The Death Panel Rumors That Won’t Die

One of the most telling moments in Obama’s New Hampshire town hall yesterday came at the very end, when one of the last questioners said:

I’m very, very concerned about the elderly. I don’t know if this is also correct, but I understand that a federal health board will sit in judgment of medical procedures and protocols to impose guidelines on all providers — when to withhold certain types of care — like, what is the point you get to when we say, I’m sorry that this cannot happen.

Now, Obama had already addressed the rumor about “death panels” in his opening remarks, and then a second time early on in the Q&A. So I give him credit for not prefacing his answer with a Jon Stewart-like “Oh, for f*ck’s sake…” And his response was pretty good. But the fear-mongering has obviously embedded itself in the heads of a fair number of people who approach the health reform debate like Stephen Colbert in a great segment last night with Jonathan Cohn: “I know what you’re saying, but this is what I’m hearing.” So I still think the White House needs to be a little less polite about smacking down the lies that are out there.

Take the videos up on their new Reality Check site. Melody Barnes tackles the euthanasia question and is fairly effective. While she makes clear that the White House does not support–nor do any health reform measures propose–”mandatory end-of-life-care counseling,” however, the distinctions she makes are all about “mandatory” versus “voluntary.” That’s fine when the subject is living wills and power of attorney, but the people who are scared of health reform have been whipped up about euthanasia.

And when Barnes addresses that fear, it’s to assure people that there won’t be “forced euthanasia.” “There’s nothing mandatory, nothing scary, nothing like those who describe the bill as forcing euthanasia,” she says.”It empowers you to make choices about your health care future.” A paranoid listener might hear that as, If you want to choose euthanasia–or your children want to pressure you to kick off when you become too much of a burden–that’s cool with us.

Wouldn’t it be easier to just say: “Health reform will not involve euthanasia. We do not support euthanasia. We are only talking about giving people the opportunity and counseling to create a living will if they want to do so”?

Obama gave just this kind of straightforward answer during another part of the town hall, in a statement he should repeat every day, if necessary: “I recognize there is an underlying fear here that people somehow won’t get the care they need. You will have not only the care you need, but also the care that right now is being denied to you–if we get health care reform.”

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Morning Must Reads: Secret

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

    A Tale of Two Economies: Mitt Romney vs. Republican Governors

    The great recession has left the state of Ohio battered and bruised–and Mitt Romney would have you believe it’s Barack Obama’s fault. Writing in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer on May 4, Romney advised Ohioans that the President has delivered them “paltry results,” and that their state is in need of “a fundamental change in direction.”

  • georgiac

    You know, I kind of wish President Obama would get a little more “Jon Stewart” sometimes. I watched a portion of the town hall meeting in which he addressed the “death panel” rumors as outrageous and puzzling, ending his reference to “pulling the plug on Grandma” with a very mild “I’m against that.” I think he believes that the notion is on its face so ridiculous that his mild brand of sarcasm will rule the day, but he’s wrong, I think.

  • hellslittlestangel

    I agree, but short of rounding up the nuttiest of the nutty and putting them into FEMA camps to be processed into Soylent Green, there’s little meaningful pushback that can be done with the birther/deathers.

  • kattest123

    Amy Sullivan: considering that the MSM consistently lies, misleads, and generally covers for BHO, and considering that BHO lied about this issue just yesterday, why should anyone believe what he, you, or the rest of the MSM tell us?

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    Aren’t the anti-Death Panelers the same people who wanted to imprison people for not being patriotic after 9/11? If anyone should be pro DPs wouldn’t it be them?

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    I mean think about all the good things that would come from a DP:
    Solves the Social Security problem.
    Solves the overpopulation problem.
    Cures incurable diseases.

  • momentomaury

    “considering that the MSM consistently lies”

    I can think of many examples of this – mostly Fox News, The NY Post, The Washington Times….

  • pflatley

    What breathtaking, profoundly cynical nihilism. Since you write in complete sentences and can hyperlink, you’re sadly not one of the ignorant ones.

  • John Royal

    Yeah, I think he needs to go Jon Stewart, too. Enough with the niceness. Just start pointing out how damn stupid these people are. Just start calling the deathers liars.

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    Now I’m not calling for Death Panels, but if the Mayans are correct and the world is going to end in 2012, maybe, just maybe the only way to appease the Sun Gods are to have these DPs.

  • pflatley

    I agree with Amy’s basic point here, though. Obama is being too cute here. He has to say, “these people are lying to you” over and over and over. He did this during the campaign, so I’m sure he is capable of doing so.

