Posts Tagged ‘mammograms’

Budget Talks As Shutdown Looms: Games Deceitful Demagoguing Demonizing Democrats Play

April 8, 2011

Here is where the lying Demoncrats (that’s “Demonic Bureaucrats”) had been according to the Associated Press:

US House defy veto threat, pass stopgap spending

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Defying a White House veto threat, the Republican-led US House of Representatives on Thursday passed a stopgap spending bill to avoid a government shutdown as a deadline looms.

US President Barack Obama’s budget office had vowed to reject the measure, dubbing it “a distraction” from difficult, ongoing negotiations on funding the US government for the rest of the fiscal year that ends September 30.

And Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had vowed to block the measure, calling it a “fantasy” and “a non-starter.”

The bill, which cleared the House by a mostly party-line 247-181 vote, would also have funded US military operations for the rest of the year.

Republicans, relying on the measure to gain leverage in the spending cut battle, used that to argue that Democrats and the White House opposed funding for US troops in harm’s way.

Harry Reid says funding for Cowboy Poetry festivals even as we face a $1.6 trillion deficit this year, yes.  Funding for our troops, hell no.

Here’s where these dishonest, disingenuous lying rat bastards are now:

Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell talk short-term deal
By MEREDITH SHINER | 4/8/11 7:58 AM EDT Updated: 4/8/11 3:28 PM EDT

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Friday afternoon that he is in talks with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to get a short-term budget deal to the floor to stave off a government shutdown.

Reid said there would be competition for what bill gets considered, with a “number of competing continuing resolution” requests on the table. Because the clock runs out at midnight, Reid would need a time agreement — what Reid referred to a “unanimous consent request” — to cut through the normal procedural red tape.

The negotiation between the two Senate leaders is in addition to Reid’s ongoing talks with the House GOP, which still are at an impasse just hours before the government is set to run out of funds.

Reid said Friday afternoon the Democrats’ proposed “clean” extension would maintain the levels of the continuing resolution set to expire Friday at midnight, a measure that contained $6 billion in cuts over three weeks. Reid added that it also would include funding through the year for the military.

Republicans in the House passed a one-week measure Thursday that would slash another $12 billion in spending and fund the Defense Department for the rest of the fiscal year.

Without securing a time agreement on any bill, stopgap or otherwise, the government is likely to shutdown because 30 hours are required between a procedural vote to open debate and a vote for final passage.

“If we’re very close [to a broader budget deal], we will figure out a way to keep the government running. If we’re very close, within an inch or two of an agreement,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters after a press conference featuring the entire caucus.

The Senate Democrats’ move toward a temporary bill Friday is a shift in strategy from earlier this week, when leaders insisted they only wanted a long-term deal. President Barack Obama had called the short-term approach a “distraction.”

By Thursday night, No. 2 Senate Democrat Dick Durbin placed the House-approved bill that funds the government for a week and the Department of Defense for a year on the Senate calendar while closing the floor. The formal action was taken when Reid (D-Nev.) was at the White House meeting with the president and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

Now that the House-approved bill is on the docket, Reid could offer the Democrats’ bill as an amendment in the form of a substitute, essentially replacing the House legislation with his, passing it and sending it back to the lower chamber.

Congressional Democrats and the White House have said emphatically and repeatedly that the House Republican short-term offering is unpalatable. It includes a policy rider limiting funds for abortions in the District, but GOP aides are quick to note that measure had been included in another omnibus package Democrats voted for when it first cleared Congress. Earlier Thursday, the administration issued an official policy advisement stating it “strongly opposed” the GOP measure and would recommend the president veto it if it were to make it to his desk. […]

Question number one: Which party is creating a government shutdown?  The Republican Party that passed a temporary fix to keep it running, or the Democrat Party – which by the way refused to do their jobs last year and pass this budget when they had total control of the presidency, the Senate and the House – which has done nothing but demonize and doesn’t even yet have a bill to offer in place of the Republican-passed bill?

Question number two: Which party is using tricks and gimmicks?  The Republicans, who passed a bill, or the Democrats who are relying on last-nanosecond chicanery?

