Remember The Health Security Act (Hillary Care)

hillary bill obama cartoonNov. 12, 1993 as the Health Security Act (Hillary Care)was in its death throes, Bill Clinton was so concerned about AIDS that , he suggested that a provision be added to the bill mandating a one-time screening for AIDS be done on all US citizens.

Clinton also proposed having the CDC require every citizen with full-blown AIDS to be confined to AIDS sanatoriums until they were no longer contagious, or until they died.

The sanatoriums were to be situated in sparsely-populated areas of the country. Upon admission, patients would be required to sign living wills with euthanasia previsions that could be triggered by proxy when their healthcare providers deemed them to be “terminal.”

The AIDS provision Clinton wanted to add to Hillarycare does not appear to be in Obamacare. However, the same federal Health Board that will be charged with the responsibility of doing the cost analysis on the merits of keeping the elderly alive versus denying them lifesaving procedures will also be responsible for preparing a cost analysis on the value of keeping terminally-ill AIDS victims alive on the public dime.(Does that mean the Very Rich will be kept alive with their private funds but, we Medicare, Obamacare Folks will be Euthanized at some point.?

It’s interesting to note that the gay and lesbian population actively campaigned for Clinton in 1992 and 1996 just as the elderly—the primary target of the Obamacare Health Board—actively campaigned, and voted, for Barack Obama in 2008.

hillary headYet, try to convince the gay and lesbian community that, if Hillarycare hadn’t failed, most of them would be spending their final days in an isolated AIDS sanatorium somewhere in the Badlands.

large group we wont take it any moreAnd the blue-haired seniors in Florida and Arizona may find that their next flare-up of irritable bowel syndrome, or their next broken hip, might land them in a terminal care unit of their local hospital where those who linger while dying go to die, instead of sitting around bragging about their latest hospital adventure at the assisted living center.

.Make no mistake about it. The Obama Health Board, or as it is legislatively known, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research, headed by death merchants the likes of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, based on the vision of Dr. Robert Pearlman, the Chief of Ethics Evaluation for the Veteran’s Administration National Center for Ethics in Health Care, who was the visionary behind the notion that disabled veterans who do not want to be a burden to their families or to society, have the right to death with dignity through assisted suicide.

Pearlman authored his death protocol in 1997. For the remaining three years of the Clinton Administration, Pearlman‘s 52-page end-of-life planning document, “Your Life, Your Choices,” not only became the basis for the living wills used by disabled military people but, it also became the framework for the federal regulation that now requires hospitals and other medical care facilities to pressure patients—particularly elderly patients—to sign Living Wills (i.e., euthanasia provisions). Today, in violation of the Hippocratic Oath, doctors regularly euthanize patients deemed to be terminally-ill. Among the list of terminal illnesses that can trigger the Living Will death-with-dignity provision is old-age.

If you’re old, sick or disabled — or have a friend or loved one who is — you should be very wary of Democratic healthcare plans. And, too, you should keep an eye on “the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff.” This is, after all, one of the two advisors to President Obama dubbed “deadly doctors” by the New York Post, a man also known as “Doctor Death,” who, as conservative blogger Gateway Pundit explained, “supports euthanasia … [and] believe[s] medical care should be reserved for non-disabled ‘participating’ members of society.”

It’s become a growing theme : ”Obamacare” will mean mandatory euthanasia for your grandmother in order to save money, and the person who created the ideological underpinnings for that policy is the brother of former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Ezekiel Emanuel, who’s currently advising the administration on healthcare reform through a post at the White House Office of Management and Budget,

Our Betters In Washington Shall Simply Order Us To Live As They Want Us To Live

Hillary is the war on women says kathleen wiley “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

The cesspool get’s deeper on a daily basis with the present crew residing in office

valerie jarretThe ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve.”

—————————————————————————

October 14, 2014 12:00 AM Local Elections with Lasting National Import
What’s at stake this November is the president’s vision for remaking America.

By Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His website is http://www.tsowell.com   thomas sowell

What is the overriding national issue that makes this year’s elections so crucial?

That issue is whether, despite all the lawless edicts of President Obama, threatening one-man rule, we can still salvage enough of the Constitution to remain a free, democratic nation.

Barack Obama will be on his way out in two years, but if he can appoint enough federal judges who share his contempt for the Constitution’s limits on federal government power in general and presidential powers in particular, then the United States of America can continue on the path to becoming another banana republic, even after Obama has left the White House.

President Obama understands how high the stakes are, which is why he is out fundraising all across the country — seemingly all the time — even though he has no more elections to face himself. Obama came to power saying that he was going to fundamentally change the United States of America — and he intends to do it, even after he is gone, by giving lifetime appointments as federal judges to people who share his view that this country’s institutions and values are fundamentally wrong, and need to be scrapped and replaced by his far-left vision.

If only Obama’s critics and opponents understood this momentous issue as clearly as he does.

The issue is whether “we the people,” as designated by the Constitution, continue free to live our own lives as we see fit and to determine what laws and policies we want to live under.

President Obama’s vision is very different. In his vision, our betters in Washington shall simply order us to live as they want us to live — telling us what medical insurance we can have, what doctors we can go to, what political groups shall be favored by the Internal Revenue Service, with more of the same coming in the years ahead, long after Obama has left the White House.

Critics who deplore President Obama’s foreign policies in general – and his weak response to the Islamic State threat in particular – as showing incompetence and who see his incessant fundraising as just a weird distraction fail to understand how different his priorities are from theirs.

Barack Obama understands clearly that his ability to fundamentally remake what he has long seen as a deeply defective and corrupt America in the image of his far-left vision depends crucially on having control of the Senate that has the power to confirm his appointments of federal judges with lifetime tenure. His fundraising is key to maintaining the Democrats’ Senate majority.

Foreign policy is subordinated to Obama’s overriding ideological vision. The president will not risk losing this year’s congressional elections by taking military actions that will alienate his political base. Token military actions can minimize the political losses from other voters.

That people will die while he stalls on military action is a price he is willing to pay. His ordering thousands of American troops into Ebola-infested Liberia shows the same ideologically driven callousness.

ebola-dead-body-guinea-liberia_si

The big question is whether those who wish to preserve a free America see the issue and the stakes as clearly as Barack Obama does — and see that this is the overriding national issue of our time, with our votes for senators not to be confused by local issues.

Hillary more of the same

 

Panetta’s Book Is A Contract Hit On Obama By Hillary

hillary head

By: Dick Morris And Eileen McGann on October 9, 2014

Leon Panetta, Bill Clinton’s former Chief of Staff who was appointed with Hillary’s blessing, has written a book with one clear motive: To bolster Hillary’s narrative that the failures of the foreign policy that she designed were simply not her fault. Everything was Obama’s fault, not Hillary’s and, of course, not Panetta’s.

In the former Secretary of State’s book Hard Choices, she criticized Obama’s lack of strategic vision saying “not doing stupid stuff” is not an overarching foreign policy organizing principle.

Now Panetta echoes this criticism in his own book, Worthy Fights, describing a president who “avoids the battle, complains and misses opportunities.” He accuses Obama of “coordinating negotiations” to allow our troops to stay in Iraq to guard against an ISIS resurgence without “really leading them.”

According to Panetta, the White House “seemed content to endorse an agreement if State and Defense could reach one” to keep our troops in Iraq, But, Panetta points out that without Obama’s personal involvement, it became impossible to convince Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki to reverse his position and agree to let a garrison of American troops remain. And Obama did not make the effort to persuade him.

Panetta amplifies the impact of the failure to leave troops there saying “To this day, I believe that a small U.S. troop presence in Iraq could have effectively advised the Iraqi military on how to deal with al Qaeda’s resurgence and the sectarian violence that has engulfed the country.”

He said Obama had “kind of lost his way” and famously noted that the president too often “relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader.”

Panetta’s comments come as Hillary wrestles with a central threat to her candidacy. She was Secretary of State for four years yet the foreign policy crafted then has proven to be an unprecedented failure. Everything that she worked on has blown up in our face. The Arab Spring has become a nightmare.

We are on the verge of signing a phony deal with Iran that will let them enrich uranium far into the future so they can make a bomb anytime they want.

The reset button with Russia is a joke and we have made zero progress on human rights or fair trade with China.

Hillary realizes that this is not a record on which to predicate a presidential campaign. So if the foreign policy she helped to craft is a fiasco, she has to blame someone else — the president.

Hillary more of the same

Panetta stepped into help frame the issue. A Clintonista above all, he legitimized Hillary’s efforts to distance herself from the president on foreign policy without having to attack him herself. Now the negative points for disloyalty will accrue to Panetta not to Hillary.

The former defense secretary underscores the extent to which Obama’s failure to act against Syria when it crossed the “red line” he had drawn against the use of chemical weapons. He said “It was damaging.” Obama “sent a mixed message, not only to the Syrians, but to the world. And that is something you do not want to establish in the world: an issue with regard to the credibility of the United States to stand by what we say we’re gonna do.”

As our involvement in Iraq and Syria escalates into a full blown war — as it must now that our airstrikes are failing to do the job — the blame game will grow with it. Panetta’s comments are an attempt to swat the blame away from Hillary Clinton.

He will get his reward. Just wait.

View Dicks most recent videos in case you missed them!

ISIS War Endangers Hillary Candidacy – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

How The Midterms Are Stacking UP – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

National Security Is Driving A Republican Surge – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Ban Flights From Liberia NOW – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Attorney General Corruption In U.S History – Dick Morris TV: History Video!

Barack Obama personally ordered the “stand-down” that caused the deaths of four Americans

hillary in front of caskets lying       Forty days before the election, Obama could not afford for al Qaeda to be resurrected from their premature grave and attack a US embassy. Afraid of scores of US casualties in an Obama-declared “normalcy zone” in the Mideast, Obama sent in two drones to monitor what happened—not to help consulate personnel, but to contain the problem—and the political blowback.

by Danielle Pletka: of the American Enterprise Institute

The media and the White House, suggested that it was confusion in chaos because of so many attacks (i.e., violent protests) in so many different places in the Muslim world that led to the muddling of facts about what happened where and when.

Not so according to Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute whose investigation revealed “…that officials from [Obama] on down were intentionally and falsely insisting the the 9/11/12 attack [in Benghazi] was not an act of terrorism is screamingly obvious.

Pletka was right although it would be about three weeks that a statement by the new US Army commander of Africom, Lt. Gen. David Rodriquez (when he relieved his predecessor, four star general Carter F. Ham), revealed that **Barack Obama personally ordered the “stand-down” that caused the deaths of four Americans.

Before he was relieved of his command on Sept. 11, 2012, Gen. Carter Ham led a very undistinguished, political-military career—which is likely why Barack Obama appointed him to head Africom. Gen. Ham proved that even a political soldier can be a patriot. He put his career on the line at a time when integrity was needed. Too bad he was not able to deploy his ready-response team to save two former Seals who also put their lives on the line that night—and lost them.

It was in August when Stevens first notified Washington of attempts to breach the consulate perimeter. The Pentagon launched two drones to patrol the skies over the consulate. One drone, although the White House has denied it, was armed with missiles. The other was armed with a video camera that allowed the DoD, the CIA and the White House Situation Room to have a real time video stream of what was happening in the compound at Benghazi.

Between Aug. 27 and Sept. 11, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus, National Intelligence Adviser James Clapper and, of course Barack Obama received over 230 warnings from Benghazi before the attack on September 11. A real president would have taken the warnings from one of his Ambassadors seriouslyparticularly when that warning was preceded with 229 others…and holes in the embassy wall in which one was big enough to install a Mickey D drive-through in it.

blood on their hands benghazi

And, no real president would have downgraded the security of a compound on US soil in a very hostile Muslim nation to “save a few extra taxpayer bucks” for his green energy friends.

Someone in the Pentagon or the CIA took the threats seriously enough to schedule the drone to flyovers of the Benghazi compound at regular intervals. The DOD didn’t send the Marines that the emails sent by Stevens requested. Nor did the CIA—which was specifically told to “stand down” by the White House Situation Room. When the CIA was told to stand down Woods and Doherty told the CIA to screw itself and went to Benghazi.

