HEALTH CARE REFORM COSTS

For months now I've been listening, studying and researching the topic of health care reform. It's actually depressing. The two loudest voices are the two most polar opposites: the status quo side and the government take-over side. Anyone dealing with the system over the last twenty years knows it can be a nightmare: needs not met, overcharges, mistakes (costing over 90,000 lives per year) and the feeling that you are just a piece of meat to those supposed to take care of us. Yet, given all that, I would rather face this than go to Canada, England or France to face their idea of state sponsored and supported health care.

It can't be denied that there needs to be change. Where we look for that change is the question. Is it, as our president believes, only through a massive government take-over of the entire system? All one has to do is read the largest, most comprehensive bill proposed on the the subject by congress--HR3200; the opening line of which starts out quite lofty but ends quir omminously: "to provide affordable, quality health care for all...and for other purposes." It's the "OTHER PURPOSES" that should worry us all. I'm one of the few people I know of who have actually bothered to read through the bill (not a fun or very easy task, trust me). It is rather scary the amount of power the government wants to give itself over my health.

I've worked many years to gain a good job with reasonably good health insurance benefits. HR 3200 allows a government bureaucrat to arbitrarily take it all away. If I choose to change any of my benefits, I WILL be put on the government insurance option. If he or she so chooses, they have the authority to take away my own insurance and replace it with government insurance It's nothing done on my part, it can just be a bureaucrat "deciding what's best for me."

What's even more sad is the fact that private, charity driven hospitals such as Shriners Hospitals for Children, the more than 600 hospitals of the Catholic Health Association or St. Judes Research Hospital will face disastrous new rules and regulations. Let's remember what these places do; they help those--usually the poorest of citizens--who can't help themselves. the Shriners help not only America's children, but go to other countries (usually Mexico and Central America) to treat children. They will even bring them to one of their hospitals in the states, letting them live and go the school at the hospital for months at a time, just so they can help children. New government regulations will curtail and even stop much of this. The same goes for St. Judes and the Catholic hospitals. The CHA also faces another challenge in that the government reform of health care also means ALL hospitals would be forced to perform abortions on demand. for the Catholics this is a stipulation that has brought much angst and concern.

Catholic Bishops have stated that they would have to shut down many, if not all, their hospitals rather than be forced to perform abortions. Many have asked, "why not just sell to another organization who can run the hospital?" It could be that committing a sin or just allowing the committing of a sin are one in the same. So the CHA is in a quandry; having to weigh the help they provide to so many who would otherwise be without help against one of the basic tenets of Catholic social teaching-- that ALL LIFE IS SACRED.

And what's the one thing that ties all of these institutions together? The fact that their only concern is for the welfare and health of those they treat. The don't care about political ties, monetary abilities, immigration status, parental lifestyles or what faith (or lack thereof) you may profess. They actually live up to their ideals of helping mankind. gosh, what a concept.

As far as the Obama administration is concerned, to reform health care to aid the small percentage of people who truly need help, the government has to destroy what does work, what does help and what a hundred million americans have acheived. I guess that's always been the cost of allowing the government to "fix" all our problems.

Where's America going?

So; I watched a four and a half minute video of all sorts of celebrities--the Hollywood types who, due to their grand and cool famousness, know more than us unfamousy types--making pledges: "I pledge to......work harder, be a voice, to meet my neighbors, to sell my obnoxious car and buy a hybrid." Most were like these; just general feel good platitudes, but, they got to the end and I heard: "I pledge to be of service to Barrak Obama," and "I pledge to be a servant to our President." Then the screen slowly pulled back to show a multi-screen of all the celebrities which then pulled back and morphed in to a multi colored iconic image of Obama superimposed over the American flag. The old Soviet Union, Cuba, Iran and North Korea came to mind quite quickly.

I was not a great fan of George Bush (massive government growth. spending in to the stratosphere, "no child left behind," and a war in Iraq that was ill conceived, poorly planned and the wrong place to be at the time) but many other people thought him to be a great President who dealt with terrorism and protected our country. What I didn't see from most of these people was any kind of mindless worship. No man is worthy of that. Yet today we see a president who enjoys the unquestioning adulation of tens of millions, including the majority of the nation's media--you can even go the the NBC site and buy Obama action figures.

While disparaging the exception--Fox news--for actually questioning the policies of this administration, MSNBC has an evening line up of Obama sycophants. First there is Ed Schultz, a typical mean spirited liberal (any who oppose the president are whacko, crazy or right wing zealots). Then you can watch Chris Mathews, a former Democtrat political player who wrangled his own talk show by playing "hardball." after Chris is the great (and he'll tell you this himself) Keith Olberman; without a doubt one of the angriest, most hate-filled ultra liberals on any network--and he has a very creepy obsession with Sarah Palin (kind of like the school yard bully who likes a girl but can't admit it so he bullies her instead). Finally, there is Rachel Maddow; a sarcastic, insulting liberal who puts down any discent from the liberal playbook with marginalizing insults and putdowns. She was one of the first to call the "Tea Party" protestors the "tea baggers," referencing a strange sexual practice. And they attack Fox for being too political? Sheesh!

We have a president who managed to take over a huge portion of the financial structure of this nation, a huge percentage of the auto industry, a monstrously huge share of the energy industry (cap and trade) and now demands a government take over of 16 percent of our GDP in the form of health care reform. He calls for a "civilan security force as large, as powerful, as well trained and as well funded as our military (uh, just who's the enemy big guy) and set up a watch-dog website for people to turn in anyone who may say anything bad about the president and his plans for us all (shades of Wilson and his secret spy network of civilians turning in civilians for speaking out against government policies). With all of this happening at a rapid pace, where are the media who are supposed to be watching a reporting this take over of our society? Panting after their new hero and savior, Obama! Where else.

When I say God help us, I really mean GOD, HELP US!