Posts
I can’t see the mountains.
1 month ago
Monday, March 1, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Pledge of Renewal
Please take a minute to read the Pledge of Renewal, a beautifully crafted document written by my fellow Patriots in RI. Send this pledge around the country, in hopes that it will revive American's hopes for a stronger United States of America, which is more closely aligned with that great nation for which our founding fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.
Pledge of Renewal
Pledge of Renewal
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Tea Partiers Most Popular
http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Poll-TeaPartyPatriotsMostPopular/2009/12/17/id/343602?s=al
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Tea Party Activists are the New GOP
Tea Party Activists Are the New GOP
Tuesday, November 3, 2009 7:11 AM
By: Richard A. Viguerie Article Font Size
After withdrawing from the special election for New York’s 23rd Congressional District, Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava, who had been the Republican candidate, threw her support to the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, rather than Doug Hoffman, a Republican running on the Conservative Party ticket.
That was one more example of the “closed tent” mentality of big-government, establishment Republicans who have worked long and hard to keep conservatives out of power at the national, state, and local levels.
The GOP leadership’s backing of Ms. Scozzafava was a slap in the face to tea party activists, town-hall protesters, and conservatives across the country. The Washington GOP establishment’s abandonment of fiscal responsibility led directly to the election of Barack Obama as president, Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House, and Harry Reid as Senate majority leader.
The American people see the GOP leadership and establishment every bit as much a part of the problem as the Democrats.
Doug Hoffman and N.Y.-23 are an earthquake in American politics, the first of many challenges to establishment Republicans that we will see for the 2010 elections and beyond. The Republican leaders' stupid decision to pour $900,000 into the race against a conservative has unleashed a fury that will lead to new GOP leadership.
Conservatives’ anger at Washington-establishment Republicans will cost the national committees tens of millions of dollars, as conservative money will start flowing directly to the tea parties and their candidates.
It’s clear that the main opposition to President Obama and Pelosi’s agenda is not from Republican politicians, but rather conservative talk-show hosts, bloggers, cable TV hosts, tea party activists, town-hall attendees, and other grass-roots conservatives.
Tea party activists and conservatives feel betrayed by Republican leaders: John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Pete Sessions, Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Michael Steele, and Newt Gingrich.
These GOP leaders would rather follow the advice of professional political consultants, who are not small-government conservatives. These people would rather satisfy their friends in the media than win — and win with principle. They are the same people who try to denigrate the tea party and town-hall protesters by calling them “teabaggers.”
That type of thinking, which actively opposes the rise of conservatives and others who challenge the old Washington political establishment, will keep the GOP as a small tent. The tea party movement, like Reaganism, is the real big tent.
Over the last dozen years, Republican Party leaders have broken the bond of trust between them and the base of the party. It will not be restored until the GOP selects new leaders who represent the views and values of grass-roots Americans, not Washington views and values.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009 7:11 AM
By: Richard A. Viguerie Article Font Size
After withdrawing from the special election for New York’s 23rd Congressional District, Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava, who had been the Republican candidate, threw her support to the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, rather than Doug Hoffman, a Republican running on the Conservative Party ticket.
That was one more example of the “closed tent” mentality of big-government, establishment Republicans who have worked long and hard to keep conservatives out of power at the national, state, and local levels.
The GOP leadership’s backing of Ms. Scozzafava was a slap in the face to tea party activists, town-hall protesters, and conservatives across the country. The Washington GOP establishment’s abandonment of fiscal responsibility led directly to the election of Barack Obama as president, Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House, and Harry Reid as Senate majority leader.
The American people see the GOP leadership and establishment every bit as much a part of the problem as the Democrats.
Doug Hoffman and N.Y.-23 are an earthquake in American politics, the first of many challenges to establishment Republicans that we will see for the 2010 elections and beyond. The Republican leaders' stupid decision to pour $900,000 into the race against a conservative has unleashed a fury that will lead to new GOP leadership.
Conservatives’ anger at Washington-establishment Republicans will cost the national committees tens of millions of dollars, as conservative money will start flowing directly to the tea parties and their candidates.
It’s clear that the main opposition to President Obama and Pelosi’s agenda is not from Republican politicians, but rather conservative talk-show hosts, bloggers, cable TV hosts, tea party activists, town-hall attendees, and other grass-roots conservatives.