Question number three: Which party is making abortion the issue: Republicans, who are merely requiring language that Democrats themselves have passed themselves?  Or Democrats, who demand that that the law continue to be ignored?  It is further informative that Barack Obama voted for the language that Republicans are using now when he was a Senator, and Joe Biden voted for it seven times as a Senator.

Question number four: Which party gives the slightest damn about our soldiers, sailors, Marines and Air Force personnel?  The Republicans who funded them and provided funding for Obama’s three wars, or the Democrats who want to use our troops for leverage in their reckless game of chicken?

See my article here for more on the history that got us to the ridiculous point where we are now at.

The Democrats’ tactics get even more ridiculous.  Harry Reid has spent the last week claiming that Republican leaders agreed to a deal, when Republicans have steadily said that no such deal had been reached.  When a legitimate deal is reached, guess what happens?  BOTH parties come out and announce it.

This is what the Republicans said: “There’s not agreement on numbers,” Boehner told reporters Thursday. “And nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to.”

It is frankly asinine that every single Democrat has come out rigidly adhering to their fuehrers’ talking points and claiming some deal had been reached even a full week after Republicans said no such deal had ever been reached.  Not one single Republican has said there was ever any kind of a deal; they have in fact said precisely the opposite all along.

How about this, Harry and all you Demoncrats: President “Zero” Obama and I agreed to a deal while you were getting your “deal”: we agreed that the Democrat Party would fold and Democrats would collectively (like the collectivists they are) march off a cliff in proverbial lemming fashion.  How about you stick to that made-up deal???

The week-long argument that Republicans should somehow be compelled to stick to a totally-invented “deal” that zero-point-zero Republicans have ever said occurred is simply on the level of second graders.  And that said with all due apologies to second graders for the comparison.

Democrats are demagogues and demonizers of the worst sort imaginable.  If you listen to them, Republicans want to reduce the massive deficit for no other reason than that they want poor people to suffer and slowly die.

Take Nancy Pelosi (PLEASE!).  Washington D.C. has two newspapers, the Post and the Times.  The Times leans quite conservative and the Post leans quite liberal.  Amazingly, Nancy Pelosi was such a demagogic lying witch that the liberal Washington Post gave her 4 out of a possible 4 “Pinnochios” for lying.  Nancy Pelosi just flat out lied about the effects of the Republican budget cuts.  To which even the liberal Washington Post said:

In a city with overheated rhetoric, Pelosi’s statement ranks high on this year’s list of bloviated bluster. It’s bad enough that she repeatedly mixed up 6 million meals and 6 million people — and made no effort to correct the record after her statement was reported in the media. But the figure she used appears to have been invented itself, with little basis in fact.

Listen to Harrry Reid’s shrill unabashed hate:

“Republicans want to shut down our nation’s government because they want to make it harder for women to get the health services they need,” Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on the floor Friday. “This is indefensible and everyone should be outraged — men and women should be outraged.”

That’s right.  It doesn’t have anything to do with Democrats’ reckless and frankly immoral out-of-control spending that will necessarily cause the collapse of America and a great depression that will make the last one look like a walk in the park on a sunny day.  It’s only because Republicans hate women and want them to suffer.

Reid said:

“But Republicans are asking me to sacrifice my wife’s health, my daughter’s health and my nine granddaughters’ health. They’re asking me to sacrifice the health of women in Nevada and across America. I won’t do it.“ 

Really, Harry, you demented liar?  You despicable little twisted piece of cockroach feces?  You secretly recorded Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell demanding that you sacrifice every female member of your family to their demonic god of meanness, did you?  Y0u ought to be tarred and feathered before having your butt permanently kicked down the steps of the Capitol for that kind of outrageous vileness.

But for Democrats, that kind of over-the-top vicious lie is simply a typical negotiating tactic.

We’ve got Democrat Eleanor Holmes Norton spewing vileness and lies the way a drunk college frat boy spews vomit:

“We are absolutely outraged. This is the functional equivalent of bombing innocent civilians,” she said.

That’s right.  The only thing keeping Republicans from firebombing every single city in America is Democrats.  Because Republicans want to murder as many Americans as they possibly can.

