~ Featuring ~
'Medicare for All' Would 
Exacerbate a Leading Cause of Death
by Jordan Candler  
Rosenstein to leave DOJ 
in coming weeks, sources say
by Louis Casiano and Jake Gibson  
{} ~ Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is expected to leave his role in the coming weeks... sources familiar with the matter told Fox News. Rosenstein wants to ensure a smooth transition for incoming Attorney General nominee Bill Barr and plans to transition out of the job in the coming weeks, the sources said. Rosenstein long thought of his role as a two-year position and the two-year mark is coming soon, officials close to the departing attorney general told Fox News. ABC News was the first to report on Rosenstein’s departure. Speculation of Rosenstein’s departure mounted after the firing of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in November. He has, until recently, overseen Special Counsel dirty cop-Robert Mueller’s probe into whether Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election and has been a target of Trump on Twitter...
Democrats Can Fund the World, but Not the Wall
by Brian C. Joondeph
{} ~ There is nothing like a government shutdown to illustrate clearly the priorities of the two opposing sides to the standoff... On one side is President Trump, keeping a campaign promise to build a wall, to keep crime, sex-trafficking, drugs, and terrorism, not to mention the unfunded burden of illegal aliens, out of America.  On the other side are the Democrats, hell-bent on keeping 25 percent of the government closed for business rather than funding border security, a concept they wholeheartedly supported a decade ago. Who's winning and who's losing the battle? If you watch cable news, it's clear that the president is on the ropes, having backed himself into a corner. Reality sings a different tune. How did we get here? Donald Trump, announcing his candidacy for president in June 2015, rode down the escalator at Trump Tower and said, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best." He went on, "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." These were among his first pronouncements that day and have been a constant theme of his rallies and tweets since then – including this tweet from a few days ago...
Can Democrats Explain 
Why The Border Wall Is ‘Immoral?’  
by David Harsanyi  
{} ~ “A wall, in my view, is an immorality. It’s the least effective way to protect the border and the most costly. I can’t think of any reason why anyone would think it’s a good idea... unless this has something to do with something else,” House Speaker Nancy Pulosi recently explained. Many other Democrats — almost all of them, in fact — claim to have, in addition to other reasons, some moral qualm about a border wall. Whether or not the United States needs a wall — or even a pointed, slanted steel fence, for that matter — is a legitimate point of debate. I’m pretty ambivalent about the prospects of a barrier myself, and I oppose any unilateral emergency measures that allow government to more easily take private land to make it happen. But the Democrats’ blanket opposition to any “wall” has a number of logical inconsistencies that expose a different kind of agenda. For one thing, is a wall really the “least” effective way to protect the border? I keep hearing Democrats offering this talking point on cable news without pushback. I’m not sure our factchecking guardians have jumped on this debatable contention, but I suspect there are numerous less effective ways to secure the southern border than putting up a giant partition. No rational person really believes that high vertical structures wouldn’t, to some extent, inhibit the movement of people. It is true, as President Trump has claimed, that Israel’s security fence, erected after a deadly terror campaign against civilians in the early 2000s, has been effective. There was an immediate and precipitous drop in terror attacks inside Israel. And, as The New Yorker recently reported, “a razor-wire electric fence” along the border in Szeged, Hungary was all that was needed to stop refugees from flooding into the country. The European Union was angered that the Hungarians built the wall because it worked...
Yes, Trump Might Be Able 
To Declare An ‘Emergency’ To Build His Wall  
by Adam Mill  
{} ~ Recently, the New York Times treated us to an op-ed explaining, “No, Trump cannot Declare an ‘Emergency’ to Build His Wall.”... The author, Bruce Ackerman, is a professor of law at Yale University, so this might seem like bad news for the president’s plans. Hopefully, if there is a wall, it’s founded on something sturdier than Ackerman’s logic—that if President Trump supports it, it must be wrong. In general, without specific congressional authorization a president cannot order the military to expend funds for a “major” construction project (see here  , here  , and here  ). This is because Congress jealously guards its authorities under Article I of the Constitution to appropriate and authorize expenditures. If the president is allowed to bypass Congress’s power to direct how the money is spent, it undermines Congress’s most important power under the Constitution. You wouldn’t have known that from reading Ackerman’s article, however, which takes an irrelevant detour into the “Posse Comitatus Act,” which prohibits the military from being used to enforce domestic law. This has to do with using soldiers to police American citizens and is completely irrelevant to building a border wall. It’s likely that President Trump is looking at 10 U.S.C. § 284 for authority to build the wall. That allows the Department of Defense to support other agencies of the federal government to counter drug activity and transnational organized crime, using such means as “Construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.”...
Palestinians: While Abbas 
and Hamas were Hurling Insults at Each Other...
by Khaled Abu Toameh
{} ~ It has been another tragic year for Palestinians living in Syria, but the international community, including pro-Palestinian advocacy groups and mainstream media in the West... seem to have missed the misery. The latest reports from Syria reveal that 82 Palestinians have died as a result of brutal torture in prisons run by the Syrian government in 2018. The report states that a total of 556 Palestinians have been tortured to death while being held in various Syrian prisons the past few years. According to the Action Group for Palestinians of Syria (AGPS), a human rights watchdog organization that was established to monitor the situation of Palestinian refugees in war-torn Syria, the real number of the Palestinians tortured to death could be higher: those are just the ones they know about; the Syrian authorities do not provide any details about detainees. In addition, AGPS pointed out, the families of the victims are afraid to announce the deaths of their sons and daughters for fear of being targeted by the Syrian authorities. AGPS says that according to its research, there are at least 1,711 Palestinians being held in Syrian prisons. In September 2018, AGPS reported that Marwan Mustafa Judeh and his brother, Muhieddin, had died under torture while being held in Syrian detention. The two, who are from the Yarmouk refugee camp near Damascus, were arrested by the Syrian authorities in 2013...
'Medicare for All' Would Exacerbate a Leading Cause of Death
by Jordan Candler:  With scumbag/liar-nObamaCare on the cusp of imploding, Democrats are predictably crusading for centralized health care. Leftist members of Congress have their eyes set on “Medicare for All,” a system under which all health care would be managed by the federal government. According to Sen. commie[-Bernie Sanders’s website, “The only long-term solution to America’s health care crisis is a single-payer national health care program.” But as Reason Foundation’s Nicholas DeSimone reminds us, “People assume universal health insurance would equal better health outcomes. This isn’t true.”

