On TV today a liberal "journalist" said, "When is a person too old to get a new heart?"
Anyone who even asks such a stupid question does not even have a heart. I would have asked that journalist, "If that 72 year old was your mother instead of a Republican VP named Cheney, would you STILL think 72 is too old to get a new heart? Or what if it were YOU?"
That's the problem with liberals in a nutshell. And it goes to show how they think - as long as it hurts someone they do not care about, that's fine. But not when it affects them.
It also explains why it is progressive liberals who have advocated euthanasia for those too old to offer anything to society - unless, of course, it is THEM, or their loved ones.
Anyone who doubts for a minute that the liberal mindset behind ObamaCare will result in rationing based on cost vs usefulness simply is not living in reality. When the unelected bureaucrat "committee" decides a procedure - like a heart transplant - is too expensive compared to the value of the person needing it, that person will be denied. Because even the government does not have access to unlimited money. Need proof? The FDA has already revoked approval of two very expensive drugs (previously approved) BECAUSE of their expense. And without FDA approval, insurance companies - including Medicare - will not cover them. So, today there are people dying because they cannot get the drug that will help them to live, simply because the government does not want to pay for it.
Back to the point --- I find it reprehensible that people in the liberal media - and progressives in general - believe that life-saving procedures should be limited to certain people that THEY approve it. It says all you need to know about progressive liberals and the lamestream media.