Althouse: Senators decide not to kill your grandma...

August 13, 2009

Senators decide not to kill your grandma...

... since you noticed.

***

Sarah "Death Panels" Palin vindicated.

213 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 213 of 213

KCFleming said...: So voluntary counseling may go away, but we will have involuntary rationing of care, without counseling, except perhaps grief counselors, post-mortem.

Yes, it's very sad that your 80 year old mom coudn't get dialysis. It was just her time, you see?; 8/14/09, 10:07 AM
Shanna said...: I'm using it to call BS on the sudden fiscal conservativism that is breaking out among the GOP and their media supporters.

As mentioned, it’s not sudden. If the republican leadership abandoned its principles, that doesn’t mean the rank and file did.

As for the FAA, only the most hardcore libertarian believes government should do nothing. Most believe there are some reasonable places for government, police, military, maybe FAA...but there are things the private sector can do just fine and I think healthcare is one of these things. Maybe there are some regulations the government can change. I would start with fixing whatever needs to be fixed with Medicare, tort reform and allowing some sort of high deductable, catastrophic insurance that is available across state lines at a reasonable price. Government doesn’t have to provide it, if they just change the regulations the private sector could provide it.

FWIW, I think it's hilarious that Palin can direct the dem's from her facebook account, but I never thought the end of life provisions were the same thing as "death panels". They were clearly not panels. I think the "death panel" thing is more about the inevitable rationing of care, and the committees that would make these decisions.

"blead". Appropriate.; 8/14/09, 10:07 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Here garage.

PA went for The One didn't they? Well according to Rasmussen, they don't seem to be too ready for his change.; 8/14/09, 10:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually, Palin is completely wrong. She said that Obama "pals" around with terrorists, except that he has been even more vigilant than Bush in the area of the world where more terrorists live, Pakistan & Afghanistan.

So, Nixon being "tough on crime" means he didn't actually commit any crimes, huh? Henry Hyde opposing infidelity means he never cheated, huh?

That how it works?

She also said that he would destroy the economy, in which he's done the exact opposite by helping to bring it back from the brink.

How many banks have failed this year?

Is unemployment still well north of 9% and higher than he expected it to be?

Is the deficit tremendously higher than it was?

Didn't the Consumer Price Index plummet today?

So, uh, where is this economy recovery? In what way are we farther away from the brink than we were in January, when unemployment was considerably less and the deficit was also far lower?

He ran on health care reform strongly, he is trying do exactly what he talked about doing.

He also ran on transparency. He ran on fiscal constraint. He ran on not being beholden to special interests. He promised to be above petty partisanship.

So, uh, how's that working out?

She's a habitual liar whose pettiness is only eclipsed by ability to say mind numbingly stupid things

Just a hint: Obama is a male. So "she" doesn't fit. But all else is quite accurate.; 8/14/09, 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Apparently, to garage, Obama is allowed to change his mind...but voters are not.; 8/14/09, 11:07 AM
Joe said...: I'm tired of the liberal thesis that doctors are a bunch of selfish bastards that won't do shit without being paid and paid well. The suggestion that a doctor won't give someone end-of-life counseling without being reimbursed is an insult to the doctors everywhere. I don't know of any doctor who wouldn't answer questions about what a DNR order means in real terms (like how well certain hospitals follow them.)

About a year ago, I went in to my local (very well run) hospital for a test in radiology. At the desk the clerk said "we don't have a DNR on file, do you want one." I said yes, she handed me the papers. If I have questions, I can all many volunteer organizations or, gasp, my doctor. Or, I can use my brain and figure out the damn answer myself (good Lord, do people really need a doctor to tell them what they already should know by common sense?)

While ranting, I'm getting tired of Obama et. al. claiming that the uninsured are a bunch of leeches who don't pay their medical bills. I've been uninsured for about half my life due to running my own business and being a contractor. During that time, I've paid every cent of medical bills for my family and I, including for a CAT scan, emergency room visits, a child birth, etc..; 8/14/09, 11:08 AM
hombre said...: @ Paddy O: Like I said at 7:50 AM, What do end-of-life counseling sessions have to do with "death panels?" That's a BHO red herring.

Enter Palin and it shifts from red herring to straw man.

She has since responded to the EOL counseling argument, but Oblahblah and the Dems and that moron Isaakson, have ducked the connection between "death panels" and gov't health care rationing.

She, and we, get distracted too easily and these guys are masters.

wv "stedion": Hanging in there in the face of lefty dissembling.; 8/14/09, 11:37 AM
Big Mike said...: @Shanna, I'm with you. I'm past fed up to the gills with Republican politicians who are socially well to my right but who spend money like you pick it up off the streets. Someplace there has to be a party for people who are fiscal conservatives. The Dems surely aren't it.; 8/14/09, 11:43 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: I'm tired of the liberal thesis that doctors are a bunch of selfish bastards that won't do shit without being paid and paid well. The suggestion that a doctor won't give someone end-of-life counseling without being reimbursed is an insult to the doctors everywhere. I don't know of any doctor who wouldn't answer questions about what a DNR order means in real terms (like how well certain hospitals follow them.)

I am not the least bit worried about doctors being greedy bastards. It bothered me in college looking at that aspect of many of the pre-meds, but no longer.

Why? Because this is a place we want to see our best and brightest. It is a long hard road they tread to make that money. I know kids graduating from HS who are entering the work force. Most physicians don't do so until their late 20s or early 30s, after finishing a grueling undergraduate program, med school, and long residencies. Would we rather the best and the brightest be the ones practicing the medicine, or second guessing them as they attorneys suing them for malpractice? Which is better for our country's well being?

Greed is good. One of the big reasons that communism, fascism, and other forms of socialism invariably fail is that they assume that man is perfectible. Capitalism creates wealth and has given us our incredible lifestyle, including good health care, by assuming the opposite, that man is greedy.

Socialism fails on so many grounds because it tries to ignore or cure greed. That Congressman who accepts campaign contributions in trade for legislative help? Greedy. That government bureaucrat who follows his mandate for cutting costs by cutting off health care for Granny because she is too old? Again, he is motivated by geed. The problem is that the system they run under assumes that they won't be greedy, and that is contrary to human nature.; 8/14/09, 11:51 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Ignorance is Bliss asked: Can I assume that you'd be equally unhappy if the bill passes due to the false narratives of the left?

We have a winner!

Yes, I don't want government by B.S.; 8/14/09, 12:08 PM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/14/09, 1:33 PM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: peter hoh-

Then that is something that we agree on. Unfortunately, government by B.S. appears to be the only kind around.; 8/14/09, 1:36 PM
Jeremy said...: Quick question: what do you think happens to grandma now? If she's got a pre-existing condition, or is poor, she gets NO COVERAGE WHATSOEVER.

If the government insurance option is going to have limits, and you think those limits are too harsh (even though they're clearly vastly less harsh than the private insurers'), then advocate for more funding so it can cover people better.

To pretend that some cover for these people is somehow worse than no cover (as now) is beyond absurd.

What a bunch of disingenuous liars.; 8/14/09, 5:44 PM