Category Archives: health care

Health Care and Critical Care

Today, a kindergarten boy is undergoing surgery for a cancerous tumor found on his kidney. As he was not feeling well the other night, his parents took him to the emergency room, where after testing, they discovered a cancerous tumor. He was taken to Kaiser Hollywood Cancer Treatment and Surgery center where he is having one of his kidneys removed.

Over the past two years, my little friend Lauren has been battling brain cancer. She was diagnosed at age four and has been an inspiration, as she has bravely undergone intensive treatment. This week, she has taken a turn for the worst, and after a heroic battle, the doctors have determined that there is nothing left that they can do for her.  Her parents have fought the fight alongside her and are now hoping to bring her home one last time.

My nephew is a million dollar baby, as his entrance into the world required ECMO, Extracorporeal Life Support to survive and months in a NICU ward at Children’s Hospital.  He is a miracle child because of the medical advances he was given.

As I pray for Lauren and the little boy Matthew, I can’t help but wonder what the new health care regime will do to the advances in the medical miracles that these children will need to survive.  I can’t help but wonder what rationing will occur and who gets to determine the worthiness of the recipient of treatment.  The Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force according to Tom Coburn where he states, “The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans “shall provide coverage for” services approved by the task force. This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients. When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.”

According to Cost of Kidney Cancer Report and the National Cancer Institute, there is a five-year rate of survival in the United States for kidney and brain cancer patients.  Stephen Finan, a policy expert with the cancer society’s advocacy affiliate commenting on the healthcare loophole in the Senate bill said, “The primary purpose of insurance is to protect people against catastrophic loss,” Finan said. “If you put a limit on benefits, by definition it’s going to affect people who are dealing with catastrophic loss.”  He also states that the cost of cancer treatment can exceed $100,000 a year (2010 The Associated Press, Tom Coburn).

Thus if life expectancy is short and cost is exorbitant, who will the government choose to cover as the “numbers of noninstitutionalized adults who have ever been diagnosed with cancer is  17.9 million”. This number does not include the statistics for childhood cancers,  where according to The Cancer Cure Foundation “an estimated 9,100 new cases are expected to occur among children aged 0 -14, with 1,400 deaths. Cancer is the chief cause of death by disease in children between the ages of 1 and 14.”

Dr. Coburn, a physician, is a Republican senator from Oklahoma, stated in an article in the Wall Street Journal,

But the most fundamental flaw of the Reid bill is best captured by the story of one my patients I’ll call Sheila. When Sheila came to me at the age of 33 with a lump in her breast, traditional tests like a mammogram under the standard of care indicated she had a cyst and nothing more. Because I knew her medical history, I wasn’t convinced. I aspirated the cyst and discovered she had a highly malignant form of breast cancer. Sheila fought a heroic battle against breast cancer and enjoyed 12 good years with her family before succumbing to the disease.

If I had been practicing under the Reid bill, the government would have likely told me I couldn’t have done the test that discovered Sheila’s cancer because it wasn’t approved under CER. Under the Reid bill, Sheila may have lived another year instead of 12, and her daughters would have missed a decade with their mom.

The bottom line is that under the Reid bill the majority of America’s patients might be fine. But some will be like Sheila—patients whose lives hang in the balance and require the care of a doctor who understands the science and art of medicine, and can make decisions without government interference.

The American people are opposing this bill in greater numbers every day because the facts of the bill—not any tactic—are cause for serious concern.

These are legitimate concerns, not conspiracy theories running a muck.  These are real people, who have benefited from the great medical innovations, that in part have come through the willingness to treat patients in spite of cost and projected length of mortality.  What say you?

Advertisements

Mediocrity in Senate Results in “Epic Fail” for Health Care

Epic Fail -A mistake of such monumental proportions that it requires its own term in order to successfully point out the unfathomable shortcomings of an individual or group.

Epic Fail, a term used by many high schoolers today, may be a useful term to describe the Senate Health Care plan. Epic: “of unusually great size or extent” Fail: “To prove deficient or lacking; perform ineffectively or inadequately”.

