Dr. Ben Carson's Scary View on 2016

Dr. Ben Carson's Scary View on 2016

Fifteen minutes after famed pediatric brain surgeon Benjamin Solomon “Ben” Carson Sr. delivered President Barack Hussein Obama an unexpected wake-up call with regard to the dangers of political correctness, deficit spending, and  Obamacare at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast, he received a call from the White House demanding he immediately apologize to the president who had been uncomfortably seated two chairs away on the dais.

True to himself, Carson, author of “America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made America Great,” refused to render any apology, saying he “had talked to the president afterwards. He didn’t seem upset and there’s no reason he should be unless what I said applied to him,” which it clearly did. 

Although he is widely known for his breakthrough medical accomplishments and outspoken conservative views, Dr. Carson has never been  considered an inflammatory extremist so when he recently predicted that a 2016 presidential election may not ever happen it might be time to sit up and take notice of that ominous possibility.

The popular candidate for the 2016 Republican nomination said just that to a shocked Chris Wallace during his appearance on Fox News Sunday. 

Wallace asked, “You said recently that there might not be elections in 2016 because of widespread anarchy.  Do you really believe that?” and Dr. Carson responded that, “I hope that that is not going to be the case. But certainly there is the potential.”

He then provided the rationale for his impressions. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39176.) 

The Roots of Barack Obama's Selective Crises

The Roots of Barack Obama's Selective Crises

From the outset, when Barack Hussein Obama first announced his candidacy for the presidency of the United States in 2007 and through Election Day, Americans of every political stripe have had serious, if often belated, misgivings regarding a candidate with minimal qualifications and experience with all of two years as a U.S. senator presumptuously vying for the highest office in the land and the position as leader of the Free World. 

Unfortunately and wrongly, those concerns were frequently dismissed as baseless reflections of racial prejudice against an African-American.

A few days before that election, liberal Charlie Rose made no reference to that canard but astoundingly admitted to liberal Tom Brokaw on national television that, “I don’t know what Barack Obama’s worldview is.”  Brokaw responded, “No, I don’t either” and added that, “We don’t know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy” or the people advising him. 

In essence, two of Obama ‘s staunchest supporters were conceding that their chosen presidential candidate was a total enigma.  

In short order, although to my knowledge neither Rose nor Brokaw have ever reiterated their qualms, they and the American people have learned a great deal about Obama’s thinking on many issues and about his advisers and we are learning more and more every day about his thinking on both foreign and domestic affairs. 

Many of his ideologically-driven thoughts and actions have reinforced the view that Obama was woefully and dangerously unprepared for his office.  

For example, just recently, America’s commander in chief decided that the deadly Ebola virus currently confined mostly to west Africa represents a far greater threat to America and the world than any other problems including ISIS terrorists who have vowed to visit their murderous movement on our country and the rest of Western civilization.

There exists no reasonable doubt that Ebola represents a significant danger to Americans’ health and safety but the virus  hardly poses an imminent threat anywhere near comparable to ISIS.

In the unlikely event Obama is right in his comparative threat assessment of Ebola, which the UN Security Council has also called a danger to world peace–without singling out the virus as the most pressing world problem–he felt it merited dispatching at least 3,000 combat troops to Liberia to set up treatment centers in lieu of sending them to Iraq despite the fact they are trained for combat and not for construction missions.

Likewise, Obama has determined that in order to crush ISIS in the Mid East, “boots on the ground” are unnecessary and that America’s potent air power, in conjunction with assistance from our coalition allies, is sufficient to wipe out 32,000 ISIS terrorists.

The problems with his “strategy” are manifold, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39120.)

The Goodells, Roger and Charlie

The Goodells, Roger and Charlie

 

National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell has proven the truth of the adage that a nut doesn’t fall far from the family tree.

After ten days of hiding from the press and from NFL fans, Roger emerged from his cocoon and conducted a news conference on Friday in which he emphatically declared, referring to his mishandling of the Ray Rice and other NFL domestic violence scandals, ”The same mistakes can never be repeated” and that he “didn’t get it right” in disciplining Rice and Rice’s fellow accused abusers.

Roger also repeated the blatant lie that no one at the NFL ever saw the TMZ video showing Rice punching his then-fiancée Lanay Palmer in an Atlantic City hotel then dragging and kicking her unconscious body out of an elevator despite the fact that a law enforcement official has said he sent the video of the brutal attack to a league executive some five months ago.

