Want to see a GP? Gipsies come first as NHS..(Warning of What to Expect from Obamacare)

Gipsies and travellers should be given priority in NHS hospitals and GP surgeries, doctors have been told.

They will be fast-tracked for doctors, nurses and even some dentist appointments above all other patients.

GPs have also been told to see any travellers who simply walk in without an appointment, even if all consultation times for the day are full.

I can just see what health care will be like in the US if Obamacare passes. Imagine "affirmative action" in health care for "minorities". Some freak who wants a sex change operation gets ahead of the line for some person who needs a real operation.

Why? WHat clout do gypsies have? Or are they scared they will pick evryone’s pockets and steal their babies so they let them in to get them out.

Why are gypsies a better class?

The only reason they are being fasttracked is to hurt everyone else. It isn’t about the gypsies, it’s about the government’s exercise of naked authority over life and death of everyone else.

One little interesting factoid in the article amused me.

There were objections since people who were paying taxes and had supported the prgram for sixty years were pushed aside for people who paid nothing.

People who paid nothing got preference and they were mad.

Maybe the Brits will learn that in that system you don’t get what you pay for. A sort of anti market force.

I thought that was significant.

You see a small handful of freaks getting preference to see the few specialist surgeons who do sex change operations. I see twenty million illegal aliens getting preference in every doctor’s office and clinic in the nation.

This is actually a good thing for several reasons:

1. It might wake up the idiots in Britain who elected a socialist government and make them finally question the whole nature of socialism.

2. It might serve as a warning to the idiots in America who are in the process of electing a socialist government that maybe, just maybe, it might not be the prudent thing to do.

3. It will provide a possible opportunity for we Americans who are refused medical care in America because of the need to “fast track illegals” (soon to be part of Obamacare, I’m sure). We can go to England where we will be “new travelers” who can go to the front of the line. (And, of course, we won’t risk getting shot because who in England has guns?)

If I were a British taxpayer the most galling thing about this to me would not be the gypsy who just walked in off the street and is now in line ahead of me (although that would be pretty freaking galling) but the thought of the Socialist Master who thought up this scheme and how large a salary I was paying him.

I bet no friggin gypsy is going to be stepping in line ahead of the Socialist Masters who thought up this scheme. I bet the doctors offices where the Socialist Masters go are tightly controlled and NO ONE but Socialist Masters get into them.

The only reason they are being fasttracked is to hurt everyone else. It isn’t about the gypsies, it’s about the government’s exercise of naked authority over life and death of everyone else.

It's all about creating self-fulfilling prophesies. Create special rights for a group due to past discrimination (real, trumped-up or imagined) to purposely agitate non-minority members. Then when said non-minority members speak up claim proof of ill will/discrimination against said minority. Don't rinse but repeat.

"National Health Preview - The Massachusetts debacle, coming soon to your neighborhood."
"Three years ago, the former Massachusetts Governor had the inadvertent good sense to create the "universal" health-care program that the White House and Congress now want to inflict on the entire country.
It is proving to be instructive, as Mr. Romney's foresight previews what President Obama, Max Baucus, Ted Kennedy and Pete Stark are cooking up for everyone else.
In Massachusetts's latest crisis, Governor Deval Patrick and his Democratic colleagues are starting to move down the path that government health plans always follow when spending collides with reality -- i.e., price controls.
As costs continue to rise, the inevitable results are coverage restrictions and waiting periods. It was only a matter of time.

They're trying to manage the huge costs of the subsidized middle-class insurance program that is gradually swallowing the state budget.
The program provides low- or no-cost coverage to about 165,000 residents, or three-fifths of the newly insured, and is budgeted at $880 million for 2010, a 7.3% single-year increase that is likely to be optimistic.
The state's overall costs on health programs have increased by 42% (!) since 2006.

What really whipped along RomneyCare were claims that health care would be less expensive if everyone were covered.
But reducing costs while increasing access are irreconcilable issues.
Mr. Romney should have known better before signing on to this not-so-grand experiment, especially since the state's "free market" reforms that he boasts about have proven to be irrelevant when not fictional.
Only 21,000 people have used the "connector" that was supposed to link individuals to private insurers."

A Very Sick Health Plan; Bay State’s ‘Grand Experiment’ Fails [RomneyCare]
"The Daily News Record, Harrisonburg, Va. - 2009-03-31 "
"For folks increasingly leery of President Obama’s plan to radically overhaul America’s health-care system,
or 17 percent of the nation’s economy, all this could hardly have come at a better time —
that is, fiscal troubles aplenty within Repubican Mitt Romney’s brainchild, Massachusetts’ “grand experiment” in “universal” health care."

"Initiated on Mr. Romney’s gubernatorial watch in 2006, this “experiment” has fallen on hard times, and predictably so.
Even though the Bay State commenced its program with a far smaller percentage of uninsured residents than exists nationwide,
“RomneyCare” is threatening to bankrupt the state. Budgeted for Fiscal Year 2010 at $880 million,
or 7.3 percent more than a year ago, this plan, aimed at providing low- or no-cost health coverage to roughly 165,000 residents,
has caused Massachusetts’ overall expenditures on all health-related programs to jump an astounding 42 percent since 2006.

So what does Mr. Romney’s successor, Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, propose as a remedy for these skyrocketing costs?
Well, whaddya think? The standard litany of prescriptions (no pun intended) — price controls and spending caps, for a start, and then, again predictably, waiting periods and limitations on coverage.
As in Europe and Canada, so too in Massachusetts. And, we feel certain, everyone from Mr. Romney to Mr. Patrick said, “It would never happen here.”
But then, such things are inevitable when best-laid plans, with all their monstrous costs, run smack-dab into fiscal reality.

"Hospital patients 'left in agony'"
"Patients were allegedly left screaming in pain and drinking from flower vases on a nightmare hospital ward.
Between 400 and 1,200 more people died than would have been expected at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust over three years, a damning Healthcare Commission report said.
The watchdog's investigation found inadequately trained staff who were too few in number, junior doctors left alone in charge at night and patients left without food, drink or medication as their operations were repeatedly cancelled.
Patients were left in pain or forced to sit in soiled bedding for hours at a time and were not given their regular medication, the Commission heard.
Receptionists with no medical training were expected to assess patients coming in to A&E, some of whom needed urgent care.
Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, said there had been a "gross and terrible breach" of patients' trust and a "complete failure of leadership".
The Healthcare Commission's chairman Sir Ian Kennedy said the investigation followed concerns about a higher than normal death rate at the Trust, which senior managers could not explain.
He said: "The resulting report is a shocking story. Our report tells a story of appalling standards of care and chaotic systems for looking after patients. These are words I have not previously used in any report.
"There were inadequacies in almost every stage of caring for patients. There was no doubt that patients will have suffered and some of them will have died as a result."
Julie Bailey, 47, was so concerned about the care being given to her 86-year-old mother Bella at Stafford Hospital that she and her relatives slept in a chair at her bedside for eight weeks.
She said: "We saw patients drinking out of..."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.