed. His family had to wait about 15 minutes for an ambulance to take him to a hospital 22 miles away, where doctors couldn’t revive him. The closed hospital was 9 miles from his house, a distance his wife or daughter — who performed CPR on him at home — might have driven.
The requirement for electronic records comes at a significant and sometimes, fatal cost:
But the $1 million or more it was going to cost to change over to electronic records was one of the last straws for Randy Stigleman, former owner of Stewart-Webster. Efforts to sell the hospital never panned out.
The anger residents feel toward Stigleman is palpable here in Richland. He appeared to shut the hospital down suddenly — giving them only a week’s notice. But Stigleman says he just couldn’t put any more money into the hospital.
And there’s one more unpleasant surprise you have coming. Ever see those websites that post all of your personal data and then demand you pay to have it removed? You’re going to see more of that- only this time with your personal medical records. Credit card companies and businesses are frequently hacked now as it is. Now that your private records have to go online they’ll be easy prey.
Insurers have already cut reimbursement rates for providers. This is leading to many clinicians questioning whether they would continue to see Obamacare patients. It’s hard to run a practice at a loss.
Things are even worse for Medicare and Medicaid. Doctors are looking at a big cut in Medicaid reimbursement:
Andy Pasternak, a family doctor in Reno, saw more than 100 new Medicaid patients last year after the state expanded the insurance program for the poor under the Affordable Care Act.
But he won’t be taking any new ones this year. That’s because the law’s two-year pay raise for primary care doctors like him who see Medicaid patients expired Wednesday, resulting in fee reductions of 43% on average across the country, according to the non-partisan Urban Institute.
“I don’t want to do this,” Pasternak said about his refusal to see additional Medicaid patients. But now that the temporary pay raise is gone, he and other Nevada doctors will see their fees drop from $75 on average to less than $50 for routine office visits.
“We will lose money when they come to the office,” he said.
The temporary raise in rates was another one of those mirages democrats threw into the air to mesmerize the public. Medicaid has been greatly expanded and democrats trumpet that (along with adding in dental coverage) as a measure of Obamacare success.
Americans are looking at higher deductibles and reduced access to care. Obama’s response to the increases in insurance rates is to obtain a lower degree of coverage to remain near the same premium. In many cases that will mean dropping from a silver to a bronze plan, and individual deductibles could run as high as $6000 and $12,000 for a family.
The solution that you’re likely to see addressing the expected shortage of doctors is the increased dependence on physician’s assistants and nurse practitioners, which leads me to why I wrote this post in the first place.
Never in one’s life does a day go instantly darker as it does when your child calls you and says
“Dad, I have cancer.”
My son (who was in his late 20s’s) made that call to me a few years ago. He usually calls his Mom to talk and I get the report on things. When he calls me, I know something’s up. I was sitting at my desk in my office when he called. Upon hearing his words I experienced an absolute emotional shock and to my surprise, tunnel vision. My first words to him were “I’ll get you through this.” He was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma and actually made the self-diagnosis, finding a positive supraclavicular lymph node.
Months before he’d mentioned to me that he had an enlarged and hardened axillary lymph node. That instantly sets off alarms in my head and I begged him to see a physician ASAP. His insurance coverage had him seeing a PA (physician’s assistant) who suggested he might have cat scratch fever based on a chest x-ray and CBC. You want to believe this represents the truth but it bothered me and never stopped bothering me and the PA insisted it was nothing. Some months later he called when he found the second node.
We saw an oncologist and then my wife and I took him up to Dana Farber in Boston to see Arnold Freedman, the top lymphoma doc in the world. I remember Dr. Freedman rubbing his hands together and saying to my son “You had a 7 cm mass under your arm and they thought it was nothing.”
If you’re a doctor you know exactly what he was saying.
The chemo regimen that Dr. Freedman recommended was the same as the one the local oncologist recommended and we felt comfortable with it. My son underwent seven chemo sessions lasting as long as nine hours. I sat together with him for six of those sessions, canceling out my days so I could. It may sound odd, but really I enjoyed the time we shared.
He’s been cancer free for several years now and for that I am eternally grateful. We would have taken him anywhere on Earth to do whatever it took. Fortunately the answer was nearby. I could not be more proud of how he shouldered the treatment.
Since then, Obamacare has excluded many of the premier cancer treatment centers from it’s coverages. That means Obama’s kids, Pelosi’s kids and grandkids and Gruber’s kids will get the very best of treatments should they require it, but yours likely won’t.
If you’re tempted to think doctors are paid too much, imagine for a moment what you would pay to save the life of your child. Imagine what you’d think if your child’s life hangs on a cheaper doctor substitute. Health care costs what it costs because people want to live. They want their kids to live. Health care costs what it costs because people need and use health care. The only way around it is high deductibles, rationing and lower cost treatments. As we’ve seen recently, liberals mean all those things for you and not for them.
My son had the benefit of having the right Dad and for Dad having one of the best internist-diagnosticians around as a close friend. PA’s and NP’s are stopgap measures, but they aren’t doctors. Someone you know is going to die because of that. You can bet your life on it.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 40 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 45 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter who is in the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Meanwhile, in reality, Obamacare is saving lives – first and foremost by eliminating the denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions:
“When I applied to Blue Cross, I was promptly denied due to “pre-existing conditions.”
By the way, having your chest cut open is not the only way to be determined un-insurable.
Pregnant? That’s a pre-existing condition.
Ever seen a therapist and been prescribed antidepressants? You have one, too.
Susceptible to chronic urinary tract infections or kidney stones? You guessed it.
Asthma? Ditto.
In fact, it wasn’t until our government passed the health care bill I so often hear referred to — with a derogatory slur — as “ObamaCare” that I earned the right to be covered under the new Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan.
Now I’m a highly functioning sick girl, and one who’s unbelievably grateful to her government for the work Congress and the President did last year, giving me the ability to stay healthy.”
http://www.lemondrop.com/2010/11/02/obamacare-saved-my-life-maxim-cover-girl-speaks-out/
And the only way to eliminate the pre-existing conditions exclusion is to require purchase of insurance (or to impose a tax …. the dollars work out much the same way).
If you can figure out a way to eliminate the pre-existing conditions exclusion WITHOUT requiring purchase of insurance (or imposing a tax) by all means propose it. Conservative in Congress haven’t.
And finally, that last part of my statement which so enraged Pete //* it’s not relevant to the claim that Obamacare will kill someone in your family OMG OMG OMG!!!!*// is still true.
So Gruber doesn’t think information technology cuts costs; he doesn’t think preventative care cuts costs; he doesn’t think the 80/20 rule cuts costs; etc; etc; etc.
He’s wrong. That’s o.k. Bureaucrats can be wrong sometime – don’t you agree?
And either way, it’s not gonna kill anyone in your family. If costs stay the same or rise only more slowly than they were rising pre-Obamacare, it’s not going to croak anyone you love….except possibly your rabid hatred of anything with Obama in the name LOL
@rewinn:
A few things-
Costs are rising- more than promised.
Deductibles are going to cause delays and deferral of care and that will result in their dying early
Did I mention that my son was denied the PET scan in a follow-up visit under Obamacare?
We have been lied to about Obamacare every step along the way. Every single one.
@rewinn:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/041013-651429-pcip-bankruptcy-bad-omen-for-rest-of-obamacare.htm#ixzz3OKSS1gIs
And you don’t think costs are going to rise- a lot? You cannot- I repeat- cannot eliminate pre-existing conditions, add millions to Medicaid, and pretend to cover everyone AND reduce overall costs. It is impossible, unless you ration care. I believe Gruber agrees with that as well.
@rewinn:
Have you clicked on your link? It takes us all to the “Love and Sex” section of HuffPo
Did you tell people this was a super model complaining?
Did you tell people she screwed up?
BTW, she’d be paying that $19,000 over two-three years with in deductibles today. She had her chest cut open and it cost only $19,000? Really?
Honestly, it sounds to me that she let coverage go and then sought it once she discovered she had a problem. She should not have waited until she contracted an illness. Her problem was likely one of personal responsibility and not insurance. This is not a good example for you as an argument.
@rewinn:
http://www.tcpalm.com/opinion/jennifer-sky-caveman-style-or-american-style-a
If, as she claimed, she lost her insurance due to a filing error, she has a cause of legal action. I will also remind you that the end of pre-existing conditions preceded Obamacare.
@rewinn:
An article from your link:
“Woman Brilliantly Busts Myth That Some Men Are ‘Too Big’ For Condoms.”
@rewinn:
Yep, you’re right. Making people pay out of pocket for elective procedures is not denying care.
In what fathomable way is this article talking about elective procedures?
Lets just wait and see how bad it gets, it just might – might – get to the point where you or someone you actually care about is deemed unworthy of some sort of procedure that is not elective.
They might be deemed “too sick” or “too old” or, if things go far too far down the road “not the right political party” and told to “just take a pill” to make them comfortable until they “pass peacefully into rest.”
It’s really easy to poo poo the concerns that conservatives have when liberals want to screw around with other people’s medical treatment.
Please come back and share your thoughts when they screw with yours.
@the other bob:
Given the history of the IRS it’s not hard to imagine the HHS determining that conservatives get the red pill and democrats get the blue pill when only the blue pill works.
//*if …. she lost her insurance due to a filing error, she has a cause of legal action*//
Nope.
LOL.
Don’t play lawyer. You’re not good at it.
//*…the end of pre-existing conditions preceded Obamacare.*//
LOLWUT?
You’re saying that before Obamacare, you could not be denied health insurance do to pre-existing conditions?
That is false. You know it’s false. So why did you write that?
I get it. You’re making stuff up to waste my time replying.
Isn’t your time more valuable than this?
Or does the pleasure you get by ranting greater than the pleasure you get actually helping people?
I got better things to do.
Good bye!
@rewinn:
No. A high risk pool was established to take these cases on prior to Obamacare. That effectively ended the policy.
@rewinn:
Yes I can. Both my boys are attorneys.
@rewinn:
Please, seek help for your cognitive dissonance.
No, we get it. When ever you liberals get your clock’s cleaned by rationale, logic and facts, you slink off like the slugs you are leaving behind only your trail of slime.
The high risk pool did not solve the problem of pre existing conditions. And it is rather silly to suggest that it did when you have before you an actual case.
If your boys are lawyers, have them explain why the lady in question had no chance of winning a lawsuit.
And, of course, to a dead person, even winning a lawsuit rather misses the point. Even a conservative should be able to understand that being alive is more important than being rich.
As to crawling in slime, Iam sure you know everything about crawling in done, since your entire argument appears to be shoutig at liberals instead of solving problems.
You amuse me and yet bore me. Why not drop the invective and address real issues?
Are you trying to drive of rational discussion so you can congratulate yourself on winning an argument?
Lol. OK you win. I really do have better things to do than give you actual cases that disprove OP.
Please enjoy your victory. It’s like winning a video game using cheat codes
@Skookum:
Thanks, Skookum. Glad to provide the proverbial best medicine of laughter.
Have a great day.
@rewinn:
Your self-assumption of superior intellect is another typical leftist tactic that fails when you write such deliberately stupid strawman arguments. You asked for a copy of Gruber’s statements, denying he said anything about denial of care. Now, in typical leftist dishonesty, you want to deflect from the topic being discussed with blithering nonsense. You demonstrate clearly the mindset of the collectivist in falsely assigning to me any preference for “unicorns and crystals” for treating medical problems as a counter to my opposition to the IPAB and Gruber’s clearly stated philosophy of denial of care. Your actual understanding of how such processes work in the real world of medicine is woefully inadequate, hence your posting of such sophomoric drivel. The irony is it is always leftists who come into the hospital demanding unproven granola-head “treatments” and resisting scientifically proven medical interventions. So it is with people who, regarding the repeatedly disproven autism/MMR vaccine theory, trust the word of a former playboy bunny and current e-cig spokesperson versus multiple studies looking at thimerosal-content in vaccines – always leftists.