The failure does not stem from lack of trying, but from lack of listening to those for whom the legislation is supposed to be concerning. The failure is due to a stubbornness that chooses to ignore alternative ideas, because an ideology, that is counter to the American way, has infected those in the position of leadership. The failure is not within the health care system, as innovation and expertise has made it the greatest system in the world, but it is found in the bureaucratic piles of needless paperwork, the greed that drives lawsuits, the regulations that tie the hands of doctors, and the state mandates on insurance companies that keep them from entering the competitive market place nationwide. There is certainly a need for a cure in the system, but not the need to euthanize the system as we know it.

Congressman Rogers’ from Michigan makes a poignant argument on Health Care last July, 2009 regarding the reform legislation in Congress in the following video. Calling one’s respective leaders today is crucial to stop this legislation and demand a better solution. Mediocrity is not the American way, and this Senate solution to healthcare falls far below the level a mediocrity, it will be an Epic Failure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc


Twas the Night Before Christmas: The Sander’s Amendment

Jefferson Smith: [His voice very hoarse] Just get up off the ground, that’s all I ask. Get up there with that lady that’s up on top of this Capitol dome, that lady that stands for liberty. Take a look at this country through her eyes if you really want to see something. And you won’t just see scenery; you’ll see the whole parade of what Man’s carved out for himself, after centuries of fighting. Fighting for something better than just jungle law, fighting so’s he can stand on his own two feet, free and decent, like he was created, no matter what his race, color, or creed. That’s what you’d see. There’s no place out there for graft, or greed, or lies, or compromise with human liberties. And, uh, if that’s what the grownups have done with this world that was given to them, then we’d better get those boys’ camps started fast and see what the kids can do. And it’s not too late, because this country is bigger than the Taylors, or you, or me, or anything else. Great principles don’t get lost once they come to light. They’re right here; you just have to see them again!

Great principles don’t get lost once they come to light.

“Bravo” to the Republicans who are requiring the reading of 767-page amendment to the Health Care bill.  According to The Hill, “Ultimately, if Republicans continue invoking regular order and requesting the full reading of all amendments, Democrats could find themselves still locked in debate by Dec. 23.”

If only we had had this type of leadership and “game plan” in the previous rush to sign away the American’s freedom and hard earned cash:  Stimulus, Pork Barrel, Cap and Tax…..and the list goes on!

By reading this amendment out loud as per Senate Standing Rules of the Senate XVAmendments and Motions, the American people have at last been given the chance to hear what Senator Sanders has up his sleeve for the people he serves.  Bring it all into the light!  If there is nothing to hide, then why the fear in shouting it from the rooftops?  There should not be a rush to sign something so monumental that will effect so many people.  It is like impulse buying, and there will be great regret when one gets it home!

As Jimmy Stewart said in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, “There’s no place out there for graft, or greed, or lies, or compromise with human liberties.”  We need a Mr. Smith to represent us in Washington. We need someone who hears the Tea Party Members,  listens to the constituents and does what is best for this country, not what lines the pockets of the politician and keeps them in office. We needto continue to keep the spot light on Washington and keep the pressure on those who represent “We the People”, making sure that our elected officials do the will of the people and not their personal wills.

There are those who truly serve the people who elected them and who view their careers in their respective political offices as a ministry to their constituents. There are men and women who would walk away, if it was best for the Country and the citizens they serve, but not many.  Service to country lays aside personal gain and ideology for what is best and moral for its citizens. They also fight for what it best for the Country as a whole and not a small minority that is vocal.   Not many in Washington, especially those who are bent on passing a Health Care bill that doesn’t reflect the need, nor the heart of those it is meant to help, truly serve those whom they represent.  They serve their party ideology, their personal agendas, and the special interest groups the help re-elect them, but not the small town constituents who they are meant to serve.

Will all the Mr. Smiths stand up and do the right thing?  Our country needs men and women to do what it takes to make sure the voice of America is reflected in all the legislation that is drafted and passed in Washington.   We need the Mr. and Mrs Smiths in Washington to stand up for what is ethical on the Hill, even when standing up might cost them their political careers.


