Exclusive Footage: British Death Panels Coming to America?

Thanks to some close contacts and in-depth investigative reporting, I was able to gain access to this top secret video showing how the Obama administration's public option is designed to work. Officially, this public option doesn't exist, although it is in the House version of the bill that most Democratic representatives support (H.R. 3200).

Obama has called it "just a sliver" and his health secretary, Kathleen Sabilius, suggested Sunday on Meet the Press that it's not essential to health care reform. But in March, President Obama said health care reform had to include a public option. And now Sabilius is backpedaling on backpedaling away from the public option. So you might say Obama and Sabilius are playing good cop, bad cop. Poorly, I might add.

The public option is modeled on the single-payer systems in Canada and Great Britain with health care boards (or rationing panels) making cost-effective decisions for every patient. This is what Sarah Palin has referred to as "death panels." In England, the decision-making board that oversees treatment of patients is called the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Or NICE. Orwellian language to be sure. If you have cancer in England, the NICE people are the ones that deny you life-saving remedies. Not so nice. In fact, the British have some of the worst cancer survival rates in the developed world.

This is actual footage of England's end-of-life health care board in action. Notice the shoddy ambulance and how the bureaucrat treats the sick, elderly patient. Viewer discretion is advised.

This is the closest representation of the so-called Obama public option that I've seen. And as we all know, in the president's own words, the public option is just a trojan horse to single-payer, universal health care. To quote Haley Joel Osment in The Sixth Sense, "I see dead people."

Unbelievable: Bernie Sanders on MSNBC: Why is There No Progressive TV Network?

Sometimes when you're half-paying attention to the TV in the background, you have to hit the DVR button to make sure you heard things right. That's what happened when I caught this "interview" between Richie Maddow and Bernie Sanders the other night on MSNDNC. Turns out I did hear things right. I just can't believe my ears.

Maddow asks how to handle those that dare speak out against state-run health care, whether to mock them (the choice of Saul Alinsky, Obama's mentor) or refute them (done less since the Dems are losing the health care debate). Senator Sanders (I) answers by blaming talk radio and accusing Fox News of being "an arm of the Republican Party" (so more mocking naturally), and then he does the unthinkable. He asks a progressive talk show host on the most progressive cable news channel in America why there isn't a progressive television station.

It's like going on PBS and asking why there isn't a public broadcasting station. It's like going on Cinemax and asking why there aren't any skin flicks. It's like going on Jon Stewart and asking why there isn't any comedy. Okay, so maybe he'd have a point on the last one.

Business and Media caught this nonsense, too.

Granted Sanders is a self-avowed socialist with a 100% lifetime legislative score from the AFL-CIO. He supports a single-payer universal health care system. As in only a public option. No private insurers. And he's from Vermont, where there are probably fewer voters than volvos with Obama stickers. But still. That's quite a statement. Where did Bernie Sanders think he was? The O'Reilly Factor? This had to have hurt the gang at NBC's feelings. They've been trying sooo hard to out-Barack CNN.

Better kick it up a notch, Keith and Richie. Maybe put a bust of Lenin in the studio. Bernie ain't impressed.

Can You Hear Me Now? Sheila Jackson Lee Filibusters on Greta

When Sheila Jackson Lee speaks, does Sheila Jackson Lee listen?

We are all aware of her rude cell phone routine during a recovering cancer patient's questioning of health care reform at a Houston town hall meeting. But it gets even better. On Thursday night, Greta Van Susteren attempted to interview the Democratic congresswoman. I say "attempted", because Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee never heard a word. She talked right over every question. It would be downright embarrassing if it wasn't so hilarious. Saturday Night Live's weekend news parodies have rarely been this funny. Sheila Jackson Lee went on TV to prove that she wasn't an elitist with a tin ear, and yet she proved undoubtedly just that. She is indeed phone-y.