Tea party activists and conservatives feel betrayed by Republican leaders: John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Pete Sessions, Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Michael Steele, and Newt Gingrich.
These GOP leaders would rather follow the advice of professional political consultants, who are not small-government conservatives. These people would rather satisfy their friends in the media than win — and win with principle. They are the same people who try to denigrate the tea party and town-hall protesters by calling them “teabaggers.”
That type of thinking, which actively opposes the rise of conservatives and others who challenge the old Washington political establishment, will keep the GOP as a small tent. The tea party movement, like Reaganism, is the real big tent.
Over the last dozen years, Republican Party leaders have broken the bond of trust between them and the base of the party. It will not be restored until the GOP selects new leaders who represent the views and values of grass-roots Americans, not Washington views and values.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 30, 2009
A Year of Jihad in America
A Year of Jihad in America
By; Christopher Holton
www.StanduUpAmericaUS.com
There is mounting evidence that the global Jihadist insurgency is fully entrenched in the United States After the Fort Hood massacre news services seem divided between those hell-bent-for-leather on denying that the Fort Hood massacre was a case of anything other than a persecuted loner "snapping" and those who proclaimed it the first "terrorist" attack on US soil since September 11th.
This focus is wrong. Fort Hood was an act of Jihad and that's really all that matters: It is essential that we find out how extensive Nidal Malik Hasan's ties to other Jihadists were. Of this there can be no doubt.
But we must refrain from entering into a debate on what amounts largely to semantics about whether or not the Fort Hood massacre was an act of "terrorism." We need to get away from focusing on the term "terrorism" anyway. Some observers still don't consider the 1983 Beirut Barracks bombing by Hezbollah, which killed 241 Marines, sailors and soldiers, an act of "terrorism" because, by some widely recognized definitions, attacks on combatants cannot be termed "terrorism."
The Fort Hood massacre and the attack on the Marine Barracks were acts of Jihad. The Jihadis themselves don't refer to themselves as "terrorists." But they most assuredly refer to themselves as "Jihadis." We should let them own that title.
This was never a war on "terrorism." Jihad is being waged against us and we have tied ourselves in knots to deny that reality. Moreover, Fort Hood was hardly the first act of Jihad on US soil since September 11th. A few examples come to mind:
* The Anthrax Attacks (Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do NOT buy the official line on these attacks, but that's a subject for another time and place.)
* The DC "Sniper" Shootings (There is a great deal of evidence that John Mohammed carried out these attacks in the name of Allah.)
* The LAX Shooting at the El Al Ticket Counter
Note that whether the perpetrators are members of a previously known terrorist organization (such as Al Qaeda) or were lone actors, these were still acts of Jihad.
It is difficult to combat a shadowy organization like Al Qaeda, but it is far more difficult to prevent "lone wolf" actors from attacking. Al Qaeda may be difficult to infiltrate and gather intelligence on, but how do we "infiltrate" a lone Jihadist?
This is symptomatic of a revolutionary Jihadist subculture metastasizing within the American Muslim community, especially within its mosques and organizations. This revolutionary subculture has produced an atmosphere in which Muslims are inspired to act violently. This is a very dangerous and volatile situation.
Over the last 12 months alone, we have been provided with a stack of evidence of the Jihadist insurgency inside America. Americans have largely ignored this evidence, or at least failed to "connect the dots." Seemingly completely unrelated cases do in fact have common threads: they are acts of Jihad.
I decided to go back and research examples of Jihad in America over the last 12 months, roughly 1 December 2008 to 1 December 2009. Here is a list of incidents, cases, actions, statements and plots which point to a Jihadist insurgency in our midst (Keep in mind that insurgencies are both civilizational/political and violent/militant.).
The list is compiled in reverse chronological order, meaning that the most recent items are listed first. We no doubt left out some cases. I believe that all of these cases and incidents brought together on a single listing will prompt most readers to conclude that the magnitude of the threat we face inside the United States is greater than they previously believed.
