Separated at blech
This is really fascinating.
Politico.com is as reliable as a Magic 8-Ball (remember, these were the people who claimed HRH Princess Caroline would get her way and become junior Senator from New York, and if not her, it would be Andrew Cuomo, and they’re also the people who have an editorial directive to repeatedly refer to this as “Obama’s first term”, as if there isn’t even going to be an election in 2012).
But, they are insisting Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius will be the new Health and Human Services Secretary.
We can’t think of a worse choice for this position, unless Obama would pick the ACTUAL Cryptkeeper puppet from HBO’s long-defunct TV scarefest (since Sanjay Gupta from TV is going to be Surgeon General, don’t laugh because that’s probably still an option).
Do you remember Sebelius’ disastrous rebuttal to Bush’s 2008 State of the Union address?
First, there was the fact she inappropriately turned that into an Obama campaign commercial, but she also proved herself to be a lifeless, uninspiring, generally creepy public speaker (whose upper lip and cheeks never move, as if her face was crafted on the cheap by interns at Jim Henson productions).
This is not a person who can bend time, space, and the elements to forge a new way forward for healthcare from deep inside a governmental system that resists this change with every fiber of its being.
Kathleen Sebelius is never going to set the world on fire…or light any fires under the rumps that need lighting to get things done. No matter how many plastic-y fireside chats she holds in her tomb, with her stale Muppet self.
If this really happens, and Sebelius is truly the new Health and Human Services Secretary, it means two things:
(1) Rahm Emanuel made this happen to screw over Howard Dean again, because Rahm Emanuel loves screwing people (0ver, at least)
(2) Democrats are not going to actually pursue substantive reform of healthcare; that was all a bunch of campaign year hooey
If Democrats were serious about healthcare, they’d install a bare knuckles big mouthed brawler at Health and Human Services. Not the Cryptkeeper.
February 9, 2009 at 6:16 am
If I remember correctly, she is also the one who lied about why Kansas didn’t quickly react to the massive tornado damage Kansas suffered a year or so ago. She said it was because George Bush had taken all the equipment needed by the National Guard, and sent it to Iraq. When it came out that she “misspoke” she never corrected her blatant hatchet job on the former President. In her defense, it was said at the time she was just trashing George at the request of Nancy Pelosi. She sounds like a winner. I bet the people in Kansas will be glad to get rid of her.
February 9, 2009 at 6:44 am
Why are you folks complaining? This pick should make you all happy. If I remember, you folks hate John Dean, Rahm Emanuel and Obama, so picking Kathleen Sebelius which you seem not to like either should make you all happy.
February 9, 2009 at 6:59 am
Who is John Dean?
Angels81, if you are going to troll, at least try to get people’s names right. It’s really the absolute least you can do.
February 9, 2009 at 6:46 am
Oh God help us all.Another incompetent koolade drinking Obot.
February 9, 2009 at 7:02 am
Serena, Great comeback. I thought I summed up the view point of most of the posters here.
February 9, 2009 at 7:11 am
Angels81 -
This is your warning. You don’t speak for anyone but yourself. Keep it up and consider yourself blocked. We have had just about all we are going to take from you.
February 9, 2009 at 7:03 am
Hill Buzz- Sorry about the spelling, I haven’t had any coffee yet.
February 9, 2009 at 7:06 am
It’s not that you spelled anything wrong — it’s that you have no idea what you are talking about 95% of the time.
Coffee’s not going to help that, Mary.
February 9, 2009 at 9:13 am
she is terrible, that youtube video was so borring. i remember watching it.
also do people agree with me that Obama is not charismatic or even good at speeches, it talks down to people an is elitist and arrogant. it is the media that said he was charismatic.
February 9, 2009 at 9:40 am
It is irritating that O’s peeps thought she wud be a good running mate. As if to say to HRC supporters – “we know you’re old and can’t see worth a hootie – so vote for this HRC look-a-like.”
February 9, 2009 at 10:04 am
I was never impressed by Obama’s preachy speeches. I was never blown away by his supposedly good looks and sexiness.He just never did any thing for me. He always seemed like an azz kisser who would do or say any thing to get elected.Just a Chicago thug on the make to his next big power position.
The way he let his aides and supporters trash Hillary and Bill and then Palin was enough for me to know that he is a sexist pig who has never done an honest day’s work in his life. He is beyond lazy and will set the record for Presidential vacations.