In a September 2 email to Secretary Clinton, Stevens described a meeting he had with Benghazi’s Supreme Security Commander. In the cable, Stevens expressed concerns that Libyan police and security forces were too weak to keep the country secure. In that email Stevens said his fears were based on the growing strength of the Abu Salim Brigade in Dema—a small village just outside of Benghazi

Stevens suspected that the Abu Salim Brigade, supported by al Qaeda and possibly aided by Iran, would ultimately overthrow the provisional Libyan government. No one in Washington, least of all Barack Obama, listened to him.

Obama was engaged in his own personal war to get elected, which of course was more far more important to him at the moment than the lives of the State Dept. personnel in Benghazi.

Since Obama only attended about 1/3 of his daily security briefings during his first term, its likely that prior to the actual Sept. 11 attack on the Benghazi compound, he may well have been completely unaware of the fact that Libyan Security forces armed only with mace, billy clubs and whistles were the only thing standing between Ambassador Stevens, his small staff and Islamist terrorists armed with rocket launchers, mortars, hand grenades and AK-47s. The official duty of the Libyan security team was described as “traffic control.” (Since the death of his ambassador, Obama now has photo ops regularly in the White House Situation Room.)

After Defense Secretary Leon Panetta made the following statement about not deploying troops without the intel that says its a good idea, career military people began talking. What they had to say suggests someone in Washington needs to be fired, and someone else needs to be impeached. The quote attributed to Panetta was: “…the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about taking place. And, as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

However, when Gen. Carter Ham, head of Africom, received the same emails that Panetta, Clinton and Obama received, he assembled a rapid response unit and informed Panetta he was ready to go. Ham was ordered to stand down.

He told Panetta to screw himself, telling the Secretary that he was sending his men in. Less than one minute later Lt. Gen. David Rodriquez told Ham—his boss—he had just been relieved of his command because he refused to obey a direct order from the Commander-in-Chief.

Obama then appointed Rodriguez as the new head of Africom. Now you know precisely who gave the order to “stand down” that resulted in the sacrificial death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, IT Specialist Sean Smith and former Navy Seals Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods for “political points.” (It is my personal opinion that any US citizen who votes for Barack Obama needs to forever refrain from ever again referring to themselves as someone who is even remotely patriotic.)

(Note: the Obama Administration also lied when it said that Doherty and Woods were assigned to personally protect Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi. That was a blatant fabrication. The former Seals, attached to the CIA, refused the White House order to “stand down.” They went to the Consulate and defended the mission with their lives. While neither man was on active duty in the US Navy at the time, both men deserve the US Congressional Medal of Honor for bravery above and beyond the call of duty.

the seals

Before believing the blatant donkey kong excreted from both sides of Obama‘s mouth whenever he speaks, pay attention to the stream of emails from Stevens in Benghazi and the CIA in Tripoli sent repeatedly to the State Department,

The White House, the Pentagon and the CIA which confirm that on September 11, 2012 as the terrorist strike on the US Consulate began, the White House Situation Room, the Secretary of State, the CIA, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs and the Director of the CIA—and, for what he’s worth, Obama‘s Director of National Intelligence, retired USAF Lt. Gen. James Clapper who, in the end, is going to be expected to fall on his is Air Force Academy saber for Obama on this one, probably just before the Election as more Americans realize it was Obama himself who gave the “stand down” order. Clearly, the Benghazi mess is not going to go away anytime soon—particularly since the Obama Administration and the Democratic leadership has assured the media that this issue is much too serious to “rush through” before the election.

Win or loss, you can bet that on Nov. 7, the Benghazi affair will be protected by Executive Privilege. Hearings in the House—and in the Senate if the GOP picks up enough seats to regain control—will once again be stonewalled by the most “transparent Administration in the history of the United States” (Obama‘s words).

You can take that observation to the bank because there has been no bipartisan cooperation in the “cause and effect” assessments and decisions emanating from the Obama Administration. Obama, like Franklin D. Roosevelt before him, sees himself as a one-man executive, legislative and judicial entity who, by Executive degree, can empower himself with the authority of a king who answers to no one.

As we can see from the past four years, when you’re a community organizer with no real corporate or senior level executive government management experience, and when your key advisers—including your Attorney General and Solicitor General—see no evil in your political sins, you will have the trappings of absolute power. T

The American people have forgotten a time-honored adage which they very seriously need to remember. The only difference between a rut in the road of progress and an economic mass grave is the size and shape of the hole. When you can no longer patch the economic hole with money, someone in a black shroud holding a large, sharp scythe will be speaking the eulogy over this nation.

SOS-FBMeme

 

Hillary More Of The Same

Recall that Hillary did her college thesis on Alinsky writings and Obama writes about him in his books. Books: Rules for Radicals, Reveille for Radicals

Hillary more of the sameSaul Alinsky died about 43 years ago, but his writings influenced those in political control of our nation today…….

There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.

All eight rules are currently in play

1) Healthcare Control healthcare and you control the people.

2) Poverty Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education Take control of what people read and listen to take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

shovelready   benghazi_banner   benghazi worst coverup than watergatereid   obama crimes                  Pictures can say a lot more

Obama the Corporatist

what happened to land of the free

By Ron Paul

Lately, many have characterized this administration as socialist, or having strong socialist leanings. I differ with this characterization. This is not to say Mr. Obama believes in free markets by any means. On the contrary, he has done and said much that demonstrates his fundamental misunderstanding of and hostility toward the truly free market.

But a closer, honest examination of his policies and actions in office reveals that, much like the previous administration, he is very much a corporatist. This in many ways can be more insidious and worse than being an outright socialist.

Socialism is a system where the government directly owns and manages businesses. Corporatism is a system where businesses are nominally in private hands, but are in fact controlled by the government. In a corporatist state, government officials often act in collusion with their favored business interests to design policies that give those interests a monopoly position, to the detriment of both competitors and consumers.

A careful examination of the policies pursued by the Obama administration and his allies in Congress shows that their agenda is corporatist. For example, the health care bill does not establish a Canadian-style government-run single-payer health care system. Instead, it relies on mandates forcing every American to purchase private health insurance or pay a fine. It also includes subsidies for low-income Americans and government-run health care “exchanges.”

Contrary to the claims of the proponents of the health care bill, large insurance and pharmaceutical companies were enthusiastic supporters of many provisions of this legislation because they knew in the end their bottom lines would be enriched by Obamacare.

