Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of former White House Chief of Staff and current Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, was interviewed this week on the implementation of Obamacare. Ezekiel, a health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, says the only way to reduce costs is to move to a program that rewards volume over “volume over value and quantity over quality.”
Med-Page Today reported, via Free Republic:
Doctors are the only people who can drive the change in healthcare delivery that’s needed to save the country from a financial crisis, a health policy expert said here.
Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, PhD, chair of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, called physicians the most important group in determining the future of the U.S., because others who have tried to incite health delivery reform have run into a brick wall when doctors weren’t on board.
“I can sit up here and talk all about it. Other experts can talk about it. Only you can put it into practice,” Emanuel said at the opening ceremony here at the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians. “You don’t do, it ain’t gonna happen. It’s that simple.”
Read more here.
“God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. …
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure.”
On vague wording of drone strike criteria: “Are you going to just drop a hellfire missile on Jane Fonda? Are you going to drop a missile on Kent State?” He later added, “That’s gobbledygook.”
On Obama’s civil liberties flip-flop: “I think its also safe to say that Barack Obama of 2007 would be right down here with me arguing against this drone-strike program if he were in the Senate.”
On John Brennan: “I have hounded and hounded and hounded him… Only after yanking his chain… does he say he’s going to obey the law. We should be alarmed by that.”
On the Constitution and the law: “I’m not saying that anyone is Hitler, don’t misunderstand me. But what I am saying that is…when a democracy gets it wrong, you want the law to be in place.”
Taking a stand: “I have allowed the president to pick his political appointees…But I will not sit quietly and let him shred the Constitution.”
On his colleagues in the Senate: “If there were an ounce of courage in this body I would be joined by other senators… saying they will not tolerate this.”
On White House “kill list”: “The people on the list might be me.”
On Obama: “He was elected by a majority, but the majority doesn’t get to decide who we execute.”
On making a point: “This will be a blip in his nomination process. But I hope people will see it as an argument for how important our rights are.”
For anyone who has done even a cursory study of Barack Obama’s life, they know that his radical Marxist views are not a recent phenomenon.
During his New York years, he was a frequent participant in the annual Socialist Scholars Conference held in Manhattan.
In the 1990s, he was affiliated with the Marxist New Party.
He called for an outright ban on guns in 1996.
Through the 1990s and 2000s, he funneled millions of dollars to socialist front groups like ACORN, via the Woods Fund and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. His buddy, domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, helped stuff the money in the pockets of these “public welfare” groups, often taking money from wealthy donors who believed the funds were being used to further education or stamp out poverty. This was Barack Obama’s first foray into “spreading the wealth around.”
The dirty little secret about Marxists is that the moral outrage they have about the poor, about gun violence, about war, and even about the environment (so-called “global warming,” now rebranded as “climate change”) is that these are all simply tools to set up a totalitarian government. A so-called utopia where “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” is not determined by the individual, but according to an elite bureaucracy.
Read more here.
A middle schooler at Genoa-Kingston Middle School in Illinois was told to remove his US Marines T-shirt at school. The boy was told it was against the school code.
Today a Genoa-Kingston Middle School student’s parent is claiming that a teacher ordered his son to cover his US Marine themed t-shirt or be suspended. Dan McIntyre says that his son Michael has wore the shirt to school many times in the past and that he is a big fan of the branch of the US military.
Dan McIntyre says that, “A teacher noticed the guns on the shirt.” He went on to say that the teacher said there was a school policy against the image of a gun.
Michael complied when the teacher asked him to turn the shirt inside out. However, Dan says that his son was still reported to the schools principal.
Dan says that his son, “was really bothered by it. He talked to me after school about it. I said I would have supported whatever decision he made.”
Now children can’t even support the military without getting a suspension.
What a crazy world.
I never envisioned the day when a congressman would violate his oath of office by approving of people wanting to overthrow our government.
On Saturday, Feb. 16, at 1st District Rep. Andy Harris’s town hall meeting on guns in Ocean City, that’s exactly what I heard and saw.
Read more stupidity here.
This white paper will examine a Marxist Revolution under the assumption that the president wants to incite Marxist Revolution in America.
When Vladmir Lenin came to power, he introduced a set of socialist policies that literally crashed the Soviet economy by 1921. After pure socialism visibly failed, Lenin introduced what was called, “New Economic Policy,” a modified form of socialism more akin to state-capitalism. Various industries were allowed to remain in private hands while others were wrangled into the purview of government control.
As we recount the industries over which the government is now in control – healthcare, energy, education, student loans – how can one not draw similarities as the contemporary version of Lenin’s state-capitalism? And if we conclude that the president is a Marxist in a still very much un-Marxist nation, how can we think this is the end of his efforts? As long as the material needs of the neo-peasant class go unmet, the Marxist’s work is never done. (As long as there is a neo-peasant class…) Socialism is only the first step in the march towards “single class” Marxist communism; and that makes us the counter-revolutionaries.
Proletariat revolution and the peasant class.
The president’s thrust to power was the result of the perfect Proletariat revolution. Because the neo-peasant class was able to vote their revolution into place with the aid of the Marxist bourgeois, a violent revolution simply wasn’t needed. But there’s still plenty of work for the Proletariat revolution. The president still needs to continue constructing socialism in order to get to Marxist communism.
This begs the question, How do you sideline, neutralize, or otherwise silence opposition? Conservatives and libertarians make up around 50% of the nation but that number is reportedly declining; therefore a violent Marxist revolution is out of the question. The Marxists simply don’t have the guns.
We would expect the president to not only engage in anti-constitutional but counter-constitutional activities. This includes circumventing the established and separated powers of government; disabling the rule of law in America by selective enforcement; and propaganda campaigns that include how anachronistic the document created by racists is. Further, we can deduce that the president doesn’t care for large portions of the Constitution and he would probably like to get rid of it altogether. We would expect the president and his staff to create a culture of non-compliance with the law, introducing new harmful laws while giving party-affiliated organizations breaks from those laws.
Threat of military coup.
Read more here.