Created by Executive Fiat – a new “Obama Fund” Dump all you “savings” into government debt

First ObamaCare and now Obama Fund

large group we wont take it any more Seniors Hit Hard by Financial Crisis

Treasury rolls out a new savings plan without a Congressional vote

Hey, kids. Uncle Sam has a new investment offer for you. Even if you have several decades of productive work ahead—and thus a long investing time horizon—the White House wants you to consider a retirement plan that will invest in nothing but U.S. government debt.

Any financial professional who advised a young investor to avoid stocks and corporate bonds—and everything else except Treasury bonds—would be sued for malpractice. But asset allocation is merely one of the problems with the new “myRA” fund rolling out from the Treasury this month.

Seniors got screwed by the housing bubble Crash. then by the phony Fed Reserve 0% fund and now the Treasury rolls out a new savings plan called ‘Obama Fund’…

Collapsing home prices, tight credit, dwindling investment income a lethal brew.

12006104-dejected-entrepreneurCollapsing real estate values and an imploding Wall Street are making life uncertain for everyone, but seniors are being hit especially hard. The economic upheaval has shattered many seniors’ retirement plans and, even worse, has cut into the income of many of those who have already retired and has sharply reduced the value of most seniors’ primary asset — their home. Lenders are cutting seniors no slack, as a growing list of complaints to ConsumerAffairs.com illustrates.

U.S. households lost billions in interest income during the Fed’s near-zero interest rate experiment. Because they are often reliant on income from savings, seniors were hit the hardest. Households headed by seniors 65-74 years old lost on average $1,900 in annual income over the past six years, according to a November 2013 McKinsey Global Institute report. For households headed by seniors 75 and older, the loss was $2,700 annually.

With a median income for senior households in the U.S. of roughly $25,000, these are significant losses. In total, according to my company’s calculations, approximately $58 billion in annual income has been lost by America’s seniors since 2008.

Retirees depend on income from their savings for basic living expenses. Without that income, many seniors have taken on greater risk to increase the yield on their savings, or simply spent down their nest eggs. After decades of playing by the rules, putting off spending and socking away money, seniors have taken it on the chin. This strikes a blow at the core American principles of self-reliance, individual responsibility and fairness.

male-crying-100100961

Lost everything when my business failed and now, at 63, working two part time jobs and getting $563 a month in early retirement pay,” said Elwood of Sinking Spring, Pa., who also supports two family members.

Elwood’s situation became desperate when he was unable to complete a “short sale” of his home. In a short sale, the buyer pays less than the remaining amount on the seller’s mortgage. In some cases, lenders will forgive some or all of the difference but lately, banks have been squeezing consumers for every last cent.

Elwood said he found a buyer for his home but Chase Mortgage rejected the deal and began foreclosure proceedings.

The Forgotten Ones

The Forgotten Ones

With the Fed’s near-zero policy, households headed by someone 75 or older have lost $2,700 annually in interest income.

What happen’s to the investment when the Government defaults on the debt, With the most to loose I guess Seniors would loose all ???

First ObamaCare and now Obama Fund

obama silly Stop Me If You Can. I Will Do What I Want.

Remember what we have already learned over a century ago. Modern liberalism is the worst disease of all… it doesn’t merely get people killed, it takes down countries!

REMEMBER, the DEMOCRATS took over COMPLETE CONTROL OF FEDERAL SPENDING, at the end of 2006, and had control of BOTH HOUSES through October 2010. The ECONOMIC CRASH, that OBAMA cites, happened in late 2008, under a Democratic Congress’s watch. (Obama says DEMOCRAT POLICIES have only been effect for 4 years. Actually, that’s EIGHT YEARS.)

 

obama and vallery

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

Politicians Putting The Squeeze On The Elderly and Middle Class

206165_453413278032501_108773658_n

As the growth of tax revenue has slowed, states have faced tensions over whether to raise taxes or cut spending to balance their budgets as required by law.

“Rising income inequality is not just a social issue,” said Gabriel Petek, the S&P credit analyst who wrote A report for msn money.. “It presents a very significant set of challenges for the policymakers.”

The Blood Sucking Politicians at the Local Level  are blaming it on income inequality. Never mentioning it was created by Politicians and our Federal Government.  Now they want more taxes which will again decimate the Elderly and middle class.

Stagnant pay for  people has compounded the pressure on states to preserve funding for education highways and social programs.

 Their investments in education and infrastructure ??   have also fueled economic growth. ?? What!  Yet we are told they’re at risk without a strong flow of tax revenue.?? Local Governments have been given our Tax Dollars for infrastructure for 40 years or more and they have spent it on social programs to help them stay elected.

We already pay more than any country in the world for education with zero results.  And how about Obamas ,Bush, Bill Clinton and Hillary’s  Open Border policy creating more mouths to educate, house, cloth, and feed. And guess who pays! You the voter and, the old time Democrats who they have convinced must pay more tax’s to save your Social Security. Already most young people are not aware you paid into Social Security during a life time of hard work sometime at two jobs.

obamacare truck fixedDebbie Wasserman Schultz wants Floridians to believe a lie. Wasserman Schultz wants you to believe some people (religious conservatives, of course) are trying to block women’s access to routine health care. But nobody is. – See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/amy-ridenour/2014/04/01/rep-debbie-wasserman-schultz-tells-four-lies-one-sentence.

Hillary is the war on women says kathleen wiley  Hillary is the “War on Woman”

In Florida,  Progressive  Democrats frighten Seniors into obeying their voting instructions. And spent millions running a proven fool Charlie Christ against A successful Governor.