This is actually how these people debate.

Then there’s the whole Planned Parenthood thing – which was at the heart of the evil Democrat statments above.  First of all, if Demoncrats had wanted to pass their own budget, they damn well should have done so last year when they were in total control of all three branches of government.  Instead, they played their stupid political games and refused to deal with their primary responsibility as politicians.  They didn’t want to pass a budget because it was an election year and the American people would have seen how determined Democrats seem to be to bankrupt America and turn us into a banana republic.  And now they are pathetically whining when Republicans take over to do their damn job for them in a way they don’t like.  Democrats shrilly and hysterically claim that Republicans are trying to kill people so nobody will look at the facts.  They say Republicans are trying to destroy women’s health so people won’t see how despicable they’ve been.

Here’s the thing: the “women’s health” argument is demonstrably bogus.

Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards claimed “If this bill ever becomes law, millions of women in this country are gonna lose their healthcare access — not to abortion services — to basic family planning, you know, mammograms.”  Numerous Demoncrats such as Barbara Boxer have repeated that false claim to justify continued funding of Planned Parenthood.  Boxer said, “In California alone, hundreds of thousands of women, the Democratic Senator said, use the organization’s “life-saving” services — including cancer screenings, mammograms, day-to-day health care, OB-GYN services as well as contraception and family planning.”  Liberal mainstream media took up the false claim that women’s lives are being saved with Planned Parenthood mammograms.  And:
In addition to being frequently repeated by politicans who are in Planned Parenthood’s pocket, this claim is frequently repeated at Planned Parenthood rallies, blogs, newspaper editorials, and on television (courtesy of Planned Parenthood’s CEO).
But here’s the truth: a very recent sting revealed that Planned Parenthood does NOT provide mammograms.  It was all a lie told by an organization that is based entirely upon abortion and the dishonest defenders of abortion:
In the tapes, a Live Action actor calls 30 Planned Parenthood clinics in 27 different states, inquiring about mammograms at Planned Parenthood. Every Planned Parenthood, without exception, tells her she will have to go elsewhere for a mammogram, and many clinics admit that no Planned Parenthood clinics provide this breast cancer screening procedure. “We don’t provide those services whatsoever,” admits a staffer at Planned Parenthood of Arizona. Planned Parenthood’s Comprehensive Health Center clinic in Overland Park, KS explains to the caller, “We actually don’t have a, um, mammogram machine, at our clinics.”

Consider this:

In a current advertisement a Planned Parenthood clinic director for eight years, Abby Johnson, explains why she left the organization.

“I learned that Planned Parenthood is not about women’s health care at all. Their primary profit center and their entire corporate culture is about abortions,” Johnson says in the ad. “My superiors actually instructed me to increase the number of abortions at my facility. I couldn’t take it anymore. Low income women need real health care services and it is time America knew the truth about Planned Parenthood.”

Caught red-handed in a total lie that was the basis of their demand for funding for Planned Parenthood, Demoncrats simply dismiss reality and continue their screeching screeds of demagogic hatred.

Republicans point out this is about spending at a time when we don’t have money.  They point out that since Planned Parenthood is an abortion organization in addition to being a radical leftwing outfit that DOESN’T perform the services they claim, they should get their money from somewhere other than the federal government.

Let’s say I get federal funding for encouraging children to eat their broccoli.  But when parents call me to get me to come and get their children to actually eat broccoli, I say, “I’m sorry, but I don’t provide that service.”

Should I keep getting federal funds?

In a sane world the answer would be “hell no.”  But Demoncrats do not live in a sane world; and they do not want the rest of us to be allowed to live in one, either.

If Planned Parenthood wants to provide abortions, let them.  It’s evil, and one day every liberal who advocated the murder of these fifty-two million babies will burn in hell, and decent people will continue to do everything we can to stop this monsterous Nazi practice.  But go private and get your damn money from liberals.  Don’t you dare bait-and-switch us with bogus claims that it’s all about women’s health and demand government money.  Particularly when it turns out you rat bastards were even lying about that.