Chuck Norris Doesn’t Just Read Books

chuck norris

Google “Chuck Norris” and the first site that comes up is the website Chuck Norris Facts. He has become a phenomenon on the Internet because of his tough guy image and the jokes pertaining to all things “Chuck Norris”.chuck norris reading

Chuck Norris doesn’t read books, he just stares them down until he gets the information he wants out of them.

Yet unlike Al Franken: an actor playing the part of a politician; Chuck Norris has read the Healthcare bill and knows what he is talking about.

“While watching these political hot August nights, I decided to research the reasons so many are opposed to Obamacare to separate the facts from the fantasy. What I discovered is that there are indeed dirty little secrets buried deep within the 1,000-plus page health care bill.”

According to Townhall.com, Mr. Norris did read the bill and found this interesting fact.

“It’s outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading “home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.” The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that the government agents, “well-trained and competent staff,” would “provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices,” and “skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development.”

It appears that Hillary Clinton’s village to raise American’s children again is sneaking in through the backdoors of our homes via the Obamacare bill.  I for one don’t like Clinton and Obama’s version of a village and don’t intend to live there or let them raise my children.  Their parenting skills are supremely lacking when it comes to running an efficient White House- hold, laying on the backs of our children ninety nine trillion dollars of debt.  I don’t want them teaching my children math skills, as they appear to have none themselves.  I don’t want them teaching my children how to read, as neither appears to have read the Stimulas Bill nor the Healthcare Bill.  I don’t want them telling my children who God is, as neither seems to understand the Bible.  And I would thoroughly disapprove of the babysitters they want to send into my home according to this bill to coach me on how to raise my most treasured possession.

We already see burned out social workers who have no love for the children they purport to “help”.  We see teachers who once had a love for kids stumble in and out of the classroom doing the job, without the motivating love behind it.  These are the types of babysitter who will be trained to assess whether or not we as American parents are doing it correctly, by their playbook.

Obama and Hillary both ascribe to the “It’s a village mentality”, but their village is more global than American and the U.N. Treaty on Children the means to the end.  According to an article at Huffington Post, “democrats from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to California Sen. Barbara Boxer, chair of a Senate subcommittee on human rights, have advocated pushing for Senate ratification of the treaty, which requires two-thirds approval in the 100-seat chamber.”  The Obama administration is looking to ratify this treaty.

As pointed out by Warren Mass in his article Obama May Revive Anti-family UN Child Treaty “like all UN conventions — is not based on the premise stated in our Declaration of Independence that rights are God-given and, therefore, unalienable (inherent and not subject to government restriction). As with the UN Charter itself, and the constitutions of many other nations, the convention presumes to grant rights. Any governmental entity that does this also presumes the converse power to restrict or suspend those same rights.”   This administration does not see our children as belonging to American families, but as to the world.  They desire to push their ethics onto the lives of all Americans, no matter what vehicle it takes, a Healthcare Bill or a U.N. Treaty, and they will not cease or desist until their agenda has permanently changed the landscape of our Nation and individually, our private homes.

My God-given rights as a parent, by virtue of the children God gave me, are not for the government to take away.  I can not stand by and allow what I know is best for my children on a day to day basis, to be stripped away by a government that seems to only desire a nation that won’t back talk and will consent to every agenda.  Washington D.C., Obama and the Democrats believe they can create a “Changed Nation” by getting to the hearts and minds of our kids.  And they are right, they can.  By taking away the rights of parents to love and choose what is best for their families, the government becomes the facilitator of cloned American children, all raised under one standard.  This standard is not “One Nation Under God”, but rather “We are the world, we are the children”.  The standard that has thrown God, the Bible and prayer out of so many crucial places in America will be the one in place when the babysitters come to check on our parenting skills.  And if I, as a parent, get in the way of the babysitter, I will be deemed an unfit mother and placed in timeout, indefinitely.

