Oh, Those Death Panels

I fear that Senator Snake-in-the-Grassley has more important things to do than telling Americans the truth. Excellent catch though. How will the GOP explain this latest blatant hypocrisy? “We voted for death panels before we voted against them” perhaps?

Holy smokes. Good catch Amy.

Yes, good catch Amy. But I must say, it is troubling to find out that only Republicans, and all Republicans, are duplicitous hypocrites and lying connivers. Isn’t it wonderful to have a party, i.e. Democrats, of pure probity striving always for the higher good? Thank God for Democrats, without whom American politics would be one back-stabbing hypocrisy after another.
~
Seriously, though, the sooner some come to the realization of the dripping corruption awash in all American politics, the better. Do not be entirely naive, please…

And another good one, Amy!

{What really happened recently when you went into seclusion? Did you have a searing experience like, say, a bolt of lightning stricking you on the head?}

Amy: good catch! Did you get that straight from the BHO administration, or did it filter through Journ-o-List first?

Exiled, you object to being cast as an evil Republican, as I recall. Are you comfortable creating similar stereotypes whereby others believe that Democrats are pure as the driven snow? I think you’ll find that many on here are not very fond of e.g. Baucus, and are also perfectly prepared to criticize Obama when we think he has failed to live up to his promises. Also, on the more narrow issue of health reform, which party do you think is making the accusations of socialism, Communism, Nazism etc, and trying to blatantly distort what is actually in the various bills under consideration? I haven’t seen Democrats accusing Republicans of creating death panels, and howling abuse and threats at town halls on healthcare reform. Have you?

nice liberal talking points amy..good job defending BHO .it s nice to know we have objective journailists like you not taking sides..lol..just join the administration like your fellow ” objective” journo Carney..and u wonder why readership is down so much…

@cfukara Thanks for noticing my absence. I spent most of the summer on a fellowship studying science and religion (that being my main beat) in the UK and doing some reporting in Rwanda. Fantastic experience, but it’s good to be back.

AMY..i know you wont respond as u only respond to your fellow liberals ..any tough critiques are met with silence.what a surprise

Thanks so much for responding to commentary, Amy Sullivan, it is very much appreciated, and highly increases the value of your blog posts (and of Swampland).
.
My sincere gratitude for the opportunity to make this a better avenue for journalism through our mutual engagement on issues.

Well Amy, my bet is lying. Nothing like some smear and fear to get out the vote. Of course, considering that the attention span of the media, I doubt most others will notice this bit of blatant flip-flopping.

neorationalist86:
.
…only Republicans, and all Republicans, are duplicitous hypocrites and lying connivers…

I don’t think that Amy Sullivan either stated or implied either of those two propositions.
.
Can you point to a specific line in her post in which the reader is told that hypocrisy and deception are the sole province of Republicans?
.
If not, don’t you think that demands like yours for journalists to painstakingly, ritually advertise their understanding that the other side –at some other place, at some other time, with respect to some other issue than the one under discussion– is equally wrong about something is one of the principle problems with American political journalism today?
.
Aren’t you really castigating Sullivan for (finally) not doing conventionally poor Beltway He Said/She Said, neorationalist86?

Basil
~
My comment was aimed at Amy, not at the Swampland ‘commentariat’ to quote Joe Klein. I often see the progressives amidst us take Obama to task for his often centrist positions. I am not denying that. But, when was the last time TIME posted a thread uncovering some glaring hypocrisy in the Democratic party, perhaps one of its many corruption scandals? I am not seeking that ‘fair and balanced, tit-for-tat’ reporting, but it would be conducive to journalism for TIME’s staff to actually report and investigate the corrupt power-hoarding mentalities of American politicians, not merely the hypocrisies of some GOP members. It’s quite clear that TIME seeks stories involving shamed Republican politicians (Sanford), disgraceful GOP tactics (Palin, Limbaugh), extreme GOP wingnuts (birthers, death panelists) and myriad other GOP blemishes. While all of these things are pertinent and factual, there is a clear underlying agenda of discrediting the GOP whilst no effort is being expended to even nominally check to make sure there is not some egregious duplicity coming from the other camp.
~
As for this:
Exiled, you object to being cast as an evil Republican, as I recall. Are you comfortable creating similar stereotypes whereby others believe that Democrats are pure as the driven snow?

I cannot see any equivalence between being lambasted as a racist, ignorant, sexist, homophobic conservative (in my case) and being considered overly idealistic and naive to the flaws of one’s party (in the case of Amy).

Amy, you should catch an IPOD broadcast of Rachel Maddow’s show that aired tonight, August 13, 2009. She pulled out an editorial penned not too long ago, where Newt Gingrich was advocating for end of life counseling for medicare recipients. He argued that the most costly part of medicare–I think 70% is the number–encompasses a patients last few months of life, and that with successful counseling, the government could save 33 billion dollars a year. Yes, the same Newt Gingrich who is a freshly minted Deather.

Rachel also pulled out a missive from Sarah Palin’s half term as governor authorizing a statewide Health Care day, or something like that, so that people can focus on end of life issues, including living wills, etc.

She also showed evidence where Chuck Grassley favored end of life counseling in the not too distant past.

I understand that politics is a dirty business, but with the advent of Youtube, Google, and Twitter (yes, that’s directed at you, Chuck!), it’s so much easier to catch these hypocrites in the act.

The fact is, the republicans have decided, en masse, to attempt to derail health care reform. The American people be damned! As Senator Demint opined, in a moment of truthfulness, “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.”

So, let’s do away with all these meaningless bromides about bipartisanship. That’s a meaningless proposition. If President Obama is able to muster Senator’s Snowe and Collins, he should consider it a job well done, because he won’t get any other republican support.

Now that the Obama Death Panel provisions have been removed from the Obama socialized medicine scheme, I can’t wait to see the reaction from the militant euthanasia enthusiasts of the Democrat party base, to wit: the Washington press corps, the pagan left, the atheist left, the feminist left, the earth worshipping left, et al.

SZ
~
It’s nice to have you back in the Swamp.

I believe my comment to Basil addressed your concerns as well, however unwittingly. If you have further queries, do not hesitate to engage.

But, when was the last time TIME posted a thread uncovering some glaring hypocrisy in the Democratic party
Three posts ago was one about a deal between Pharma and the White House that may or may not have happened. Is that glaring enough or should I search further?

There is not going to be any repercussions for lying to the press or American people. There never is, unless it involves sex…and even then it has to be a Democrat doing the sex and lying (President Gingrich and David “Diapers” Vitter are still GOP all stars when you need an interview).
We aren’t going to see Republicans get the lying shoved back in their faces this Sunday morning. It is never going to happen. Grassley is never going to face this question:
“you lied to Americans about what you now pretend will kill grandmas and you even supported the concept previously. We have 5 more minutes of interview here, why should we believe a word we say if you are going to lie about such a serious and personal sort of issue?”

Reposting from the other thread, just cuz
.
My father passed away in 1989 at age of 62. He might not have, but a comittee at the privately owned Hospital where he received his care determined that at his age, a lung transplant would not be an efficient use of a limited resource.
.
My mother passed in 2005 at the age of 76. She had a living will properly drawn out, and cleary spelled out DNR orders. Both died in their own homes.
.
Anyone who speaks cavalierly about how health care isn’t rationed yet but will be under Obamacare or how there’s something wrong witrh providing sensible counseling to people facing serious illnesses is not only hopelessly ignorant but probably heartless as well.

Exiled, would you mind specifying these “many corruption scandals”? I would settle for say 10 in the last 5 years. Also, how about telling us about all this blatant disinformation you seem worried about? I am assuming you’ve got plenty of material in mind here, rather than mounting a fishing expedition or building a false equivalence along the lines of: the GOP does bad things, the GOP is made up of politicians, the Democrats are politicians, therefore the Democrats do bad things. Care to share what’s on your mind and give us some specifics to work with?

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/08/12/newt-gingrich-changes-whats-left-of-his-mind-on-end-of-life-care/
.
For those who appreciate a nice discussion of where dear old Newt is coming from.

So you DID get the job of writing up those last novels for L. Ron Hubbard! Congratulations. But you need to cut back on the florid prose and overheated imagination. Even he might think you’ve gone too far in your search for an alternate reality.

There’s a fatal flaw in the premise of this post, Amy.

You assume that the jackholes peddling the ‘death panel’ crap have enough shame to care, and that the people protesting on the basis of ‘death panels’ will ever make the connection between the votes over the actual counseling provisions and the stuff that’s been willfully twisted to kill health reform progress.

You’ve already seen Grassley crow 1) about stripping the provision because of how it could be misunderstood, not a day removed from telling his constituents they SHOULD be afraid of that exact misinterpretation, and 2) about how he stonewalled the ‘bipartisan compromise’ long enough to have the town hall protests come to fruition. You know, like they had this all planned from the very beginning.

Basil,
This is silly, but I’ll humor you.
~
Eliot Spitzer, James McGreevy, Rod Blogojevich and John Harris, Bernard Madoff, and currently John Murtha, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters and the entire state of New Jersey. There’s certainly not a lack of substance to talk about Basil, with regard to the Democratic party.
~
But I am not asking for a quid pro quo reporting scheme equally apportioning dirt to each side. What I am noting is the clear agenda here of solely seeking to smear one side. It’s positively unquestionable given the propensity here at TIME to cover GOP indiscretions and hypocrisies, while largely ignoring these other stories.

I am now quitting the repulican party. I will be the blunt of all jokes when my friends and I have a beer and talk politics.

Exiled, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t it you who denied being a GOP partisan as recently as yesterday? Also, why is it silly to ask you to offer some sort of support for the rumors and fearmongering hints you offer about how bad the Democrats are. Also, you’ve offered lists of names, not actual evidence of corruption. Would you mind being specific about what these people were found guilty of doing – in court? Also too, as a recent GOP star might say, how precisely is “the whole state of New Jersey” guilty of corruption (not to mention being Democratic)? Are the rocks and streams themselves to be found guilty as well as enjoying a party affiliation?

This might have been worth the trouble if AS hadconfronted Grassley directly with it. Now it’s too late to have any effect, particularly if she only “asks” him in a blog entry he’ll just ignore.

The media have been played very effectively by the liars and fearmongers who know reporters no longer have guts.

I’ve been watching this whole debate here, north of the border, with amazement and bewilderment and it astonishes and saddens me. I just don’t get the fear and rage that the mere idea of a fair, universal health care system has raised amongst some people.

And really, shame on everyone — I mean everyone — who has allowed themselves to be distracted from the very real problems you people currently have with your present system with all this nonsense about “death panels” and the rest.

Does anyone really, really believe that the people who are behind this propaganda give a single damn about providing decent care to those who currently don’t have it?

Or is it more likely that they are the catspaws of the insurance industry who has, up until now, had everything their own way and does not want the gravy train to stop?

The Republicans deserve a good swift kick in their collective ass for putting their petty politics and miserable “we’ll get Obama at any cost” mentality ahead of the good of the people they are supposed to represent.

And the Democrats deserve a slap upside their collective heads for (a) not countering this crap with the truth and (b) not growing a set and standing up for what they believe in.

It is to weep.