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    Listen all I’m really saying is let’s stop playing “God Bless America” during the 7th inning stretch, that’s prime stretching time that’s being ruined by forced God induced patriotism.

  • http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com lawyermommy

    “Wouldn’t it be easier to just say: “Health reform will not involve euthanasia. We do not support euthanasia. We are only talking about giving people the opportunity and counseling to create a living will if they want to do so?”

    Yes, I could not agree more, however, I think it will not address the frenzy. I hope Obama reasonably anticipated this response from the far right. His focus should be on blitzing the media with details of the plan. The problem is that focusing on this one issue is very counterproductive. “The matter has been asked and answered”, should be his response while he identifies the key changes within the body of the proposed reform.

    This continued focus on one issue is distracting and counterproductive. Obama should promote a full review of key issues within the plan. I think such an approach will be beneficial in calming those who are capable of logical thought that have been caught up in the “one issue” hysteria.

  • darius3

    Wouldn’t it be easier to just say: “Health reform will not involve euthanasia. We do not support euthanasia. We are only talking about giving people the opportunity and counseling to create a living will if they want to do so”?

    Well, that’s exactly what someone who secretly supports death panels would say, now, isn’t it? ;-)

    Seriously, though, there’s nothing Obama can realistically do to convince those on the lunatic fringe to abandon their conspiracy theories. Instead, Obama’s making a play for the moderate, undecided voters. And by coming off as the calm voice of reason, the adult in the room, he can do more to win over those in the middle than Stewart-esque mockery or fiery denunciations ever could.

  • palininatowel

    Let’s ask why media outlets continue to even take the suggestion of “death panels” seriously. (I know, I know… “We’re just reporting what we hear!”)

    But as pflately noted in Joe Klein’s early post, .The New York Times and most other media outlets spend inordinate amounts of ink and time covering 6the shouting and inane claims on “death panels” and considerably less ink and time debunking this garbage.

    You do the same here by suggesting it should be up to Obama to debunk this lunacy (which he did — over and over as you point out).

    The whole Fox News “fair-and-balanced” malarkey has infected every corner of our media. No longer do hard news outlets call a lie a lie. Rather, they report anything anyone says — no matter how absurd or distant from reality — and leave it to the reader/view/listener to decide. Fox News’ phony mantra, “We report, you decide,” has become the watchword for a cowed media.

    How pathetic.

  • palininatowel

    And this…

    Rather, they report anything anyone says — no matter how absurd or distant from reality — and leave it to the reader/view/listener to decide. Fox News’ phony mantra, “We report, you decide,” has become the watchword for a cowed media.

    … is the very reason the Cheney cabal was able to sell us all a bill of goods in the run-up to the Iraq war. No matter how inane the claims made by “Curveball,” a vast majority of mass media outlets (save McClatchy and a few independent reports like Michael Massing in <i.The New York Review of Books) “reported” on Curveball’s outrageous claims without a shred of investigation into whether they were, or even could, be true.

  • kevin

    Yep.

    More than that, he needs to say, I can see you’re angry over this. But it’s a lie. And you should be angry at the people who are feeding you this lie, because they *know* it’s a lie.

    And he should ask the next questioner where they heard that from. Make them attribute it to a source, see what that source said, and hold that source accountable.

  • deconstructiva

    “So I still think the White House needs to be a little less polite about smacking down the lies that are out there.”

    “…but the people who are scared of health reform have been whipped up about euthanasia.”

    …and who’s been doing the whipping? Thanks, Amy, for this good post. I want more exposure and real outrage over the fake “outrage”. Still too many corporate media types passively report the “protests” but not who’s behind them. Help show your colleagues the light, Amy. Go for it. I’m with you and pflatley: Obama and other “town hallers” must stop playing nice and call out liars. Ask these “protesters” point blank to their beet-red faces, “…hey, nice Anthem polo shirt. Who are you with again? Conservatives for Patients’ Rights?”

  • gysgt213

    As Dan Froomkin points out in this post.

    In a Wall Street Journal article and accompanying video published Wednesday, Jonathan Weisman and Neil King Jr. accuse President Obama of micromanaging and mock him for his attention to what they consider minutiae.

    There are all sorts of legitimate reasons to be concerned about Obama’s approach to governing.

    But particularly after the presidency of George W. Bush, who so often seemed detached both from details and reality, Obama’s intellectual curiosity is one thing journalists in particular should celebrate, not sneer at. It’s the know-nothings we should be exposing, not the know-somethings.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/12/wsj-reporters-mock-obama_n_257313.html

  • gysgt213

    Media is apparently banking on these town halls now.

