Eugenics: the skeleton that rattles loudest in the left’s closet

Having suffered through a weekend of unbearable news, and watching Santorum start his long ride into obscurity, what could I post about today. In desperation, I somehow stumbled upon History 2 channel mega long program covering the beginnings of our great nation on Sunday. Washington of course, was the central character. After about six hours of it, I did feel somewhat renewed in energy. With all that these early men and women sacrificed, can we not do all that we can? This brings me back to Santorum. While I share most of his personal beliefs, that is what they are. Personal. But unfortunately, he is unable to frame the issues in a positive way. The left will make him look like a Conservative nut case. I do know what he means. If the State had its way, his daughter Bella, would not have received the necessary care that would keep his daughter alive. That is a true fact. So I will give him a shot at support. Here is why.

Please check out the “Complete Lives System” espoused by Rahm Emanuel’s Physcian brother and Berwick to understand how the rationing will occur.  The Obama Rationing Plan- why seniors fears are real,  Read Here. And “ Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources” by Ezekiel Emanuel. Lancet Article. Rahm Emanuel’s brother. You will not sleep well tonight

To follow-up on my premise, I snagged this from “The Guardian”. Just a reminder of what this whole thing really is all about:

Socialism’s one-time interest in eugenics is dismissed as an accident of history. But the truth is far more unpalatable.

Eugenics went into steep decline after 1945. Most recoiled from it once they saw where it led – to the gates of Auschwitz. The infatuation with an idea horribly close to nazism was steadily forgotten. But we need a reckoning with this shaming past. Such a reckoning would focus less on today’s advances in selective embryology, and the ability to screen out genetic diseases, than on the kind of loose talk about the “underclass” that recently enabled the prime minister to speak of “neighbours from hell” and the poor as if the two groups were synonymous.

Progressives face a particular challenge, to cast off a mentality that can too easily regard people as means rather than ends. For in this respect a movement is just like a person: it never entirely escapes its roots.

It is eugenics, the belief that society’s fate rested on its ability to breed more of the strong and fewer of the weak. So-called positive eugenics meant encouraging those of greater intellectual ability and “moral worth” to have more children, while negative eugenics sought to urge, or even force, those deemed inferior to reproduce less often or not at all. The aim was to increase the overall quality of the national herd, multiplying the thoroughbreds and weeding out the runts.

Such talk repels us now, but in the prewar era it was the common sense of the age. Most alarming, many of its leading advocates were found among the luminaries of the Fabian and socialist left, men and women revered to this day. Thus George Bernard Shaw could insist that “the only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man”, even suggesting, in a phrase that chills the blood, that defectives be dealt with by means of a “lethal chamber”. Full Story :Guardian UK

Just in case you missed this:


Kidney Patients told to accept death, forgo Dialysis

A comment is receving a lot of attention on our post: Mark Levin: A Neurosurgeon calls in about death panels.

“I am a nurse in a dialysis unit where we have multiple patients over 65. What we are hearing is any person over 65 years old or diabetic will not “qualify” for dialysis. (dialysis is where a person’s kidneys have failed and they have 3 times a week dialysis to “clean” their blood and remove fluid since that patient doesn’t urinate anymore). This is considered life support yet some of our patients continue to live full lives with full time jobs. We have heard this is what is done in China, Japan and some European countries. We have to stop this death panel”!! Yes Virginia, there are Death Panels. Sarah was right.

From: Kidney Patients being told to accept death and forgo dialysis

As they calmly say:

“It was meant to keep young and middle-aged people alive and productive”.

So of course if you are no longer productive, you are really of no use to the Progressive Society. So here tis a piece from the NY Times including the header.

Asking Kidney Patients to Forgo a Free Lifeline

Kidney specialists are pushing doctors to be more forthright with elderly people who have other serious medical conditions, to tell the patients that even though they are entitled to dialysis, they may want to decline such treatment and enter a hospice instead. In the end, it is always the patient’s choice. But for how much longer?

One idea, promoted by leading specialists, is to change the way doctors refer to the decision to forgo dialysis. Instead of saying that a patient is withdrawing from dialysis or agreeing not to start it, these specialists say the patient has chosen “medical management without dialysis.”“That is the preferred term,” said Nancy Armistead, executive director of the Mid-Atlantic Renal Coalition, a Medicare contractor that collects data and patient grievances.

Of all the terrible chronic diseases, only one —end-stage kidney disease — gets special treatment by the federal government. A law passed by Congress 39 years ago provides nearly free care to almost all patients whose kidneys have failed, regardless of their age or ability to pay.

But the law has had unintended consequences, kidney experts say. It was meant to keep young and middle-aged people alive and productive. Instead, many of the patients who take advantage of the law are old and have other medical problems, often suffering through dialysis as a replacement for their failed kidneys but not living long because the other chronic diseases kill them. Full story: New York Times

We will change the way we pay for health care – not by procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. . . . If we’re wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare,” Obama said

This is what the Progressives have been and are all about.

%d bloggers like this: