Saturday, Dec. 10, 2016    Login | Register        

She warned us . . .

Cal Thomas's picture

Sarah Palin deserves an apology. When she said that the new healthcare law would lead to “death panels” deciding who gets life-saving treatment and who does not, she was roundly denounced and ridiculed.

Now we learn, courtesy of one of the ridiculers — The New York Times — that she was right. Under a new policy not included in the law for fear the administration’s real end-of-life game would be exposed, a rule issued by the recess-appointed Dr. Donald M. Berwick, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, calls for the government to pay doctors to advise patients on options for ending their lives. These could include directives to forgo aggressive treatment that could extend their lives.

This rule will inevitably lead to bureaucrats deciding who is “fit” to live and who is not. The effect this might have on public opinion, which by a solid majority opposes Obamacare, is clear from an email obtained by the Times.

It is from Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), who sent it to people working with him on the issue. Oregon and Washington are the only states with assisted-suicide laws, a preview of what is to come at the federal level if this new regulation is allowed to stand.

Blumenauer wrote in his November email: “While we are very happy with the result, we won’t be shouting it from the rooftops because we aren’t out of the woods yet. This regulation could be modified or reversed, especially if Republican leaders try to use this small provision to perpetuate the ‘death panel’ myth.”

Ah, but it’s not a myth, and that’s where Palin nailed it. All inhumanities begin with small steps; otherwise the public might rebel against a policy that went straight to the “final solution.” All human life was once regarded as having value, because even government saw it as “endowed by our Creator.” This doctrine separates us from plants, microorganisms and animals.

Doctors once swore an oath, which reads in part: “I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.” Did Dr. Berwick, a fan of rationed care and the British National Health Service, ever take that oath? If he did, it appears he no longer believes it.

Do you see where this leads? First the prohibition against abortion is removed and “doctors” now perform them. Then the assault on the infirm and elderly begins. Once the definition of human life changes, all human lives become potentially expendable if they don’t measure up to constantly “evolving” government standards.

It will all be dressed up with the best possible motives behind it and sold to the public as the ultimate benefit. The killings, uh, terminations, will take place out of sight so as not to disturb the masses who might have a few embers of a past morality still burning in their souls. People will sign documents testifying to their desire to die, and the government will see it as a means of “reducing the surplus population,” to quote Charles Dickens.

When life is seen as having ultimate value, individuals and their doctors can make decisions about treatment that are in the best interests of patients. But when government is looking to cut costs as the highest good and offers to pay doctors to tell patients during their annual visits that they can choose to end their lives rather than continue treatment, that is more than the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent. That is the next step on the way to physician-assisted suicide and, if not stopped, government-mandated euthanasia.

It can’t happen here? Based on what standard? Yes it can happen in America, and it will if the new Republican class in Congress doesn’t stop it.

[Cal Thomas is America’s most widely syndicated op-ed columnist, appearing in more than 600 national newspapers. He is the author of more than 10 books and is a FOX News political contributor since 1997. Email Cal Thomas at] ©2010 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.


I have read the section of the health bill about doctor/patient counseling as to decisions to be made by the patient and no one else, unless impossible for the patient to make the decision, and that then can be made by a relative only. No death panel involved.
This information generally is to be made ahead of need.

No panel will decide what factors cause prevention of treatment.

Currently some ill people lie unconscious for months on life support and no one will decide what to do nor how to pay for it. The worst that can happen is removing life support for brain-dead people by permission of the patient in writing or the nearest of kin.

The fear of the government deliberately killing old people have seen too many films like "Soylent Green," starring Charlton Heston!