    “Tea Baggers are hoping for a literal “riot” at an upcoming town hall event, in order to create a spectacle for CNBC’s cameras. And the event will be hosted by a Democratic congressman who this week had a swastika painted on a sign outside his district office.

    Yesterday, Tea Party Patriots national coordinator Jenny Beth Martin sent an email, obtained by TPMmuckraker, to a Tea Party google group. Martin told the group: “We have a media request for an event this week that will have lots of energy and lots of anger. This is for CNBC.”

    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/email_tea_baggers_hoping_for_riot_at_rep_scotts_to.php?ref=fpblg

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    And why won’t these rumors die? These last 3 threads couldn’t be a clue, could they?

  • palininatowel

    Wouldn’t it be nice if Time, or any media outlet for that matter, posted a big, bold headline that read:

    THERE ARE NO DEATH PANELS. PERIOD.

  • hotbbq

    @kattest123 You’re an imbecile. Consider yourself John Stewart’ed

  • hotbbq

    @kevin

    Exactly. Make people take ownership of their own stupidity.

  • dumdedumdum

    We’ve got a very interesting situation developing, I think. A big chunk of the “national conversation” is being driven by complete disinformation, some of which is befuddled confusion but a lot of which is deliberate distortion that is amplified for effect and further amplified by the deplorable state of the news media — television, especially cable news, is increasingly little more than a conduit for the most nonsensical and despicable items of the day. I’m afraid that a White House response mechanism will largely serve to increase the volume and number of false and absurd claims that need to be countered or responded to — the gibberish and “let’s turn the town hall into a riot” devices being used work essentially as a denial of service attack on the nation’s bandwidth for rational discussion and consideration — a resource that like any other is limited and vulnerable to such attacks.

    It looks more and more to me like we’re getting painted into a corner.

  • palininatowel

    Why do you think the MSNBC anchor was practically wetting himself yesterday when one of their camera operators spotted a guy with a gun strapped to his thigh near the Obama event?

    Then they booked the idiot on “Hardball,” and the guy was as coherent as Joe the Plumber or Sarah Palin. Surprise.

  • plukasiak

    The problem here is that its an important question — and one that needs to be addressed with more than scoffing and mocking of those who ask it in this fashion.
    _
    For instance, should Medicare pay for a kidney transplant for someone in a permanent vegetative state if the family wants that kidney transplant, and a doctor is willing to perform the operation?
    _
    Obviously, the answer is “no”, public tax dollars should not be used in this fashion — and just about everyone recognizes this. the question here is where, and more importantly how is that line drawn….
    _
    The country would be better off if Obama were to directly confront this issue, and acknowledge that tax dollars will not be spent on pointless and ineffective medical treatments — and that everyone will still have the option, like they do today, to purchase supplemental insurance for procedures not covered by Medicare.
    _
    This is not the kind of question that you can finesse with fancy rhetoric — and Obama has to acknowledge that one way that he intends to cut the government costs associated with medical care is to eliminate unnecessary and ineffective procedures — and that includes “end of life” treatment and procedures. He should emphasize that the decisions will continue to be made by doctors acting as doctors — but that the Medicare simply can’t afford to pay for ineffective treatments.
    _

  • deconstructiva

    …KT tried in her “Sarah, Sarah, Sarah” 8/7 post, but alas, no headline. However, I’m guessing that she did type slowly so that birthers / deathers could understand it.

  • pflatley

    I think it’s important to confront and expose this stuff head on, but I do agree with your general point. While Amy’s post was pretty good, I hope she realizes how different the title “The Death Panel Rumors That Won’t Die” is from “The Death Panel Lie That Won’t Die.” It’s one word, but it makes all the difference in the world.

  • donovong

    Don’t you have a health-care reform townhall to go disrupt?

  • dumdedumdum

    @13 — never mind whether society should pay for such a transplant — should a healthy kidney be allocated to such a use? If the list of those who need kidneys is such that someone in a vegetative state bubbles up to the top, it sounds like there’s a surplus of available kidneys. It seems like a pretty hypothetical dilemma but I’m willing to be corrected.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    “We have a media request for an event this week that will have lots of energy and lots of anger. This is for CNBC.”
    -Tea Party Patriots national coordinator Jenny Beth Martin
    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/email_tea_baggers_hoping_for_riot_at_rep_scotts_to.php?ref=fpblg

