This is SO not surprising:
I came across this by watching Glenn Beck. He credited Verum Serum for the video, and then improved it. Only for some reason my browser doesn’t access Fox News video. Just to give full credit to where it is due, and to direct attention to what may be an even better damnation of the liberal-Obama agenda on health care.
Some great quotes:
“A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer” – Rep. Jan Schakowsky (to wild applause).
“Someone once said to me that this is a Trojan horse for single-payer, and I said, ‘Well it’s not a Trojan horse, right? It’s just right there! I’m telling you! We’re going to get there. Over time, slowly, but we’ll move away from reliance on employment-based health insurance – as we should – but we’ll do it in a way that we’re not going to frighten people into thinking they are going to lose their private insurance” – Dr. Jacob Hacker, New America Foundation.
“This is not a principled fight. This is a fight about a strategy for getting there, and I believe we will” – Rep. Jan Schakowski
We see that there is no intention of telling the American people the truth; rather, the idea is to keep the American people from realizing what is happening until it is too late. And the people who are running this deception-campaign don’t give a damn about principles, but only about the ends they are trying to impose.
Verum Serum is on top of this: they also have videos revealing that prominent Senator Russ Feingold sees the ultimate goal of the health care plan to be a single-payer universal health care system.
They have a very good article to show that there is a clear agenda to sell a “public plan option” while smuggling in universal health care by poisoning the health insurance industry. That article includes this statement by Rep. Jan Schakowsky with a corresponding video.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and co-sponsor of HR-676 answered criticisms from single-payer advocates. She said the public option is not a compromise, but a strategic step toward the single-payer system and the elimination of the private insurance industry…
The public option is simply the opening salvo against the private sector, Schakowsky and other speakers said.
Both Schakowsky and McNary stressed the need for solidarity among health care reform activists, in order to build mass support and momentum toward the goal of a single-payer system.
Liberals such as Schakowsky are literally boasting at liberal rallies for Obama’s healthcare initiative that their government-provided healthcare plan will put private insurers out of business – ending any privatized system.
The American people need to wake up and realize that they are NOT choosing any sort of compromise between a private system and a more government-controlled system, but that the Democrats are determined to usher in a total-government controlled nationalized socialized healthcare system based on the failed European model.
We have frankly known this was coming since the so-called “Stimulus” bill was passed. And even back then, we learned that the bill would ultimately create a rationing system that would result in the premature death of senior citizens as bureaucrats determined that their care was too expensive.
Aged-based health care rationing will be the cornerstone of any Democrat universal healthcare plan. You can count on it. Bottom line: it is a fact that the largest consumption of health care resources occurs in the final six months of one’s life.
The problem is that there is no way to know exactly when that “final six months” actually is. Take a 75-year old woman with cancer: she may very well die in six months without treatment; but she might well live another 20 years if she HAS treatment.
What you need to do is decide RIGHT NOW whether you want a bureaucrat making that assessment based on a chart in some office in Washington, rather than you and your physicians.
D. James Kennedy made a prophetic statement:
“Watch out, Grandma and Grandpa: Because the generation that survived abortion will one day come after you.
And that day of reckoning is coming under the first president to come from that very generation. Unless we stop him.
As a PS, Obama in his speech today claimed that 46 million Americans are uninsured. That claim is false, and in fact is an implicit statement as to his intention to cover illegal immigrants.
My mother – who is nearing her mid-70s – has been undergoing treatment for an aggressive form of breast cancer. The oncologist repeatedly said that the chemotherapy mortality studies did not even include women in her age group. In hindsight, I reflect on those words and realize how easy it would have been for some bureaucrat to deny her lifesaving treatment.
And when I realize that my mother – who I would throw myself under the path of an oncoming bus to save – might well someday be denied essential treatment so that someone who doesn’t even belong in this country can gave full access to our medical system, I am enraged.
Tags: age, elimination, Feingold, health care, healthcare, medicine, private insurance, rationing, Schakowsky, single-payer, six months, socialized, universal, Verum Serum, video
Start Thinking Right 
June 16, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Who cares if Schakowsky says the insurnance companies will be out of business? The truth is there will be some form of nationalized health insurance plan. The insurance companies that one to exist will adjust their fees and services to meet the publics needs. And those that succeed will keep many people that feel more comfortable with private insurance. And those that deny services, charge through the roof, will die or find a niche within the industry to survive. There is no need for fear tactics. There are many examples of “free” services such as radio and tv, yet millions of people choose to pay for it. The same will be true for healthcare.