Exiled, Spitzer used prostitutes, which, although repellent, is hardly corruption in any meaningful sense. Madoff defrauded a lot of people, but bought Republicans as well as Democrats, and committed his crimes under the eyes of the GOP administration and DOJ. Blagojevich and Harris I grant you, although they seem like one case to me. McGreevey resigned after coming out of the closet – which is not corruption in any sense of the word, any more than Sanford’s affair qua sexual folly would be, and was never found guilty of financial impropriety. Murtha – well, I dislike his handling of pork, but he has not actually been prosecuted. Rangel and Waters – again, what specifically have they been tried and convicted for? I may not find them especially edifying individuals, but that doesn’t make them corrupt. This really isn’t a tremendously impressive list, Exiled. It hardly compares with torture, Iraq, US Attorney firings, the lies about death panels and so forth. Sure, the Democrats aren’t pure – but do you really think this list compares with the 8 years of Bush and the recent lunacy of Palin, Grassley, Gingrich et al? And how on earth do you find all of New Jersey guilty? Must we assume that all of Texas is guilty because of Bush, Gonzalez, Rove etc?

Grollican
~
I am not a Republican any more. I recently registered independent. However, despite your partisan interpretation, I am not defending the GOP, I am merely tired of seeing the Democratic party get a free-pass in the media in terms of its improprieties. Hypocrisy, corruption, duplicity. TIME seems to consider these GOP traits rather than American political traits.
~
Spitzer, McGreevy, Blogojevich and Madoff I am certain you are aware of. Murtha is embroiled in yet another earmarks corruption scandal; Rangel seems to be having some tax issues; Waters and TARP kick-backs; NJ has a notorious history of Democratic corruption epitomized by the recent FBI round-up of several mayors and other Democratic officials involved in some egregious activity including blackmarket organ sales. So, are these worthy of some TIME attention? I certainly think so. There is nothing partisan with my desire to see journalism devoid of its one lop-sided partisan agenda in taking aim solely at the GOP. I am not refuting the substance of this recent TIME fetish in exposing GOP wrongdoings and hypocrisy, but as a media outlet it is unprofessional to continue to push these partisan-driven attacks.

Exiled, have you really forgotten how the media treated the Clintons? How they spent years smearing them? I hardly think you can claim Democrats get a free ride. Or how about Kerry, who actually did serve his country in war, and yet was attacked and slandered 24/7 by draftdodgers and cowards like Bush and Cheney? if you want to push this line of the liberal media, you are doing so against all the evidence, and against reality. Also, you haven’t denied that Grassley and Palin are hypocrites and liars. Why is reporting this – in fairly tepid terms – a partisan attack?

Wait, wait wait. Why are both of you pushing this ‘conviction-only’ criteria for media coverage of Democratic wrong-doings? While you encourage TIME to oust GOP members for their nauseating statements (free speech mind you) you reject coverage of Democrats lest they have been criminally convicted of something?

Feel lucky, my Canadian friend. Sooner or later the GOP will accuse you of euthanising Stephen Hawking and slaughtering poor people in your fiendish Communist medical death camps. Just enjoy your peace and quiet while you can, and, of course, those immoral cheap drugs that Americans eye with envy and sometimes smuggle across the border into our free market paradise.

Thanks for the great work, Amy. Please keep up the pressure on this issue. Will you post more stories about your UK studies?

Basil
~
TIME magazine, not media. Now, not always.
~
I am not defending Grassly or Palin. I am not defending the GOP. I am not defending hypocrisy. I am only puzzled as to TIME’s recent GOP-only binge.

Before I leave for the night let me just make a few quick notes. I am not opposed to ousting Palin and Limbaugh as the maliciously ignorant fools they are. I do not reject reporting of Grassley’s duplicitous hypocrisy. I have no qualms with the condescending smack-downs of rabid anti-Obama weirdos such as the Birthers and Death Panelists. The GOP should be held accountable for the actions/statements emanating from this recent surge of craziness. However, the extent to which TIME seems to dwell on this madness, and any GOP impropriety is, shall I say, ‘fishy.’ Look at how long the Sanford saga was drawn out. I think perhaps there was one quick post with few comments about the NJ corruption ring. In my opinion a corruption ring involving multiple mayors and city officials across NJ working in consort with 5 rabbis to sell blackmarket human organs is quite a story. Where was TIME during all this mischief? Where is TIME now as Murtha, Waters and Rangel are facing scrutiny over earmark/tax/donation improprieties and discrepancies? There is simply no point on visiting Swampland if it is to be hijacked solely by anti-GOP venom. A little context would be nice, some proportionality. By ignoring Democratic deficiencies there is an indisputable caricature being painted here, one that has the GOP in the dark, while the Democrats bask in the light of righteousness. It’s a flawed characterization that colors people’s already tainted perceptions. It’s marketing, not journalism.
~
In any case, Basil, it’s been a pleasure, on both threads. You have good points, it’s been enjoyable. Ciao a tutti.

“Holy smokes”?
Has it already been 40 years since Woodstock?

It seems to me that there is enough here for the Dems to take the fight to these Palinists/Repugs by mounting a very vigorous, scorched-earth psyche war of one-liners against the clueless, nasty armies of shuffling lying Zombies.

Lackluster.
How desperately do the Dems want this bill?
Is there fire in their belly and passion in their hearts?

Well, maverick – I thank you for your good wishes, and I promise that should someone fly Mr. Hawking from Cambridge, England to the University of Toronto and then attempt to smother him, I shall do my best to stop them.

As for the Communist death camps, well, I haven’t seen a red or even a dusky pink for a long time. There was a communist party candidate on my ballot the last election, but I think that was more for form than anything else.

Off-topic aside: We do have a Marijuana Party — saw their free time political party ad at 2 in the morning during the last election (I kid you not!) and was seriously tempted to vote for them!

I wish the GOP would have the balls to come up here and see how our system works, the good and the bad. It’s by no means perfect, but if you get sick, you don’t have to worry about losing your home or your job.

As for our immorally low-priced drugs, well, I have insurance (that’s what most Canadians mean when they talk about job-related health care benefits) which takes care of 80% of my drug costs; I still consider the costs to be fairly hefty. For instance, I take anti-depressants – they run about 100 or so per month (that’s without the insurance).

But if both the insurance companies up here and the drug manufacturing companies here in Canada manage to make a decent profit, then what kind of robbery are they getting away with in YOUR country???

what I’m hearing is a group of lawmakers (mostly Republican, some Democrat) saying “I was FOR death panels before I was AGAINST them.”

Thanks for catching this – though I don’t expect it to spread like wildfire through the mainstream media…

Mmm… probably not for L Ron, but more likely for Lyndon LaRouche. S/he’s got all the right buzzwords to appeal to that base.

Hey!
Only dirty, beret-wearing communists want to remedy the burdens created by an uneducated, perpetually ill populace, or think that people shouldn’t be driven into bankruptcy for the crime of developing cancer.

This is not the smoking gun. But judging by the comments here and at Daily Kos the reaction to this entry is a great example of confirmation bias.

For one, I’m not sure that this provision became law exactly as quoted here. It didn’t show up in a google search. Someone else should check this.

What’s worse,Sullivans’s quotation is taken out of context as it applies to this debate – it refers to terminally ill people getting information from hospice doctors or employees.

Here’s the quotation taken from Amy Sullivan’s blog:

“The covered services are: evaluating the beneficiary’s need for pain and symptom management, including the individual’s need for hospice care; counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options, and advising the beneficiary regarding advanced care planning.”

I googled part of the quote “The covered services are: evaluating the” and only found 5 links. To me, this means that I’ve got right source for her quotation.

It’s a link to Thomas, the Libary of Congress search engine. Her’s a short link to it
http://tinyurl.com/houston-problem

Here’s the whole section from Thomas. Sullivan’s quotation comes in the conference provision. Note the limitations to terminally ill and hospice doctors or employees.

———-start quotation———-

Coverage of Hospice Consultation Services (Section 512 of the Conference Agreement and Section 512 of the House Bill).

Present Law

Current law authorized coverage of hospice services, in lieu of certain other Medicare benefits, for terminally ill beneficiaries who elect such coverage.

House Bill

Coverage of certain physician’s services for certain terminally ill individuals would be authorized. Persons entitled to these services would be individuals who have not elected the hospice benefit and have not previously received these physician’s services. Covered services would be those furnished by a physician who is the medical director or employee of a hospice program. Services would include evaluating the individual’s need for pain and symptom management, counseling the individual with respect to end-of-life issues and care options, and advising the individual regarding advanced care planning. Payment for such services would equal the amount established for similar services under the physician fee schedule, excluding the practice expense component. The provision would apply to consultation services provided by a hospice program on or after January 1, 2004.

Senate Bill

No provision.

Conference Agreement

The conference agreement provides coverage of certain physician’s services for certain terminally ill individuals. Beneficiaries entitled to these services are those who have not elected the hospice benefit and have not previously received these physician’s services. Covered services are those furnished by a physician who is the medical director or employee of a hospice program. The covered services are: evaluating the beneficiary’s need for pain and symptom management, including the individual’s need for hospice care; counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options, and advising the beneficiary regarding advanced care planning. Payment for such services equals the amount established for similar services under the physician fee schedule, excluding the practice expense component. The provision would apply to consultation services provided by a hospice program on or after January 1, 2005.

—–end quotation ———

I’m sorry, but this provision applies to terminally ill people getting information from hospice employees or doctors. Presumably, these are people who have decided that they no longer want active treatment but only palliative care.

That’s a world of difference from a program that applies to people who aren’t terminally ill AND have not decided to choose hospice care.

There’s no doubt in the world that the Republicans supported the voluntary once every 5 year end-of-life consultation but you can’t prove hypocrisy by using an earlier provision that’s very difference in terms of timing and population.

There’s the also the issue of why this error wasn’t caught in any of the comments at Daily Kos or at Amy Sullivan’s blog.

My guess is confirmation bias. There’s a world of evidence out there. Some of which fits with what we already believe in and some of which doesn’t. Stuff that fits gets a much easier pass than stuff that doesn’t.

I’m not sure why I looked up the quote. Probably because it was just too good to be true. I had the advantage of just getting burned by a quotation which I posted about and then had to correct.

shel –
I think you are misreading something. The people eligible for the end of life services “are those who have not elected the hospice benefit”.
_
This is pre-hospice counselling. (“The covered services are: evaluating the beneficiary’s need for pain and symptom management, including the individual’s need for hospice care; counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options…)
_
in other words, this really is what Amy purports it to be — a bill that provides for “euthanasia” counselling.

The dirty truth is that these protests “against” health care have very little to do with health care. That’s merely the cover being used at the moment.

If you listen to the rants from the teabagging performance art crowd, you will quickly learn what it’s really about–a fear that the U.S. is being converted into a worker’s paradise by an Unamerican brown guy with an Islamic sounding name. Or, as Glenn Beck (one of the gods of the teabagging crowd) recently declared on national T.V, that President Obama is a “racist” with a “deep-seated hatred of white people.” Presumbably, even his own mother and grandmother.

Look at the composition of the protesters as well. Nearly all are middle-aged or older white people who voted for McCain in the last election.

