Curtis Dahlgren
Do you want the Ivy League in charge of your "health"?
By Curtis Dahlgren
"When you come to a fork in the road [to the left, DON'T] take it." — Yogi Berra [paraphrased]
CANDIDATE OBAMA PROMISED THE MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY. He was right. We can see right through it. Talk is cheap (even "articulate" talk)! And coming events always cast their shadows before them.
It's CRUNCH time! Life-and-death decisions are resting on the shoulders of a few poorly-informed members of Congress. When they use such terms as "America's Affordable Health Choices Act," just exactly what do they mean?
"It's too expensive...so we're going to let you die." So said Presidential adviser Robert Reich in an imaginary "campaign" speech at UC-Berkeley in 2007. Was that a slip of the tongue, or a foretaste of things to come?
The following excerpt is forwarded from DOESGODEXIST (Sept/Oct 09):
ATHEIST PROPOSES "TRANSVALUATION OF VALUES"
"Pigs, chickens and fish have more signs of consciousness and rationality — and, consequently, a greater claim to rights — than do fetuses, newborn infants, and people with mental disabilities . . . the calf, pig, and the much derided chicken come out well ahead of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy." — Peter Singer (Princeton University)
This statement is typical of atheists minimizing the value of human life. Singer builds on the work of the atheist philosopher Nietzsche who coined the phrase "transvaluation of values" [including "life devoid of value"]. The argument is that we are not creations of God, but rather mere Darwinian primates. Singer says:
"We must remove Homo sapiens from his privileged position and restore the natural order." [end of excerpt]
As John Clayton says, Singer would protect apes but allow unwanted children, people with mental disabilities, and the noncontributing elderly to be euthanized. Atheists will not like to see Singer's atheist views presented as what all atheists believe, but in reality, if God is removed from the picture "it is difficult to avoid that conclusion."
["res ipsa loquitor" — "the thing is as it appears"]
Presidential adviser Robert Reich, in a speech billed as "what a politician would say if he weren't interested in getting elected," said as much himself. By the way, Hitler never had to run for reelection, which made him all the more dangerous.
The following is the conclusion of "Staring into the Abyss" by Dinesh D'Souza
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/march/22.60.html -
"Some of Singer's critics have called him a Nazi and compared his proposals to Hitler's schemes for eliminating those perceived as unwanted and unfit. A careful reading of his work, however, shows that Singer . . doesn't want state-sponsored killings. Rather, he wants the decision to kill to be made by private individuals like you and me. Instead of government-conducted genocide, Singer favors free-market homicide.
"Why haven't the atheists embraced Peter Singer? I suspect it is because they fear that his unpalatable views will discredit the cause of atheism. What they haven't considered, however, is whether Singer, virtually alone among their numbers, is uncompromisingly working out the implications of living in a truly secular society, one completely purged of Christian and transcendental foundations. In Singer, we may be witnessing someone both horrifying and yet somehow refreshing: an intellectually honest atheist."
The theory of "Life devoid of value" was all the rage in German universities in the 1920s, especially among some physicians and "legal experts." They didn't "want" state-sponsored killings either, but what the 1930s "got" was a direct product of their theories, translated through the mind of Adolf Hitler. The common ordinary citizen didn't see the death camps coming, but was aware of "the new attitude toward human life."
An old Chinese curse says, "May you live in interesting times," and since November 2008 our times have become a little too interesting!
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/10/13/robert-reich-reveals-brutal-health-care-truths-msm-snores
"In an audio recording from a September 2007 speech to an audience at the UC Berkeley, Reich reveals what he believes an honest liberal presidential candidate would say about health care. The 'truth' about health care as Reich sees it is quite shocking and as you can hear on the recording, he is definitely not kidding. Here is an excerpt of the brutal truth about health care as Robert Reich sees it:
"Prof. Peter Singer of Princeton University put in bluntly in the Sunday Magazine of the NY Times. Prof. Singer states that the life of an elderly American is not worth the life of a young American. And all of this will be done in the name of fiscal conservatism and human rights. Let's make health care less costly by letting the costly folks die. 'Every child a wanted child.' The abortion justification on the back end. This is why we can call a 'reform' bill that increases government spending and encourages death 'America's Affordable Health Choices Act' . . . And all of this debate ignores the value of human liberty."
The title of this column was "Marx in the operating room: death panels were formed long ago." www.RenewAmerica.com/columns/kline/090810
CONCLUSION
There is an indisputable fact that the more we Americans find out about "free health care," the less we want it. Only fifteen percent of Americans are dissatisfied with our present imperfect system, and probably six out of ten of us are opposed to proposed "reforms."
But another indisputable fact is that the politicians DON'T CARE what you think. They say that they don't really want to run the auto industry or the banks, but obviously they really really do want to run the health-care system (because that's where the BIG bucks are)!
["res ipsa loquitor" — "the thing is as it appears"]
Have a nice day and/or rest of your life.
© Curtis Dahlgren
October 18, 2009
"When you come to a fork in the road [to the left, DON'T] take it." — Yogi Berra [paraphrased]
CANDIDATE OBAMA PROMISED THE MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY. He was right. We can see right through it. Talk is cheap (even "articulate" talk)! And coming events always cast their shadows before them.
