But seriously, folks: Obama death panels? »
Posted By Progressive 3 months, 3 weeks ago in Political Opinion
So now Sarah Palin alleges that President Obama's "death panels" might have killed Trig had they been in place. "Where to start?" wonders Joan Walsh in Salon. "Palin's entire statement is so ignorant, so bollixed rhetorically and morally, it hurts to read it." Most "health care screamers are sadly uninformed," she writes. But unlike most, Palin was a candidate for vice president, which "shows the Republican Party has arrived at a point of abject shame."
Walsh faults Democrats, who should have seen it coming, for being "flat-footed" in response.
Read Full Story at salon.com »
911 Views Share Story 126 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Progressive
There are only two kinds of people who are really fascinating: people who know absolutely everything, and people who know absolutely nothing. -- Oscar Wilde
I ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 126 (view all)
-
-
50%
calitennflo3 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
94%
CRYMTYPHON3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Right!
Reply
We can let the country be run by
- people who have no political beliefs!
- or hobbits!
- or geneticly modified corn stalks.
- or committees of specialy chosen people who will represent us,
according to our political beliefs, but wont form a party because they
will not be allowed to talk to each other.
- or we could build a giant computer and let it run things!
It would have to be programmed by non-partisan programmers, of course.
-
-
17%
LegalBob3 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
86%
skyking2p3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
how about Digg http://digg.com/politics/Palin_Obama_Death_Panel_C...
Reply -
20%
LegalBob3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"believable" was a bad reference. "Prestigious" would be more accurate, IMHO of course. As far as the others mentioned, Puffington is right up there with 'em. All a matter of opinion and perspective and of course the spin, not necessarily the accuracy of the event which sometimes is inaccurate. "'Believe Only Half Of What You See And Nothing That You Hear. Don't Trust Any One At All". Applies to today's drive by media. Ever read the AP financials every day, you'll know what I mean.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So exactly what assertions does the article make that you disagree with? And why?
Reply
I see too little sober, straightforward mainstream media reporting about how completely inaccurate, ideological and dangerous the GOP assault on health care reform is.
You can't seriously challenge that statement.
-
-
6%
chip563 months, 3 weeks ago
-
100%
Progressive3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I confess to only skimming "this thing", but I beg to differ regarding the people who have read it in its entirety getting false impressions such as Sarah Palin's (who doesn't seem to read much of anything).
Reply
Beau7890, the only Propeller member who had demonstrably read all of the healthcare bills quite carefully, has spent most of his time here lately debunking the lies and misrepresentations of those whose limited understanding of the bills comes primarily from Rush Limbaugh. -
100%
smithichie3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's quite an imagination you have there.
Reply
I have to admit I have not read the whole bill, but I have read the part that's setting off the paranoid among us and in no way would it apply to Trig. Firstly all it's about is providing the resources for folks who wish to make living wills, not forced, and here's the big factor Sarah seems to have overlooked in her 'reading', it only applies to seniors, not children. -
100%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I seriously doubt Sarah Palin has read H.R. 3200, and understood it.
Reply
Anyone who understands what the bill says knows the fear of "death panels" comes from the section defining "advance care planning consultation" for end-of-life care. Those advance care planning consultations are mentioned in the context of becoming a service Medicare will pay for, if desired by the patient.
Just as not every Medicare patient takes advantage of "qualified psychological services," which are available as a service Medicare will pay for and defined in the Social Security Act of 1969, not every Medicare patient will take advantage of advance planning consultation.
Advance care planning consultation is discussed in Sec. 1233 of H.R. 3200 (pp. 424-434). At the very beginning of that section, it says that the language set out therein (including the definition of and provision for advance care planning consultation) is meant to amend to Section 1861 of the Social Security Act. That section of SSA defines those services that Medicare will pay for.
So Section 1233 of H.R. 3200 adds an additional service (advance planning consultation) offered by Medicare. There's no requirement that everyone covered by Medicare use each of those services.
Don't take my word for it. You can download H.R. 3200 in PDF form here
and read Section 1233 (pp. 424-434) for yourself.
