Obama's Slow-Genocide Health Care Initiative

August 3, 2009

One of the aspects of Obama's proposed overhaul of our health care system that has not been brought to light has to do with the fundamental reason why he wants the state to decide when to deny health care to seniors, and it has nothing to do with saving money. The reason is much more insidious than that. The President and his agenda-driven leftist cohorts need a way to thin the ranks of a group of voters who are adamantly opposed to his agenda, and the best way to do that is to kill them off over time by denying them the health care that might keep them alive. And the best way to do that is to appoint government agents to "consult" with seniors about end-of-life decisions and, ultimately, to decide who is eligible (or not eligible) to receive life-extending therapy.

And if that sounds like too radical and inhuman an analysis of the situation, we need only uncover the goals of the people who make up Obama's core supporters by looking back at a few of the ways they've found to implement their agenda over time.

Of all the demographic groups in the United States, those over the age of 65 are far and away the most likely to hold the very values - among them self-reliance, faith in a Supreme Being, and love of country - that are anathema to Obama and the radical socialists with whom he has consorted and who have now infiltrated our federal government. Seniors voted by a 53% to 45% margin for John McCain in the 2008 election - they were the only age demographic to favor the Republican candidate - and they are one of the final refuges of common sense and love of freedom in America. Anything the Left can do to reduce their numbers, while making it appear as though they've got seniors' "best interests" at heart, is another step toward their ultimate objective: wiping out opposition to their takeover of this country.

The Left has already made significant strides toward another of their key demographic-focused goals by changing the way younger people see our country and our culture through their (Democrats') educational initiatives. With the schools having been essentially taken over by left-leaning teachers unions and, through a compliant cadre of teachers and administrators inculcating in their students a strong sense of conformity and a diluted, not to say, distorted view of American history, senior citizens, most of whom were fortunate enough to have attended school before the "revolution" in curricula occurred, represent one of the last bastions of support for non-doctrinaire education, and keeping them around longer than necessary represents a very real threat to the takeover that is in progress today.

One can certainly understand that Obama might not harbor good will for his parents and his "white grandmother." He grew up without a father, and his mother was often absent from his life, and it's certain that he has no foundation in his life experience for understanding in his heart, as most of us do, how much loving and supportive parents mean to their children. His answer to Jane Sturm, who asked him at an AARP-sponsored town hall-style meeting about whether the pacemaker that allowed her vigorous 100-year-old mother to extend her life by another five years (and still counting) would have been available to her under Obama's plan demonstrates that. The President's callous response to Ms. Sturm and to the other seniors present: "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking a painkiller."

Ms. Sturm had talked about there possibly being a provision for the "spirit" of the elderly "outside the medical criteria for prolonging life" in assessing what care they would receive, to which the president replied that we "as a culture and as a society" need to make better decisions for ourselves and for our families. Now aside from the obvious point that Obama, like leftists everywhere, sees people collectively and not as individuals, the President, with his singular lack of affect regarding many issues most of us feel deeply about, is the perfect shill for a plan that has as its one of its consequences hastening the deaths of our elders by denying them life-extending health care. So much for "empathy" being an important quality in a President; apparently it's only Supreme Court justices who should base their decisions on this character trait.

The poll numbers give Democrats further reason to worry about seniors' sentiments. A recent Gallup survey shows that by a margin of 36% to 12%, those over 65 say the proposed health care legislation will reduce their access to health care, and 39% of seniors say their health care will worsen under Obama's plan, while only 20% say it will improve. One of the reasons is that by targeting "unnecessary" medical costs and reducing payments to physicians, the new healthcare initiative is likely to drive doctors out of the business of treating senior patients and thus reduce the availability of care to those over 65.

In addition, many seniors are actually reading relevant sections of the health care bill, including pages 425 to 430, the "end-of-life" consultation provisions in the legislation. Neither seniors nor the children so often charged with seeing to their health and comfort during their last years see these provisions as anything more than limiting the options for sustaining their lives. Rather, it's overwhelmingly regarded as "death counseling" designed to rid society of a burdensome segment of the population. That it's also aimed at a group that is overwhelmingly opposed to the President's overarching goals of transforming America into a third-world style, central government-heavy oligarchy is much more than just frosting on the cake of a Democratic Party takeover. It's nothing less than slow genocide, a war of attrition against those most likely to oppose that takeover.