NOVEMBER 2009
* Ten Indicted in Philadelphia in Case Involving Material Support for Jihadist Terrorist Group Hezbollah
* Terrorism Charges Unsealed in Minnesota Against 8 Somali Members of Jihadist Terrorist Group al-Shabaab
* Feds in New York Move to Seize Assets of Iran-tied Alavi Foundation
* Nidal Malik Hasan Kills 13, Wounds 20 In Shooting Rampage at Fort Hood, Texas
OCTOBER 2009
* US Jails Al Qaeda Sleeper Agent (Ali al-Marri was previously held in brig at Charleston, SC Naval Station)
* Two Chicago Men Charged in Jihadist Terrorist Plot in Denmark
* Eleven Members of Jihadist Group Arrested in Detroit; Imam Killed in Shootout with FBI (Luqman Ameen Abdullah Shot and Killed FBI Dog During Arrest)
* Boston Muslim Charged in Plot to Kill Shoppers, Troops
* Three Ohio Residents Sentenced in Plot to Commit Terrorist Acts Against Americans Overseas
* Massachusetts Man Charged With Conspiracy to Provide Material Support for Terrorists
* University of California-Irvine Files Complaint with Feds that Muslim Student Union Raised Money for Jihadist Terrorist organization HAMAS
SEPTEMBER 2009
* Najibullah Zazi of Colorado Indicted in New York for Conspiracy to Use Explosives Against Persons or Property (Zazi had contact with Al Qaeda leader in Afghanistan). (More here and here)
* Illinois Jihadist Arrested in Plot to Bomb Illinois Federal Building
* Jordanian Muslim Arrested After Placing Inactive Bomb in Dallas High-Rise
* Lebanese-born Swede Sentenced to Life in Prison for Oregon Terrorist Training Camp Plot
* Three British Muslims Convicted In Plot to Bomb Airliners Bound for America (Plot could have killed 10,000)
* Apostate from Islam, Rifqa Bary, Flees Family After Her Father Threatens Her
AUGUST 2009
* Member of Prison Islamist Group Sentenced to 70 Months for Plot to Kill Jews, Attack Military Bases
* Atlanta Muslim, Ehsanul Islam Sadequee, Convicted of Supporting Foreign Terrorist Organization (Supported Lashkar-e-Tayyiba which carried out Mumbai attack)
* German Jihadists Describe Hatred of US as Reason for Terror Plot
* Yemeni Sheikh Pleads Guilty to Aiding HAMAS in New York Court
JULY 2009
* "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid Sues to Resume Jihad From Prison
* The Odyssey of a Jihadist: From Long Island to Pakistan. (More here and here)
* Seven Charged in North Carolina for Terrorism (Plot to attack Marine Corps Base Quantico) (More here)
* American Al Qaeda Jihadist Sentenced to Life for Bush Assassination Plot
* Hizb ut-Tahrir Jihadi Conference Held in Chicago
JUNE 2009
* New Jersey Muslim Convicted of Providing Material Support to Jihadist Terrorist Group Hezbollah
* Tennessee Muslim Convert Kills One Soldier, Wounds Another Outside Little Rock Recruiting Office
* Ex-Georgia Tech Student Convicted on Terrorism Charges
MAY 2009
* Texas Muslim Charity Officials Sentenced to 65 Years for Financing HAMAS Jihadist Terrorist Organization
* New York Jihadist Plot to Target Synagogues Disrupted
* Canadian from Somalia Living in Minneapolis Pleads Guilty to Aiding Al Qaeda
* Five Miami Jihadists Convicted in Sears Tower Bombing Plot
APRIL 2009
* Three New Jersey Jihadists Sentenced to Life in Fort Dix Terrorist Plot
MARCH 2009
* Somali-Americans Recruited for Al Qaeda-linked Group, Says FBI
FEBRUARY 2009
* Ohio Jihadist Sentenced to 20 Years in Terror Bomb Plot
* Muslim Television Channel Founder Charged With Beheading His Wife in Honor Killing
* FBI Director Warns of Terror Attacks on US Cities
* Lashkar-e-Taiba Mumbai Attackers Had Worldwide List of 320 Targets
* Jailhouse Islam Convert Murders Philadelphia Police Officer
JANUARY 2009
* FBI Cuts Ties with Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Over HAMAS Ties
* Terrorist Who Plotted to Bomb New York Targets in 1970s Released From Prison, Deported to Sudan. (More here)
* Chicago Cousins Plead Guilty to Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to Terrorism
DECEMBER 2008
* Staten Island Satellite TV Operator Pleads Guilty to Supporting Hezbollah
* Former University of South Florida Student Sentenced to 15 Years in Terrorism Case
--------------------
By; Christopher Holton
www.StanduUpAmericaUS.com
There is mounting evidence that the global Jihadist insurgency is fully entrenched in the United States After the Fort Hood massacre news services seem divided between those hell-bent-for-leather on denying that the Fort Hood massacre was a case of anything other than a persecuted loner "snapping" and those who proclaimed it the first "terrorist" attack on US soil since September 11th.
