All posts tagged Healthcare

This Vet Learning About Healthcare Globalization

Published September 8, 2011 by glaumland

This is another journal entry from my class on Healthcare Organizations. Just when I though the healthcare industry couldn’t get any bigger or scarier, we looked at it on a global level. We also looked at longevity that week, but I’ll save that for another post. Wow!


Wow! There is a lot of stuff to think about this week. I hardly know where to start. But I think
I’ll start with the articles.

 “How Health Insurance Design Affects Access To Care And Costs By Income In Eleven
Countries” by C. Shoen et al. – I found this a very interesting article,
but probably not for the reason the authors intended. What I found interesting
was the efforts to make ‘science’ out of opinion. It’s really quite easy, and
lots of ‘scientists’ do it all the time.

 Here’s how it works…you ask people how they feel about a subject and then use their
response to come up with statistics (confusing subjective and objective
information). The authors of this study did exactly that. To establish incomes,
respondents were told their country’s median income then asked if they felt
they were about average, much or somewhat above average, or  much or somewhat below average.  In other words, how do you feel about your income compared to the average? The biggest problem with this methodology is that it can introduce bias issues into your study, and although the authors
admit this problem when it comes to estimating medical expenses, they don’t
mention it about income. Ideally, the authors would have given an exact range
(if the median income was $35K, then ask if people make $30-40K (about
average), $15-30K (somewhat below average), $40-70K (somewhat above average),
etc.) That is a number most people have a pretty good idea about and can answer
truthfully, giving better data. (And about the truthful answer part, another
way to introduce bias is when the respondent either answers untruthfully
because they don’t think it is your business what their income is – I’ve done
that before – or they reply with what they think the correct answer is trying
to please the questioner.)

 Anytime you ask people about their ‘experiences’ you are introducing the potential for more
bias in your study. I can say this from personal experience. If a survey was to
catch me during a bad time with one of my health issues, my responses may
revolve around that one episode and not necessarily take all circumstances into
account. When I’m grumpy and hurting, I’m not necessarily the font of wisdom.
Likewise, asking a patient if they are confident they could get ‘the most
effective’ treatment, how are they to know? Is this their opinion or have they
educated themselves to know the different options and what will work for them?
Also, are they speaking of their own experiences or are they considering those
of friends and relatives in their answer?

 There were a couple of other things I didn’t like about this article. First, they really stressed
that low-income people are more likely to suffer more chronic conditions and be
elderly. Whereas I believe that it is the elderly and those with more chronic
conditions who are more likely to have lower incomes. I think that dollars
earned by the elderly during their working years are not worth as much during
their retirement years, thus many of them fall into the low income category.
This is especially true during this economic downturn when nearly everyone’s
financial worth has taken a hit. I also believe that people with chronic
conditions are less able to have an active or productive work-life (this would
include me) and that is why many have low incomes. It comes down to the
‘chicken or egg’ argument, but I don’t believe that having a low income leads
you to be elderly or sickly; that isn’t logical.

 Another statement in this article was that the countries varied in their ability to provide access
to 24 hour healthcare outside of the emergency room. My first reaction was
“so?” Isn’t that the reason for emergency rooms? I don’t see why this
topic was presented as an ‘oh my gosh’ one. It just seems like a no-brainer to

 That’s true of many of their arguments. Maybe I’m naïve (some of my friends tell me that!) or
narrow-minded (some different friends tell me that!) so perhaps I’m just not
open to these studies that push the benefits of healthcare reform. Although I
have to say I didn’t know that was the purpose of the study when I started
reading it. But by the time I started going through their survey results, I had
a pretty good idea what their conclusions would be. I do know I am suspicious –
it comes with age and experience.

 I know that surveys are difficult to do (and especially in different languages and cultures); it
takes a lot of work and careful consideration to do a survey properly. Adding
in a potential for a lot of bias, then covering it with statistics, just leads to
the creation of junk science, and that’s what I think they have here. I can
honestly say I was not as impressed with this report as with the other articles
we read this week where ‘real’ numbers were used. And there I’m exposing my
bias against healthcare reform, as I don’t believe one bill can effectively or
efficiently cure all issues. I think there are some ways in which really good
studies could have been designed (like retrospectively looking at
post-hospitalization surveys). I do agree that you will miss some important
sections of society and some important information, but again, I don’t think
you can design one study to get all answers.