To call the president a corporatist is not to soft-pedal criticism of his administration. It is merely a more accurate description of the president’s agenda

obama-communism.jpg rothchildsWhen he is a called a socialist, the president and his defenders can easily deflect that charge by pointing out that the historical meaning of socialism is government ownership of industry; under the president’s policies, industry remains in nominally private hands. Using the more accurate term — corporatism — forces the president to defend his policies that increase government control of private industries and expand de facto subsidies to big businesses.

This also promotes the understanding that though the current system may not be pure socialism, neither is it free market since government controls the private sector through taxes, regulations and subsidies, and has done so for decades.

Using precise terms can prevent future statists from successfully blaming the inevitable failure of their programs on the remnants of the free market that are still allowed to exist. We must not allow the disastrous results of corporatism to be ascribed incorrectly to free market capitalism or used as a justification for more government expansion. Most importantly, we must learn what freedom really is and educate others on how infringements on our economic liberties caused our economic woes in the first place.

Government is the Problem. It Cannot Be the Solution.

The fundamental problem with health care costs in America is that the doctor-patient relationship has been profoundly altered by third-party interference. Third parties, either government agencies themselves or nominally private insurance companies virtually forced upon us by government policies, have not only destroyed doctor-patient confidentiality. They also inescapably drive up costs because basic market disciplines — supply and demand, price sensitivity and profit signals — are destroyed. Obamacare, via its insurance mandate, is more of the same misdiagnosis.

Hillary more of the same

 

Republicans Need a Direction

11044834-republican-logo

by:Peggy Noonan

In a year when Republicans are operating in such an enviable political environment, why aren’t their U.S. Senate candidates holding big and impressive leads? Why does it look close? Why are party professionals getting worried?

The Democratic president is unpopular. What progress can be claimed in the economy is tentative, uneven, feels temporary. True unemployment is bad and people who have jobs feel stressed and hammered by costs. Americans are less optimistic than they’ve ever been in the modern era, with right-track/wrong-track numbers upside down. Scandals, war, uncertain leadership—all this has yielded a sense the whole enterprise of the past six years just did not work.

But Republicans aren’t achieving lift-off. The metaphor used most often is the wave. If Republicans can’t make, catch and ride a wave in an environment like this, they’ve gone from being the stupid party to the stupid loser party.

What’s wrong?

An accomplished establishment Republican this week shrugged and noted the obvious: Every race is state-by-state and has its own realities; some candidates prove good and some are disappointing. Another establishment figure, an elected officeholder, observed with satisfaction that Republicans in Washington have done a good job making sure local candidates weren’t nutty persons who said nutty things.

But is that enough? Kellyanne Conway of The Polling Co. says no: “It’s not enough for voters to have a candidate who doesn’t say something controversial. They need something compelling.”

The party’s consultants say it comes down to money: Republicans are raising less than Democrats and need more. But Ms. Conway notes that in 2012, well-funded Republicans George Allen, Connie Mack, Linda McMahon, Josh Mandel and Tommy Thompson all went down to defeat. It’s not all about money.

The question this week is whether the election should be nationalized, lifted beyond the local and given power by clear stands on some agreed-upon national issues. Those who resist say the election has already been nationalized by Barack Obama. His and his administration’s unpopularity are all the unifying force that’s needed.

But put aside the word “nationalized.” Shouldn’t the Republican Party make it clear right now exactly what it is for and what it intends to do?

Here the views of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and much of the Washington-based GOP election apparatus have held sway. If you are explicit in terms of larger policy ideas, you just give Democrats something to shoot at. Don’t give them a target. ObamaCare, the foreign-policy mess, the IRS—these are so unpopular they’re more than enough reason to vote Republican. Don’t give voters a reason not to!

This sounds like the hard practicality of big-time politics, and it has a certain logic. But it doesn’t take into account some underlying realities.

**One is the rising air of public crisis. Many voters, especially in the Republican base, feel America is under threat and we are losing our country. They feel they are fighting to save it. In a time of alarm, vagueness doesn’t seem clever but oblivious—out of touch and unaware.

A second reality is the GOP’s brand problem. Everyone knows about it and is tired of saying it; the Democrats continue exploiting it because it’s almost all they have. Moreover, history suggests a political brand problem gets resolved only by a vivid figure like FDR or Reagan, who through their popularity and power changed how people saw their parties. Republican politicians can’t sit around waiting for a vivid figure to come along, so they don’t talk about the problem anymore.

The cliché is that Republicans are old, white, don’t like women or science, are narrow, numeric and oppose all modern ways. The cliché probably isn’t as powerful as it used to be because the president has made so many new Republicans, but it’s still there.

But Republicanism right now has a special duty to be dynamic and serious. It has to paint a world of the possible. It has to make people feel that things can be made better. The spirit animating the party should be “This way, we will take that hill and hold it. Together, now, let’s march.” To rouse people you have to tell them your plans.

And it would be especially welcome at this moment. The Democratic Party in the last years of Obama is running on empty, pushing old buttons. To judge by their current campaigns, their only bullets are mischief and malice. The mischief includes a wholly fictional Republican war on women and the malice involves class-mongering and “check your privilege” manipulation. Only the young seem idealistic; older Democrats seem like a sated force.

18547381-strong-determination-managing-risk-and-uncertainty-with-a-large-elephant-climbing-a-rope-high-in-theThe Democrats’ reputation is suffering, but the point here is the Republicans’. When you have a poor brand, do you spend all your time saying the other guy is worse? Or do you start rebuilding your reputation? In politics that means saying what you are for, not what you are against, and what you will do, not what the other guy will do if the voters let him.

A third reason to go with the idea of avowed meaning is the suspicion some voters must have that while to vote Democratic this year is to vote for the potential of more trouble, to vote Republican may be a vote for nothing changing or improving very much.

Both parties in Washington use stasis as a strategy. I suspect there are Republicans on the ground who intuit the Republican version of this. Republican inertia was outlined to me this spring, ironically, by a GOP congressman:

The 2010 election, he explained, was about winning the House, don’t rock the boat. Twenty twelve was all about the presidential—again don’t rock the boat, don’t mess things up with anything controversial, win the presidency to effect change. In 2014, he said, it’s all about the Senate—win it, hold the House. Then in 2016 it’s going to be all about the presidential and holding the Senate. In 2018, he said, it will be all about holding Congress for a Republican president or against a Democratic one. Then in 2020 it will be all about the presidential.