We are facing national extinction in a not very distant time.  We cannot even possibly continue to spend like this.  It is insane.  It is morally and fiscally insane.  And yet Democrats WILL NOT make even trivial cuts in spending.  And any time Republicans try to make the cuts that are absolutely necessary to prevent the financial implosion and Great Depression that is guaranteed to come, Demoncrats falsely demonize them at every turn.

We don’t need to cut billions of dollars from the federal government; we need to cut TRILLIONS of dollars from the federal government.

It comes down to this: if Democrats get their way, if the American people support them with their votes, America will fall, and fall soon.

Then we will truly see which party wanted the people to suffer.

We Can’t Just Ignore It: Democrat Bill WILL Ration Your Health Care

November 23, 2009

Mammograms – or the lack of them – are all the buzz right now.

They are serving as warning shots of the massive health care rationing to come if the Democrat health plan becomes law.

The former head of the National Institute of Health says that women should very forcefully ignore the recommendations of the Obama administration’s U.S. Preventative Services Task Force:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 (UPI) — The former head of the U.S. National Institutes of Health says American women should ignore the mammogram recommendations of a government breast cancer panel.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” former NIH chief Dr. Bernadine Healy, now health editor for the magazine U.S. News & World Report, said she disagreed with the assessment of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a 16-member panel assembled by Department of Health and Human Services. The group this month recommended women under 50 forgo routine breast cancer tests and instead get mammograms individually in consultation with their doctors.

Asked if women should ignore the panel, Healy said, “Oh, I’m saying very powerfully ignore them, because unequivocally — and they agreed with this — this will increase the number of women dying of breast cancer.”

But as it turns out, neither women nor anyone else can ignore these recommendations.

Rationing via “death panel” is coming home to roost, to paraphrase Jeremiah Wright.

Sunday morning, on ABC’s “This Week,” with George Stephanopoulos, we saw how a fairly harmless sounding paragraph in a bill can have massive consequences on real people.

George Stephanaopoulos and Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn – when they were actually get a word in edgewise over Democrat Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s constant grandstanding – underscored that the country will find itself facing rationed health care:

BLACKBURN: And, George, this is exactly how it happens. If you go to page 1,296 of the House bill, the engrossed copy, and you began to read in title three of that bill, on preventive and wellness services, and you get down to section 2301, this is what happens. In section 3131 of that bill, it changes the Preventive Services Task Force to the Clinical Preventive Services Task Force.

Then, you go back and you see that that task force on preventive clinical services is tasked with rating A, B, C, D, or I all preventive services. Then you go back into section 222 of the bill

(CROSSTALK)

BLACKBURN: Yes, I have read this bill. And it indicates what would be paid or covered. And this is where the actual link comes, and I’ll read it for you. In section 2301, it says, “All recommendations of the Preventive Services Task Force” — that’s the group that did the mammograms — “and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services, as in existence on the day before the date of the enactment of this act, shall be considered to be recommendations of the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services.”

STEPHANOPOULOS: So the guidelines — the point is that the guidelines then…

BLACKBURN: They become the law.

STEPHANOPOULOS: … would — would become…

BLACKBURN: They become the law, the mandate.

STEPHANOPOULOS: … would become controlling.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: No, they would not be.

BLACKBURN: Yes, they do.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: And what’s unfortunate is that the Republicans, and Ms. Blackburn, have for the first time politicized breast cancer.

BLACKBURN: That is incorrect.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: That is — no, it is not. And I’m a breast cancer…

BLACKBURN: No, it is incorrect.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: As you know, as a breast cancer survivor, Marsha…

BLACKBURN: That is incorrect. It’s in the bill, Debbie.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Excuse me.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let her finish her point.

BLACKBURN: I have a great respect — yes.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: As a breast cancer survivor, I came out against these — these recommendations. Every major cancer organization has come out against these recommendations. The task force language in that bill actually makes sure that prevention — preventive services like mammograms and colonoscopies and other cancer screenings would be free. The task force recommendations — the language in the bill…

(CROSSTALK)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, Debbie, let me — let me clarify this

(CROSSTALK)

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: … that even more women would get access to…

(CROSSTALK)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Excuse me for a second. That — that is true. But let me clarify a little bit, because under the — the bill — and we have — we have the language, as well. It says that a group health plan and health insurance issuer offering the group (ph) shall provide coverage, but only under — if the Preventive Services Task Force rates it as an A or B.