Call it selective memory or CYA, covering your ass, Roger also refused to offer his resignation from his cushy job for which NFL team owners unaccountably compensated him with $44.2 million last year in salary and bonuses. 

Not a bad haul for a guy oblivious of major violations of league rules!

On the other hand, Roger was just following his father’s example who was noted for his failure to live up to expectations.

Charles “Charlie” Goodell, a little-known, moderate Republican  congressman from upstate New York, was  picked  in 1968 by New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller to fill the U.S, Senate vacancy following the assassination of Robert Kennedy and quickly switched allegiance from his conservative roots and became a liberal in Rockefeller’s mold. 

He gained the favor of the leftist, anti-Viet Nam War crowd when he evolved virtually overnight into a typical spendthrift Democrat liberal as well as an outspoken pacifist.

He came to be known as the “Christine Jorgensen of the Republican party” and was soundly defeated by conservative James L. Buckley two years later.

During his brief, 22-month  tenure in the Senate, Charlie didn’t undergo a sex change like the famous Jorgenson but he did manage to antagonize many Republicans in the GOP by transforming himself from a generally conservative former congressman into a Rockefeller–Jacob Javits liberal to conform with his patron’s political philosophy by choosing the path of least resistance in the liberal New York Republican Party.

Confirming his radical change, Goodell even won the cross endorsement of New York’s Liberal Party when he ran for election in 1962, finishing third in a 3-man race with a grand total of 24.3% of the vote.

Charlie Goodell’s only son, Roger, likewise failed to fulfill his responsibilities as NFL Commissioner. . . .(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39101.)

The Stat-Spangled Banner and the Dearth of American Patriotism

The Star-Spangled Banner and the Dearth of American Patriotism

 

The title of this essay refers to the “dearth” not the “death” of American patriotism; patriotism is far from dead in our country even if it is under deadly, unrelenting assault.

For example, in a failed effort to appear objective, Brown University historian Ted Widmer doesn’t precisely say he detests America’s  National Anthem but instead cites everything wrong about “The Star-Spangled Banner,” strictly for the purposes of historical accuracy , of course.  
 
After all, what would it look like for a renowned American historian to overly and overtly criticize his own country’s  most sacred patriotic song?
\
In “Is It Time to Ditch the Star-Spangled Banner,” Widmer correctly points out some valid issues with “The Star-Spangled Banner” like its high notes that few can render satisfactorily but devotes most of his attention to the seedy background of the music.
As most people know, the lyrics of the four stanzas of America’s future National Anthem were originally written as a 4-stanza poem by Francis Scott Key describing his anxiety over watching the massive shelling of Fort McHenry by British forces on the night of Sept. 13-14, 1814 during the War of 1812.
When Key saw the American flag was still proudly flying on the 14th despite the bombardment, he wrote and published the “Defence of Fort  M’Henry,” which was eventually re-titled “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

However, historian Widmer doesn’t focus as much on Key’s lyrics as he does on the fact the music is derived from London’s “back alleys” and “drunken” ditties and he felt compelled to point out that the third stanza “considerably weakens the song’s claim to celebrate ‘the land of the free’” since Key fails to mention “the presence of [unspecified] significant numbers of African-Americans, fighting with the British in hopes of finding a personal freedom they had no chance of securing in  the United States.”
 
The relevance of that omission to Widmer’s call for ditching our National Anthem somehow eludes me since it, along with the American flag, doesn’t bear at all on the necessity of retaining “The Star-Spangled Banner.” 

However, his emphasis on that single, two-line excerpt in a thirty-two line poem as a supposed blemish combined with his overall negative tone toward our future anthem shows a clear antipathy, if not antagonism, toward the patriotic fervor of Key’s words.

Patriotism has gotten bunches of bad press over the course of the last few decades . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39066.)

Black Professor Attributes Blac Failures to Black Families

Black Professor Attributes Black Failures to Black Families

 

In a frank and brutally honest essay on the lives and failures of blacks in America today titled, “Blacks Must Confront Reality,” distinguished African-American Professor Walter E. Williams outlines the grave issues confronting that 13% of our population.  He suggests the root cause of most troubles afflicting blacks is not discrimination or white bigotry but the disintegration of black families .  Doctor Williams describes the article as a preview of his documentary "Suffer No Fools" scheduled to be aired on PBS this fall.