A List of Liberal Lies and the Truth
1. Count Every Vote– This was the mantra of the Al Gore campaign after the 2000 presidential election, when they were hand counting votes in 3 highly Democratic counties, while at the same time trying to disqualify military votes. In effect they were trying to change the rules of the election after the election had taken place, which violated federal election law. A liberal Florida Supreme Court ruled in the favor of the Gore Campaign until the U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to it. To this very day, liberals actually believe George Bush stole the election.

2. There is a vast right wing conspiracy- There is a far right wing in the Republican Party, but it is a small fringe element. However, there is a far left wing in this country and it is a large part of the main stream of the Democratic party. Remember when Hillary Clinton went on the Today Show and responded to the allegation of an affair between her husband (President Clinton) and an intern (Monica Lewinsky) as untrue and blamed it on a Right Wing Conspiracy? Over the past ten years Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Mario Cuomo, Richard Gephardt and Jesse Jackson have been the loudest and most influential voices in the Democratic party. Are any of these people Moderates? Also please note, there is a liberal bias in the media. You might make the argument that there is a vast left wing conspiracy.

Hillary more of the same

3. This is a tax break for the rich- This is class warfare at it’s finest. If a person earning $40,000 a year gets a 10% tax reduction and a person earning $1,000,000 per year gets a 1% tax reduction- the person earning $1,000,000 will get a much greater tax break. Tom Daschle and Richard Gephardt once stood next to a car in front of the Capital Building holding up a muffler. They made a statement that a proposed George Bush tax cut would allow the rich to buy a new car and the average American to buy a muffler. This is a strategy Democrats use on every Republican proposed tax cut. They stop everyone from getting a reduction in their taxes by using class warfare. Please note, tax reductions are not an entitlement program.

4. There is no liberal bias in the media- For close to 50 years the news in America was controlled by ABC, NBC and CBS. In the last 20 years CNN came on to the scene. This is pretty much comparable to the BBC in Europe and AL Jazzera in the Arab world today. It was in the last 6 years when Fox News and other cable news networks were born to give a more balanced approach to news analysis. However, if you look at the major networks today, they are still run by the left. . In print media there is the Los Angeles Times in California, The New York Times in New York and The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Georgia. These have been the major newspapers in our most populous cities for many years and their reporting has a liberal bias.

5. Republicans want to cut school lunch programs- This was the attack leveled by Democrats against the Republicans during a budget battle in 1995. Democrats proposed a double digit increase in funding for school lunch programs, while Republican proposed a more modest increase. To put this in perspective, you must ask this question. How many people get a double digit increase in their pay each year? Democrats called the Republican proposal a cut and charged they wanted to starve children, because the proposal was less than what Democrats proposed. Please note, the Republican proposal called for an increase in funding. The media printed the story, never challenging it, even though it was not true. This became famous for when does an increase become a cut- only in Washington DC.

6. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky- We all know the truth here. There is nothing to be added- except that it was not a vast right wing conspiracy.

7. Republicans are mean spirited and want to throw the poor out on the street- This was a charge leveled by Democrats against Republicans when they proposed time limits for receiving welfare. Polls show that the majority of Americans believe in time restrictions for welfare recipients. Republicans know that to escape poverty it takes education, hard work and discipline. The greatness of this country rests in its freedom and that within one generation a person can rise from poverty to obtain great wealth. Allowing endless dependency on an entitlement program has trapped many in poverty. Why would Democrats want to keep anyone dependent on an entitlement program like welfare?      How many people on welfare vote Republican?  shocked

8. I support the military- It has been well documented that when it comes to voting for military funding- liberals would much rather spend money on social programs. First you must understand their rational. Approximately 10% of the population in the United States is poor, which is about 30 million Americans. There are approximately one million Americans serving in the military. If only 1 in 5 of the poor vote, that equals about six million votes as compared to one million votes from the military. There are two relevant questions here. What percent of the poor vote Republican? How close was the 2000 Presidential Election? This leads directly to the answer of why would liberals rather appropriate money to social programs than to the defense of our country. Please note, the defense of our country is a primary, if not the primary responsibility of our government. If we don’t protect the country, we may not have a country or our freedom.

9. Privatizing social security is risky. Contribute $300 a month to Social Security and you may get $1,800 a month when you retire. Sound like a good deal? There was a story about Dick Gephardt’s mother living on Social Security and having numerous checks she had written returned for insufficient funds. Gephardt politicized the event by stating that this was an example of why Social Security should not be privatized, because if it were not for Social Security his mother would have been much worse off.

Please note that the S & P 500 has returned more than 10% over it’s lifetime. Therefore- if you invested $300 a month in an S & P 500 mutual fund for 40 years at the end of that time (enter these numbers into any compound interest calculator) you would have approximately 2 million dollars (Please note that these are conservative numbers). This means you could withdraw almost $200,000 or 10 percent a year and never exhaust your money. Break that down and it is $20, 000 a month. Social Security does not sound so good any longer.

Please be advised that the key to obtaining wealth is systematically investing for the long term. There is no quick sure fire scheme to getting rich. If Gephardt’s mother had been investing in mutual funds her entire life instead of Social Security- she would have been much better off at the present. Also, please be advised that privatizing Social Security helps the poor the more than anyone. The rich invest money in 401K plans. The poor, the clerk at a convenience store or a customer service representative doesn’t have excess funds to invest and so their only investment vehicle is Social Security.

10. Trickle down economics does not work– Money in the hands of people stimulates the economy, whether they are rich or poor. The problem- how to you put money in the hands of the poor? Transfer of more wealth from the rich to the poor each year? This would only create greater dependency on entitlements and give lessen the incentive to achieve. Give the poor greater tax cuts? You can only cut the taxes for the poor by so much, because they don’t pay much in taxes.