After that, he said, we might do something!

His point was that party professionals think the party has to keep winning, so—wait. For what?

Republican political professionals need to get the meaning of things back. Otherwise, if Republicans do take the Senate, their new majority will arrive not having won on the basis of something shared. They will not be able to claim any mandate for anything. That will encourage them to become self-driven freelancers in a very pleasant and distinguished freelancer’s club, which is sort of what the Senate is.

It’s good to win, but winning without a declared governing purpose is a ticket to nowhere.

Some feel a vague list of general stands might solve the problem and do the trick. They think it’s probably too late to do more than that. But there are 6½ weeks before the election, and plenty of voters would be asking for more information and open to changing their minds. In such circumstances, explicit vows are more likely to be taken seriously than airy sentiments.

Republicans need to say what they’re for. They need to make it new and true—not something defensive but something equal to the moment.

 

The Great Events (scandals) Of The Clinton Presidency

BILL CLINTON EXCITED

Bill Clinton will probably be remembered as the most corrupt president in American history. Aside from being the ONLY popular elected president ever impeached, Bill Clinton’s legacy extends to little more than widespread rococco corruption. On this page we look at the great events (scandals) of the Clinton presidency and what they involve.

Obama during winter meeting of the Democratic National Committee in WashingtonOr will Obama be remembered as the most corrupt president in American history? .(jj)

The Clinton Scandals:

From: The Capitalist Conservative Republican Homepage.

Whitewater:
Most of Clinton’s involvement in the Whitewater scandal took place while Clinton was governor of Arkansas. Whitewater is the name given to the alleged banking and real estate scandals of Clinton and his friends. After money loss and a failed real estate venture, an illegal method to recover the losses was conceived. The scandal involves Clinton allegedly pressuring Arkansas Small Business Administration (SBA) worker David Hale into making an SBA loan to Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan. The money from the loan was then funneled out with cashier checks and personal accounts (many under false names) to pay for Clinton’s debts from the failed Whitewater land project. In other words, tax dollars bailed Bill and Hillary out of a financial crisis after illegal means were used to acquire them.

The President’s friends and land deal associates, Fmr. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker and Jim and Susan McDougal, who were involved in Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan and the Whitewater land deal, were recently convicted for their involvement in the scandal. Subpoenaed billing records of the Rose Law Firm, which Hillary Clinton worked for and which is involved in Whitewater, mysteriously showed up in the White House in January 1996. Among the finger prints on these records were those of Hillary Clinton. While this case has been open for several years, facts are still being revealed. President Clinton testified on behalf of his convicted friends during their trial. After countless trials and hearings, Susan McDougal refused to speak on the issue, though a bailout check signed by her, and with Clinton mentioned on it, has been displayed as evidence Mysteriously, few reasons exist for her to remain silent except what many allege to be pressure and/or threats from Bill Clinton. This scandal is still under investigation. Over a dozen convictions have come from it thus far.

Cattlegate:
This scandal involves Hillary’s investment of approximately $1,000 in cattle futures. Not much later $100,000 had been “earned.” In other words, Hillary invested a small amount of money and made a several thousand percent profit from it under very questionable circumstances.

Hillary more of the same

Helicoptergate:
David Watkins, at the time a Clinton aide, used the presidential helicopter to make golf trips. Each use of the Helicopter cost taxpayers thousands.
Back

Travelgate:
The Clintons fired seven white house travel office employees in favor of hire cousins and friends. The employees were lifelong employees in good standing. After stating no other reason for the firings than the employees were viewed as disloyal to the administration, officials began to question the White House. Soon after the firings were questioned, the White House allegedly used the FBI to investigate the employees then attempted to ruin the worker’s reputation by making the fact of an FBI investigation public. Travel employees ended up spending their life savings defending themselves in court against the false charges. Further investigation revealed that former travel office chief Billy Dale’s FBI file was among the nine hundred plus requested files of Filegate.

Gennifer Flowersgate:
In 1992 Clinton denied a 12 year affair with Gennifer Flowers. She taped phone calls with him but he claimed they were false. After appearing on television branding Flowers a liar and strongly denying the relation, Clinton has again changed his story. Now he has admitted to at least some of the affair. It ironically turns out Clinton is the liar (big suprise).

Filegate:
This Clinton scandal involves the discovery of over 900 Republican FBI files in the White House. Files of former Secretary of State James Baker, former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, and Newt Gingrich’s spokesman Tony Blankley were found to be on this list. Upon the discovery of these files, the White House issued an excuse claiming that the files were mistakenly requested by a White House employee working with an outdated list. They were called a simple “snafu.” Investigations into Filegate revealed that not a common White House worker but the President’s friend and close advisor, Anthony Marceca, had requested the files. When the presidency starts illegally compiling an enemies list it is a sure sign he is not fit to serve office and that, just maybe, a crime has been committed. 

Vince Fostergate:
Soon after Clinton lawyer Vince Foster committed suicide under mysterious circumstances, his office was cleared out. Along with his office went the Whitewater billing records and several key pieces of evidence. Evidence suggests that Clinton associate Bernard Nussbaum purposely delayed access to the office to investigators. Not to mention the mysterious suicide in which there is some hint that evidence was tampered with. Witnesses have testified they saw Clinton aides clearing the supposedly sealed office.

I wonder where those whitewater billing records came fromgate:
Years after they had disappeared from Vince fosters office, subpoenaed Whitewater billing records appeared in the White House. In January of 1996 an aide stumbled across them sitting on a table in the White House. They couldn’t have been sitting their all these years unnoticed. Hillary’s finger prints were on them. 

Paula Jonesgate:
Paula Jones sued Bill Clinton after alleging he exposed himself to her in an Arkansas hotel room. After inviting her to what was supposed to be a promotion. Jones claims she was pressured by Clinton as he made advances on her. Though the administration has fought the entire way, refusing to cooperate with investigation while constantly attacking Jones’s credibility, the case has been successful in revealing many more scandals of the Clinton presidency. Although the case was thrown out recently, it was successful in uncovering several other of Clinton’s affairs as well as declaring that the president is not above the law (supreme court). More may come of this one with an appeal. Now that the Supreme Court has specifically defined sexual harassment, the Jones case has a good chance of coming back! Clinton has also become the first US president cited for contempt of court. His testimony under oath was ruled as both false and designed to be evasive and obstruct the course of the Paula Jones case. Clinton faced being disbarred and a potential of over a million dollars in fines due to this contempt charge.

