One that I missed and would like to share with you

I managed to miss Sheldon G. Adelson’s pre-election op-ed piece in the WSJ about the sea change in Democrat party values, but it’s never too late to read a good editorial.  This opinion piece couldn’t change the election’s outcome, but I think it’s still worth reading, especially if all of us are committed to changing one Progressive/Democrat mind before the next election.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • PaulScott

    OK, if you want to try and convert one progressive Dem by the next election, I guess two can play this game. The following is an essay by someone who should be your demographic. Fits it to a T. He wrote a classic wake up call for your side that, should you decide to ignore, will only give us 8 more years beyond Obama’s administration. You probably won’t like the next team we run against you either, so maybe you should read this and take it to heart.

    Letter to a future Republican strategist regarding white people
    NOVEMBER 9, 2012


    To whom it may concern regarding the United States federal elections of 2014, 2016 and beyond:
    Allow me to introduce myself to you, the existing (or aspiring!) strategist for the Republican Party. My name is Eric Arnold Garland and I am a White Man. Boy, am I ever – you need sunglasses just to look at my photo!
    If I read the news correctly, I fit a profile that is of extreme importance to the GOP, as I embody the archetype that fits your narrative of Real Americans. Just how much should my profile interest you? Are you sitting down?

    My family lineage goes back to the MAYFLOWER, BOAT ONE!!! (Garland family of New England-> John Adams -> Howard Alden -> Plymouth colony ->KINGS OF MUTHAF***IN’ ENGLAND)
    I am a heterosexual, married to the super Caucasian mother of my two beautiful children who are, inexplicably, EVEN WHITER THAN I AM.
    I am college educated (Master’s degree!) and affluent.
    I am a job creator and small businessman.
    We pay a lot of taxes! Every year!
    I grew up in a rural area and despise laziness!
    Having started my own business, I have complained at length about the insanity of federal, state and local bureaucracy – and its deleterious impact on the innovative small businessman.
    I currently live in the suburbs in a historically Red state.