(See his incisive analysis at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39049.)

Texas, the Eyes of America Are upon You!

Texas, the Eyes of America Are upon You!

 

Mexico is upset with America’s Lone Star State and has been upset ever since 1836 when Texas won its independence from Mexico and further humiliated and infuriated Mexicans in 1845 when it was admitted to the Union.  That anger intensified this year when Texas Governor Rick Perry was forced by the American government to dispatch National Guard troops to our, and its, southern border.   How Mexico will react to Texas’ possible secession and independence from the United States is unclear, although it’s unlikely Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto will be very pleased if and when that movement succeeds but his reaction is contingent on various factors.

Some background:

After Texans, then known as Texians, launched and won the hard-fought, bloody Texas Revolution in 1835 and Texas was annexed and granted American statehood a decade later, Mexicans were incensed mainly because they felt the huge territory had been stolen from them, a claim that contradicted the historical reality that Mexico had been soundly defeated and had freely signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848.
 
When Texas Governor Perry sent 2,200 National Guardsmen and Women to the border last month, Mexican President Pena Nieto became upset anew and angrily protested the deployment which was taken due to President Barack Hussein Obama’s refusal to enforce immigration laws and protect our nation’s borders.  Perry acted in Teaxas’ interests by bolstering the Border Patrol, many of whom have been functioning as food service workers and virtual nannies to tend to the needs of the flood of tens of thousands of undocumented, i.e. illegal, aliens.

Those lawbreakers, including untold numbers of mostly unaccompanied Central American children, are being dispersed to undisclosed American destinations, their numbers “untold” because the Obama administration has failed to accurately count them and their destinations”undisclosed”  in spite of Obama’s reiterated pledge of unprecedented government transparency.

President Nieto Pena contended that Texas’ deployment of the National Guard was not only “unpleasant” and “reprehensible” but that the border should not be militarized and any issues should be jointly resolved in particular because Perry’s actions could adversely affect bilateral relations. 

In his defense, Gov. Perry has cited the dismal border security which has allowed entry into America of again untold numbers of suspected terrorists, drug traffickers, gang members, and infectious disease carriers, allegations Mexico dismissed without a shred of evidence as “absurd.” 

Something is certainly absurd in this situation.  However, it is not anything Perry has said or done but . . .  (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=39022.)

Islam's Culture of Rape and Violence

Islam's Culture of Rape and Violence

 

Fourteen centuries ago, Islam’s founder, the “holy” Prophet Muhammad, set the standard for his religion’s treatment of young girls and women when he married young Aisha when he was in his fifties.

One of his many wives, Aisha was all of six or seven years old at the time although she supposedly remained with her parents until she attained the unripe age of nine or ten when her marriage to Muhammad was consummated in the holy city of Medina. 

Aisha ultimately evolved into the ”Mother of the Believers,” according to Islam’s holy Quran. Today, she might be classified in some quarters as a “baby momma.”

Although marriages of young girls to elderly men in ancient times weren’t extremely unusual, nowadays such practices are regarded and punishable as child abuse and pedophilia in most cultures, except in Muslim-dominated societies where they are considered normal and legal under sharia law.

However, some contemporary followers of Muhammad, in accord with the Quran’s teachings that females are second class  creatures who deserve fewer rights and respect than animals and are generally seen as lower life forms as evidenced by Muslim men who frequently treat women and girls with outright contempt.

And, what could be more contemptuous than subjecting them to rape and even gang rape as a matter of either public policy or societal acceptance?

Quarnic teachings with respect to women can be ambivalent and confusing, a fact that plays a major role in Muslim treatment of the fair sex and even raping them.

On the one hand, the sex-obsessed Quran preaches gender equality, although males are described as” a degree above females,” which seems anything but equal.

That one degree is noteworthy since the Quran is filled with reminders that men are superior to women in the home and under the law: Husbands are free to dictate their wives’ bedroom behavior, marry as often as they want, and divorce their wives in part because women (and their children) are the guileful enemies men and their wives are “unclean,” especially during and after menstruating when they should be shunned like the plague.

Legally, women are considered worth half the value of men, are required to produce four male witnesses if they claim they were raped, are permitted to have only one husband at a time, are entitled to just half their rightful inheritances, must obey their husbands and, if they refuse sex or disobey, must be beaten into submission.