The evidence is nauseating. For example, DeSimone notes that in the U.S., heart disease and cancer are ranked number one and two respectively in leading causes of death, each taking well above half a million lives annually. But sitting in third place is something unbeknownst to most people. Sadly, recent research by Johns Hopkins found that medical errors produce a quarter-million deaths each year, although other research suggests 440,000 annual deaths. Yet even these guesstimates could be dwarfed under a Medicare for All scheme. As DeSimone writes:
               Our current health care system is based on a fee-for-service (FFS) reimbursement model that rewards doctors for providing more treatments than necessary because payment is dependent on the quantity, not quality, of care. … Unnecessary tests and treatments have accounted for $200 billion annually and have been found to actually harm patients. That’s because the FFS system is volume-based, not necessarily value-based. Therefore, any increases in the volume of care equal increases in medical errors. … If Medicare for All covered all 325 million Americans — which include the nearly 30 million uninsured Americans and the 41 million more with inadequate health insurance — it would be the most disastrous third-party payer ever, once cost was not a primary factor. Including fatal medical errors and the hundreds of thousands of deaths resulting from longer wait times — already exhibited by VA health care — this could presumably make Medicare for All the single biggest factor to the leading cause of death in the US.
               Clearly, Medicare for All provides no health-care cure, doing nothing is harmful too. That’s why American Enterprise Institute resident fellow James C. Capretta argues, “To Keep Medicare for All at Bay, Offer a Better Alternative.” He rightly observes, “It may not be enough just to be against government-run health care if the public perceives the alternative as inadequate, and, currently, there is widespread agreement that the status quo is inadequate. The provision of medical care remains far too costly. Waste is rampant. Administrative costs are high. The system is fragmented and uncoordinated, the paperwork is maddening, and the quality of care provided to patients is uneven. The persistence of these problems over many years is a major reason why the U.S. has been on a steady march toward greater government control of the health system, even without a full embrace of a nationalized plan.
               Capretta adds: “Opponents of Medicare for All shouldn’t try to defend the dysfunctional status quo. Instead, they should advance reforms that would make the system work better for patients, and bundle them as the alternative to Medicare for All. The last two years have demonstrated how difficult this challenge will be for Republicans.” Indeed it has. However, capitulating is a recipe for even greater disaster. As Capretta concludes, “Making the case for market-driven health care to a skeptical public is a tough assignment, but there is no real alternative to trying. At some the point, if the market is never tried, the public will get fed up with the waste and dysfunction, and Medicare for All will look like the only answer.” Conservatives mustn’t let that happen. Unify, and stay on message.  ~The Patriot Post  

Views: 9


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco


SICK: Leprosy On The Rise In Los Angeles 

Ahh, the joys of open borders and Democrat leadership.

California is not just a public toilet but now there is evidence that leprosy is on the rise in Los Angeles County.

Barack Obama changed US law in 2016 and allowed immigrants with blistering STDs and leprosy to migrate to the US.

Medscape reported:

Leprosy, also known as Hansen’s disease, is rarely seen in the United States, but cases continue to emerge in Los Angeles County, a new report says.

“Hansen’s disease still exists, and we need to educate medical students and physicians,” coauthor Dr. Maria Teresa Ochoa from Keck Medical Center of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, told Reuters Health by email.

Dr. Ochoa and colleagues identified 187 patients with the disease in a review of medical records from their leprosy clinic spanning 1973 to 2018. Most patients were Latino, originating from Mexico, and they experienced a median delay in diagnosis of more than three years, the team reports JAMA Dermatology, online August 7.

Multibacillary leprosy (MB) cases outnumbered paucibacillary leprosy (PB) cases by nearly eight to one (88.6% vs. 11.4%, respectively), and Latino patients were more likely than non-Latino patients to have MB, as were patients from Central or South America (versus other regions).

Most patients (80.7%) received multidrug therapy, and most (92.6%) received antibiotics for more than two years, especially if they had MB.

Only about half of patients (56.7%) had World Health Organization (WHO) grade 0 disability (no signs or symptoms suggestive of leprosy or disability) at the one-year follow-up, whereas 16.0% had grade 1 disability (loss of protective sensation) and 26.2% had grade 2 disability (visible deformity) at the last follow-up.

Among the patients who lost protective sensation, 87.7% (50/57) did not regain it following therapy.

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service