So, keep that in mind when you see this debate unfold. There are people, of course, who have legitimate concerns about health care reform. After all, when you have major voices in a political party (Newt, Palin, Grassley, etc.) warn about euthanasia or “death panels”. You would have to be brain dead not to be concerned. Many folks are not political junkies. They don’t pay all that much attention to politics, but when they watch the nightly news with dire warnings of “death panels”, and pulling the plug on grandma, then inevitably, there are going to be questions.

The failure of our corporate media (who thrive on sensationalism for ratings) is that they do not do an effective job of separating fact from fiction.

“in other words, this really is what Amy purports it to be — a bill that provides for “euthanasia” counselling.”
.
Since when is dying of natural causes euthansia?
.
The truth is, people get sick and die. Our medical technology is advanced, but it has its limits. At a certain point, the body begins to shut down regardingless of all our well meaning attempts to stave it off.
.
When people choose hospice care, it is not “euthanasia”. It is a place where the inevitable occurs, but under managed circumstances, so you don’t face it in unbearable pain or loneliness.
.
Now, euthansia is something different altogether. Euthansia is when medicine is used to bring about the end immediately, rather than prolong it. We can argue about the morality of this, or not, but don’t equate hospice with euthansia. That’s just deplorable.

Yeah, I had to Google that Rod Blagojevich guy to find out who he was and what he did because of the Time-led media blackout of his story. Evidently he peddled influence or something. When will the MSM report on this? Or should I say WHEN WILL THE MSM REPORT ON THIS????????

Great catch, Amy. Hears hoping the electronic media picks the ball up now and runs with it.

” Because that’s not just shameless, it’s stupid”.

Actually it’s not stupid. Most Americans are pretty uninformed and quite ignorant when it comes to current affairs and policy matters. Politicians understand this and have no qualms about being cynical enough to exploit it. Why should the GOP be considered “stupid” or “shameless” for mischaracterizing the end of life provision? a) Most of the people in the public screaming about this provision probably don’t remember or have no idea there was a GOP-backed 2003 Medicare Bill with the very same provision. There are Medicare recipients who stridently oppose government involvement in health care — absolutely clueless that Medicare is a government program.

The facts being on your side of a particular arguement is irrelevant when most people are a) ignorant of the facts and/or b) there are no objective set of facts and people believe whatever they want.

It’s enough to make you throw your hands in the air and give up.

The sad truth is, is that there comes a time in many peoples lives where aggressive Medical treatment is indeed a waste of money. Being appalled and frightened by that fact is a symptom of being human.
.
That fear is now being cruelly exploited to derail sane debate about vitally important issues.
.
That is nothing short of criminal.

“euthanasia” means (literally) “good death”, and withholding life-extending treatment in a humane manner is part of most definitions of euthanasia. (see http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/euthanasia)

The current GOP tactics, are repugnant, abhorrent and down right sleazy, but I digress. Most importantly what they are is downright stupid. While at the moment it may seem like smart political play to the GOP and the score keeping branch of the American media, which is no doubt why they are not doing the smack down dance, but those who fail to study history will be doomed to repeat it. The GOP has paid dearly in the past for their demagoguery, hypocrisy, and deceitfulness and they will again. We went through a similar, although somewhat more intense, situation after the Great Depression, after which the Republicans were relegated to the wilderness for about 40 years. Clearly, while they may remember the success of these deplorable tactics in the 1993 health care debacle, they’ve seemed to forgotten what happens after a transformational economic event to the side that is the cause of the upheaval and is eventually revealed as the side that consistently tries to thwart all avenues of recovery.
.
Americans may be woefully uninformed about politics, but every one can understand being played for fools and nobody likes it.

What the GOP are gambling on is stopping reform and presenting themselves as “saviors”. They know full well that if health reform happens, they’ve just lost a huge chunk of voters. The fact that they could have been constructive about this, served their constituents and benefited their country simply doesn’t matter to them in comparison. Basically it’s the calculation that Kristol made in 1994 when he advised the GOP to reject Clinton’s health plan “sight unseen”. This time around they get to use racism as well as the usual lies about socialism and so on and so forth. The real question is whether Obama can make the Democrats see that panicking will only encourage the enemy. If the Democrats stand firm, they can and will win big time. If they panic and fail, I suspect that 2010 will see a considerable loss of seats in the House. If that cleans out some of the Blue Dogs, fine and good, but it’s clear that the GOP has nothing to offer this country, and cannot be trusted to govern responsibly or honestly.

Plukasiak, I’m still not following your point. The way the opponents of health care are defining euthansia is different than the dictionary, text book definition.
.
The implication of the argument from the right, is that the GOVERNMENT is going to somehow mandate, or withdraw care due to financial concerns, that a patient actively wants.
.
I guess you could call that involuntary euthansia, which would be understandably controversial, but that is not proposed, or even implied, in the current health care bill.

Has anyone considered this:
.
Underlying all the pitchfork throwing by GOPers, is the idea that somehow, it is better to have CEOs rule your life than it is to have the government rule it.
.
So having someone pick your fate who is nakedly greedy is good is somehow better? At least government officials profess to working for the greater good*.
.
If these insane idiots really think Obama has “death panels”, well, aside from the silliness of it, what about all the stories where insurance companies have done exactly the same thing!?!?!?
.
The silly season session is now open. Please step forward when your number is called.
.
Or not…
.
*I’m not saying that all things government is good, but sh!t, let’s get some reality in here!

I disagree. And I would be able to write more if not for text input switching to German or Norwegian or something. Umlauts are bad.
.
First, let me give the requisite GOP renouncement. I am in absolute disagreement with the chum in the water Sarah Palin has distributed as of late, though doubtless a few posters here will still attack me as a Republican borg drone regardless.
.
Now let me submit the difference between the two compared pieces of legislation. Where was the Republican rhetoric about bending the cost curve when their legislation was passed? Eugene Robinson supports this point best:
.
“That’s the reason people are so frightened and enraged about the proposed measure that would allow Medicare to pay for end-of-life counseling. If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.”
.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/10/AR2009081002455.html
.
There zou have it, Amz. Bz the waz, I would appreciate it if this kezboard interface switch was fixed so I could spell correctlz. I know it has to do with Swampland onlz because Microsoft Word still uses the correct interface. Thanks.

Hmph. It would appear the problem is with mz browser. Nuts.

[...] to ridiculous, exaggerated populist fear…and being absolutely hypocritical while doing so. GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com instead of supporting reduced costs, the GOP has been trying to put fear in seniors that medicare [...]

They are pretty good at making lies stick, though. I saw a CNN “Quick Vote” poll this morning that broke down this way, so far:
.
24% think Obama has Death Panels
63% think he doesn’t
13% don’t know.
.
That means that there’s a lot of stupidity running loose, but in reality, even if every undecided decided on stupidity, it wouldn’t add up to Sarah Palin’s approval ratings (or just barely!).
.
I sometimes have an evil wish in that one of these town hall confrontations results in a death or deaths because I know the backlash would be savage, and possibly as damaging as the Palin rally “Kill Him! Kill Him!” episode was at the end of the campaign.
.
I know it’s wrong to think that, becuase I don’t want any fellow Americans to die for such thing, but maybe that is what it is going to take before the rest of America can finally get their hands around the throats of the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck, et al.

[...] Politics by CThilk on August 14, 2009 So Republicans had no problem with end-of-life counseling in 2003 but now they do? Seems about right, actually, and I think Amy Sullivan is right in guessing this is [...]

Sh!t yoshi, you are a borg drone.
.
According to you, these are “fringies” when all the world knows they are what’s left of the mainstream menagerie that apes the GOP line.
.
Get back to us when you guys clean your house of the likes of Limbaugh et al, and fyi, it isn’t just Sarah Palin chumming the waters. Or do you really need a literal barrage of links?
.
Hey, Yoshi!
.
Cheer up! Your peers have stated clearly they don’t need diversity to win! Hug ‘em tight, Yoshi!

Clearly this is what they are betting on. That’s why I say they are doomed to repeat history because right now we are politically and economically closer to 1933 than 1993.
.
After they tried everything in their power to thwart Roosevelt, including demagoguing social security and voting against it just as they voted against medicare 30 years later, they weren’t seen as saviors. When the dust settled. the public saw them for exactly what they were: inept for getting us into this economic mess, opportunists for their scare tactics in trying to thwart Democratic recovery and safety net efforts and deceitful hypocrites when those efforts were successful. The public made Roosevelt president for life, and made the Republicans a minority party in the Congress for forty years.
.
Well to be truthful, the GOP does remember some of this which is why they are trying so hard to keep Obama from being successful, they are afraid if he successfully steers this country towards a new prosperity, the great recession will be a repeat of the great depression and there will be a clamor for a constitutional repeal of the amendment barring a president from more than two terms that was put in after Roosevelt. and they will end up in the wilderness for another 40 years.
.
Of course unfortunately for them that ship has already sailed, Their only way out was bipartisanship and once again, as they prove consistently, they’d rather sink to the bottom in their own morass then rise with the tide with the rest of us.

53_3: to me the poll suggests that actually the GOP isn’t winning the spin wars, so to speak. 24% is pretty close to the residual GOP party ID figure. If 63% really think that the GOP has lied about this, that’s actually pretty good news. It is clear that the right path for the Democrats is the courageous one. If the GOP wreck health care reform, they’ll simply run a campaign of lies in 2010 about how they saved Americans from euthanasia. If the Democrats stand together and win, they can campaign on how they worked to get better, cheaper, more widely available health care for everyone. I know which argument would look better for the Democrats.

THANK YOU CANADA!!! That we have been distracted from what is good, and should be, shows how incredibly foolish we are. Something stinks in America. The “conversation ” seems to have shifted from improving access to health care – to “reforming health insurance”. I think they call that mission creep. Somewhere along the way, we have (already) lost the vision needed to truly get to where we need to be. It is amazing how these industries that should die, just seem to hang on to the teat and continue to extract the milk. (see also: The Federal Reserve Bank – a private bank) Reform health insurance? This is a BIG business that does not want to go down or give up it’s astonishing profits. That our society even supports this evil parasite…

Exiled:

MURTHA: (March 11, 2009)

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/03/11/murthas-allegedly-corrupt-take-368-to-the-nth-degree/

SPITZER: (March 10, 2008)

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/03/11/murthas-allegedly-corrupt-take-368-to-the-nth-degree/

MADOFF: (Dec 12, 2008)

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1866154,00.html

BLAGOJEVICH (Dec 10, 2008)

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1865474,00.html
.
I don’t think you can really claim that Time (or the media as a whole) has simply ignored these scandals. As for Sanford and Palin – nobody forced them to hold a series of embarrassing press conferences, or, for that matter to quit an elected office before launching bizarre falsehoods. They kept the stories alive – not a biassed press corps. But replying to your larger point: do you really expect the media not to cover this latest round of GOP lunacy and dishonesty? Who forced Grassley to lie through his teeth about something he had previously supported? And if we are going to talk about government interference between patient and doctor, not to mention end of life issues, I seem to remember a certain Terri Schiavo. Do you really want to claim that the media was unfair to the GOP on that sordid issue? Did they force Frist to “diagnose” her over a video-link? Did they force the GOP to interfere with her family?

No guys, see, when the Republicans did this, it was in order to buy elderly votes. Waaaayyy different story.