A Vet Looks At Longevity & Euthanasia

Published September 8, 2011 by glaumland

Another subject we covered in my Human Healthcare class was the Longevity Revolution. We all hear about the Baby Boomers getting older, but it is interesting to consider that our healthcare industry is aging, as well. And anytime you focus on longevity, you also have to look at the end of life. Choosing for animals is very different than choosing for people.


OK, enough griping.
Now I’ll focus on some of the topics that I really liked this time and how I
see some of them in my veterinary practice. You know, sometimes my kids are
really impressed by how I seem to know everything (that ‘eyes in the back of my
head’ thing); at other times they roll their eyes because they can’t believe
how ignorant I am. I’m not ‘hip’ or ‘with it’, although I know those terms are
as dated as I am!

I really liked the
information about the aging population and the need for more general
practitioners. (I never really considered about the medical practitioners aging
as a group…hmmm.) I totally agree that there needs to be a move towards
family doctors. For many years the medical industry was gaining so much
specific knowledge and technical abilities, and it seemed like medicine became
very ‘targeted’ – if you had a joint problem, you went to a joint specialist,
etc. Of course, many people still technically had a primary physician, but
often it seemed that they did little but authorize the trip to the specialist.

For instance, I
never took my kids to pediatricians. My children are a part of a family unit
and need to be treated that way. They don’t live in a vacuum. And I think this
is the best example of how human medicine has gotten so off kilter. I’ve been
lucky enough to have found some really good family doctors who take the time to
do thorough histories. (Darned if they don’t leave just about the time I really
get them trained.) Doctors who take the time to listen and ask the right
questions are way ahead in treating the whole patient, not just throwing some
medicine at some symptoms.

In my practice a
good history is a must, especially since my patients can’t talk for themselves.
I think the biggest problem is that doctors have to get so many patients
through a day to make it profitable. Also, I think the culture of medicine
needs to get back to teaching the doctors about how important gathering
background information is. Or maybe just that it needs to be done. When you had
small practices in small areas, the doctors probably already knew most of the
family information about their patients because they were a part of the same
small community. That’s just not likely to happen today.

Another point that I
think was really well made this week was that lifespan does not equal
health-span. Whenever the legislature talks about raising the retirement age, I
consider it an interesting issue to tackle. When you look at the older people
you know, some people are ‘old’ at 65 and some are ‘young’ at 85. How do you
differentiate between those people who really need to slow down in their 60’s
(or even 40’s or 50’s), and those who are active and able into their 70’s and
80’s? I don’t see that there is a way to legislate this problem as it would
need to go person by person and case by case.

Hospice is one of my
favorite parts of the medical industry. My grandmother went into a hospice
house in Topeka after a massive stroke, and it was the best experience ever
(relatively speaking). Everyone I’ve ever talked to who have used hospice homes
have had good things to say about them. I don’t know as much about hospice done
at an individual’s home (I really haven’t heard of any in the last decade
personally), but I would imagine there is a move to get people into the hospice
facilities where there would be better access to staff, equipment, medications
and facilities.

To choose hospice is
to choose the right to die with dignity and comfort. But can the same be said
about euthanasia? As a veterinarian, I can say that euthanasia is one of the
most difficult things that I do. I hate the days when I transform from ‘Dr Glaum’
to ‘Dr Gloom.’ I appreciate being able to end the suffering and pain for the
pet of a family. Since I don’t like the ‘Dr Gloom’ I usually try to push the
animals and the families to put that decision off as long as we can maintain
the quality of life.

Once I have a
terminally ill patient, we have a ‘pet hospice program’ we use that helps the
patients stay comfortable and helps the families know when it is time for
euthanasia. This has been one of the best programs that we have instituted in
the past few years. We have a scoring sheet that looks at different topics
(like movement, hunger, pain) so that the pet owner can evaluate their pet, see
trends, and better communicate with us. If something is trending downwards, we
know that is an area to work on (like installing ramps, changing food types,
adjusting pain meds). Better quality of life (QOL) means that pet and parent
have more time together. And it relieves some of the worry and guilt that they
experience when that time does come.

