noworldsystem.com


Leftist: If You Can’t Justify Your Existence You Must Die

Leftist: If You Can’t Justify Your Existence You Must Die

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ

In this clip from the 2008 film “The Soviet Story”, we see that George Bernard Shaw, the celebrated progressive playwright defended Hitler, advocated killing those who can’t justify their existence and called for the development of lethal gas 10 years before the national socialists in Germany did exactly that.

George Bernard Shaw was one of the left’s most revered figures and the only person besides Al Gore to win both an Oscar and a Nobel prize.

Obama Adviser: Old People Have to Die

VA Guide Urges Sick Vets To End Their Own Lives

Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory: Eugenics

Obama Health Care Like Hitler’s Genocide Program

 



ObamaCare: Just Another Tax On The Middle-Class

Baucus Bill Will Impose 23% Tax Rate Increase on Middle Class

TaxProf
October 14, 2009

Following up on last week’s post (80% Marginal Tax Rates After Health Care Reform), there is an op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal by former Director of the Congressional Budget Office Douglas Holtz-Eakin, The Baucus Bill Is a Tax Bill; Middle-Class Families Would Get Hit With a Double-Digit Increase in Their Marginal Tax Rate:

Most astounding of all is what this Congress is willing to do to struggling middle-class families. The bill would impose nearly $400 billion in new taxes and fees. Nearly 90% of that burden will be shouldered by those making $200,000 or less.

It might not appear that way at first, because the dollars are collected via a 40% tax on sales by insurers of “Cadillac” policies, fees on health insurers, drug companies and device manufacturers, and an assortment of odds and ends.

But the economics are clear. These costs will be passed on to consumers by either directly raising insurance premiums, or by fueling higher health-care costs that inevitably lead to higher premiums. Consumers will pay the excise tax on high-cost plans. The Joint Committee on Taxation indicates that 87% of the burden would fall on Americans making less than $200,000, and more than half on those earning under $100,000.

Industry fees are even worse because Democrats chose to make these fees nondeductible. This means that insurance companies will have to raise premiums significantly just to break even. American families will bear a burden even greater than the $130 billion in fees that the bill intends to collect. According to my analysis, premiums will rise by as much as $200 billion over the next 10 years—and 90% will again fall on the middle class.

Senate Democrats are also erecting new barriers to middle-class ascent. A family of four making $54,000 would pay $4,800 for health insurance, with the remainder coming from subsidies. If they work harder and raise their income to $66,000, their cost of insurance rises by $2,800. In other words, earning another $12,000 raises their bill by $2,800—a marginal tax rate of 23%. Double-digit increases in effective tax rates will have detrimental effects on the incentives of millions of Americans.

 

Obamacare Means $1,700 More in Insurance Premiums for a Typical Family

Dick Morris
Townhall
October 14, 2009

Will a young, healthy, childless individual or couple buy health insurance costing 7.5 percent of their income as required by Obama’s health legislation? Not until they get sick. Then, they can always buy the insurance — and the Obama bill requires the insurance companies to give it to them. And, if the premiums come to more than 7.5 percent of their income because they are now sick, no problem. Obama will subsidize it.

Instead, young, healthy, childless people will likely opt to pay the $1,000 fine (a.k.a., slap on the wrist) mandated in the bill. After all, even if they make as little as $50,000 a year, the fine is a lot cheaper than 7.5 percent of their income (or $3,500 a year)!

So … these young households will not contribute to the coffers of any health insurance company until they are sick and need the coverage. By then, their costs will come to vastly more than their premiums.

Who will subsidize the difference? We will.

The insurance industry estimates that the bill will drive up premiums for the average family by $1,700 a year. By the time the bill takes effect in 2013, it estimates that the average annual family health insurance premiums (now $12,300) will rise to $17,200 if the Obama bill is passed, but only to $15,500 if it is defeated.

And who do you think the voters will blame for the hike in their premium? The Democrats who passed the bill.