When Tom Daschle said that the result of a proposed Bush tax cut would mean that a rich person would be able to buy a new car, without realizing it, he proved the theory of Trickle Down Economics. The person selling that car would generate income that he would otherwise not have had. Please note that if that person sells enough cars, he will gain wealth. If tax rates in this county were at 75% what would happen to the economy? The answer is that no one would have money to spend on anything except housing and food. The result would be that businesses everywhere would fail, because no one would have money to buy clothes, electronics, entertainment, repairs for their homes or cars, go on vacation….. If they did buy such things, they would have to go in to debt to do so. How would this help the working class or the poor? Please note the average taxpayer, pays roughly 50% of their income in taxes.

liberals are for tax hikes and against tax cuts. The only thing that helps the working class is a strong economy. It gives the average worker more freedom and more bargaining power. When the financial sector was booming from 1987 through 1989, workers were getting bonuses, overtime and stock options. When the financial sector suffered a downturn in 1990, it trickled down. There were no more bonuses, overtime, stock options and there were layoffs.

         emoticon-animal-032.gif Rat        And the biggest Lie  “There is no Death Panel”  

Dr. David Janda explains rationing

Dr. Janda was the keynote speaker at a congressional dinner at the Capitol Building in Washington on Friday, July 17, 2010. As he began his prepared speech, he said, “It should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on the Obamacare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.””The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care.

The plan’s method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.”

The rationing of care is implemented through the National Health Care Board according to this plan. This illustrious board ‘will approve or reject treatment based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment.’ Translation—if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced for of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer, dream on if you think you will get treated. Pick out your coffin. Dr. Janda’s words, not mine.

Oh—you think this could never happen? Sorry…this is the same model they use in Britain

large group we wont take it any moreToday hospitals and health care facilities are required to ask patients if they have a living will or lose government funding! The question is proposed in such a way to create pressure on patients so that they think it is something good, desirable and necessary. “Do you know that you have a right in the state of Minnesota to possess a living will??        smiley-shocked028

Please remember that the living will targets you for euthanasia by denying you medical treatment. Living wills kill: they do not protect you. Instead, I urge you to obtain a copy of “The Protective Medical Decisions Document” (PMDD) from the International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force,   P.O. Box 756, Steubenville, Ohio 43952. Ph: 740-282-3810. Sign it and keep it among your records.

Obama Administration’s New Proposed Rule For Medicare Part D

large group we wont take it any more

The Obama administration’s new proposed rule for Medicare Part D would eliminate half of all Medicare Part D plans and raise prescription drug premiums for millions of seniors by up to 20 percent, according to a U.S. House subcommittee chairman.

“Today, the average senior has 35 different [Medicare Part D] plans to choose from this year. This rule would reduce that choice to two plans. 50% of the plans offered today will be gone, and the health care that seniors like may go with it,” House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee chairman Rep. Joe Pitts said in a statement at a Feb. 26 hearing attended by a top administration health official.

“Limiting seniors’ choices like this will inevitably lead to higher costs. By some estimates, the restriction on the number of plans that can be offered could cause premiums to rise by 10%-20%. Costs to the federal government may increase by $1.2-1.6 billion according to a study by Milliman,” Pitts said. “…I urge Secretary Sebelius and Administrator Tavenner to rescind this.

The study Pitts cited also showed that the new rule would increase  out-of-pocket drug costs for 6.9 million seniors who do not qualify for  low-income subsidies, and would raise federal taxpayer costs for 6 million  seniors who do qualify.

President Bush signed Medicare Part D into law in 2003 to subsidize  prescription drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries.

The Daily  Caller reported that the administration’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid  Services (CMS), a division of Kathleen Sebelius’ Department of Health and Human  Services (HHS), recently introduced a new proposed rule on the Federal Register called “Medicare  Program: Contract Year 2015 Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare  Advantage and the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Programs.”

The new rule “would revise the Medicare Advantage (MA) program (Part C)  regulations and prescription drug benefit program (Part D) regulations to  implement statutory requirements; strengthen beneficiary protections; exclude  plans that perform poorly; improve program efficiency ; and clarify program  requirements,” according to the Federal Register.

The rule states that it also aims “to implement certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act.”  smiley-shocked028       Oh of course they do !!!! ???

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/02/house-subcommittee-chairman-obama-administration-policy-would-eliminate-half-of-all-existing-medicare-part-d-plans/#ixzz2uuf6k0xS

Euthanasia Victims to Face Death by Morphine Injection in America’s Hospitals and Hospices

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saxlS5gVZHA   Over 65? Please watch  this video

these two 3.jpg 5     The Evil One’s

the forgotten ones The Forgotten Ones

Jon Christian Ryter       2010

Dr. Janda was the keynote speaker at a congressional dinner at the Capitol Building in Washington on Friday, July 17, 2010. As he began his prepared speech, he said, “It should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on the Obamacare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.”

“The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventative health care needs whatever. The plan’s method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.”

The rationing of care is implemented through the National Health Care Board according to this plan. This illustrious board ‘will approve or reject treatment based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment.’ Translation—if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced for of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer, dream on if you think you will get treated. Pick out your coffin. Dr. Janda’s words, not mine.

Oh—you think this could never happen? Sorry…this is the same model they use in Britain.

[Obamacare] mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. [The plan] creates the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effective Research, the purpose of which is to “slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs.” The plan also that doctors will be forced to tolerate “oversight” from the federal medical bureaucracy. Their work ethics (both doctors and hospitals) will be reviewed by the National Coordinator for Health Information and Technology.

The “Coordinator” will “…monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate.” The guidelines continue, “…Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties.” According to those he has spoken to in Congress, Dr. Janda noted, the penalties could include large, six figure fines and possible imprisonment.”

According to the Obamacare Plan, Dr. Janda noted, “…if your doctor saves your life, you might have to go to prison to see your doctor for follow-up appointments.”

