Now, I mentioned earlier in the program that “A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the US Health and Human Services Secretary to suspend existing organ allocation rules to give a 10-year-old Pennsylvania girl a better chance at a life-saving lung transplant.” The judge is Michael Baylson. He’s a Bush, George W. Bush appointee.
Judge Baylson “told Kathleen Sebelius to direct the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, or OPTN, to make an exception to the so-called ‘Under-12’ rule as it applies to Sarah Murnaghan, who has end-stage cystic fibrosis, for at least 10 days, until a hearing on June 14. That move means that the girl can be considered more quickly for organs as an adult, instead of being limited to the pediatric transplant list.”
So all they’re doing is simply removing her age as an arbitrary factor.
Until the judge moved in, Kathleen Sebelius was the death panel.
One person, Kathleen Sebelius, was gonna determine whether or not — and she said, “Some people live. Some people die.” Who else said it? It was some member of Congress at some congressional hearing on something. It was Elijah Cummings. I forget what he was talking about. I forget what the hearing was about. But he said (paraphrasing), “In life, there is death, and in death there is life.” Benghazi. “Death is a part of life,” right. Well, that’s what Kathleen Sebelius was saying, all the while the regime is denying, of course, that there were death panels and that Obamacare was not gonna be doing this, and everybody knew that it was.
Well, I ran across last night a post at a blog that I read called RedState.com, and I printed it out, and unfortunately the name of the writer did not print, and I don’t remember it. But Koko will find it, and we’ll link to it at RushLimbaugh.com. The title of the post is, “The Real Danger of Liberal Bias.” Now, this prints out to four pages. I’m not gonna read the whole thing. I’m gonna try to summarize it for you here.
The author starts by saying, “IÂ’m going to tell you what media bias is really all about. ItÂ’s about a dying, 10 year-old girl –” This is posted before the judge’s order. “ItÂ’s about a dying, 10 year-old girl and a sexagenarian, politically connected trial lawyer. ItÂ’s about official malfeasance treated as human error when a Democrat is president. ItÂ’s about power and systemic corruption that is unremarkable to people offended that George W. Bush didnÂ’t call his advisers liars to their face. It is about Fred Baron and Sarah Murnaghan.”
Now, Fred Baron, does that name ring a bell, Snerdley? It should. It was John Edwards lawyer. He was the guy that facilitated John Edwards’ baby being taken up by the guy that wasn’t the father and he was a huge trial lawyer, a huge bundler and fundraiser for the Democrat Party. He was also a plaintiff’s asbestos lawyer. He was a prolific Democrat bundler. He made a great deal of money by breaking Fortune 500 companies. Personal friend of John Edwards and of Bill and Hillary Clinton, and in 2008 he was dying of multiple myeloma, which is cancer, as you know, of the bone marrow.
“At 61, Baron had become one of the DemocratsÂ’ foremost source of trial lawyer funds, and they rewarded him with access and influence. Where this story diverts from the usual depressing tale of money and influence is in the closing days of BaronÂ’s life.” Stage five cancer is what he had, multiple myeloma. It’s a death sentence. “Because Baron had the luxury of being rich, he spent a great deal on doctors to discover what the rest of us would know.” He was terminal.
Thomas Crown is the author of this piece.
“However, his doctors believed that Tysabri — a monoclonal antibody that is used primarily to treat multiple sclerosis and other autoimmune diseases … might save BaronÂ’s life. … They were hoping the drug would slow or block the cancer cells. … The problem of course was that the Food and Drug Administration had not cleared the drug for use on cancer patients. The drugÂ’s manufacturer had the drug in what are called Phase I trials — the first part of the labyrinthine approval process for a drug that makes us one of the slowest drug approval regimes among modern societies. … The drugÂ’s manufacturer could not approve the drugÂ’s use out of the very limited number of test patients receiving it, and the drug would be at best 5-7 years from broad market use.”
So the drug that the doctors wanted to give Fred Baron could not legally be given to him. It was still in trials, and the reason they don’t like to make exceptions on this is because if the drug doesn’t work, then it may never be approved for what it was otherwise intended for. So they don’t want to go outside the approval, the companies don’t. The FDA doesn’t. There’s a drug, it’s being approved for something, but some doctor thinks, you know, it might work in this cancer patient, the patient wants it. Can’t do it. It’s not permitted. The law doesn’t allow it. We don’t want you to have it because it’s not being designed for that purpose, and if it doesn’t work for you, we’re just facing bigger problems.
The bottom line was that Nancy Pelosi made the FDA give the drug to Fred Baron, because he was a great Democrat donor, a great Democrat bundler, a great Democrat fundraiser, a great Democrat pure and simple, great trial lawyer, had taken down a bunch of companies that were enemies of the Democrat Party, Nancy Pelosi called the FDA and by hook or by crook, she got the FDA to give the manufacturer the all-clear to give Fred Baron the drug. Baron got the drug. He took the drug. He died anyway. He got a waiver. Now, this post was written before the judge reversed the order on Sarah Murnaghan being allowed to be on the list for the lung.
His point here, the poster’s point is look at what being a great Democrat allowed to have happen to you. Every rule and every law was swept aside as though it didn’t exist so that a great Democrat could get an experimental drug that nobody else could legally get. It must work. He died anyway. Over here is a 10-year-old girl who’s not a Democrat and who isn’t a donor, and who has nothing to say about whether the Democrats win elections and what do they say to her? (Raspberry) you. That’s media bias, because the media would not tell the true story. The media will not do what it’s supposed to, and that is expose this kind of corruption, which is rampant and everywhere in this government and in this regime.
RUSH: I checked the e-mail during this break. There were some people who heard about this Fred Baron story. That’s right, because we told you about this back when it happened. The Dallas Morning News had a story back in August of 2010 about Pelosi pulling strings to let this dying Dallas lawyer, Fred Baron, try an experimental cancer drug. I told people, “This exactly what’s gonna happen with Obamacare. There are going to be people with preferred status.”
I remember saying, “You’re in line at the exchange window or wherever it is you have to go to get health insurance or to get health coverage/treatment. I can see it where they have a record, and they’re gonna show up and they’re gonna know whether you voted for Obama, whether you’re registered Democrat or Republican. What happens if they decide on preferential treatment from people from the right party?”
I remember asking that question specifically, that it could very logically and easily become part of Obamacare. Now it is. The Fred Baron story is exactly what we warned about. Now, Thomas Crown’s point at RedState.com was this is media bias, because this is clear corruption. I mean, you have corruption upon corruption in the Fred Baron story. You’ve got the corruption of his involvement with John Edwards and protecting Edwards and the baby that Edwards tried to deny was his while Edwards was running for the presidency.
Edwards had that friend of his pretend to be the father, and Fred Baron was paying for all of this. The media looked past it because Edwards was a good Democrat. He ended up being John Kerry’s running mate in 2004, and then the Democrats moved heaven and earth to allow Baron to get access to a drug that nobody else could. Then over here you have a 10-year-old girl, and his point was the media bias comes in all different flavors. But this is a really, really gross and great example of it that doesn’t involve ideology.
They’re just overlooking corruption.