Universal Health Care -- shhhh don't talk to the nurses

Imagine being in a hospital and you start to feel a chest pain and shortness of breath, you yell out to a group of nurses that are nearby, and much to your shock and horror they turn around and command you to shhhhhhh -- there on the front of their medical frocks emblazoned in bold white letters it reads "Do not Disturb"

Can you imagine Florence Nightingale walking among the wounded in the Crimea with a sign round her neck saying ‘Do not disturb’? Or wearing a uniform emblazoned with the words ‘Sort out your own problems — I’m too important to help’?

That's exactly what is happening in Britain where patients are outraged at the latest chilling inversion to the basic tenets of health care. In NHS (National Health Service ) hospital wards today, nurses are sporting bright red tabards printed on the front with the bold words: ‘Do not disturb, drug round in progress.’

After pilot schemes in Kent, these deeply offensive tabards are to be worn by nurses in hospitals across the country. The rationale, according to the hospital trusts, is that patients asking nurses for help will distract them while they are giving out medicines.

The idea, while typical of government run entities, seems grotesque and ridiculous, and is a perversion to the whole idea of health care. I mean if you can't do more that one thing at a time, maybe you should be working on an assembly line at the auto plant, not as a nurse at a hospital.

There are still a lot of hard working dedicated professionals working at hospitals both here in the U.S. and Britain, but that is changing. Government run health care is changing the game, and many would say not for the better. There are far too many people in health care that maybe should not be there, and spend most of their time hiding behind computers, laboriously filling in forms or chatting among themselves.

America is often criticized for its lack of a universal health-care system comparable to the Europeans and Canadians, even though Germany, the United Kingdom and even Canada are increasingly turning to the private sector in order to relieve the financial burden on government and solve serious delivery problems, most notably rationing by queue, and a prolonged wait times for many services, including critical care services cancer treatment and cardiac surgery.

So if you happened to be unfortunate enough to have had a stay in the hospital recently, and had that feeling of deja vu, that you were not at the hospital, but at the DMV getting your drivers' license renewed, it's not your imagination. over half the health care in America is now government run health care.

Helping people is a moral issue. The government should not be in the business of forcing people to do moral things.

From : The Daily Mail

Ron Paul On The Failures Of U.S. Intervention In Libya

From : The Daily Bail

Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk - Aug. 29, 2011 Full transcript is below. This is outstanding.



Source - Ron Paul Mission Accomplished in Libya? Mission Accomplished in Libya?

Even as a major hurricane hit America's eastern seaboard, the administration is determined to expand the war in Libya while threatening the regime in Syria. Is there any limit to government's appetite to create more problems for our nation and economy?

Americans may be tempted to celebrate the apparent victory of US and NATO backed rebels in Libya, since it seems the Gaddafi regime is overthrown. But I believe any enthusiasm for our Libyan misadventure is premature.

The Obama administration attacked Libya without a constitutional declaration of war, without congressional authorization, without meaningful consultation with Congress -- and without a dollar being authorized from the House or Senate. It was a war started by a president who turned to the United Nations for its authority and ignored the authority of the US Congress.

Are we better off as a nation by ignoring and debasing our Constitution? Are we better off having spent more than a billion dollars attacking a country thousands of miles away that had not threatened us? Are we more financially sound having expanded the empire to include yet another protectorate and probable long-term military occupation? Are we more admired throughout the world for getting involved in yet another war?

Still, many will claim that getting rid of Libyan ruler Gaddafi was worth it. They will say that the ends justify the means. As the civilian toll from NATO bombs adds up in a war started under the guise of protecting a civilian population, even the initial argument for intervention is ridiculous. We should not forget that there were no massacres taking place in Libya before the NATO attack. The attack was a dubbed a preventative humanitarian intervention. But as soon as NATO planes started bombing, civilians started dying.

