Posts Tagged ‘Health Care’

Obamanet to Replace Internet

February 24, 2015

Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act passed by Democrats in Congress (no Republicans) who did not read what was in it, brought chaos to health insurance, reduced actual health care, raised premiums (and taxes) for those with insurance, and initiated the loss of millions of full-time jobs.

Now we are facing Obamanet, approved by the votes of three Democrat commissioners on a five-member Federal Communications Commission who followed Obama’s wishes. Backed by over 300 pages of new regulations, the internet will become government regulated and subjected to key provisions of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 under which the FCC oversaw Ma Bell – or we should say “broke up” Ma Bell.

Unless Congress or the courts block Obamanet, everything on the internet will have to pass a “just and reasonable” test administered by government bureaucrats who are certainly not known for being just or reasonable. One can expect the internet will run with the same efficiency as the VA and the same simplicity as Obamacare. It will also run slower, similar to the internet in Europe where regulations have curtailed broadband’s reach and staunched new investments in broadband.

Once again this president is forcing his personal agenda onto the nation, bypassing Congress, and using executive orders, presidential memoranda, and departmental regulations to make new laws that affect the entire nation. His “transformation of America” is highly influenced by a Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view he embraced in college while associating with radicals. This view is also protected by an elitist ego denying the validity of criticism.

If our representatives in Congress do not stop this runaway administration, there will be more irreversible damage. If you do not see the danger, you are part of the problem.

David J. Hentosh

Obama Didn’t Care

November 13, 2013

A Chicago Tribune editorial finally dares to ask: “Did he (Obama) not bother to learn the details of the law before he told us we could keep our doctors and our insurance, or did he know the truth and flat-out lie?” The answer is “yes” to both of these questions, but the worst part is that Obama didn’t care.

Obama came into office with universal health care as a personal, political priority. It was the mere passage of such a bill that mattered, not content; therefore, selling it to the public and getting it through Congress was his only goal and he approached it like all his campaigns – with wholesale, feel-good promises.

It is inconceivable that he was unaware of the negative consequences of the health care bill because Republicans were screaming about them all along. He just wanted to get the bill passed, so he focused on allaying the biggest fears many had and those were losing current plans and current doctors.

These fears didn’t come out of thin air. They came out of the health care bill itself and the warnings from those who actually read the bill. Obama knew about them and began making promises to counter those fears – just to get the bill passed. He didn’t care about the bill’s details, consequences, or flaws. He only cared about hastily getting it through Congress while it still had a Democrat majority.

The bill was passed without one Republican vote. A bill that totally changes health care’s coverage, care, and cost for every single person in the country was forced upon all by Obama and a rubber-stamping Democrat Congress.

Obama didn’t care if anyone liked it or not and he didn’t care if it would help or hurt. He only cared about getting it passed because it is all just a political game to him. His promises were deliberately misleading to help win the game. He still doesn’t care – but we certainly should.

David J. Hentosh

The Return of Back-Alley Abortions?

August 28, 2013

Progressives have used the scare of “back-alley abortions” to promote legalized abortion for years. Every time there is a move to limit abortion in any way, this scare is pulled off the shelf, dusted off, and shoved into everyone’s face as a direct consequence from limiting abortions. Now, progressives are opening the door wide for a re-birth (no pun intended) of those amateur, back-alley abortions.

A bill has been approved by California’s State Senate allowing non-physicians to perform abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy. This approval brings the bill one step closer to becoming a law and brings back-alley abortions one step closer to revival.

The bill allows nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives and physician assistants to perform the procedure, but we all know that the “slippery slope” is alive and well. We saw how legalizing only “medicinal” marijuana in California slid quickly down that slope into a pot free-for-all environment. It will happen with abortions, too, putting women at more risk rather than less.

California does not provide abortion reports to the federal government, so the exact number occurring in the state is not accurately known. Whatever that number is (and we can assume it is huge), it is not large enough to satisfy progressives’ desire for more. It wouldn’t be surprising to find this bill to be a proactive attempt to offset the dearth of doctors that Obamacare is sure to cause in order that abortions can continue undiminished. Such is the progressive’s thirst for abortions.

Unintended consequences from progressive policies abound because the idealism behind those policies requires blinders. Even when consequences are predicted, as with Obamacare, the blinders remain in place blocking reality. This California abortion bill is loaded with unintended consequences that our children will have to fix. The slippery slope is greased and waiting.

David J. Hentosh

Insurance or Tax?

February 20, 2013

A bill introduced in the New York State Assembly would require the state’s residents to acquire liability insurance as a condition for gun ownership. The annual cost for $1 million in liability insurance is estimated to be between $1600 and $2000.

Proponents of the bill will certainly argue that this is no different than requiring insurance coverage for car registration or home insurance in order to obtain a mortgage. There is logic to that argument, but the bill opens the door for an onslaught of requirements for insurance.

Clearly, this is a mandate to buy insurance, though it is not the same as the mandate from Obamacare because it does not require everyone to buy insurance. However, if this bill were to land in a court’s lap for a decision, could it be labeled a tax?

No one expected the Supreme Court to rule the Obamacare mandate to be a tax, especially after Obama adamantly assured us it was not a tax. However, that is what occurred and, as with many court rulings, it created a slippery slope that a NY court may decide to slide down. Stranger things have happened.

Once that door is wide open, could liability insurance be required for ownership of a bow and arrow, machete, BB gun, darts, or a nail gun? How about for ownership of a dog, baseball bat, skateboard, or a bicycle? Could a purchase of cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, or prescription painkillers require liability insurance or an additional health policy?

That may sound crazy but not too long ago it sounded crazy to buy water in bottles like soda, pay for a cable to receive free TV, hand out condoms in grade schools, or provide sex-change operations to prison inmates. Perhaps this may be a good time to buy stock in insurance companies.

David J. Hentosh

PC Ambulance Procedures

March 14, 2011

It is continually evident that the obsession with political correctness is dangerous. In Massachusetts, it has now seeped into EMT procedures by means of directives from the state’s Department of Public Health, making political correctness more important than your health. The first question to be asked by EMT’s responding to an emergency is now to be: “Are you Hispanic/Latino/Spanish?” If you dare to raise questions about this priority, you will lose precious more time of treatment by being subjected to further dictated responses from the EMTs.

From The Boston Herald via Michelle Malkin

…the Mass. Department of Public Health has issued a new directive, “Guidance on the Collection of Race and Ethnicity by Ambulance Services.” In this document, the first question to the sick person is not: “Do you want to go to the hospital?” The first question is: “Are you Hispanic/Latino/Spanish?” To which the patient would most likely respond: “What the hell are you talking about, bub? I’m sick.”

But in Gov. Defal Patrick’s PC world, the sick person meekly responds: “What is meant by Hispanic, Latino or Spanish?” The EMT is provided with an explanation to read, just slightly shorter than the Gettysburg Address…

…in the actual document there’s not a syllable about patient health and safety coming first, or even last. This is about a sick obsession by the liberals with somehow proving “disparities…

Read about it here:  PC Ambulance

DJH

Saudi King to Seek Medical Treatment in US

December 2, 2010

From Reuters:

Saudi Arabia’s elderly King Abdullah will leave for the United States Monday for medical checks for a back ailment, and Crown Prince Sultan is returning from holiday abroad, state media said Sunday.

Western diplomats in Riyadh said the prince’s return indicate that kingdom, the which has no political parties or elected parliament, is trying to prevent a power vacuum and reassure Washington and other allies.

A day before his departure, the king reappointed several officials close to his reform course, including Saudi Arabia’s relatively moderate top Islamic scholar and the ambassador to Washington.

Read the rest here.