One of the
non-scored topics I have to deal with though is the burden on the caregiver. I
know how important this is to people on the human side more than even the pet
industry. It is one thing to carry a 10# Poodle outside to go potty, but a very
different thing to move a 100# Labrador around. Sometimes the problem is the
clients can’t afford meds or have ‘people’ family commitments they need to
attend to. We, as veterinarians, have that luxury of being able to say,
“That’s OK, it’s time.” I have seen my parents caring for my
grandparents as they aged, and frankly, I’m scared that when it is time for me
to step into that role I may not be up to it. I hope I can find a way where it
is my responsibility, but not a burden. Time will tell.

The last thing I
wanted to note on euthanasia is what a burden it is to have the power over life
and death. It isn’t easy, at least for me. Perhaps that is because of my belief
that animals are all unique as God’s created creatures; I just don’t know. I do
feel honored to be allowed to be a part of the intimate time when the pet
owners say good-bye to their pets. I try not to cry at the moment, but often
the tears come on the way home. One especially bad period a few years ago, I
lost 12 pets in 9 days; it was a hot August and the little old guys just
couldn’t handle the heat stress on top of everything else.  Anyway (probably TMI), I went into a
depression that lasted for months. The point is, euthanasia is really tough and
I don’t think the human medical industry needs to go to that difficult place. I
think that hospice can fill that need.

A Veterinarian’s Look At Human Healthcare

Published September 8, 2011 by glaumland

I took a class this summer about the Administration of Healthcare Organizations. I wasn’t looking forward to it and was very nervous going into it. But it actually turned out to be a VERY interesting class. With respect to my own health issues, I learned a great deal. I also discovered a lot that I will be able to apply to my practice of veterinary medicine.

Part of what we did in that class was to journal each week about our studies. Since I spent time on my journal and not posting to my blog, I thought I would publish some of my class journals on the blog. I’m not sure it will mean anything to anyone except me, but I hope you find some jewels just like I did. Sorry the formatting is so funky…I’ll try to work on that.


OK, I have to admit
that prior to this first week I was very nervous. The subject of human
healthcare is way outside of my expertise, even though I have been a chronic
consumer. It is interesting to hear healthcare referred to as an industry,
because it makes it seem so large and expansive and over-reaching. As a
veterinarian, I know I’m part of the animal health industry, but my goal is to
peel away all of the layers and bring vet care to a personal level in the exam
room. I think that is why my clients like me. I feel like I spend a lot of time
talking, but my goal is to ask the right questions and find the answers that
the clients often don’t know that they have. Good pet care begins with getting
knowledge and ends with giving knowledge back to the client. I like it when I
get the same kind of personal care from my doctors, so thinking in terms of an
‘industry’ is overwhelming and a little scary.

One of the most
interesting parts of the presentations this week was the John Stossel segment
on Whole Foods and their approach to purchasing services from health
practitioners. It makes a great deal of sense and would seem to be very
effective. But as a doctor, I have to confess I don’t know the prices of
procedures and services that my clinic offers. Size of patient and length of
procedure are just two variables that can affect cost. However, I do have my
staff print off estimates and I will go over them with the client. The other
issue that I have to consider, which I think may also have great relevance to
this topic, is that I have to be careful not to only offer services that I
think my clients can afford. It isn’t my place to make those decisions for
them. Offering plan ‘A’, ‘B’ & ‘C’ can help the client receive services
that benefit the patient and also stay in their budget. We’re seeing more people use Care Credit (a medical credit card) and various
forms of pet insurance. I really do recommend that clients have these tools
available; what many don’t realize is that the cost of veterinary care is
closer to what their own health care should be without medical insurance.

