While I am deeply upset with the passage of the healthcare bill and disappointed in our congressmen for so blatantly ignoring the wishes of their constituents, I am encouraged by the fact that God is in control. He has a plan for this country.
Rep. Randy Neaugebauer, R-Texas, released a statement taking ownership of last night’s “baby killer” comment shouted while Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., was speaking Sunday night. . . .
“Last night was the climax of weeks and months of debate on a health care bill that my constituents fear and do not support. In the heat and emotion of the debate, I exclaimed the phrase ‘it’s a baby killer’ in reference to the agreement reached by the Democratic leadership. While I remain heartbroken over the passage of this bill and the tragic consequences it will have for the unborn, I deeply regret that my actions were mistakenly interpreted as a direct reference to Congressman Stupak himself. “I have apologized to Mr. Stupak and also apologize to my colleagues for the manner in which I expressed my disappointment about the bill. The House Chamber is a place of decorum and respect. The timing and tone of my comment last night was inappropriate.”
If only our congressmen would say what they mean, what they think, more often. The next generation of Americans is being annihilated, and Rep. Neugebauer can't say that the bill is a baby killer. Which, considering the fact that it supports abortion, it is. The inclusion of funded abortions relegates those in support of it to the role of murderers. And yet people at my college can stick posters across campus advertising that "meat's not green" and that we need to save the polar bears.
I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world. -John 16:33
Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts
22 March 2010
28 October 2009
21 October 2009
If I become life-threateningly obese, can I count on my fellow Americans to pay for my surgery?
Paul Mason, 48, needs a [$33,000] life-saving [operation] after a compulsive eating disorder left him "super-obese".
He eats 20,000 calories of food a day - EIGHT TIMES the official adult male average of 2,500.
Paul scoffs three family-sized takeaways a night and wolfs down Sunday roasts like snacks.
He has spent much of the past eight years in bed at his home in Ipswich, Suffolk.
His care costs taxpayers an estimated [$165,000] a year.
And now he needs drastic stomach surgery to stop him eating and keep him alive - at a cost of [$33,000] to the NHS.
But first health chiefs have to tackle the problem of transporting Paul to a specialist hospital 152 miles from his home.
They even considered using an RAF Chinook HELICOPTER to airlift him to the unit in Chichester, West Sussex.
They have ruled out that option and Paul will now travel in a five-ton ambulance specially built for obese people at a cost of [$148,000]. An NHS Suffolk spokesman said: "This man is very ill and this is life-saving surgery.
"The nature of his illness is psychological and the NHS has a duty to help him.
"He is in a very fragile state and needs help. We are exploring all options for transporting him from his home to hospital but we have now ruled out an airlift.
"The most important aspect of transporting him is preserving his dignity and looking after his safety.
"We have not had anything like this before."
Susie Squire, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "While it is important to get this man the medical attention he needs, cost-effective methods must be used."
Paul has battled a compulsive eating disorder most of his adult life. His widowed mother Janet looked after him but she died six weeks ago at 76. He now has two carers treating him.
In 2002 a forklift truck had to be used to transport Paul from his bed and into hospital.
At that time he weighed 56st and paramedics called the fire service after finding it impossible to lift him.
Six firemen were also unable to get him on to a stretcher.
Eventually they took out a window and brickwork and knocked down a neighbour's garden wall to get him out.
Paul managed to shed 20 stone in 2006.
At the time he admitted: "You've got to change your mindset when you've got a food addiction. You can't have treats."
But he soon put the weight back on. And in 2007 he complained to his local council that he could not fit his special 3ft-wide wheelchair through the gates of an Ipswich park.
He eats 20,000 calories of food a day - EIGHT TIMES the official adult male average of 2,500.
Paul scoffs three family-sized takeaways a night and wolfs down Sunday roasts like snacks.
He has spent much of the past eight years in bed at his home in Ipswich, Suffolk.
His care costs taxpayers an estimated [$165,000] a year.
And now he needs drastic stomach surgery to stop him eating and keep him alive - at a cost of [$33,000] to the NHS.
But first health chiefs have to tackle the problem of transporting Paul to a specialist hospital 152 miles from his home.
They even considered using an RAF Chinook HELICOPTER to airlift him to the unit in Chichester, West Sussex.
They have ruled out that option and Paul will now travel in a five-ton ambulance specially built for obese people at a cost of [$148,000]. An NHS Suffolk spokesman said: "This man is very ill and this is life-saving surgery.
"The nature of his illness is psychological and the NHS has a duty to help him.
"He is in a very fragile state and needs help. We are exploring all options for transporting him from his home to hospital but we have now ruled out an airlift.
"The most important aspect of transporting him is preserving his dignity and looking after his safety.