Despite Islam’s pretensions of moral rectitude, the religion of peace is neither moral nor peaceful as demonstrated by the applications of Quranic principles to the people Muslims defeat in war and by the interminable, bloody wars in which the followers of Muhammad engaged both under the leasership of their warrior prophet and after his death and the Crusades. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38971.)

Obama: I'm Not the Cause of People Feeling "The World Is Falling Apart"

Obama: I'm Not the Cause of People Feeling "The World Is Falling Apart"

 

The artful dodger President Barack Hussein Obama recently explained at a Democratic National Committee barbecue in Purchase, N.Y. that social media and the nightly news–certainly not he–are responsible for creating what he called a common misconception that “the world is falling apart.”

Although he was totally wrong in charging that view is a misconception, Obama was absolutelycorrect in saying, “the world is falling apart” and that scary fact of international life is largely attributable to him.

Our president is fond of shamelessly playing the blame game as cover for his multiple, miserable failures, a ploy second only to his use of the race card as a defense, and he invariably pins responsibility on others for everything from the world’s disintegration to the abject disaster of his legacy issue of Obamacare to the utter failure of his multi-billion dollar stimulus boondoggle that didn’t stimulate much of anything.
There are obviously many problems associated with the titular leader of the Free World consistently hiding behind gross prevarications in order to maintain a semblance of his already-shattered credibility, a tactic that has always been a popular gambit among unethical politicians as an effort to cloud the truth.

However, when the President of the United States regularly trots out the blame card and effectively denies responsibilty whenever anything goes  wrong, he poses a clear and present danger to the safety and welfare of Americans and to the peace and tranquility of the rest of the planet.

As with the of moral of Aesop’s “boy who cried wolf” fable involving a fictional child shepherd who repeatedly deceives the townspeople into believing a wolf is attacking his sheep and, when a real wolf does appear and he again cries for help, the people assume the boy is still lying and the wolf ends up eating his sheep, Obama is endangering everyone he is supposed to be protecting.

One version of that fable concludes with the warning that it “shows how liars are rewarded: Even if they tell the truth, no one believes them,” the precise predicament facing our president today when all but his most stalwart idolators doubt virtually everything he says.

For example, in accusing the media of creating “misconceptions” about “the world falling apart,” Obama is attacking the very same institution, . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38933.)

Ray Rice and Chris Brown Should Be Forgiven

Ray Rice and Chris Brown Should be Forgiven

 

Americans and the sports world have gotten all exercised over Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice after the release of a surveillance tape  showing his brutal knock out punches delivered last February to his future wife Lanay Palmer in an Atlantic City hotel elevator.

Prior to that release, the National Football League had suspended Rice for two games for conduct unbecoming to the League but, following a public uproar over the tape, Rice was summarily sent packing by the Ravens and suspended indefinitely by the NFL. 

However, in all fairness to Rice and other athletes as well as entertainers, especially black athletes and entertainers, none of them are wholly responsible for their criminal behavior since we now live in a society that selectively condones such violence and, in the case of blacks, many hail from a culture in which violent criminality often supersedes common decency.

Of course, celebrities of all colors tend to inordinately get involved in acts of violence against their spouses and others because they somehow feel entitled to do anything they want to do by virtue of their celebrity status and stardom which usually enables them to escape serious punishment and gain public forgiveness.

Thus, when Sean Penn smacked his then-wife Madonna with a baseball bat and Charlie Sheen beat up his ex-wife Brooke Mueller and shot his fiancee Kelly Preston. and Bill Murray assaulted and almost killed his ex, their careers  were unaffected and frequently even enhanced by their notoriety.  While similar acts committed by, say, a corporate executive or your average joe would get them fired on the spot and/or land them in jail, celebs pretty much escape both censure and condemnation.

Like Penn, Sheen, and Murray, Ray Rice and recording artist Chris Brown were raised in  fairly comfortable  households but, unlike the former trio, they grew up surrounded and immersed in today’s black culture that glorifies violence and general disorder.

For example, when repeat jailbird Chris Brown beat his girlfriend Rihanna to a bloody pulp in 2009, he was sentenced to probation and community service, an agreement he soon violated with his violent behavior, and the songstress actually reinstated him as her beau after he apologized to her. . .   (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38935.)

