Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hey Seniors! Just Die Already!
WhenWeAreQueen ^ | July 26, 2009 | Queen1

Posted on 07/26/2009 5:29:45 PM PDT by pharmamom

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
Link to the CEI press release: http://cei.org/news-release/2009/07/23/obama-adviser-urges-controversial-%E2%80%9Csenior-death-discount%E2%80%9D-health-care-reform
1 posted on 07/26/2009 5:29:45 PM PDT by pharmamom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pharmamom; backhoe

Obama Care - Deathcare.

Backhoe do you have any of your great graphics you could add to this thread?


2 posted on 07/26/2009 5:31:58 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

Ezekiel playing roulette huh. With others’ lives in play. Or is it Wheel of Fortunes?


3 posted on 07/26/2009 5:35:08 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Fili et Spiritus Sancti.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
Ezekiel Emmanuel, may you have the privilege of dying first! Then, we will think you know that you are willing to stand behind your word.... you weasel
4 posted on 07/26/2009 5:35:57 PM PDT by bareford101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

See page 425 of the new healthcare bill - counseling sessions for seniors on how to die - this is not a joke


5 posted on 07/26/2009 5:37:56 PM PDT by unitedwestand (What's up with that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

Hmmm...I thought that was his dad.


6 posted on 07/26/2009 5:38:36 PM PDT by Pharmboy (Who ever thought we would long for the days of the Clinton administration...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
I oppose what Obama wants to do to healthcare, but I think many Americans have to wake up to the reality that individuals have to pay — and should pay — for more of their own healthcare. If any entity — an insurance company, government, whatever — is paying for peoples’ medical care, that entity MUST ration, and rationing based on age is one way to do that. Many people over 65 are cheap, cheap, cheap — and I'm talking about rich geezers, too, so the “they-live-on-fixed-incomes-argument” won't wash. Part of the reason we've hurtled so quickly towards socialized medicine is that many older Americans balk at any adjustment to government spending, such as raising the age when you can collect Social Security benefits.
7 posted on 07/26/2009 5:38:48 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom
Somehow, I don’t think this is going to go over very well with the AARP.

The AARP knows all about it. They agreed with the Obama Administration to the cuts in Medicare providing Medicare was opened up to people between ages 50 and 64 - that way, AARP can sell a new group of people Medicare Supplement Insurance (as approved by the Obama Administration).

The AARP is primarily about selling insurance - protecting the rights of seniors is just a sales ploy.

8 posted on 07/26/2009 5:41:53 PM PDT by BusterBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

Men who think like Ezekiel Emanuel need to be contained for the good of society.


9 posted on 07/26/2009 5:41:58 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (The revolution IS being televised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unitedwestand

Yes, I know, I have been trying to explain the deathcare bill to several today who supported it. EVEN with the end of life counseling mandatory, I could not win. These are Obama koolaid drinkers of the worst sort.

“We have to do something about healthcare”

One even said - for a doctor to make $350K is outrageous and must be stopped!

But, I said, putting a government bureaucrat in charge of what care you receive and don’t receive and your end of life situation which should by no means include government bureaucratic decisions.....is more like Nazi Germany than the USA!


10 posted on 07/26/2009 5:42:12 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: unitedwestand
See page 425 of the new healthcare bill - counseling sessions for seniors on how to die - this is not a joke

How about posting it, if possible?

11 posted on 07/26/2009 5:43:52 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (The revolution IS being televised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

The longer their parents live, the less inheritance they’ll get.


12 posted on 07/26/2009 5:44:28 PM PDT by jennyjenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

I agree. The problem really lies with 71 1/2 and over. They want heart transplants and want us to pay for it.

As I have said before, we just allocate a percentage of GDP to Medicare and be done with it. But Obama wants to cut healthcare to people over 65 and give it to illegal immigrants.

F*ck Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


13 posted on 07/26/2009 5:44:38 PM PDT by whitedog57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

The solution is LESS government involvement in healthcare, not more. It includes tort reform bigtme. It includes giving more tax incentives to healthcare reimbursement accounts and users of those accounts....just for starters.