    .
    “Of course, the White House counsel’s office had to sign off. Of course, an administration in its last two years looks for some fresh blood to inject into jobs. Of course, DOJ’s analysis of prosecutors goes beyond performance evaluations to achievements or failures on policy issues like immigration.
    I think we can get this just right with your help.”
    .
    -Washington Post ‘Reporter’ John Solomon to the White House after the DOJ Atty scandal broke.
    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/08/in_the_woodward-bernstein_tradition.php?ref=fpblg
    .
    How much more proof do you need that the corporate media is in on it? Why do you keep coming here and feeding this god awful blog and it’s corporate overseer? LET IT DIE PEOPLE. When Tumluty’s brother in law dies, you can come back and leave your condolences in what will surely be a poignant post, but until then, you are rewarding the enemy by giving them page hits and comment numbers. Enough already.

  • dumdedumdum

    OK, I’ll do it the new way.

    never mind whether society should pay for such a transplant — should a healthy kidney be allocated to such a use? If the list of those who need kidneys is such that someone in a vegetative state bubbles up to the top, it sounds like there’s a surplus of available kidneys. It seems like a pretty hypothetical dilemma but I’m willing to be corrected.

  • Tom in The Swamp

    Unfortunately, the President who can’t seem to hold torturers and those who ordered torture accountable for war crimes is going to have a hard time holding corporate propagandists accountable. After all, in both cases, they are just doing what they are ordered to do by those who pay their salaries.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    So long, cincinnatus. See you on the flip-side.

  • pflatley

    Too cynical for me. Yes, the corporate media owner is Don King and the great majority of journalists his stable of Mike Tysons. Absolutely. But it’s too easy to stop there. The Washington Post has become a bad newspaper under Fred Hiatt, but Dana Priest and Walter Pincus still write for it. They’re tremendous reporters.

  • juniusredivivus

    The country would be better off if Obama were to directly confront this issue, and acknowledge that tax dollars will not be spent on pointless and ineffective medical treatments — and that everyone will still have the option, like they do today, to purchase supplemental insurance for procedures not covered by Medicare.
    .
    Pluk, if Obama said this, the media would immediately translate it as:
    .
    WHITE HOUSE ADMITS GRANNY WILL BE SWITCHED OFF
    .
    OBAMA: BIG GOVERNMENT DOES HAVE DEATH PANELS
    .
    LEFTWING BUREAUCRATS TO EUTHANIZE SENIORS
    .
    and so forth. Surely you know by now what reality looks like?

  • deconstructiva

    …hmm, thanks hellslittlestangel, no more soylent green for me, though it’s good with pate or Cheez Whiz. Try it with caviar (in place of blini). In Congress, tourists misbehaving in the House and Senate chambers are removed immediately, no questions asked. Maybe this should happen here too? Protest, yes, but expect to be called out on lies and asked who sent you there. Keep shouting or make any threats, bye bye.

  • http://www.davesromanticpiano.com durangodave

    It seems to me that the overwhelming majority of the disinformation that is poisoning this debate (and many others) is coming from two sources: Rush Limbaugh (echoed by his talk-radio wannabes) and the Fox News/Murdoch “news” organizations (and I shouldn’t omit CNN’s Lou Dobbs). The problem is, given the first amendment guarantee of freedom of speech, what can be done about it?

  • pflatley

    And then Matthews thinks he’s Ed Murrow by trying to expose the guy as a Birther. Murrow had to do soul-sucking interviews like that in order to build the network capital to spend on taking on McCarthy. Matthews thinks that this absolute circus clown is McCarthy! Hey, whatever allows him to sleep at night.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    One can either ignore such utter nonsense, or report this speech to Big Brother (flag@whitehouse.gov) to be logged for future use.

  • bobell

    Zeke Emanuel, Rahm’s brother and a highly respected physician, made this point in a publshed article, pointing out that there must be some sort of assessment of priorities in the allocation of such scarce medical resources. As I recall, he specifically used the example of transplantable kidneys, far more of which are needed than available. Sure enough, Betsy McCaughey, in a right-wing op-ed purporting to out Zeke as a good prospective death-panel member, quoted just the part about having to make choices — without pointing out that it was in the context of a shorage of transplantable organs. An excellent example of how to lie by selective quoting out of context.

    I know that for many journos “lie” is a four-letter word. But sometimes nothing less will do.

  • palininatowel

    Exactly, pflatley. As if establishing in an interview that a guy who straps on a holster and pistol near a presidential event is a kook is some kind of accomplishment.

    But that about sums up the level to which most television pundits aspire.

  • palininatowel

    F*** it. I’m goin’ all-in on Death Panels.