Oh…remember the Obama rhetoric about keeping your current coverage and opting out of Obamacare? Wrong. Section 102 of Obamacare: “Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage” mandates that it will be illegal to keep your private coverage if your work status changes—if you lose or change your job; retire from your job and become a senior…or, graduate from college and get your first job. Because the moment you come off mom and dad’s private insurance, you go on Obamacare.

But don’t worry…as long as you are not a “double dipper,” you’re okay. So, even though your healthcare will have deteriorated into something worse than third world healthcare, at least Big Brother won’t be trying to euthanize you. Euthanasia will be reserved for the elderly—those taking advantage of Big Brother’s largess by enjoying the “world’s best healthcare” and living on the taxpayer dole (i.e., Social Security—which the recipient paid into from 35 to 50 years). The elderly are being singled out for extermination because the Social Security system is bankrupt. While the bureaucrats blame the bankruptcy of Social Security on the fact that people now live too long, the reality is that Social Security is bankrupt specifically because, for the last 77 years, elected politicians stole the Social Security Trust Fund (which was supposed to have been invested, by law, in high yield government bonds) and used your money to create the welfare society. That money is now long gone. In its place are IOUs the government cannot redeem. Today’s elderly are now expected to pay for that theft with their lives because there are too many people seeking repayment of the funds they deposited, in good faith, with the federal government.

By the way…Barack Hussein Obama was elected by millions of elderly voters who will be delivered to the euthanasia centers of America as the Federal Coordinating Council reports that, for the first time,health costs under Obamacare are actually projected to decline. Why 2013 instead of this year or next year? Obama needed to make sure that the first euthanasia victims to face death by morphine injection in America’s hospitals and hospices don’t happen until after the Election of 2012. And, as grandma is being trucked off to the hospice, Obama will be making his second inaugural address.

Jon Christian Ryter       2010

Hillary is the war on women says kathleen wiley Hillary more of the same and more.

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.

 

 

 

Kathleen Sebelius’s Scare Tactics on Obamacare

large group we wont take it any more

The Heritage Foundation

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is already claiming that seniors would be adversely affected by House-passed legislation defunding Obamacare. Nothing could be further from the truth. Obamacare is the program inflicting harm on seniors–because, as Nancy Pelosi said, the law “took half a trillion dollars out of Medicare” to fund Obamacare. Defunding the law would make seniors much better off.
http://herit.ag/14rnst7

Those hurting will have to continue to hurt until they die. And, those needing meds for serious illnesses will have to die. 10 drugs that cost more than a car.

Crowd SignsSooooo…. where does the “affordable” come in to play???
Some may feel the title is a bit to strong. But, Politically correct and the propaganda fed to we Senior Citizens is appalling.It’s time Seniors Faced the Horrors of this Healthcare Bill and this Administration.
Seniors worked and paid and the government took the money and spent it. Now 14 million mostley uneducated illegals will automatically be eligible for social Security, food stamps,ect ect.(The Gang of Eight Immigration bill) deceptive information that is systematically being spread that hides the simple fact that most of these illegals will earn $22,000 or less so, pay no taxes on that amount and will be eligible for all Government handouts.You tell me how this bodes for Seniors. Congress will not stand up and fight for us. Democratic leaders like Debbi Wasserman Scultz and Bill Nelson spin their” Obama weasel juice” to senior citizens here in Florida.
Read below: 10 drugs that cost more than a car.

The Washington Times Reported:
The White House promised to let the drug industry continue to set their own drug prices
Obama administration cut backroom deals with the nation’s top drug companies to win support for President Obama’s health care overhaul, threatening them with steeper taxes if they resisted and promising a better financial deal for the industry if they acquiesced
Obama agreed to drop his long-standing support for letting Americans buy cheaper foreign prescription drugs — something the pharmaceutical industry vehemently opposed — and the drugmakers promised to mount a public campaign to sell the public on the health care legislation.
The threats appeared to work, and the parties met the next month to hammer out a final deal. The drug companies agreed to pay higher Medicaid rebates and a new health care reform fee to raise $80 billion for the legislation, and promised to run positive television ads about it.
In exchange, the White House gave them direct input into the new policies and promised to let them continue to set their own drug prices
the Whitehouse bypassed members of its own party to iron out specific details with the drug companies. read more>
http://www.washingtontimes.com/

By Leah Culler, MSN Money
10 drugs that cost more than a car.
Pharmaceuticals that cost well north of $100,000 for a course of treatment are far from rare these days.
The Affordable Care Act, which goes fully into effect next year, could mean that patients with cancer, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and other conditions will pay more toward the cost of their expensive medications. In California, for instance, patients could end up paying as much as 30% of the cost for some pricey drugs, according to The Associated Press. Other states have said they will set flat co-pays, even for high-priced “specialty drugs.”
In case you have been lucky enough not to encounter these drugs, we’re not talking about a $3 bottles of aspirin. Many of these designer drugs can hit six figures for a single course of treatment.
Here are 10 of the priciest drugs currently on the market:
Acthar
This drug, once available for $50 a dose, now costs $28,000 for a 5-milliliter vial, according to an article last year in The New York Times. The drug, once used primarily to treat spasms in infants, is now marketed by Questcor as a treatment for multiple sclerosis, nephrotic syndrome and rheumatologic conditions.
Avastin
Avastin, from Genentech, slows the growth of new blood vessels and is prescribed to treat a number of cancers. It has been shown to prolong the lives of some cancer patients by several months, but the medication can cost as much as $100,000 a year.
Cerezyme
This drug is used to treat a condition called Gaucher disease, which causes lumps of fat to build up in the heart, brain and spleen. The condition results from a missing enzyme, which used to be replaced using a drug made from human placentas. Cerezyme, a newer version of the drug, is made by Genzyme with genetically engineered hamster cells. The treatment can cost $200,000 per year, and it must be continued for the life of the patient.
Elaprase
This drug, from Shire Human Genetic Therapies, is prescribed to treat Hunter syndrome, a rare genetic disorder that affects males almost exclusively and causes a variety of symptoms, including mental impairment and problems with mobility. Hunter syndrome patients have severely shortened life expectancy. Elaprase, an enzyme replacement therapy, has been found to decrease the symptoms of Hunter syndrome and improve the ability of patients to walk. It costs about $375,000 per year, according to Forbes.
Folotyn
This drug is used to treat patients with T-cell lymphoma who don’t respond to treatment or whose cancer recurs. The drug, made by Allos Therapeutics, works by killing cancer cells, thus shrinking tumors; it costs about $30,000 a month.
Iclusig
This is the newest — and most expensive, at $115,000 a year — of a number of drugs used to treat chronic myeloid leukemia. Ariad, the company behind Iclusig, has said its drug has proved to be effective for patients who aren’t helped by other treatments.
Soliris
This drug, made by Alexion Pharmaceuticals, is used to treat the rare blood disease paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, as well as the kidney disorder atypical hemolytic-uremic syndrome. It has been described as the most expensive drug in the world, at an annual cost of $409,500, according to Forbes.