Supporters of the bill are quick to counter that greater efficiency, etc. will hold down premiums. But they have little to answer the argument that, without higher fines, the young and healthy will not consent to pay an arm and a leg for insurance they don’t need.

Any lingering motivation to pay the premiums will disappear once the Obama bill requires insurance companies to cover them when they do, finally, limp in the door, desperately in need of insurance. Why pay now when you can always pay later? And, with a government subsidy, you gain nothing by paying for all those years when you don’t need insurance.

So Obama’s program turns out not to be one to spread insurance and thus spread the risk of costly illness, but one to make people pay 7.5 percent of their incomes once they get sick, with the government picking up their remaining premium and the health insurance customers paying for the medical expenses. Some deal!

So tote up the cost of this bill on the middle class:

— $1,700 more in insurance premiums for the average family.

— Medical devices like wheelchairs and hearing aids get taxed.

— Those who are sick must pay an average of about $600 more a year in income taxes because the bill raises the threshold for deducting medical expenses from 7.5 percent of income to 10 percent.

— A $404 billion cut in Medicare.

— Ending the subsidized Medicare Advantage insurance for costs over and above Medicare. Without Medicare Advantage, the elderly can only augment Medicare by buying Medigap coverage for which no subsidy is available and whose premiums are higher (offered, conveniently enough, by Obama’s buddies at the AARP).

— No importation of Canadian medicines and no competitive bidding to hold down prescription drug costs (Obama’s deal to get Pharma’s support and advertising dollars).

— A shortage of medical personnel and equipment as 30 million new patients are added without any expansion of the population of doctors and nurses. This shortage will make rationing inevitable, even if it shortens life expectancies among the elderly.

And, all of this assumes that the House bill, which imposes a 4.5 percent payroll tax (which will discourage new employment), does not pass — and that the cost estimates of this program prove realistic. Despite the Congressional Budget Office’s concurrence, one can’t help noticing that Massachusetts’ program was estimated to cost $200 million in 2005 and now costs $700 million!

This health care bill is, indeed, Obama’s first tax on the middle class.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL7ak__MGyw

 



Obama Adviser: Old People Have to Die

Robert Reich On Health Care: Old People Have to Die

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
October 10, 2009

Robert Reich, Clinton’s Secretary of Labor and avid Obama supporter, wants to deny health care to old folks. They’re too expensive. He also told an audience in 2007 that most people will not live longer than their parents. Again, too expensive. He wants to force medical technology corporations to stop developing new life-saving technology.

Reich, of course, supports the so-called “public option,” the government’s take-over of the health care industry. In order to push the Obamacare scam, Reich proposed a march on Washington by the liberals to demand the public option. He wanted to do this on Grandparents Day, September 13.

Reich wanted people to march in favor of a plan that would mandate old people die on a day set aside for old people. You can’t make this stuff up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT7Y0TOBuG4

Mr. Reich’s pronouncement is yet another confirmation that the government wants to kill old people who are after all — according to our eugenicist rulers — nothing if not useless eaters.

Democrats and liberals went ballistic when Sarah Palin mentioned the fact that the government wants to use the “level of productivity in society” as the basis for determining access to medical care. This Darwinian and Malthusian concept is supported by Dr. Ezekial Emanuel, brother of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and White House health care policy adviser.

Emanuel does not use the term “death panels” and the term does not appear in the Obamacare bill. That would be political suicide. Instead he argues in favor of “The Complete Lives System,” a system that “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.”

In 1996, Emanuel said health care should be rationed for those who are not “participating citizens,” that is to say the old, the infirm, and those suffering from irreversible medical conditions.

As a good liberal, Emanuel would like to avoid the perception that he proposes killing old people simply because they are old — that would be “ageist” — and instead argues that they have used up their “life-years” and basically need to get out of the way and stop using up precious medical resources.

Robert Reich reduces the academic gobbledygook of Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” down to language the average person can understand. In the above video, he spells it out — the government will intervene in medical decisions made by you and your family. Grand daddy is a burden on society and has nothing left to contribute because he no longer works and pays half or more of his income to the government in the form of confiscatory taxes.