    HOLY WHITE PEOPLE, BATMAN!!! Wow, you’re thinking – this is not some Mexirican in the Sun Belt we need to attract via harsh anti-Castro policies or appeals to “valores de familia” – this is the BREAD AND BUTTER OF THE GRAND OLD PARTY, a Mayflower-descended small business owner, burdened by taxation, looking out for his beautiful White family in the suburbs of a city (St Louis) surrounded by racial tension and urban blight!
    How can I put this gently? My wife and I are not sensitive to your messaging, nor did we vote for the candidates you proposed for us this past Tuesday. 
    B-b-but, what? Aren’t we investors, hard-workin’ white folk surrounded by same in a manicured cul-de-sac, scared by a vision of economic collapse amidst the takers in a land of fewer givers? Didn’t Mitt Romney’s strong family, wealth, leadership history and chiseled chin give us the uncontrollable urge to high-five him into the White House?
    May I explain why not, purely for your education, such that you might be interested in winning an election on the national level at some point in the future? It bears pointing out that I should be your Low Hanging Fruit, the easy vote to get as opposed to, say, African-Americans, Latinos, or Asians – and you’re not even speaking well to me. The reasons why ought to concern you deeply.
    As a Card-Carrying White Male I love expressing my opinion irrespective of whether people care to hear it, so let’s get started.
    Science – One of the reasons my family is affluent is that my wife and I have a collective fifteen years of university education between us. I have a Masters degree in Science and Technology Policy, and my wife is a physician who holds degrees in medicine as well as cell and molecular biology. We are really quite unimpressed with Congressional representatives such as Todd Akin and Paul Broun who actually serve on the House science committee and who believe, respectively, that rape does not cause pregnancy and that evolution and astrophysics are lies straight from Satan’s butt cheeks. These are, sadly, only two of innumerable assaults that the Republican Party has made against hard science – with nothing to say of logic in general. Please understand the unbearable tension this might create between us and your candidates.
    Climate – Within just the past 18 months the following events have come to our attention: a record-breaking drought that sent temperatures over 100 degrees for weeks, killing half the corn in the Midwest and half the TREES on our suburban property – AND – a hurricane that drowned not New Orleans or Tampa or North Carolina but my native state of VERMONT. As an encore, a second hurricane drowned lower Manhattan, New Jersey and Long Island. The shouted views of decrepit mental fossil Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma that this is a fraud perpetrated on the American people by evil, conspiring climate scientists is belied by such events and is looking irresponsible to even the most skeptical.
    Healthcare – My wife and I are quite familiar with America’s healthcare system due to our professions, and having lived abroad extensively, also very aware of comparable systems. Your party’s insistence on declaring the private U.S. healthcare system “the best in the world” fails nearly every factual measure available to any curious mind. We watch our country piss away 60% more expenditures than the next most expensive system (Switzerland) for health outcomes that rival former Soviet bloc nations. On a personal scale, my wife watches poor WORKING people show up in emergency rooms with fourth-stage cancer because they were unable to afford primary care visits. I have watched countless small businesses unable to attract talented workers because of the outrageous and climbing cost of private insurance. And I watch European and Asian businesses outpace American companies because they can attract that talent without asking people to risk bankruptcy and death. That you think this state of affairs is somehow preferable to “Obamacare,” which you compared ludicrously to Trotskyite Russian communism, is a sign of deficient minds unfit to guide health policy in America.
    War – Nations do have to go to war sometimes, but that Iraq thing was pretty bad, to put it mildly. Somebody should have been, I dunno – FIRED for bad performance. Aren’t you the party of good corporate managers or something? This topic could get 10,000 words on its own. Let’s just leave it at: You guys suck at running wars.
    Deficits and debt – Whenever the GOP is out of power, it immediately appeals to the imagination of voters who remember the Lyndon Baines Johnson (!) administration and claim that the Republican alternative is the party of “cutting spending” and “reducing the deficit.” The only problem with your claim is that Republican governments throughout my entire 38 year life (Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43) have failed to cut spending and deficit and debt EVEN ONCE. I hope you understand that your credibility suffers every time you promise one thing for three decades and do the EXACT OPPOSITE. Egads – if you actually were the party of fiscal responsibility – you might win our votes despite your 13th century view of science!
    Gay marriage – As the child of Baby Boomers who got divorced (as was the fashion!) in the 80s and 90s, and for whom 50% of my friends had their homes broken by divorce in the critical years before age 18, I sure am unsympathetic to your caterwauling bullshit that “gays will destroy the sanctity of marriage.” Perhaps if everyone in your generation didn’t take the period of 1978 – 1995 to start surreptitiously banging their neighbors and coworkers, only to abandon their kids because “they just weren’t happy,” I would take your defense of marriage more seriously. The institution of Middle Class suburban marriage was broken by the generation of aging white Baby Boomers who populate what is left of the Republican Party, so your defense is wrongheaded and disingenuous. And moreover, as someone who got called “faggot” about 127 times a day from the years 1985 through 1991 – guess what – I grew up to be pretty good friends with actual homosexuals, whose sexual orientation is usually the least significant thing about them. The Republican perseveration on homosexuals as any sort of threat consigns them to history’s trough of intellectual pig dung.
    That’s quite enough for one essay, wouldn’t you say? Now, given my initial description as a wealthy, hard-working, job creating, heterosexual, married suburban White Male – doesn’t your current platform look woefully insufficient to the task of gaining my vote? This doesn’t even get into the demographic tensions that show that people of my exact profile are going away permanently in America. You can’t even win on what you perceive to be “home field advantage.”
    Uh oh, wait, I can already hear you through the web browser, dismissing all of my above points because THAT GUY WAS NEVER GONNA BE A REPUBLICAN ANYHOW, CUZ HE’S A LIBRUL WHO HATES AMERICA AND…
    All right, let’s do one last point:
    Meanness– Your party is really mean, mocking and demonizing everyone who does not follow you into the pits of hell. You constantly imply – as Mitt Romney did in his “47% speech” – that anybody who disagrees with you does so not by logic or moral conviction, but because they are shiftless, lazy parasites who want “free stuff” from “traditional Americans.” Wow, you guys managed to follow up a stunning electoral defeat with insulting the very people you wish to attract for a majority in the political system! Brilliant! You are losing elections because being angry and defensive and just-plain-mean is more important than being smart and winning elections – and thus you deserve everything happening to you.
    If you want to know exactly where you failed in 2012, and will continue to fail, here it is. Look you assholes, I’m as traditional an American as it gets, and I do not “want free stuff.”  I am a taxpayer, and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. I got my first job – dragging bags of cow manure, horse feed and fertilizer around a farm store – when I was 12. I started my first company when I was 28. I have followed the vast majority of the rules set out for middle class white males (for good and for ill.) And if it weren’t bad enough that your policy positions are a complete clusterfuck for the reasons I lay out in great detail, you manage to follow up the whole exercise with insulting me, my wife, and my friends of every stripe who didn’t vote for your political party – all of whom are hard-working, taxpaying, job creating, law abiding, great AMERICANS of EVERY COLOR AND CREED.
    From this white, Mayflower-descended strategic analyst, allow me to offer you the three strategic options you have before you:
    1. You drastically moderate your platform to harmonize with the policy positions I present above
    2. You disband the party and reorganize it to reflect current realities
    3. You kick and scream and stamp your feet and call me and my friends names – and submit to several decades of one party rule
    While I do not want a one-party system, I also don’t particularly care which of these options you choose. If you look carefully at the numbers on Tuesday, nobody else cares, either.

    Just a word to the wise from one White Man to (presumably) another. 

  • Ron19

    Eric forgot to mention that in all his accomplishments and attitudes, he is the only white man who is not a racist.

  • Mike Devx

    Um, Paul?  Your little Eric is a liberal.  And so are you.  So what?

