This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Thursday, September 3, 2009

Getting Use to Obamacare

Had an Obamacare conversation with my oral surgeon today. I had raised the question whether it was worth someone my age getting a tooth implant. “Goodness yes, he said, you have taken care of yourself and have a body of someone 15 to 20 years younger. You will get years of use from an implant."

I grinned and replied: “You realize we just had an Obamacare conversation. One day, a bean counting bureaucrat behind a computer in Washington will get a report from a Boone physician saying, “We have a healthy 80-year-old and a 60-year-old. The 60-year-old has debauched his body but both need the same expensive procedure.”

The Obamacare puppet responds, “That is a no-brainer. The computer says, ‘go with the youngest’ Offer the 80-year-old the pill. That’s how its done in Europe.”


Liberal POV said...


Can you backup this fairy tale with any facts?

USS Rodger Young said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV, can you prove it wrong?


Your ole pal
USS Rodge Young

aDaughterOfYaHWeH said...

Lib POV,

Here's the fact to backup this so called "fairy tale" ...

Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of Rahm Emanuel-Pres. Obama's Chief-of-Staff) is currently acting as Special Advisor for Health Policy to Peter Orszag. He said the following:

"The complete lives system discriminates against older people. Age-based allocation is ageism. Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years. Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not.

When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated (figure).78 It therefore superficially resembles the proposal made by DALY advocates; however, the complete lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value. Additionally, the complete lives system assumes that, although life-years are equally valuable to all, justice requires the fair distribution of them. Conversely, DALY allocation treats life-years given to elderly or disabled people as objectively less valuable."

aDaughterOfYaHWeH said...

"The social or, in the economist's language, the macro level entails the proportion of the gross national product (GNP) allocated to health care. The patient, or micro, level entails determining which individual patients will receive specific medical services; that is, whether Mrs. White should receive this available liver for transplantation. Finally, there is an intermediate level called the service or medical level that entails determining what health care services will be guaranteed to each citizen. These socially guaranteed services have been called 'basic' or 'essential' medical services … So rather than risk the bankruptcy of having nearly every medical service socially guaranteed to all citizens, Americans have been willing to tolerate a system in which the well insured receive a wide range of medical services with some apparently basic services uncovered; Medicare beneficiaries receive fewer services with some discretionary services covered and some services that intuitively seem basic uncovered; Medicaid beneficiaries and uninsured persons receive far fewer services … Without overstating it (and without fully defending it) not only is there a consensus about the need for a conception of the good, there may even be a consensus about the particular conception of the good that should inform policies on these nonconstitutional political issues … Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. A less obvious example is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason."

"There is one final matter to consider: the possibility that euthanasia not only would be performed on incompetent patients in violation of the rules—as an abuse of the safeguards—but would become the rule in the context of demographic and budgetary pressures on Social Security and Medicare as the Baby Boom generation begins to retire, around 2010. Once legalized, physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia would become routine. Over time doctors would become comfortable giving injections to end life and Americans would become comfortable having euthanasia as an option. Comfort would make us want to extend the option to others who, in society's view, are suffering and leading purposeless lives. The ethical arguments for physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, advocates of euthanasia have maintained, do not apply to euthanasia only when it is voluntary; they can also be used to justify some kinds of nonvoluntary euthanasia of the incompetent....The proper policy, in my view, should be to affirm the status of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia as illegal. In so doing we would affirm that as a society we condemn ending a patient's life and do not consider that to have one's life ended by a doctor is a right. This does not mean we deny that in exceptional cases interventions are appropriate, as acts of desperation when all other elements of treatment—all medications, surgical procedures, psychotherapy, spiritual care, and so on—have been tried. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should not be performed simply because a patient is depressed, tired of life, worried about being a burden, or worried about being dependent. All these may be signs that not every effort has yet been made."

If after reading this you still desire more information I will be happy to provide it to you! There ARE PLENTY OF FACTS out there regarding this issue... apparently you are just blind to them...

Sarkazein said...