    First on my list to go, those suffering from Mental Midgetism.

    We’ll miss you, Glenn.

  • shepherdwong

    “So I still think the White House needs to be a little less polite about smacking down the lies that are out there.”
    .
    Great idea. Then he should write the story of the early 21st Century about how the “conservative” movement has driven about a third of the country into functional insanity with their 30-year campaign of anti-government, anti-enlightenment, race-baiting propaganda.

  • cfukara

    ” .. most .. media outlets spend inordinate amounts of ink and time covering .. inane claims on “death panels” and considerably less ink and time debunking this garbage..”

    You would think that these clowns, the deathers, are driven by a higher calling – a “right to life” for all – including dear dying grandma.

    Look closely: They are from the stock of crass criminals whose “death panels” (of neo-cons and evangelical proselytizing christianists) harangued us with gratuitous lies and stampeded us and the world to wantonly kill thousands upon thousands of innocent humans – kids, mothers and fathers, grandpas and grandmas in Iraq …

    Yes. The USA’s vaunted MSM (of the ruling elite class) played the familiar supporting (psyche war) role in that aggression and crimes against humanity – for the crude oil and the $$$.

  • cfukara

    ” .. So I give him credit for not prefacing his answer with .. “Oh, for f*ck’s sake…”
    O, la la, Amy!
    When we say that a Bible girl shall “see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil” – we also cover “report on no evil (curse words)”, right? You know, under the “speak no evil” provision ..

  • carney3

    Well, what a relief, then!

    Here with all the relentless talk of “controlling costs” and dark talk of huge expenses incurred by the elderly in their last year of life I somehow thought there might be rationing. How silly and paranoid of me!

    I should just trust a politician’s promises and rosy predictions instead!

    Good to know there are no trade-offs, no difficult choices, no limits, no “catches”, and that everybody wins and nobody loses.

    Nobody will have any procedure denied for any reason ever.

    No private providers will be driven into bankruptcy or even make less of a profit than now.

    No one will have to pay more in premiums or taxes.

    There will be no drag on the economy or the federal budget as a result of creating a brand new entitlement program.

    Hooray!

  • deconstructiva

    …now this is progress. Once that fireandbrimstonewall is breached, look out! It’s sorta like those good girls and guys in college who have their first plastic party cups of hairy buffalo or cheap wine. Keep up the good work, Amy.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    In case anyone else is tired of Death Panels, the morons who fear them, the ideologues who maliciously spread lies about them, the media that perpetuate discussion on them, and finally the White House “Big Brother” department attempting to silence purveyors of said panels, here’s something new:
    .
    http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/12/holbrooke_victory_in_afghanistan_is_like_pornography

  • textee

    The Time magazine/Obama socialized medicine scheme: Obama lied. Grandma died.

  • pdermman

    Directly from your article

    “only around 35 million Americans – i.e., U.S. citizens – are uninsured”

    Well, then, forget the whole thing. Only 35 Million, not 42 Million? There’s obviously no point.

    The fact that you can just overlook the fact that, whatever it’s intended paranoid point, the article clearly states that 35 freaking million US citizens have no health coverage and not cringe makes me fear for you as a human being.

  • cfukara

    Now, textee, your grandma wasn’t meant to live for ever, was she?
    [And thank goodness, we, the people, shall not have textee, the anti-Obama, to kick around for ever ..]

  • deconstructiva

    …actually, alas, we might if human cloning takes off, think “Alien Resurrection”.

  • obumba

    Wowww!! What a bunch of blind sheep you obama worshipers are. Blind sheep walking straight towards the wolf’s mouth.

  • cfukara

    Perish the thought!

  • cfukara

    “Wouldn’t it be easier to just say:
    In fact, from the 2-minute video clip I saw of the last townhall meeting in NH, BHO said precisely that.

  • timkevrog

    Lets just get to the point at the Town Halls and allow those who oppose any government run health care programs to withdraw from medicare. Let them put their money where their mouth is and buy the private insurance they think is so great.
    I for one would support a government refund to such people of all the money they had contributed to medicare over the years just to get them out of the program.
    I am so sick of these misinformed people who are too deluded to realize that medicare is the only real lifeline they have.
    While they are at it, the same people can withdraw from social security too.

  • motugab

    Ms Sullivan’s article puts the healthcare reform debate in a sensible and enlightened view. Congratulations.

  • jdversion4

    Obumba, give the computer back to your mom and go play with some Leggos.