Perhaps that’s why I
don’t think ‘healthcare reform’ is a practical approach to addressing this
issue. Because the industry is so big and changing rapidly, you cannot just
whisk in and make sweeping and effective changes. I think compartmentalization
is the key; break the healthcare industry down into its various sections and
functions and work on them one at a time. I also think another key to efficient
healthcare is to keep the administration as close as possible to the consumer.
Too many layers of bureaucracy create waste and inefficiency. Think of the
restaurant owner who walks through his dining room full of customers; he can
get feedback on their favorite dishes, what they’d like to eat, and what isn’t
working (be it food, staff, environment, etc.). The restaurateur is in a much
better position then to address the important topics to improve his customers’
experiences. Ha, if only it were that easy!

I hate that this
topic has become so partisan and so political. It keeps people from coming up
with good solutions that are practical and efficient. And when things get
stalled out because everyone is so busy hammering away at their point of view,
real opportunities are missed. I’m really bothered by the term ‘equality’, and
I’m hoping to learn more in this class about how it is applied. I do think that
everyone should have equal opportunities for health care (and everything else),
but it is unreasonable to expect equal outcomes. So much can happen on that
journey from A to Z, and I believe that the direction of that journey must be
decided by the individual, not by a third party, and  especially not by a government that can’t
even run itself well. I’m sounding more and more libertarian all of the time.
That is too funny.

I love the fact that
the history of public health was brought up. I love history. Here I wish we had
LESS compartmentalization. It seems that most people think that history is for
historians, but we can/should learn all there is about the background of our
professions, families, and politics. Why repeat someone else’s mistakes. Figure
out what worked and what didn’t. There is a lot of interesting knowledge out
there, much more applicable to today than most people realize. In my public
health area, there are diseases that are emerging much in the same way that
they emerged centuries ago.  I think
there are some basic public health principles (like sanitation and quarantine)
that need to be ‘rediscovered’ as people have become so dependent upon
antibiotics and hospital care.

The REAL Medi-scare You Should Be Worried About

Published May 30, 2011 by glaumland

This is something I’ve been watching and worrying about for a while and I’m glad to see that this topic is finally getting some press. No, it’s not the Mediscare that the Democrats are talking about, but it is something to be concerned about. Very concerned.

There are a myriad of reasons that this would occur, some will blame the economy, red-tape, legislation. In fact, I think that those reasons have added to the medicine shortage. But from my point of view, the biggest problem is that larger drug companies are buying out the smaller companies. The supply of cheaper American-made generics is losing out to the production of brand-name heavily promoted drugs.

Two examples…

First example? Plain old eye lubrication ointment. Nothing special about this stuff – it’s petrolatum that is ophthalmic grade. But in the last six months the price of a little tube had quadrupled. But you can still get it, if it isn’t on backorder. And that’s just the stuff without any medication in it.

The next example – injectable medication for treatment of heartworm positive dogs. The old stuff was economical and effective (an injectable arsenical compound), although treatment could always be dangerous and deadly (you know, the Old Lace kind of poison). But I can say I never lost a patient, thanks to zealous attention to changes in patients’ medical conditions and some luck. Unfortunately, this drug was made by a small company that got bought out by a big drug company (one of those Pharma’s) that had produced a new (and only FDA approved) heartworm treatment. Here’s their MO: buy up the little company, have the EPA declare the factory a hazardous waste site due to the presence of arsenic, and start selling the heck out of your new drug. The problem? There isn’t enough of the new drug manufactured to treat all of the heartworm positive dogs, and you can only get their drug if you can pass their compassionate care guidelines.

Less available and more expensive, and sounds like a giant conflict of interest. I do think that drug companies do need to have a profitable business plan and reap the benefits of years and $$$ put into research (and we only see the successful drugs). But new business plan of getting rid of the small competition is going to bite us all in the rear.

All of those $4 drugs from Walmart are available because Walmart purchases on such a large scale and because they are willing to take a loss to get you inside the store. Good for them, good for you as an individual, but not so good for the drug industry. No Profits + No Protection = No Products.

Many of the generics now are being purchased from overseas suppliers, especially in India and Asia. Although this is good for their economies and global trade, consumer beware! Many of these medications are not what they seem – they can have different quantities of medicine or look different from how they are normally distributed – possibly not being as effective as usual. But worst of all, they can be adulterated, meaning they can have toxins or other compounds present in them that may actually be detrimental to the patient taking the medicine.