There are also a few nuts who can't bring themselves to even write a will!

birdman's picture

Cal Thomas, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and everyone's favorite Sarah can only enflame the right wing. Facts are not part of it. Too bad. Most of us who actually consider the potential end of our lives have already written living wills and DNR orders. If someone has a life ending illness, this type of consideration is paramount. My Mother in Law died of Cancer and had a DNR. When she went into failure one of the paramedics wanted to revive her which would have resulted in her last days being comatose on life support. The other literally pulled him off yelling that she had a DNR. It was a horrible scene for the family. She had already taken care of her end of life decisions. Imagine the angst for a family member who now must make the decision for a loved one.
But the Repub wingnuts need the emotional argument. To actually support paid counseling for those on medicare would be to support the Affordable Care Act (yeah, that's the real name). They can't do that so they let Brainiac Sarah lead the charge.
But if the Repubs really opposed "death panels," they'd rail against the Health Insurance industry. You know, those big companies that deny coverage, throw people off their insurance if the care gets too expensive, deny treatment if the predicted results don't meet their "criteria for success," deny treatment due to a "pre-existing condition," etc. Now those are real "death panels." They actually decide who lives and who dies. Yet they want to totally trash a law that has corrected some of those "death panel" decisions, and never, NOT ONCE does ANYONE speak out about people dying due to denied insurance because the hugely profitable insurance companies don't want to dip into their profits and save anyone's life.
Actually, a question, exactly what parts of the Affordable Care Act do people object to, and why? No one really addresses the actual act, only the Fox talking points (most of which are not correct).

Cyclist's picture

<strong>Actually, a question, exactly what parts of the Affordable Care Act do people object to, and why? No one really addresses the actual act, only the Fox talking points (most of which are not correct).</strong>

I could have sworn I heard that there were a few court cases concerning the "Commerce Clause" thingy. I suspect the "supremes" will ultimately decide.

Now tell me where in the "act" does it acknowledge how the actual cost of health care will be reduced? How will it roll back the cost of MRI's, EKG's, surgeries, band aids, in others words, all the components of health care? Will it rollback salaries of those in the medical field? How about the financial incentives to invest in new technologies will that too be capped?

I'll tell you what I do see a 40% excise tax on so called "Cadillac" plans to pay for it.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

birdman's picture

It seems your only objection is money. You really should actually research the bill and not just listen to Sarah. The CBO estimates a deficit reduction of $145 billion over 10 years. The CBO estimates a reduction in Medicare premiums for seniors. 30 plus million getting health care. Insurance companies required to spend 85% of premiums on direct health cost. The implementation of insurance co-ops to increse competition. Etc. As to insurance costs, mine have gone up yearly since Bush became President. In 2000 I had free health care. I now pay abot $400 per month. This all before the Affordable Care Act. And who pays for all the uninsured when they flood our emergency rooms for basic care?

Interesting fact.....our company's health care insurer's CEO made $128 million in 2008 for a single years compensation! Guessing lots of proceedures denied to justify that salary package. Now that's a death panel!

Food for thought, this bill should lead to a healthier population. A healthier population is more productive. More productive population adds to the economy.

I suspect I will see some tax increase to pay for this. But I do believe I'll see more benefit than cost.

PTC Observer's picture

"Food for thought, this bill should lead to a healthier population".

It's a tax increase of major proportion, that's it. Oh and 15,000 or so tax collectors to enforce it.

Cyclist's picture

And your focus is only on the insurance side. How does this bill - actually it's the law of the realm - actually reduce the cost of medical care? Its primary focus is on the insurance side. And yes, I have read the CBO estimates but remember that's based on the premise of this forced "insurance" thingy that's currently being challenged. If that challenge is successful this whole thing starts to unravel.

Oh, about the uninsured and hitting the emergency floor. That's still going to happen and we are still going to pay for that. That population simply does not have the wherewithal to buy insurance even the government sponsored stuff.

As for those evil insurance companies and their "profits" let me point out that this nation spends $282 million an hour on health care. If one applies the insurance industry profits - about $12.2 Billion a year - to the health care dollar stream it would only provide health care for 43 hours. So taking the those profits off the table and we are still faced with incredibly expensive health care.

Healthier population? Yeah, posters at food chains of 20 or more will really make a difference.

My fear is this whole thing is going to quickly get out of control. Insurance rates are going to rise in order to cover all the mandates associated with this law. And I can hear the future uproar and more finger pointing at the insurance companies. And when they can no longer make a profit in this risk endeavor they will exit and then there's nothing to buffer that $10,000 out-patient procedure.

But hey, I guess someone that flies a "bus" can better afford paying more. Us earthbound folks will struggle with $4 to $5 a gallon gasoline soon.