Sebelius is almost as reprehensible as McKaskill in her throwing the most competent and qualified woman aside for the untested,unvetted popular man.Can you imagine being in a meeting with all three of them.Barf bag over here,now!
February 9, 2009 at 12:03 pm
[...] Meanwhile, the HillBuzz blog has its own take on the possibility, with this headline: “Politico claims The Cryptkeeper’s going to be Health and Human Services Secretary.̶… [...]
February 9, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Not so sure about this one…don’t like seeing women judged based on looks and speech-delivery inadequacies..
As far as Sebelius’s BHO allegiance, now that’s something else!
February 9, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Let us pray that your point #2 does NOT come to fruition, but SCHIP has already gone through in the dark of night (was that another Friday afternoon news dump?).
“(2) Democrats are not going to actually pursue substantive reform of healthcare; that was all a bunch of campaign year hooey”
They are already doing it and there is more to come. With this expanded SCHIP, you do not have to prove you are an American citizen to receive health benefits under it and “children” are considered those less than 30 years old. I think health care is one of Obama’s TOP priorities, in that he wants the government to usurp as much power from the American people as possible. Our country is beyond broke, and here they are granting more entitlements, many of which will go to illegal immigrants.
I was shocked years ago to find out my 80 year old parents needed to purchase private insurance on top of Medicare. Reason: Medicare does not reimburse providers adequately for services rendered.
Once government completely takes over health care, people without insurance now will initially rejoice and it will seem like Christmas has finally come. Then, the government will realize how expensive it is to really allow people to see their doctors on their whims and will impose restrictions and RATION. People will wait and wait and wait for care. And, government will decide who gets care and who doesn’t. Too fat? No diabetes or blood pressure medicine. No joint replacements. Smoke? Why bother supplying supplement oxygen or breathing treatments or consider you for heart surgery, after all, you knew it was bad for your heart, didn’t you? Too old? Why do you need cataract surgery/cancer surgery/etc/etc/etc, you will die in a few years anyways…
I spoke with a colleague who worked in England for a while and he was saying how heartless health care rendered in England can be. He said he was trying to treat an older person with a stroke and another more seasoned person came along and canceled all his tests because it cost too much and there was nothing to do for that person anyways. Just anecdotal, but he had a lot of similar stories. He laughed when I told him socialized medicine was coming to the U.S., thinking it absurd that treatment could be that bad in this country.
People will not be frugal with something that is free. Many of us in health care have seen someone with Medicaid run to the E.R. because of a runny nose that started that morning. Or, come in because they want a prescription for Tylenol because “my medical card will pay for it”. They can do it now, because the private sector picks up the cost of the stupidity of the entitlement abuser AND the government mandates a “medical screening exam” for all comers to an emergency room. That will go away once the government has everyone under THEIR system and their control. Ration, ration, ration.
Plus, the quality of the health care providers will deteriorate as well. Compensation for work will go down. For a physician, who will spend 11 years of their life accruing debt if there will be no way to pay if off at the end of the tunnel?
Sorry this is long but this is my soap box. I just hope I’ll have enough money when I’m older to fly to India for my health care needs… (if the government will allow it…)
February 9, 2009 at 1:26 pm
She is not that bad looking for a woman her age. I wouldn’t mind being Ben to her Mrs. Robinson.
February 9, 2009 at 2:18 pm
…and for the record, I voted for McCain
February 9, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Check out BO’s health care proposal “hidden” in the pork sandwich. It appears Daschel is merely physically removed.
Read it and weep:
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey
Commentary by Betsy McCaughey
Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) — Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.
Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.
Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).
The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.
But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”
Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.
New Penalties
Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)
What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.
The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.
Elderly Hardest Hit
Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.
Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).
The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.
In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.
Hidden Provisions
If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.
The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).
Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”
More Scrutiny Needed
On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.
The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.
(Betsy McCaughey is former lieutenant governor of New York and is an adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. The opinions expressed are her own.)
To contact the writer of this column: Betsy McCaughey at Betsymross@aol.com
Last Updated: February 9, 2009 00:01 EST
February 9, 2009 at 7:53 pm
C Mill, you are spot on! And don’t think it will stop with the elderly. Mentally and physically disabled are at risk as well by being unworthy of the cost.
Wasn’t it the republicans the dems always blamed for wanting to starve old people and deny them their prescription drugs?
This is very serious folks!