I saw a couple polls the other day that showed that popularity for Dem reforms were losing their luster a bit, but the flipside was that the Republicans weren’t picking up the fruit. I think I posted one of ‘em this last weekend that showed the GOP getting only 14% of Americans who trust them on health care.
.
I look at this as a sort of a snapshot: It represents a highstand after weeks of unopposed propaganda. In other words, it represents the best they are going to get out of this, and to the GOP, this should be bad news indeed.
.
Our own GOPers don’t seem to realize that these ozone breathers are killing the conservative cause (not to mention that there is little solution-wise they have to offer) and they are going to pay dearly for it.
.
Before the election, I always saw the far right, which controls the GOP, referred to frequently as the “30 percenters”, then, after the election, as the “28 percenters”, and now, I see, in most polls, core causes are dropping into the low to middle 20′s.
.
I feel that they are going to get killed when it comes to the campaign season. There is so much out there that is incriminating and damning that the vaunted GOP spin machine will again meet it’s match!

It might have been apollyon07, but these ozone breathers are screwing it up. I’m not elderly, but I am 55, and I can say that the fearmongering might work for a minute, but after a while, reality will set in.
.
Keep in mind that most of this group faced problems that cannot be solved by simply preserving the status quo.
.
The fearmongering will work, but only until the next medical bill arrives!

I find it humorous that you report facts and all the conservatives here accuse you of “liberal bias” and taking talking points from the Obama administration.
-
What is really sad in this particular case is that the outcome is detrimental to the public. The end-of-life counseling has been recognized by members of both parties to be a valuable service, but by hypocritically turning it into something it’s not, Grassley, Palin, Bachmann and others on the right hope to better serve their corporate masters and scuttle the whole package.

[...] Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com So first we have Palin who was for it before she was against it. Now Grassley too. Careful, Reps [...]

[...] http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/13/oh-those-death-panels/ [...]

Yoshi the problem that the GOP has, as well as those who defend the conservative ideology is simple and unavoidable. You had thirty years to prove that your ideology could produce a better way of life for Americans and all it proved is that could make a better way of life for those at the top of the pyramid.
.
Your side is opposes government intervention of any kind unless it’s to dictate social behavior and to many that is the height of hypocrisy, especially since conservatives like to wag their finger and espouse the moral superiority of their families, their values and their God, while failing so often to live up to the standards by which they all too often overtly and covertly choose to judge their opponents. As you like to claim Democrats fall down as well, yes but we don’t tell voters that the reason to vote Democratic is because we are morally superior, although when it comes to the public good I believe we are.
.
You ask why the public should trust in Democratic intentions rather than read Republican inspired twisted scenarios into these policies? Because these policies are designed to bring evidenced-based, better quality outcomes, not so they could be used to diminish care. Diminishing care, that would be a plank in the Republican platform. I would add that the likelihood of that ever happening would only be as a result of a Republican controlled government.
.
Your side is against government intervention on behalf of ordinary individuals and the history of Democrats on issues of public support are a lot better than anything the GOP could ever hope to muster unless you go back to the civil war. In fact, the few accomplishments the GOP can claim in this arena, would not only fail in the current environment, your side won’t even acknowledge the inroads into affirmative action put through by Nixon or the earned income tax credit put through by Reagan. And Lord knows despite all of its giveaways to big pharma and the health insurance industry I doubt that a Medicare prescription drug package would be supported by conservatives now — it wasn’t even all that popular under Bush.
.
Republicans consistently oppose any initiative designed to help ordinary people and to help them raise their standard of living including the minimum wage, medicaid, medicare, social security, welfare, except of course the corporate kind, labor rights, the GI bill, my God is there anything you can think of that helps the American people that you people have supported?
.
If anyone is responsible for rationing care it is the GOP because right now they support rationing care for 47 million people — its call not having any at all. Now there’s a death panel.
.
If you don’t like how cruel and in humane you sound, don’t blame the media for not coming up with equivalent horrific failures of Democrats because on this level no one competes with the GOP on its inhumanity and lack of compassion for their fellow citizens and going to church on Sunday and listening to family radio isn’t going to make up for it.
.
Sorry Yoshi, you’re stuck with the failure of Reaganism. It lived off of our reputation for a greatness that was achieved by innovation and growth from seeds planted by government intervention and investment whether you are talking about the highway system of the 50′s, the educational investments of the 60s and 70′s and the foundation for the Internet and a whole host of industry spawned by NASA. What have Republicans done to contribute to that legacy except say lie to a country and convince them to hate their government. Yes convince them by being inept and then claiming government was the problem because they its inept.
.
You can worship Reagan all you want and you’re right he was transformational, but that doesn’t mean the transformation was good. We used to belive in America and conservatives taught us to believe only in self. We used to look out for each other and conservatives taught us that only fools looked out for those who didn’t contribute, as if anyone who was less fortunate did it all to themselves. You sold us a bill of good for the last thirty years and the country has finaljy figured out that not only is the emperor naked he hasn’t ‘t bought any clothes since 1980.

Yes, those death conversations with your doctor do exist if you are terminally ill. And they are the ultimate in horrific treatment of the ill. My mother who did not want a DNR (do not resuscitate) order. So Dr. and nurses and administrators came into here room every several hours and asked her if she wanted to continue treatment or just die. Do you have any idea how horrific it is to have people asking you all the time if you would please just die for them? Now you want to expand this to people who are healthy. And you want to have this conversation, not with a doctor, but with bureaucrats. “Say Bill, you have reached the age of 65 and it’s time to talk about your death. How do you want to die Bill? I know you are in good health today but that may not last and if you get sick is it OK if we just don’t treat you? If you decide you don’t want any ‘heroic’ efforts and sign the order now, when you have a heart attach we just won’t shock your heart or send the paramedics, we’ll right you off right now. How’s that Bill? If you don’t want to do this today, Why we’ll see you in 6 months and have this conversation again at that time, OK Bill”

Why don’t we dispense with the conversation and just shoot everyone over 65 or we would enact the ‘Logan’s Run’ legislation and kill everyone over 30.

Better trolls, please.

True enough, Amy, but so what? This is hardly the first time that the GOP has turned on a dime to excoriate something they loved a short time before. This is SOP for totalitarians – there is only “now”; “before” doesn’t really exist, especially if it conflicts with ideology or immediate goals. I doubt very much that this story will make the popular media, and doubt even more that it would have any effect if it did – the people in favor of ‘reform’ already know this sort of thing happens regularly, and the people opposed to ‘reform’ already refuse to notice it.
Still, good work.

Yeah kind of like how the public was buying McCain until Palin open ed her mouth — proof will out.

This of course reiterates my point. All the horrible stuff everybody is afraid WILL happen Is ALREADY HAPPENING routinely.

But since it’s being done by insurance companies whose accountability is to stockholders expecting a profit, it’s all AOK. But turn it over to some government official whose accountability is to the administration and voters and all of the sudden it’s a horrific intervention.

The stupid – it burns!

You don’t think anyone actually believes you do you? If you don’t have a leg to stand on in the debate that sit the f@ck down and if all you CAN do to add to the debate is lie that STFU.

Before we kiss Amy’s ring , how about comparing language between that “great catch” and the current house bill. The earlier one provides for the payment of , the current REQUIRES this counseling every 5 years. A difference that even the dimmest lib could see (except prob. themaverickfor)

my original point was that Amy had interpreted the bill correctly — that shel had misread the text in a way that said the counselling was available for those under hospice care (i.e. who had already chosen a “good death”).
_
you told me that I didn’t know what the word “euthanasia” meant, so I corrected you (with a link).

well there is maverickforthe making up his own facts again. No one yelling abuse or threats? That would be news to the young black man beaten by union thugs.

Since libs find it difficult to understand that we are sliding into the eternal pit of socialism maybe they would believe their comrades from Pravda http://english/pravda.ru/print/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0 in an article entitled “American Capitalism gone with a whimper”

mav – record intact no runs no hits only errors

[...] [...]

http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2009/08/anger-frustration-consume-senator-in.html
.
Bad news for Arlen Specter, I fear….

http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002042/

Sarah Palin does not have an Original Thought on the Issues. She Heard Gingrich and ran with it [Sad] Newt’s Key Word [Down Syndrome] was all that was needed to set her off !!

3 Days Prior to Palin’s [Fear Mongering] about something that does not Exist in the Pending Health Care Reform Bill…

Newt Gingrich made such a False claim.

1. Rahm Emanuel’s Brother is [Not] President Obama’s Chief Executive Adviser and Never has been, which ABC News George Stephanopoulis Pointed out to Mr.Gingrich, though Newt Lied and said just that 3 Days Earlier at a town hall meeting.

2. The Fear Mongering is to Gin The Crazies who will Oppose Anything President Obama does or says, because they were Against Him from the very begining.

3. Sarah Palin Did Not Research, she ran with Newt Gingrich’s Words and Did Not Rely on Sitting Down and Researching for herself. She’s Finished.

4. People who Critically Think, will Never Vote for this Hollow, Floating, Bubble. She has a degree in Journalism, yet she Does Not Read or Investigate, to Separate fact From Fiction.

Note: Alaskan Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski Read & Researched and said it was [Wrong to Fear Monger] using [Death Panels] as a talking point.

Rep.Sen. Johnny Isaakson also said it was Ridiculous, he should know, he Endorsed the Language in the pending bill.

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/08/12/newt…

Newt Gingrich Changes What’s Left of his Mind on End-of-life Care

More than 20 percent of all Medicare spending occurs in the last two months of life. Gundersen Lutheran Health System in La Crosse, Wisconsin has developed a successful end-of-life, best practice that combines: 1) community-wide advance care planning, where 90 percent of patients have advance directives; 2) hospice and palliative care; and 3) coordination of services through an electronic medical record. The Gundersen approach empowers patients and families to control and direct their care. The Dartmouth Health Atlas has documented that Gundersen delivers care at a 30 percent lower rate than the national average ($18,359 versus $25,860). If Gundersen’s approach was used to care for the approximately 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries who die every year, Medicare could save more than $33 billion a year.

via Health Care Rx: Across the Country, Some Systems Are Getting It Right – Newt Gingrich.

That was Newt Gingrich just a few months ago praising the “Advance Directives” practiced by a hospital in Wisconsin. Advance Directives are another word for the end-of-life consultations that the teabggers have been flipping out over of late. Gingrich loved them a few months ago. This is Gingrich a few months before that, responding to a PBS query:

[...] provided funding for? Did you say counseling for end-of-life issues and care? Ding ding ding!! GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com __________________ No can has other Ceiling Cat!! U gotz other Ceiling Cat, I shoot yous wit mah [...]

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/12/murkowski-o…

Murkowski ‘offended’ by Palin’s ‘death panel’ fearmongering.

murkowskiwebSarah Palin’s claim last week that President Obama plans to institute bureaucratic “death panels” has been called “crazy” and “nuts” by pundits and lawmakers looking to distance themselves from the untrue and ugly rhetoric. But perhaps the harshest rebuke came last night from a fellow Alaskan, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R), who said while speaking to a crowd in Anchorage that she was “offended” by Palin’s baseless attack:

“It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there’s these end-of-life provisions, these death panels,” Murkowski, a Republican, said. “Quite honestly, I’m so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn’t (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.“

http://crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy/sarah-pa…

Palin Leaves Behind Mismanaged AK Health Care System – Hundreds Die Waiting For Care

By Logan Murphy Wednesday Aug 12, 2009 3:00pm

Perhaps Sarah Palin made that ridiculous statement about “Obama Death Panels” because she knew this story was going to break — it was happening in her own state, right under her nose:

State programs intended to help disabled and elderly Alaskans with daily life — taking a bath, eating dinner, getting to the bathroom — are so poorly managed, the state cannot assure the health and well-being of the people they are supposed to serve, a new federal review found.