The sad and frightening thing is, when Reich told the audience they will have to die, they applauded.

Obama Adviser Supports Limiting Population Growth

Obama Advisor: No Health Care For The Disabled

Obama Science Advisor Advocates Forced Abortions

 



ObamaCare Supporter Bites Finger Off Protester!

ObamaCare Supporter Bites Finger Off Protester!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4272tcAjn1Q

 

ObamaCare Supporter Spits On Protester

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sCqC6cdxgU

 

ObamaCare Supporter Elbows Town Haller in the Face!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE48gm5uqGM

Kicked, beaten and called a “nigger” by SEIU ObamaCare Supporter

 



Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

 



ObamaCare Gives Dictatorial Powers to ‘Health Choices Commissioner’

Health Care Bill Gives Obama Power to Appoint Government ‘Commissioner’ With Sweeping Power to Dictate Health Coverage

Fred Lucas
CNS News
September 3, 2009

The health care bill under consideration in the House of Representatives would give President Obama the authority to name a new federal “Health Choices Commissioner” who would have sweeping power to govern the health insurance plans offered in a so-called ”exchange” where millions of Americans would get their health insurance if the bill is enacted.

These powers would include deciding which treatments are covered, which companies can participate, which states can run their own exchange, and enrolling individuals into the public exchange.

Though the bill, House Resolution 3200, faces many political hurdles, it has passed three House committees and could be ready for a floor vote after Congress returns from recess. The overhaul package calls for establishing a health insurance exchange where people earning up to 400 percent of the poverty level will be able to purchase health insurance with the help of federal subsidies. This exchange would include a “public option” government-run health care plan as well as private plans that provide a minimum benefits package dictated by the government.

The Health Choices Commissioner would establish “the benefits to be made available under Exchange-participating health benefit plans during each plan year,” according to page 84 of the 1,018-page bill. That means the commissioner would determine what benefits the participating insurance companies must offer participating customers in the exchange.

The commissioner would also set rules for insurance companies to participate in the health insurance exchange, and establish criteria for individuals to receive federal subsidies to purchase insurance in the exchange, according to section 142 on page 42 of the legislation.

Further, the commissioner would have the authority to establish “automatic enrollment” of individuals who qualify for the health insurance exchange.

“The Commissioner shall provide a process under which individuals who are Exchange-eligible individuals described in subparagraph (B) are automatically enrolled under an appropriate Exchange participating health benefits plan,” the legislation says, beginning on page 97. “Such process may involve a random assignment or some other form of assignment that takes into account the health care providers used by the individual involved or such other relevant factors as the Commissioner may specify.”

The exchange eligible individuals [determined by subparagraph (B)] include someone who “has not opted out from receiving such affordability credit,” someone who “does not otherwise enroll in another exchange participating health benefits plan,” and someone “enrolled in an Exchange-participating plan that is terminated (during or at the end of the plan year) and who does not otherwise enroll in another Exchange participating health benefits plan.”

Read Full Article Here

 

Health Care Bill Will Disclose IRS Tax Data

Declan McCullagh
CBS News
August 27, 2009

One of the problems with any proposed law that’s over 1,000 pages long and constantly changing is that much deviltry can lie in the details. Take the Democrats’ proposal to rewrite health care policy, better known as H.R. 3200 or by opponents as “Obamacare.” (Here’s our CBS News television coverage.)

Section 431(a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted gross income, the number of dependents, and “other information as is prescribed by” regulation. That information will be provided to the new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs and used to determine who qualifies for “affordability credits.”

Section 245(b)(2)(A) says the IRS must divulge tax return details — there’s no specified limit on what’s available or unavailable — to the Health Choices Commissioner. The purpose, again, is to verify “affordability credits.”

Read Full Article Here

 

John McCain gets Owned at Town Hall in Phoenix (8-26-09)

 



Doctor admits euthanizing patients during Katrina

Doctor admits euthanizing patients during Katrina

Raw Story
August 30, 2009

A doctor who was working the rounds at New Orleans’ Memorial Medical Center during Hurricane Katrina has admitted euthanizing patients during a crucial shortage of energy and supplies at the hospital.

