Death Panels / Eugenics A-OK when "Conservatives" approve of it

[birther truther tenther]

Brewer on Transplant Cuts: Sad but Necessary

Updated: Friday, 07 Jan 2011, 5:13 PM MST
Published : Friday, 07 Jan 2011, 5:13 PM MST

PHOENIX - "Arizona is in a huge fiscal crisis -- and we have to make some serious difficult cost cutting and we intend to do that," said Governor Jan Brewer Friday, speaking publicly about transplant cuts to Medicaid patients.

It's the first time we've heard from her since doctors in Tucson linked the death of a patient directly to those cuts. Doctors at University Medical Center confirm the cuts definitely played a role in that death.

In October, the state cut funding for certain transplants to help close the state's budget hole. That left about 100 people without coverage.

In November, Mark Price died during chemotherapy treatments. He was waiting for a transplant, but died before he was healthy enough to have one.

Brewer has been taking a lot of heat over the death of another transplant patient, and Friday, she addressed the criticism.

"I said from the beginning of my term that we were going to hit this big cliff and that it was going to be disastrous. And it's heartbreaking. But the fact of the matter is those decisions will have to be made."

She spoke to business leaders at a luncheon in downtown Phoenix. No matter where she goes, she is faced with questions about transplant funding.

"I believe that the media has blown that totally completely out of proportion. It's an unfortunate thing that people have passed away, that the two people that have died, but I do believe that it wasn't because of the funding at this particular time," she says.

Read rest of article here:
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/health/brewer-on-transplant-cuts-1-7-2011


My commentary:

Remember, if allowing sick people to die in the name of "saving taxpayer money", the "conservatives" and "libertarians" will lap it up like dogs, because "the state" is the root of all evil.

Top eugenicist Bill Gates on death panels to save money for teachers' jobs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrJBY2l1MQQ

The real problem for Arizona is Interest on the Debt.  What Brewer needs to do, is instead of cutting Medicaid for the sick and poor, is we need to have a State Bank of Arizona set-up like North Dakota's model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_North_Dakota

This would balance the budget within a couple of fiscal years, and not allow our residents to die in "conservative"-brand death panels.

[Freeski]

How can you claim, from this, that "libertarians" would ever condone such a practice? Nobody values a life more than a "libertarian".

[MonkeyPuppet]

Isn't it just like a fascist sell-out state to cut services to citizens rather than gutting the beast itself of the wasteful bureaucratic overhead that is EVERY F**KING DEPARTMENT of the state's government.  Unfortunately for most of the U.S., it will take several (if not most) states going completely under before the rest wake the hell up.

I don't care about socialized "medicine" or "health" services, but rather those limited functions/responsibilities bequeathed to the governments by the citizens.  If these power-hungry douchebags would stop looting the public trust and stealing from the citizenry for their own personal gain, stop squandering the state's revenue (both legitimate and illegitimate) on gambling schemes like the stock market, and develop a respect for liberty and justice, perhaps this Republic would not be doomed.

F**k "public servants"... all of them.  They are ALL liars, thieves and deserve to be hung without the privilege of a proper knot.

[Freeski]

Isn't it just like a fascist sell-out state to cut services to citizens rather than gutting the beast itself of the wasteful bureaucratic overhead that is EVERY F**KING DEPARTMENT of the state's government.  Unfortunately for most of the U.S., it will take several (if not most) states going completely under before the rest wake the hell up.

I don't care about socialized "medicine" or "health" services, but rather those limited functions/responsibilities bequeathed to the governments by the citizens.  If these power-hungry douchebags would stop looting the public trust and stealing from the citizenry for their own personal gain, stop squandering the state's revenue (both legitimate and illegitimate) on gambling schemes like the stock market, and develop a respect for liberty and justice, perhaps this Republic would not be doomed.

F**k "public servants"... all of them.  They are ALL liars, thieves and deserve to be hung without the privilege of a proper knot.

Splendid!

[birther truther tenther]

How can you claim, from this, that "libertarians" would ever condone such a practice? Nobody values a life more than a "libertarian".

Libertarians I know applauded Brewer on her decision to cut funding for transplants, hence why I posted this article tonight.

I debated them, and claimed that "saving taxpayer money" is a gimmick.  The whole financial system is rotten to the core.  The CAFRs still show a surplus in Arizona, while the budget is off of the deep end.  Now 100 Arizonans on AHCCCS will die in death panel fashion, and the libertarians I know are praising it.

"That's what they get for not having 'private' insurance" was one of my buddy's reply on it.  I rebutted that the working poor can't afford insurance.  AHCCCS is the only choice for some people, especially with the job market in the sh*tter.  A friend of mine's mom runs her own business and she pays $600 a month for private Health Insurance.  If you make $9 an hour, "private" health insurance is out of your league.

If a commie under a toadstool wants the sick to die to save the planet earth, then the Libertarians will get worked up, but if the sick die to "save taxpayer money" then they're all for it.

This is why I support Geolibertarian's version of Libertarianism and not the Reason/CATO/Heritage and even Austrian School version of Libertarianism.

Thus, if I had to pick a label with which to describe myself ideologically, it would be progressive libertarian --  "libertarian" in the sense that I advocate limited government on both personal and economic issues, "progressive" in the sense that I believe efforts to reduce government spending should be directed at programs designed to assist the poor only to the extent that the tax, monetary and regulatory policies that created the apparent need for such programs in the first place are either abolished outright or structurally reformed.

If I were a Congressman, for instance, I would oppose efforts to repeal the minimum wage so long as Congress insisted on taxing wages to death. I would oppose cutting Medicare spending so long as Congress refused to relegalize alternative medicine (including medical marijuana) and revoke overextended drug patents (particularly those granted for "me-too" drugs). I would oppose cutting individual welfare so long as Congress insisted on wasting nearly $100 billion a year on corporate welfare. I would oppose cutting tax-funded job training programs so long as state governments refused to reduce occupational licensing barriers.

The underlying principle of my approach to economic issues in general is crystallized in the following quote:

"Social injustice, therefore, prevails, not on account, nor in spite, of Individualism, but through the absence of Individualism, through the active and passive disregard of equal individual freedom by the State. The removal of social injustice, therefore, is not to be obtained by still further interference with equal individual freedom, and still less by the abolition of individual freedom which Socialism contemplates; it can be obtained only by the removal of all interferences with individual freedom which exceeds that necessary for the maintenance of equal freedom for all.

"This conclusion is not invalidated by the admission that remedial measures involving further restrictions of individual freedoms...may have had beneficial results. For if State limitations of individual and equal freedom have deprived the majority of the people of independence and power to resist capitalistic oppression, as they have done and are still doing, restrictions placed upon the oppressors, otherwise unnecessary, may to some extent alleviate the oppression. Nevertheless, it is clear that such consequential interferences would be unnecessary if, through the removal of the original interferences, the balance of power were restored. At their best, moreover, they are merely attempts to alleviate symptoms without touching the cause of social disease."

-- Max Hirsch, Democracy vs. Socialism, pp. 254-5

[Freeski]

From what I've learned it all comes down to control.

To classify oneself as a libertarian doesn't necessarily mean you "get it". Libertarianism just means live and let let; it's basically what the American Revolutonaries tried to implement. "A republic, mam, if you can keep it". Wise words.