14 posted on 07/26/2009 5:44:45 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

Start calling Ft Myers and snow bird papers to ask if the communities like the snowbirds’ business (and relatives’) or not.

Farm agencies & small weeklies. 4-H.


15 posted on 07/26/2009 5:44:56 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Fili et Spiritus Sancti.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

Think it is brother...

Pharmboy, eh. Am I your mother?


16 posted on 07/26/2009 5:49:56 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bareford101

AMen!


17 posted on 07/26/2009 5:51:29 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

I agree 100% about the solution’s being less government involvement. My point was that many seniors have abetted this march towards socialism by refusing to consider HOW the government will pay for endless entitlements. Many old Americans who are now afraid they won’t get pacesetters at age 100 were the same people who got hysterical when raising the age for SS benefits was ever raised.


18 posted on 07/26/2009 5:53:27 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

bump


19 posted on 07/26/2009 5:55:06 PM PDT by CPT Clay (Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: whitedog57
Wacky cheapness afflicts the under 65 set, too. I know women who will not get mammograms unless insurance covers them. I've told some friends if their insurance companies won't cover mammograms until, say, age 40, they should just pay for the mammograms themselves. (Yes, there are places that don't accept insurance that will give and analyze mammograms for paying patients.) But most peoples’ reaction is, “I'm not going to pay for a mammogram!” That's just great, isn't it? People who pay a couple of hundreds of dollars a month on cable and internet balk at paying for a test that could save their lives.
20 posted on 07/26/2009 5:57:21 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: whitedog57

To be sure, end of life care and the costs associated with it is an ethical issue we need to address. What we don’t need, though, is for the government to address it for us. And end of life care is a different question than allocating resources to seniors for routine care...we do not want to be in the position of having the government deciding at what point a life loses value.

From what I read, the bulk of our healthcare $ are spent on a minority of the populace with chronic disease (80/20). That 20% is probably mostly of an older age, but not necessarily. Do we want the government denying care to a 40-year-old with chronic disease because they have used up “their share?”

The government needs to free up the market for something that is truly “insurance;” people need to pony up for their routine maintenance care; and conversations about end-of-life care and extraordinary measures need to take place privately, among family members, not with the government bean-counters.


21 posted on 07/26/2009 5:58:34 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

I have paid into SS my entire working life by force. I am a few years away from Social Security. I understand that I will likely never see it.

The seniors in this country who have worked all their lives and by force had to pay into Social Security are DUE their payout. I do not begrudge them that at all and at age 65.

What I resent is government workers who retire at 50 and get full benefits at THAT age for the next 40 or 50 years at taxpayer expense. Let’s talk about the fairness of THAT.


22 posted on 07/26/2009 5:59:16 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

AARP supports it.

They want the “old” people dead so the “newly old” have more resources.

I’m not a member of AARP and detest that my Insurance Company is associated with them.


23 posted on 07/26/2009 6:03:22 PM PDT by HighlyOpinionated (Governor Palin, we love you. We hope you'll run for POTUS in 2012. You have our votes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
Listen, you will definitely get your SS benefits. My point is that if the SS age were raised by even one year, much pressure would be relieved. There are some people who will not entertain raising the retirement age by even a few months. I've gone back and forth with some freepers who have refused to agree to hypothetically starting to collect SS even three months later! My point is that something has got to give.

Everyone should get his SS benefits, but we must raise the age at which people can receive them. Very, very few people will consider doing this, and this mentality has paved the way for more socialism.

24 posted on 07/26/2009 6:04:09 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom
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.

Yeah, we can have medicare only in reverse. Everyone has full coverage up to age 65, then nothing, can't even see a Doc because it would take up the time which could otherwise be devoted to a 25 or so year old. I'll bet this guy is great with kids having learning disabilities as well.

25 posted on 07/26/2009 6:04:22 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

You are right, so lower the cost with tort reform, but BO is the Mistress of he Trial Lawyers.


