Tag Archives: Death Panels

London Educated Paul Krugman: Co-Constructs Basis For ‘Death Panels’ Through New Keynesian Economics aka; Smoke Screen Economics!

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

WHEN in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to desolve the political bands (of The British Monarchy – my emphasis) which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the seperate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. 


Co-Construct The Modus Operandi For Society To Be Ruled Under ==> Monarchy Serfdom aka; Dictatorship aka; Communism ==> So as to Dictate Life based upon Economics OWING ALL TO THE ROYAL PAIN IN THE ASS -> The British Monarchy

Paul Krugman A New Keynesian Economist : This Is A Smoke Screen For Creating Failure And Then Crying Out For Centralized Control aka; British Monarchy. This type of Economics is pure propaganda for George Soros To co-construct FAILURE - thus producing complete knowledge to Hedge Against aka; Investing 'short' money against what is being made to fail. In short, this is called Pump/Dump Economics an Illegal Insider Trading Economic Smoke Screen personified by Paul Krugman and exploited by British Agent George Soros.


Yesterday, on ABC’s “This Week,” New York Timescolumnist Paul Krugman addressed the subject of escalating health care costs. He said, “Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.”
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:
It was not necessary for Paul Krugman to “clarify” what he meant yesterday, but he took the opportunity to do so anyway on his blog. He wrote that “health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for—not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care.” Indeed, he is calling for death panels. In fact, he even characterized his comments on “This Week” by saying that “the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on ‘death panels and sales taxes.'” (My emphasis.)
Krugman has written 19 columns mentioning “death panels,” almost all of them in a mocking tone. He has spoken of the “death panel smear”; the “death panel lie”; and the “death panel people” as being part of “the lunatic fringe.” Similarly, there was a New York Times editorial in September that took to task “the cynical demagoguing about ‘death panels.'” Two weeks ago Times columnist Maureen Dowd blasted those who engaged in “their loopy rants on death panels,” and one week ago Times columnist Frank Rich talked about “fictions like ‘death panels.'”
So it turns out that all along Krugman’s ridicule was just a smoke screen: he’s wanted death panels from the get-go. Whether he speaks for the editorial board, Dowd and Rich is not certain, but it’s time for them to stop the antics and tell the public what they really believe. Krugman has. Catholics, especially the bishops, would love to see them all come clean.
Jeff Field
Director of Communications
The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
450 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10123
212-371-3394 (fax)

Unalienable Rights – Absolute Rights – Natural Rights

The absolute rights of individuals may be resolved into the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights are declared to be natural, inherent, and unalienable. Atchison & N. R. Co. v. Baty, 6 Neb. 37, 40, 29 Am. Rep. 356.

By the “absolute rights” of individuals is meant those which are so in their primary and strictest sense, such as would belong to their persons merely in a state of nature, and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it. The rights of personal security, of personal liberty, and private property do not depend upon the Constitution for their existence. They existed before the Constitution was made, or the government was organized. These are what are termed the “absolute rights” of individuals, which belong to them independently of all government, and which all governments which derive their power from the consent of the governed were instituted to protect. People v. Berberrich (N. Y.) 20 Barb. 224, 229; McCartee v. Orphan Asylum Soc. (N. Y.) 9 Cow. 437, 511, 513, 18 Am. Dec. 516; People v. Toynbee (N. Y.) 2 Parker, Cr. R. 329, 369, 370 (quoting 1 Bl. Comm. 123).

Chancellor Kent (2 Kent, Comm. 1) defines the “absolute rights” of individuals as the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights have been justly considered and frequently declared by the people of this country to be natural, inherent, and inalienable, and it may be stated as a legal axiom [A principle that is not disputed; a maxim] that since the great laboring masses of our country have little or no property but their labor, and the free right to employ it to their own best interests and advantage, it must be considered that the constitutional inhibition against all invasion of property without due process of law was as fully intended to embrace and protect that property as any of the accumulations it may have gained. In re Jacobs (N. Y.) 33 Hun, 374, 378.


Transcript of the entire Declaration of Independence

Learn the fate of the signatories

The 13 Colonies

Enemies Of The States – Health Rationing Vote Done At 1:00am: Now Is Your Hour Judas – The Hour Of Shadows!


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has set the stage for a major vote Monday morning at 1:00 AM – one that would require the support of 60 Senators. That would, if all goes according to Senator Reid’s plan, set up a late-night Christmas Eve vote on final passage. Senator Reid also used a rare procedure to block any further amendments from being offered, debated or voted upon.

When it comes time for Senators to cast their vote at 1:00AM Monday morning, shortly after Sunday Night Football ends and most Americans are in bed, they will have had less than 38 hours to understand a 383-page amendment that introduces several new concepts into the health care debate, including:

  • A scheme that gives the Office of Personal Management immense power in administering what amounts to a multi-state public plan;
  • How much a state “opt-out” of abortion coverage in the legislation erodes the long-standing Hyde-amendment;
  • The budgetary impact of ELIMINATING the physician reimbursement fix; and,
  • Multiple new taxes, federal regulations and sweet-heart deals aimed toward certain states like Nebraska.
  • Permanent Death Panels

It is important for Americans to understand the process being used by the Senate. Barring any procedural snags (of which there are many in the Senate’s complex rules and precedents), the debate is likely to play out as follows:

  • Monday, 1:00 AM – Vote to invoke cloture (i.e. end debate) on the manager’s amendment. 60 votes are necessary.
  • Tuesday, 7:00 AM – Vote to approve the manager’s amendment. A majority vote is necessary.
  • Tuesday, 8:00 AM – Vote to invoke cloture on the original Reid substitute amendment (the 2,000-page bill). 60 votes are necessary.
  • Wednesday, 2:00 PM – Vote to approve the Reid substitute amendment. A majority vote is necessary.
  • Wednesday, 3:00 PM – Vote to invoke cloture on the underlying bill. 60 votes are necessary.
  • Thursday, 9:00 PM – Vote to approve the underlying bill (i.e. the Senate’s version of Obamacare). A majority vote is necessary.


