Obamacare or the U.S. health care reform is indicative of socialized medicine applauded by people like Fidel Castro, Lenin, Karl Marx, Hitler and Stalin. by Art Thompson
Communist Dictator Fidel Castro Applauds Obama
Art Thompson, CEO | John Birch Society
29 March 2010
"Cuban Leader applauds US health-care reform bill."
So reads the heading on an Associated Press dispatch highlighting the fact that communist dictator Fidel Castro has applauded Obama for the passage of healthcare legislation.
“We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama’s) government,” Castro wrote. He went on to say that Obama needed to lead on climate change and immigration reform.
It is interesting that this notorious communist dictator would be pleased with the passage of an American piece of legislation. It is no surprise, however, to students of history, since Lenin, the person most responsible for modern communism besides Karl Marx, is widely believed to have said: “Socialized medicine is the keystone in the arch of the socialist state.”
To the average American these statements would seem incredulous. This is especially so in light of statements by those who promoted healthcare reform as a measure that would deliver more freedom for the American people. House Majority Leader Steny (D-MD) said, for example, that healthcare reform will “give patients – not insurance companies – greater control over their healthcare.”
Something doesn’t seem right. If communist leaders have stated what they have about so-called healthcare, and politicos in Washington have told us that Americans will be freer as a result of healthcare legislation, then who is right? Someone is lying.
The sad truth is that totalitarian states have always used healthcare as a means to implement government policy. Lenin did it, Hitler as well.
It is not only the insurance industry that will be placed under government control by socialized medicine. In fact, clinics, hospitals, doctors, nurses, aides and all medical personnel will be placed under the central government's control. More importantly, all of the patients will as well.
While telling us that healthcare is liberation, in reality it is the opposite. If an American will no longer have the freedom of choice over what doctor he sees, where he sees him, and the treatment prescribed, then where is the freedom in that? Only in a totally free enterprise system can a person have the freedom to choose their doctor, their treatment, and where and when the treatment takes place.
A government system, at best, takes this freedom away. At worst, it is used as a method to subjugate — even eliminate — certain sectors of a country’s population.
Lenin used a two-pronged approach to subjugating Russian opposition to a communist dictatorship. He used a so-called war on terror that was actually a government-sponsored terror campaign on the citizens. Secondly, he used a healthcare system to control every citizen while telling them that he was giving them free medical care.
Hitler used the existing German healthcare system to impose the eugenics program he and the Nazis patterned after American eugenicists. Since the doctors and medical personnel received their income from the state, few stood in the way of euthanizing the feeble-minded or aged. It rapidly escalated to the “gene pool,” ultimately ending in killing millions of Germans and others of “inferior race.”
In addition to controlling medical care and personnel, socializing medicine interferes in other sectors of society and we are beginning to see articles and media pieces preparing us for the intrusion of healthcare regulation into these areas. Medical care not only involves our bodies as an isolated entity, it involves what the body eats, the conditions of living the body sustains, and if the body is subject to stress, either physical or mental.
We are already witnessing doctors and social workers working together for the “well being” of patients, especially in the inner cities of our country.
In addition, we have seen major attempts to bring supplements such as vitamins under the control of government. The latest attempt has been a recently withdrawn bill by Sen. John McCain.
It is not a big leap to think that the healthcare bureaucracy that will come out of the Obamacare machine will start to manufacture reasons to be involved in housing, forcing landlords to provide better living conditions for the poor. Coercion in this area is already a part of the medical process in some major cities in treating the poor.
Interference in family affairs with counseling to reduce stress likely will be part of the process. This is likely to occur in the workplace. We should also expect to see Obamacare uniting with the Department of Education to provide medical counseling and treatment in the government schools, then the private institutions as well, using health issues as the pretext. Under such regulations, vaccinations would become mandatory. Birth control, abortion, and a series of other prerogatives that are the right of the parents to decide will begin to fall under the umbrella of central government authority.
Given the breathtaking ramifications for the expansion of power on the back of health care "reform," it becomes easy to see why dictators and demagogues like Lenin, Hitler, Stalin and Castro, among others, love government healthcare. We suspect the socialists who disguise themselves as Democrats and Republicans love it too, otherwise why would they vote for it or put up weak arguments against it? In the recent fight against Obamacare, the Republican leadership never put up arguments that resonated with the people. The bill could have been stopped, but it wasn't.
Healthcare needs to be repealed, as quickly as possible. We have to be wary of those who will profess the desire to repeal simply as a fundraising ploy or to channel people into ineffective repeal programs. One of the most dangerous things that can happen is for well-meaning people to advocate a solution to repealing healthcare that will be more dangerous in the long run, such as by calling for a constitutional convention (con-con) to implement the repeal.
A con-con cannot be limited in scope. There are other arguments against using this as a solution. View our DVD, Beware of Article V for further insight into the problems of calling a con-con.
YouTube - Beware Article V (part 1 of 4)
We simply have to abide by the Constitution. Healthcare is un-constitutional. We do not need an amendment to clarify that fact. Besides, if the Constitution is not being adhered to now, what makes anyone think that Congress or the courts will adhere to a new amendment anymore than they do with the 2nd, 4th, or 5th Amendments now – particularly the 10th?
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/614...applauds-obama
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us