  • PaulScott

    It’s OK, Mike, I WANT you guys to ignore this. Please run another candidate just like this one. I’m fine with that. And if you want to go further to the right, and ignore all that this fine man wrote about, even better.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I loved the part about we conservatives “suck at running wars”. Yeah…Kennedy and Johnson (Bay of Pigs, Vietnam), Jimmy Carter (Iran), Clinton (Somalia), Obama (Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya/Benghazi). I will give Clinton credit for the Balkans, however.


  • Caped Crusader

    I just looked up the definition of arrogant prick in the Urban Dictionary and believe it or not there was a picture of Paul Scott and “educated” friends with the caption saying, “just ignore them”. These people speak to us as though we were ignorant fools, but I know my wife and myself can better their “education” boasts by many years and have not abandoned common sense and basic arithmetic; and I know this is true of most who comment here on a regular basis.

  • PaulScott

    Being called an arrogant prick by someone who claims to be a “Caped Crusader” is actually funny. I’ve gotten a lot of humor from this crowd of psuedo-intellectuals tromping around with your superior attitudes and mean comments toward anyone who disagrees with you.

    The satisfaction I get from watching you all squirm at the thought of four more years of Obama has been worth the price of reading your nasty comments toward me.

    The fact that the piece I pasted to this thread hasn’t resonated within your community is further proof you haven’t got a clue about the reality you face. I will enjoy reading more mouth breathing, knuckle dragging comments from you for years to come. When Supreme Court replacements come up, and especially as I watch you all bluster about the next fool you run against a Democratic ticket that is on the right side of the issues described in the above essay. Like Romney, we you secretly despised, but touted as your savior, the next hard core right wing zealot will fall just as hard.

    Fun times ahead! 

  • Danny Lemieux

    The mistake you make, PaulScott, is to interpret the election of your president, your party and their/your ideas as a validation of reality.  It is not. I will grant you, though, that it is a validation of the will of the American at this moment in time. So, congratulations: you called it right.

    Juan Peron and his wife were elected and re-elected by Argentinians, even as they took Argentina right down the crapper. What this election did was to confirm that Forrest Gump’s mother was right, “stupid is as stupid does”.

    So, enjoy yourself in your contempt of and mockery for us. Yours is an emotion. However, it should not in any way be confused with “reason” or a proper reflection of reality. Only time and events can prove that.

  • Charles Martel

    Paul, Paul, Paul, my vexatious overwrought boy. Are you always this much of a drama queen?
    I notice that you alternate between sweet reasonableness and even a smidge of humor, then you drop your mask and come at us full-tilt. Goodness, you’ve become this room’s version of The Hulk.
    Another thing I notice—and I find this typical of left-wing sneer artists—is that you try to load us up with other people’s (badly made) arguments, then stand beside them as though you came up with them on your own. But I can understand why you rely on second-hand arguments: Every time you’ve tried to argue on your own, you’ve been thoroughly debunked. Your answer is to either declare unilateral victory or slink off for a few days then return pretending that you’ve de-Hulked and that your last snit didn’t happen.
    But we understand. We are the light and you are the moth.
    PS: How are things in your progressive lily-white beach enclave?

  • PaulScott

    Hey Charlie, things are great here in sunny Santa Monica. I’m selling lots of LEAFs to very happy customers who no longer give their money to the oil companies, no longer pollute the environment and no longer send their money out of the country for foreign oil. We’re all very happy! 

    I’m curious why you would characterize Santa Monica as “progressive lily-white beach enclave”. Progressive, sure, guilty as charged and proud of it, but lily-white? Hardly. Maybe you’ve never been here, but there are lots of people of color. It makes for a fun community.

    The piece I posted is a very well made argument to anyone who is rational and not a mean spirited person.

    And I disagree that my arguments have been thoroughly debunked by the members of this group. Quite the contrary. You all seem to think so, but that’s because pseudo-intellectuals “think” they are much smarter than they really are. 

  • lee

    “Meaness”? We’re the MEANIES? That’s hysterical! After eight years of “Bushitler” comments, a film fantacizing about the assassination of Bush, of snarkiness disparaging conservatives, like “clinging to guns and religion,” of treatment that people like Stacy Dash received, Obama’s latest campaign–and WE’RE  the Party of Mean? I have to wonder if someone who claims we’re “mean” even listened to what their candidate SAID??

  • Charles Martel

    Paul, I’ll take a page from your book: I win. Only an irrational mean-spirited person cannot see that.
    I have to go now. Taking another page from your book, I need to be alone and wallow in my goodness.

  • lee

    Don’t know how to “run a war,” huh? Hmmmmm…. U S casualties in Afghanistan have been significantly HIGHER the past four years than anytime during the preceeding eight. Actully, around 75%  of the US casualties have been since Obama took office. So, in less than half the time almost three times as many troops have been killed under a Democrat Commander -in-Chief.