You can continue to ignore the very real impact of government bureaucrats – with no requirement for them to be physicians – determining which treatments are valid and worthy (and therefore recompensable) versus the physician at the bedside actually caring for the patient. See, if you had any actual experience practicing medicine, particularly in a field such as neonatology, you would know that much of what is accepted as common practice in neonatology is not “proven” by medical studies because such studies cannot be performed under the precepts of medical ethics. You would know that relatively new therapies, such as therapeutic hypothermia (the cooling of infants for 72 hours who suffered from hypoxic-ischemic injury at delivery) which are now accepted as literally life/brain saving, were initially considered “ineffectual” or “controversial” because we did not have enough data to “prove” they worked. This medical treatment is now considered “standard of care”, and ambulance chasers are on the lookout to sue doctors who don’t use this treatment. Under the idiotic bureaucratic rules of the IPAB, any such future new medical treatments or interventions would be denied until “proven”. If you need another example, you can look up the history of stomach ulcers and the battle the primary care physician who determined the helicobacter pylori (bacterial species) cause of >90% of all stomach ulcers went through against all the “experts” who insisted bacteria couldn’t possibly survive stomach acid to cause ulcers.
The main on point difference – within this debate – between us is that you are so entrenched in support of collectivism that you prefer the decision-making of the power-centered bureaucracy with little-to-no subject matter expertise to that of the medical provider actually laying hands on the patient. Furthermore, you ignore (purposefully, I presume) the clearly stated motivation to deceive the public which Gruber declared when he commented on “get people covered first, THEN worry about cost control” as the tactic to enforce government health care. Though socialists always deny during their attempted takeover that care will be denied, there is no possible way that care cannot be denied when resources are finite and must be paid for. The NHS in England did not start out denying organ transplants or dialysis beyond 55 years of age, but they have such measures now. Once the government takes over health care, it will not be the medical condition of the patient that determines the treatment plan, but the POLITICAL condition. It makes no sense for taxpayers to pay for the surgical mutilation of someone afflicted with gender identity mental illness, yet that will be covered. That is only one example.
Your self-image as someone who “cares about the poor and uninsured” makes you vulnerable to the highly manipulative and evil propaganda of politicians who are enacting this power grab, all the while pretending to care about the poor and downtrodden. I assume it also makes you perceive me as a cold-hearted, greedy, selfish bastard due to my vituperative animosity to socialist “health care”. If so, I would challenge you to spend some time shadowing a physician for a day or two and get some actual experience in what it means to care for patients.
@rewinn:
LOL…OK…let’s play “tit for tat” on the effect of obamacare.
http://sharylattkisson.com/obamacare-fail-stories/
.
Now – not that I expect you to have read all the way through to this point, being a leftist as you are – but if you went to the weblink I included you will know that these are less than 1/5th of the page of obamacare complaints that have been posted there. So you can keep throwing out your silly sob stories of people who just couldn’t get health care before the horror of obamacare, and I can keep posting the vastly larger numbers of stories of people who were fine with their pre-obamacare coverage who are now being severely negatively impacted all for the sake of a despicable leftist power grab.
Conservatives have put forth numerous plans to actually improve health care coverage issues – like allowing people to purchase coverage for what they want, not what some government bureaucracy arbitrarily decides needs to be a covered benefit; portability of insurance plans across state lines; extension of employer provided tax exemption for health insurance coverage – all of which would do vastly better than the idiocy of socialism.
@rewinn:
Your rabid adoration of anything Obama-related blinds you to reality. Honestly, as much as I despise Gruber and those like him for their deceitfulness, he is far more accurate in his assessment of the manner in which socialist systems cut medical costs than the wishful thinking silliness you demonstrate.
Preventive care can result, in theory, in decreased medical expenses IF everyone is forced to undergo annual physicals; endure enforced diet and exercise regimens based on their BMI, lab results, and medical history; if all tobacco products and drugs of abuse are made illegal; if alcohol use is strictly limited; if dangerous physical activities are banned – then you can get decreased medical expenses from preventive care. Personally, I am not interested in living under such leftist/fascist regulation of my life.
Provide any study which demonstrates the occurance – not predicts in the future – a cost savings from conversion to all electronic medical records.
The only method of actually decreasing medical costs on a national scale is through government rationing of care, as all socialist health systems do. This leads to lower 5 year cancer survival rates than what we have in the US. This leads to resource shortages such as the entire province of Quebec having fewer MRI machines than the city of Buffalo, NY – which incidentally greatly impacts wait times and negatively effects the whole “preventive care” paradigm of which you are so enamored. This leads to the regular example of British Columbia and Alberta needing to send infants needing NICU care to NICUs in Washington state due to not having enough NICU beds in their socialist Canadian medical system.