Delusions of grandeur? Check. I wouldn't say she's as bad as former representative Cynthia McKinney, but give her time. She's certainly as vocal. And worse she's from Texas, so I feel obliged to apologize to the nation for sending her to Washington. It's clear Sheila Jackson Lee doesn't represent the interests of her constituents. She represents the interests of Sheila Jackson Lee. But who knows? Because she speaks about herself in third person, she just might be convinced she is representing an outside party.

Here's the million dollar question, which Greta touches on briefly: why do legislators who support health care reform have to call a hotline to get answers about a bill that they wrote? Don't they know? If they've read it (as they claim) and still don't understand it, isn't that evidence that their health care reforms cause more problems than they solve? Isn't that evidence that the bill is too invasive and complicated? How do you accuse your opponents of intentionally misconstruing what's in the bill when you can't say yourself without calling a hotline?

Jackson Lee, however, dodged anything close to answering. Instead, she complained that the video of her at the town hall "looked strange." As if it were footage of Bigfoot or something. Greta, quick on her toes, shot back, "It looked bad. This behavior looks bad."

We are being governed by spoiled children who would rather whine and demonize their critics than do their homework. They don't like the status quo, they can vilify insurance companies for cheap political points, and their messiah is in favor of a single-payer system. Case closed. Any reform that strips power from the free market will do, making them heroes in their own twisted minds. They're not reading, they're not listening, and they sure as heck aren't leading. This is why people are infuriated.

Can you hear us now, Democrats?

Headline of the Year!

CANADIAN MOUNTIES BREAK UP ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION DRUG RING

A little humor to break up all the health care talk. Although technically, this brings up more questions about single-payer systems and socialized medicine. If the system in Canada is so much better, why is there a market for counterfeit prescription drugs? Surely they're not rationing. No wonder Canadian birth rates are down (as they are in almost all European-style, socialist nanny states).

There's a joke here somewhere about a sore horse's ass, but I won't go there. Whoops, I think I just did. Exit question: has Brendan Fraser ever starred in a good movie?

Pot? This is Kettle: Dems Suddenly Squeamish Over Tea Party Protesters

Question of the week: what's more artificial? The supposed astroturfers protesting state-controlled health care at town hall meetings or the outrage and disgust which the Left has been feigning at protesters? Do they remember what we put up with for the past eight years? There's hypocrisy and then there's hypocrisy. While President Obama organizes his own paid demonstrators recruited on craigslist, he could learn a lesson or two from President Bush, who was decent enough to accommodate Cindy Sheehan and often talked about the great American right to disagree and assemble freely. But that was the evil Bush administration. Obama is post-partisan and above that.

The only thing more fake than Democrats complaining about protests (except for Nancy Pelosi who really does disdain free speech), is the Fauxbama himself, who has been staging his own phony Hollywood style town hall meetings complete with pre-selected doughy-eyed girls (Hat tip: Gateway Pundit). Or as Laura Ingraham says, giving them the ol' razzle dazzle. It's such a set-up, it's like visiting an old county fair and watching a snake oil salesman push their Cure-All. "It's the health care fix that cures all licks!"

Are you buying it? Me, neither. Dissent is still patriotic, right? Maybe this will serve as a reminder.

To see more of Obama's astroturfing efforts, check out Yid with Lid's excellent blog. And none of this would have been possible without Zombie's wonderfully weird Hall of Shame catalog of protest photos. Music written and performed by Deadman.


If you are wondering why I haven't posted a blog in almost a week, I was in film school learning my new mad mac skills! More videos to follow.

What Price, Tyranny? Obamacare Won't Save You a Dime, but It Could Cost You Your Life

One of the biggest myths the Obama administration continues to push is that health care reform is necessary in order to control health care costs for you, the consumer. This is such a blatant lie, I laugh out loud every time they send out one of their spokespersons to repeat it. If only laughter really were the best medicine, we'd have found a cure in the nonsense that is Obamacare.