1998-1999 The Capitalist Conservative Republican Homepage

Willeygate:
Lifelong Democrat Kathleen Willey has directly accused President Clinton of fondling her in the White House then attempting to hide it. Why would a Clinton supporter attack Clinton? She did appear on national TV and accuse the leader of the free world of fondling her and then pressuring her to lie about it. It’s the word Bill Clinton, a president who has a reputation for lying, verses the word of Kathleen Willey, a Democrat and enthusiastic Clinton supporter who would have little reason to attack him (not to mention the word of several others with whom the president has been accused by).

Web Hubbell prison phone callgate:
This scandal surrounds Web Hubbell, former bureaucrat, ,Clinton friend and partner, and convicted criminal. While in prison, Hubbell was taped making phone calls in which methods to achieve pardon and evidence on other Clinton scandals was discussed.

Selling Military Technology to the Chinese Commiesgate:
Essentially, Bill Clinton has given military technology to Communist China. This information included satellite guidance technology and enough information for communist China to modernize their nuclear arsenal. Reports suggest that China has missiles positioned to where they could attack us.

Chinese missile weapon technology had greatly improved due to Clintons “gift.” Keep in mind that a guidance chip was also found missing from an American satellite that crashed on take off over China. The military is investigating who removed it since the crash site was blockaded for several hours following the crash – restricted to Chinese officials. Launching our satellites on Chinese rockets from communist China? Another Clinton policy. Remember also that this all came out just as Clinton and the Chinese dismissed investigations into the “China Scandals” as groundless. I think Johnny Chung proves otherwise. Many investigations are underway with the most recent being the Cox report which revealed that China was actively spying on the United States and had been stealing top secret nuclear weapons plans for two decades. Worse, Clinton was informed of the espionage problem months and years in advance of it breaking to the public yet did absolutely nothing about it and even continued to transfer other technology and pursue close relations with China! Maybe the commies finally received something in return for all the campaigning and donations they made to Bill’s reelection. This is yet another to keep your eye on.

Illegal Funds for Advertisementsgate:
On Janet Reno decided investigate evidence that Bill Clinton wrongly used DNC funds to bypass spending limits on 1996 campaign advertisement. Again Reno faultered to pressure from Democrats by refusing to appoint an investigator. This matter needs to be investigated but it is up to Congress now. Similar measures involving Al Gore are also under investigation.

Coverup for our Russian Comrades as Wellgate:
This recently revealed “snafu” involves a CIA memo that was sent to Algore’s office. The memo included evidence of major corruption in Russian leadership. It was returned with little more than a post it note telling the CIA that Gore didn’t want to here about it right now. The reports included charges that former Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin used many illegal means for personal gain. Chernomyrdin is said to have charged $1 million for a meeting with a German businessman. The CIA set aside the evidence that this event occurred because of Gore’s dismissal of the earlier reports. So power is being sold by the same guys we give massive aide checks to? Then again selling power is not a crime according to the Clinton administration. I don’t see any difference between this incident and the ’96 coffee breaks.

Wag-the-Dog-gate:
This applies to the repeated use of the United States military to draw attention away from the presidential impeachment and expulsion proceedings. Please make no mistake. All of the listed actions are fully justified. Their timing, however, has been manipulated to suit Bill Clinton’s desire to use them as a political bailout tool. Three incidents where Clinton has used military action to divert press attention have occurred. The second was simply a use of timing as given. The first and third actions were manuevered to occur when they fit Clinton best politically.

Three days following a disastrous attempt at apology on August 17, 1998 Bill Clinton launched a missile attack on several facilities in an attempt to halt terrorist Osama Bin Laden. Though this attack was neccessary, Clinton seems to have purposely delayed it for political reasons. The attack on Bin Laden had in fact been proposed over a week in advance but was delayed by Clinton. Clinton then acted when he felt it was politically appropriate.

The day following a settlement with Paula Jones, Clinton made an aborted strike on Iraq. Though the timing of this event was probably the least manueverable of three incidents worthy of pointing out, Clinton did act at an excellent time for press coverage. He successfully kept the Jones settlement off the news for an entire weekend.

The third incident is the most blatantly obvious manipulation of power. One day before he was to be impeached, Clinton called an uncharacteristic suprise air attack on Iraq. Though the stated reason was refusal to allow UN weapons inspections, one must note that Saddam Hussein acted no differently than he had in the preceding six months. Though Hussein’s actions have long warranted a military strike, Clinton prevented any action until the time suited him. To delay his inevitable impeachment, Clinton put American lives in the line of fire by striking Iraq. This action alone constitutes among the lowest forms of manipulation and abuse of power that America has ever seen.

Jaunita Broaddrick Gate:

Yet another female indescretion from Clinton’s Arakansas history! Jaunita Broaddrick, a former Clinton campaigner in Arkansas, appeared on national television and accused Clinton of raping her in the late seventies. Again we have the word of an ordinary citizen with past allegiance to Clinton as a campaign worker faced against a proven perjurer and chronic liar with a long history of adultery and womanizing. Congratulations to the Democrats in the Senate! You just acquited an apparant rapist!

Perjury and jobs for Lewinskygate – the aftermath:
Along with the Lewinsky scandal comes evidence that she was instructed how to hide the affair by Clinton and offered a job by Vernon Jordan – as an “incentive” to remain quiet. It’s kind of stretching it to think of this as all a mere coincidence. Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice surrounding the job offering.

PBS-gate:

A series of scandals involving PBS soliciting donor lists to liberal activist groups directly involves the Clinton administration. In at least three cases it has been discovered that PBS recieved donor lists to solicit directly from the Clinton-Gore 1996 campaign, a violation of federal law. This issue alone has greatly damaged PBS’s credability while placing the question of federal funding for PBS under severe scrutiny. As of now, the administration has refused to answer any questions about the matter

Email-gate:
The Whitehouse email system apparantly contained a glitch that allowed thousands of emails to escape record, many of which were evidence to other Clinton scandals. The nature of this glitch was allegedly undisclosed so as to hide email evidence from investigators

Vandalgate:
Before leaving the White House, members of the Clinton administration, particularly the Vice Presidents office, are reported to have vandalized the Whitehouse as a “prank” on the incoming Republican administration. Democrats have tried to downplay this scandal and dismiss it as false, but the fact remains that several pranks did occur including the removal of “W” keys off computer keyboards. This prompted office supply companies to donate replacement keyboards and keys. Elsewhere the Clinton staffers wrote lewd messages on door nameplates and left their trash including pizza boxes (perfectly fitting for the Clinton administration) in the offices.

Looter-gate:
Bill and Hillary Clinton left the Whitehouse with their pockets full – full of silverware, furniture, and pretty much everything else they could grab that wasn’t theirs. Included was a multi thousand dollar furniture set belonging to the interior department, which the Clintons had tried to claim as a gift before being forced to return it under pressure and outrage.

Pardongate:
On the night before and morning of his departure from office, Bill Clinton made several controversial “midnight” pardons. Aside from pardoning political allies and scandal co-conspirators such as Susan McDougal, Henry Cisneros, and his brother Roger, Bill pardoned fugitive criminal millionaire Marc Rich. Rich was charged in the early eighties with several felony offenses but fled to Switzerland to avoid facing trial. Among Rich’s crimes were oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis and ties to arms smuggling. Amazingly, Clinton completely disregarded pardon protocol in the Rich case and failed to properly inform many authorities in the justice department of Rich’s fugitive status. The story becomes more interesting considering that Marc Rich’s ex wife Denise, who fought for his pardon, is a close Clinton friend and DNC donor. Denise Rich gave $1 million in contributions to the DNC, $450,000 to Bill Clinton’s library fund, and $70,000 to Hillary Clinton’s senate campaign according to the Washington Times (2/22/00). The Rich pardon appears to be a political pay off and, though the president may constitutionally pardon anyone, it appears he abused his authority in a quid pro quo pardon in exchange for political donations. Clinton’s pardon of Rich has prompted criticism from even the most liberal Clinton defenders and several prominent Democrats. Former President Carter called the pardon “disgraceful” while Senator Tom Harkin and even Rep. Barney Frank criticized it!
But that is by no means all. Hillary Clinton’s brother Hugh Rodham was paid over $400,000 dollars for successfully fighting for pardons and commutations for criminals Carlos Vignali and Almon Glenn Braswell, two included in Clinton’s last minute pardons and commutations list. Upon the eve of this story breaking, Hillary and Bill denied any knowledge of Hugh’s involvement and, under pressure, called on him to return the money.

The Clinton Administrations Policy of Shamelessness:

The Bill Clinton Tiananmen Peace Tour Vacation:
While more of a mishap than a scandal, I included this section because it truly shows the character of this administration. The visit to China itself had been purposely scheduled at the time the Paula Jones trial was to take place. What has truly upset many, however, was the both the time of year this visit was to take place and the ceremony at Tiananmen square. Clinton’s visit took place over an unprecedented nine day span. Beginning in late June, the tour did not end until July 3rd. In other words, Clinton did not return home until July Fourth, Independence day. For Clinton to be spending the days in preparation for July fourth in communist China is upsetting to many.
Worse was the “kowtow” to Chinese demands about a Tiananmen Square ceremony. If you are not aware, Tiananmen was the location of a massacre of thousands of pro democracy protesters in 1989. This visit came the same week that the government released a report about the Chinese stealing a top secret guidance chip from one of our satellites that crashed in China. In other words, Clinton made a visit to a place of oppression and massacre on the anniversary month of that massacre only a few years after it occurred. At the same time, reports indicating that this communist country had threatened national security were released. More so, The visit comes only a month after the eruption of several major scandals surrounding Clinton and China – scandals in which national security and presidential election procedures were quite possibly threatened. What if Kennedy had visited the Kremlin during the cuban missile crisis? Or maybe Harry Truman touring Soviet military bases during the Berlin blockade and airlift. All I am saying is that this “visit” to China came at a very dangerous time.
Though I acknowledge some diplomatic intents of this trip, I find the time period and nature of it to be in poor taste. The president is taking much criticism for this visit by all sides of the political spectrum. Has he truly crossed the line?

Shameless Administration. Part Two:
The Lewinsky address by the president displayed both extreme arrogance and a shameless attempt to pass the responsibility and troubles of the administration onto Ken Starr. Clinton truly has no decency.

The Clinton Response to Starr’s Report:
Within hours of Starr’s report, Clinton’s lawyers issued a response. Within this response, they essentially argue a simple apology serves justice and supersedes the law in the matters of which Clinton committed an offense. They too argue that Clinton technically did not perjure himself even though he has shown to have contradicted himself in testimony. They attempt to blame Kenneth Starr, Bettie Currie, Lewinsky and others for actions that lie in the sole responsibility of the president. The report attempts to label impeachment, an essential key to checks and balances as well as law enforcement, as an act which ” presents the potential for greater injustice — injustice both to the Chief Executive and to the people who elected him” and an act which threatens to “undo popular will.” Sorry Mr. President, elections do not void out the law. A crime is a crime no matter who it applies to. Clinton is essentially arguing that the law doesn’t apply to him because he was elected and because he said he was sorry (a bad apology at that). Evidently the administration failed. Impeachment caught up with Bill Clinton.
Note: These are just the major scandals (with a few minor events thrown in for fun). Had I attempted to write on all the detailed events, it would end up looking like the 1040 tax form.

“I Will Stand With Them (Muslims) Should The Political Winds Shift In An Ugly Direction”.

obama-bows-to-saudi-king.jpg the same way that a dog will lay down before it's master “I will stand with them (Muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction”

What does it say to Americans when their President by passes Congress and Attacks Syria a Sovereign Nation with the deadly war forces of 5 Muslim Countries some that supported the 9/11 terror attack on the United States of America. and not one Western Ally has joined him. Also not many outspoken voices here at home.

Is it payback for perceived past oppressions or exploitation by the West against Obama’s non-West. So is he replacing pro-Western governments like Egypt in the Middle East with Islamic extremist governments.? Is He calling for the restoration of the caliphate by uniting Muslim nations?? The Arab Nations he has joined us with want something we may not understand but – Obama does?

obama arms alQada and the behead priest

obama muslim flagPerhaps he has joined with them to war against American Culture and interests??

What Do You Think?   Please Comment.

obama-immeltThe president’s arrogance, narcissistic behavior, disdain for any opposition, willingness to make wild and scary claims, and his general dislike of Americans and our national history and culture Make him unfit to lead.

The American people have been betrayed — both by Obama and the Democrats, whose lust for control intensifies daily, and by Republican leaders in Washington, whose cowardice and defeatism have turned their guts and spines into tapioca.

muslim brotherhood infiltrates obama adm

 

 

 

 

 

 

Many Democrat’s Say Old People Are Such A Burden. Enter Ezekiel Emanuel.

large group we wont take it any moreWho Says Old people are such a burden.

 by:Robert Laurie  

Democrats seem to love death. Whether they’re yammering about abortion or “end of life” planning, they just can’t get enough of talking up the myriad ways people can exit life’s stage. They always claim this is simply a discussion about personal responsibility and individual choice but, since they despise those ideals in virtually every other matter, it’s a hard argument to buy.

Enter Ezekiel Emanuelshocked

Emanuel was one of the chief architects of ObamaCare and is, of course, the brother of Rahm. Over at The Atlantic, he’s penned an article about his own death and he’s made a shocking announcement about the perfect age at which he hopes to die. While he very specifically rules out euthanasia, (oh really?) Emanuel says he hopes his ticker shuts down at the not-particularly-old age of 75. (In the healthcare bill-no help for elderly cancer patients 75 and older)

The reason? 75 is, apparently, the perfect age for a human to buy the farm. According to Emanuel, people who live longer than that risk struggling through a less-than-perfect existence.

Doubtless, death is a loss. It deprives us of experiences and milestones, of time spent with our spouse and children. In short, it deprives us of all the things we value.

Emanuel rambles on in a painfully long-winded argument about how modern medicine is extending lives but, in his view, does so by keeping people in a sad, miserable, and often painful state. The elderly are not enjoying being alive and – according to Emanuel - become burdensome shadows of their former selves.

Emanuel says “living as long as possible has drawbacks we often won’t admit to ourselves. I will leave aside the very real and oppressive financial and caregiving burdens that many, if not most, adults in the so-called sandwich generation are now experiencing, caught between the care of children and parents. Our living too long places real emotional weights on our progeny”

So, for the sake of their overburdened families, they should probably just snuff it at 75 rather than drag it out for another 20 years. After all, they’re probably pretty unhappy being alive, and their continued existence places a ton of emotional stress on their progeny.

Sure, their children may love them – and they’ll miss them when they’re gone – but as long as mom and dad are alive they’re putting a lot of pressure on their offspring.

“But parents also cast a big shadow for most children. Whether estranged, disengaged, or deeply loving, they set expectations, render judgments, impose their opinions, interfere, and are generally a looming presence for even adult children. This can be wonderful. It can be annoying. It can be destructive. But it is inescapable as long as the parent is alive. Examples abound in life and literature: Lear, the quintessential Jewish mother, the Tiger Mom. And while children can never fully escape this weight even after a parent dies, there is much less pressure to conform to parental expectations and demands after they are gone.”

How incredibly, horrifically, selfish.  

Hillary more of the same

Emanuel argues that the price of adding more years to your life is decreased ability. In short, he argues that we’re not really adding “life” as much as we’re stretching out the process of death – and he wants no part of it.

The example he gives to showcase the horrors of old age is truly disturbing. Not because the life in question is so miserable, but because it actually sounds pretty great – and it belongs to his own father.

“My father illustrates the situation well. About a decade ago, just shy of his 77th birthday, he began having pain in his abdomen. Like every good doctor, he kept denying that it was anything important. But after three weeks with no improvement, he was persuaded to see his physician. He had in fact had a heart attack, which led to a cardiac catheterization and ultimately a bypass. Since then, he has not been the same. Once the prototype of a hyperactive Emanuel, suddenly his walking, his talking, his humor got slower. Today he can swim, read the newspaper, needle his kids on the phone, and still live with my mother in their own house. But everything seems sluggish. Although he didn’t die from the heart attack, no one would say he is living a vibrant life. When he discussed it with me, my father said, “I have slowed down tremendously. That is a fact. I no longer make rounds at the hospital or teach.” Despite this, he also said he was happy.”

My father was 86 he was bed ridden. He told me he was very happy. He said he reads, watches TV and has visitors. I agree he worked hard all his life like many other elderly. This is their time to live out the rest of their time as they see fit. Not as monster Progressive Democrat’s dictate.

My father was not given the choice he was Euthanized during a downturn by another family member and a MS. Doctor. His Bank Accounts were cleared out as well. This is what is in store for many elderly by greedy children and caregivers.

So, let’s get this straight, Ezekiel’s own father has a happy, relatively healthy life. He lives with a wife he loves, gets to interact with the children he loves, and can still swim and engage with the world. …But that’s not good enough. He’s “slowed down” so, in Emanuel’s warped mind, he’s a good example of how life after 75 isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

As he puts it: “the fact is that by 75, creativity, originality, and productivity are pretty much gone for the vast, vast majority of us.”

Emanuel says it’s “uniquely American” to assume that you’re going to have a happy, healthy life right up until the very end. He calls people who think they’re going to avoid the slow decent into death “American Immortals.” He claims these immortals believe they’re going to be perfectly healthy until they’re in their 90’s and then just keel over dead one day. (I have friends I play sports with that are in late 80’s and 2 are 90’s and we all enjoy our lives.. ) How dare Government can decide it can end us.jj)

I’ve never met anyone who thinks that. We all know that the end of our lives will, more likely than not, involve years of “slowing down” and some time in a hospital bed. Most of us have watched – or helped – someone they love go through the process.

That doesn’t mean we stop fighting for every. single. precious. second.

Most of us want to spend as long as possible with the people we love. Most of us want to see and do as much as we possibly can, for as long as we possibly can. Most of us are desirous of a medical system which is constantly struggling to give us as much life as science can provide.

Unfortunately, the man who was – in large part – responsible for Barack Obama’s unpopular, rightfully despised, “signature law” is not “most of us.”

Obama-  “I reject this aspiration. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive”

In other words: “just take a pain pill.”

Be sure to “like” Robert Laurie over on Facebook and follow him on Twitter. You’ll be glad you did.

blue text jj

h/t National Review