Eugenics on Steroids: ObamaCare after 2013

from Jeanie Coates,  National Leadership Council, Conservative Capitalist Coalition, New Mexico.

 

"This message was copied from FB friend TeBo, who reported the following conversation:

 

"I had one of the most troubling, most disturbing conversations ever with Julie's sister-in-law, Dr. Suzanne Allen, head of emergency services at the Johnson City Medical Center in Tennessee. We were discussing the "future" and I asked her had she seen an affects of ObamaCare in her work?

 

"Oh, yes. We are seeing cutbacks throughout the services we provide. For example, we are now having to deal with patients who would normally receive dialysis can no longer be accepted. In the past, there was always automatic approval under Medicare for anyone who needed dialysis. Not anymore."

 

So, what will be their outcome? "They will die soon without dialysis," she stated. What about other services? She indicated as of 2013 (after the election), no one over 75 will be given major medical procedures unless approved by locally administered Ethics Panels.  These Panels will determine whether a patient receives medical treatment or not. While details on specific operating procedures and schedules, Dr. Allen points out that most life-threatening emergencies do not occur during normal hospital business hours, and if there are emergencies that depend to be resolve within minutes or just few hours, the likelihood of getting these Panels approval in time to save a life are going to be very challenging and difficult, if not impossible she said.

 

 This applies to major operations such as receiving stents, bypass surgery, kidney operations, or treating for an aneurysm that would be normally covered under Medicare today. In other words, if you needed a life-saving operation, Medicare will not provide coverage anymore after 2013 if you are 75 or over. When in 2013? "We haven't been given a specific date. Could be in January or July.  But it's after the election."

 

This is shocking to any of us who will be 75 this year. Her advice: get healthy and stay healthy. We do not know the specifics of the actual implementation of the full ObamaCare policies and procedures. "They haven't filtered down to the local level yet. But we are already seeing severe cuts in what we provide to the elderly.  We refused dialysis to an individual who was 78 just the other day.  We refused to give stents to a gentleman who was in his late 80s." 

 

"Every day," she said, "we are seeing these cutbacks aimed at reducing care across the board for anyone who is over 75. We can only hope that ObamaCare will be overturned by the Supreme Court. Otherwise, this is a death sentence to those who are over 75.  Perhaps you should pass this on to your friends who are thinking of voting for Obama this year. Regardless if you have private health care coverage now (I have Aetna Medicare Part B) it will no longer apply after 2013 if the Ethics Panels disapprove of a procedure that may save your life.

 

Think about this? You? Your parents? Your loved ones? Didn't know about it? Of course, not. As Nancy Pelosi said, "well, if you want to know what's in the bill, you'll have to read it." After it was passed.

 

This is a graphic reminder of the need to stay healthy.

End of First Amendment Rights

All of NM's federal legislators voted for this.

Latest From the Hill: Congress Criminalizes the Right to Free Assembly

Strips Basic Protections of First Amendment
Mac Slavo
SHTFPlan.com
Thursday, March 1, 2012
It seems like every day brings us one step closer to a totalitarian police state, and today is no exception.

The Daily Crux and Economic Policy Journal have reported on a little known bill that was overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives (H.R. 347 vote tally388-3) and the Senate (S.1794 passed with unanimous consent, no voting records were kept of which Senators approved).
The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 essentially strips Americans of their right to protest and assemble in government buildings or on public or private grounds where events of “national significance” are taking place.
The summary of the bill clearly outlines the direct attack on our First Amendment protections which allow for peaceable assembly and public redress of grievances against our government or elected officials within it:

Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 – Amends the federal criminal code to revise the prohibition against entering restricted federal buildings or grounds to impose criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly enters any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority. Defines “restricted buildings or grounds” as a posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of: (1) the White House or its grounds or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds, (2) a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting, or (3) a building or grounds so restricted due to a special event of national significance.

Bill sponsor Tom Rooney (R-FL) claimed in a tweet responding to grievances on the internet, that “HR 347 does not effect your right to protest in any way whatsoever. It deals with fence jumpers, not protestors.”
As it turns out, the two page bill deals not just with ‘fence jumpers,’ but also lays the groundwork for all protests, gatherings and politic dissent in any facility or grounds in the United States of America that has been identified as a place of ‘national significance’ or where the Secret Service is charged with the protection of an individual – ANY individual, whether it’s the President, a congressional member or anyone else of national interest.
This is serious business, and you can be assured that, while Tom Rooney may have meant for the bill to stop fence jumpers, it can and will be used for far more than that:

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”
It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.
Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.
Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection…
In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — whether it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense…
Source: RT

For those who will undoubtedly be charged under the new legislation, the penalties will be severe.
If you are found to possess a weapon deemed as dangerous (not necessarily a gun) when you knowingly enter an event of national significance you can be imprisoned for up to ten years.
If you are a peaceful, unarmed protester and you disrupt an event you’ll be treated with a bit more mercy by our benevolent leaders and be given up to one (1) year in prison.
With what we’ve seen over the last few year in Greece, greater Europe, Syria, and even the United States, the legislation makes complete sense from a government standpoint. What better way to keep dissenters and protesters quiet than to imprison them for months or years? It will take only a few public examples the next time a Tea Party or Occupy style protest take place and millions of Americans will understand that staying home and staying silent is their new Patriotic duty.
And, if it so happens that protests turn to violent rioting and civil unrest, the government will have the pretext to arrest, detain and imprison anyone and everyone in those ‘restricted areas of national significance.’
Housing these criminals should not be a problem, as our government, the Pentagon and DHS have been planning for just this scenario for quite some time, going so far as to build largescale detention facilities where those identified as subversive to our government can be re-educated.