"We have not had anything like this before."
Susie Squire, of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "While it is important to get this man the medical attention he needs, cost-effective methods must be used."
Paul has battled a compulsive eating disorder most of his adult life. His widowed mother Janet looked after him but she died six weeks ago at 76. He now has two carers treating him.
In 2002 a forklift truck had to be used to transport Paul from his bed and into hospital.
At that time he weighed 56st and paramedics called the fire service after finding it impossible to lift him.
Six firemen were also unable to get him on to a stretcher.
Eventually they took out a window and brickwork and knocked down a neighbour's garden wall to get him out.
Paul managed to shed 20 stone in 2006.
At the time he admitted: "You've got to change your mindset when you've got a food addiction. You can't have treats."
But he soon put the weight back on. And in 2007 he complained to his local council that he could not fit his special 3ft-wide wheelchair through the gates of an Ipswich park.
The country is certainly in a sad state when the government considers using the air force to transport a man to surgery, which will be paid for by the citizens of said country, simply because some random man didn't have enough will power to stop eating. Perhaps he should have considered the fact that I'm sure 99% of the rest of Ipswich's citizens can fit through the gates of the park before he decided to complain.
27 August 2009
Questions Asked
Why is it that the people that are crying the loudest for free health care are the same ones that wouldn't think of giving up their tobacco, giving up their alcohol, giving up their cable tv or their cell phone, trips to McDonald's, movies and other things they probably could be saving money on. Why is that?
Why is it they test people in the military for drugs, and police for drugs, and government officials for drugs, but they don't test welfare recipients for drugs?
I can't tell you how many times I had to pee in a bottle when I was in the military. By giving these people welfare checks and not guaranteeing that it isn't being spent on food and other necessities, we're supporting a lot of people's drug habits.
Written by Mad Dog 20/20. Posted by Eun.
Why is it they test people in the military for drugs, and police for drugs, and government officials for drugs, but they don't test welfare recipients for drugs?
I can't tell you how many times I had to pee in a bottle when I was in the military. By giving these people welfare checks and not guaranteeing that it isn't being spent on food and other necessities, we're supporting a lot of people's drug habits.
Written by Mad Dog 20/20. Posted by Eun.
21 August 2009
Trust in Obama and War Waning
Despite President Obama's attempts to prepare the American people for rising casualties in Afghanistan, a new poll shows most Americans see the war as a wasted effort.
Congressional lawmakers say this is a sign the president needs to make the war in Afghanistan a front-burner issue in his public addresses and do a better job explaining the stakes to the American public.
Though the war in Afghanistan is a clear priority for the president, the push for health care reform has dominated his public appeals. And when he does address Afghanistan, some lawmakers say, Obama is telling more than explaining.
"You can't just say it's the good war and trust me, because actually his trust factor is dropping. He's going to have to build a case for it," said Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.
The Washington Post-ABC News poll showed 51 percent of people say the war is not worth fighting. That sentiment was particularly high among members of the president's own party, with seven in 10 Democrats saying the war is not worth its costs.
Imagine that -- the American people aren't willing to trust a man with no military experience with a war, a war in which many of our brave men and women are sacrificing their lives (July saw the most casualties since the war began), a war that the Democrats, of all people, don't support. I would like to know how many Democrats have loved ones fighting this war.
I believe that healthcare, privatized healthcare, is an important issue. But I also feel that our current system is working, and we might want to turn our attention to something more pressing. Like a war. I would also like to see that poll conducted on Fox News or something other than WaPo and ABC.
Congressional lawmakers say this is a sign the president needs to make the war in Afghanistan a front-burner issue in his public addresses and do a better job explaining the stakes to the American public.
Though the war in Afghanistan is a clear priority for the president, the push for health care reform has dominated his public appeals. And when he does address Afghanistan, some lawmakers say, Obama is telling more than explaining.
"You can't just say it's the good war and trust me, because actually his trust factor is dropping. He's going to have to build a case for it," said Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.
The Washington Post-ABC News poll showed 51 percent of people say the war is not worth fighting. That sentiment was particularly high among members of the president's own party, with seven in 10 Democrats saying the war is not worth its costs.
Imagine that -- the American people aren't willing to trust a man with no military experience with a war, a war in which many of our brave men and women are sacrificing their lives (July saw the most casualties since the war began), a war that the Democrats, of all people, don't support. I would like to know how many Democrats have loved ones fighting this war.
I believe that healthcare, privatized healthcare, is an important issue. But I also feel that our current system is working, and we might want to turn our attention to something more pressing. Like a war. I would also like to see that poll conducted on Fox News or something other than WaPo and ABC.
21 July 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)