And I take care of PATIENTS, not just my family members. Your selfishness in commenting about “your family members won’t be killed” – or whatever you wrote reveals far more about leftist motivation than what I am saying in opposition to a horrible law and the negative effects it is and will continue to have for ALL Americans – not just my family members.
@ #48
I really don’t know precisely what I’m dodging as your rant seems to be an all-out sporadic hodgepodge of nitpicking. regurgitation of debunked arguments, and a grasp of amplifying any minute hiccup you can muster up. So if somewhere in your compilation of radical soundbites and unhinged conspiracy theories I missed some question that indicts me of dodging, perhaps you can elaborate. Or, as the theme of your diatribes suggests, you can simply keep that hidden in order to use as an invisible get-out-of-jail-free-card to exonerate you from your failed gibberish.
@Pete:
Sharyl Attkisson? Isn’t she kinda like the Orly Taitz of the birthers. Hasn’t she been slapped down harder than a Betsy McCaughey by Jon Stewart? This is the gal that went utterly batshit crazy with OBS from the very onset of the Obama Administration, even suing Obama for hacking her laptop, only flip flopping while doubling down on that. Even The American Conservative states that she says “jawdropping stuff”. She utters the “Benghazi” word so often that she actually compared it to the Sony hack. She has a long long history of selective and misleading reporting. Lloyd Grove of the Daily Beast says it best: “The word is she’s crazy, she’s a kook, you can’t trust her, she lies, she makes up stories.” She has even gone to work for the now discredited Heritage Foundation, a group who’s main objective is a war against Obama and The Affordable Care Act. Facts and reality mean nothing to them.
But it’s one thing to invoke a fruit loop like Attkisson to somehow validate your unhinged conspiracy theories. It quite another to use her followers.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Character assassination, especially one that relies on the comedian Stewart, merely demonstrates your complete inability to refute facts, or to present an argument that has anymore credibility than a 5 year old sticking out his tongue.
Just because you state something is invalid, does not make it invalid.
Your pathetic attempt to dismiss facts inconvenient to your ridiculous position has the same level of veracity as the leftist denunciations of Chamber’s revelations about Algier Hiss.
@Pete: Dismissing the credence of Sharyl Attkisson in an ACA argument is hardly a character assassination. She may be an exceptionally great person, just as the others I mentioned such as Orly Taitz and Betsy McCaughey (who like it or not, love him or hate him, comedian Jon Stewart proverbially kicked her ass in an ACA debate, And I really don’t think that’s even arguable) may be. But these people have simply lost credibility in their political standings because of both their obvious ODS and their exposed dishonesty. The need to find bad prohibited them to acknowledge anything positive and accordingly, their radical extremism superseded reality.
You Pete, may very well be a great person too but you seem to be suffering from this very same dilemma.
Actually, I’m not the one trying to state a position but rather, trying to get you to rationalize yours and obviously, coming up short.
And by the way, why so angry?
@Pete: Revelations confirmed by the NSA’s release of the Venona Cables. Yes, Alger Hiss was a spy and he made FDR look like a fool to the Russians, especially Stalin. And his administration was riddled with spies, far more than McCarty alluded to, but those are inconvenient facts for Leftists, but from the intercepted cables of the big Leftist cheeses, it is stupid trying to carry on the charade. ROFL
You would be well served Pete, to listen to the words @Skookum: as he not only researched Alger Hiss for you (for those that may have missed it) but rolled it into an association of those “Leftists”. To top it all off, he gives you an “out” with ” it is stupid trying to carry on the charade”. Rodeo clown enters stage right while Pete ducks under fence stage left.
To pass up this perfect opportunity to shut the hell up would certainly go against script.
@Ronald J. Ward:
I think you need to re-read what I wrote. Whittaker Chambers was ridiculed as unreliable for calling Algier Hiss a communist spy (until the evidence clearly showed Hiss was a communist spy) – in the same manner you are trying to ridicule Attkisson for calling out the problems of obamacare.