Despite the revelations, the state prosecution service in Louisiana says it will not re-open an investigation into the matter, the Associated Press reports.

The doctor’s admission comes on the fourth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina making landfall on the Gulf Coast, an event that would lead to the death of more than 1,000 people and the displacement of a city of one million.

It also comes at a time when the US is busy debating fundamental reforms to the country’s health system. The specter of “rationed health care” has been raised during the debate.

But in the panic and chaos of Katrina, the notion of “rationed care” was taken to a brutal new level.

Dr. Ewing Cook told ProPublica’s Sheri Fink that he gave the order to give an elderly patient a dose of morphine he knew would kill her.

‘‘Do you mind just increasing the morphine and giving her enough until she goes?’’ Cook says he asked the patient’s nurse.

In a sign of his certainty the patient would die under the morphine overdose, Cook penciled in “Pronounced dead at” on the patient’s chart and left it blank to be filled in later.

‘‘To me, it was a no-brainer, and to this day I don’t feel bad about what I did,’’ Cook told ProPublica. ‘‘I gave her medicine so I could get rid of her faster, get the nurses off the floor.’’

He added, ‘‘There’s no question I hastened her demise.’’

The complete investigative article from ProPublica, which appears in the August 30 edition of the New York Times, is here.

 



VA Guide Urges Sick Vets To End Their Own Lives

VA Guide Urges Sick Vets To End Their Own Lives

 



Obama Joker Posters All Over San Francisco

Obama Joker Posters All Over San Francisco

 



Obama Would Refuse His Own Health Care Plan!

Obama Would Refuse His Own Health Care Plan!

Rense
August 14, 2009

Yesterday on “ABC-TV” (better known as the all Barrack channel) during the “network special on health care”…. Obama was asked:

“Mr. President will you and your family give up your current health care program and join the new ‘universal health care program’ that the rest of us will be on?”…..

(bet you already know the answer)…

There was a stoney silence as Obama ignored the question and chose not to answer it…. in addition, a number of Senators were asked the same question and their response was…”We will think about it.” And they did.

It was announced today on the news that the “Kennedy health care bill” was written into the new health care reform initiative, ensuring that that Congress will be 100% exempt !

This should speak volumes to all of us. so, this great new health care plan that is good for you and me… is not good enough for Obama, his family or Congress…??

We (the American public) need to stop this proposed debacle asap!

This is totally wrong !!!!! If you agree please pass this on …. If not plan to suffer with the Obama health care plan ….for free…. while our self-serving politicians make sure that they take care of themselves and their families at our expense.

 



Obama Care Means Government Control of All Health Care

Obama Care Means Government Control of All Health Care

 

Free Speech Under Assault?

 



Obama Care Will DESTROY Health Care

Obama Care Will DESTROY Health Care

 



Obamacare: ZERO compassion for the Disabled

Obamacare: ZERO compassion for the Disabled

DEADLY DOCTORS

Betsy McCaughey
New York Post
July 29, 2009

THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They’d decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.

Yet at least two of President Obama’s top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.

Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. “Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change,” he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, “as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others” (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

Yes, that’s what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they’ll tell you that a doctor’s job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.

Emanuel, however, believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96).

Translation: Don’t give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy.

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).

The bills being rushed through Congress will be paid for largely by a $500 billion-plus cut in Medicare over 10 years. Knowing how unpopular the cuts will be, the president’s budget director, Peter Orszag, urged Congress this week to delegate its own authority over Medicare to a new, presidentially-appointed bureaucracy that wouldn’t be accountable to the public.

Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors’ lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too “enamored with technology” and is determined to reduce access to it.

Dr. David Blumenthal, another key Obama adviser, agrees. He recommends slowing medical innovation to control health spending.

Blumenthal has long advocated government health-spending controls, though he concedes they’re “associated with longer waits” and “reduced availability of new and expensive treatments and devices” (New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 2001). But he calls it “debatable” whether the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. (Ask a cancer patient, and you’ll get a different answer. Delay lowers your chances of survival.)