June 16, 2009 at 2:02 pm
First of all, your statements fly in the face of what the people pushing this system are saying – including Barack Obama, who similar to Schakowsky said that he wanted to see a single payer system.
Second, the fact that you say, “The truth is there will be some form of nationalized health insurance plan” is ITSELF reason to be fearful. The fact that you worship the government, and want it to be an intrinsic part of every aspect of your life notwithstanding, those of us who’ve seen the Post Office fail against UPS and Federal Express know that the government can’t do things as efficiently as the private sector; and those of us who’ve seen the DMV know what “service” will look like under government run health care.
Third, whether a couple insurance companies are somehow allowed to survive or not is really quite beside the point (beyond the fact that privatized health care cannot exist without them). What IS the point is that I don’t want the government barging into my health care and dictating terms to me. You make the point about radio and TV – as though I should be so glib about what surgeon is operating on me or whether I even GET TO BE OPERATED ON in equal terms to which channel I watch. That’s just a complete non sequitur.
A better example is failing government schools. Sure, there is the option of a private school; but when parents are forced to pay both for the government school AND the private school, few can afford to go to the other option. That’s a better analogy because THAT is how the liberals plan to kill insurance companies.
June 16, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Constitutionally ignorant Americans arguably DESERVE the headaches that they’re having with constitutionally clueless Obama, including being forced into constitutionally unauthorized federal health care. Please consider the following.
Not only did the Founders make the 10th A. to reserve the lion’s share of government power to serve the people to the states, not the Oval Office and Congress, but speaking of health care, Jefferson had likewise noted that the Founders had trusted the states, not the federal government, with the care of the people. See for yourselves.
“Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our external and mutual relations; **to each State, severally, the care of our persons** (emphasis added), our property, our reputation and religious freedom.” –Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262 http://tinyurl.com/onx4j
But more importantly, Chief Justice Marshall had established the following case precedent, now wrongly ignored, which appropriately limits federal government power to lay taxes.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” –Chief Justice Marshall, GIBBONS V. OGDEN (1824) http://supreme.justia.com/us/22/1/case.html
So not only is misguided Obama’s stimulus package and proposed health care constitutionally unauthorized, but based on Justice Marshall’s official notes the feds never had the power to lay taxes to fund these programs in the first place. In fact, federal government funding for the states for these things can be thought of as the feds returning to the states money that the feds have stolen from the states anyway.
The bottom line is that the people need to wise up to the ongoing, illegal usurpation of state powers by the Constitution-ignoring feds and put the constitutional leash back on the renegade federal government by doing the following. The people need to elect pro-state power people to the federal and state governments in 2010 who will do as follows. Pro-state power leaders need to use their power to amend the Constitution to repeal the ill-conceived 16th and 17th Amendments, the source of power for the corrupt Democratic Party now running the country, in my opinion. The 16th A. in particular, the amendment that gives the feds the power to tax citizens directly, has to go. It needs to go because it has made it too easy for the corrupt feds to lay constitutionally unauthorized taxes, in my opinion.
And once the 16th A. has been repealed and the federal income tax eliminated, the states can finance the federal government with higher state taxes for the following reason. The states can use their greater constitutional powers to serve the people to fight a downhill battle with the feds, eliminating constitutionally unauthorized federal taxes, keeping as many tax dollars in a given state as possible for running things like state healthcare programs. (Did you hear that California?)
And when any state lawmaker shows the voters that they are more interested in protecting the welfare of the federal government than that of their own state, then they can look for another job.
The truth of the matter is that the phony powers now associated with the Oval Office and Congress, powers that the corrupt feds have been scandalously stealing from the states since the days of constitutionally clueless FDR, need to be destroyed. Again, repealing the 16th and 17th amendments is one way to do this, in my opinion.
June 16, 2009 at 3:04 pm
If you haven’t read Mark Levin’s books “Men in Black” or “Liberty and Tyranny,” you should. He is on the money – as you are in your comment.
When the Constitution is a “living, breathing document,” it stands for nothing. The result? Every judicial nomination because a new trench warfare, because it is ALL ABOUT THE JUDGE, RATHER THAN ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION.
Judges who impose their own will rather than interpreting the Constitution is a form of tyranny – and it is a form of tyranny advanced by the left, with the ground rules long-since having been grudgingly accepted by the right.
Government has become a monstrous octopus that has no accountability because it no longer has to worry about the Constitution or the many limits on government authority that the Constitution wisely imposed.
June 16, 2009 at 3:28 pm
You are making some grand generalizations to suggest that because I believe the government will provide some form of health care is not the same as saying I “worship government and want it to be a part of every aspect of life.” That is actually pretty humorous.