When you're referred to Section 1861 of the Social Security Act, you can find that here as a web page.
-
-
10%
alanocu3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Amazing that Letterman can "joke" about the rape of Palin daughter and libs find that hilarious. Sick. Why do liberals walk around in T-shirts that say "Sarah Palin is cu*t? Why do liberals publish articles about conservative women they want to hate f**k? Are there no attractive liberals to demonstrate this "tolerant" activity with? Libs are just sick and gross. Listening to them talk about morality is like listening to the French talk about military deterrence.
Reply-
95%
Progressive3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Are there no attractive liberals to demonstrate this 'tolerant' activity with?"
Reply
What are you trying to say?
Are you just too immature to contribute anything beyond childish nonsense to a conversation?
What does your diatribe have to do with the healthcare debate?
...or are you just a Sarah sycophant skater? -
-
-
-
100%
tchef3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm considered a Liberal and don't think that any joke about rape is funny. I don't think Letterman is funny either. I have never seen or heard of the T-shirt you mention. Your past Republican leaders both averted military service but had no problem sending our children to die in a war based on lies. Gloria Steinhem was quite attractive in her day. She even was considered for a Playboy shoot. Want to talk about morality? What about that Governor from South Carolina? Or Larry "widestance" Craig?
Reply -
100%
djn3nunez33 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Amazing but irrelevent rant of your savage(but comically dittohead like) emotions towards libs.
Reply
There will be no death panels. Mrs. Palin is lying again. Been caught again. All you can do is whine about how bad you think the libs are. All too typical brain-dead(dittohead) reponse.
-
-
100%
AnteUp3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the head's-up, Progressive - I like Joan Walsh.
Reply
It was nice to have her complete a sentence - that would be
because I usually see her with Chris Matthews!
IMO he has one of the most irritating "interview" styles.
For the record - she's absolutely right. These people are spinning on spin! There is no resemplence to the truth and they know it - and they don't care. -
-
beavis617bComment removed: Retracted by user20 Replies
-
beavis617bComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
beavis617bComment removed: Retracted by user2 Replies
-
-
-
13%
lloydm653 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When it comes down to it I will take Palin's word against Obama nine days a week.This dude makes the Clinton duo of pathological liars look saintly.He has based his whole life skirting the truth,lying,and cheating.He has surrounded himself with the same ilk,none better than the other,but all worse than the other.I thought Bill's little girl toy was bad enough crawling around on the oval office carpet putting everything in her mouth,well it can't compare with this bunch.They really stink up the place.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
Tcaros3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Dow Jones is above 9,300. The new home sales show slight increase with overall home sales returning. The automakers say "Cash for Clunkers" is working. The money being spent on infrastructure is creating jobs and more importantly repairing old bridges, roads that were left falling apart under Bush.
Reply
The short story is "we are spending money at home- fixing our problems." This is better than lining the pockets of the "oil companies" and "killing innocent people in Iraq." It's better than handing the money over to the likes of Haliburton or KBR.
It looks like a great 2010.
-
-
-
33%
Georgia503 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's revealing how Palin has managed to get the Obamatons all worked up. Notice that this is all "she said, they said."
Reply
NOT ONE LIBERAL HAS THE GUTS TO SAY THIS: IF IT WERE DETERMINED THAT OBAMACARE WOULD LEAD TO WHERE PALIN SAYS IT WILL, THEN I WILL OPPOSE IT.
Liberals only want to argue semantics, interpretation, and subjectivity. They NEVER want to address Sarah Palin on the merits of her argument, which is this: death panels are evil.
So tell us, liberals, are death panels evil or not? Let's address that first, then we'll drill down into the bill and see what it says. If you're not willing to acknowledge that death panels are evil, then no such drill-down is needed. We will know what you are, and you will know what you are.-
100%
Progressive3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
IF IT WERE DETERMINED THAT OBAMACARE WOULD LEAD TO WHERE PALIN SAYS IT WILL, THEN I WILL OPPOSE IT.