The situation is so bad the federal government has forbidden the state to sign up new people until the state makes necessary improvements. No other state in the nation is under such a moratorium, according to a spokeswoman for the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

In the meantime, frail and vulnerable Alaskans who desperately need the help are struggling. One elderly woman is stuck in a nursing home, for lack of care at home. Another woman, suffering from chronic pain and fatigue, said she’s so weak, she often can’t even pop dinner into the microwave.

This is the GOP’s alternative to a public or universal option. Sarah wants to talk about evil socialist plans that will kill people, but I betcha she doesn’t want to talk about the hundreds of Alaskans who died waiting for these services.

A particularly alarming finding concerns deaths of adults in the programs. In one 2 1/2 year stretch, 227 adults already getting services died while waiting for a nurse to reassess their needs. Another 27 died waiting for their initial assessment, to see if they qualified for help. Read on…

In honor of the people of Alaska who died on her watch, Sarah Palin needs to stop makin’ stuff up about health care reform, and apologize for screwing things up and then running away when the going got tough.

I hate that people are twisting the words to make this sound like a bad thing. This type of counseling exists now with any private insurance and no one is in an uproar about that.

Being terminally ill is very hard on the indiviuals as well as the families and offering psychological care for depression, pain, stress and mourning is not a bad thing.

When I am very old and no longer able to care for myself or I am in pain from some debilitating disease, I want someone to help me and my family to deal with it.

Its offering to have a psychologist come in and assess you and make sure that the doctors and caregivers are properly taking care of you.

I think its sad that people are trying to scare old people into thinking that by accepting this counseling they are going to be murdered. They need this to help them and their family make decisions that are very hard to do.

I would like TIME to do a story where they actually interview families who have used these services and ask their opinions of how it worked for them.

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/08/12/newt…

That was Newt Gingrich just a few months ago praising the “Advance Directives” practiced by a hospital in Wisconsin. Advance Directives are another word for the end-of-life consultations that the teabggers have been flipping out over of late. Gingrich loved them a few months ago. This is Gingrich a few months before that, responding to a PBS query:

Let me give you an example that I find fascinating. In LaCrosse, Wisc., the Gundersen Lutheran Hospital system is, according to the Dartmouth [Atlas of Health Care], the least expensive place in America for the last two years of life. They have an advanced directive program, and over 90 percent of their patients have an advanced directive. They have electronic health records, so everybody on the staff knows what the advanced directive is. They have a very strong palliative care program for using drugs to manage pain. They have a hospice program.

The result is today, the last two years of your life in costs are about $13,600. The last two years of your life at UCLA are $58,000. Now, why should Medicare pay $58,000 for the same outcome if it could pay $13,600? You can say, well, Los Angeles is more expensive; they do a couple of more complicated things. So fine. So let’s say it ought to be $20,000 at UCLA. That’s still [$38,000] less than it currently is. …

We don’t think the politicians can ever fix this because the hospital lobby is so powerful, and the doctor lobby is so powerful, and the pharmaceutical lobby is so powerful, and the medical technology lobby is so powerful…

And we also know — this is the great irony — the best places in America are always less expensive than the worst places. Health is not like jewelry and automobiles. In jewelry and automobiles you pay a lot more to get a lot better. In health, because the best places do it right the first time, they do it very efficiently, they pay real attention to quality, they’re actually less expensive than the places that are bad.

freeinpa: Read the actual bill. It is NOT mandatory.

Shame on you.

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=125478331&blogId=505402623

For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Govern

In recent weeks, right-wing groups have been pushing the myth that health care reform will somehow kill seniors. One of the most high profile voices pushing this lie has been Sarah Palin, who claimed President Obama will institute bureaucratic “death panels.” Today, again on her Facebook page, she continued the attack.

Though some Republicans have rebuffed this absurd, inaccurate notion — like Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who called such talk “nuts” — others, like Newt Gingrich, have piled on to agree with Palin.
However, on April 16th 2008, then Gov. Sarah Palin endorsed some of the same end of life counseling she now decries as a form of euthanasia.

In a proclamation announcing “Healthcare Decisions Day,” Palin urged public facilities to provide better information about advance directives, and made it clear that it is critical for seniors to be informed of such options:

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions.

WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.

WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.

Though this proclamation is now deleted from the Alaska governor’s website, it shows that Palin’s current fear-mongering is purely political. Palin is not the only conservative leader completely flip-flopping on this issue. Merely months ago, Gingrich too endorsed end of life counseling. At a conference in April of this year, Gingrich said advance directives can “save money” while also helping to “decrease the stress felt by caregivers.”

I see that little Freepie has emerged to peddle more idiocies. Presumably, it’s leisure hour at the correctional facility.

Great post Amy! I’m sure you’ve heard by now that Sarah Palin was also for “death panels” before she was against it. She actually went as far as proclaiming April 16, 2008 “Healthcare Decisions Day” in Alaska:

Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions.

You can read the full proclamation here: http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2009/08/governor-palin-proclaimed-apri.html

Apparently freeinpa means free from the rigors of reading. The consultations are voluntary. The only requirement is for Medicare reimbursement of doctors for this service every five years.

I guess you would call me an environmentalist liberal who is also a strong supporter of our military. Having said that, I don’t think you should be too quick to disparage Sen. Grassley. He’s fighting for his principals and constituents. While most Senators, Dem and Repub alike, jumped on the do-whatever-it-takes bandwagon after 9/11, Grassley was one of the few who had the spine to raise hell about the no-bid contracts being funneled to Cheney’s cronies at Halliburton/KBR and to the hyper-connected Christian mercenary army of Blackwater USA. He saw the bonanza that Iraq presented for the war profiteers and fought it. I’ll cut him some slack for that alone. I might disagree with him but hashing out such a massive change in our health care system over a few months vs. a few weeks isn’t a crazy idea at all, imho.

To freeinpa: You might want to check your facts – it is NOT mandatory. You should actually read the bill, not just listen to Fox (News?), Rush, Hannity, Beck, et al.
Passing along lies don’t turn those lies into facts!
Why oh why can’t people think for themselves.

“Now that the Obama Death Panel provisions have been removed from the Obama socialized medicine scheme, I can’t wait to see the reaction from the militant euthanasia enthusiasts of the Democrat party base, to wit: the Washington press corps, the pagan left, the atheist left, the feminist left, the earth worshipping left, et al.”
.
Good point. The Republicans stand alone in their breathtaking flip-flopping, demagoguery, assuring that thousands of families will get to watch grandma wither on a respirator in a vegetative state for the remaining weeks, months or years of her life, costing the country $ billions for good measure. You must be so proud.

We are fortunate that our local hospital has already put together a program to deal with end-of-life issues. The team was invaluable to my family this spring, when my 91-year-old mother began to have multiple systems fail. There was no “plug-pulling”; the team, comprised of a palliative care physician, social worker, psychologist, clergyperson, and hospice expert, met with us to discuss whether we wanted measures like a cardiac valve replacement and kidney dialysis to extend her life. The answer was no.

We agreed to do what we could with medication, to control her congestive heart failure — while trying to strike a balance, since the drugs would further compromise her kidneys.

No one took away care. No one proscribed the decision for us. What every member of the team did was to help us explore all options for making my mom comfortable; no one wrote her off.

This is a long post. But these are long stories; no two are alike. How fortunate we were to have the benefit of help with end-of-life decisions.

[...] this in…to kill our grandma, why did all the (R) vote for this? Why was this put in by an (R)? Oh, Those Death Panels [...]

[...] another one supported "death panels" before he was against them. GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com Oh, Those Death Panels Posted by Amy Sullivan You would think that if Republicans wanted to [...]

[...] you call 42 GOP Senators and 204 GOP Housemembers? Hypocrites? Liars? Forgetfull? All of the above. Time’s Amy Sullivan posted an article that remindes us that a grand number of 246 GOP members have voted [...]

When my father threw an embolism a week after surgery, his brain was functionally dead within moments. But the hospital was ready to air lift him to the best neurological-specialty hospital in the region to try some experimental procedure that really had no chance of substantially changing his outcome. I have no idea what that would have cost (he had gold-plated insurance so it would have been borne by the system) but, fortunately, my dad had left strict instructions in his will about such measures (he was smart and educated) so we were all spared the decision or the exercise.

“Before we kiss Amy’s ring , how about comparing language between that “great catch” and the current house bill. The earlier one provides for the payment of , the current REQUIRES this counseling every 5 years. A difference that even the dimmest lib could see (except prob. themaverickfor)” freeinpa

The problem freeinpa is that you didn’t read the damn bill. It is not REQUIRED in the current House bill H.R. 3200 Section 1233 period. Show me the wording where it says that it’s mandatory or required and I’ll apologize. But it simply doesn’t say it.

I’m truly sick and tied of these people being dogmatic about what is in the bill when they have not even read it. Why they take what others say as gospel without checking it for themselves is truly amazing.

freeinpa,
Aboslutely wrong! Another big lie.
The provision in 1233 calls for voluntary counseling, not mandatory. Why would it be mandatory? Thats dumb. Oh, its because Dems wanna pull the plug on Grandma. Obama set the trap and Grassley walked right into it. Now with him marginalized, on to the Dogs.

So are theysaying that the government won’t start denying people care based on cost vs. expected productive value to society, or are theyjust saying they won’t call this fetid bill of bean-counting bureaucrats a “Death Panel”?

[...] 14, 2009 Is this a surprise to ANYONE? I mean seriously? Posted by alittlenuance Filed in Uncategorized Leave a Comment [...]

[...] I think Grassley is trying to  quickly backpedal after the embarrassing revelation that he voted to fund counseling for end-of-life issues in [...]

The Republicans DO have a free enterprise version a medical and health care plan instead of just irrationally criticizing Obama.

Their plan is called “Soylent Green.”

[...] PDRTJS_settings_178626_post_658 = { "id" : "178626", "unique_id" : "wp-post-658", "title" : "Simply+Put%3A+Republicans+are+Liars", "item_id" : "_post_658", "permalink" : "http%3A%2F%2Fmarkwadestone.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F08%2F14%2Fsimply-put-republicans-are-liars%2F" } Thank you, Amy Sullivan of Time, for calling out the lying Republican Haters: [...]

Galeforce – none of what you’ve said is relevant to Grassley’s shameful lies on this issue. The fact here is that he’s used scaremongering to cheat older people of a form of care – and has done so after voting for precisely that form of care in 2003. Whether he denounced Halliburton back in the day is totally beside the point. And no, you can’t claim to be serving your constituents by lying to them and defrauding them of health care.

[...] Amy Sullivan: “You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and demagogue it like nobody’s business, they would at least pick something that the vast majority of them hadn’t already voted for just a few years earlier.” [...]