As Chuck Norris pointed out, “Government needs less of a role in running our children’s lives and more of a role in supporting parents’ decisions for their children. Children belong to their parents, not the government. And the parents ought to have the right — and government support — to parent them without the fed’s mandates, education or intervention in our homes.”

toon072109

Another claim on children, by another government, was Hitler’s Youth. According to History Learning Site, movements for youngsters were part of German culture. The Hitler Youth was a logical extension of Hitler’s belief that the future of Nazi Germany was its children. The Hitler Youth was seen as being as important to a child as school was. Another dictator also saw the benefit in capturing the minds of children.  As stated also in the Norris article, Josef Stalin once declared, “Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.”  These men were smart and so are the Progressive who rule our country today.  They know that they can create permanent Change by leaving an indelible mark on our Nation’s children, through education and re-education of the American parents.

Perhaps this is why the fight against this bill is so impassioned, as deep down, we recognize a take over of things we holder dearer to us than just Healthcare reform.  The take over is our freedom to be Americans, to raise our families in God fearing homes if we so choose and to teach our children what “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” means historically, not progressively.  The fight is far from over, but if we have women and men, like Chuck Norris, ready and willing to take a stand, at all costs for our children and the country they will inherit, we can win and return it to her foundational roots.


Health Care Reform is the House Built on the Sand

By: Theosebes

wrecking-ball

“My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works.” Really?  Then why did the American people have to sit through an hour long gilded sales pitch for the 1018 page healthcare reform package?There was nothing simple stated during the Presidential Press Conference regarding healthcare reform.   Nothing to help the American people lean back and say, “This is simple and it makes dollars and sense.”

The average American, when faced with a problem that seems insurmountable, tackles each issue one step at a time.   If the house is falling apart, the owner with common sense looks at what absolutely needs fixing so that he may continue to live in his house as he works to correct that particular problem.  If the plumbing fails, one calls the plumber, not the bank to do a complete home makeover.

Our servants in Washington, the Congress and the President, should learn from those they serve and make one fix at a time.   According to an analysis by Republican staff of the House Ways and Means panel, the deficit from the health care reform bill would be $760 billion by 2024, the end of the first 10 years of full benefits coverage. It would be $1.6 trillion by the end of the 2020s.deficitgraph_gop_healthcare

This is not how a well run American household handles expenses.  They look at the absolute need before them, and spend the appropriate money to fix the immediate problem before tackling the lesser of the needs.  Health care needs a fix, but not reform.

Obama’s very language, “Health Care Reform” demonstrates that he is waiting with the wrecking ball, to demo the already standing structure that has many durable and worthwhile features in order to redecorate according to his ideological tastes and beliefs.

There is no thoughtful blueprint laid out to see what is worth saving, what needs a little new paint, and what represents the leaking faucet that must be replaced.  There is no prioritizing as to what is absolute necessary, but only, “When it comes to the cost of our health care, then, the status quo is unsustainable. Reform is not a luxury, but a necessity. I know there has been much discussion about what reform would cost, and rightly so.”

Obama’s dream home is not a home in which America can afford to live.  But like many who were caught up in the Real Estate boom, pulling equity from their over inflated homes, pouring it into a dream home reform project that they couldn’t afford and then losing it in foreclosure, so also is this Administration and Congress doing to our Country.  They have no vested interest in the people, but are like the lenders in years past who at all costs, disregarded ethics and morals, sold mortgages to individuals they knew on paper couldn’t afford the ink they were signing with, all for the sake of power and prestige.

The irony is that the President, responding to a question from the Press Corp said, “I have the best health care in the world, I want to see that every American have good healthcare.”  We the people may sit on his porch and have what he terms as “good” while those living in the White House and the Congressional Houses in Washington D.C., get the “best” insurance.  If We the People are their employers, if they work for us, then how is it, that we get stuck with the crumbs off the king’s table?   How is it that we, the rightful owners of the White House and the Houses of Congress are not even invited to the meal to participate in the discussion?