Last January, President Obama told his senior staff that “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.” Now, an unconstitutional health care proposalthat was drafted behind closed doors and poised to be approved while Americans are not looking will become the touchstone of his presidency. Surely this was not what the American people signed up for.


Obama Death Panels, CNN’s Best Kept Secret & Ramadan, Festival Of Head Cutters

Nick Berg

Nick Berg

USA Nick Berg memorial


Editors note: Have you wondered what Sarah Palin is talking about when she refers to Obamacares “death panels”? Does government health care really mean rationing – which is to say, denial – of medical care for the elderly and infirm? What is it about Obamas health-care advisers that has critics up in arms? Following is an excerpt of a shocking investigative report published in the August edition of Whistleblower magazine, titled “MEDICAL MURDER: Why Obamacare could result in the early deaths of millions of baby boomers.”


President Obama has promised huge cuts in medical spending. In fact, he has warned that, if America fails to make such cuts, it will face financial Armageddon.

“Make no mistake: the cost of our health care is a threat to our economy…,” Obama told the American Medical Association in Chicago June 15. “It is a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America. … If we fail to act, one out of every five dollars we earn will be spent on health care within a decade. And if we fail to act, federal spending on Medicaid and Medicare… will eventually grow larger than what our government spends on anything else today.”

To avoid this catastrophe, America must make drastic cuts in health spending, says Obama. The size of his proposed cuts varies from speech to speech, but the figure cited most often by Obama’s advisers is 30 percent per year – up to $700 billion annually.

Get Jerome Corsi’s classic No. 1 New York Times bestseller, “The Obama Nation,” autographed by the author only in the WND Superstore.

A 30-percent annual cut is going to take a big bite out of somebody’s health care. The only question is whose.

The numbers make clear that most of these cuts will have to come at the expense of those who need health care the most – the elderly, the disabled and the gravely ill.

“Older, sicker societies pay more on health care than younger, healthier ones,” Obama told the AMA.

He is right. According to a 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services, five percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 50 percent of health care spending in America. Who are those five percent? Most are people over 65 years of age with serious, chronic illnesses.

By contrast, the study notes, half of the U.S. population “spends little or nothing on health care… with annual medical spending below $664 per person.” These, of course, are mostly healthy young people – people without serious, chronic illnesses.

Obviously, Obama will not meet his cost-cutting targets by reducing care to healthy young people. They are already spending next to nothing. It is the old, the dying and the chronically ill whose health care he will cut. The numbers make this clear.

At present, the main vehicle of Obamacare is the so-called America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, introduced on June 9.

This law will force Americans to enroll in “qualified” health plans – that is, plans approved and controlled by the government. Americans will be invited to “choose” between “public” and “private” insurance plans, but will find little difference between them. “Public” or “private,” they will all follow the same rules, dictated by the Department of Health and Human Services – the same agency, incidentally, which issued the report, titled “The High Concentration of U.S. Health Care Expenditures, 2006.”

How will Obama cut costs? His June 13 radio speech gave some hints. Obama said his plan would provide “incentives” to doctors to “avoid unnecessary hospital stays, treatments and tests that drive up costs.”

And what sort of treatment does Obama consider “unnecessary?” In an ABC News special June 24, he implied medical treatment might be wasted on elderly people with grave illnesses, citing his own grandmother as an example.

Dying of cancer, with less than a year to live, Obama’s grandmother broke her hip. “[T]he question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?” asked the president.

It turns out that Obama’s grandmother did get the hip replacement – though he did not say so on ABC that night. Obama left the story about his grandmother unfinished, but went on to suggest that other people faced with such choices might do well to forget about surgery and settle instead for palliative or comfort care – treatment that helps you feel better while you are dying, but does not prolong your life.

“Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller,” Obama concluded.

It’s already happening in Europe

In Europe, governments already ration health care, just as Obama plans to do here. The older and sicker people are, the less care they get.

In England, for example, bureaucrats determine a patient’s eligibility for health care using the QALY system (quality-adjusted life years). They divide the cost of treatment by the number of “quality” years the patient is expected to live. Older, sicker patients are expected to live fewer “quality” years, so why bother treating them at all? On this basis, British elders are routinely denied treatment for cancer, heart disease and other deadly illnesses.

Many die in filthy, overcrowded hospitals or nursing homes, rife with pestilence, including the deadly, antibiotic-resistant “superbugs” Clostridium difficile and MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus). Each year in the U.K., nearly three times more people die from hospital infections than from traffic accidents.

In the nation where Florence Nightingale invented modern nursing 150 years ago, cleanliness has become a lost art. British newspapers reported in 2007 that patients in government hospitals were told to “go in their beds” when they had diarrhea.

In March 2009, British health inspectors reported that poor treatment at one hospital may have killed up to 1,200 people in three years. That’s 1,200 people at just one hospital.

Denied food, water and medicine, patients at Stafford Hospital in Staffordshire were left screaming in agony, drinking from flowerpots and lying helpless in their own waste.Many waited for operations which were repeatedly postponed.

British officials were quick to label the Stafford horror an “isolated incident.” But many health care professionals in England say it is typical. Unfortunately, dissenters have little voice in Britain’s National Health Service. The system is notoriously hostile to whistleblowers.

Continue reading →


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,711 other followers