This focus is wrong. Fort Hood was an act of Jihad and that's really all that matters: It is essential that we find out how extensive Nidal Malik Hasan's ties to other Jihadists were. Of this there can be no doubt.
But we must refrain from entering into a debate on what amounts largely to semantics about whether or not the Fort Hood massacre was an act of "terrorism." We need to get away from focusing on the term "terrorism" anyway. Some observers still don't consider the 1983 Beirut Barracks bombing by Hezbollah, which killed 241 Marines, sailors and soldiers, an act of "terrorism" because, by some widely recognized definitions, attacks on combatants cannot be termed "terrorism."
The Fort Hood massacre and the attack on the Marine Barracks were acts of Jihad. The Jihadis themselves don't refer to themselves as "terrorists." But they most assuredly refer to themselves as "Jihadis." We should let them own that title.
This was never a war on "terrorism." Jihad is being waged against us and we have tied ourselves in knots to deny that reality. Moreover, Fort Hood was hardly the first act of Jihad on US soil since September 11th. A few examples come to mind:
* The Anthrax Attacks (Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I do NOT buy the official line on these attacks, but that's a subject for another time and place.)
* The DC "Sniper" Shootings (There is a great deal of evidence that John Mohammed carried out these attacks in the name of Allah.)
* The LAX Shooting at the El Al Ticket Counter
Note that whether the perpetrators are members of a previously known terrorist organization (such as Al Qaeda) or were lone actors, these were still acts of Jihad.
It is difficult to combat a shadowy organization like Al Qaeda, but it is far more difficult to prevent "lone wolf" actors from attacking. Al Qaeda may be difficult to infiltrate and gather intelligence on, but how do we "infiltrate" a lone Jihadist?
This is symptomatic of a revolutionary Jihadist subculture metastasizing within the American Muslim community, especially within its mosques and organizations. This revolutionary subculture has produced an atmosphere in which Muslims are inspired to act violently. This is a very dangerous and volatile situation.
Over the last 12 months alone, we have been provided with a stack of evidence of the Jihadist insurgency inside America. Americans have largely ignored this evidence, or at least failed to "connect the dots." Seemingly completely unrelated cases do in fact have common threads: they are acts of Jihad.
I decided to go back and research examples of Jihad in America over the last 12 months, roughly 1 December 2008 to 1 December 2009. Here is a list of incidents, cases, actions, statements and plots which point to a Jihadist insurgency in our midst (Keep in mind that insurgencies are both civilizational/political and violent/militant.).
The list is compiled in reverse chronological order, meaning that the most recent items are listed first. We no doubt left out some cases. I believe that all of these cases and incidents brought together on a single listing will prompt most readers to conclude that the magnitude of the threat we face inside the United States is greater than they previously believed.
NOVEMBER 2009
* Ten Indicted in Philadelphia in Case Involving Material Support for Jihadist Terrorist Group Hezbollah
* Terrorism Charges Unsealed in Minnesota Against 8 Somali Members of Jihadist Terrorist Group al-Shabaab
* Feds in New York Move to Seize Assets of Iran-tied Alavi Foundation
* Nidal Malik Hasan Kills 13, Wounds 20 In Shooting Rampage at Fort Hood, Texas
OCTOBER 2009
* US Jails Al Qaeda Sleeper Agent (Ali al-Marri was previously held in brig at Charleston, SC Naval Station)
* Two Chicago Men Charged in Jihadist Terrorist Plot in Denmark
* Eleven Members of Jihadist Group Arrested in Detroit; Imam Killed in Shootout with FBI (Luqman Ameen Abdullah Shot and Killed FBI Dog During Arrest)
* Boston Muslim Charged in Plot to Kill Shoppers, Troops
* Three Ohio Residents Sentenced in Plot to Commit Terrorist Acts Against Americans Overseas
* Massachusetts Man Charged With Conspiracy to Provide Material Support for Terrorists
* University of California-Irvine Files Complaint with Feds that Muslim Student Union Raised Money for Jihadist Terrorist organization HAMAS
SEPTEMBER 2009
* Najibullah Zazi of Colorado Indicted in New York for Conspiracy to Use Explosives Against Persons or Property (Zazi had contact with Al Qaeda leader in Afghanistan). (More here and here)