26 posted on 07/26/2009 6:05:35 PM PDT by Shady (The Fairness Doctrine is ANYTHING but fair!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

My friend has this idea.

“While discussing the upcoming Universal Health Care Program with my sister-in-law the other day, I think we have found the solution. I am sure you have heard the ideas that if you’re a senior you need to suck it up and give up the idea that you need any health care. A new hip? Unheard of. We simply can’t afford to take care of you anymore. You don’t need any medications for your high blood pressure, diabetes, heart problems, etc. Let’s take care of the young people. After all, they will be ruling the world very soon.

So here is the solution. When you turn 70, you get a gun and 4 bullets. You are allowed to shoot 2 senators and 2 representatives. Of course, you will be sent to prison where you will get 3 meals a day, a roof over your head and all the health care you need!!! New teeth, great!!! Need glasses, no problem. New hip, knee, kidney, lung, heart? Well bring it on. And who will be paying for all of this. The same government that just told you that you are too old for health care. And, since you are a prisoner, you don’t have to pay any income tax. “


27 posted on 07/26/2009 6:06:57 PM PDT by sweetiepiezer (I have a Pal in Sarah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

I am sure that anyone who falls into the category of “chronic user” is in his gun sights. I haven’t read the paper in the Lancet—I assume he published it there (2nd tier journal) because it got a cold reception with journals here in the States. Of course it would go over well in Britain—they already deny their seniors care based on their analysis of Quality-Life-Years or whatever they call them.


28 posted on 07/26/2009 6:07:06 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sweetiepiezer

LOL! Why not give them a full clip, though? And don’t limit it to CongressCritters. It would solve that pesky public official problem we have, too.


29 posted on 07/26/2009 6:08:34 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

Get the gov out of all of it. Free up the insurance companies to make whatever kind of policies consumers want across state lines. No free care to illegals. Tourists can take out short-time insurance policies when they come in (Mexico does that to Americans for driving cars). Let people & employers make their own decisions. Let the free market set costs of hospitals, doctors, etc.
Get the gov out of healthcare altogether.
For the truly poor let there be charity.


30 posted on 07/26/2009 6:09:44 PM PDT by Bhoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

Why don’t you suggest governmnent workers stop early retirement? That would save TONS, billions in taxpayer money. Do that first. Then we can talk about people who don’t retire til they are 65 getting their SS benefits.


31 posted on 07/26/2009 6:10:35 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jennyjenny

and the more the Cabal can confiscate.


32 posted on 07/26/2009 6:10:55 PM PDT by Shady (The Fairness Doctrine is ANYTHING but fair!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

Ezekiel, Rahm, and Barach are the antiChrist Triad®.


33 posted on 07/26/2009 6:15:20 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
I have no problem with raising the government retirement AND SS ages by one year. If the government retirement age were raise, would you agree to wait an additional year to begin collecting SS?
34 posted on 07/26/2009 6:25:03 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

From the paper:
“Additionally, the complete lives system
assumes that, although life-years are equally valuable to all, justice requires the fair distribution of them.”

Whenever politicians start talking about “justice,” you know we are in trouble.


35 posted on 07/26/2009 6:29:33 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

By contained, do you mean 6 feet under pushing up daisies?
Seems people like him are deserving of such containment.


36 posted on 07/26/2009 6:32:39 PM PDT by This I Wonder32460
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

Government retirement is at age 50 or after 30 yrs of work.

Let’s raise that age to 65 how about it? Then we can talk about raising SS age beyond 65.


37 posted on 07/26/2009 6:36:52 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

AARP doesnt give a crap about seniors, heck they are FOR Obamas cutting medicare


38 posted on 07/26/2009 6:39:20 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pharmamom

I remember when I was 40 that 75 looked pretty old. Now I am 67 and it doesnt look so old any more. Perhaps it would be nice if this clown figured out that one day he will be 65 and condemned because of his age.