“Seriously, though, the sooner some come to the realization of the dripping corruption awash in all American politics, the better”

While this is true degree matters. “Middle of the road” Republicans use this all the time, especially after Bush, and I like to use a prison analogy;

All of the people serving time in prison are CRIMINALS. However, trying to lump them altogether like the political statement is like saying that the guy who stole a car is the same as one who murdered his parents. Both criminals – yes – but its the degree that counts.

Hey freeinpa. The way rational discourse goes is this. “I really like the way the Johnsons decorated their living room.”

“Eh, I think it’s a little too orange for my taste.”

“Yeah, now that you mention it, it is.”

Notice that person one has changed his or her mind after the comment made by person two.

This is how the health care debate is going:

“I really like the way the Johnsons decorated their living room.”

“JOHNSON IS A FACIST! HE’S A TERRORIST! HE’S A SOCIALIST! DEATH PANEL! WE NEED GUNS!”

“Uh….what?”

[...] End Of Life Counseling: GOP For It Before They Were Against It By rectonoverso Time Magazine’s Amy Sullivan pointed out last night that, for all of his ardent demagoguery on the so-called “death panels,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) voted for just such a provision in 2003. [...]

[...] (361)December 2008 (182)November 2008 (52)October 2008 (37)September 2008 (4) Great catch by Amy Sullivan of Time. Unbelievable. Except not, really:You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally [...]

RE: Exiled at home: Talk about naive.

Are you not yet aware that corruption not only permiates ALL American politics but ALL Americans and as a matter of fact ALL people of all nations?

Have you seen anyone who has been elected or has taken over positions of power anywhere and that have NOT become corrupt? Now of course that depends on ones PERCEPTION of corruption doesn’t it?

Of course our humaness is based on getting all I can get for ME.

Now there are some who have recognized this and do try to counter their basic REPTILIAN FEELING based motivation but they are far and few between.

How about you? Are you corrupt? Or how do you define corrupt?

[...] life-long dream has been to be a political pundit — and she’s GOOD at it! Check out her original. Oh, Those Death Panels by Amy [...]

Dee, 53, both of you are in the same holding pattern.
-
53, you endlessly complain about Limbaugh, Palin, and whatever other right-wing personality you can get your hands on, as if every logical point a Republican could make is twisted through some sort of moral irresponsibility committed by a totally different person. You might have a point if you could prove I love Limbaugh and Palin, but I don’t, and I’ve never said so. So who cares?
-
About cleaning house of them: Not my place, or my right. They have their freedom of speech. I have mine. Case closed. Until then, I’ll continue to vote for the candidate whose policy positions make the most sense in my eyes – usually from the right. Makes sense doesn’t it? Or would you have me reflexively vote for the other guy because I have nasty pundits on my side? Tell you what, next election, I’ll vote for a lefty because Limbaugh is a conservative and you’ll vote for a righty because Maher is liberal. If you won’t accept the terms, then you should stop trolling.
-
Dee, your rant is long, but it doesn’t cover ANY of the substance of my post. Again, as with 53, you are hobbled by what you perceive as a laundry list of Republican sins. What does this have to do with today’s debate? Nothing. Is there anything in there in common with Obama’s stated political philosophy? No (although your writings are very similar to his actual philosophy). That your moving account doesn’t really, er, move any voters seems to be rather frustrating to you, at which point you and more than a few here will lament the stupidity of Americans.
-
The overall point is, both of you are stuck in cliches. (Republicans are evil, craven knaves who should be shut out of the debate because of how craven they are, blah blah) But your cliches will not move the reality of Obama’s, and to a greater extent, the left’s, inherent difficulties with convincing America of their boondoggles for very long.

[...] they only sought to insure that what is already covered would be covered in the new bill Oh, Those Death Panels [...]

[...] the short and sweet: back in the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, Republicans supported a portion of the bill that would allow doctors to be reimbursed from Medicare for giving end-of-life counseling to [...]

Sensei
~
That was my whole bloody point! Everyone of these fools in Washington are corrupted hypocrites to some degree. Thus to perpetually report on GOP wrongs is clearly a politically motivated blitzkreig by TIME to promote, through lack of illumination, those of the Democratic party. When all anyone sees is a slew of GOP scandals and hypocritical stances, the more naive among us may actually begin to believe that the Democrats somehow stand for probity. Wrong! They are politicians, and American politicians at that, so they naturally stand for private interests, AIPAC, money, power, retention of power, etc etc…

Consider me ignorant, because this may sound strange, but in what address did anyone on the right, and especially Ms. Palin, identify the counseling sessions as the death panels, rather than some private session in which cost-cutting groups determine which practices are cost effective, and which ones need to be cut as wasteful?

President Obama said:

“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.

So how do you — how do we deal with it?

Well, I think 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.”

I think these “discussions” are what people are thinking of when the “death panels” fear is in these debates. I know that there are a few whackos who think euthanasia will be advised … heck, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that some counselors advise it, but it wouldn’t be the LAW … but I do think that there will be beaurocratic decisions based on cost about end-of-life treatments, and I honestly believe THAT is what people are afraid of, and I personally think that is the type of situation Ms. Palin was describing.

I happen to think a lot of the left-wing problem with the use of the term “death panels” is of their own definition for partisan poltical attacks. They are no different than the right, no more moral, no more ethical, no more truthful. truth never seems to play a big role in political debate on either side. From what I can tell, the partisans on BOTH sides could care less about the truth.

Thank goodness that there is a sizable center in the country who will ultimately have to judge these things, and hopefully they can weigh the facts from both right- and left-wing propaganda.

“But your cliches will not move the reality of Obama’s, and to a greater extent, the left’s, inherent difficulties with convincing America of their boondoggles for very long.”
.
Oh, yoshi, yoshi, yoshi!
.
In none of any real polls, are the GOPers garnering more than 24% approval unless you go with your own home rolled propaganda on FOX.
.
The problem is Yoshi, you just spout talking points. Ergo, since you do, the statement pertaining to cravenness does indeed apply.
.
I’m smart enough to realize that your intent is to sow confusion and to disinform. You trying to sell your own personal take against the barrage of orchestrated objections, and we have more than a few websites instructing you and your peers on how.
.
As for my fixation with Limbaugh, et al, they are, after all, the only standing group left (which you have clearly accreted onto) out there on the far right. As far a free speech is concerned, why yes, that’s a good excuse for avoiding the problem of blatant racism in your party, but I wasn’t talking about abridging free speech.
.
I was talking about getting them out of your party!
.
Now, I’m guessing you’re going to take a double take here and defend them, or try to come up with some other excuse to which I might sharply jab you with this thought:
.
Just wait until Obama appoints an Asian liberal to the bench.
.
I need say no more than that!
.
Like I said, don’t look at me for outrage, they’ve partaken of these things. I’m just pointing out who they are…
.
Your peers are sh!t.

Oh, btw, Yoshi, I don’t have problems with conservatives. I have problems with racists.
.
Rush Limbaugh is a racist.
.
Bill Maher is not.
.
Over to you, mr. myopy…

[...] catch by Amy Sullivan of Time. Unbelievable. Except not, really: You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally [...]

The first paragraph is a red herring. The stimulus and HR 3200 are losing approval in the eyes of America. Whoever said anything about the GOP gaining approval?
-
Second and third paragraph: Now I’m a disinformation agent? And you think conservatives are paranoid?
-
The rest: I frankly don’t care about party ID, and you can’t make me care about it. I care about putting guys into office who will do the right thing. I now propose to you, once again, that

I’ll vote for a lefty because Limbaugh is a conservative and you’ll vote for a righty because Maher is liberal. If you won’t accept the terms, then you should stop trolling.

-
Run Maher out of your party, 53! Or else, vote for the next righty young buck.
-
And as for this:
-

Just wait until Obama appoints an Asian liberal to the bench.

-
What on earth are you talking about? Identity politics? I get the strong sense that you’re patronizing me.

53_3
August 14, 2009
at 5:02 pm

-
So you have problems only with racists, and not with opportunistic, lying, slandering, tone-deaf dirtbags? Why, I never knew you appreciated all those qualities.

53, if you didn’t catch it, please see #75. And quit complaining about Limbaugh.

Well, Yoshi, they are your peers! I’m not patronizing you in the least. I’m pointing out your innate stupidity.
.
It wasn’t me who said all those things!
.
Oh, FYI, “identity politics” is a euphemism. It is roughly equivalent to:
Using racial hatred to achieve a political means.
.
Maher is just plain funny.
.
Of course, I’ll just wait for an “I told you so” moment of Obama does appoint an Asian woman to the bench.

I would dearly love to see you try to ride that rather sharp picket fence.
.
You’ll be supplying me with weeks of laughter…

Its what you get when you lie in a bed full of rattlesnakes, Yoshi…

Care to specify who your calling a dirtbag? It would appear that your letting your insistence on ‘equivalence’ interfere with your own tenuous reasonability…..

“So you have problems only with racists, and not with opportunistic, lying, slandering, tone-deaf dirtbags?”
.
Like, uh, Sarah Palin?

Let me try to translate this mess:
-
First: call yoshi stupid, again
-
Second: “It wasn’t me who said all those things!” Er, are you saying that I’m the one saying this, or are you saying it?
-

Oh, FYI, “identity politics” is a euphemism. It is roughly equivalent to:
Using racial hatred to achieve a political means.

-
Nope, sorry. It translates to using race to achieve political means.
-

Maher is just plain funny.

-
So everything’s okay because he’s funny. Great reasoning, that.
-

Of course, I’ll just wait for an “I told you so” moment of Obama does appoint an Asian woman to the bench.

I would dearly love to see you try to ride that rather sharp picket fence.
.
You’ll be supplying me with weeks of laughter…

-
This is sometimes considered rude on the internet, but WHO CARES IF THE PERSON IS ASIAN, FEMALE OR NOT? Qualifications matter. Judicial records matter. Race or gender does NOT. You have really jumped the shark. I don’t play the identity game.

[...] Update: Oh Those Death Panels [...]

Care to specify who your calling a dirtbag? It would appear that your letting your insistence on ‘equivalence’ interfere with your own tenuous reasonability…..

-
Uh, Maher.

I stick to my first definition, Yoshi. The correct one.
.
Using racial hatred for political means
.
I’ve been watching them for 40 years, Yoshi. I can supply enough information on this to make you, and this thread, choke. My definition is correct.
.
If you don’t like what I say, then you better get them out of your party. Don’t fire your outrage at me, tell your godd@mn peers!, idiot.

Sorry. If your trying to distance yourself from the racist wing of the Republican party, your doing a poor job of it. Calling Maher a dirtbag does little but convince me that in addition to defending racists, you also have poor taste in comedians.

Sorry, you’re incorrect. Identity politics is the politics of race. If I ran for President and said something like “vote for me because I’m an Asian-American”…well, I would be playing identity politics.

If you don’t like what I say, then you better get them out of your party. Don’t fire your outrage at me, tell your godd@mn peers!, idiot.

*cough* trolling *cough*
-
By the way, you’re lucky that I’m not too specific with my ancestry. A lot of “Asians” would jump on you for even suggesting that we support each other as a monolithic block.