BTW, Sarah who? (eyes rolling)

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

PTC Observer's picture

" And when they can no longer make a profit in this risk endeavor they will exit and then there's nothing to buffer that $10,000 out-patient procedure."

Couldn't turn out better for the state, they will step in and then we will have only one source for our healthcare, unless you are really, really rich. Then you can fly anywhere in the world on a "bus" to find it.

Only problem with this is that the state is broke.

birdman's picture

Here is a copy of the Nixon Whitehouse tapes regarding HMO's:

"This is a transcript of the 1971 conversation between President Richard Nixon and John D. Ehrlichman that led to the HMO act of 1973:
John D. Ehrlichman: “On the … on the health business …”
President Nixon: “Yeah.”
Ehrlichman: “… we have now narrowed down the vice president’s problems on this thing to one issue and that is whether we should include these health maintenance organizations like Edgar Kaiser’s Permanente thing. The vice president just cannot see it. We tried 15 ways from Friday to explain it to him and then help him to understand it. He finally says, ‘Well, I don’t think they’ll work, but if the President thinks it’s a good idea, I’ll support him a hundred percent.’”
President Nixon: “Well, what’s … what’s the judgment?”
Ehrlichman: “Well, everybody else’s judgment very strongly is that we go with it.”
President Nixon: “All right.”
Ehrlichman: “And, uh, uh, he’s the one holdout that we have in the whole office.”
President Nixon: “Say that I … I … I’d tell him I have doubts about it, but I think that it’s, uh, now let me ask you, now you give me your judgment. You know I’m not too keen on any of these damn medical programs.”
Ehrlichman: “This, uh, let me, let me tell you how I am …”
President Nixon: [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: “This … this is a …”
President Nixon: “I don’t [unclear] …”
Ehrlichman: “… private enterprise one.”
President Nixon: “Well, that appeals to me.”
Ehrlichman: “Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can … the reason he can do it … I had Edgar Kaiser come in … talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because …”
President Nixon: [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.”
President Nixon: “Fine.” [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: [Unclear] “… and the incentives run the right way.”
President Nixon: “Not bad.”
[Source: University of Virginia Check - February 17, 1971, 5:26 pm - 5:53 pm, Oval Office Conversation 450-23. Look for: tape rmn_e450c.]"

As you can see when the whole HMO issue came forward even Nixon realized it was about profit not health care.

The insurance industry is simply "profiting" itself out of business. The health care industry is messed up. The time is coming when health insurance will be for only the elite. This will result in your greatest fear, public health.
If you look at what insurance companies pay compared to what a doctor charges you will understand. Here is an example. My wife had surgery. The doctor bill was $21,000. The insurance company paid $3500. Only 1/7 of the bill! (I paid nothing). If I had been uninsured I would have been on the hook for $21,000. How is this a reasonable and sane system? Even you point out the unbelievable cost of health care. It is draining the economy. Over 50% of personal bankruptcy's are due to health care costs (, although did dispute this to some degree in Dec. 08.

If we insure 30 million more, it will reduce the use of emergency rooms.

You may think I "fly a bus" but I still struggle here on earth too. Maybe instead of always whining about the current law, how about putting forward some alternatives. In fact the claim by Boehner that Americans overwhelmingly want repeal of the bill are simply false. Only about 26-33% favor repeal. The rest favor either partial repeal, changes, expansion, or leave as is. (

Healthier population? Yeah, those posters will help, but yearly physicals and checkups like colonoscopy's will certainly help, and they are part of having insurance.

Face it, is it really that "un-American," or "un-Christian" or simply so horrible to keep people from being un-insurable, or kicked off policies, or allowed to die because they can't afford insurance, or the insurance company decides it would rather pay the CEO $128 million than actually pay for treatment?

Compassionate Conservatism at it's best.

Cyclist's picture

There you go again - it's all about the insurance industry. You seem to be stuck in that record groove, so let's try a different tack.