The Biblical parable about the wise and foolish man can speak to this very issue.  In Matthew 7, Jesus talks about building a house, and though He was speaking about spiritual issues, it applies to the kind of decisions that men make and the effects those decisions have on the lives that they influence.  The President, by virtue of his position affects Americans through his decisions.  Judge for yourself, are the leaders of this country building a house on a rock or the sand?  Do their decisions represent wisdom or is their great foolishness in their positions that will cause America to crumble in years to come?

24Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:  25And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.  26And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.  28And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:  29For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Health Care Reform is just one of the houses being built on the sand.  It will cause a huge collapse and the fall will be great.

sandcastle

Wise up America!


Hyppocratic Obama?

By: Theosebes

The Hippocratic Obama

health care

Barrack Obama is pushing for a National Healthcare bill to be on his desk by the end of the legislation ready in the Finance Committee by week’s end month.

The thoughtless rush in penning this complex bill, by those who are so under qualified to do so is frightening.  Healthcare is a complex issue and not one easily fixed by men and women whom have no real experience in the health industry. But they have a mandate and an agenda that is pushing them, again, at break neck speed to create legislation that none will read, let alone understand what they are reading. Having the government step in to save the day, will not ultimately save lives, nor money, but will jeopardize the health of our country and lay the burden on the backs of future generations. Although the health debate affects real people, there must be a look at the philosophical, ethical and moral reasons that the government should not get involved as Supreme Giver of Health Insurance.

The following is the philosophy found on the Democratic Party’s website in regard to health care.

Healthcare for All

“The American people understand that good health is the foundation of individual achievement and economic prosperity. Ensuring quality, affordable health care for every single American is essential to children’s education, workers’ productivity and businesses’ competitiveness. We believe that covering all is not just a moral imperative, but is necessary to making our health system workable and affordable. Doing so would end cost-shifting from the uninsured, promote prevention and wellness, stop insurance discrimination, help eliminate health care disparities, and achieve savings through competition, choice, innovation, and higher quality care.

Health care reform must also provide adequate incentives for innovation to ensure that Americans have access to evidence-based and cost-effective health care. Research should be based on science, not ideology. For the millions of Americans and their families suffering from debilitating physical and emotional effects of disease, time is a precious commodity, and it is running out.”

The first sentence of the Democrats stand on healthcare is fallacious.  Good health is the foundation of individual achievement and economic prosperity? There have been many people through out history, who have in poor and failing health achieved greatness and/or economic prosperity. In American history alone, we have examples in the following individuals. Helen Keller was an American author, political activist and lecturer. She was the first deafblind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Teddy Roosevelt was a weak and asthmatic child who grew up to be one of the most robust and ambitious United States presidents ever. Of Franklin Delanore Roosevelt, his wife Eleanor Roosevelt thought FDR’s polio was “a turning point” that “proved a blessing in disguise; for it gave him strength and courage he had not had before”. Not only did Abraham Lincoln suffer from serious bouts of depression, but he also tried to give advice to others he knew were suffering. Lincoln’s depressions, whether they lasted for hours, days, weeks, or months always came to an end. Knowing this, he could encourage others.

The Democratic Party talks a good talk, which tickles the deaf ears and brings false light to the eyes of its constituents. But their utopia can never be obtained through a universal health care plan. Good health is not a right, constitutionally or otherwise, and it can not be mandated or legislated. Though we all hope and pray for good health for our families, friends and loved ones, we should not believe the lie that the Democratic Party is the giver of such promises. The ideological statement posed by this Party of Change ignores those who have gone before in spite of great challenges to health and wellness, who have achieved greatness on their own, without the benefit of the Government giving them “benefits”.

The most crucial question however is this: “Will Dr. Obama, M.D. and his colleagues swear the Hippocratic Oath when they take over the Health Care of our Nation?” As I read through the original Greek oath, I was astounded to find that already this new administration does not hold to this ancient oath.

The Hippocratic Oath: Classical Version

“I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant.”

(Modern version: I SWEAR in the presence of the Almighty and before my family, my teachers and my peers that according to my ability and judgment I will keep this Oath and Stipulation)

“To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art—if they desire to learn it—without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else. I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.”