  • lee

    Healthcare. This is one of the problems with Progressives–they see something problematic, throw a bandaid on it and call it a day. There is not a healthcare problem, there are mnay problems, and Obamacare addressed very few of them, so it is just going to get worse.
     The expense in the US has primarily to do with the costs of litigation. Ever hear of John Edwards? How’d he get so RICH? Doctors have to pay outlandish malpractice premiums, which drive up the costs of seeing a physician. (A Miami Ob-Gyn pays over $300,000 in malpractice premiums, on average.) Litigation costs also drive up the costs of drug discovery and development. A vaccine was developed in the 90’s for a bacteria that infe ted infants and caused diarrhea. in the US, the mortality rate is pretty low;  in the Third World, hundreds of thousands of babies die from this. But during the inital release of the vaccine, someone CLAIMED there was an increase incidence of intussiception among vaccinated infants. A law suit ensued, the pharmaceutical company ya ked the vaccine. It turned out that there was actually a DECREASE statistically in intussuception, though no correlation was shown. And fewer babies in the US died from complications of intussuception than from complications from diarrhea, and there was a reduction im the cases of diarrhea. But the scare went out, and the lawyers went to work. Driving up the costs of drug discovery and development. (And the timeline to bring a drug to market, which also ups the costs.)
    That WHO report that the left love to refernce to show how our healthcare “sucks” rated us FIRST in “responsiveness”–which means from the time a patient sees a doctor, gets diagnosed and gets the appropriate course of treatment. To me, that is the most important thing. What drove our stats done was ratingd of out-of-pocket expenses, and govern,ent spending. We didn’t have some outlandish socialized healthcare (which many countries are rolling back on) so we didn’t rate tol hibh there. We also didn’t rate to high because we do have high out of pocket expenses.Vide supra. The infant mortality numbers are also misleading because we count ALL births, which inflates the number. (The WHO recommends only live births where the infant lives past a certain number of weeks be countd.)

  • Caped Crusader

    Paul, please explain how any country borrowing 40% of every dollar it spends and an ever increasing demand for “entitlements”, and decreasing tax income due to the overburdened economy expects to survive, and how much longer before total collapse and a civil war and a military dictatorship. Please try to be serious and tell us what your long term prognostication is for our country, following the present course you so warmly embrace.

  • lee

    The other area in which US healthcare excelled was five year cancer survival rate. And we beat the pants off the number two country. (Which I can’t recall, but France was number three or four. England was bad.) Me, my idea of good healthcare is that I get seen quickly by a doctor, get treated quickly, and survive, if it is not a terminal illness. The fact that there are few doctors per 1000 in the US (much lower than in France, but then in France, nothing resembling Phycians’ Assistants and Nurse Practitioners were included in the numbers) or that the US spends fewer dollars per 1000 people, (yep, not nearly as high as France) doesn’t too me indicate the QUALITY of US healthcare, it just indicates that we had less socialized healthcare.

    I’ll admit, as will any conservative, that there are some problems with the healthcare and insurance system. But as I said earlier, Obamacare does NOTHING to address those problems–it just adds more and more layers of additional problems that is going to very likely screw up what is EXCELLENT about healthcare in the US.

    CLIMATE–Does “Climategate” ring any sort of bell? The University of East Anglie emails? Indicating that the AGW crowd, including Michael Mann (the so-called “climatologist,” not the TV producer of “Miami Vice”) manupulated data to get the result they wanted. And btw, the record setting drought was in the 1930’s–this summer was nothing in comparison. The 1938 hurricane was far more deadly. The blizzards of 1888–both the Great Blizzard and the Schoolchildren’s Blizzard have been unmatched since. The world gets warm–the Vikings could grow grapes in Greenland; the world gets cool.  BTW, the polar bear population is exploding!

  • PaulScott

    Caped Crusader, I don’t think we can sustain our spending, not even close. Entitlements need to be trimmed, absolutely. We also need to transition to renewable electricity for much of our transportation as fast as possible to stanch the flow of dollars out of our economy for oil. That will also enable us to trim tens of billions from our military expenditures for oil-related endeavors.

    Lee, we spend way too much for end of life care. A good 25% or more of all healthcare is spent in the last year of life, when the end is clearly at hand, and people fearful of death try to extend their lives or their loved one’s lives as long as possible. It’s understandable in some cases to do this, but when you are spending billions for what in essence is a marginal result, then IMO, there is a better use for the money.

    On the climate thing, you can believe whatever you want. Reality is not going to pay you any attention. 

  • Danny Lemieux

    Now I am worried: PaulScott is raising the flag on the end-of-life healthcare costs. Let’s bring into play another great Progressive concept: euthanasia of the elderly. It’s already pro-forma in the Netherlands and the UK. Let’s normalize it here.

    Are you ever planning to get old, PaulScott? Do you have an inside connection with the Obamacare death panel people to get yourself a waiver?

  • Charles Martel

    Danny, the leftist fascination with power, which includes the power of life and death, goes back to the Garden: “Ye shall be as gods.” Thus the near adoration of abortion and the false compassion that calls for the old to be killed.

  • PaulScott

    I love this! Tou guys complain that healthcare costs are too high, but you’re willing to spend 25%+ of the healthcare budget keeping dying people hooked up to all manner of expensive equipment.

    Then, when healthcare for children is underfunded, you say, too bad, not enough money to cover everybody.