* Illinois Jihadist Arrested in Plot to Bomb Illinois Federal Building
* Jordanian Muslim Arrested After Placing Inactive Bomb in Dallas High-Rise
* Lebanese-born Swede Sentenced to Life in Prison for Oregon Terrorist Training Camp Plot
* Three British Muslims Convicted In Plot to Bomb Airliners Bound for America (Plot could have killed 10,000)
* Apostate from Islam, Rifqa Bary, Flees Family After Her Father Threatens Her
AUGUST 2009
* Member of Prison Islamist Group Sentenced to 70 Months for Plot to Kill Jews, Attack Military Bases
* Atlanta Muslim, Ehsanul Islam Sadequee, Convicted of Supporting Foreign Terrorist Organization (Supported Lashkar-e-Tayyiba which carried out Mumbai attack)
* German Jihadists Describe Hatred of US as Reason for Terror Plot
* Yemeni Sheikh Pleads Guilty to Aiding HAMAS in New York Court
JULY 2009
* "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid Sues to Resume Jihad From Prison
* The Odyssey of a Jihadist: From Long Island to Pakistan. (More here and here)
* Seven Charged in North Carolina for Terrorism (Plot to attack Marine Corps Base Quantico) (More here)
* American Al Qaeda Jihadist Sentenced to Life for Bush Assassination Plot
* Hizb ut-Tahrir Jihadi Conference Held in Chicago
JUNE 2009
* New Jersey Muslim Convicted of Providing Material Support to Jihadist Terrorist Group Hezbollah
* Tennessee Muslim Convert Kills One Soldier, Wounds Another Outside Little Rock Recruiting Office
* Ex-Georgia Tech Student Convicted on Terrorism Charges
MAY 2009
* Texas Muslim Charity Officials Sentenced to 65 Years for Financing HAMAS Jihadist Terrorist Organization
* New York Jihadist Plot to Target Synagogues Disrupted
* Canadian from Somalia Living in Minneapolis Pleads Guilty to Aiding Al Qaeda
* Five Miami Jihadists Convicted in Sears Tower Bombing Plot
APRIL 2009
* Three New Jersey Jihadists Sentenced to Life in Fort Dix Terrorist Plot
MARCH 2009
* Somali-Americans Recruited for Al Qaeda-linked Group, Says FBI
FEBRUARY 2009
* Ohio Jihadist Sentenced to 20 Years in Terror Bomb Plot
* Muslim Television Channel Founder Charged With Beheading His Wife in Honor Killing
* FBI Director Warns of Terror Attacks on US Cities
* Lashkar-e-Taiba Mumbai Attackers Had Worldwide List of 320 Targets
* Jailhouse Islam Convert Murders Philadelphia Police Officer
JANUARY 2009
* FBI Cuts Ties with Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Over HAMAS Ties
* Terrorist Who Plotted to Bomb New York Targets in 1970s Released From Prison, Deported to Sudan. (More here)
* Chicago Cousins Plead Guilty to Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to Terrorism
DECEMBER 2008
* Staten Island Satellite TV Operator Pleads Guilty to Supporting Hezbollah
* Former University of South Florida Student Sentenced to 15 Years in Terrorism Case
--------------------
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
How To Cut Healthcare Costs Chapter 1: Kill Women
The Wall Street Journal
NOVEMBER 19, 2009
A Breast Cancer Preview
The mammogram decision is a sign of cost control to come.
A government panel's decision to toss out long-time guidelines for breast cancer screening is causing an uproar, and well it should. This episode is an all-too-instructive preview of the coming political decisions about cost-control and medical treatment that are at the heart of ObamaCare.
As recently as 2002, the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force affirmed its recommendation that women 40 and older undergo annual mammograms to check for breast cancer. Since regular mammography became standard practice in the early 1990s, mortality from breast cancer—the second leading cause of cancer death among American women—has dropped by about 30%, after remaining constant for the prior half-century. But this week the 16-member task force ruled that patients under 50 or over 75 without special risk factors no longer need screening. [As a matter of fact, it was only 6 MONTHS AGO -- before health care legislation had moved to the front burner -- that this panel re-issued its own WARNING about the importance of early breast cancer detection, annual mammograms after age 40, and self-examinations. Now we have their VERY ABRUPT reversal of a VERY longstanding opinion, which for many years had concurred with the American Cancer Society's recommendations. The government panel has suddenly decided to oppose the ACS's recommendations -- on the basis of absolutely no new medical evidence.