Gaddafi may well have been a tyrant, but as such he was no worse than many others that we support and count as allies. Disturbingly, we see a pattern of relatively secular leaders in the Arab world being targeted for regime change with the resulting power vacuum being filled by much more radical elements. Iraq, post-Saddam, is certainly far closer to Iran than before the US invasion. Will Libya be any different?

We already see grisly reprisals from the US-backed rebels against their political opponents. There are disturbing scenes of looting and lawlessness on the part of the rebels. We know that some rebel factions appear to be allied with Islamic extremists and others seem to have ties to the CIA. They also appear to have a penchant for killing each other as well as supporters of the previous regime. The tribal structure of Libyan society all but ensures that an ongoing civil war is on the agenda rather than the Swiss-style democracy that some intervention advocates suggest is around the corner.

What is next after such a victory? With the big Western scramble to grab Libya's oil reserves amid domestic political chaos and violence, does anyone doubt that NATO ground troops are not being prepared for yet another occupation?

Neo-conservatives continue to dominate our foreign policy, regardless of the administration in power. They do not care that we are bankrupt, as they are too blinded by their desire for empire and their affection for the entangling alliances we have been rightly counseled to avoid. They have set their sights next on Syria, where the US moves steadily toward intervention in another domestic conflict that has nothing to do with the US. Already the US president has called for "regime change" in Syria, while adding new sanctions against the Syrian regime. Are US bombers far behind?

Obama's Uncle Onyango -- an illegal alien is arrested for drunk driving

Okay you can't make this stuff up. Right in the midst of the uproar of Obama's implementation of the "Dream Act" by executive fiat, and while in Obama is in Martha's Vineyard hobnobbing with his rich white friends and campaign donors, the mystery of  "Where is Uncle Onyango" has been solved.

Obama's uncle Onyango Obama an illegal was arrested for drunk driving...he is going to use the same lawyer as Aunt Zeituni Onyango , who also was living in Boston as an illegal, Margaret Wong The now infamous Immigration attorney from Clevaland, who as far as we know was not born here, but is legal.

Uncle Onyango is being held by ICE because there is a warrant out on him. I would like to know who is paying Margaret Wong's fees? You would think with that empty mansion in Chicago, the president would take in, or help his Aunt & Uncle instead of having the taxpayers support them ?

Apparently Uncle Onyango was not invited to any of the lobster dinners or fundraisers the Obama's attended while at Martha's Vineyard, and was left on his own to wander around outside Boston.

Framingham police said Onyango Obama was arrested Wednesday after he failed to stop completely at a stop sign and a police officer had to quickly apply his brakes to avoid hitting Obama's SUV. Officer Val Krishtal said in a written report that Obama slurred his speech and became argumentative after he was told that he was being stopped because he had failed to fully stop and yield to traffic. "I explained to him that I narrowly avoided striking his vehicle, and he told me that he did not hear my tires screeching, so I was not being accurate," Krishtal said in the report.

Obama originally told Krishtal he had nothing to drink but later said he had had two beers, Krishtal wrote in the report.Krishtal said Obama failed several sobriety tests and blew a reading of 0.14 percent on a blood-alcohol breath test, which is above the state's legal driving limit of 0.08 percent.

The arrest ends a mystery over the fate of a relative that the US President wrote in his memoir had moved to America from Kenya in the 1960s, and his whereabouts were unknown.

I have a feeling that Obama was not looking too hard for him, but thankfully Uncle Onyango finally found Obama, it should be ah, er, uh happy family reunion, after the drunk driving charges, illegal alien issues, and lawyer fees are all settled. Obama will probably drop him back in taxpayers laps.

Trial Lawyers prepare for war with Rick Perry

As Govenor of Texas, Rick Perry signed into law a tort-reform bill designed to eliminate frivolous lawsuits in Texas.  And no one hates Rick Perry more in Texas than trial lawyers. Now Perry is bringing the long overdue issue of tort reform into the national spotlight.

Trial Lawyers are not taking this lying down, they are mobilizing into a national phalanx of pro-Obama bundlers and super PAC donors with the sole intention of defeating Rick Perry in 2012 and taking Tort Reform off the National agenda.


