Sign of Revolt Against Obama's Hitlerian Health Care "Reforms"

June 15, 2009 (LPAC)—Sunday's New York Times and Washington Post both reflected a growing revolt against the Obama Administration's so-called health care "reform" schemes, as the President himself steps forward to provide details about the killer cuts envisioned by his team of lab-coated murderers.

In a front-page story headlined, "Obama's Spending Plans May Pose Political Risks—Concern Mounts in White House as 2010 Elections Loom," the Post's Scott Wilson wrote, "After enjoying months of towering poll numbers, legislative victories and well-received foreign policy initiatives, the White House has become increasingly concerned that President Obama's spending plans, which would require $9 trillion in government borrowing over the next decade, could become a political liability that defines the 2010 midterm elections." Wilson cited recent Gallup polling data that showed that, while Obama still has a personal approval rating of over 60 percent, less than half approve of his handling of the budget and debt, and his overall ratings on economic policy have plunged in the last month. Even Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, candidly admitted that the Obama budget numbers don't add up, and that claims that savings brought about by the pending health care "reform" will cut the deficit over the next decade, are bogus. "The second five years is where we're on a completely unsustainable course," he said. "People know we have an overall situation here that doesn't add up."

The New York Times coverage zeroed in on the President's health care schemes. Even before Saturday's radio address, in which Obama announced a total of $950 billion in total cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and hospitals, the president of the American Hospital Association, Richard J. Umbdenstock, issued a call to action, to stop the planned Obama cuts. "Payment cuts are not reform," he warned, denouncing the Obama plan, which calls for "blunt cuts that cripple hospitals' ability to do better for their patients. The Times interviewed Dr. Patricia A. Gabow, of the Denver Health and Hospital Authority, which runs a large public hospital, who accused the Obama Administration of pushing a "pretty risky" plan to wipe out the existing safety net. "What about homeless people, the chronically mentally ill, substance abusers and people with low literacy? You think they will be using the federal health insurance exchange to enroll in insurance plans? I don't think so." Kenneth E. Raske, president of the Greater New York Hospital Association, called the Obama plan, announced Saturday, "devastating to hospitals that serve inner-city communities." He noted that none of the plans put forward by the Administration or Congress would provide coverage to illegal immigrants, and that the current hospital subsidies make up for shortfalls in Medicaid payments. "Medicaid woefully underpays for outpatient clinics" and other services, especially in New York State.

While none of these critics drew the precise parallel to the Nazi T-4 euthanasia program of Hitler, the identification of poor and chronically ill segments of the population as targetted for loss of services, comes right up to the water's edge. And so far, neither the White House, nor its Senate point man, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), has issued the legislation. Baucus is expected to publicly release his draft bill, to be co-sponsored by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Ia.), this coming week. Then the fireworks are certain to escalate.