So what changed? Nothing substantial in the clinical evidence. But the panel—which includes no oncologists or radiologists, who best know the medical literature—did decide to re-analyze the data with health-care spending as a core concern.
The task force concedes that the benefits of early detection are the same for all women. But according to its review, because there are fewer cases of breast cancer in younger women, it takes 1,904 screenings of women in their 40s to save one life and only 1,339 screenings to do the same among women in their 50s. It therefore concludes that the tests for the first group aren't valuable, while also noting that screening younger women results in more false positives that lead to unnecessary (but only in retrospect) follow-up tests or biopsies.
Of course, this calculation doesn't consider that at least 40% of the patient years of life saved by screening are among women under 50. That's a lot of women, even by the terms of the panel's own statistical abstractions. To put it another way, 665 additional mammograms are more expensive in the aggregate. But at the individual level they are immeasurably valuable, especially if you happen to be the woman whose life is saved.
The recommendation to cut off all screening in women over 75 is equally as myopic. The committee notes that the benefits of screening "occur only several years after the actual screening test, whereas the percentage of women who survive long enough to benefit decreases with age." It adds that "women of this age are at much greater risk for dying of other conditions that would not be affected by breast cancer screening." In other words, grandma is probably going to die anyway, so why waste the money to reduce the chances that she dies of a leading cause of death among elderly women?
The effects of this new breast cancer cost-consciousness are likely to be large. Medicare generally adopts the panel's recommendations when it makes coverage decisions for seniors, and its judgments also play a large role in the private insurance markets. Yes, people could pay for mammography out of pocket. This is fine with us, but it is also emphatically not the world of first-dollar insurance coverage we live in, in which reimbursement decisions deeply influence the practice of medicine.
More important for the future, every Democratic version of ObamaCare makes this task force an arbiter of the benefits that private insurers will be required to cover as they are converted into government contractors. What are now merely recommendations will become de facto rules, and under national health care these kinds of cost analyses will inevitably become more common as government decides where finite tax dollars are allowed to go. [IE, it is THIS PANEL which will be tasked with / authorized to determine what procedures will or won't be allowed for whom, under every single version of Health Reform Legislation sponsored by the Democrats. With the passage of any of these bills, this panel's recommendations will become the rules under which medical care is provided, BY LAW. Reminder: there are NO oncologists and NO radiologists on the panel. -- Morry]
In a rational system, the responsibility for health care ought to reside with patients and their doctors. James Thrall, a Harvard medical professor and chairman of the American College of Radiology, tells us that the breast cancer decision shows the dangers of medicine being reduced to "accounting exercises subject to interpretations and underlying assumptions," and based on costs and large group averages, not individuals.
"I fear that we are entering an era of deliberate decisions where we choose to trade people's lives for money," Dr. Thrall continued. He's not overstating the case, as the 12% of women who will develop breast cancer during their lifetimes may now better appreciate.
More spending on "prevention" has long been the cry of health reformers, and President Obama has been especially forceful. In his health speech to Congress in September, the President made a point of emphasizing "routine checkups and preventative care, like mammograms and colonoscopies—because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse."
It turns out that there is, in fact, a reason: Screening for breast cancer will cost the government too much money, even if it saves lives.
[And that money is needed for bailouts -- ie corporate welfare to the top 1% of the nation's business firms -- as well as for stimulus packages and all the pork and earmarks so crucial to keeping our essential political elite comfy in the style they've become accustomed to. -- Morry]
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
***************************************************************************
THE RELEVANT FACTS:
In England today, the success rate for curing breast cancer is 2 out of 4 cases. (Many cases become terminal while the woman is waiting for surgery.) In the US it is 3 out of 4. Breast cancer strikes roughly 12 % of women. This means that breast cancer will strike roughly 18 million women who are alive today in the US. Of those our present system, if it survives, will cure 13.5 million; the British system would cure 9 million. There is no reason to believe government run medical care in the US will be any more successful than it is in Britain. Indeed, Hillary Clinton and others have praised the British system and stated that we should do more or less the same thing in the US. This means that of the 18 million victims of breast cancer, 4.5 million will die unnecessarily. It is not unreasonable to expect that 4.5 million women, alive and healthy today in the US, will be killed by ObamaCare.