 Trial lawyers from Texas are taking the lead in organizing "National Super PACS" to take on Perry.
 See also:  Trial lawyers prep for war on Perry

America’s trial lawyers are getting ready to make the case against one of their biggest targets in years: Texas Gov. Rick Perry.Among litigators, there is no presidential candidate who inspires the same level of hatred — and fear — as Perry, an avowed opponent of the plaintiffs’ bar who has presided over several rounds of tort reform as governor.And if Perry ends up as the Republican nominee for president, deep-pocketed trial lawyers intend to play a central role in the campaign to defeat him.

That’s a potential financial boon to a president who has unsettled trial lawyers with his own rhetorical gestures in the direction of tort reform. A general election pitting Barack Obama and Perry could turn otherwise apathetic trial lawyers into a phalanx of pro-Obama bundlers and super PAC donors.

Democratic Houston trial lawyer Steve Mostyn — who, along with his wife, Amber, donated nearly $9 million to Texas candidates and party committees in the 2010 cycle — said he’s in the process of forming “some federal PACs” to take on Perry. That will likely include a federal super PAC that could take in the kind of massive donations that are permitted in Texas.Mostyn said his political spending wouldn’t just center on the trial lawyers’ agenda.

Obama shuts door on the discussion about Tort Reform

 See Also:  Medical Tort Reform

Obama was recently booed the annual meeting of the American Medical Association in Chicago. He was booed by an audience that included America's leading medical experts for declaring he was "not advocating caps on malpractice awards. Medical experts know what Obama refuses to discuss. It costs a great deal of money, and a greater an amount of valuable time, for a medical practitioner to protect himself or herself against malpractice lawsuits. Some estimates run as high as $100 billion a year .

Obama has called the cost of health care "a threat to our economy" and "a ticking time-bomb." so it seems strange that he declares “off limits “one of the obvious solutions to lowering health care costs. Obama continues to pay lip service to being "willing to listen" and we "need to explore a range of ideas" Could this have something to do with the fact that the tort bar has been the largest single contributor to the Democratic Party in recent years?

Obama and Democrats continue to simply slam the door on any discussion on a wide range of issues they consider sacrosanct such as ; medicare, social security, welfare reform , entitlement spending, as well as tort reform that. While masquerading under the guise of  watching out of the middle class and poor, Obama Democrats actually continue to feed the coffers of bankers, and lawyers at the expense of the taxpayer. No one has suffered more from Obama's failed economic policies, or lack of than the poor and the middle class.

Just the mere mention of any of these issues by a Republican in relation to the credit crisis or the national debt brings out the fear mongers on the left, but no discussion of the issues.

Please consider the article below from Politico, casting Perry as "Dangerous" for America.

Rick Perry “Dangerous” potentially “devastating” for America.

“Rick Perry thinks that Medicare and Social Security are unconstitutional — he wrote it in his book. When the health care debate was heating up, he raised the specter of secession. And when asked about the chairman of the Federal Reserve, he used the word "treasonous."
While fair-minded Americans may view these moments as dangerous flashes illustrating the kind of man Rick Perry is, a plurality of Republican primary voters view him as their choice to be the nominee. …

Perry’s very loose and dangerous use of the term "treason" is something that brought him criticism from many corners — just not Republican primary voters.

Voters who are disturbed by ending Medicare, what it means when a major governor threatens secession in the 21st century, and what it means for a major national figure to throw around terms like "treason" should be just as worried about this Republican Party as they are about Texas Governor Rick Perry.”

The fear mongering continues, and important issues such as ; welfare reform, entitlement spending, medicare, social security, and tort reform remain off the table for discussion. Meanwhile Obama continues to apply "word fixes" to our  our problems while doing nothing.

