America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

7 Most Disturbing Quotes From Obamacare Architect’s ‘Die At 75′ Article
Profile photo of David Rufful
David Rufful


Screen Shot 2014-09-23 at 11.08.16 AM

Obamacare architect Ezekiel Emanuel shockingly claimed 75 is the optimal age to die in an article at The Atlantic.

Here are the 7 most disturbing quotations:

1. I think this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is a pretty good age to aim to stop.

2. It is not just mental slowing. We literally lose our creativity.

3. Living parents also occupy the role of head of the family. They make it hard for grown children to become the patriarch or matriarch.

4. When parents routinely live to 95, children must caretake into their own retirement. That doesn’t leave them much time on their own—and it is all old age.

5. How do we want to be remembered by our children and grandchildren? … We want to be remembered as independent, not experienced as burdens.

6. But even if we manage not to become burdens to them, our shadowing them until their old age is also a loss. And leaving them—and our grandchildren—with memories framed not by our vivacity but by our frailty is the ultimate tragedy.

7. This means colonoscopies and other cancer-screening tests are out—and before 75. If I were diagnosed with cancer now, at 57, I would probably be treated, unless the prognosis was very poor. But 65 will be my last colonoscopy… After 75, if I develop cancer, I will refuse treatment. Similarly, no cardiac stress test. No pacemaker and certainly no implantable defibrillator. No heart-valve replacement or bypass surgery. If I develop emphysema or some similar disease that involves frequent exacerbations that would, normally, land me in the hospital, I will accept treatment to ameliorate the discomfort caused by the feeling of suffocation, but will refuse to be hauled off… Flu shots are out.

h/t Breitbart


Read more at http://www.youngcons.com/7-most-disturbing-quotes-from-obamacare-architects-die-at-75-article/#hDKrVIZvQ0y2IMV3.99

Mitt Romnet is the architect of Obamacare. When he used the office of Governor of Massachusetts as a stepping stone he left us with it.

Gene... By that logic death panels have existed since Drs have existed.

Every single person in the health care field considers the age and health of a patient when determining treatment. My dad spent a year going to different drs trying to get one to do a hip replacement for my mother (offering cash even). Due to her health they all essentially said no.

Are you saying that in a hypothetical situation, you'd spend an unlimited amount of money (not yours even but in the millions of dollars) to keep someone who's 90 alive exactly 1 more week?

While I don't disagree with you that's completely irrelevant to the argument of "death panels". Hell, sounds like you're advocating death panels at the hospital level.

I think he just really hates the "old person smell"

Are you saying that we always need the police to tell us who committed a crime? Let's be honest here, very seldom doohickey protect us from aggressors, but are only there to write up a report.

Sadly, that's not what has been happening lately.

They already do and you and I both know it. Victims forced to relive what happened to them in court. Even when a perp is caught red handed with multiple witnesses....same dog and pony show with the law giving what seems More protection under the Constitution than the victim and their family members.

Sure there is a dog and pony show. But, ..............





By and large most crime victims are victimized outside the presence of witnesses. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to commit crimes in front of witnesses. The notion of someone being caught "red-handed" is mostly fiction perpetuated by TV.

As a part of the "system" I'm glad people accused of crimes have the rights they do. If my loved one stood accused of a crime I would certainly hope they have the ability to defend themselves. Do we really want to live where we are tossed in jail and presumed to be guilty and have to prove our innocence?

Anthony. Then you tell Me why is it in virtually every community when there is a spike in crime or a run on criminal activity the answer is ALWAYS to hire more LEO's ?? Because they ( Mayor / COP etc. want to instill a False sense of security that the population will now " be safer " but I'm not convinced the cost to taxpayers is worth what they get in return. And it's interesting you say they're not body guards but there to investigate the crime...I thought that's what the Detectives did

Detectives are law enforcement officers. But, detectives don't investigate every case. In fact patrol officers make numerous cases themselves with little or no assistance from detectives. Depends on the case.

Money is power. Increasing ones budget is a way to garner more power. Adding employees is a great way to increase a budget.

Most departments operate on a very simple plan. They have officers who are on patrol. About the only places they actually patrol is small "Mayberry" type towns though. What that really do 12-16 hours a day is go from one call to the next. "Stolen" cell phones, 911 hang ups, "suspicious" persons walking alongside the road, fights, corner dope deals, "beer runs," etc. Detectives get called out on major incidents like rapes, robberies, murders, burglaries, etc....

Law enforcement is really not about safety. It is for the most part a reactionary force called after the fact.

All that being said, law enforcement is at times proactive. But, as a reaction to something that has happened. For instance, suppose a neighborhood has experienced a rash of burglaries or rapes. Then law enforcement with react by stepping up patrols and/or stakeouts in those areas provided they have sufficient resources to do so.

As far as hiring more officers when crime rates go up, is that any more different than a contractor hiring more carpenters when housing sales go up.

It seems you have little regard for law enforcement officers. But, who is going to arrest the thugs?

Respect is earned, not demanded. In all walks of life, there are those who forget this.

The criminal justice system is one big puzzle. You will most certainly hear officers complain of judges that continuously let criminals go. Truth be told, in many, but not all cases the officers were deficient in their presentation to those judges. I've seen this many times first hand. Those same officers will curse defense attorneys for embarrassing them on the witness stand. That being said, I have seen judges rule one way on a particular issue. Then do an about face and overrule their own ruling on the same matter.

I don't really think anyone is being let down. Our system isn't perfect, but no system really is. In some countries, a citizen can be accused of a crime and incarcerated even though there is little evidence to prove such a case.

Recently, there was a case from Iran that gained worldwide attention. A lady was accused of murdering a person who if memory serves me tried to rape her. There was very little evidence against her. But, as we all know women are not afforded nearly as many rights as men in that country. Long story short, she was minutes from execution when her life was spared for the second time. One wonders how many lives she has.

At the end of the day, I prefer our system. The notion that one's freedom can be taken away is one that should always be carefully considered, errors should fall on the side of the accused and only when we are sure without any reasonable doubt should a person be deprived of their liberty. To do so however, means that some guilty parties will walk. But, as with anything there is an opportunity cost.

I'm puzzled by how many folks think nearly everything in this country is effed up yet still claim to think this country is great.

Our legal system has son warts but by god I'm glad we have ours as opposed to virtually any other.

Then again I'm one of those folks that would rather have 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent incarcerated. To accomplish that there will be cases to bitch about.

I'm puzzled by how many folks think nearly everything in this country is effed up yet still claim to think this country is great.

Our legal system has son warts but by god I'm glad we have ours as opposed to virtually any other.

Then again I'm one of those folks that would rather have 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent incarcerated. To accomplish that there will be cases to bitch about.

Let's just say it's " losing " some of its greatness. And I'm not sure I agree with your take on the whole 10 to one scenario, with the friggin appeals process we have it's rare anymore that when it's over that the wrong man / woman went to jail or prison. Unless of course there was some falsifying of evidence going on somewhere.

It puzzling that you've so puzzled. On the other hand, I don't think or judicial system is edged up, though there are surely some effed up people who are a part of said system.