BLACKBURN: That’s right.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And, actually, under the — under the task force, they said that these mammograms for women 40 to 50 is rated C. So they actually wouldn’t be covered. So you have a great expansion for a broad part of the population, but actually, these guidelines would be controlling for ages 40 or 50.

With all due respects to Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s inability to face reality, ABC News’ Chief Washington Correspondent and former Clinton administration Communications Director George Stephanopoulos and Rep. Marsha Blackburn are right: under this bill, when a government panel recommends that care be rationed, that care gets rationed.

And you’d better face up to that reality.

And if government rationing isn’t bad enough, there is also the fact that this takeover of the private health care system will also result in higher premiums, according to the CBO.  You will pay more and get less.

You’d better face up to that reality, too.

You’d also better face up to the reality that once this bill gets online, it will cost at least $2.5 trillion every ten years – and very likely ten times that figure if history is any guide.

Democrats argue that we should pass this bill to “get something done,” and then come back and fix it later.  But this bill is beyond dreadful.  The Dean of the Harvard School of Medicine gave it a flunking grade, and The Wall Street Journal called it “The Worst Bill Ever.”  The Democrats’ plan is beyond bad; it is evil.  We can surely start with something better than this.

This bill WILL lead to a government takeover via a public option (whether it is present in the bill or presented as a ‘trigger’ to happen later), and it will CERTAINLY lead to rationed care along with a shortage of doctors to provide medical services.

It is human nature to avoid dealing with unpleasant realities.  And the Democrats’ attempt to take over health care is the epitome of an unpleasant reality.  If it passes, it will be too late; and voting Democrats out of office in retaliation will be way too little, way too late.  The American people must either rise up and scream this monstrosity down, or it will very likely become the law of the land.

Breast Cancer Screening: Government Fires First Volley Of Rationing, Death By Medical Neglect

November 19, 2009

Let me begin by saying that the current versions of ObamaCare don’t have a single death panel.

It’s more like 111 separate death panels.

Some of the names  and acronyms of the dozens and dozens of bureaucracies are undoubtedly different under the new iteration of socialized medicine, but here’s a snapshot of your new health care system if Democrats get their way:

The Senate version is 2,075 pages of fun, I hear.  Nobody understands it.  And nobody is going to end up getting a chance to read it by the time it gets voted on.

If you thought that there was going to be any kind of transparency or accountability – or even honesty – from the Obama administration – you need to stop smoking your crack pipe.

This latest event in the march toward socialized medicine reminds me of the case of Barbara Wagner.  In Oregon, which has “universal coverage” through the state, she was abandoned to die by a system that would not pay for her cancer treatment, but offered to pay for her euthanasia.

Only this time, the government wants to deny treatment on the other side of the cancer diagnosis.

IBD Editorials

Rationing’s First Step

Health Care: A government task force has decided that women need fewer mammograms and later in life. Shouldn’t that be between patient and physician? We have seen the future of health care, and it doesn’t work.

We have warned repeatedly that the net results of health care bills before Congress will be higher demand, fewer doctors, more cost control, all leading to rationing.  New recommendations issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) regarding breast cancer and the necessity for early and frequent mammograms do not convince us otherwise.

Just six months ago, the panel, which works under the Health and Human Services Department as a “best practices” study group, was shouting its concern about a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study showing a 1% drop in the number of women regularly undergoing such screening and prevention.

The task force was saying that women older than 40 should get a mammogram every one to two years. It found that frequent screening lowered death rates from breast cancer mostly for women ages 50 to 69. But that was then, and this is now.

“We’re not saying women shouldn’t get screened. Screening does save lives,” Diana Petiti, task force vice chairman, said of the recommendations published Tuesday in Annals of Internal Medicine. “But we are recommending against routine screening.”

Now the panel recommends that women in their 40s stop having routine annual mammograms and that older women should cut back to every two years. The concern allegedly is that too frequent testing can result in increased anxiety, false positives, unneeded follow-up tests and possibly disfiguring biopsies.  Preventing breast cancer and saving lives almost get lost in the new analysis.