Reply
I only want to argue facts and Sarah Palin's arguments have no merit. If her argument is merely that "death panels are evil", it is a strawman argument because THERE WILL BE NO DEATH PANELS.
If neocons would debate the bill rather than right wing rhetoric they embrace from the daily Rush rants we wouldn't have to keep pulling their feet off the accelerator as they drive toward the edge. -
100%
djn3nunez33 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry Geo, But that is contrary to what Mrs. Palin actually wrote.
Reply
"The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/08/07/...
There will be no "Evil" death panels as Mrs. Palin describes from the plan to decide wether her parents or her baby lives or dies. -
100%
Beau78903 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no argument about semantics or subjectivity.
Reply
You do, however, misinterpret the plain (but long) language of the legislation, and because you do, you refuse to believe the evidence when it's presented to you.
Death panels would be evil if they were going to exist. I would oppose any legislation that created death panels.
But there are no death panels.
Seriously, Georgia--why do you think any elected official would think creating death panels would be the best way of cutting costs from healthcare, or would think it'd be good for his or her career?
-
-
0%
walli54703 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Americas problems are what they are because ALL politicians have had a hand in getting us where we are.The politicians voted on everything in order to get us there. Now they are raiding your pockets to clear up their mess.
Reply
As long as the taxpayers are fighting each other they stay off the backs of the politician and that makes them happy.
obamas' health care is on the internet for the whole world to read. Clearly, according to some of the comments I have read, many people are arguing for this health care plan but they have not read about all the topics it covers and how invasive it is into your life. I read it. It scares me.
Read it before you argue for or against it.
Taxpayers are so pathetic, it's no wonder they are taken advantage of so easily by the politically elite.-
100%
Progressive3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It isn't Obama's healthcare--it is the healthcare bills written by Congress. Clearly you have not read the proposed legislation itself and are relying on misinformation gleaned from anti-Obama bloggers you chose to believe instead.
Reply
-
-
50%
oldslowjim3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is important to analyze what is not included in a law as well as what is written. Does anyone believe that over time bureaucrats won't assume as much power as a law allows and push the limits to the max.
Reply
While Palin's remarks could have been stated better, she speaks for many who are frightened about what may occur over time. While 'end of life' conferences may be optional, there is nothing that prevents doctors from being coerced by the government into pressuring patients to have them.
It is not far fetched to foresee a councilor arriving with a POLICY BOOK that begins with pressuring someone to SAVE MONEY for their heirs, and taxpayers, by accepting a morphine pump rather than aggressive medical treatment. Barring specific restrictions, do you think doctors won't be REQUIRED to discuss cost effectiveness to the taxpayer for how to proceed. Heck, they'll probably be provided a government checklist on items they must cover and in what order. I can even imagine that a patient would be required to ask about specific procedures before a doctor or councilor would discuss them.
Be afraid of bureaucrats, be very afraid. This law needs to have a specific "patients bill of rights" included that RESTRICTS the government from doing some of these things. Otherwise, over time, bureaucrat's interpretation of the law will proceed to maximize their power and authority.
Here is one example. Can anyone find a provision the pre-authorizes citizens to sue the government over decisions being made by bureaucrats? I can't find one. This means there will basically be no recourse to the courts without being able to afford lots of constitutional lawyers or being able to convince congress to allow each individual lawsuit to proceed.-
100%
Progressive3 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Can anyone find a provision the pre-authorizes citizens to sue the government over decisions being made by bureaucrats?"
Reply
Can you find a provision that addresses tort reform? This means patients and their heirs can continue to file malpractice suits without award ceilings, which many attorneys will take on pro bono.
"Barring specific restrictions, do you think doctors won't be REQUIRED to discuss cost effectiveness to the taxpayer for how to proceed."
No, I don't think doctors will be required to discuss cost effectiveness to the taxpayer because they will not be employed by the government under any of the legislation currently being considered and are therefore not subject to such restrictions.
However, many doctors are currently unable to provide all of the care they believe their patients need because insurance companies are unwilling to pay for all life-saving treatment and this is something that CAN change under these plans.
-
-
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.