Obama appointed Blumenthal as national coordinator of health-information technology, a job that involves making sure doctors obey electronically deivered guidelines about what care the government deems appropriate and cost effective.

In the April 9 New England Journal of Medicine, Blumenthal predicted that many doctors would resist “embedded clinical decision support” — a euphemism for computers telling doctors what to do.

Americans need to know what the president’s health advisers have in mind for them. Emanuel sees even basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much: “Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy . . . physicians’ offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms” (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

No one has leveled with the public about these dangerous views. Nor have most people heard about the arm-twisting, Chicago-style tactics being used to force support. In a Nov. 16, 2008, Health Care Watch column, Emanuel explained how business should be done: “Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration’s health-reform effort.”

Do we want a “reform” that empowers people like this to decide for us?

 

Deaf Man Worried that Obamacare Would Shut Out Disabled/Deaf People

 



Protesting at town halls is an act of “political terrorism”

Democratic Rep. Barron Hill says speaking your mind is an act of “political terrorism”

Louisville Courier Journal
August 12, 2009

Jeering protesters, unruly crowds and even arrests for disorderly conduct.

Throughout the nation, Democratic town hall meetings on health care have made for a lively congressional recess — and Kentucky and Indiana Democrats are concerned that they could be next in the line of fire.

Rep. Ben Chandler, D-6th District, has scheduled no public meetings on the issue, citing concerns about the shout-fests that have greeted other lawmakers.

Democratic Reps. John Yarmuth, of Kentucky’s 3rd District, and Baron Hill, of Indiana’s 9th, are using more limited forums to discuss health care, although Yarmuth plans a face-to-face town hall during the first week of September.

[…]

Hill, a member of conservative Democratic “Blue Dogs” on Capitol Hill, was among a small group who forced some concessions in the House version of health care legislation approved last month by the Energy and Commerce Committee.

He has been speaking to hospital groups, local chambers of commerce and civic clubs and appeared Tuesday before the Rotary Club of Indianapolis. He said he plans to hold small town halls that he can control, though his office still was working out details.

“I don’t mind people disagreeing with you, but just to blow up a meeting is an act of political terrorism,” he said in an interview.

Read Full Article Here

 



Pelosi Calls Attacks On Obamacare “Simply Un-American”

Pelosi Calls Attacks On Obamacare “Simply Un-American”

The Swamp
August 10, 2009

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, insisting at the start of a long and politically heated summer congressional recess that healthcare reform can be achieved this fall, today are calling the disruption of “town-hall” meetings by vocal protesters “simply un-American.”

“We believe it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate,” Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Hoyer (D-Md.) write in an Op-ed essay published by USA Today.

“However, it is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue,” the two leaders write…. “These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

Read Full Article Here

 



MSNBC: Word “Socialist” Code For The “N-Word”

MSNBC: Word “Socialist” Code For The “N-Word”

 

MSNBC Says 65% Of Town-Hall Protesters Are Racist

 



Obama Advisor: No Health Care For The Disabled

Obama Advisor: No Health Care For The Disabled

 



What’s In Health-Care Reform Bill Will SHOCK You

What’s In Health-Care Reform Bill Will SHOCK You

The Real Revo
July 29, 2009

Great Leader and Chairman Obama wants to ram his gargantuan health care bill down our throats before anyone realizes what’s in it. What doesn’t he want us to see? Some examples, from a quick inventory by Family Security Matters:

Pg. 22 of the HC Bill mandates the Government will audit books of all employers that self insure.

Pg. 30 Sec 123 of HC bill – a Government committee will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.

Pg. 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill – YOUR HEALTHCARE WILL BE RATIONED!

Pg. 42 of HC Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your health care benefits for you.

Pg. 50 Section 152 in HC bill – Health care will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Pg. 58 HC Bill – Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances and a National ID Health-card will be issued!

Pg. 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 – Government will have direct access to your bank accounts for election funds transfer.