    Charlie, I’n not calling “for the old to be killed.” I’m just saying don’t spend $100K keeping someone alive who is unconscious and terminal. Do you really believe that’s a good use of scarce resources?

    And Danny, it’s not euthanasia when they are dying naturally. It’s called “letting nature take it’s course”.

    I own property in Oregon, so when my time comes, if CA hasn’t passed a death with dignity act, I’ll go there to take care of matters. I’ll not waste my hard earned resources trying to stay alive for a few more weeks or months if the pain it too severe or the quality of life isn’t worth it.

    Danny and Charlie, if you are dying, and your family is faced with spending all of their resources keeping you alive for a few more weeks, then you die anyway, is that a good thing for them? They are now broke, your doctors and your hospital made a shit load of money from your dying, and maybe the government kicked in a few tens of thousands, too. Do you think that’s better than just being rational and ending things naturally?


    Car salesman and Margaret Sanger rolled into one happy fella. I wonder if he’s got aging parents or has he determined their care is just to darn expensive. Maybe a young tot with a long-term health issue – it’s not like the poor kid would grow up to be productive and sell more LEAFS.

  • PaulScott

    Sadie, My parents are both dead from smoking related illness, but thanks for asking. 

     So here’s a question, let’s say you have x amount of funds for healthcare. You have lots of old people dying from all manner of diseases and it will take a large percentage of your budget to keep them alive for a few more weeks, and they’ll be in hospitals hooked up to equipment the whole time. The quality of life there is pretty bad, I’ve been hooked up to some of that equipment myself, and it’s no party. The end result is the patient dies, but they were “alive” for a few more weeks. 

    With the money you spent for that one old person for a few weeks of low quality life, many of whom are not even conscious, you could have spent the money saving the lives of 10 children in poor communities who have no access to healthcare other than an emergency room.

    Who do YOU spend the money on?

    By the way, what do you do for a living? 


    Paulscott, end of life decisions are personal ones – they’re tough enough without AHA dictating to those decisions.  No doctor can tell you what amount of time remains with certainty. No one lives forever and no one is in the process of dying forever. Every life has value, the young, the old and even yours. 


  • lee


    Not the best title for this topic–is about science? Or about the jackasses in Washington? Any conservative will admit that there are plenty of idiots–on BOTH sides of the aisles. And way too many crooks. (If “pro” is the opposite of “con,” what’s the opposite of “progress”?) For every Todd Akin, there is a Maxine Waters. There have been crooks–both DEMOCRAT and REPUBLICA–serving on the “ethics” committee, people who don’t know sorghum from corn serving on the agriculture committee… the list can go on and on and on and on. And pleny of HYPOCRITS–again, on BOTH sides of the aisle. (See Henry Waxman.)

    Now if you are really talking science…

    Maybe it is a good idea to have some skeptics on a science committee. One thing that most conservatives value is that there be some skeptical voices. It’s the best check on ramming things through, to hold off for a fresh point of view. Skepticism can be a good thing. Too many idiotic to downright evil things have been wright in the name of “Science.” Let’s hit a topic or too that were considered the cutting edge of “science” in their day:

    Eugenics? Because it was considered “scientific” and a cure for social ills, members of the American Progressive Movement supported eugenics. John Maynard Keynes and Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood) supported eugenics. Cold Spring Harbor Lab started out as the Eugenics Records Office.

    How about lobotomies? Muniz shared the Nobel Prize in Medicine for the “discovery of the therapeutic value of leucotomy in certain psychoses”. Lobotomy.

    And check out Atlantic Monthly’s article on DDT. (And you can’t accuse Atlantic Monthly of being a right-wing rag.) It’s a very interesting article on sme shoddy “science.”

    And of course, last but not least, “climate change.” Vide supra. I may have only had a few undergraduate courses in the sciences, but even in my humanities course we were taught that you don’t manipulate the results to fit your thesis.  In my undergraduate science courses they told us that doing something like that was scientific misconduct. In my other classes, they told us that as academically dishonest and we could expect an F, and possibly getting kicked out of school. Not much happened to Michael Mann or to the crowd at East Anglia.

  • Charles Martel

    Paul, I agree that it is a waste of resources to keep a terminally ill person alive for a few more days or weeks. However, until your beloved Obamacare has completely removed that decision from our hands, it is a private decision for people to make. It’s really none of your business.
    You don’t realize how much you reveal your mindset in your comments here: You really are into power over others.

  • RLaker

    You seem focused on the elderly as a big cost problem for healthcare. Why? Why would someone who’s all for free “reproductive health” care (which as a card-carrying, caring progressive you must be) get so worked up about the cost of elderly care? Do they not deserve to be treated with dignity? Do they not deserve, having worked all their lives, to enjoy their golden years without fear of a horrendous, lonely death? For all you know this is the first time in their lives they have had health problems, and you would deny them on age grounds?
    You also talk about letting nature take its course. Well nature will, I guess, but I can tell you as a UK resident that the Liverpool Care Pathway is all about clearing beds, and nature is most emphatically not allowed to take its course. The elderly are denied food and water – literally! – and thus starve to death. There are families who get around this by sneaking water in to their elderly loved ones (sneaking!), and, lo and behold, some of these elderly people get better, leave the hospital, and live healthy lives. Someone, somewhere, has made the determination in these cases that the elderly person’s life no longer had value. Who on earth has the right to do that?