  • johneg

    I think some are ignoring the “elephant in the room.”
    SENSATIONALISM SELLS NEWS PAPERS AND ATRACTS EYES TO HEADLINES.

  • dla2s

    Let Mr.Prez duke it out with Paylin prime Time. or with any other rumor maker out there. finish um once and for all. Good Ratings too. its a win win situation

  • dla2s

    timkevrog. I like that idea.

  • pcwalt

    pdermman, if that is as accurate as you are under these circumstances, why should anybody take you seriously?

  • pcwalt

    If your first post is correct, then “these anti-Death Panelers” are people I’ve never heard of before. Who are these people you refer to, who wished to imprison folk for not being patriotic enough? Are you using wild hyperbole? Or are you hiding part of the equation in the attempt to make it look and sound nutty? (P.S. Perhaps you are not aware of how nutty you sound?)

  • pcwalt

    Perhaps I don’t quite catch your point, but are you including the quoted questioner in that “you” who are being fed lies? If so, please read that quote again and point out the lie or implied lie in it. Amy is quite adept at making it sound like it implies euthanasia, but it does not. It is merely asking how this nationalized health care can fail to do in America what it does in other countries with nationalized health care.

    Are you suggesting that all people of any age, any condition of health, any history of lifestyle, will get any surgical procedure they request, pronto? That is impossible. The only question is the one the questioner reasonably points out: where is the point at which the ones making the decisions will say, “No, that will not be done.”

  • erikofmke

    Perhaps the author should read the bill for answers. You can say whatever you want at a Q&A session, but the truth is IN THE BILL. Start with pages 284-288, SEC. 1151. REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOSPITAL READMISSIONS.

  • http://frankdozier.com frankdozier

    I sure hope I don’t end up on one of those death panels. Cuz I’m sick, you know.

  • billsanford

    Good ole, Time magazine; ever the DNC supporter, doing it’s duty to support Obama.

    Maybe if the Democrats didn’t engage in such huge amounts of ” Fear Mongering ” themselves, they would not be seeing it use against them.

    Maybe if Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Soros would put out a clear bill, consistent with the Senate version, and say, “this is the one”… we could have a debate that is focused on facts rather than ‘nuance’.

    Maybe if Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Soros were not trying to slam-dunk a bill before ANYONE thoroughly understands the contents that will affect 15% of the US GDP and 300 million people… the American people would have some confidence in their tactics.

    Until then, this whole mess looks like one BIG POWER GRAB.

  • vickiinflyoverusa

    Here’s the problem with your article. The issue with folks is not euthanasia, it is denied access to care. I doubt many people believe the government is literally going to pull the plug, however, a nat’l healthcare system could empower the gov’t to deny life saving/extending medicines. This DID happen in Wash State, a woman was denied treatment for her cancer but was offered a cheaper “euthanasia” drug. I know Obama is an intelligent guy, but in his own words in April he discussed that as much as 80% of the cost of health care is in people’s last year of life. Well, duh! People get sick, then they die. No gov’t program can change that. 90plus percent of us will die of some illness, such as cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc. Very few people just drop dead. End of life will ALWAYS be expensive. People are scared to death that if they are already reaching their life expectancy that the gov’t will deny care that would improve and extend their final days/months/years. people want HOPE. I guess Obama forgot that.

  • strohs71

    This is not complicated. If your insurer is the government, then it will determine what care will be approved in any given circumstance. Call that decision making entity what you will. The elderly will be denied types of care/treatments/procedures on utilitarian ground.

  • strohs71

    Palin reports the following on here facebook page:

    Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens….An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]

  • mustang1970

    I hate to stir up the liberal love-in at the “global warming is fact” periodical of record but note the following excerpt from a column I saw today. The point is not the column but the excerpts from Mr. Obama’s own words (recently). Read them and then blog what an idiot I am along with the rest of the “mob” for actually understanding the words from his mouth and reacting to them rationally:

    Somebody call White House flack Linda Douglass at Fishy-1-1 – Mickey Kaus is circulating discouraging arguments suggesting Obama’s risky health reform scheme might actually lead to “death panels”, and yet again he is relying on Obama’s own words:

    If, as Harold Pollack argues, “rationing of life-saving or life-extending care” would not really be a priority for the “effectiveness” panels–such as the Obama-endorsed IMAC–then it was all the more stupid to bring the topic up, no? Here’s the first graf from a Bloomberg account of an early Obama health care foray back in April:
    April 29 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said his grandmother’s hip-replacement surgery during the final weeks of her life made him wonder whether expensive procedures for the terminally ill reflect a “sustainable model” for health care.