Pg. 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions and community organizations (read: ACORN).

Pg. 72 Lines 8-14 – Government will create a health care exchange to bring private health care plans under Government control.

Pg. 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill – Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example – Translation for illegal aliens.

Pg. 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 – The Government will use groups, i.e. ACORN and Americorps, to sign up individuals for Government health care plan.

Pg. 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members – your Health care WILL be rationed.

Pg. 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill – Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

Pg. 124 lines 24-25 HC Bill – No company can sue Government on price fixing. No “judicial review” against Government Monopoly.

Pg. 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill – Doctors/ AMA – The Government will tell YOU what you can earn.

Pg. 145 Line 15-17 HC Bill – An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE.

Pg. 126 Lines 22-25 HC Bill – Employers MUST pay for health care for part time employees AND their families.

Pg. 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill – Any NON-RESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)

Pg. 195 HC Bill – Officers and employees of the health care admin (the GOVERNMENT) will have access to ALL Americans’ finances and personal records.

Pg. 203 Line 14-15 HC Bill – “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax” Yes, it says that.

Pg. 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill – Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Elderly, very sick, low income, poor will be affected.

Pg. 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill – Doctors – doesn’t matter what specialty – will all be paid the same.

Pg. 253 Line 10-18 – Government sets value of Doctor’s time, professional judgment, etc. Literally, value of humans.

Pg. 265 Sec 1131 – Government mandates and controls productivity for private health care industries.

Pg. 317 L 13-20 – PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.

Pg. 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 – PROHIBITION on expansion – Government will mandate hospitals cannot expand.

Pg. 354 Sec 1177 – Government will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people!

Pg. 425 Lines 4-12 – Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations. Think Senior Citizens end of life (euthanasia)

Pg. 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 – Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in how to die.

Pg. 427 Lines 15-24 – Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends! ( euthanasia )

Pg. 429 Lines 10-12 – “advanced care consultation” may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from the Government to end a life!

Pg. 430, SEC. 1233, Lines 11-15, ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION: The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.

Pg. 472 Lines 14-17 – PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION. 1 monthly payment to a community-based organization. (Like ACORN?)

There’s plenty more provisions here (scroll down). Also check out the actual bill (HR 3200).

 

Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will Eliminate Private Insurance

 


Obama Science Advisor Advocates Forced Abortions

Obama Science Advisor Advocates Forced Abortions
In 1977 book, John Holdren advocated forced abortions, mass sterilization through food and water supply and mandatory bodily implants to prevent pregnancies

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
July 11, 2009

President Obama’s top science and technology advisor John P. Holdren co-authored a 1977 book in which he advocated the formation of a “planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control, including forced abortions, mass sterilization programs conducted via the food and water supply, as well as mandatory bodily implants that would prevent couples from having children.

The concepts outlined in Holdren’s 1977 book Ecoscience, which he co-authored with close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich, were so shocking that a February 2009 Front Page Magazine story on the subject was largely dismissed as being outlandish because people couldn’t bring themselves to believe that it could be true.

It was only when another Internet blog obtained the book and posted screenshots that the awful truth about what Holdren had actually committed to paper actually began to sink in.

This issue is more prescient than ever because Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April, Holdren recently advocated “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via chemtrails.

Ecoscience discusses a number of ways in which the global population could be reduced to combat what the authors see as mankind’s greatest threat – overpopulation. In each case, the proposals are couched in sober academic rhetoric, but the horrifying foundation of what Holdren and his co-authors are advocating is clear. These proposals include;

– Forcibly and unknowingly sterilizing the entire population by adding infertility drugs to the nation’s water and food supply.

– Legalizing “compulsory abortions,” ie forced abortions carried out against the will of the pregnant women, as is common place in Communist China where women who have already had one child and refuse to abort the second are kidnapped off the street by the authorities before a procedure is carried out to forcibly abort the baby.