Also I agree that Federal Express does a better job than the post office. And those that can afford UPS or Fed Express do so. And those who can’t or prefer the postal system have that choice. The same can be true with healthcare.
I don’t know what insurance coverage you have presently, but I can almost guarantee you they are already intruding into your health decisions. And they will evaluate coverage for you based on those decisions. So why is that so different than what you fear the government will do?
Moreover we already have examples of how the government deals with healthcare. Medicare and medicaid are not bogged down because the government is making decisions. The doctors still call the shots. And the VA hospitals provide about the cheapsest medication a vet can get. So don’t overly simplify this by suggesting big bad government is going to tell your sugeon what to do. If I were you, I’d be more concerned about your insurance approving the procedure, limiting your doctors and hospital choices, and then making you pay a hefty deductable, and then debating if they’ll cover you if you ever need insurance. I’d be more afraid of that.
Your example of private vs. public schools is a good one. I wish I could take the money I use for public schools and apply it to private schools of my choosing but I can’t. However with a health plan, I could still choose a private plan, or if I so wish I could use the government plan.
June 16, 2009 at 3:58 pm
“There is no need for fear tactics”
The factual truth which Michael documents of what Obama and his co-horts are attempting to do SHOULD scare every freedom loving American to action!
June 16, 2009 at 5:58 pm
First of all, if you want the government involved in running your health care, I don’t have a darn thing to apologize for in my “worship” comment. When the government can control your health care, it can control your activities (e.g. if you smoke, or drink, or are too heavy, you can be compelled to “toe the line” or lose your coverage). That is a huge power over people’s lives. I want the government the hell out of my personal decisions, and in particular those decisions that will affect my quality of life – and EVEN MORE FRIGHTENINGLY, MY AGING PARENTS.
Barack Obama refused to allow banks to repay their bailout money until he was finally forced to do so due to political pressure. He flagrantly violated bankruptcy law in order to pay auto company bondholders – who were legally entitled to be first in line to be repaid in full – pennies on the dollar while giving politically-connected unions benefits they did not deserve. I don’t want this guy – who has imperiously appointed more “czars” (20 at last count) who are unaccountable to anyone but him to run whole sectors of the economy – running my damn health care. All right?
I have read too many horror articles (quick example) about the quality of government health care in Europe and the UK. I have personally run into dozens of men and women in my town who came to this country to get health care that they either could not get in their home countries, or had to wait so long to get that it was necessary for them to come here. And these were in much smaller countries, where such a system would be far easier to implement.
I produced the actual statements and video of leftists who are very much intending to pursue a hidden agenda (at least hidden by the Obama administration and largely concealed by the mainstream media). They have on the record expressed their intent to subvert the system you describe (“I could still choose a private plan, or if I so wish I could use the government plan”) and replace it with a single-payer government system. If the actual agenda is not something to be feared, why don’t they come out and tell us the truth?
In my links, I cited articles describing the coming rationing of health care. I can point to the man who was Obama’s FIRST choice for Health czar and quote him talking about the duty of the elderly to expect fewer health care resources.
Your logic of “the government is already involved in your health care, so you might as well go whole hog” is tantamount to, “You put your toe in freezing water, so you might as well dive in.” I DON’T WANT MORE GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN MY HEALTH CARE; I WANT LESS.
Barack Obama is on the record saying he wanted to see universal health care. I don’t.
As I say in my article, my mother has been receiving treatment for cancer. In my conversations with her, she has already mentioned significant changes in her treatment regime based on changes made since Obama took office (due to changes in Medicare policy). And the damn health care boondoggle hasn’t even been passed yet. I am so glad that she had her cancer when she did, rather than having to count on bureaucrats to decide whether she would get to live in a nationalized system.
If you want socialized medicine, whoopie-doo for you. But please don’t lecture me on what I should want, or what I should be willing to accept.
June 16, 2009 at 6:25 pm
It sure scares me. If it doesn’t scare 4wrdthnkndad, that’s his affair.
I remember that actress, Natasha Richardson, who would almost certainly have survived if her skiing injury occurred in the US had the exact set of circumstances occurred. Canada’s health care system couldn’t do a CT scan – routine in most American hospitals – that would have identified her issue in time to save her life. And once the doctors realized that her life was in jeopardy, there were no “lifeflight” helicopters in the region to rush her the 50 miles to Montreal where they actually HAD the equipment that most any US hospital would have had to begin with.
Now, if 4wrdthnkndad wants that system, he should move to Canada, or Cuba, or North Korea where he can get it. But I sure don’t want it here, and I intend to fight to keep from getting it imposed on me.