With my fibromyalgia I’m on a lot of meds, and I’ve noticed that certain meds seem to act different from bottle to bottle. Is is me? Or is it the meds? I’m starting to wonder…

Don’t be afraid to question your doctor and your pharmacist to make sure you are getting good quality medicines, preferably made in the USA. Your health may depend upon it.

Don’t be afraid to bring this issue up to your representatives…your future health may depend on it. Don’t take my word for it, do your own research.

Until next time…


Baucus Puts The ‘Boob’ In BOOB TAX!

Published October 8, 2009 by glaumland

Senator Max Baucus has become the Democrat’s Champion on “bipartisan” health reform. It isn’t truly bipartisan, but the Democrats are trying to position it that way, as anyone who isn’t for Pelosi’s public option plan would surely support Mr. Baucus. Hah! Baucus’ plan is just another ring act in the healthcare reform circus.

If Senator Baucus gets his way, Class II – VI medical items over $100 will start getting taxed. (His original proposal to tax all medical items got thrown out, after it became known as the TAMPON TAX!)

I looked at a *.pdf organized by Ed Morrissey over at and found out just how many ways we’re gonna be taxed if Max Baucus gets his way…

Smile Tax:  Denture & Braces – whether you are young or old, you’ll have to pay more for a nice smile.

Milk Tax:  Breast Pumps – so much for saving money on formula.

Wheel Chair Tax: Why see the world when you can stay home and watch it on TV?

Lab Tax: getting lab tests will be more expensive with longer waits for results when they start taxing lab equipment & kits.

Oxygen Tax: Yep, they’re gonna tax you to breathe, that is if you want to have a portable O2 machine.

Cancer Tax: Treatment devices for many cancer diagnosis and therapies fall under this tax. (Maybe we can rename it the BOOB TAX: The tax for mammograms and the Boobs who passed the tax!)

Stent Tax: Learn to live with clogged arteries.

Deaf Tax: If you want to hear, you’ll have to pay taxes on those hearing aids and implants.

Implant/Prosthesis Tax: And speaking of implants, new body parts of any kind are gonna cost you. (This, too, could fall under the BOOB tax, as this affects perky parts of any cup size.)

Vision Tax: Contact lenses are on the list.

Heart Tax: This will include pacemaker systems, wires and even batteries!

How You Doin’ Tax: Monitors of all kinds will be taxed.

And finally…

Heart Attack Tax: Don’t plan on surviving a heart attack unless you’ve got your tax money in hand. Emergency Defibrillators and oxygen generators will be taxed as well.

It’s easy to see that the Baucus plan is to tax us on all single-use medical supplies/equipment, like pacemaker batteries and knee replacements. But even on the big ticket items, like hospital equipment that is used over again (endoscopes, IV infusions pumps, anesthetic machines, etc…), medical providers will pass those taxes on to the consumer, and result in even higher costs for care.

Those Democrats who are leading the charge for healthcare reform keep talking about how they want to make healthcare more affordable for everyone. It just doesn’t make sense that we’ll save money by paying more taxes. Only a BOOB would think that would work!

Until next time…

I’m Not A Doctor, But I Play One In The White House

Published September 9, 2009 by glaumland

While I was watching the Presidential address tonight I behaved very much like a mad woman – going from screaming frustration to screaming hysterics. I’m sure if you polled some liberal folks, that’s just what they would expect from us conservative-loonies. Oh well, in some ways it was very cathartic, in other ways, enlightening. (But come to think of it, all cathartics lighten you up in one way or another…hmm…)

We heard lots of the blame game – we’re trying to work with them, but they’re trying to ruin our plans bacause they don’t like me. [Insert a whalloping dose of self-pity, cry a few tears, and please try to help the poor man stack his blocks again!] Oh, and I loved the Obama mantra “we inherited” too.

Sure, tonight was alot of fun, but I’m sorry to say not as much as the press conference back in July. You remember, the one where we didn’t hear Obama take the mike and say, “I’m not a real doctor, but I play one on television.” Because tvland is obviously where he gets most of his medical knowledge. He must have a healthcare czar who sits around watching soap operas on TV (maybe Michelle’s momma?) Because most of the scenarios he has come up with in the past sounded just like plots from those shows.