(Modern: TO RECKON all who have taught me this art equally dear to me as my parents and in the same spirit and dedication to impart a knowledge of the art of medicine to others. I will continue with diligence to keep abreast of advances in medicine. I will treat without exception all who seek my ministrations, so long as the treatment of others is not compromised thereby, and I will seek the counsel of particularly skilled physicians where indicated for the benefit of my patient.)

Is the Obama Administration able to fulfill this dictate, seeking the counsel of skilled physicians for the benefit of the patient, as opposed to the benefit of their political agenda? Can the government truly take care of every American citizen, from the halls of Washington D.C., assess their needs physically and mentally and thereby render a treatment that will keep them from harm and injustice? Absolutely not!

“I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.”

Both Obama and Hilary Clinton supported in separate interviews Oregon’s “Death with Dignity Law. Hilary Clinton stated that Oregon was “breaking new ground and providing valuable information as to what does and doesn’t work when it comes to end-of-life questions, I think, is very beneficial.”

When Obama was asked this question, “A couple of other issues of interest to Oregonians involve initiatives passed by the voters that have come into conflict with the federal government: physician-assisted suicide and medical marijuana. Do you support those two concepts?” He answered: “I am in favor of palliative medicine in circumstances where someone is terminally ill. … I’m mindful of the legitimate interests of states to prevent a slide from palliative treatments into euthanasia. On the other hand, I think that the people of Oregon did a service for the country in recognizing that as the population gets older we’ve got to think about issues of end-of-life care. …” http://www.deathwithdignity.org/

“Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.”

(Modern: I WILL FOLLOW that method of treatment which according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patient and abstain from whatever is harmful or mischievous. I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient even if asked nor counsel any such thing nor perform the utmost respect for every human life from fertilization to natural death and reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life.)

The Democratic Party Platform violates this part of the oath:

“The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to comprehensive affordable family planning services and age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs”

“In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.”

(Modern: WITH PURITY, HOLINESS AND BENEFICENCE I will pass my life and practice my art. Except for the prudent correction of an imminent danger, I will neither treat any patient nor carry out any research on any human being without the valid informed consent of the subject or the appropriate legal protector thereof, understanding that research must have as its purpose the furtherance of the health of that individual. Into whatever patient setting I enter, I will go for the benefit of the sick and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief or corruption and further from the seduction of any patient. I WILL FOLLOW that method of treatment which according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patient and abstain from whatever is harmful or mischievous. I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient even if asked nor counsel any such thing nor perform the utmost respect for every human life from fertilization to natural death and reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life.)

Our very Constitution has foundational ties to the principles and writings of ancient Greek society, yet even in this, the Administration strays far from these ideologies that helped to make our Nation great and that have been pivotal in the medical community for thousands of years.

“I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.”

Should the government create an office in which men and women, who are not involved in the medical field and therefore untrained at “using the knife” be given authority in the name of Government Health Care to make decisions that only a doctor should make with his patients?

“Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves.”

No government remains perfectly just and moral when it views itself as the righter of perceived wrongs as its societal ideology. The administration views justice as “wealth distribution” and in this case “health distribution”. Those who have must be willing to give up their premium health care so those who don’t have may partake in some lesser form of health care. There is intentional injustice at the expense of the “haves”.

“What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.” (Modern: WHATEVER IN CONNECTION with my professional practice or not in connection with it I may see or hear in the lives of my patients which ought not be spoken abroad, I will not divulge, reckoning that all such should be kept secret.)

The administration hopes to “improve the economy and deploy electronic health records for every clinician and hospital in the U.S.” http://www.emaxhealth.com/1/34/27513/electronic-medical-records-and-obama-039-s-economic-plan.html. If the government has access to one’s private medical records, does this not infringe on the individual’s protection under the Fourth Amendment? Do we as American citizens want the government to have access to our most private records?

“If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.”

(Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943.) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html and also http://members.tripod.com/nktiuro/hippocra.htm

As I read this ancient document, I realized that our government is in no position to be taking on the role of Health Care Reform. The reform that must take place runs deeper than many are willing to admit. This is not just a Republican or Democratic issue, but a deeply moral and personal issue. If we in America can not hold to our own Constitution, how then can we hold to the ethical ideals put forth by “the civilization of the ancient Greeks that has been immensely influential on language, politics, educational systems, philosophy, science, and the arts”? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece

The Hippocratic Oath merely highlights how far we have fallen from great moral and ethical truths that have been held for thousands of years. When an government begins to correct perceived wrongs, appeasing the voters, but refuses to engage the greater issues of morality because to do so would mean to explore areas of foundational truths that many choose to ignore or not believe as true for today; then that society will follow the way of every other great civilization and will no longer be a beacon of morality and goodness, but a “has been of history”.

The founding fathers would be astounded at how far America has come in terms of the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. They would stand in awe at the great progress that the people of the United States have made in the arenas of science, education, art and literature. They would be delighted that leeching is no longer the medical care of choice prescribed by physicians. Yet I believe there would be grave concern because of the direction that this progressive government has taken and the callous disregard for the moral and the foundational truths that birthed this Republic. The health of our Nation is at stake, but not because we are debating health care reform, but because we are not debating the health crisis that is at the very heart of our country: morality and truths demise.

nut health care


Tea Parties are Coming, the Tea Parties are Coming!

tea-party11

The Tea Parties are coming, the Tea Parties are coming! For a second showing, the Tea Parties are coming to a neighborhood corner near you on the Fourth of July, 2009. If the first event was missed, then participation is highly suggested. So come one, come all and bring your red, white and blue tea cups to share with others, in the ever growing frustration that has taken most Americans by storm.

Is the storm brewing as a result of our twenty first century Tea Tax or is there a greater angst, a deeper discontent than just the enormous deficit that will be handed down to our great, great-grandchildren? I suggest that as with the colonist of the 1760’s, the taxation without representation was only a part of a greater injustice that was imprisoning the patriots who gave so much for us, their great, great, great-grandchildren. Would men fight and die because the tax man, in this case Britain, was assessing “unfair taxes”? The taxation they faced was only twenty percent of those being taxed in England, so where did the cry for independence gain in fervor?

The issue that shook the world then and I believe is beginning to shake our world today is not just about the exorbitant taxes that Obama and Company is laying on the backs of millions, but the shackles brought on by an enormous government and the freedoms that are being stripped away, daily in the name of change, in the name of progress. The colonists didn’t shed their blood because they were angry that England was asking for more money, in fact after the War of Independence, colonists were taxed twenty fold more than they had been under the crown. The blood of these patriots ran on the soils of Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill and Brandywine because their freedoms were being stripped away.

What freedoms have been confiscated from the hands of private citizens today and given to the oligarchy on the hill? To sum up: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have become endangered ideals under these ruling elite. Economic freedoms under government regulation, property rights, and the freedom to succeed and fail in business are just a few areas in which the government has overstepped the limits of its Constitutional powers as seen in the frantic vote of the Stimulus Bill. There is a strong arm push for mandatory government run health care. There is the deceit in the Obama plan for educational reform that strips parental rights to choose what is best for their children under the guise of the Convention on the Rights of Children, a treaty if ratified would supersede American law and sovereignty. The First Amendment is under attack through the Fairness Doctrine which was “rooted in the media world of 1949, when lawmakers became concerned that by virtue of their near-stranglehold on nationwide TV broadcasting, the three main television networks — NBC, ABC and CBS — could misuse their broadcast licenses to set a biased public agenda” this is being revisited by Pelosi and friends and yet we see Obama-mercials for his policies without the benefit of hearing from the other side of the discussion.

Fourth Amendment rights are under attack as Obama is using the oft-disproved contention that “90% of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States” as the stated basis of his support for the international treaty he is promoting. The treaty is formally known as the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials (CIFTA) treaty.