Or maybe he is just rich and can pay his own way and wants the poor Seniors to die.


39 posted on 07/26/2009 6:41:55 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

What if the age at which government workers could begin collecting their pensions were raised by, say, three years? So, a police officer who worked from age 20 to 50 and retired at age 50, couldn’t start getting cash benefits until age 53. Would you then be willing to start collecting SS one year later?


40 posted on 07/26/2009 6:42:46 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

Let’s talk about people other than public safety officers. Let’s talk about your average government bureaucrat who gets to retire at 50.

No, pushing their retirement age to 53 is not the equivalent of pushing the age of retirement from 65 to 66 for someone who has worked for 45 years.


41 posted on 07/26/2009 6:47:58 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

I think government workers should be able to retire after 30 years with a full pension—which they cannot begin to collect until they reach normal retirement age of 65.


42 posted on 07/26/2009 6:48:06 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BusterBear

Anyone that joins AARP is supporting communism!!!!

They haven’t got anything to offer in supplemental insurance that you can’t outside on your own.

They don’t even offer the best, SCAN!


43 posted on 07/26/2009 6:49:11 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bhoy

Get the gov out of all of it. All gov programs are ripped off by the politicians, the lobbyists, the industry involved, and the consumers if they can figure it out.

Free up the insurance companies to make whatever kind of policies consumers want across state lines.

No free care to non-citizens.
(Tourists can take out short-time insurance policies when they come in (Mexico does that to Americans for driving cars)).

Let people & employers set their own priorities.

Let the free market set costs of hospitals, doctors, etc.

Get the gov out of healthcare altogether.

For the truly poor let there be charity.

TORT REFORM. Class action lawsuits against pharm companies is a major industry. Look at all the ads on TV for pharm products.

How is medicare/medicaid paying for all those powerchairs?
I’ll bet that’s interesting.


44 posted on 07/26/2009 6:52:10 PM PDT by Bhoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: whitedog57

I second the last two words of your post and say them almost daily!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


45 posted on 07/26/2009 6:54:36 PM PDT by tina07 (In loving memory of my father,WWII Vet. CBI 10/16/42-12/17/45, d. 11/1/85 -Happy B'day Daddy 2/20/23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

Look, you are illustrating my point by refusing to agree to raise the SS age no matter what scenario I propose about other people’s government benefits. No matter what I come up with, you’re going to say, “Let’s focus on XYZ” or “What about ABC?”

You are part of the problem!


46 posted on 07/26/2009 7:00:42 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

I did not say I would not consider it.

But before we push out the date of retirement (social security benefits), fairness dictates that we push out the date of government bureaucrats’ retirement - bigtime.

Let’s do that - which you do not want to agree to - first.

Then we can talk about pushing back the SS date from 65.

Otherwise you will have people being forced - in the private sector - to work longer just so that government bureaucrats can retire at age 50.

THAT is not fair nor just.


47 posted on 07/26/2009 7:08:11 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

I propose we raise the age at which one can receive any kind of federal government pension by three years and the age for SS benefit by one year. Is it a deal?


48 posted on 07/26/2009 7:13:28 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: utahagen

No. NO deal.

50 to 53 is not fair to the private sector person who is having to work til 66 or 67 or 70 (because the age will keep being raised) just to pay for a bureaucrat to have retirement freedom 15 years earlier.

No, No deal. Are you one? (government bureaucrat who got the retirement at age 50?)


49 posted on 07/26/2009 7:25:00 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
Nope, I don't work for the government and have no pension of any sort coming to me. But I know the overall system of government entitlements is crashing and bringing our country down. I would be willing to accept receiving SS a year later than we are currently entitled to because I think much pressure would be relieved if the minimum age were raised. I understand and share your frustration about government pensions, but I think it is unpatriotic to fold our arms and say, “Not one inch.” I am exasperated by how few freepers would agree to raising the SS minimum age without imposing conditions that we all know are not going to happen.
50 posted on 07/26/2009 9:13:02 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson