Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Tue, Feb 4, 2014, at 8:51 PM:
A Brave Doctor Stands Up to Obamacare
Tuesday, 04 Feb 2014 11:05 AM
By David Limbaugh
I don't have a completely satisfactory answer when people ask me what we can do to combat the tyranny we are witnessing in this country, but one brave and principled Texas physician is showing how people can stand up.
Dr. Kristin Held of San Antonio, whom I've befriended on Twitter and grown to deeply admire for her vocal advocacy against Obamacare, has taken the next step in her battle -- our battle.
Last week, she wrote a letter to Aetna insurance company terminating her participation in its program because of unilateral changes she said the company had made to its contract with her.
In her letter, Dr. Held informed Aetna that "Obamacare, the 'law of the land,' contains ever-changing-at-the-whim-of-HHS, politically expedient mandates, rewards, penalties, rules, and regulations with which I cannot rationally or morally treat my patients and run a practice, much less interpret, implement, or comply."
She continued with something that cannot be said often and strongly enough, if for no other reason than President Obama will simply not acknowledge it and callously glosses over it, whether in his self-serving State of the Union speech or in his painfully evasive interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly.
"Millions of Americans," wrote Dr. Held," have lost coverage because of the healthcare law and must now shop on a defective, insecure government website and sign up for more expensive policies through Federal and State exchanges."
Next, she described how she only accidentally found out that the insurance company with which she had enjoyed a contractual relationship for years had changed the contractual terms in the middle of the stream without her knowledge, much less with her consent.
"Only by logging in as a prospective patient," said Dr. Held, "did my office manager and I discover that Aetna was selling plans for which I am a provider -- effectively selling my services without even asking, much less informing me that my services would be sold on such a site, under the auspices of new terms with which I will not comply." Bravo!
She said that "after the fact," she received a "form letter" informing her of the company's "new allowables." She told the company in no uncertain terms that she would not be treated this way.
"I will not sell my services under such terms," she wrote. "While treated as such, patients and doctors are not commodities worthy of such impersonal, inconsiderate, and cavalier treatment. We choose dignity and personal service over disrespect and form letters."
She went on to scold the company for "getting new business offering health insurance plans featuring (her) services with (her) consent under terms which are unacceptable to (her)."
In closing, she wrote, "It saddens me to think of the decreased access to care from actual physicians and the shockingly increased costs Aetna patients will now experience because of your choice to collude with big government rather than collaborate with patients and physicians."
Dr. Held wrote in her blog on Dec. 21, 2013: "Obamacare empowers a few political elites, their operatives, and cronies to do whatever they want to the American people on the false promise of access to 'free', 'quality' 'medical care', aka tyranny-through-medicine. They write and rewrite the deceitfully-passed law for political expediency, power, and money; patients are an afterthought, an annoying impediment to their ultimate goal -- socialized medicine, the keystone in the arch of Socialism . . . Our current Federal government is the antithesis of all that composes American medicine and the sacred patient-doctor relationship."
Dr. Held is exactly right. This law was deceitfully passed, and patients are the last thing Obamacare's designers and supporters are concerned about. In their obsession to continue with this law's implementation, they are obliterating the nation's healthcare system, forcing millions off their plans and apart from their chosen physicians, and then disgracefully pretending it hasn't happened.
They are ensuring that patients will have less access to and fewer choices of care, despite promising more of both, and that their healthcare costs are increasing, despite explicitly guaranteeing cost reductions.
Please don't assume that Dr. Held is exaggerating when she says that the goal of these statists is to impose socialized medicine on America. It's not deniable. They can no longer credibly say they are pushing this system for the reasons they initially claimed, because every one of those has proved to be false -- and they knew it ahead of time.
I watched a debate between Obama's radical friend Bill Ayers and Obama critic Dinesh D'Souza over the greatness of America. Guess which one touted America's greatness and uniqueness? D'Souza, of course, credited America's founding, and Bill Ayers claimed, essentially, that any greatness America possesses comes from its radicals and activists against the government.
Well, let's take a page out of the Ayers-Obama-Alinsky community organizing playbook and, like Dr. Held, exercise our own form of activism to fight the lawless tyranny of the current federal government. Except that when we engage in activism, as it was with Dr. Held, it will be within the law.
God bless Dr. Held for standing up to tyranny and fighting for her patients, her profession, and the unique protections of God-given liberty enshrined in our Constitution.
Replies (47)
Oh my. The liberals go crazy when the see the Limbaugh name. Dome kind of envy thing I guess.
Ok back to the thread. I have doc's in the family and they will not be sending their smart kids to med school and tell their friends to do the same.
Make room for the idiots and slow learners to attend because they will be your docs in 30 years. I'll be long gone by then so all I can say is good luck and enjoy what is left.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Feb 4, 2014, at 9:00 PM
We're all just glad you are more informed and more knowledgeable about medical care and health insurance than a doctor is.
Should change your username to Einstein.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Tue, Feb 4, 2014, at 9:19 PM
I doubt her letter was meant to inform you of anything.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 5:55 AM
"She mixes her outrage at insurance companies with outrage at the PPACA"
The PPACA and the insurance companies are interchangeable, since the exchanges are the marketplace for insurance companies, and we are mandated by the PPACA to buy the insurance companies' products.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 6:44 AM
FFF--Thanks for starting this thread and thanks to Dr. Held for standing up to Aetna. Wish more doctors would do the same. Insurance and medical costs have gotten out of hand. Many can't afford either even under the new "ObominalCare". Lord, help us all!
-- Posted by whoknows? on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 6:56 AM
When any one signs a contract with an insurance company, they should understand it is a unilateral contract.
If the Doctor signed a "preferred provider" contract, she should have known her services would be marketed. Meaning that her name would be advertised on the insurance company's preferred provider list.
In addition, the Doctor should be aware her contractual agreement would be amended to meet legal requirements. With that said, I bet if she read her mail, she was notified by the insurance companies legalese of all contractual changes.
Yes, the letter read like the daily speak out rants from those with too much time on their hands.
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 8:11 AM
"...and they will not be sending their smart kids to med school..."
Possibly they may let their adult children make up their own minds.
But why not? Do they believe that money is the only reason that people that are not "...idiots and slow learners..." go to medical school.
Maybe they should send their "smart kids" to finance school, but may be not be able to come back home to visit. "Keep skunks and bankers at a distance."
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 9:35 AM
correction...
"...but then again, maybe not, if they become "financiers," they might not be able to come back home to visit. "Keep skunks and bankers at a distance."
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 9:39 AM
With a deep sense of sadness, I must inform you that I will no longer serve as a physician for Aetna patients under the terms of our contractual agreement, which you most recently unilaterally changed.
I have been privileged and honored to care for thousands of patients covered by Aetna policies since the 1990's. I have devoted my life to providing the very best, state-of-the-art care to these individuals. We have formed a patient-doctor relationship, which I hope many will chose to continue in spite of my severing ties with Aetna. You see, health insurance has evolved such that insurers and government have inserted themselves smack-dab in the middle of the once sacred patient-doctor relationship. I am called a provider- not a doctor. My patient is now yours- not mine. What I can do as a physician now has strangulating strings and nonsensical numbers attached- to you and government and money-not the best interests of the patients.
The contract was changed without the Doc's consent. That sounds like a civil case against the insurance co. But then again the insurance company was mandated to do so.
Sounds like the typical result of a committee changing a light bulb.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 9:50 AM
"....or in his painfully evasive interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly."
How was that evasive. If he wanted to be "evasive" he wouldn't have agreed to the Fox request.
No coverup at Benghazi and no scandal at the IRS. Pretty clear, but unfortunately, not what Fox wanted to broadcast.
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 10:06 AM
We can all rest easy soon as Professor Dug will give us his unbiased opinion. Any bets on how that will play out?
-- Posted by left turn on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 10:12 AM
The thread is now compete. Common has renewed his fantasy of getting someone to join him in praising Obama. miccheck has jumped in to demonstrate how a proper discussion should be held and Spaniard has demonstrated his superior wit.
Time to move away from the subject and start the school yard match up.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 10:22 AM
"You see, health insurance has evolved such that insurers and government have inserted themselves smack-dab in the middle of the once sacred patient-doctor relationship. I am called a provider- not a doctor. My patient is now yours- not mine. What I can do as a physician now has strangulating strings and nonsensical numbers attached- to you and government and money-not the best interests of the patients."
I cannot see how anybody can not understand the above statement made by the doctor.
If I were writing the insurance company, I don't think I would have wasted so much ink.
The following would have served the purpose.......
You and the government changed our contract.
I cannot live with the changes.
Here is why (see above)
I quit.
Dr xyz
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 10:52 AM
Why would you think that I expect anyone to "join me?"
Anyone that had watched the interview would have heard the President clearly state that there was no coverup and no scandal.
If you choose to believe whatever point O'Reilly was trying to make, that's you decision
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 10:54 AM
"Anyone that had watched the interview would have heard the President clearly state that there was no coverup and no scandal."
Hmmmmm!
I wonder if that was the same President who stated clearly and unequivocally over and over.... If you like you healthcare insurance, you can keep it. Period! And he went on about the doctor etc.. Not exact quotes, but he said it, we all know it and he was proven to be a liar.
Is that the same President Common...... I believe it is. Why would we believe he isn't lying here as well?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:01 AM
"I quit.
Dr xyz"
And she has every right to, what's your point. Do you actually believe that every doctor in the nation feels exactly the same way?
Why could she not keep her former patients if that's what they and she want; unless of course it has nothing to do with treating her loved and loyal patients and everything to do with money.
The more competant doctors will find ways to do both. My geuess is that the conservative Doctor Held is a "whiner."
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:03 AM
If the entire letter was just that part, it would have made sense. Of course, in that was the case, it wouldn't have had anything to do with Obamacare or gotten any national attention...so maybe her true goals are showing.
-- Posted by miccheck on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:05 AM
"You see, health insurance has evolved such that insurers and government have inserted themselves smack-dab in the middle of the once sacred patient-doctor relationship."
The first sentence above, which is from the quote your thought was ok, says it all ("insurers and government"). I think when she said government, it is perfectly clear she was referring to Obamacare.
I think her "true goals" are evident.... take the insurance company and the government out of life and death decisions which should be made by doctors!
Did anybody else not understand that? Well besides Common, Lefty and Ike that is.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:16 AM
'The contract was changed without the Doc's consent. That sounds like a civil case against the insurance co. But then again the insurance company was mandated to do so.'
Insurance contracts are unilateral contracts. Meaning, the insurance company may and will change the terms at any time. Not rocket science folks, insurance contracts have always been unilateral.
I have little doubt the insurance company informed the doctor; she didn't read her mail.
There is no civil case. To suggest so is ludicrous. Most likely, the doctor has the option to terminate the contract at anytime without penalty, when a unilateral change is made.
For a doctor, she sounds quite illiterate in her rant.
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM
Common, I didn't watch O'Rielly's interview, was celebrating Groundhog Day.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:21 AM
" Not rocket science folks, insurance contracts have always been unilateral."
Could be, I don't know. But does that mean the party of the 2nd part is bound to it, until death due us part?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:23 AM
"Is that the same President..."
Of course. The "keep your doctor" benefit was part of the original plan. When it was altered the President should have qualified future statements and he did not. He admitted that mistake and apologized for it.
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:36 AM
But does that mean the party of the 2nd part is bound to it, until death due us part? -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:23 AM
Most likely, the doctor has the option to terminate the contract at anytime without penalty, when a unilateral change is made.-- Posted by constable on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM
The very definition of an unilateral contract answers your question.