And that is just breast cancer. Consider colon cancer, prostate cancer, heart disease, . . . .etc.
Lewis
------------------------------------------------------------
THERE IT IS, FOLKS, THE 1st step to be taken by ObamaCare to fulfill its promise of making healrh care affordable. It's so simple, it's amazing no one thought of it before!! We inaugurate the plan with the beautiful-in-its-simplicity step of killing 4.5 million American women. True, this will only cut medical costs by 1 or 2% overall, but don't lose heart!! Remember, there's still colon cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer, bladder cancer, stomach cancer, heart disease, lung diseases, etc, etc,etc, each one a very promising area for effecting further cuts. We will probably be able to cut costs by up to 20% or more simply by arranging for the premature deaths of another 40-60 million Americans. True, simple tort reform has cut costs by an average of 30% in the few states which have enacted it, but this would be unfair to lawyers, as the currently considered Senate bill wisely recognizes. Lawyers are necessary because they are huge contributors to the Democrats' campaign chests, and the nation needs all the concerned, big-hearted Democrat accessories to murder it can get. (The bill currently under consideration in the Senate explicitly provides for substantial cuts in Federal funding to any state which places any restrictions or limits on awards in medical cases.) So . . . KUDOS FOR OBAMACARE. It's the smart way to go, and even if it is grossly dishonest and literally murderous, this is just part of the nature of many politicians, and in a nation of diversity, we must accomodate their viewpoint. So let's patch up our differences and all join together with the nation's medical malpractice attorneys and with our hard-working morticians in praising the virtues of ObamaCare!! -- Morry
NOVEMBER 19, 2009
A Breast Cancer Preview
The mammogram decision is a sign of cost control to come.
A government panel's decision to toss out long-time guidelines for breast cancer screening is causing an uproar, and well it should. This episode is an all-too-instructive preview of the coming political decisions about cost-control and medical treatment that are at the heart of ObamaCare.
As recently as 2002, the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force affirmed its recommendation that women 40 and older undergo annual mammograms to check for breast cancer. Since regular mammography became standard practice in the early 1990s, mortality from breast cancer—the second leading cause of cancer death among American women—has dropped by about 30%, after remaining constant for the prior half-century. But this week the 16-member task force ruled that patients under 50 or over 75 without special risk factors no longer need screening. [As a matter of fact, it was only 6 MONTHS AGO -- before health care legislation had moved to the front burner -- that this panel re-issued its own WARNING about the importance of early breast cancer detection, annual mammograms after age 40, and self-examinations. Now we have their VERY ABRUPT reversal of a VERY longstanding opinion, which for many years had concurred with the American Cancer Society's recommendations. The government panel has suddenly decided to oppose the ACS's recommendations -- on the basis of absolutely no new medical evidence.
So what changed? Nothing substantial in the clinical evidence. But the panel—which includes no oncologists or radiologists, who best know the medical literature—did decide to re-analyze the data with health-care spending as a core concern.
The task force concedes that the benefits of early detection are the same for all women. But according to its review, because there are fewer cases of breast cancer in younger women, it takes 1,904 screenings of women in their 40s to save one life and only 1,339 screenings to do the same among women in their 50s. It therefore concludes that the tests for the first group aren't valuable, while also noting that screening younger women results in more false positives that lead to unnecessary (but only in retrospect) follow-up tests or biopsies.
Of course, this calculation doesn't consider that at least 40% of the patient years of life saved by screening are among women under 50. That's a lot of women, even by the terms of the panel's own statistical abstractions. To put it another way, 665 additional mammograms are more expensive in the aggregate. But at the individual level they are immeasurably valuable, especially if you happen to be the woman whose life is saved.
The recommendation to cut off all screening in women over 75 is equally as myopic. The committee notes that the benefits of screening "occur only several years after the actual screening test, whereas the percentage of women who survive long enough to benefit decreases with age." It adds that "women of this age are at much greater risk for dying of other conditions that would not be affected by breast cancer screening." In other words, grandma is probably going to die anyway, so why waste the money to reduce the chances that she dies of a leading cause of death among elderly women?