Democrats, Global Warming, and Deceit

Democrats, Global Warming, and Deceit

 

Now that the presumptive 2016 Democrat Party nominee for president and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has seconded the current Secretary of State John Kerry in determining that climate change is easily the greatest threat to the future of the planet and America’s national security than all the other dangers confronting us and the rest of the world today, it might seem a tad impertinent to suggest that Democrats may be inhaling a lot of the mind-altering pot smoke that President Barack Hussein Obama once loved so much.

However, as impertinent as it may be, the charge is well-founded.

Clinton and Kerry, like Obama, believe that no national or international crisis, not worldwide Muslim terrorism, not the ongoing economic doldrums and related unemployment, and not any of the other serious and multiple issues facing us today are more dangerous to peace and security than the perils of climate change.

That fixation explains a great deal about skewed Democrat positions and their flawed thinking.

Defending why the president has placed climate change at the top of his priority list, Sec. Kerry unequivocably declared in August that the global impact of climate change is “the biggest challenge of all that we face right now.” 

Kerry subsequently cited biblical imperatives to support his view that reversing those changes is critical to saving “Muslim-majority”countries from the consequences of their environmental impact.

And, echoing both Kerry’s and Grand Climate Guru Al Gore’s dire warnings, Hillary Clinton said last Thursday at Sen. Harry Reid’s annual National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas that, “Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face.  The threat is real, and so is the opportunity . . . if we make the hard choices,” the last remark clearly an allusion to her underselling recent book of the same title.

There are so many ironies involving the Kerry and Clinton pronouncements that it is difficult to prioritize them. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38910.)

Let's Forget 9/11, For Now

Let's Forget 9/11, For Now

 

As the thirteenth anniversary of 9/11 approaches, Americans would have thought and hoped that all questions regarding that day of infamy visited upon America by Islamic extremists, its causes, circumstances, and perpetrators, would have been resolved.

Amazingly, while the United States impotently awaits the next Muslim attack presaged by dire warnings from our government that increased Internet chatter is indicative that even worse, deadlier destruction lurks on the near horizon than we witnessed in 2001, we still don’t fully understand everything concerning about how and why 9/11 happened.

And, as critical as the answers may be, we probably will never know all the answers.

As with the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln a century and a half ago, Pearl Harbor in 1941, and the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy fifty-one years ago, nagging doubts, confusion, and conspiratorial suspicions about 9/11 still abound.

Who knew what and when did they know it?

Did President Bill Clinton miss multiple opportunities to kill Usama bin Laden?  Was President George W. Bush aware of the severity of al-Qaeda’s threats yet allowed the attacks?  Did WTC Building 7 implode as a result of pre-planted explosives and not from shock waves from the nearby impacts of fuel-laden airliners?  Were Israelis gleefully and safely watching from a rooftop as the disaster unfolded?  Why did the North American Aerospace Defense Command fighter jets not respond in time?  Why did the 9/11 Commission neglect to interview pertinent witnesses? 

Was the whole sickening event actually orchestrated by maniacs in our government intent on instigating a national panic?

The causes of national tragedies tend to take on lives of their own but, in the case of the most horrific assault ever on American soil, there would seem to be little reason for the continuing debate on 9/11 since it has been exhaustively investigated like no other.

Based on the fact previous national tragedies have yet to be fully explained, at this point in time, none of that is relevant today . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38731.)

Ebola Spreading Uncontrollably

Ebola Spreading Uncontrollably

 

If anyone really believes the Ebola virus that is spreading rapidly throughout areas of Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and now in parts of Nigeria will be confined to those western and central African states, they must also believe such epidemics can be readily controlled and eradicated today thanks to modern, medical technological advances.

That’s called wishful thinking.

By their insidious nature, viruses tend to change, mutate into different forms and sometimes with varying symptoms, a fact evident with Ebola which consequently make their outbreaks much more difficult to diagnose and treat. 

As a consequence, despite international interventions in Africa by countries equipped with all the latest medical technology, Ebola’s progress has yet to be prevented from spreading.

To suggest the Ebola virus could very well and not in the very distant future, reach and infect perhaps millions in America may be unnecessarily alarmist but such a suggestion could also reflect a reasonable doubt that Ebola researchers and physicians completely grasp its dangers or, for that matter, whether information as to its proliferation would even be publicized to suppress panic.