1.decided by one party: decided or acted on by only one involved party or nation irrespective of what the others do
2.accounting for one side only: taking into account only one side of a subject
3.binding only one party: binding or at the insistence of only one party to a contract, obligation, or agreement
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:49 AM
:He admitted that mistake and apologized for it.'
Was no mistake, he knew what he was saying was wrong.... it was a LIE!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:00 PM
But does that mean the party of the 2nd part is bound to it, until death due us part?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:23 AM
Most likely, the doctor has the option to terminate the contract at anytime without penalty, when a unilateral change is made.
-- Posted by constable on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM
Huh????
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:01 PM
"Was no mistake..."
I guess you just were not aware that the original plan had doctor choice "grandfathered."
So now you know the facts.
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:12 PM
Common, I can detect the difference between facts and fairy tales. OK??
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:40 PM
Huh????-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:01 PM
For example, if your RV insurance company raises the premiums your coverage, you are not bound to continue the coverage.
If your RV insurance company changes your coverage, you are not bound to continue the coverage.
However, if you pay the premium for an offered coverage, the insurance company is bound to the contractual agreement they offered you in writing.
All amendments (changes) have to be made in writing with a specific number of days notice, which is different for each state, each type of amendment and insurance contract.
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 12:51 PM
Looks like Constable been around a while.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 1:01 PM
"...difference between facts and fairy tales. OK??"
No, not OK. Particularly if you don't understand what was "grandfathered" in the original plan, which is a fact.
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 1:11 PM
But does that mean the party of the 2nd part is bound to it, until death due us part?
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:23 AM
Most likely, the doctor has the option to terminate the contract at anytime without penalty, when a unilateral change is made.
-- Posted by constable on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 11:18 AM
Constable
My HUH had to do with your answer.
I asked the question, if or not the unilateral contract was till death do you part.
Your answer was......
Most likely, then you went on to explain how the doctor could get out of it. Sounded contradictory to me.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 1:15 PM
**Sounded contradictory to me. -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 1:15 PM
That seems to be your problem.
**Looks like Constable been around a while.-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 1:01 PM
Roughly 63 1/2 years.
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:02 PM
Roughly 63 1/2 years.
-- Posted by constable on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:02 PM
I had a social security number when you were still in diapers.
No it isn't a problem with me, your answer was contradictory.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:10 PM
"So have I been regrets!"
I meant as in this board. Hows the RV?
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:16 PM
**"Unilateral means one side can *change* the terms of the contract."
miccheck, True and unilateral also means only one party is held to the terms of the contract. The other party may end at anytime.
After pondering on the Doctor issue, I am going to correct myself. To be a preferred provider, which is what I believe she was, there would be a normal contract with both sides offering consideration and both sides would be held to the agreed upon contractual terms.
When the insurance company changed terms to stay within legal obligation due to law changes; the insurance company would have notified the doctor in writing. Unless legal obligation changes were specifically excluded within the contract, the doctor would have to 'option' to end the contract because of contractual changes.
Unilateral contracts apply to insurance companies and insures.
**I had a social security number when you were still in diapers. -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:10 PM
Which explains the grumpy old geezer persona.
-- Posted by notrump on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 2:52 PM
"Which explains the grumpy old geezer persona."
No, it simply means that I may have a little more knowledge of things than you give me credit for. I can read and comprehend what someone is saying and that is better than a couple of you Leftist posters appear to be capable of.
What you are good at is, when caught in an error or saying something that makes little or no sense, you spin, change the subject, try to make someone else out to be the idiot and show your lack of experience in general.
Yes, I come from a simpler era, but about 30 years or so ago, by necessity I had to learn to deal with the yuppie generation of MBA's who thought they could lie their way out of anything, and when caught at it they did all of what I explained above. I survived... a lot of them I dealt with did not and have been gone so long I barely remember their names. They taught me the number one rule of doing business with them, trust but verify... EVERYTHING. No more doing business on a handshake.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 3:56 PM
"I can read and comprehend what someone is saying..."