– Babies who are born out of wedlock or to teenage mothers to be forcibly taken away from their mother by the government and put up for adoption. Another proposed measure would force single mothers to demonstrate to the government that they can care for the child, effectively introducing licensing to have children.

– Implementing a system of “involuntary birth control,” where both men and women would be mandated to have an infertility device implanted into their body at puberty and only have it removed temporarily if they received permission from the government to have a baby.

– Permanently sterilizing people who the authorities deem have already had too many children or who have contributed to “general social deterioration”.

– Formally passing a law that criminalizes having more than two children, similar to the one child policy in Communist China.

– This would all be overseen by a transnational and centralized “planetary regime” that would utilize a “global police force” to enforce the measures outlined above. The “planetary regime” would also have the power to determine population levels for every country in the world.

The quotes from the book are included below. We also include comments by the author of the blog who provided the screenshots of the relevant passages. Screenshots of the relevant pages and the quotes in their full context are provided at the end of the excerpts. The quotes from the book appear as text indents and in bold. The quotes from the author of the blog are italicized.

Page 837: Compulsory abortions would be legal

“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

Page 786: Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government; or they could be forced to have abortions

“One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.”

Page 787-8: Mass sterilization of humans though drugs in the water supply is OK as long as it doesn’t harm livestock

“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”

Page 786-7: The government could control women’s reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control

Involuntary fertility control

“A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Page 838: The kind of people who cause “social deterioration” can be compelled to not have children

“If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection.“

Page 838: Nothing is wrong or illegal about the government dictating family size

“In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”

Page 942-3: A “Planetary Regime” should control the global economy and dictate by force the number of children allowed to be born

Toward a Planetary Regime

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”

“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

Page 917: We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force

“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”

Page 749: Pro-family and pro-birth attitudes are caused by ethnic chauvinism

“Another related issue that seems to encourage a pronatalist attitude in many people is the question of the differential reproduction of social or ethnic groups. Many people seem to be possessed by fear that their group may be outbred by other groups. White Americans and South Africans are worried there will be too many blacks, and vice versa. The Jews in Israel are disturbed by the high birth rates of Israeli Arabs, Protestants are worried about Catholics, and lbos about Hausas. Obviously, if everyone tries to outbreed everyone else, the result will be catastrophe for all. This is another case of the “tragedy of the commons,” wherein the “commons” is the planet Earth. Fortunately, it appears that, at least in the DCs, virtually all groups are exercising reproductive restraint.”

Page 944: As of 1977, we are facing a global overpopulation catastrophe that must be resolved at all costs by the year 2000

“Humanity cannot afford to muddle through the rest of the twentieth century; the risks are too great, and the stakes are too high. This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants’ destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world.”

Page 944: As of 1977, we are facing a global overpopulation catastrophe that must be resolved at all costs by the year 2000

“Humanity cannot afford to muddle through the rest of the twentieth century; the risks are too great, and the stakes are too high. This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants’ destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world.”

See Screenshots of the Actual Pages in Holdren’s Book “Ecoscience”.



Obama Health Care Like Hitler’s Genocide Program

Obama To Deny Health Care To Elderly, Very Sick & Poor People

LPAC
June 22, 2009

In October 1939, Nazi Leader Adolf Hitler issued an order, written in his own hand, ordering the extermination of those who were considered “unworthy of life.” The order, entitled “The Destruction of Lives Unworthy of Life,” stated that patients “considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, be accorded a mercy death.”

Hitler’s murder spree started with the mentally ill, the terminally ill, invalids, and the disabled, and eventually spread to millions of Jews, Gypsies, and other “undesirables”—worked to death or exterminated in concentration camps.

This monstrous program was initially sold as an economic measure: “The economic burden represented by people suffering from hereditary diseases is a danger for the State and society,” Nazi Dr. Gerhard Wagner said at the Nazi party congress in 1934. The Nazis required all state institutions to report on patients who were chronically ill, and used those reports as the basis to decide which patients should be killed.