Thanks Governor Rick Perry  we are, for the first time, able to use “Ponzi scheme” to describe Medicare and Medicaid. Malpractice Insurance  costs are major cost of health care, frivolous lawsuits drive up the costs for all of us. If Obama and The Democrats were serious about addressing the cost of health care they would be seriously talking about setting reasonable limits on frivolous lawsuits and trying to rein in the high cost associated with health care.


Rick Perry  "Dangerous" for America ? I cannot imagine anyone more dangerous for America  than the third rate community organizer that has taken over our government and surrounded himself with fourth and fith rate talent.

Maybe  Perry will be the one to lead us out of Governance by  INCOMPETENCE  - CORRUPTION - PATRONAGE  and  REGULATIONS and back to Governance for the people by the people.

Ron Paul wants FEMA OUT of the disaster relief business

On Saturday, FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate gave Obama a tour of the agency’s command center for the storm. The president, who was with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and his assistant for homeland security, John Brennan, told workers that “everybody here, you guys are doing a great job.”

Not everyone agrees with that assessment. Ron Paul wants FEMA out of the disaster relief business, and claims federal disaster relief is “bad economics, bad morality, and bad constitutional law.” There is a lot of evidence to back up his claims.

FEMA's reputation for making bad situations worse is legendary, FEMA’s emergency housing program, was a massive waste of taxpayers’ money: FEMA paid out nearly a third of a billion dollars over three years for temporary housing for displaced disaster victims of the 2005 hurricane season. These housing units were also declared by FEMA to be unsuitable for housing because of formaldehyde contamination and are awaiting disposal.”

In addition to that, it took FEMA six years to figure out that it overpaid and mistakenly awarded money to victims of Katrina, Rita, and Wilma $600 million.

MSNBC reported :

“Up to 900,000 of the 2.5 million applicants who received aid under FEMA’s emergency cash assistance program-which included the $2,000 debit cards given to evacuees-were based on duplicate or invalid Social Security numbers, or false addresses and names…Thousands of additional dollars appear to have been squandered on hotel rooms for evacuees that were paid at retail rather than the contractor’s lower estimated cost. They included $438 rooms in New York City and beachfront condominiums in Panama City, Florida, at $375 a night.”

Noting these various issues, Paul hopes to pre-empt similar problems in the wake of Irene. He claims:

“We should be like 1900; we should be like 1940, 1950, 1960.”
There is historical evidence to support the notion that Americans were better off before the inception of programs like FEMA.

Ron paul is not the only critic of Federal response to natural disasters, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, in discussions regarding earthquake aid to his own district in Virginia following the recent earthquake, said,

“There is an appropriate federal role in incidents like this….all of us know that the federal government is busy spending money it doesn’t have.”

FEMA right now is woefully underfunded. Republicans have called on the Democratic-controlled Senate to pass an annual spending measure for the Department of Homeland Security that provides a total of $3.65 billion to FEMA’s disaster relief fund -- $1 billion in emergency funding and $2.65 billion for the 2012 fiscal year. The GOP-led House approved the bill in early June.

Again Obama throws lot of talk and promises at the problem, but has yet to take any action. Obama requested $6.79 billion for FEMA in 2012, down slightly from the 2010 budget, which was $7.1 billion. But the administration has yet to submit a supplemental budget request to cover additional emergency costs, sound familiar ?

Ron Paul thinks that the best people to deal with a problem are those in the community that are impacted by the problem, not a federal government which is so far removed from the scenario that they are incapable of understanding the needs to be met, or of meeting those needs.

In 1794, when Congress estimated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from San Domingo, James Madison stood on the House floor and declared,

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents…Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”

There are much better ways to handle such things. Making people dependant on the federal government and locking them up for years of red tape and paper work for help that may not be adequate or even forthcoming is waste of money and resources. Ron Paul believes that the States and local communities could a much better job of identifying where resources are needed and allocating them more efficiently.

I agree it's worth a try. The couldn't do much worse than FEMA has done, and could save us a lot of money, as well as reduce the misery index for people who are already suffering, which should be the goal in the first place.

Thanks to : The New American and Foxnews