“I have a particular concern in this case about who was involved in this task force,” says Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., who was a heart surgeon in private life. “There are no surgeons or oncologists who deal directly with breast cancer or even radiologists. … I’ve seen far too many young women develop late-stage breast cancer because they didn’t have adequate screening.”

Little, if anything, has happened medically in the last six months to cause such a shift. A lot, however, has happened politically as a health care overhaul has limped forward on life support. The Congressional Budget Office has been busy pricing these various bills, a process that includes screening and prevention.

As we have warned, the growing emphasis seems to be on cost containment rather than quality of care. About 39 million women undergo mammograms each year in America, costing the health care system more than $5 billion.

“The American Cancer Society continues to recommend annual screening using mammography and clinical breast examination for all women beginning at age 40,” says Otis Brawley, its chief medical officer. “Our experts make this recommendation having reviewed virtually all the same data reviewed by the USPSTF, but also additional data that the USPSTF did not consider.”

Daniel Kopans, a radiology professor at Harvard Medical School, says: “Tens of thousands of lives are being saved by mammography screening, and those idiots want to do away with it. It’s crazy — unethical, really.”

This, sadly, appears to be the future of medicine under government-run health care. Aside from taxes on insurers, providers and device manufacturers, we’ll be up to our eyeballs in cost-effectiveness boards that will decide who gets what tests and treatments, when and if. These are only recommendations for now, but they are the shape of things to come.

An IBD/TIPP poll found that 45% of medical doctors would consider retiring if the Congressional health care “reform” passes.  Given the fact that an increasing shortage of doctors is already one of the chief burdens in providing health care, this exodus would amount to a catastrophe that our health system would never recover from.

In Canada, the chronic doctor shortage has been bad enough that patients literally have to sign up for a lottery in order to have a chance to “win” a primary care physician.  But now we are learning that overwhelmed Canadian doctors are using a lottery of their own to dump patients.

Why on earth would anyone want this for America?

The Obama administration is preparing the health delivery system to implement the philosophy of Obama advisers such as Robert Reich, Ezekiel Emanuel, and Cass Sunstein, which can be easily summarized with the quote:

It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

Robert Reich’s words in context only make the hateful idea sound even more hateful:

And by the way, we’re going to have to, if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

Then there are the words of Obama’s Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein, who wrote:

“I urge that the government should indeed focus on life-years rather than lives. A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people.”

And Rahm Emanuel’s brother Ezekiel, whom Obama appointed as his OMB health policy adviser in addition to selecting him to serve on the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research wrote:

“When implemented, the Complete Lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuatedThe Complete Lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value.”

“Attenuated” means, “to make thin; to weaken or reduce in force, intensity, effect, quantity, or value.”  Attenuated care would be reduced or lessened care.  Dare I say it, in this context it clearly means, “rationed care.”

And Obama himself told a woman who wanted to keep her aging mother alive:

“At least we can let doctors know — and your mom know — that you know what, maybe this isn’t going to help. Maybe you’re better off, uhh, not having the surgery, but, uhh, taking the painkiller.”

YOU take the painkiller rather than have that lifesaving surgery, Barry Hussein.  And why don’t you insist that Michelle and your two daughters take the pill rather than have that lifesaving surgery, too?  Just to be like all the “little people” out there.

But of course that’s not going to happen.  Rather, Democrats have now exempted themselves from 11 separate amendments that would have required them to have the same ObamaCare that they want to force everyone else to have.

You can understand why they would do so, given the promises that the system will be worse than terrible, and due to the fact that even a complete idiot who looks around and sees how horribly the administration has managed the H1N1 vaccine situation can recognize that taking on 1/6th of the economy would be beyond catastrophic.  I mean, heck, if I were a Democrat, I’d be sure to exempt myself from this monstrosity too, lest MY family members fall under the coming steamroller.

This “recommendation” of reducing mammographies isn’t mandatory now, but that’s because the government hasn’t usurped the health care system yet.  You just wait a decade from now, when the government runs everything, and soaring deficits force them to start cutting costs.