Last year our nation spent $1 trillion more than it took in. We spent money to service the national debt, social security, medicare, defense, the Friendly Aviation Association and on and on. We also spent money on the following;

Upkeep for Unused Monkey House and Other Buildings -
(Department of Veterans Affairs) $175 Million

Sprucing Up Apartments Before They Are Torn Down - (Shreveport,
LA) $1.5 Million

Museum Where Neon Signs Go to Die… - (Las Vegas, NV) $1.8

“Free” Grateful Dead Archive - (Santa Cruz, CA) $615,000

Agencies Pile Up Unnecessary Printing Costs - $930 Million

Poems in Zoos - (AR, IL, LA, WI, & FL) $997,766

Shooting Range Armed with Taxpayer Dollars - (Las Vegas, NV)
$15.68 Million

Studying World of Warcraft and Other Virtual Games - (Irvine,
CA) $2.9 Million

Fraudulent Medical Testing by Criminal Gangs - (U.S. Center for
Medicare and Medicaid Services) $35 Million

Bogus Tax Refunds for Prisoners - $112 million

Rebuilding Mosques - $6 million

Internet Dating Study - (Stanford, CA) $239,100

City Builds Streetcar System on Same Route as Subway System -
(Atlanta, GA) $47.6 Million

Studying Male Prostitutes in Vietnam - (San Juan, Puerto Rico)

And finally,

Teaching South African Men How to Wash Their Genitalia -
(Los Angeles, CA) $823,200

As you look at these examples, ask yourself: at a time when we are borrowing over $44,000 for every person in the country, are these items a priority and are they a federal responsibility?

Honestly, I would rather have spent that money for health care. But noooo, our government doesn't even think about that. Now do they?

The concern is that we, the tax payer, will once again shoulder another load that will take another dollar of tax which is one less dollar that goes into buying things such as.....well such as buying tickets to fly someplace.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Oh,I see change already---healthcare premium for 2011 up 32%, co-pay to see a specialist up 17%. Now that's change you can suck up!

THE REASON we must have a change in health insurance! Costs gone wild.

The USA can't survive in a country where the "health" industry will soon be a third of our economy if allowed to continue as it was.

Changing the number of those who can be insured and criteria and length of insurance in no way lowers the cost of care.

PTC Observer's picture

If we can predict the future based on the past, we can predict that anything the government touches will go up in cost.

No government social program of which I am aware has ever shrunk in size and scope or not increased in cost. Most key social programs are underwater and continue to run deep deficits that we are funding using freely printed money.

I can't see why this program should have any outcome that would be different.

In theory, you're wrong Gym. If I'm an insurance company with x amount of people covered, and I all of a sudden have, say, 20% more people covered, that gives me additional leverage when negotiating reimbursement rates with, say, hospitals. (As an aside, I was hospitalized recently and was absolutely astounded with the discount my insurance company had with the hospital).

The reality, sadly, is probably more in line with your position.

You expect a great deal of ugly fact-free spittle-flecked rhetoric from the likes of Cal Thomas, but this column sets a new standard for shameless demagoguery.

Cal Thomas uses all the fringe-right scare tactics in a pathetic attempt to equate discussing a DNR order with your doctor with Palin's pathetic "the gummint wants to pay doctors to pull the plug on granny!"

If it was such a whiz-bang directive, why did Obozo put the kaibosh on it?

President Obama decided it wasn't worth spending the political capital necessary to defend the DNR advisory.

When you look at the big picture, DNR advisories are a very very small component of health care reform that has gathered an inordinate amount of attention.

President Obama's team made the calculated decision that it simply wasn't worth the time or effort to defend.

I can't say I blame them. I've got a medical power-of-attorney already in place, as does everyone in my immediate family over the age of 50. Do your family members have one?

"President Obama's team made the calculated decision that it simply wasn't worth the time or effort to defend."

That's pure hogwash. The administration was found to have been trying to implement a probram that Americans soundly rejected. They are death panels and everyone knows it. Americans just aren't as dumb as the libs try to make them out to be.

BTW, the plans I have made with my family are none of your beeswax.

I get such a kick when you and your kind are reduced to lecturing us about what "everyone knows"!

Kinda like "everyone knows" that God cursed Sarah Palin's womb with defective children as punishment her unrepentant evil ways, don'tcha know?

I do, however, wish to apologize to you about asking if your loved ones had medical powers-of-attorney. After I wrote the post, I remembered that you have to be of sound mind in order to have an enforceable order, which of course would disqualify you and all those that share your rancid inbred DNA.

NUK_1's picture

How this guy is nationally syndicated makes me weep for my country.

I ignored his spew long ago, but it's sad to see that his column of pathetic ignorance and any lack of logical reasoning still gets distributed. I guess even the dumbest of fundies can read and PERHAPS comprehend, though that shocks me too. Obviously, there's a "market" for Cal Thomas out there, and that sucks.

Try reading Neal "the deal" Boortz column in today's paper if you think Cal Thomas is a nutcake.

He defends the Constitution as written---slavery, 3/5 population count for Negroes and none for Indians, no women's rights, property owners vote, and all.

I'll bet he could defend the US Supreme Court deciding how Florida's Supreme Court can count their votes!! Ask Gore!

Boortz isn't even an entertainer, he is a trouble maker.

NUK_1's picture

Been in the ATL area for long enough to have seen/heard Boortz be ultra-left, then ultra-right, then reincarnate as a libertarian, all in the name of $$$ and radio stations ratings. More power to him on that but I don't take a lot of what he says too seriously since I know he's not too principled unless it comes to getting himself over with the public. The Fair Tax books are exercises in simplicity/stupidity that somehow won over a lot of Repubs, so you have to admit that Boortz knows how to market himself extremely well. The guy has gotten rich from a small radio station and being an abrasive shock-jock into a millionaire. Great for him.

I'd put Palin right into the same category except Boortz can at least back up some of the stuff he spouts and can do it well at times. Palin has no clue what she is talking about and it shows. Even the most Repubs of the Repubs are trying to get some distance away from her right now. Wait until Michele Bachman officially announces her run for Prezbo and then Palin will be second-hand garbage that doesn't get the same media hype.

Pretty much agree with your assessment of Boortz. Rude & crude, but usually pretty accurate with statements--opinions are just that-opinions. Sure don't find many folk willing to take him on in a serious debate. Can't hardly argue with success.
Bachman & Palin: neither electable--just noisemakers. Personally, I'd like to see Jon Huntsman Jr get into the race--Plusses: successful businessman,twice-elected as Gov of Utah, Diplomat (current Ambassador to China), speaks 2 dialects of Chinese, no skeletons. Minus: Mormon. Doesn't bother me personally, but it does some folk.
Gov Mitch Daniel, Indiana would be a prime candidate but claims no interest.

It looks like Sarah Palin got her wish, promoting her "gun-sight map" on her website to target which Democrats to get rid of. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) was shot in the head today at a political rally in Arizona.

Your comment is typical of your slime-ball political posturing. Instead of conveying best wishes to the Congresswoman and others wounded by the unidentified young gunman,you've just gotta make it a political issue. Shame on you.

...shame on Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the right-wing nutjobs for instilling and promoting violence on others, in the name of their misguided political ideologies.

"instilling & promoting violence." SHOW ME WHERE THAT HAPPENED!

Look for trouble against the ultra-extreme right-wing screwballs who now for years have gone about as far as possible with talk radio, gun-slinging and bomb sight graphs, and newspaper columns, to belittle and damage all politicians not on their side.

Our sympathy for those killed and wounded in gun-sight alley Arizona has nothing to do with being quiet right now about such detractors.

A whole platoon of people were today found in Mexico with no heads. This is caused by the same reasons some people here will do anything with their influence to become rich---il-formed blabbering and upsetting radical nut cases.

I shuddered at the comparison of yesterdays tragedy with the decapitated bodies in Mexico - but maybe we better realize that the Sheriff in Arizona has a point, Words and ideas are powerful - and must be used to convey truth by responsible leaders. The words in our Constitution have been used to correct the wrongs of some of the misinterpretation of those words throughout our history. Sarah Palin's misuse of words is coming back to haunt her. (I don't believe she foresaw this tragedy - but words used regarding violent acts can be dangerous.) Those who manipulate words and ideas to 'rile' up the 'people' to do their will or create fear are dangerous to a free society. If we look at the history of effective leaders - they had the gift if using words to convey ideas that controlled the masses. The battle of words is on in the global media. We, the people, must not be manipulated. We must always seek the truth. One ideology does not have all the 'truth' in a free society. An educated - not indoctrinated - population is essential to a free society. Let's look for the truth in this situation - and refuse to be used by 'talking points' or media 'pundits'.