And so can others. Some are more willing to read and accept a range of opinions, some read only what they are sure will agree with their preconceived opinions. Some are modest and some are not.
-- Posted by commonsensematters on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:08 PM
Wheels, I'd do business with you on a handshake and we have never met.
I've been burnt enough to kind of trust my gut even though it's not fool proof.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:14 PM
Likewise Old John!
But there aren't many of us out there in the business world any more. The gut is what I go by as well. It serves pretty well.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:26 PM
I've been burnt enough to kind of trust my gut even though it's not fool proof.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:14 PM
I still do 80% on a handshake, but when it is new companies (less than 5 years old) I worry about getting paid. They don't have the same pride about being on time as the older companies I started with. But it will most likely keep them from being old companies.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:32 PM
Regret, I stopped at a construction site up the road and asked the guy if he could haul some chat for me. I never asked how much and he never asked about being paid. After several loads and two days I paid him the reasonable price he presented and then we had the handshake.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 4:57 PM
Old John
I had the same thing when we had a house at the Lake of the Ozarks. The guy said I will deliver it this week. I said I cannot be there to pay you. He said that is OK.
When he brought me the bill, I paid him and asked him, don't you ever get burned on trusting people like this. He said occasionally, but then when they are gone back to the city, I deliver them some more rocks. A little bigger ones though. As in the kind most of us wouldn't have anthing to budge them with. He said they usually call me back and I go pick up my big rocks at an additional charge and collect for both first.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 5:34 PM
Old John & Regrets,
If you are dealing with office jockeys and they have an MBA behind their name, I highly recommend a signed contract or agreement.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 5:36 PM
Foreigners and older people pay on demand but let you have it if they think it wasn't right.
The best are the guys that look like they don't have two nickles to rub together and still drive the 79 ford pickup they bought new.
What I've learned to stay away from:
The people that start griping about the cost before they even hire you for a discretionary job. I leave them alone because they will be a pain in the even if they pay.
The people of modest income that have two brand new cars, a big house, and he's wearing a diamond ring bigger than hers.
The one where the woman has a hen pecked husband. She will be trouble 90% on the time.
I have learned:
The guy that asked right off the bat, "can you get me financed", can't get financed.
.
.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 5:48 PM
I have learned:
The guy that asked right off the bat, "can you get me financed", can't get financed.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 5:48 PM
Regrets,
Add to that the guy who tells you 2 or 3 times while you are talking to him.... "I have the money for the work". He doesn't.
Or the guy who gives you one or two God Bless you Brother Hallelujahs..... bid high enough you won't be bothered with this job. He is going to be trouble.
I have a deep appreciation for a good and/or religious man, but generally those who are too vocal about it are usually neither.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 7:17 PM
Well said brother, Hallelujah!
And common is reading and comprehending with an open mind. :) :)
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 7:22 PM
Just to inform new posters or old ones who may have forgotten......copper wire was invented when Regret and HWWT picked up a penny at the same time.Also, a socialist snow plow just went by my house...will this tyranny ever end?
-- Posted by left turn on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 7:31 PM
I've had a plows going by my house since the bad weather started. We voted to have a special road district that does a good job. Too bad you are too cheap to vote for such a service.
Is your plow socialist because government takes money from us working people to pay for it?
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 5, 2014, at 7:37 PM
Menu
A Brave Doctor Stands Up to Obamacare
Tuesday, 04 Feb 2014 11:05 AM
By David Limbaugh
I don't have a completely satisfactory answer when people ask me what we can do to combat the tyranny we are witnessing in this country, but one brave and principled Texas physician is showing how people can stand up.
Dr. Kristin Held of San Antonio, whom I've befriended on Twitter and grown to deeply admire for her vocal advocacy against Obamacare, has taken the next step in her battle -- our battle.
