The US Council of People’s Commissars 256
Phyllis Schlafly writes that Obama has appointed 34 czars. There may be more. Some of them are called ‘advisers’ rather than czars, but the difference is hard to discern.
One of them, Van Jones, Green Jobs Czar – who has come under scrutiny due to the intense and exciting efforts of Glenn Beck on Fox – is a Communist, a rabble-rouser (no, it’s not Barack Obama we’re talking about now, we’re still on the subject of Van Jones) a racist, and a ‘Truther’. There are others equally as revolutionary who have apparently slipped easily through any vetting process, or had none, and have moved into the White House. Examples (from Canada Free Press): John Holdren, Science Czar, who has written about the advisability of forced abortions and sterilization; Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar, who has declared in Newspeak that ‘there is no liberty without dependency’; Ezekiel Emanuel, Health Czar, who wants government, once it controls the budget for everybody’s medical treatment, to be sternly thrifty with it for small children and old folk; Mark Lloyd, Communications Diversity Czar, who wants the state to control the media and believes that any discussion of freedom of speech is ‘a distraction’; Carol Browner, Global Warming Czar, who wants world government.
Such as these form a constellation round the President. They constitute his actual as opposed to his official cabinet. To these he listens. Why should he not? He has chosen them himself.
The tax-payer remunerates them.
As we have said before, they should more suitably be named Commissars. They may be intended as the nucleus of the totalitarian government of an American Soviet Union that we suspect is the dream of the supreme community organizer of the United States.
Footnote September 6: News – Van Jones has been forced to resign. Well done, Glenn Beck!
Ezekiel Emanuel 143
‘He who knots a noose might get his neck caught in it.’ – Anon.
Ezekiel Emanuel
(with apologies to Leigh Hunt)
Ezekiel Emanuel, who’s known
As Doctor Death, or Doctor Heart-of-Stone,
Woke to see by moonlight in his room,
Smoking, and writing in The Book of Doom,
The Angel Barry, halo round his head,
Who’d come to note who, this week, should be dead.
And to the Presence in the room he said,
While half asleep, but sitting up in bed:
‘What are you writing, Barry? Speak to me!’
And Barry answered, ‘Checking out, I see
That you’ve established something of a test
To help us heavenly rulers to decide
Who’ll be allowed to live and who must die.
But you yourself are going o’er the hill,
You’re over fifty and you may be ill.
Thing is, are you worth keeping on your toes?
I’m noting who’s been tested, stays or goes.’
The Angel wrote, and vanished. The next night
He came again, with a great awakening light,
And showed the names of those who’d failed the test –
And lo! Emanuel’s name led all the rest!
You’ve had your share, now die 129
The Obama administration believes that if you are too old to play an active part in the community they’re organizing, you should die. To help you do this, you will be denied medical treatment under their ‘health care’ plan, which will necessarily be a rationing plan.
This from Newsmax.com
Discrimination against the elderly when it comes to healthcare is not discrimination — at least not to a key member of the Barack Obama administration.
Ezekiel Emanuel is director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the U.S. National Institutes of Health and an architect of Obama’s healthcare reform plan. He is also the brother of Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s White House chief of staff.
Express Riders, the blog of conservative businessman and philanthropist Foster Friess, reports that Ezekiel Emanuel has written that health services should not be guaranteed to “individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens.”
He also stated, “An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia,” according to Friess’ site.
Friess also points to an equally troubling article co-authored by Emanuel, which appeared in the medical journal The Lancet in January. It read in part: “Unlike allocation [of healthcare] by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination. Every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age.
“Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years.
“Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not.”
Friess asks: “Are these the values we want undergirding our healthcare system?”