    Gee, where could the misinformed town hall crazies have gotten the idea that Obama was thinking about saving money by denying expensive procedures toward the end of life? … [via Dish] … 1:49 P.M.

    Ha! Folks who really want to stick it to Obama and sow hysteria about “death panels” will extract this from Obama’s same fateful interview with David Leonhardt of the Times (my emphasis):

    THE PRESIDENT: So that’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that’s also a huge driver of cost, right?

    I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.

    DAVID LEONHARDT: So how do you — how do we deal with it?

    THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.

    So Obama “suspects” that the legislative process will produce some sort of independent group that can give non-determinative “guidance” on end-of-life care for the chronically ill, with an eye towards saving money. Just don’t call them death panels!

  • http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2009/08/13/death-panels-and-who-will-die.html tdaxp » Blog Archive » Death Panels and Who Will Die

    [...] Sullivan has a remarkably deceptive piece on her blog in which she attempts to debunk this as a “myth:” I’m very, very [...]

  • steve851

    Since Obama has spoken in favor of the equivalent of death panels on numerous occasions, he is in no positiion to do any push back on the issue. He has repeatedly said we should have medical panels making decisions as to what care should be provided. And he has said that we spend too much money on end of life care. While I am tempted to agree with him on the latter point, it still sounds like death panels to me.

  • elwimpo

    According to AOL sources, Sullivan ‘hails’ Colbert’s request to be on a death panel. Ann Coulter expressed the same sentiments last night on my favorite network. Perhaps we ought to hail her, as well?

    Other sentiments you might wish to check out would be Zeke Emanuel. He has some *ahem* interesting comments to make about his Hippocratic oath.

    Here’s another fact we can all chew on awhile: conservatives are committed to the sanctity of all life; the left regards life as expendable.

  • http://evangelicalgateway.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/morning-report-august-13-how-do-we-assess-the-successfailure-of-obamas-initiatives-why-the-left-cannot-countenance-the-rationality-of-opposition-disa Morning Report, August 13: How do we assess the success/failure of Obama’s initiatives? Why the Left Cannot Countenance the Rationality of Opposition. Disappearing Boats. And the God of Danger and Dynamite. « Evangelical Gateway

    [...] her concern, you might find it’s more rational than you think.  These are not merely rumors, not merely deception.  And until the left acknowledges that they have at least a basis in truth, [...]

  • harvinohio

    I was against Death Panels before I was for them….
    I just saw 2 old hacks (Andrea Mitchell and Bob Schrum) reporting together. It has persuaded me to be FOR these “death panels”!!

  • jackdavis1

    Obama on his death panels:

    ===================================

    QUOTE:

    “Obama’s response? He says reform “would not basically pull the plug on grandma because we decided that it’s too expensive to let her live anymore.” But the House bill comes dangerously close to giving unelected health boards the power to pull that plug. And as policy students know, it’s not always the precise wording of legislation that counts, but the regulatory interpretations of laws that are made by federal and state officials.

    So, in a sense, Obama’s denial was a non-denial denial. He should have unequivocally demanded that the death-board language be removed from any bill. But he didn’t — perhaps because he agrees with it.”

    END OF QUOTE–and thank you, Larry Kudlow, Real Clear Politics

    ========================================

  • peterclarke

    The majority of Americans know when attempts are made to hoodwink them by a bunch of self-serving Senators and House Members whose loyalty is not to the people but rather to their individual political parties.

    The following is a calibrated version of just what truly is UN-American.

    Democrats and Republican politicians who put party politics and policies above those of the people.

    Republicans and Democrats who voted to saddle the next three generations of our children with debt, mortgaged and held by foreign countries.

    The unelected voice of the news medias that report biased and slanted articles in support of only the political policies of ONE political party and fail to report all the facts.

    Senators and Congress members that do not speak up against a President and Administration for breaking the privacy act. No citizen, including the President, is above the laws which he was sworn to uphold.

    An Attorney General that dismisses criminal charges against thugs that were restricting voters during an election at polling stations, for political reasons, contrary to existing laws he was sworn to uphold.

    Republicans and Democrats who do not pay their share of taxes yet continue to spend the people’s money as if it were their own with no accountability to anyone but themselves.

    Unelected and unaccountable czars that direct and influence policies from closed door meetings and dealings with lobbyists and friends.

    Party politics that have divided the country and pit brother against sister not for the best interest of the people but solely for the self serving interest of political parties.

    The American people have had it with these daily and calibrated UN-American activities that go on in Washington and across the States.