[quote=AtHomeGym]"instilling & promoting violence." SHOW ME WHERE THAT HAPPENED![/quote]

Sarah Palin's website sticks a gunsite target on Arizona and lists Rep. Giffords name, and the verbiage "1 down, 17 to go"

Shooter shoots Rep. Giffords

Just an unfortunate coincidence, right? Right?

Interesting - some have been taken down - and on her fundraising page - she offers her sincere condolences to the Congresswoman’s family.

I believe they took some of the webpages down for maintenance.

If you'll notice Mainstream's initial post, Sarah Palin's gunsite graphic had the verbiage "1 down, 17 to go!"....I suppose they're updating it to "2 down, 16 to go!"

In a tangentially related event, some wiseass created a Facebook page for the alleged shooter, and made him a Facebook fan of Barack Obama, Saul Alinsky and Nancy Pelosi. Within minutes there were over 100 comments over on Sarah Palin's page from her supporters "SEE? I TOLD YOU!".


(Facebook took the parody page down shortly afterwards).

PTC Observer's picture

yourself please, give it one big try. I know you can do it.

A woman named Caitie Parker has been tweeting that she went to school with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' alleged shooter Jared Loughner and that he had met Giffords previously.

Also," he was a pot head & into rock like Hendrix,The Doors, Anti-Flag. I haven't seen him in person since '07 in a sign language class" and "As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal. & oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy."


Cyclist's picture

I suspect that she wishes that she never had that "targeted" poster. It could become a liability if she attempted to make a run in 2012. (eyes rolling)

Of course she did say during her Alaskan adventure show "why would anyone ever want be in some stuffy political office."

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

PTC Observer's picture

IMO, she will be a king maker in the 2012 election. I don't think she will have the support, even from the TP to run. However, she can decide who will be nominated that's for sure.

Cyclist's picture

but I sure hope she doesn't interfere or becomes a liability for that candidate. We literally can not afford that.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Disagree. Do not think she will have any major influence in selection of the R 2012 candidate.

PTC Observer's picture


Same kind of influence she had for McCain!

She is a good sounding board for all the nuts and their impossible ideas!

PTC Observer's picture

come on Bacon, even you can figure this one out.

Let's stop with this until all have recovered from this tragedy.

Mike King's picture

Anyone who would make a comment that vile has neither the courage nor concern for their fellow man to do so without cover. Even those of the cop killer Ayers ilk do so in the open.

I could be wrong.

For Christ's sake, Gym,it was a <strong>political assassination attempt!</strong>

This shooting had <strong>everything</strong> to do with politics.

PTC Observer's picture

I can see your point but do we really know this for sure?

I think the guy is just deranged; he makes no sense on his YouTube page.

Why don’t we wait to see what this is all about before making such a claim? We have a long way to go before that happens.

My point is that if a deranged man attacked Bill Graham would that make it a religious thing automatically? Or a guy attacks students at WV Tech, does that make it an anti-education thing? I don't think so.

Why do you choose to inflame things even more? What problem do you think you are solving here?

There is enough info out there to see this guy was clearly deranged. Obviously the left is trying to use this crisis for political purposes. Mark my words, pretty soon it will be the guns fault and another attack on the 2nd ammendment will begin. -GP

May God guide the surgeons hands. -GP

She is out of surgery and expected to recover.

Alleged shooter Check his reading list, Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto? Sure doesn't sound like anyone that would listen to Palin, Beck or Rush. Hmmmmm... -GP

Unfortunately - the words this individual has shared follows the 'thinking' of some of the posters on many blogs. Most educated Americans have read Mein Kamph and The Communist Manifesto. Reading a book does not mean that you agree with everything the author has said - but it means you are aware of the authors 'thought''. I'm sure we'll learn more about the suspect.

to his youtube rant it is obvious this a VERY disturbed individual. I have also read Mein Kamph, the Communist Manifesto, the Motorcycle Diaries, Mao's Little Red Book, etc, but would never list any of them as my reading on a website. That being said I feel this is just an awful tragedy and should not be used for any political purposes. -GP


Ad space area 4 internal