Keep your mouth closed children, because when Dr’s tell you to say, “Ah!” they’re just looking for an excuse to rip your tonsils out! While other doctors would send you from specialist to specialist running the same tests over and over, Dr Obama will just lay his hands on you and know what ails you (just like he’s done for the country). And Dr Obama doesn’t want the bad doctors to take them tonsils out 3 or 4 times, so he’s just gonna pop you some new pills, cause maybe you just got an allergy or something. But you won’t get the blue pill, because the red one is 50% cheaper. Dr Obama can cure everything!

[An brief interlude of screaming…I had finished my post and the last half disappeared! AARRGGHH! So I’ll try to remember what I wrote, because it’s so interesting I’m sure you won’t want to miss a single word! Not only that, but I got bit by a cat today and my finger is throbbing – I’m going to treat it myself because I’m sure all my doctors would make me have several CT-scans, a colonoscopy and liposuction before they’d just amputate my arm. Although, if I just go to a town-hall meeting in California, maybe some leftie wing-nut job will bite if off for me!]

As someone who has extensive experience with the healthcare system (fibromyalgia, Crohn’s, female problems and a couple babies), I can tell you that Obama is really clueless when it comes to healthcare reform. He shovelled so much BS tonight that the flies in DC should stay happy and warm for quite a while. Maybe we can tax Obama’s carbon emissions to help pay for his healthcare plans. Since it won’t cost our country A SINGLE DIME! (Can’t argue with him there, the dimes will be piled so high we won’t be able to count them.)

OK, so here’s my take on Obama’s points:

1) If Obama’s healthcare reform doesn’t pass, millions of people are going to die or go bankrupt. But don’t believe any of the scary lies that SOME people are telling (he’s talking about you, Sarah!). The majority of Americans showed there support for his plan this summer at the town-halls, except for the fear-mongers who don’t want anything to change.

2) Let’s not forget, he inherited a 3T deficit in January. Sure, the economy is in the tank, but with all of the money he saves on healthcare reform it will pay for itself. Otherwise he’s gonna get out his scalpel and make some cuts, baby. He’s been watching those soap operas and he knows how it’s done. Oh yeah, and everyone that doesn’t agree with his plan can just ‘lend a hand’ or ‘chip in’  or ‘do your part’ – whatever the nice way is to say MORE TAXES.

3) Anyone who has a serious plan about healthcare reform will be listened to. Ummm, except when he’s on vacation, ’cause being the president is sooo cool but sooo much harder than anyone told him. Oh  yeah, and if you interupt his work-out time he gets kinda cranky, so mornings are out, too. Oh, and gosh, he’s got an awfully busy social calendar hosting beer parties, so I guess that leaves out afternoons. Well, just leave your suggestion with They’ll make sure that Obama  the Justice Department the healthcare czar gets it.

4) Obama is just looking out for the little guys trying to compete with the big insurance companies (did he mention how evil they are?). You know, little guys like the, oh, auto industry who are trying to compete on an international level. The same companies that our government spent billions of dollars to bail out, after he inherited a 3Trillion dollar deficit. And I’m not sure if America should be proud or ashamed for being an ‘advanced democracy’ – I think that’s lib-speak for ‘you rich ba****ds’. One of Obama’s ideas to help people get insurance is to let them form co-ops so that they can negotiate with the big, evil, profit-making insurance companies (sshhh…don’t tell anyone that this option already exists…it sounds better when it seems like it’s his idea).

5) And Obama’s gonna REQUIRE EVERYBODY to get health insurance, just like we’re required to get auto insurance. So Cousin Timmy at the IRS is gonna check your returns to see if you can afford insurance. But don’t worry, if you’re a friend of Obama’s and forget to pay your taxes, there’s a special exemption waiting for you so you can have the same great healthcare our legislators have (and you’ll get a czar position to boot!). ‘Cause, without his plan everybody’s gonna die or go bankrupt!