“This is sometimes considered rude on the internet, but WHO CARES IF THE PERSON IS ASIAN, FEMALE OR NOT? Qualifications matter. Judicial records matter. Race or gender does NOT. You have really jumped the shark. I don’t play the identity game.”
.
I can tell you don’t like it, but rather than vent at me, vent your anger at your peers. You relentlessly ignore everything your peers do to violate that very true concept – which is not observed by Republican spokespeople.
.
I have absolutely no sympathy whatever for this. It’s not identity politics, as you call it, to point out that your peers are hip deep in it.
.
So toss your pitchfork at them!

Sorry, Yoshi. I really don’t care that you are offended, but now I’ll rub your face in reality:
http://www.splcenter.org
.
Take a look.
.
Your lesson will begin there.

RE: Exiled at home” It would seem you have a huge hard on for TIME. I would suggest you NOT read TIME anymore. At least not until you have taken a cold shower.

Try “the nation” for awhile.

Nonsenseical

[...] August 14: Time’s Swampland blog notes that the the Republicans passed exactly the same language in a bi…– except that bill limited application only to the terminally ill.  That provision worked [...]

I can tell you don’t like it, but rather than vent at me, vent your anger at your peers.

You’re trying to make me jump at the identity bait. I’m not buying it. And now you want to change the subject to avoid discussing your ham-fisted implication of “ethnic” solidarity.
-
Remember, I don’t care what Limbaugh thinks. I’m just going to help the guy who makes the most sense.

Translation: I pretty much don’t have a clue, but here’s a change of subject! Wheeeee!

Oh, I don’t look at Asians as monolithic, Yoshi.
.
You just have no idea. Those peers remain your peers. Enjoy your sleep with rattlers. Don’t yell at me. I’m just telling you who your peers are.
.
Try typing in a few of the old time Republicans in the search box of http://www.splcenter.org. Try typing in the words CCC. Try typing in the words Patriot Movement.
.
You have so much to learn Yoshi, and you’re so blind…

That’s fine, Yoshi, but don’t expect GOP credibility to be high. You have such a short memory…
.
Also, I feel free to attack you when you come in with talking points, kneejerking outrage which, if not encouraged directly by the likes of Limbaugh, is at least closely paralell to it.
.
As I’ve said before, save that bile for your peers. I made an observation, and there is nothing wrong with that!

[...] Originally Posted by Mike from back east Grassley is a known moderate , which makes his stand on "end of life conseling" unfathomable. Especially when Grassley voted for such provisions in the past: "Yes, that's right. Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed with the votes of 204 GOP House members and 42 GOP Senators? Anyone want to guess what it provided funding for? Did you say counseling for end-of-life issues and care? Ding ding ding!!… So either Republicans were for death panels in 2003 before turning against them now–or they're lying about end-of-life counseling in order to frighten the bejeezus out of their fellow citizens and defeat health reform by any means necessary. Which is it, Mr. Grassley?" GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com [...]

Oh, I don’t look at Asians as monolithic, Yoshi.

Yeah, you just act like you do on the internet. Nice try.
-
Let me be clear (/obama): I will help the politician who works to bring about what, in my eyes, is the best for America.
-
And I don’t give a flying pig about “old time Republicans.” Forget them.

[...] the bejeezus out of their fellow citizens and defeat health reform by any means necessary,” wrote TIME’s Amy [...]

[...] the bejeezus out of their fellow citizens and defeat health reform by any means necessary,” wrote TIME’s Amy [...]

Also, I feel free to attack you troll when you come in with talking points, kneejerking outrage dare to post on this board which, if not encouraged directly by the likes of Limbaugh, is at least closely paralell to it. and I spam Limbaugh Palin Limbaugh Palin

FIFY

Also, I feel free to attack you troll when you come in with talking points, kneejerking outrage dare to post on this board which, if not encouraged directly by the likes of Limbaugh, is at least closely paralell to it. and I spam Limbaugh Palin Limbaugh Palin.

Now it’s fixed…

Meh. This post function doesn’t do strikethroughs.

“And I don’t give a flying pig about “old time Republicans.” Forget them.”
.
Well, Yoshi, it’s clear that you would rather not know. They are the founders of this race-laced ideology that you call conservatism.
.
Real conservatism doesn’t have those features, but, well, if you just don’t wanna look, well, I guess you just don’t wanna! Oh well.
.
At this point though, when I tell you I’ve watched these guys for 40 years and know who they are, and where they came from, and what they believe, you really cannot refute what I’ve stated.
.
As for Asians, well, all I need to do is to point out your peers’ recent self-inflicted damage over the Sotomayor nomination, and follwoing the debate, Hispanics had a broad reaction. The same will accrue if and when Obama names an Asian.
.
I know your peers better than you do, appearently…

At this point though, when I tell you I’ve watched these guys for 40 years and know who they are, and where they came from, and what they believe, you really cannot refute what I’ve stated.

You have the burden of proof. I yield the floor to you, Senator 53.

As for Asians, well, all I need to do is to point out your peers’ recent self-inflicted damage over the Sotomayor nomination, and follwoing the debate, Hispanics had a broad reaction. The same will accrue if and when Obama names an Asian.

Let’s see here, after you stuck your fingers in your ears, this commenced: Peers blah blah change of subject blah blah no I didn’t needlessly and hamfistedly bring up race blah blah SOTOMAYER!

Yoshi, face it, you won’t win this one. You insist on myopy. So be it.
.
I’ve got documentation. 40 years of documentation, all about “identity politics”. More “identity politics” than you could absorb in a year of solid reading.
.
All you’ve got is rhetoric and cut/paste tricks.
.
And would it help if I included Hannity, Glenn Beck, and other ozone breathers who are leading the chorus you are singing? How about Sessions. Gingrich? Lott?
.
Wow, where does one stop…

http://bit.ly/mVBsc

NPR: Americans Traveling To Other Countries For Surgeries

__________

60% of Americans are willing to [Leave] the USA for Cheaper Medical Services.

http://bit.ly/bGARF

NPR-LISTEN:Miami,Carribean & Latin Americans come to have Surgeries In the USA

While Americans Travel Abroad For Surgeries Because Of High-Cost.

Yoshi:
Here is the way you should express it. My children do this too, when they hear stuff they don’t want to hear:
.
Fingers in ears
Nyah, nyah, nyahnyah, nyah! I don’t hear you!

Fingers in ears
Nyah, nyah, nyahnyah, nyah! I don’t hear you!

Fine, if you insist, you did that and not my interpretation of the finger-sticking technique. Now, about that burden of proof, because I care more about the issues today than racist geriatrics.

Yoshi, face it, you won’t win this one. You insist on myopy. So be it.

More blissfully evidence-free trolling. You’re really going strong today.

All you’ve got is rhetoric and cut/paste tricks.

I have sources. You haven’t provided any. I don’t doubt, that much, that Lott or Sessions have a history of racism. I just don’t really feel like looking it up. (that’s your job. Burden of proof) You know, there are a lot of Republicans besides those you mentioned.
-
By the way, ozone breathers isn’t a particularly clever dig.

Yoshi, these racist geriatrics are the ones who are currently charting the course of your party. I told you where to look for the hard facts about the GOP and racism, and you don’t wanna.
.
Again, before you resort to rhetoric, there is enough proof on that site alone. I can supply others, but if you don’t look there, then what’s the point. I’ve provided more than ample proof, but like I said, you just don’t wanna look!
.

Have it your way, Yoshi. Everyone else can find the documentation, then. Like I said, you just don’t wanna.

It’s pretty obvious we have an impartial analyst here: “You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and demagogue it like nobody’s business”. Chris Matthews or Obernutman couldn’t put an opening out better. But to answer the question, where did the “Death Panels” come from, perhaps we just need to look to…yet another example of an Obama associate that Obama claims to know nothing about. Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Rahm the Enforcer. From his leftist redistribution ramble on universal health care that reads like an Obama teleprompter: (http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Where_Civic_Republicanism_and_Deliberative_Democracy_Meet.pdf) “This civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health care resources. Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future genera- tions, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. A less obvious example Is is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason.” And, like most Obama “public forums”, it is an Obama-controlled admission only, like-minded sycophants only need apply. And they make decisions on what will and will not be provided as basic medical coverage. ‘Nuff said.

[...] unfortunately, hypocracy is contagious, and doesn't respect partisan boundaries: http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=1094&type=6 http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009…-death-panels/ [...]

I will assume you know what burden of proof means. Can you act on it?
-
(by the way, according to many on the left, nobody is charting the course of the GOP now. They’re leaderless, falling into disarray, etc etc)

What’s Good For The Grassley Is Always Good For The Death Panel…

Maybe voters should drop Grassley from consideration next election because of the way he could be misinterpreted and implements double-standards incorrectly: Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed with the votes of 204 G…

[...] about living wills and end of life counseling in 2005 during the Terri Schiavo affair, and indeed, the very same Senators decrying the death panels today were the ones voting for the death panels in …, which, by the way, was not seen as a horrible evil fascist communist government invasion upon our [...]

“But to answer the question, where did the “Death Panels” come from, perhaps we just need to look to…”

…the fevered imaginations of lying, authoritarian-following wingnuts?

I just don’t understand these people. On one hand they scream about how they don’t want the Gov. making their end of life decisions for them. But these are the same people that demanded the Gov. step in during the Terri Schiavo fiasco.

Gov. Jeb Bush actually sent law enforcement to forcibly remove her from the hospice to have her feeding tube reinserted after a circuit judge ruled it be removed. Then, when another judge ruled it be removed, his brother Georgie actually cut short his vacation to force Congress to throw together a bill that would override a previous judge’s decision.

This VOLUNTARY end of life counseling provision is meant to prevent another family from having to go through what the Schiavo’s went through by making their loved ones last wishes known.

Why is that so dam hard for people to understand?!? Both Michael Schiavo & the Schindlers need to come out publicly in support of this provision by reminding the public what their family went through and how easily it could happen to them.

I’ve seen this same post on numerous blogs under different names which leads me to believe that these are talking points that minions like yourself are trying to spread.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/zeke-emanuel-on-sarah-palins-accusation-of-death-panels-its-an-absolute-outrage.html

I guarantee you have not read 1 single paper or book Dr. Emannuel has written. You have parsed his writings and copied distortions from other sites in an attempt to further lie & mislead people.

Knock it off because you know dam well that you don’t know anything about what you’re talking about.

[...] Thurs­day night, Time’s Amy Sul­li­van reported that Grass­ley actu­ally voted for a ver­sion of this same idea, back in 2003. On Fri­day, Greg [...]

[...] Uhhhh, Sen. Grassley? [...]

[...] the bejeezus out of their fellow citizens and defeat health reform by any means necessary,” wrote TIME’s Amy [...]

I thought this was a real “gotcha” moment until I read about “the only difference” between the 2003 provision and Section 1233 involved, well, actual terminally ill patients.

Oh. Never mind.

[...] Amy Sullivan: “You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and demagogue it like nobody’s business, they would at least pick something that the vast majority of them hadn’t already voted for just a few years earlier.” Visit Source [...]

[...] respond. After all, I did your request, so man up and do mine. Thanks in advance! Oh, by the way. GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com Laffo. http://www.whatsyourobsession.com – High quality toy/statue photography and [...]

[...] The same “death panels” that are drawing so much criticism from Republicans today are the pretty much the same “death panels” that were approved in President Bush’s prescription drug bill. [...]

[...] serious illness.  Bravo, maybe for her next act she can start stealing their walkers. Update : GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com – Political posturing at the expense of citizen’s health, booyeah. Tags: death panel, [...]