Last week, she wrote a letter to Aetna insurance company terminating her participation in its program because of unilateral changes she said the company had made to its contract with her.
In her letter, Dr. Held informed Aetna that "Obamacare, the 'law of the land,' contains ever-changing-at-the-whim-of-HHS, politically expedient mandates, rewards, penalties, rules, and regulations with which I cannot rationally or morally treat my patients and run a practice, much less interpret, implement, or comply."
She continued with something that cannot be said often and strongly enough, if for no other reason than President Obama will simply not acknowledge it and callously glosses over it, whether in his self-serving State of the Union speech or in his painfully evasive interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly.
"Millions of Americans," wrote Dr. Held," have lost coverage because of the healthcare law and must now shop on a defective, insecure government website and sign up for more expensive policies through Federal and State exchanges."
Next, she described how she only accidentally found out that the insurance company with which she had enjoyed a contractual relationship for years had changed the contractual terms in the middle of the stream without her knowledge, much less with her consent.
"Only by logging in as a prospective patient," said Dr. Held, "did my office manager and I discover that Aetna was selling plans for which I am a provider -- effectively selling my services without even asking, much less informing me that my services would be sold on such a site, under the auspices of new terms with which I will not comply." Bravo!
She said that "after the fact," she received a "form letter" informing her of the company's "new allowables." She told the company in no uncertain terms that she would not be treated this way.
"I will not sell my services under such terms," she wrote. "While treated as such, patients and doctors are not commodities worthy of such impersonal, inconsiderate, and cavalier treatment. We choose dignity and personal service over disrespect and form letters."
She went on to scold the company for "getting new business offering health insurance plans featuring (her) services with (her) consent under terms which are unacceptable to (her)."
In closing, she wrote, "It saddens me to think of the decreased access to care from actual physicians and the shockingly increased costs Aetna patients will now experience because of your choice to collude with big government rather than collaborate with patients and physicians."
Dr. Held wrote in her blog on Dec. 21, 2013: "Obamacare empowers a few political elites, their operatives, and cronies to do whatever they want to the American people on the false promise of access to 'free', 'quality' 'medical care', aka tyranny-through-medicine. They write and rewrite the deceitfully-passed law for political expediency, power, and money; patients are an afterthought, an annoying impediment to their ultimate goal -- socialized medicine, the keystone in the arch of Socialism . . . Our current Federal government is the antithesis of all that composes American medicine and the sacred patient-doctor relationship."
Dr. Held is exactly right. This law was deceitfully passed, and patients are the last thing Obamacare's designers and supporters are concerned about. In their obsession to continue with this law's implementation, they are obliterating the nation's healthcare system, forcing millions off their plans and apart from their chosen physicians, and then disgracefully pretending it hasn't happened.
They are ensuring that patients will have less access to and fewer choices of care, despite promising more of both, and that their healthcare costs are increasing, despite explicitly guaranteeing cost reductions.
Please don't assume that Dr. Held is exaggerating when she says that the goal of these statists is to impose socialized medicine on America. It's not deniable. They can no longer credibly say they are pushing this system for the reasons they initially claimed, because every one of those has proved to be false -- and they knew it ahead of time.
I watched a debate between Obama's radical friend Bill Ayers and Obama critic Dinesh D'Souza over the greatness of America. Guess which one touted America's greatness and uniqueness? D'Souza, of course, credited America's founding, and Bill Ayers claimed, essentially, that any greatness America possesses comes from its radicals and activists against the government.
Well, let's take a page out of the Ayers-Obama-Alinsky community organizing playbook and, like Dr. Held, exercise our own form of activism to fight the lawless tyranny of the current federal government. Except that when we engage in activism, as it was with Dr. Held, it will be within the law.
God bless Dr. Held for standing up to tyranny and fighting for her patients, her profession, and the unique protections of God-given liberty enshrined in our Constitution.
Replies (47)