Tecfidera
This just-approved treatment for multiple sclerosis from Biogen Idec costs about $55,000 per patient per year. Two earlier oral drugs for MS, Gilenya and Aubagio, cost $60,000 and $45,000, respectively. All three are prescribed to treat flare-ups of symptoms in the relapsing form of MS.

Xeljanz
Pfizer last year got Food and Drug Administration approval for this new, more affordable treatment option for rheumatoid arthritis, which is expected to cost $25,000 a year. (It’s about 7% cheaper than other existing options, according to Forbes.com.) European authorities recently recommended against allowing the treatment there, citing concerns about its safety and efficacy.

Zaltrap
When this drug came on the market as a treatment for colorectal cancer, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center refused to use it because of its $11,000-a-month price tag. Three doctors from the hospital penned a New York Times opinion piece lashing out at what they called a health care system that often fails to take costs into account. The doctors pointed out that the newly approved drug was no better than existing — and cheaper — medications. After the column ran, Sanofi, the company that markets the drug, announced it Loading…

COMMENTS
2345 April Faure  This just makes me sick. luckily not one of the sicks that require one of these drugs. I know research is expensive, but this is just evil greed. This is one of the reasons we have such a healthcare nightmare in this country. I think that patent length needs to be shortened. There are meds that I need that I can’t afford because of no generic. Raising the price of an existing drug because it is found to cure something else like the one mentioned in this article is the same as price gouging during a disaster, and should be just as illegal. And it probably doesn’t cost any more to produce these 10 drugs than it does that $3 bottle of asprin.
NOTE TO CONGRESS!!!!!!!! You are the sorriest bunch of people I have ever known of! NOT A ONE OF YOU deserve more tnan MINIMUM WAGES!!! IF ANY ONE OF YOU can think of a reason you deserve full time pay for a part time job done so poorly, ” The Affordable Care Act… could mean that patients with cancer, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and other conditions will pay more toward the cost of their expensive medications.”
Sooooo…. where does the “affordable” come in to play?????????? I see nothing affordable about it.

letsgo21 PMdrugs that used to be cheap and now cost more… greed is what it is and the federal govt lets the crooks get away with it !!!! its a multi billion/trillion dollar business and running amok !!! no end in sight they want to keep people on druge for a cure would put the greedy pill pushers out of business …the difference between a drug dealer and the drug companies is the drug companies got a license to sell

BeingHonest08031   This article simply means those hurting will have to continue to hurt until they die. And, those needing meds for serious illnesses will have to die. Why do more than 300 million Americans not turn out in the streets over this???
I will never know.

This will hit all of us at one time or another. This is the time for an all out rebellion in this country!! How could saltrap be cut in half after exposure if it cost nearly that much to produce? I don’t think any pill can cost more than a few dollars to make. We have no leadership in this country. It is time we all get in the streets!!! ..
This article points out what I’ve been thinking for a long time. The FDA (Future Destruction of America, here today) along with the legal drug lords are here for one thing: To take every penny one has or can beg, borrow or steal. And, we have a CONgress that is allowing it. I hope this article stirs the American People,  All are elderly, or have elderly family members. All have some sort of illness if they have ever gone to a doctor. Psychiatrists invent new illenessed for children time after time…then a life of addiction! I see no hope for America. We need leadership and we don’t have it now. The health indursty is the only thing growing.

Talking-Back You people think your pissed off now, wait until you read this. All of the hard working tax paying citizens of this country will be forced to pay for health insurance plus pay astronomical prices for medications while all the illegal immigrants will be handed these luxuries on a silver platter to go along with their FREE college tuition and driver’s license. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE????????
PETER SCHARDT   Why isn’t anything done? Because congress is bought off. Campaign contribution is a sweet way to say Bribery!!! Someone needs to step up to the plate and say enough is enough.
The FDA needs a total overhall as well with congress.
phrannie S   This is going to get interesting once the government starts running health care…the whole scenerio scares the crap out of me (course, I’m 62….and I’m sure the powers that be would much rather have me pushing up daisies, than collecting Social Security. When the true cost of universal health care becomes apparent, don’t think for a moment that the elderly aren’t going to be dropping faster than they are now.
.

Now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place. The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system. The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund to finance the Progressive Democrats Welfare State, now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

hillary-in-blue-hijab-300x205

Bill Clinton was so concerned about AIDS that on Nov. 12, 1993 as Hillary’s Health Security Act was in its death throes, 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.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.               , And 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. And 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.