According to the United Nations’ World Health Organization (WHO), the Ebola death toll has already exceeded 1,900 as opposed to 1,552 dead less than a week ago and more people have now died than in all previous outbreaks of the virus combined, according to WHO’s director general Margaret Chan. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38871.)

Will St. Michael of Ferguson Join St. Trayvon of Sanford?

Will St. Michael of Ferguson Join St. Trayvon of Sanford?

 

They’re still demonstrating in Ferguson, Missouri three weeks after the shooting death by a white policeman of the black, unarmed, 18 year old ”Gentle Giant” Michael Brown, a six foot, four inch, 200+ pound “Big Teddy Bear,” and there are already signs that Brown may soon be elevated to virtual sainthood to reign with Trayvon Martin as the patron saints of all black teenaged martyrs of evil white people.

The unarmed, seventeen year old, black teen Trayvon Martin was killed in Sanford, Florida in 2012 with a bullet fired from the legally-owned weapon of Neighborhood Watchman, mixed-race George Zimmerman.

Numerous reports surfaced substantiating the truth, namely that Martin was a violent gang banger, after Zimmerman was  exonerated on the basis of self defense by an impartial jury of his peers.  Nevertheless, Trayvon Martin has been enshrined by his supporters as an innocent martyr to the cause of the African-American quest for truth and justice, a black saint who gave up his life to a hateful, white bigot.

If anything, Michael Brown revealed himself as an even greater low life than Trayvon during his aborted career as a rap aficionado.

In Brown’s case, his supporters have intentionally ignored multiple video and eyewitness evidence that the Ferguson police officer had also acted in self defense and in line with his enforcement duties but those realities and the fact that police and FBI haven’t even completed their investigations have failed to deter them from characterizing Brown as just one more innocent victim of white injustice worthy of virtual sainthood.

Lauded by his 2013 summer school English teacher as an aspiring rap song writer who “had a plan. It was his music, and then it was technical school. A lot of kids who think they’re rappers don’t have a Plan B, but Mike really seemed to.” 

But Wesley Lowery, while gratuitously praising Brown, described him in the Washington Post as a prolific rapper “who appeared to be one of those guys who was putting in the time, even if the skills didn’t quite match his aspirations.”

To advance his rap career as “Big Mike Luh Vee K,” Brown actually built a makeshift, basement music studio where he composed, sang, and recorded such lyrics as, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38835)

Obamacare Death Panels Are Alive and Well

Obamacare Death Panels Are Alive and Well

 

The former “Paper of Record,” the New York Times which enthusiastically endorsed virtually every feature of the greatest scam ever to be foisted on Americans and America’s health care system, is just as enthusiastically touting the glories of Obamacare death panels, the morbid process of  convincing our sickest and most elderly citizens that they are better off dead and shuffling off to the Great Beyond than draining any more of our precious resources.

And, preferably, shuffling off ASAP!

The Times, like other liberal-leftist proponents of President Barack Hussein Obama’s scheme to socialize America’s medical care and treatment in emulation of the UK’s failed, bankrupt National Health Service with all the attendant NHS documented horrors, didn’t see fit to mention those horrors nor did it mention the Times‘ oft-repeated denials that death panels were an integral facet of Obamacare.

After all, why confuse doltish Americans with ugly truths?

Besides, the 2008 GOP vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, had raised a huge stink over Obamacare’s provisions for death panels and was roundly lambasted for her ignorance, so why give her credibility for being absolutely right?

To be sure, the Times‘ article published on Saturday, “Coverage for End-of-Life Talks Gaining Ground” by Pam Belluck, does not describe those conversations between doctors and patients now reimbursed by many Medicare and Medicaid plans as death panels.  

Nor does it attribute the ground-gaining to pressures from Obamacare administrators on doctors and medical facilities to curtail and/or radically increase charges for everything from annual breast exams to prescriptions.

Instead, Belluck credits the avid Obamacare supporter the American Medical Association and cost-conscious insurance companies for agitating in favor of death panels, now deviously and euphemistically called “advanced care planning” since the term “death panels” is so very unsettling and misleading.

Belluck anecdotally cites the sentiments of 80 year old Mary Pat Penell who allegedly told her doctor during her end-of-life discussion, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38820.)