  • lee

    The biggest costs of of healthcare for the elderly are NOT end of life expenditures, but more to do with the costs of prescription medication, quality of life surgeries (e.g., hip replacement, other joint replacement.) Usually, when an elderly person is diagnosed with a life threatening condition, such as pulmonary fibrosis, as my father was, it mostly involves palliative care, which is still pretty expensive. (vide supra. Medication is EXPENSIVE. Seeing a doctor is EXPENSIVE.) My 79 year old father was NOT eligible for a lung transplant–because of his age. So we already have these decisions being made without Obamacare and its panel. Very rarely are extreme measures extended to elderly patients. Not to say that it is never done, but it is usually discouraged. In some cases, because they may do more harm than good.  

    My mother is 84 years old. She is not particularly healthy, but there is nothing specifically life-threatening wrong with her (thank God!) so there are no extraodrinary measures being taken. But her monthly medications–for high blood pressure, parkinsons, and a whole slew of other things–add up quickly. As does the cost of a physical therapy–between the parkinsons and the spinal stenosis, walking is a problem. None of these things involve being hooked up to equipment, or involve extraordinary measures. They are reasonable quality of life measures. She has a severe hernia,  but because of the potential side effects of what is usually not a terribly complicated surgery, she lives with it. My mother is fairly typical of the elderly population.

    Thank God my mother does not have to deal with Alzheimers. AD is a devastating illness–and extremely expensive to treat. And treatment RARELY involves extraordinary lifesaving measures, and being hooked up to machines, etc., etc., etc., The high costs of health care for AD patients has more to do with the MEDICATION and the costs of AD facilities–providing a decent quality of life to otherwise physically healthy (or more or less physically healthy) seniors, who are too confused and frequently too difficult to “age in place.” (And “too difficult” is NOT a judgment–it is EXTREMELY difficult to take care of AD patients–they can become violent, they are generally confused. Their circadian rhythm is completely off.)

    While most senior who develope cancer will have surgery and chemotherapy or radiation, they are not usually afforded “extraodinary measures.” They don’t get organ transplants. They don’t get experimental treatments. They don’t get the insanely expensive medications that extend life maybe five months. Almost all physicians recommend DNR orders to family members of the elderly in connection to another illness or treatment.

    So don’t think that the increasing costs of healthcare for the elderly are due to “extraordinary” measures taken at the end of life. That is rare. The increasing costs of healthcare have more to do with the costs of medicine, the costs of seeing a doctor or health care professional, the costs of senior care.

  • lee

    I forgot to add that under Obamacare, all of what seniors DO get now, will go away. They will only be eligible for “palliative care.” So, that will save Medicare LOTS of money. I just hope that people like PaulScott are older than me, and have to go through it first.

  • lee

    RLaker–you bring up an excellent point. And I am afraid that is where we are headed. And I am terrified. (Though not as terrified as my mom, who is in her eighties.)

  • Caped Crusader

    Allow me to insert my comment from June, 28, 2011. The is the meaning behind the Progressives constant onslaught and celebration of the culture of death. As abortion at any time and for any reason becomes enshrined and acceptable ever more deeply in our culture, the weak and elderly we be a pushover.  And then the handicapped, mentally retarded, gypsies, homosexuals; and we always have the Jews to blame for anything going wrong. The roots of this are in science and eugenics and Adolph and Mengele were overjoyed to carry this out. Be careful what you set in motion for you may be on the receiving end. We will either be governed by God or man, and if it’s man, the “truth” is whatever science (controlled by government) and government says it is.

    “An honest, intelligent person cannot say that the fetus is entirely separate from the baby or the grandmother.  They are one and the same, just at different developmental stages.  To kill a fetus is to kill an old person.”

    BOOKWORM, As always an excellent piece but the above contains a profound statement that has slipped by even you. For thirty years I have predicted that society would have to find a socially acceptable way to rid itself of an elderly and sick boomer population. This the hidden meaning in Obamacare. The boomer generation has always been a problem and will become more so as they age. Similar to a garden snake trying to swallow and digest a buffalo. There will need to be an old folks home in every neighborhood and immense medical facilities to give proper care. We are already bankrupt so it will be impossible to finance. It is ironic that the generation so supportive of taking life will now get to partake of it as they are denied medical treatment  in what will be a “socially acceptable” explanation that they are no longer useful. Thought I would die before it happened but since I’m now 77 all I can advise is STAY HEALTHY and don’t expect anything good from Uncle Sam who no longer has deep pockets.

  • Danny Lemieux

    It is no coincidence that Hitler’s “bible” for the Holocaust was a book written by an American Progressive.

    Same thugs, different gang colors. 

  • Charles Martel

    Tut, tut, Danny. Need I remind you that Hitler was a right winger who would have been at home demonstrating for lower taxes, meat eating, and capitalism right along with the Tea Party?

  • Danny Lemieux

    Not to mention small, decentralized government, Hammer! 

  • PaulScott

    Give me a break. This is where you guys fall apart. You take a perfectly logical explanation of lack of resources to do everything possible to prolong a life that is naturally ending and you make into some monstrous eugenics thing out of Hitler’s Germany.

    No such thing is being discussed here. I’ve asked a few times how you expect to pay for everything, yet none of you have offered an inkling of how to pay for our healthcare. There are thousands of kids dying every year for lack of healthcare. Kids! They haven’t had a chance to live yet. We don’t know if they’ll become great people who will do good things for society and we will never know because we don’t have the resources for them and the people who are at the end of their lives, many of whom want to die, but because of religious objections, they can’t take their own lives in a controlled manner and at a time of their choosing. 

    You guys seem to want to prevent doctor assisted suicide. Sure seems at odds with your freedom at all costs mantra.

    Again, HOW DO YOU PAY FOR EVERYTHING? Do you even have a plan? You sure are silent on this question. Why? 

  • Mike Devx

    Charles M said to Paul Scott: I notice that you alternate between sweet reasonableness and even a smidge of humor, then you drop your mask and come at us full-tilt. 

    Thank you, Charles, and you know of course that I agree.  I have plenty of liberal acquaintances and relatives I can debate without having to deal with Mr. Scott’s duplicitousness in his approach to us here.

    Take a look at Mr. Scott in #7:

    The satisfaction I get from watching you all squirm at the thought of four more years of Obama has been worth the price of reading your nasty comments toward me.  The fact that the piece I pasted to this thread hasn’t resonated within your community is further proof you haven’t got a clue about the reality you face. I will enjoy reading more mouth breathing, knuckle dragging comments from you for years to come. 

     I don’t treat the liberals I know the way Paul Scott enjoys treating us, and in a conservative commentary area no less.   He will call us mouth-breathing, kuckle-draggers… and then expect us to pay attention to even one word of what he has to say?  Not me.

    I’ve no interest in debating him.  I don’t know why anyone does.  I consider him low class and entirely not worth my time.

  • Charles Martel

    Mike, we’re not debating him. It’s not our fault that he just can’t see how badly he’s being punked.

  • Mike Devx

    I would like to throw in a comment concerning the “letter” from Eric Garland that Mr. Scott gave us.  I do like myself a good rant, I must say, and we have some good ranters here.  At a few spots, that letter was actually a good rant.

    I had a hard time seeing it, because I had to wade through all that “White Male” this and “White Male” that sly race-baiting, which was an immense turn-off.

    But there were a few good nuggets.  I take Eric at his word, that he is a hard-working American who grew up on hard work and believes in the virtues of hard work.  Maybe I can take him at his word that he is REALLY pissed off about being lumped in with the grifters and the moochers – who do exist.  But the vast majority of the rant is just a liberal sounding off on why he hates conservatism.

    I will say this: The Democrat Party, especially that wing of the party owned currently by Barack Obama – doesn’t appear to have much use for a hard-working guy who values and sees the benefit of hard work.  Maybe that’s why Eric is so royally pissed off:  He hates the GOP and hates conservatives, but he’s devalued by his own party, too.  He has no home.

  • Charles Martel

    I’m not as sure of Eric’s pedigree as you are, Mike. His rant reads as though it were written by leftist who almost gets the conservative mindset, but in the end succumbs to the shibboleths the left holds about us. The tell is the all-too-easy shift into “progressive” talking points once he thinks he’s proven his bona fides.
    Think of Axis Sally or Tokyo Rose—they came close, but couldn’t quite cigar it when it came to getting the tone just right. Whoever manufactured Eric’s rant gets a C+ from me.


    “HOW DO YOU PAY FOR EVERYTHING? Do you even have a plan?”

    Wonder when I first heard that question and who asked it? 

    Speaking of “sea changes”…. anyone notice that Benghazi has more red herrings than a fish market.       


  • Danny Lemieux

    I like the part about “thousands” of kids dying in a America because they lack healthcare.

    That’s right up there with: “millions of specie”billions and billions of…”, “hundreds of thousands of deaths from coat-hanger abortions before Roe v. Wade” and “Romney is an ax murderer”. Whatever.

  • Danny Lemieux

    Oh, forgot one more: “Music Man” Barack Hussein Obama’s mother died because she had no health insurance”. 

  • Charles Martel

    Danny, every day I walk down streets littered with waifs who hold out their withered hands, feebly imploring me for a tongue depressor, or a tab of aspirin, or a tooth pick. Some of them, victimized by carbohydrate-heavy diets, are a mere 3 or 4 years away from starvation. Thank God for the emergency rooms! And the public schools! And the social service agencies! Without them these children would be dying by the thousands in Santa Monica, and Berkeley, and Madison, and Ann Arbor, and Staten Island.
    Ooops, didn’t mean to mention Staten island. Everybody knows that blue-collar white children live pretty high on the hog. Let the little fascist racists suffer.