It's CRUNCH time! Life-and-death decisions are resting on the shoulders of a few poorly-informed members of Congress. When they use such terms as "America's Affordable Health Choices Act," just exactly what do they mean?
"It's too expensive...so we're going to let you die." So said Presidential adviser Robert Reich in an imaginary "campaign" speech at UC-Berkeley in 2007. Was that a slip of the tongue, or a foretaste of things to come?
The following excerpt is forwarded from DOESGODEXIST (Sept/Oct 09):
ATHEIST PROPOSES "TRANSVALUATION OF VALUES"
"Pigs, chickens and fish have more signs of consciousness and rationality — and, consequently, a greater claim to rights — than do fetuses, newborn infants, and people with mental disabilities . . . the calf, pig, and the much derided chicken come out well ahead of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy." — Peter Singer (Princeton University)
This statement is typical of atheists minimizing the value of human life. Singer builds on the work of the atheist philosopher Nietzsche who coined the phrase "transvaluation of values" [including "life devoid of value"]. The argument is that we are not creations of God, but rather mere Darwinian primates. Singer says:
"We must remove Homo sapiens from his privileged position and restore the natural order." [end of excerpt]
As John Clayton says, Singer would protect apes but allow unwanted children, people with mental disabilities, and the noncontributing elderly to be euthanized. Atheists will not like to see Singer's atheist views presented as what all atheists believe, but in reality, if God is removed from the picture "it is difficult to avoid that conclusion."
["res ipsa loquitor" — "the thing is as it appears"]
Presidential adviser Robert Reich, in a speech billed as "what a politician would say if he weren't interested in getting elected," said as much himself. By the way, Hitler never had to run for reelection, which made him all the more dangerous.
The following is the conclusion of "Staring into the Abyss" by Dinesh D'Souza
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/march/22.60.html -
"Some of Singer's critics have called him a Nazi and compared his proposals to Hitler's schemes for eliminating those perceived as unwanted and unfit. A careful reading of his work, however, shows that Singer . . doesn't want state-sponsored killings. Rather, he wants the decision to kill to be made by private individuals like you and me. Instead of government-conducted genocide, Singer favors free-market homicide.
"Why haven't the atheists embraced Peter Singer? I suspect it is because they fear that his unpalatable views will discredit the cause of atheism. What they haven't considered, however, is whether Singer, virtually alone among their numbers, is uncompromisingly working out the implications of living in a truly secular society, one completely purged of Christian and transcendental foundations. In Singer, we may be witnessing someone both horrifying and yet somehow refreshing: an intellectually honest atheist."
The theory of "Life devoid of value" was all the rage in German universities in the 1920s, especially among some physicians and "legal experts." They didn't "want" state-sponsored killings either, but what the 1930s "got" was a direct product of their theories, translated through the mind of Adolf Hitler. The common ordinary citizen didn't see the death camps coming, but was aware of "the new attitude toward human life."
An old Chinese curse says, "May you live in interesting times," and since November 2008 our times have become a little too interesting!
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/10/13/robert-reich-reveals-brutal-health-care-truths-msm-snores
"In an audio recording from a September 2007 speech to an audience at the UC Berkeley, Reich reveals what he believes an honest liberal presidential candidate would say about health care. The 'truth' about health care as Reich sees it is quite shocking and as you can hear on the recording, he is definitely not kidding. Here is an excerpt of the brutal truth about health care as Robert Reich sees it:
-
"Thank you so much for coming this afternoon. I'm so glad to see you and I would like to be president. Let me tell you a few things on health care. Look, we have the only health care system in the world that is designed to avoid sick people. And that's true and what I'm going to do is that I am going try to reorganize it to be more amenable to treating sick people but that means you, particularly you young people, particularly you young healthy people . . you're going to have to pay more. . . We're going to use the bargaining leverage of the federal government in terms of Medicare, Medicaid — we already have a lot of bargaining leverage — to force drug companies and insurance companies and medical suppliers to reduce their costs. What that means: less innovation, and that means less new products and less new drugs on the market which means you are probably not going to live much longer than your parents."
"Prof. Peter Singer of Princeton University put in bluntly in the Sunday Magazine of the NY Times. Prof. Singer states that the life of an elderly American is not worth the life of a young American. And all of this will be done in the name of fiscal conservatism and human rights. Let's make health care less costly by letting the costly folks die. 'Every child a wanted child.' The abortion justification on the back end. This is why we can call a 'reform' bill that increases government spending and encourages death 'America's Affordable Health Choices Act' . . . And all of this debate ignores the value of human liberty."
The title of this column was "Marx in the operating room: death panels were formed long ago." www.RenewAmerica.com/columns/kline/090810
CONCLUSION
There is an indisputable fact that the more we Americans find out about "free health care," the less we want it. Only fifteen percent of Americans are dissatisfied with our present imperfect system, and probably six out of ten of us are opposed to proposed "reforms."
But another indisputable fact is that the politicians DON'T CARE what you think. They say that they don't really want to run the auto industry or the banks, but obviously they really really do want to run the health-care system (because that's where the BIG bucks are)!
["res ipsa loquitor" — "the thing is as it appears"]
Have a nice day and/or rest of your life.
© Curtis Dahlgren
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