Today, the Obama Administration is beginning to descend down that same road, promising to make the “tough choices” to cut entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security to save money—at precisely the time in which an increasing number of Americans are forced to depend on them as the economy slides deeper into Depression. Obama is willing to spend trillions of dollars to bail out the financial markets, and pay for it by slashing programs which keep ordinary Americans alive.

Think we’re exaggerating? Take the case of a paper entitled “What Are the Potential Cost Savings from Legalizing Physician-Assisted Suicide?” It sounds like something that might have been written by Jeremy Bentham, or Aldous Huxley, or maybe Nazi doctor Karl Brandt, but it was actually co-authored in 1998 by “bio-ethicist” Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a leading advisor to Obama’s budget director Peter Orszag, and a member of the 15-person Federal Coordinating Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, the group which has been designated to prepare the list of which medical procedures will henceforth be permitted, and which will not. Emanuel’s co-author, Margaret Battin, has written other papers promoting suicide and selective refusal of medical treatment. The pair are really just echoing Karl Brandt’s defense of euthanasia at Nuremberg: “Death can mean deliverance. Death is life—just as much as birth. It was never meant to be murder.” But it was.

Lyndon LaRouche warned:

The Hitler program has been revived by the Obama Administration. This is straight Nazi stuff. It’s not a quibble; it’s not an interpretation. This is a direct copy of the philosophy of the Nazis. You cannot duck that issue. This is Nazi stuff, it’s explicit. We know all this stuff from Hermann Göring and so forth in the 1920s, and after that with their international connections, like certain Wall Street firms. We have been warned, and we act accordingly. People who condone this are criminals, because they either knew, or should have known, what they are doing. They either knew, or should have known.

This is mass murder. Obama has adopted Hitler’s program. There is no reason to hold one’s tongue. When the President of the United States has adopted Hitler’s program, that’s the time to unleash. This is exactly what I warned about on April 11th in my webcast. Obama has a Nero complex. Obama is the new Nero. This is exactly what is happening. This is Hitler’s policy now being echoed by Obama. Let’s not allow any compromise. You have to attack this directly. He has adopted Hitler’s genocidal health policy.

Read Full Article Here

 

Doctors and Feds list who won’t get care in flu pandemic

YOUR NEW REALITY
May 25, 2008

When the bird flu pandemic comes, and medical centres and hospitals are overloaded with the sick and the dying, not everyone is going to find the help they need.

In fact, there are tens of millions of people in the United States alone who will be denied help simply because they happen to fit into one of the following categories :

• People older than 85.

• Those with severe trauma, which could include critical injuries from car crashes and shootings.

• Severely burned patients older than 60.

• Those with severe mental impairment, which could include advanced Alzheimer’s disease.

• Those with a severe chronic disease, such as advanced heart failure, lung disease or poorly controlled diabetes.

The Centre For Disease Control, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security were all involved in selecting the categories under which people will be left to die.

The above categories are almost exactly the same as the “Leave Them To Die” health care rationing plans prepared by governments in Australian, South East Asia, the UK and most of Europe.

“If a mass casualty critical care event were to occur tomorrow, many people with clinical conditions that are survivable under usual health care system conditions may have to forgo life-sustaining interventions owing to deficiencies in supply or staffing,” the report states.

To prepare, hospitals should designate a triage team with the Godlike task of deciding who will and who won’t get lifesaving care, the task force wrote. Those out of luck are the people at high risk of death and a slim chance of long-term survival.

If followed to a tee, such rules could exclude care for the poorest, most disadvantaged citizens who suffer disproportionately from chronic disease and disability, he said. While health care rationing will be necessary in a mass disaster, “there are some real ethical concerns here.”

While the notion of rationing health care is unpleasant, the report could help the public understand that it will be necessary, Bentley said.

Devereaux said compiling the list “was emotionally difficult for everyone.”

Particularly for 86 year old car accident victims with mental health problems and limited lung capacity.

The Population Reduction Agenda For Dummies
http://www.infowars.com/the-population-reduction-agenda-for-dummies/

Program Pays Young Girls $1 A Day To Not Get Pregnant
http://www.wxii12.com/health/19843503/detail.html