  • Mike Devx

    Charles: Whoever manufactured Eric’s rant gets a C+ from me.

    I wouldn’t even give it a C+, Charles.  I caught a “few good nuggets” amidst the dross is all.  And yes, the vast majority of it was just liberal shibboleths, but at high volume and with energy.  And as far as rants go, you can’t divide a rant into sections.   That loses significant style points, because it ranting is an art form, and you must not impose structure upon a rant.

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Getting outside of the bubble: taking liberal arguments seriously()

  • PaulScott

    That’s because you don’t have answers to my questions! What a chickeshit way to get out of answering the questions! 
    It’s bad enough you’re the kind of person you are, but to be a coward on top of it really pisses me off. Either tell me how you’ll pay for everybody, or admit you don’t have the answer. You “freak out” saying I’m going to kill all the old folks, then when I suggest you come up with an answer as to how we can pay for the people who don’t have health care, you go silent. 
    You’re all cowards. Snively, pseudo-intellects who just like ganging up on the enemy. You no longer interest me. I got my kicks reading your funny crying like babies act after the election. That was a riot. 
    If we’re all lucky, I’ll stay away from this snake pit. Please don’t try to lure me back in.

  • Charles Martel

    “If we’re all lucky, I’ll stay away from this snake pit. Please don’t try to lure me back in.”
    Luck be a lady tonight!
    Or even a transgender.

  • Ron19

    The sixth rule is: A good tactic is one your people enjoy.

  • Ymarsakar

    The thing about the Left is that even if people refuse to believe my descriptions of their operations, sooner or later a Leftist operative or cannon fodder lets out just a little bit too much and starts stomping on your faces with their fascist boots. Now even if you didn’t want to believe me before, it would take quite a bit of cognitive dissonance + brilliance to be able to ignore that. When the Left wants you to know who is in charge, they will tell you, irregardless of whether people ever believed a single word out of me. They will be shown the truth by a method they cannot gainsay.

  • lee


    I even wrote about the costs of healthcare and while I didn’t specifically address one of the major ways we can rein in costs, I thought it might have been a little obvious since I talked about litigation. The first thing we need to do to rein in healthcare costs is TORT REFORM. Hard to do since the American Trial Lawyers Association fights things like that tooth and claw. (vide aviation tort reform.)

    As I wrote earlier, the costs of malpractice premiums are through the roof. Ob-gyn’s can barely stay afloat (they have among the highest malpractice permiiums, thank you, John Edwards.)

    Allowing interstate purchasing of health insurance would help reduce insurane–and health care costs.

    Oh, and TAXING MEDICAL DEVICES, oh, yeah! THAT is sure to reduce healthcare costs. (Sarcasm!) Taxing medical devices just adds to the costs of health care.

    “Oh, the children! The children!” Thousand of children do die every year. But lack of health insurance isn’t the reason or cause. For those families not covered by Medicaid (because they make to much money), S-CHIP wass passed (now known as CHIP). The State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

    The numbers of uninsured people in this country is fairly small. A large percentage of those are people who risk it because they are young and healthy. There are others who don’t even try to see what may be available out there. (After I graduated, I BOUGHT MY OWN HEALTH INSURANCE through my alumni association. I didn’t whine because no one gave it to me, and because my part-time job didn’t offer any.)

    I did know one person who died of breast cancer who was uninsured. She and her boyfriend weren’t wealthy, but they could have afforded to buy their own health insurance.  Both lived in Marin. Both were independent contractors who ran their own businesses. When I first looked at setting up my own business (which I ultimately did NOT do), I looked at the costs of insurance, from health insurance, to disability insurance, to E&O insurance. Any person setting up their own business should be looking at all of that. This couple was not.

    Sure, there are problems in our current system. Any conservative will admit that. But our approach is to try and address the specific issues, rather than to scrap what really is an EXCELLENT healthcare to base it on socialized medicine. (You think Medicaid and the VA work so great? Well, that’s what’s in store for ALL of us soon!

  • Mike Devx

    A certain liberal commented above that he’s gonna take his ball and go home because we’re not responding to him in the manner he would like.

    I have a comment for him:  Often I leave a post here, posing what I hope are thoughtful questions and comments that I hope to see answers to, that I also hope may cause some insightful discussion.  Many of those posts go completely unanswered.  It doesn’t bother me!  It simply means that my concerns – and the direction of my thoughts – lie in areas that other simply aren’t interested in.  AND THEY HAVE THAT RIGHT!  You know, to simply not be interested.

    Why in world does he get so hot and bothered about not being answered “correctly”.  (They all seem to do this, by the way).  They never understand that other people are busy with their own lives, and have their own way of thinking, and you do NOT GET TO COMPEL THEM to fall into line.  Sheesh.

    I’d also add that if I, a conservative, invaded a liberal commentary blog, there’s no way you’d see me acting the way this arrogant idiot acts around here.  Book wants me to treat him seriously.  I’m sorry, I simply cannot.