Unemployment at a 26 year high, deficits are quadrupling, Americans more divided than ever, Afghanistan War going badly, banks closing at record numbers, and the MSM is still celebrating Obama.

Gregg said...


Is all of that Bush's fault or Rush's fault?

Livberal POV said...


I missed any facts you listed all I saw were opinions.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes-


Sarkazein said...

POV- aDaughterOFYahWeH posted a quote from: Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of Rahm Emanuel-Pres. Obama's Chief-of-Staff) - currently acting as Special Advisor for Health Policy to Peter Orszag.

Forget the nepotism here for a moment, it is Emanuel's opinion, not an opinion of his opinion. Or did you even read it.

Blogger said...

guy faulkes said...
I am with this lady concerning Obamacare.

Sarkazein said...

The end of Guy Faulkes' video shows the sincerity of this speaker.
I think I see a rather dour look from the lady sitting on the right of the speaker when the cheering gets loud. Is that an Obama T-shirt?

Libeal POV said...

Sark and GOP ( Grumpy Old People )

"Unemployment at a 26 year high, deficits are quadrupling, Americans more divided than ever, Afghanistan War going badly, banks closing at record numbers, and the MSM is still celebrating Obama."

Were you working for a different out come or did you have a plan to do better?

Remember It was your side that put us on this course in history.

Stop hoping for failure.

Gregg said...

"Stop hoping for failure." -LiberalPOV

If Obama fails to implement his vision then America wins. If Obama succeeds with his radical agenda then America looses. I hope he fails.

Blacks have already lost, Obama's election is the worst thing that could have happened to them.

Libeal POV said...


You and other hate junkies have to go to Fox News, Rush or someone similar, or the internet to get your fix of anger.

The right wing hate industry is the new crack for Republicans.

This hate industries raw material is misinformation and distorted information the final product is anger.

You folks are not just groupies but anger junkies.

This can't be healthy for the nation or you.

Gregg said...


You're a broken record. Can you at least attempt to debate the issue? To the best of my memory no one on this blog has EVER accused you of not being responsible for your own opinions and beliefs. To do so would be the height of arrogance and rudeness. We simply demolish your logic. Please reciprocate...if you can. I would absolutely LOVE to be shown to be wrong about my belief that Obama is a radical bent to "fundamentally change America" (his words) for the worse (my words). I don't like to think these things about my President, please convince me otherwise. I very much want to be wrong about my intepretation of TONS of evidence to the contrary.

USS Rodger Young said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV said:

"This hate industries raw material is misinformation and distorted information the final product is anger."

Name one ounce of disinformation a conservative has promulgated on this site. Just one. Please just one. Were you born stupid or did you just get that way somehow. I thought Virginia Foxx and gang (Aaron Whitner) were pretty dumb, but you take the cake. You have never answered a single post and have no arguements to counter the bashing you recieve each and every day. Like those fascists on Watauga Watch, you speak and speak without saying anything other than a few insinuations towards obscure subject matter. How about engaging those you disagree with instead of always talking around the subject.

That's asking too much I know, but then again you have had everything given to you your whole life so what should we expect. Something given has no value -remember that o liberal one.


Your biggest fan..LOL...

USS Rodger Young


Sarkazein said...

If one Googles "USS Rodger Young crew", it is the 6th hit.

A Watauga Conservative: White House Asking You to Turn in Your ...
Aug 5, 2009 ... USS Rodger Young PS Biker Lard isn't smart enough to see he has a hat ... I read , and re-read the USS Rodger Young post three times and ... html -

BikerBard said...

We have such health care decision makers now. They are called, "Insurance Companies."

Gregg said...


I can choose my insurance company. I can make up my own mind about my demise. I can take my own chances if I want no insurance. I can pay for anything I choose to pay for. I can decide who(m?) to trust with my life if I am incapacitated. I can choose my own doctor.

I would MUCH rather depend on a private sector insurance company that is motivated to perform by obscene profit than a government motivated by obscene micro-management of my life.

Sarkazein said...

After the government bureaucrat turns you down, it's off to the black market. It will cost you triple because the doc could be jailed for treating you...going against the will of the government. Right before you are put under, you look up and see the doctor with a cigaret dangling out of his mouth and no mask. There is a lot of traffic noise, because you are in his van. The doc tells you to keep drinking the anesthetic.

Gregg said...

One of the things that jumps out at me in watching the numerous videos of town hall meetings is how incredibly informed and articulate the "mob" is. This is made even more clear by how incredibly uninformed and dismissive the politicians are. They can't answer the very important questions so they accuse the questioners of being astro-turf, Nazis and full of hate. It's a lot like Liberals on this blog.

Blogger said...

Gregg, As usual, well put. Democrats have become like suicide bombers. They don't seem to realize that the world of information has changed. When they run in 2010, they can no longer count on people being uninformed.

Liberal POV said...


What you don't seem to get is if you or your famly's health fails the insurance company can make up it's mind if you are still profitable to keep as a customer.

Do you own an insurance company? Why are you so vested in protecting these insurance interest?

Gregg said...


Every Republican proposal I've seen wants to address the "pre-existing condition" problem. Blogger has also said as much. Same with portability. Your argument is a red herring, nothing new. It's been pointed out over and over.

So, I'll play along. If my insurance company drops me I find another. What are my options if the government "death panel" decides not to pay. Where do I go if ALL the doctors are government employees? Canada?

What do you have against private enterprise prospering?

Liberal POV said...


Once one insurance company rejects you you will have a difficult time with all of the others.

Imagine for profit Fire departments or EMS.

The current plan does not out law for profit insurance or medical practice.

Gregg I don't believe you are naive enough to believe the death panel lies.

Did any of you old people read the current issue of AARP bulletin on the health care bills in the senate and house?

Notice it called the death panel scare tactic a lie.

The turth is not that hard to find just get away from the anger industry.

I would suggest Newsweek, Time, C-span, NPR, BBC, CBC, Fact

Gregg said...

"Gregg I don't believe you are naive enough to believe the death panel lies." - LiberalPOV

No Lib, I already proved that one to you on the "Letter To Kay Hagan" thread, September 2, 2009 10:19 PM and 10:24 PM. You ignored the evidence of Democrats and Republicans horrified by the death panels that exist today in America for Native Americans. You also ignored the evidence of the death panels in England.

In addition I referred you to Sarah Palins well sourced FaceBook page.

You are incapable of honest debate.

Liberal POV said...


I did miss having time to watch your video post on Indian Health Care.

Do you not understand this tragic sort of thing is happening not just on Indian reservations but in low income area all across this great country.

Your side wants to prevent malpractice judgements for bad medicine in cases like you posted.

Blogger has the type coverage we are talking about in the bills before congress and there are no death panels in those. Read the current AARP Bulletin.

I did go to the Palin facebook site and the woman is just pulling misinformation out of her ass.

No facts there at all. Why would you believe such garbage?

Liberal POV said...


This is for those who believe Sara Palin the queen of Know Nothings and silliness.

Gregg said...

Focus Lib. Explain to me why you don't think death panels exist in our "Indian Health Services" or England's NHS. Here's the link to Sarah Palin's facebook page. Scroll down to "Concerning Death Panels". Read what she actually wrote and sourced.

I've given you a wealth of information to support my claim. Your pompous ass has given me zip to refute it. Address the issue.

Liberal POV said...


Can you prove the sun won't come up tomorrow?

You can't prove a negative.

The British system is not in the bills before congress, I wish it was the Canadian system but it's not that either.

What is in the bill is ability for all Americans to buy into medicare and sulplements for the working poor and middle class, There access for most to have health care coverage regardless of age, health conditions. Why do you want to make that more then what it is the humanitarian thing to do.

I know you don't want to see people die in the streets in front of American Hospitals because they don't have health care coverage. Lets fix it.

The Sarah Palins are not part of the solution.

Find the truth, Buy a Time, Newsweek, or any real journalism. Stay away from the propaganda and anger industry.

Gregg said...

"The British system is not in the bills before congress, I wish it was the Canadian system but it's not that either." -LiberalPOV

The Indian system IS in place in America now. They are making life and death decisions based on economics. It's irrefutable. Life MUST be rationed in ANY socialized health care system.

You don't have to "prove a negative". If Sarah Palin is so dumb then show me the flaw in what she wrote. You haven't so I assume you can't. Check that, I KNOW you can't.

Why are you always so mad?

Liberal POV said...


Give me a link were Sarah Palin has any facts posted.

Please no opinions, lies or silliness.

Gregg said...


Been there, done that three post up, September 7, 2009 8:18 AM.

It's full of facts. Here's her sources:
[1] See
[2] See
[3] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1); Sec. 1233 (hhh)(3)(B)(1), above.
[4] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1)(E), above.
[5] See
[6] See].
[7] Id.
[8] See].
[9] See
[10] See
[11] See

Blogger said...

Gregg, Thank you for all this hard work in finding material that has seminal information as well as the thoughtful concerns of informed people. I do have to wonder if you did all this for the liberals on this blog. I hope not. By now, we all have learned there is something lacking at the bottom of their brains which allows contrary facts or reasoning just to leak out like from holes in a barrel.

USS Rodge Y. said...

Liberal Socialist POV,

When are you going to learn? Oh wait..that's right, you are one of those fringe left dope smokers who doesn't have enough brain left to formulate rational thoughts. Too bad for you.

Irrational psychopaths such as yourself don't exactly do the left any good. Wanna make some bets on 2010? LOL!!

Your ole pal

USS Rodge

Gregg said...

USS Roger and Blogger,

You both have brought up the 2010 elections. I too think Republicans will fare well. History is on their side. 2002 and 2004 were anomalies and it's amazing that Bush didn't loose more ground before 2006. All else aside Republicans should gain seats in 2010. That said, I'm still worried. It's not that Republicans don't have a message it's that it isn't getting through. Opposition is good but not enough. I think Republican politicians need to show the backbone that's being shown by the patriotic citizens at the town hall meetings. We need leaders and the best I can tell the leaders are the citizens not the politicians.

My real concern is 2012. Dig, what about Hillary? She's definitely more of a hawk than Obama. She could, with the help of the MSM, paint herself as the anti-Obama Democrat. Libs could atone for voting for the Obama disaster by suporting her. What if she resigned in an adversarial way in 2011? It could be her perfect storm. That is of course unless we get hit by terrorist again but I can't hope for that.

Bottom line: let's not count our chickens before their hatched.

Gregg said...

Should read they're hatched (just in case Shyster/Nonny is reading).

Sarkazein said...

WASHINGTON (AP) - A top senator is calling for fines of up to $3,800 on families who fail to get medical insurance after a health care overhaul goes into effect.
The plan from Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana would make health insurance mandatory, just like auto coverage. It would provide tax credits to help cover the cost for people making up to three times the federal poverty level. That's about $66,000 for a family of four, and $32,000 for an individual.///

Remember the Hillary-care mentioned JAIL/IMMPRISONMENT over 50 times. What happens if you don't pay your $3800 fine? JAIL.

Sarkazein said...

News Home World
'Doctors told me it was against the rules to save my premature baby'
Last updated at 7:58 AM on 09th September 2009

Doctors left a premature baby to die because he was born two days too early, his devastated mother claimed yesterday.

Sarah Capewell begged them to save her tiny son, who was born just 21 weeks and five days into her pregnancy - almost four months early.

They ignored her pleas and allegedly told her they were following national guidelines that babies born before 22 weeks should not be given medical treatment.

Battle: Sarah Capewell is fighting to have guidelines about caring for very premature babies changed

Miss Capewell, 23, said doctors refused to even see her son Jayden, who lived for almost two hours without any medical support.

She said he was breathing unaided, had a strong heartbeat and was even moving his arms and legs, but medics refused to admit him to a special care baby unit.

Miss Capewell is now fighting for a review of the medical guidelines.///