And your pretension of calm rationalism is rather laughable, RJW, considering how you initiated these exchanges, dodge actual facts in lieu of petty leftist propaganda, and throw out irrelevant strawman arguments. I admit I am rather angry about what obamacare has done, is doing, and will continue to do to the American people while collectivist liars keep denying the clear truth right in front of us. That anger stems from actually caring about patients and not wanting to see them harmed by socialist insanity.
And to your comrade-in-arms, rewinn, perhaps you may have seen this little gem from the ever lurking worm Ezekiel Emmanuel:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/09/opinion/skip-your-annual-physical.html?_r=0
Now RJW, I know you weren’t spewing the idiocy that rewinn was regarding Gruber’s commentary that preventive care doesn’t reduce costs. Due to my patient care duties this morning, I don’t have time to go back and search through the posts here to specifically add to my responses to his comments – so I am simply doing so here.
So Ol’ Dr. Death, who has previously commented that after age 75 people should stop getting medical care, is now laying the ground work for denial of care by claiming there is no benefit to undergoing annual physicals vis a vis reduction in mortality. Now, anyone who is familiar with Cochrane reviews understands that they are not perfect (i.e. the moronic continued inclusion of the discredited 1980’s “Hi-Fi” study in the Cochrane review on high-frequency neonatal ventilation) and one might question why the studies reviewed are limited to the years 1963-1999, as if there have been no changes to the manner in which annual physicals are performed, but this is exactly the kind of data being pushed by the collectivists to justify denial of care – because they know that is the only way to decrease medical costs under the socialist medical system they want to force upon us.
And with regard to my previous posts on the goal of obamacare effecting the end of private/employer-provided medical insurance, from ol’ Zeke again:
http://pnhp.org/blog/2014/04/29/ezekiel-emanuel-reinventing-american-health-care/
And the plan to deal with physician shortages from forcing everyone into “free” socialist healthcare? just cut the training and shove more people through, regardless of whether or not they actually know what they are doing.
Think this isn’t an accurate portrayal of the leftist mindset on doing away with private insurance?
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116752/ezekiel-emanuel-book-excerpt-end-health-insurance-companies
The dirty little secret, when slimy vermin like Emmanuel speak (besides the fact that every previous claim they made as to the wonders of obamacare have been demonstrably false) is how they try to make “cookie-cutter”, no-thinking-required medical care sound like a good thing, as if individual humans are completely interchangeable. All for the main goal, which is to reduce costs, not actually take care of the patient.
Still think the collapse of the private insurance system isn’t the goal of these socialist bastards? (From the same article)
The arrogance of these leftists in thinking that they know what is best for you is breathtaking in it’s shamelessness. From other columns by the bastard Emmanuel:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/opinion/in-health-care-choice-is-overrated.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/opinion/no-there-wont-be-a-doctor-shortage.html
He, and the ilk of leftist obamacare pushers, have already been caught lying (you can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance plan; your insurance premium will decrease by $2500/year; abortion won’t be covered; illegal aliens won’t be covered; the mandate is not a tax increase…) and they continue to lie in their effort to destroy the US medical system and replace it with socialist medicine.
So, yeah, RJW and rewinn, you bet I am angry. I don’t like liars. I despise liars who pretend to care about patients, while trying to force a system down our throats that explicitly will harm patients.
As I have said before – which you leftists consistently will not acknowledge (much less refute) – if obamacare was going to be so damned good, why was it necessary for Obama, et al, to lie about everything it would do, whether or not it was a tax, and be passed solely on a party line vote via questionable legislative maneuvers (being “deemed” passed via reconciliation)?
Gruber’s 2009 policy paper clearly shows the intent of the Obama administration to deceive the American people because they knew they could not be honest about obamacare and expect it to pass . Tell us, please, of a single example of blatant deception ever resulting in anything good for the party or parties that have been deceived.
Obamacare is utterly, contemptibly evil. It is not concerned with improving access to care, nor in improving the quality of medical care to patients. Watering down medical training and destroying private medical insurance makes no sense if your true goal is to improve medical care and access to medical care. It only makes sense if your goal is to force the government takeover of medicine. Obamacare is solely an effort to increase leftist control over the lives of every citizen in the US.
Now pardon me while I go take care of patients.