6) Don’t pay attention to any of those bogus claims that we’ll have bureaucratic death panels (Sarah, are you listenin’ darlin’?). You know, just because we’ll have new government panels to decide what treatments are cost effective doesn’t mean we’ll keep you from getting the cheapest alternative treatment available. By golly, if you need a cane, we’ll find you a nice, sturdy stick to lean on. Need that Upper GI Scope AND a Colonoscopy? We’ll use the same scope in both places and that way we’ll save on equipment costs. Naseous? Go ahead and puke, it’s what people have done for centuries…

7) Government run healthcare is going to be so much cheaper than privately-run insurance companies because… wait, it’s coming… there isn’t as much overhead! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!! Obama should really think about doing stand-up comedy. So without the overhead, excessive administration costs, and executive salaries, we’d all be getting a great deal. Gosh, we must be an advanced democracy if our government can avoid all of those problems.

8) If any of Obama’s progressive (that must be the new term for liberal/socialist/fascist) friends or his Republican friends (that’s likely to be a pretty small number, have any legitimate concerns, refer back to #3. He only wants to listen if people are really serious about this. Not like those scary fear-mongers or the evil insurance executives.

9) Don’t forget our dear friend Teddy Kennedy. Let’s all pause for a moment while Joe reaches for his hanky to dab at his eyes. Teddy liked healthy kids, because healthy kids were more fun to party with. It was all about Teddy’s large heart (and hopefully, large feet – because Obama wants everyone to walk in Teddy’s shoes). Frankly, all of Teddy’s family at the address looked pretty shell-shocked. I can’t say I blame them, I’m not sure I’d want to be on display as the pathetic, grief-stricken family for the nation to gawk at.

10) There are people out there who don’t believe that big government can solve every problem we face. If you don’t believe “We’re from the government and we’re here to help,” well then, you’re just un-American. Just ask Nancy. If you don’t believe big government is needed to keep Wallstreet from going crazy, you’re just trying to exploit the little guy. If you don’t believe that socialism is the future of America, you’re just downright mean. And Obama’s gonna throw anyone who doesn’t agree with him under the bus.

 [I was going to mention somewhere about the revelation I received tonight: women with big hips shouldn’t wear hot pink pleats. Think about it.]

Do I think there needs to be some healthcare reform? Sure, that seems pretty obvious. I just think that when we’re having serious discussions on this topic, we should look at what is already being done in the world…that in itself would lead to some legitimate concerns. Why make the same mistake that other countries have done, just so you can congratulate yourself on being an ‘advanced democracy.’ 

Think I’ll go hang out with the disruptive, fib-tellin’ scare-mongers…I’ll be in good company.

Until next time…

Obama’s Fantasy Island

Published June 26, 2009 by glaumland

So many people probably don’t remember this TV show so let me clue you in:

Someone (say Gina, the librarian) paid for a vacation at Fantasy Island. Mr. Roarke (played by the wonderful Ricardo Montalbon) created their fantasies for them to live out (let’s say Gina wanted to fall in love with a rock star). Someone from their real lives end up with a surprise vacation (like Ed, the janitor, who’s always had a thing for Gina). Gina goes on to find out that the rock-n-roll lifestyle isn’t her cup of tea and that rockers may be hi-fi but usually not fi (that’s fidelity for you youngsters). So Gina hooks up with Ed, and the guy who had a fantasy about being a rocker gets his vacation…get the idea?

Anyway, I think Obama needs a vacation on fantasy island. We all know what his fantasies are: instant healthcare reform, instant banking reform, instant car reform, instant diplomacy with rogue nations, instant power reform…many with price tags in the trillions.

Anyway, on Fantasy Island Obama would have as much money and cooperation as he needed to see his goals accomplished. He would see the people dying because they were too risky to spend precious government medical dollars on. Obama would see the financial world in a bigger mess because poor policies leads to more poor policies (oops – are we there yet!). He would see that by-passing the bankruptcy system doesn’t create a brand new healthy auto industry. He would see that the nations who hate us won’t change just because he wears an “America Sucks!” button. And he would wear a CO2 monitor to see just how much of a carbon emissions problem he is, especially when he’s speachifying..

Would Obama then see the light? Would he convert to conservatism? No, I doubt it. He’d probably be one of those odd screwballs who got sucked into Fantasy Island and never got out. Now THAT’S my fantasy!

Until next time…