[...] No comment here either. As they say in law, res ipsa loquitur. [...]

[...] end-of-life counseling is okay if a Republican is in the White House: Yes, that’s right. Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed [...]

[...] responds to the idea that his 2003 vote for the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA)–which, again, included funding for end-of-life counseling–in any way makes his stringent opposition to end-of-life counseling in current health reform [...]

A new low for journalism: a senior editor at Time is unable to read – two days before she supposedly read the bill and could not find any trace of death panels there.

[...] respond. After all, I did your request, so man up and do mine. Thanks in advance! Oh, by the way. GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com Laffo. You didn't "call me out" on anything you flat lied about what I said and when [...]

[...] “no longer worthy”? And worse, it wasn’t just the lunatic fringe that believed this, it was people that clearly know better. People who are now just cynically stoking the flames for their own political [...]

[...] http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/13/oh-those-death-panels/ [...]

[...] Grassley did support end of life care back in 2003. And whoops!  Palin was also in support of end of life care before she quit being [...]

All you so called [Republicans]

Did Reagan get Rid of Government Run, Single Payer Health Care called…

[Medi-Care]

Ans: No

Did Republican Presidents, 7 Years Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, 4 Years.George H.W.Bush Or his son

8 Years. George W.Bush Jr. get rid of Medi-Care, Medi-Caid, Indian Health Services, VA:Hospitals, CHIP: Covering Poor American Children…

Ans: No

Did they get Rid of the IRS [No]

Or the Federal Reserve [No]

Did they start the Flat Tax [No]

What do you know, Majority of the USA has been Under Control of Republcans, the Presidency, Congress and Senate and what have they Accomplished ?

Not a Thing

Bush Extended Medi-Care [Fact]

Medi-Care:A Government Run Single Payer Plan and You Love It.

It’s called antiprocess: http://www.cardsmithing.com/legacy/antiprocess/antiprocess.htm

You just prevent cognitive dissonance by rejecting whatever threatens to cause it.

What inconsistency?

Look at response 2.2 for an excellent example of antiprocessing. You make a false distinction, you throw in a piece of disinformation that you have already whitewashed with prior antiprocessing thus converted it into truth in your head, and you attack your opposition with a broad brush to make yourself feel better about it all, and voila! What double standard? What cognitive dissonance?

Well done, Exiled. You successfully derailed the discussion from one about the hypocrisy and lying of the right regarding alleged Death Camps to something else in which liberals felt forced to defend Democrats.

Furthermore, you kept the discussion going so long that I, for one, am tired of reading these comments and will move on after submitting this post, although I must confess to scanning ahead and seeing a series of irrelevant “good catch” comments to the blogger, so in all fairness a “really good job” is due the whole bunch of conservative apologists and distractors. If there is any intelligent discussion of the author’s thesis, it is hopelessly buried under a nearly impenetrable wall of irrelevant chatter.

It’s important to keep protecting people like Palin and Grassley, and to keep trying to equate the likes McGreevey, Spitzer and Rangel with them. Because unimpeded discourse is the lifeblood of democracy, and we can’t have that. You all function like a well-trained, even professional team if I may say so, just like the ones I see wherever liberals frequently post.

[...] and Republicans supported them when they were in the majority and Bush was their infallible king, Oh, Those Death Panels You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and [...]

Amy, you’re not being totally honest are you? Anyone who has read the 2003 bill knows that the EOL Counseling was limited to TERMINALLY ILL PATIENTS and it was optional. There was no age component and it was not mandatory.

Kinda’ different, don’t ya’ think?

Here’s the link to the bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?sel=DOC&&item=&r_n=hr391.108&&&sid=cp108M6VRe&&refer=&&&db_id=cp108&&hd_count=&

Now, please go read it and stop embarrassing yourself. Everyone else can stop frothing at the mouth and move along. There’s no comparison here.

And would they really rather we were advised on end of life decisions by our family who may be biased about whether we live or die? These are really social decisions about resources: do you have the money, caregivers and mental health to be taken care of if you live? I hope the result is that people do start talking to their families and doctors, even if the doctor isn’t paid. Its about time! Go to GoWish.org for a free “game” to facilitate this difficult conversation. Print out your wishes, take them to your doctor and put them in your advance directives. TAKE CONTROL of your life.

[...] The nonsense about fascist death panels in the health-care reform “debate” is a purely Republican phenomenon, so we shouldn’t be surprised to find that not only is it a lie, actual Democratic proposals for end-of-life counseling aren’t so very different from those of the GOP of a few years ago: [...]

[...] plug on grandma.” We suspect he fully understood the positive nature of the provision, since he actually voted for this exact same thing in legislation back in [...]

[...] mentions a bill, gives its spin and selectively quotes it, but doesn't link to any bill or study. GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com And as to newsbusters and whatever may have been said that source was used soley to show that [...]

[...] Amy Sullivan at TIME.com’s Swampland Blog, August 13, [...]

Shleperdum and f’edupinFLA — are you too blinded by dedication to the chosen one, or just too stupid to follow a hotlink? The paper, as written by Dr. Emmanuel himself, is linked to…in its entirety. Read it, if you can.

[...] Witness Senator Chuck Grassley, furthering the whole “death panel” debate by saying “There is some fear because in the House bill, there is counseling for end-of-life. And from that standpoint, you have every right to fear.” Add the voices of Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin into this mix-tape of malleable reality and you’ve got a veritable trifecta of misinformed right-wing rhetoric. And in Senator Grassley’s case, it appears that he was for the “death panels” before he was against them. [...]

[...] to (quietly) admit that there was no truth to the “death panels” attack and was also (quietly) exposed as a hypocrite on the issue should not go [...]

[...] efforts to expand Medicare coverage to “counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options” for terminally ill patients. In 2003, Grassley voted in favor of the provision as part of [...]

[...] Bush’s efforts to expand Medicare coverage to “counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options” for terminally ill patients. In 2003, Grassley voted in favor of the provision as part of [...]

[...] Bush’s efforts to expand Medicare coverage to “counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options” for terminally ill patients. In 2003, Grassley voted in favor of the provision as part of [...]

[...] efforts to expand Medicare coverage to “counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options” for terminally ill patients. In 2003, Grassley voted in favor of the provision as part of [...]

[...] Late last night, Time reported that Senator Grassley had supported a 2003 Medicare bill including coverage for end-of-life care consultations.  LINK: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/13/oh-those-death-panels/ [...]

[...] Amy Sullivan at TIME.com’s Swampland Blog, August 13, [...]

[...] You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and demagogue it like nobody's business, they would at least pick something that the vast majority of them hadn't already voted for just a few years earlier. Because that's not just shameless, it's stupid. Yes, that's right. Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed with the votes of 204 GOP House members and 42 GOP Senators? Anyone want to guess what it provided funding for? Did you say counseling for end-of-life issues and care? Ding ding ding!! Let's go to the bill text, shall we? "The covered services are: evaluating the beneficiary's need for pain and symptom management, including the individual's need for hospice care; counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options, and advising the beneficiary regarding advanced care planning." The only difference between the 2003 provision and the infamous Section 1233 that threatens the very future and moral sanctity of the Republic is that the first applied only to terminally ill patients. Section 1233 would expand funding so that people could voluntarily receive counseling before they become terminally ill. So either Republicans were for death panels in 2003 before turning against them now–or they're lying about end-of-life counseling in order to frighten the bejeezus out of their fellow citizens and defeat health reform by any means necessary. Which is it, Mr. Grassley ("Yea," 2003)? Read more: GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill – Swampland – TIME.com [...]

[...] I’d love to laugh this off as yet another adorable slip up by RNC Chair Michael “What Up” Steele, but there is a troubling pattern to the GOP’s health care reform opposition. Remember the “death panels” from Our Great Hysterical Town Hall Summer of 2009? Remember when the end of life counseling so derided by these GOP health care deniers was actually supported by them in the 2003 Medicare bill? [...]

[...] wasn’t paid for, is complicated as hell, and doesn’t do all that much—though it does include coverage for end-of life-counseling, or what Grassley now calls “pulling the plug on [...]

[...] wasn’t paid for, is complicated as hell, and doesn’t do all that much—though it does include coverage for end-of life-counseling, or what Grassley now calls “pulling the plug on [...]

[...] wasn’t paid for, is complicated as hell, and doesn’t do all that much—though it does include coverage for end-of life-counseling, or what Grassley now calls “pulling the plug on [...]

[...] Amy Sullivan at TIME.com’s Swampland Blog, August 13, 2009: Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed with the [...]

[...] When to Pull the Plug on Grandma”!  This of course overrules the processor’s own previous support for Medicare-covered end of life counseling.  I Support Death Panels! Life begins at conception [...]

[...] When to Pull the Plug on Grandma”!  This of course overrules the processor’s own previous support for Medicare-covered end of life counseling.  I Support Death Panels! Life begins at conception [...]

[...] When to Pull the Plug on Grandma”!  This of course overrules the processor’s own previous support for Medicare-covered end of life counseling.  I Support Death Panels! Life begins at conception [...]

[...] When to Pull the Plug on Grandma”!  This of course overrules the processor’s own previous support for Medicare-covered end of life counseling.  I Support Death Panels! Life begins at conception [...]

[...] if you’re going to pull the plug on grandma.” Yes, the very politician who back in 2003 voted for pretty much the same provision in the Medicare overhaul orchestrated by his own [...]

[...] completelyinnocuous concept of end-of-life counseling, which had been supported by Republicans in years past. The death panels, however, are notions of governmental bureaucrats—full of fulsome praise for [...]

[...] completely innocuous concept of end-of-life counseling, which had been supported by Republicans in years past. The death panels, however, are notions of governmental bureaucrats—full of fulsome praise [...]

[...] it out for good. It does cause some infliction on the believers to point out facts like this, Oh, Those Death Panels You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and [...]

[...] “death panels” – Republicans were for them before they were against them – Oh, Those Death Panels You would think that if Republicans wanted to totally mischaracterize a health care provision and [...]

[...] grew hysterical and violent, she gloated about the influence she was wielding.  Never mind that much of the Republican Party supported end of life counseling in 2003.  Palin very intentionally mischaracterized health care reform’s provisions for end of life [...]

[...] of the death panel myth – voted Politifacts lie of the year in 2009. And a reminder that Republicans were for “death panels” before they were against them, Yes, that’s right. Remember the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, the one that passed [...]

[...] had voted in favor of end-of-life counseling as part of the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill (http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/08/13/oh-those-death-panels/)–the same “death panels” he said were in Obama’s plan [...]

[...] Before Republican Chuck Grassley was a deather, he supported legislation providing funding for counseling for end-of-life care.  Fear-mongering [...]

[...] Before Republican Chuck Grassley was a deather, he supported legislation providing funding for counseling for end-of-life care.  Fear-mongering [...]

[...] Before Republican Chuck Grassley was a deather, he supported legislation providing funding for counseling for end-of-life care.  Fear-mongering [...]

[...] discussions already happen. The provision was to cover the expense. Wanna hear something funny? GOP Supported End-of-Life Counseling in 2003 Medicare Bill | Swampland The link the article takes you to the GOP-supported bill to do basically the same thing as Obama [...]