  • pmg25

    August 12, 2009
    There He Goes Again (Just Don’t Call Them “Death Panels”)
    Somebody call White House flack Linda Douglass at Fishy-1-1 – Mickey Kaus is circulating discouraging arguments suggesting Obama’s risky health reform scheme might actually lead to “death panels”, and yet again he is relying on Obama’s own words:

    If, as Harold Pollack argues, “rationing of life-saving or life-extending care” would not really be a priority for the “effectiveness” panels–such as the Obama-endorsed IMAC–then it was all the more stupid to bring the topic up, no? Here’s the first graf from a Bloomberg account of an early Obama health care foray back in April:
    April 29 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama said his grandmother’s hip-replacement surgery during the final weeks of her life made him wonder whether expensive procedures for the terminally ill reflect a “sustainable model” for health care.

    Gee, where could the misinformed town hall crazies have gotten the idea that Obama was thinking about saving money by denying expensive procedures toward the end of life? … [via Dish] … 1:49 P.M.

    Ha! Folks who really want to stick it to Obama and sow hysteria about “death panels” will extract this from Obama’s same fateful interview with David Leonhardt of the Times (my emphasis):

    THE PRESIDENT: “So that’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that’s also a huge driver of cost, right?

    I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.”

    DAVID LEONHARDT: “So how do you — how do we deal with it?”

    THE PRESIDENT: “Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.”

    So Obama “suspects” that the legislative process will produce some sort of independent group that can give non-determinative “guidance” on end-of-life care for the chronically ill, with an eye towards saving money. Just don’t call them death panels!

    from: http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2009/08/there-he-goes-again.html/

  • infidel18

    The liberal’s hysterical reaction to the dissenters of a bill that will bankrupt our country, in values and treasure, is truly sad to watch. The administration’s and the media’s attempt to isolate and marginalize the legitimate concerns of average Americans is hypocritical and pathetic. Its easier to portray these folks as racists, fringe loons and far right extremists than to address the legitimate concerns behind the “death panel” statements and the real concerns about overreaching government control over free markets and our lives.

    You don’t have to be a “conspiracy theorist” not to trust this government to make reasonable and timely decisions about your most precious commodity, you and your families health. You don’t have to be a “conspiracy theorist” to believe that this bill and the resulting consequences once in place will result in rationing, a single payer system and a lower standard of care for those who currently have good health care.

    Perhaps all you have to be is a little “intellectually curious,” like you all credit Obama to be, to look beyond the spoon feeding from those pushing this bill. Americans of all stripes and extremes finally woke up and want answers and accountability from their elected officials. Some express themselves more thoughfully than others. Extreme examples and exaggerations can be cited to both sides of this debate but should not be used to ignore, discredit or marginalize the majority of the American people who question this bill.

    We want people given the honor to serve us to not only read, but understand the bills they sign and the resulting consequences. We want the truth about the costs and how this massive program will be paid for by the tax payers. We demand they explain these details to us instead of attempting rush a massive bill through in three weeks. The administration/congress choose political expediency breaching their promise of transparency to the American people to their peril. Now let them complain about/face the consequences.

  • peterclarke

    Why are Democrat and Republican, Senators and House Members supported by their respective political parties, lobbyists and special interest groups rushing to DISMANTLE our health care insurance programs?

    American citizens already have the best health care insurance programs in the world. More than 85% are satisfied with the coverage available to them. It is envied by people from around the Globe and they come to America for health care.

    Do Americans travel to Canada, Cuba, England or France etc. to seek health care? Of course not, It is already the best.

    Is the reform then mainly to include health benefits for the 15 to 20 million illegal’s and non-Americans? Is it to cover the 2 to 3 million who do not have and can not afford health care coverage for political reasons? Or, is it, so Government and political parties can further control your life style and have unelected bureaucrats and czars make treatment decisions for us based on the cheapest available drug or health procedures?

    Why is there NO clause or statement in any proposed health reform that specifically states that NON-CITIZENS will NOT be entitled to benefits under the Government socialized universal health care program. WHY?

    The Obama reform for a socialized universal health care government run program, will lead to the complete dismantling of our current health care insurance system within 5 years. So, other than a government attempt to further control our lives and give coverage to 15 to 20 million illegal residents and Non-Americans it makes no sense.

    Wake up people, these Senators, House Members, with their respective political parties and biased and pro Obama news media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN etc.) lobbyists and special interest groups are not looking out for our interests, but rather the interest of 15 to 20 million illegal and non-Americans living here at our expense through increased taxes for all Americans.

blog comments powered by Disqus