Sunday, August 16, 2009

Long Term Care

Well, I haven't heard it raised as a question and have not seen it addressed as one of the silly items in the Health Scare Bill, but I am wondering just how all of this is going to affect all those Long Term Care contracts that people have been paying premiums for over the years.
 
I'm sure that as soon as Otrauma and his Legion of Death appointees figure out that this has slipped through their fingers, they will quickly resolve that oversight!

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Don't Drink the Water?

The following is an excerpt from the July 15, 2009 Town Hall article by Michelle Malkin, entitled “Two Scientists, Two Standards.”
The rationality police in the newsroom have not, however, seen fit to print the rantings of a radical secular evangelist now serving as the White House "science czar." John Holdren, Obama's director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and co-chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, co-authored the innocuously titled "Ecoscience" in the 1970s with population control extremists Paul and Anne Ehrlich.
Earlier this year, Ben Johnson at the online publication FrontPage Magazine provided quotes shedding light on Holdren's embrace of "compulsory abortion" for American women "if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." In "Ecoscience," Holdren and the Ehrlichs also outlined their desire for "a comprehensive Planetary Regime (that) could control the development, administration, conservation and distribution of all natural resources."
Johnson outlined the book's ugly eugenics plan and neo-Malthusian vision of enviro-crats engineering the population. Yet, there was scant mention of Holdren's stomach-churning proposals during his confirmation hearings in February. Holdren's defenders might have comforted themselves by claiming that the quotes were taken out of context. But last week, another online investigative journalist scanned copious pages from the book to show that his words had been unedited and accurately transcribed. The disturbing documents can be found at http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/.

There, you'll find Holdren musing about how to infect the nation's water supply to make women infertile for the benefit of Mother Earth:

"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. … No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: It must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets or livestock."

Holdren's planetary regime would also breed out undesirables "who contribute to social deterioration" and "insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption -- especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone."

Single mothers who wanted to keep their children would be "obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it."
Now someone please explain to me that we shouldn’t be concerned that Obama is gathering around him all the scarier elements of Nazi-ism (as developed by Adolf and the Gang) and Communism (Soviet and Chinese style).

Lest you think I’m taking this out of context, you should go read the entire article at http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2009/07/15/two_scientists,_two_standards?page=full&comments=true.

There you will also find that he has selected as his choice to head the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis S. Collins, a geneticist! Now, why a geneticist? It may be a perfectly logical choice, but most can see why, in the light of historical perspective, there would be some concern about the reasons for the particular combination of talents that the Obama team is putting in place.

Or maybe I’m just another right-wing conspiracy theorist. What do you think?

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

So, You Believe

that Obama is being straightforward when he looks into his teleprompter and proclaims that, if you are happy with your current private health insurance coverage, you will be able to keep it?  Before you let yourself be led down that path, you might want to read the following verbiage from page 15 of the proposed (and still unread by legislators) Government health control plan:

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) GRANDFATHERED INSURANCE OVERAGE DEFINED.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
       (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT. ---
               (A) IN GENERAL—Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
               (B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day.
       (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS.—Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.

The bottom line is:  If you have coverage under a private option insurance plan as of the day this piece of crap goes into effect (day 1 of Y1), you will be allowed to keep that coverage.  Sounds just like what The One says, doesn't it?  But there is a big message hidden in plain sight here.  They are hoping that we, the people, won't read this thing any more than those  legislators (who, by the way, get a huge salary and lots of "perks" for supposedly representing us).   I have this crazy right-wing idea that "representing us" means reading and understanding bills before they vote on them.

You have to do a little third grade logic to connect with the message, but I'll make it easy:  This says no new policyholders for those private companies as of that day, and that any term or condition that gets changed after that day will allow the shut down of that coverage (i.e., all covered persons will have to move to the so-called public option).  Now, how long do you think your insurance company can hold out in the face of:  initial defections to the ObamaNation plan, older customers dying off, and lack of ability to adapt coverages to changing needs.  These private companies will need to get funds from some place to provide coverage.  Guess what?  Higher premiums, which you can bet will be one of the terms which, if changed, will trigger the shutdown of that insurance plan.

A disclaimer:  I am not a lawyer (thank goodness), but that doesn't mean I rode in on a turnip truck.  I did develop, write, negotiate and administer multi-billion dollar contracts for major space system vehicles and systems for 25 years.   I can read, write and interpret government doublespeak with the best of them.

You have been warned!