The list of liberties at risk is lengthy and could not fit into a mere blog. Perhaps our greatest liberty, the right to worship God, as guaranteed under the First Amendment, is our most tragic loss. Any honest reader of history will recognized that many of the first settlers in America came for religious freedom and the cost that so many paid for such freedom was the utmost price, their very lives or the lives of their loved ones. Individuals die for those things which have intrinsic value and the right to worship God, unimpeded by the government, is one of those invaluable rights. Today we see this First Amendment right under attack as evidenced by the H.R. 1592 that is pending committee in the U.S. House. This is a bill that would “criminalize thought or emotion or even speech,” said Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund. But I suggest that this attack began decades ago when the Supreme Court ruled in 1947 that it was unconstitutional for the government “to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”2 in Everson v. Board of Education 330 US 31.

Tom West of the Claremont Institute wrote, “The victory of relativism has made the Founders’ understanding of religious liberty alien to us. Liberty today is taken to mean “the right to choose,” the right to do whatever one pleases.

Surprisingly, both liberals and conservatives agree on this definition. Their disagreement is over the extent to which government should impose limits on abuses of liberty. A sign of our shared view of liberty is that we often speak of balancing liberty with order, with responsibility, or with community. If we define liberty as the unlimited right of the irresponsible will, we do have to look to a source outside of liberty for some restraint on it. But if liberty is inherently responsible liberty, as the Founders thought, it does not need to be balanced by anything. It contains within itself its own balance.

For the Founders, the irresponsible, irrational will is not free. It is enslaved. James Madison said that “the tyranny of their own passions” led the Athenians to condemn Socrates to death. What Madison meant by this phrase was spelled out by the Reverend Samuel West of Massachusetts in a 1776 sermon: “The most perfect freedom consists in obeying the dictates of right reason, and submitting to natural law. When a man goes beyond or contrary to the law of nature and reason, he becomes the slave of base passions and vile lusts. . . . Hence we conclude that where licentiousness begins, liberty ends.”4

http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.669/pub_detail.asp

The liberty and freedom that American’s once enjoyed, free from governmental legislation, came from the idea of personal, conscientious self rule that denied self in the best interest of society or in closer context the best interest of one’s neighbor. There was also the belief of God or a Deity that had defined standards of behavior that human kind should follow because it was best for the individual and society. Because many Americans have shunned the notion that there is absolute truth and therefore absolute law, and because the government operates on the same premise, they legislated on what is good for now, for the ruling class, to remain relevant to the voting population. But those who have remained steadfast in the knowledge that there is in fact absolute truth and who temper their lives through self control and self rule for the best of society, will not only make a distinct stand against the direction of this type of government, but will also perhaps lose their rights to speak out against this abuse of power by the very government they hope to rebuild.

Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America, “It must never be forgotten that religion gave birth to Anglo-American society. In the United States, religion is therefore mingled with all the habits of the nation and all the feeling of patriotism, whence it derives a peculiar force….Christianity has therefore retained a strong hold on the public mind in America….Christianity itself is an established and irresistible fact.”

For this reason men and women have paid the ultimate sacrifice, not because they were angry that taxes were too high, but because loss of liberty was too costly. Freedom and liberty come from God, and the Christian religion has been the tool that has shaped this country from the beginning. Calvin Coolidge stated, “If American democracy is to remain the greatest hope of humanity, it must continue abundantly in the faith of the Bible.”

So let the Tea Parties begin, but let them begin with the purpose of regaining the liberties that the Left has so easily taken from the American people. The fight is for the future, the fight must begin now, or the wars of the past, the signatures on the Declaration of Independence, the sacrifices of the Founders, the Colonists, the Military, the fathers and mothers, who for hundreds of years have given their utmost, will die in vain, as the America they founded dies on the threshold of the twenty-first century.


Since we no longer distinguish between liberty and license, we no longer understand the Founders’ conception of liberty, including religious liberty. For them, the freedom to follow one’s religion should be protected, in Washington’s words, as an “inherent natural right.” No one may be harmed or punished for his mode of worship. But religious liberty is not religious license. Government may therefore prohibit religious practices that are criminal or immoral. And government may and should promote religious practices and convictions that accord with reason, which favors individual responsibility and political liberty.