Obama_1_nose_in_the_air_cropped  Obamacare, which supersede all current health options (including those offered by private carriers) enacted into law, your signing a living will that requires all extraneous means be used to prolong your life will not save, or prolong, your life for one minute if the Health Board rules that you have exhausted your “healthcare options.” The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over healthcare recipients who are construed to have either terminal or catastrophic illnesses, or, if they are victims of expensive chronic illnesses that historically drain financial resources without healing the patient, the Board will have the right to deny procedures or surgery even though they may enhance the quality of life of the patient

The 15-member Obama Health Board was created under HR 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The board will gain its authority from HR 3200, The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The board, which the legislation purports to be an advisory panel created to perform cost analysis of all phases of the stimulus plan is, in reality, a panel of physicians and healthcare providers whose role it will be to determine at what point it is no longer cost productive to sanction the use of taxpayer dollars to save the life of a patient who requires a surgical procedure, medical procedure or lifesaving medications to correct a medical malady that threatens the life of an elderly patient or someone with a catastrophic illness.

The American people—thanks to Hillary Clinton—now have a more complex understanding of how, by design, universal healthcare puts into place the foundation of regulations that will allow government to control not only the lives of the people, but their mobility as well. Universal healthcare provides government with the platform that will surreptitiously allow them to, ever so slowly, steal the liberty of the People under the guise of taking care of them.

Like Obamacare, Hillarycare also contained provisions to ration healthcare to the elderly and also to catastrophically-ill people whom statistics said would drain the finite resources of the public healthcare system and bankrupt it if caps were not placed on catastrophic care.The specific language that deals with the rationing of healthcare to the elderly found in The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (which was drafted in part by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over elderly healthcare recipients

We dont have to take it anymore. The Obama election says “yes you do”.
Paul Joseph Watson
Thursday, June 28, 2012
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.

If Britain’s socialist healthcare system is a benchmark for what we can expect from Obamacare, hundreds of thousands of elderly patients face being euthanized through “assisted death” techniques designed to cut costs.

elderly musicians
The idea that “death panels” would be introduced through Obamacare as a means of rationing healthcare was discussed during an Aspen Institute conference in 2010 when Bill Gates argued that money should not be spent on treating the elderly.
During a question and answer session, Gates implied that elderly patients undergoing expensive health care treatments should be killed and the money spent elsewhere.

Gates said there was a “lack of willingness” to consider the question of choosing between “spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient” or laying off ten teachers.
“But that’s called the death panel and you’re not supposed to have that discussion,” added Gates.

However, Britain’s socialist healthcare system under the NHS has gone light years beyond death panels and actually introduced a method of “care” that actually has the intended effect of euthanizing patients.

elderly ladiesimages

In a recent exposé, Patrick Pullicino, a consultant neurologist for East Kent Hospitals and professor of clinical neurosciences at the University of Kent, revealed that of the 450,000 patients who die annually under the care of the NHS, 130,000 of them were on the Liverpool Care Pathway.
Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) is a process whereby a doctor identifies a patient who is likely to die and that patient is then heavily sedated while treatment is withdrawn, “including the provision of water and nourishment by tube.”
“If we accept the Liverpool Care Pathway we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying as it is now associated with 29 per cent of NHS deaths,” Pullicino
Thank You Hillary and Obama for pretending to care for what was called our finest generation.And advising aspirin instead of care and all the morphine they want!!! I believe You Progressives are monsters.
I wonder how this will work when Georgr Soros goes in Hospital (no care and all the Morphine he wants) I doubt it.Sadly, Hillary Clinton’s failed Health Security Act of 1993 offered a bureaucratic solution: rationed healthcare. Obamacare, which will supersede all current health options (including those offered by private carriers) is enacted into law, your signing a living will that requires all extraneous means be used to prolong your life will not save, or prolong, your life for one minute if the Health Board rules that you have exhausted your “healthcare options.

” The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over healthcare recipients who are construed to have either terminal or catastrophic illnesses, or, if they are victims of expensive chronic illnesses that historically drain financial resources without healing the patient, the Board will have the right to deny procedures or surgery even though they may enhance the quality of life of the patient.

Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place.
The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system. The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund to finance the Welfare State, now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

Obama’s 15-member Health Board, officially branded as the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research,  ???? The verbiage in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. makes it appear that the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research was legislated as an advisory panel to do cost analysis on all facets of the stimulus package.

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   (This happened to me just a few months ago I was pressured to sighn and refused.)

 Today, in violation of the Hippocratic Oath, doctors regularly euthannize 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.!!!

No right-minded person should ever sign a living will unless they have a penchant to prematurely expedite their exodus from this world. When you sign a living will, you are actually signing your own death warrant—and you are giving someone you don’t know the right to end your life when they see fit to do so. The argument of the pro-euthanasia crowd (whose primary goal is population reduction at both ends of the age corridor) is that people have a right to death with dignity.

There is no such thing. There is no dignity in death. Even in a roomful of people, death is a journey we travel alone. God, not a bureaucrat, appointed when that journey will begin for each of us.

additional on this topic shortly:

Hillary more of the same.jpg 2

(This happened to me just a few months ago I was pressured to sighn and refused.)This line was added by me.

Hillary And Obama’s Frightening Thoughts On Our Healthcare

2009 Jon Christian Ryter

According to the protocol of the Clinton White House a meeting that took place on Nov. 12, 1993,”…The President…”

meeting with senior aide Gene Sperling and two other Clinton aides identified in the protocol only as as JFS and DG “…gives an overview of the AIDS situation and its relationship to the Health Security Act. Based on position papers submitted to the President from various organizations [that] include the WHO and the CDC, it is evident that AIDS is an epidemic in the United States. Juggling figures to show [only those with active AIDS] has kept the figures artificially low…The President now believes that it would be impossible to include any…AIDS patients with those citizens to be covered by the Health Security Act.

Clinton was so concerned about AIDS that on Nov. 12, 1993 as the Health Security Act was in its death throes, 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.

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. Yet, 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. And 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 euthannize 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.!!!

No right-minded person should ever sign a living will unless they have a penchant to prematurely expedite their exodus from this world. When you sign a living will, you are actually signing your own death warrant—and you are giving someone you don’t know the right to end your life when they see fit to do so. The argument of the pro-euthanasia crowd

(whose primary goal is population reduction at both ends of the age corridor) is that people have a right to death with dignity.

There is no such thing. There is no dignity in death. Even in a roomful of people, death is a journey we travel alone. God, not a bureaucrat, appointed when that journey will begin for each of us.

Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place.

The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system. The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund.Now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.

Here’s just one of a thousand examples of “death with dignity.” On February 20, 1998 when Mary Helmueller, a RN from Minneapolis, was visiting friends in Mexico City, her grandmother fractured her left knee and was admitted to a local hospital. When Helmueller returned, she learned that her grandmother had died. According to the hospital records concerning her grandmother’s demise which Helmueller personally examined, her grandmother was alert and oriented upon admission but, within 48 hours, she went into a coma.

The “coma” was in fact, unconsciousness induced by morphine. According to nurses at the local hospital who attended her, she would awaken between pain medications saying: “I don’t want to die. I want to live to see Johnny ordained. I want to see Greta walk.” (Johnny was her grandson who was studying for the priesthood in Rome. Greta was her new great-granddaughter.) She was transferred to a hospice where she died a day or so later. Her medical charts said she had a stroke and was in renal failure.

Helmueller insisted that her grandmother had no terminal illnesses. But, based on federal guidelines, she did. She was old. Old age is construed to be a terminal illness since you can’t recover from it. Also, according to Helmueller, to the best of her knowledge, her grandmother never signed a living will. It was not until hospice officials called family members and told them that death was imminent and there was no chance the elderly woman would recover, that they tacitly gave the hospital permission to execute her. Keep in mind, all that was wrong with her when she was transferred to the hospice was a fractured knee and overmedication—by the medical staff.

Carefully tracing the events that led up to her grandmother’s “coma,” Helmueller discovered that her grandmother became increasingly unresponsive after each morphine treatment. It appeared to Helmueller that her grandmother’s coma was caused by a morphine overdose. However, the admitting records at the hospice affirm the statements of two hospice doctors who swore, by their signatures, that she was terminally ill. However, the first doctor, the director of the hospice, never examined or evaluated her—nor did he so much as review her chart which, by the way, listed her as a “No Code” patient. The second doctor was on vacation when Helmueller’s grandmother arrived via ambulance from the hospital. He returned from vacation three days after her death. Yet, in the expert medical opinions of both doctors—neither of whom ever saw her while she was living—she was terminal when she was admitted.

The medical-legal community now defines terminal illness as any incurable or irreversible illness or chronic medical problem that will, or could, result in death in six months without medication or medical intervention. What that means is, if you suffer from heart disease that is under control with medication, but you are nearing retirement age, under Obamacare, you could be construed to be terminally-ill by the federal guidelnes mandated by the Death Squad.

Therefore, if youy’ve signed a living will, and you have a chronic illnesses or catastropic disability, you can be denied medical treatment or suddenly find yourself in a morphine-induced “coma,”—and euthanized.

Pinellas County, Florida Circuit Court Judge George S. Geer ordered Terri Schiavo to be denied liquid nourishment and life-sustaining water—sentencing an innocent woman to be executed in an extremely painful manner. No judge in the United States of America has a constitutional right to sentence an unconvicted, innocent person to death. No judge in the United States could pronounce a death sentence on even the most notorious mass murderer that entailed starving them to death to the extent of even denying them water and have it stand up under judicial scrutiny. Yet, that’s what Geer did to Schiavo. No court overruled him, and no governor “pardoned her.” The death sentence stood, and Terri Schiavo was executed by the State of Florida..

The 15-member Obama Health Board was created under HR 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The board will gain its authority from HR 3200, The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The board, which the legislation purports to be an advisory panel created to perform cost analysis of all phases of the stimulus plan is, in reality, a panel of physicians and healthcare providers whose role it will be to determine at what point it is no longer cost productive to sanction the use of taxpayer dollars to save the life of a patient who requires a surgical procedure, medical procedure or lifesaving medications to correct a medical malady that threatens the life of an elderly patient or someone with a catastrophic illness.

The specific language that deals with the rationing of healthcare to the elderly found in The America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (which was drafted in part by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel), an advocate of assisted suicide, with considerable input from Dr. Pearlman, the author of Your Life, Your Choices” the head of ethics evaluation for the Center for Ethics in Health Care in the VA.

On Sun., Aug. 23, Chris Wallace, host of Fox News Sunday questioned Tammy Duckworth, an Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs about the “death book” that suggests to all disable veterans that their lives aren’t worth living and that they should consider “end-of-life” options. Duckworth, herself a paraplegic who lost both legs as a helicopter pilot in Iraq, told Wallace that the Obama Administration was not using Pearlman’s death book. She then noted that it was used during the Bush Administration. Wallace corrected her by reading a July 9, 2009 VA memo which clearly indicates an Obama mandate that Your Life, Your Choices, be supplied to every veteran—not just those who are traumatically disabled.

Duckworth told Wallace that, as the copilot of a Blackhawk helicopter, when she was shot down over Iraq, she had both a living will and a power of attorney that allowed her husband to execute her wishes. Duckworth was wounded on Bush’s watch, not Obama’s. Had Duckworth been wounded in Afghanistan or Iraq on Obama’s watch, in a post-passage Obamacare world, under Obama’s federal Health Board guidelines that weighs not only the monetary cost to save and rehabilitate the wounded warrior, but also the post-medical care cost in terms of the disability income, the government would be obligated to pay to that wounded warrior for the rest of his or her life.

When President George W. Bush learned that the Veteran’s Administration was using Pearlman’s death book in 2007, he asked that a copy of the booklet be sent to the White House. After reading the worksheet on page 21 that poised various negative life scenarios and then asks the reader to decide whether or not his or her own life is actually worth living. One of the most tasteless scenarios is this one: “Have you ever heard anyone say, ‘if I’m a vegetable, pull the plug.’?”

Bush ordered the VA to discontinue its use. Why would the Veterans’ Administration, or any agency of the United States government, pose questions specifically to make members of the armed services question their own worthiness as humans, and make them feel guilty for surviving the wounds that disabled them? Your Life, Your Choice was actually designed to cause disabled servicemen (and women) to ponder just how much of a burden they were on their families, and whether they should do the merciful thing and end their own lives? In point of fact, the Veteran’s Administration wasn’t raising the specter because they believe disabled veterans are a financial burden on their families but, rather, because they are a financial drain on the resources of the State.

At the start of his second term, in 2005, Bush-43 began frantically waving a large warning flags that Social Security was very literally—not theoretically—bankrupt. Bush warned that if something was not done very quickly, within 10 years, the system would collapse and the federal government would no longer be able to meet its financial obligations under Social Security. In order to devise a system that would prevent the bureaucracy from putting Social Security receipts into the general treasury and spending it instead of placing it in a trust fund as required by law, Bush proposed privatizing Social Security. Under Bush‘s idea, the money would go into investment accounts that Congress could not touch. The bureaucracy didn’t like that idea. As Bush-43 scurried around looking for

45 million brand new US taxpayers earning middle class incomes to replace the Baby Boomers who began to retire in 2005 through an amnesty plan the make citizens out of approximately 25 million illegal aliens, the left accused him of fearmongering while they assured America’s retirement age seniors and the soon-to-be retirement age seniors that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Social Security system. Adding their voice to calm America was the AARP, the advocacy group of the elderly—which receives millions of dollars in federal grants each year to advocate to seniors on the behalf of the federal government.

The bureaucracy knew there was a major problem—too many old people and not even retirement revenue. The problem existed for over a decade before George W. Bush stumbled across it in 2005. Twenty years of unrestricted abortion in the United States between Jan. 22, 1973 and Jan. 20, 1993 (when the Clintons came to the White House) eliminated approximately 32 million future taxpayers. Adding the children these aborted babies did not grow up to have, we actually lost 49.6 million future taxpayers and consumers between 1973 and 1993. Today, after a quarter century of killing the unborn in the United States, that number has reach just a hair under 70 million. From 1973 to 2009, the age demographics of the nation radically shifted as the population of the United States began to age.

The problem wasn’t that there were too many elderly people. The problem was that there weren’t enough young people paying into the Social Security system. The far left changed the Trust Fund law and stole the Social Security Trust receipts. They replaced the money with worthless IOUs. Today, there is no trust fund. Tax receipts earn 1% interest, but the money is virtually spent as soon as it’s received, so it doesn’t matter. The money deducted from your paycheck this month covers someone else’s Social Security check next month. Social Security has become a pyramid scheme. Violating the Ponzi law is what Bernie Madoff went to prison for. Like every pyramid scheme, ultimately there will be more recipients demanding benefits than there will be workers to fund those payments. When that happens, Uncle Sam’s Ponzi scheme will collapse.

Before that happens, government has to find a way to restore the age balance in the taxpayer pool needed to keep the fund solvent. Sadly, Hillary Clinton’s failed Health Security Act of 1993 offered a bureaucratic solution: rationed healthcare.

If Obamacare, which will supersede all current health options (including those offered by private carriers) is enacted into law, your signing a living will that requires all extraneous means be used to prolong your life will not save, or prolong, your life for one minute if the Health Board rules that you have exhausted your “healthcare options.” The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over healthcare recipients who are construed to have either terminal or catastrophic illnesses, or, if they are victims of expensive chronic illnesses that historically drain financial resources without healing the patient, the Board will have the right to deny procedures or surgery even though they may enhance the quality of life of the patient.

Obama’s 15-member Health Board, officially branded as the Federal Coordinating Council for

Comparative Research

, is authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Its mandate is to “…assist the agencies of the federal government, including HHS and the Department of Veterans Affairs…to coordinate comparative effectiveness and related health service research…The Council will consider the needs of the population served by federal programs

The verbiage in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

makes it appear that the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research was legislated as an advisory panel to do cost analysis on all facets of the stimulus package as though to suggest their job is to make sure stimulus money is properly disbursed and that council—funded with $1.1 billion annually—will address the impact of the stimulus bill on subpopulations in the United States. Its deliberations, according to the legislation, will be public and transparent based, the government’s memo said, on the [Resident’s] commitment to open government.

The Council will be headed by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel,(Dr Death) brother of Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. From the HHS are Anne C. Haddox, Chief Policy Officer; Dr. Thomas B. Valuck, MD, Senior Advisor in the Center of Medicare Management; Peter Delaney, Director of the Office of Applied Studies; Dr. Carolyn Clancy, MD; Deborah Hopson, Ph.D, RN, Associate Administrator, HIV/AIDS Bureau; Dr. David Hunt, MD; James Scanlon, Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; Dr. Elizabeth Nabel, MD, National Institute of Health; Dr. Garth Graham, MD, Office of Minority Health; Dr. Jesse Goodman, MD, Acting Chief Medical Officer for the FDA; Dr. Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo, MD, Acting Deputy for Office on Disability, HHS; Neera Tanden, attorney for Health Reform at HHS; Dr. Joel Kupersmith, MD, Veteran’s Administration; and Dr. Michael Kilpatrick, MD, Department of Defense.

2009 Jon Christian Ryter

.
.