Sarah Palin Kills Obama Death Panel

[WuDrWu]

I find it funny that liberals (11, Sc etc) keep bringing up Beck, Rush, Savage etc....


Not elected officials. Not a threat to anyone. Free speach entertainers.


Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Lee, Frank....etc.


Elected officials trying to destroy the Constitution. Real threats.


Do you understand? We'll keep trying, no matter your stubborness and ignorance.

[SB Shock]

Here let me fix your quote

Right wing fanatics don't get it. They are the biggest threat to this country is

1. Socialist Labor Party
2. Industrial Workers of the World
3. Greens USA
4. Green Party
5. Democratic Socialist of America
6. Socialist Action
7. Solidarity
8. Socialist Party USA
9. Black Radical Congress
10. Labor Party
11. News and Letters
12. Freedom Socialist Party
13. Freedom Road Socialist Organization
14. Left Turn
15. Committees of Correspondence
16. Communist Party USA
17. Spark
18. Socialist Workers Party
19. International Socialist Organization
20. Socialist Alternative
21. Revoluntionary Communist Party
22. Spartacist League
23. Progressive Labor Party
24. Revolutionary Workers League
25. Workers World Party
26. League of Revolutionaries for a New America
27. Maoist Internationist Movement
28. MoveOn.ord

[Maggie]

What is, or I suppose at least for now was, in my judgment problematic about the “end of life consultation” provision is that, to be discussed seriously, it must be viewed within the context of limiting health-care expenses (which is the often stated goal of the President, etc.).

Viewed in this rubric, there is a considerable difference between encouraging citizens to voluntarily and affirmatively seek out independent counsel with regard to drafting living wills and powers of attorney to ensure that their wishes are honored and the government providing monetary incentives for health-care professionals to approach, presumably while they are in a hospital or doctor’s office, etc., to “discuss” these very sensitive matters. The former minimizes coercion while the latter creates an environment in which coercion is in fact encouraged.

Conservatives, including Palin, are not alone in making this, rather obvious, observation. For example, here are two commentators who call attention to this issue and can hardly be called conservative:

Mickey Kaus in Slate:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/08/12/will-you-won-t-you-be-on-my-death-panel.aspx

And, in pertinent part, Charles Lane in The Washington Post:

Section 1233, however, addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones. Supporters protest that they're just trying to facilitate choice -- even if patients opt for expensive life-prolonging care. I think they protest too much: If it's all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what's it doing in a measure to "bend the curve" on health-care costs?

Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren't quite "purely voluntary," as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, "purely voluntary" means "not unless the patient requests one." Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that's an incentive to insist.

Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they're in the meeting, the bill does permit "formulation" of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would "place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign," I don't think he's being realistic.

What's more, Section 1233 dictates, at some length, the content of the consultation. The doctor "shall" discuss "advanced care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to"; "an explanation of . . . living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses" (even though these are legal, not medical, instruments); and "a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families." The doctor "shall" explain that Medicare pays for hospice care (hint, hint).

Admittedly, this script is vague and possibly unenforceable. What are "key questions"? Who belongs on "a list" of helpful "resources"? The Roman Catholic Church? Jack Kevorkian?

Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life's end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it's good to have a doctor's perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party -- the government -- recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don't have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach. (emphasis added).

As it happens, I have a living will and a durable power of attorney for health care. I'm glad I do. I drew them up based on publicly available medical information, in consultation with my family and a lawyer. No authority figure got paid by federal bean-counters to influence me. I have a hunch I'm not the only one who would rather do it that way.

In short, Palin’s rhetoric might have been over the top (and I would concede it was) but she has a point.

Cross posted in the “Healthcare Hypocricy?” thread.

[shocklight]

Bottom line:

The Dems were busted by Sarah Palin on bad policy so they removed it from the proposed legislation. What a great country!

If the socialists were so convinced that this was the best thing for the country, why did they cave on it? Why?

Bottom line:

Now, Grandma gets to live! Woohoo. I heard President Obama was coming like the grim reaper for everyone over 80 the day after the bill was signed. I know this is true because Rush, Palin, and Glen Beck told me so.

Yeah, what's the big deal? We would never kill off our elderly, the liberals have told us so. Just like in the early 70's on abortion, it was to stop back alley abortions, and they told us then it would never be used for birth control! Now 100 million dead babies later (1/3 of our population) we are a better off country!

You guys just don't get it!!!!!!!!!!!

Right wing fanatics don't get it. They are the biggest threat to this country.

The biggest threat to this country is the liberals with their socialist agenda! Larger government and higher taxation. This in part is why many came to this new world. Don't get me started on the freedom of religion part.

SC, you never come back with a valid arguement for debate. Your only comebacks are to call people names! Tell us all why you believe we need higher taxes, why we would want national health care, why we want to abort our babies, why we want bigger government (we already have a huge government), why is class envy so important to the dem's (PBO made 20 million last year, at least I think it was reported he did, it was in the millions).

Join us in the debate, you're a great shocker fan and you contribute nicely when we talk about the shockers, try it with polotics!

[kcshocker11]

I find it funny that liberals (11, Sc etc) keep bringing up Beck, Rush, Savage etc....


Not elected officials. Not a threat to anyone. Free speach entertainers.


Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Lee, Frank....etc.


Elected officials trying to destroy the Constitution. Real threats.


Do you understand? We'll keep trying, no matter your stubborness and ignorance.

Heres One! Need I say more!



8)