There are no guarantees health care reform will reduce costs for you, and the government knows it. That's why they are trying to ram it through as quickly as possible. In fact, it will most likely increase costs. How else do you expect insurance companies to cover the expense of high-risk patients with preexisting conditions that they will now be forced to insure? As the president said, "there are no free lunches." Someone has to pay for this and no surprise, it's you and me, hard-working and healthy individuals. If it takes higher premiums and higher taxes down the road, so be it. Obamacare is basically a universal surcharge disguised as "caring for people."

Think about it. If Democrats really cared about how much you have in your pocket to pay for health insurance, they would be in favor of letting you hold on to more of your money. That's called a tax cut. It's the quickest and most effective way to make sure families and individuals can meet their budgetary obligations. But when was the last time you remember a liberal proposing a tax reduction? They'd rather confiscate your wealth and redistribute it as they see fit.

So while the Obama administration talks about saving you money in health care reforms, they're planning tax increases that will eat up any savings you might see. Just this weekend on Meet the Press, Timothy Geithner left the door open for a tax increase on the middle class. You know, the one Obama promised he would never raise, "not even a cent", when he was campaigning for office last year.

Then there's the cap-and-trade legislation that will raise the cost of energy by taxing energy companies, eating into the budgets of small businesses and working families. Last time I checked, all those fancy machines that doctors and hospitals use to treat patients require energy, so if President Obama's crap-and-trade passes, the cost to treat patients will go up. Unless Obama is planning on rationing electricity. Maybe that's what he means when he talks about eliminating unnecessary tests. No more CAT scans, MRIs, heart monitors, dialysis machines, you name it. The energy costs too much!

How can an administration or anyone seriously claim that you pay too much for health care while at the same time trying to increase what you pay for gas and electricity? Or saying you don't pay enough in taxes? Yet they do, because the media lets them get away with it. This is a shell game, plain and simple, a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. No families will see a net increase in the money they bring home under this scheme. The only savings will be for the government. Which we know they will waste.

The fact of the matter is the government has become too involved in health care, killing choice and competition. In fact, 46% of all health care costs in this country are paid by Uncle Sam thanks to Medicaid and Medicare. The government has never set the appropriate amounts of money aside for these entitlement programs, underfunded them from the beginning, and now they are even skimping on payments to the doctors and hospitals who accept them, leaving private insurance to pick up the slack. Not surprisingly, Medicaid and Medicare are bankrupt government solutions sold to us by the same clowns selling us the new solution of universal health care. And they were sold to us for a lot less than they actually cost.

So what do you do when your Ponzi scheme is running out of money? As Bernie Madoff would say, find some new suckers! Enter Obamacare. It forces everyone to enroll in government-regulated insurance (including the public option) or be punished with a tax (2.5% for every uninsured member of your family). It forces businesses who don't supply their employees with health insurance to pay a tax (8%). And by forcing young, healthy people who usually don't have many medical claims into plans with unnecessary coverage and considerably higher premiums than the private sector has ever charged (you know, the evil ones that make a profit) it basically sets up a system like social security (also going broke), that relies on young workers to work harder to pay for the old and unhealthy.

If just Medicaid and Medicare are too expensive and underfunded, you can imagine what will happen when a health care entitlement program is expanded to include tens or hundreds of millions of new participants. We will be burdening ourselves under even greater amounts of debt, as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has articulated. Heck, just for fun, ask a liberal to name one government program that has ever cost less than projected. Might as well make it a hundred dollar bet, because there aren't any.

There's no bending the curve on health care costs unless the government controls actual health care decisions by price fixing and rationing. In fact, that's exactly what the bill that has been proposed in the House is designed to do. It will be sending bureaucrats out and about to monitor procedures, monitor doctors, monitor medical devices, monitor expecting couples and young families, and monitor end-of-life decisions. There's never been so much Big Brother in a bill before. Not in America. Pundit and Pundette has done a great job of breaking down some of the details by providing pertinent page numbers in the 1000 page bill.