The effects of this new breast cancer cost-consciousness are likely to be large. Medicare generally adopts the panel's recommendations when it makes coverage decisions for seniors, and its judgments also play a large role in the private insurance markets. Yes, people could pay for mammography out of pocket. This is fine with us, but it is also emphatically not the world of first-dollar insurance coverage we live in, in which reimbursement decisions deeply influence the practice of medicine.
More important for the future, every Democratic version of ObamaCare makes this task force an arbiter of the benefits that private insurers will be required to cover as they are converted into government contractors. What are now merely recommendations will become de facto rules, and under national health care these kinds of cost analyses will inevitably become more common as government decides where finite tax dollars are allowed to go. [IE, it is THIS PANEL which will be tasked with / authorized to determine what procedures will or won't be allowed for whom, under every single version of Health Reform Legislation sponsored by the Democrats. With the passage of any of these bills, this panel's recommendations will become the rules under which medical care is provided, BY LAW. Reminder: there are NO oncologists and NO radiologists on the panel. -- Morry]
In a rational system, the responsibility for health care ought to reside with patients and their doctors. James Thrall, a Harvard medical professor and chairman of the American College of Radiology, tells us that the breast cancer decision shows the dangers of medicine being reduced to "accounting exercises subject to interpretations and underlying assumptions," and based on costs and large group averages, not individuals.
"I fear that we are entering an era of deliberate decisions where we choose to trade people's lives for money," Dr. Thrall continued. He's not overstating the case, as the 12% of women who will develop breast cancer during their lifetimes may now better appreciate.
More spending on "prevention" has long been the cry of health reformers, and President Obama has been especially forceful. In his health speech to Congress in September, the President made a point of emphasizing "routine checkups and preventative care, like mammograms and colonoscopies—because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse."
It turns out that there is, in fact, a reason: Screening for breast cancer will cost the government too much money, even if it saves lives.
[And that money is needed for bailouts -- ie corporate welfare to the top 1% of the nation's business firms -- as well as for stimulus packages and all the pork and earmarks so crucial to keeping our essential political elite comfy in the style they've become accustomed to. -- Morry]
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
***************************************************************************
THE RELEVANT FACTS:
In England today, the success rate for curing breast cancer is 2 out of 4 cases. (Many cases become terminal while the woman is waiting for surgery.) In the US it is 3 out of 4. Breast cancer strikes roughly 12 % of women. This means that breast cancer will strike roughly 18 million women who are alive today in the US. Of those our present system, if it survives, will cure 13.5 million; the British system would cure 9 million. There is no reason to believe government run medical care in the US will be any more successful than it is in Britain. Indeed, Hillary Clinton and others have praised the British system and stated that we should do more or less the same thing in the US. This means that of the 18 million victims of breast cancer, 4.5 million will die unnecessarily. It is not unreasonable to expect that 4.5 million women, alive and healthy today in the US, will be killed by ObamaCare.
And that is just breast cancer. Consider colon cancer, prostate cancer, heart disease, . . . .etc.
Lewis
------------------------------------------------------------
THERE IT IS, FOLKS, THE 1st step to be taken by ObamaCare to fulfill its promise of making healrh care affordable. It's so simple, it's amazing no one thought of it before!! We inaugurate the plan with the beautiful-in-its-simplicity step of killing 4.5 million American women. True, this will only cut medical costs by 1 or 2% overall, but don't lose heart!! Remember, there's still colon cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer, bladder cancer, stomach cancer, heart disease, lung diseases, etc, etc,etc, each one a very promising area for effecting further cuts. We will probably be able to cut costs by up to 20% or more simply by arranging for the premature deaths of another 40-60 million Americans. True, simple tort reform has cut costs by an average of 30% in the few states which have enacted it, but this would be unfair to lawyers, as the currently considered Senate bill wisely recognizes. Lawyers are necessary because they are huge contributors to the Democrats' campaign chests, and the nation needs all the concerned, big-hearted Democrat accessories to murder it can get. (The bill currently under consideration in the Senate explicitly provides for substantial cuts in Federal funding to any state which places any restrictions or limits on awards in medical cases.) So . . . KUDOS FOR OBAMACARE. It's the smart way to go, and even if it is grossly dishonest and literally murderous, this is just part of the nature of many politicians, and in a nation of diversity, we must accomodate their viewpoint. So let's patch up our differences and all join together with the nation's medical malpractice attorneys and with our hard-working morticians in praising the virtues of ObamaCare!! -- Morry
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
