"Liar, liar, pants on fire " the old playground chant shot through my mind as I listened to the President's Joint Address to the Congress and Senate, on health care reform. What triggered that flash from the past, was my memory of a town hall type meeting, held by President Obama, in July. May I share that with you.

A woman said her mother had been informed by her Physician that she would benefit from a pacemaker, but he was reluctant to do the procedure because she was 100 years old. They sought a second opinion. The second doctor was impressed by the woman's vitality and spirit, and in spite of her advanced age, he thought it was worth doing. The daughter continued, "My mother is now 105 and still going". She then asked the President if his health care plan would consider the "whole" person and take their zest for life into consideration.

She was told no. President Obama explained that would be too subjective. He explained that the most expensive health care normally occurs in the last year of life. He hoped under his plan the Physicians and patients, could be encouraged to look more towards the hospice program. Perhaps they should have offered her mother a pain "pill instead of a pacemaker."

For a moment I couldn't believe what I had seen and heard from his lips. I was amazed by the cold callousness of the suggestion that this woman's mother, a living, breathing, fully functioning person should have been denied the last 5+ years of her buoyant productive existence.

How could such a statement be made about someone continuing to live a fulfilling life? How could that be said to the daughter who loved her? What humane person would suggest that the opportunity to live, that she had enjoyed, should have been denied?I was incensed by the suggestion, that a pacemaker and a pain pill could be used interchangeably. It was not only an incredibly stupid statement but it also showed a profound lack of understanding of the issue.

My disbelief and shock had turned to anger. How dare this mortal man presume to put in place a program that would decide who should live and who should die, based on the demographic of age, and a cold and calculating value system? This had become a life and death issue for seniors.

Tonight he spoke with disgust of those who had claimed that health care reform would somehow "kill off the old people." There would be no "death panels" he declared. That is technically true.

No one has suggested there would be a firing squad at the 65th birthday party nor will we be forced to stand before a panel of judges who will tell us whether we live or die. But there is also the lie of omission.

President Obama, in that town hall meeting made clear his intent.

There will be bureaucrats who develop economic health care policies, based on demographics which will include age, and value to society. In addition Section 12;33 of the House Bill, demands government mandated end of life counselling at 65, and every 5 years thereafter, unless you are in ill health, and then it would be done more often.

Maybe, it could be considered "killing off" when people are denied knowledge/choice of treatments that would extend or improve their quality of life. Would it be "killing off" if Doctors are not allowed to do those procedures because the person is too old, too fat, too anything, that marks them as "of too little value" to society? Would it be "killing off" if the person, after government mandated counselling, decided their life was no longer worth living?

You can't "pull the plug on Granny" if Granny wasn't allowed to be plugged in.