Even with rationing, the cost curve will eventually bend the wrong way and snap back to reality. Why else do you think Obama and the Democrats are only asking that the plan be deficit-neutral for the first ten years? Because that's the furthest they could cook the books without looking like Enron. After that, they can't keep the costs down without massive tax increases, as this chart shows. State-controlled health care will be contributing to the deficit in a big way twenty years out.

What does this mean for you, the consumer? Besides less choice, less money in your pocket, and a ballooning federal deficit that your grandkids will inherit? It means inferior service and longer waits, a shortage of ambulances, and lotteries to see a specialist (just ask Great Britain or Canada). These aren't scare tactics. These are real consequences of real governments making health care decisions based on the state's bottom line. And it's exactly what's wrong with Obama's plan, even if it can reduce some people's premiums.

Anyone who tells you otherwise isn't signing up for the public plan, you can count on that. They are the ridiculously wealthy, the politically connected, and the elites, and they will go outside the system for preferential treatment. The same way Fidel Castro traveled abroad for his health care rather than use the single-payer Cuban system, you can expect the same dastardly behavior out of our elected officials. After all, as Obama said in his press conference, he doesn't need the public system. "I have the best health care available. I have doctors following me around everywhere." Lucky him.

You don't reduce the cost of government by adding new entitlement programs that increase bureaucracy and the size of government. You don't reduce the costs to businesses by adding layers of invasive regulation. Obamacare is a massive transfer of wealth from the private sector to the state camouflaged as necessary reform just because it isn't the status quo. Funny, but isn't that the same way we were sold TARP, the government takeover of Chrysler and GM, and the failing stimulus bill? Obama seems to think any proposal is better than the status quo, even if it's handing over massive power to the state. Or I should say especially if it's handing over massive power to the state.

Given a choice, I would prefer to be poor and free rather than wealthy and enslaved. But it looks like state controlled health care will give us a third option: sick, poor, and bounded by bureaucracy.

Rep. Boehner was Here? "I'm Not a Doctor" Ad Launches

Oh dear, is someone in high places paying attention to my little blog? If so, I may have started something. House Republican leader John Boehner has a new video out regarding Obamacare and it mirrors pretty much everything I wrote the night of Obama's health care press conference. That was nearly two weeks ago. Here's the video and here's the blog. You be the judge.





My only disappointment is that they didn't include the "asthma/breathalyzer" stuff from the campaign trail last year. Of course, it's possible that great minds think alike. In which case, hire me. I can help articulate the conservative message in attention-grabbing ways better than almost anyone. Seriously. What are you waiting for?

Blind Dart Thrower Picks Glowing Headline to Describe Obama's Economy

If the headline spins decreased consumer spending and negative GDP growth as a positive sign, you can bet there's a Democrat in the White House. Who else could make unemployment fun? The economic report on the second quarter came out earlier this week. Read the following article and see if you can find the good news. I couldn't either, but the Reuters headline says otherwise. Some things are too predictable, as I wrote about this phenomena yesterday.

Reuters: U.S. Economy Fares Better Than Expected

Shhh! Don't tell any laid off workers or small business owners. They'll find out eventually.

According to the report, consumer spending reversed nearly 2% percent, business investment decreased almost 9%, residential investment fell around 30%, and business inventories declined by $141 billion, worse than the $114 billion drop during the first quarter. For those keeping track, the GDP has fallen for four consecutive quarters, the first time that's occurred since the government started measuring in 1947. Oh, and the length of unemployment for those out of work is the longest in 50 years (Wall Street Journal).

Of course, we all remember this Reuters headline from two years ago when the economy was really bad, unemployment was 4.7% (imagine!), and you-know-who was still president. But the recession is over according to the latest cover of Newsweek.

Frank Strategies does a video comparison of the coverage just for laughs. Funny how anyone can still claim there isn't a left-wing media bias.