You are here

Who’s in the Empty Suit Now?

Topic: 
People: 
Places: 

I’ve seen plenty of righty speculation that part of the reason Sarah Palin drives lefties crazy is her staunch display of the value of human life. She didn’t abort Trig. Instead, she is proud of him and full of love.

She has been ridiculed as an intellectual lightweight. Yet, she is the one who put the label “Death Panel” on Federal health legislation:

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

She knows the details behind her rhetoric:

Section 1233 [of one version of legislation] authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care?

Palin’s rhetoric communicates a reasoned idea, her core principles applied to life and law.

Meanwhile, the current President is campaigning for stuff he hasn’t read:

In an effort to swing support for ObamaCare, the president hosted a conference call, asking liberal bloggers to put the pressure on Congress.

 

During the call, a blogger asked a question regarding an article he read in Investors Business Daily, claiming that the House bill would outlaw private insurance.  He asked:  “Is this true?  Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?”  Obama replied:  “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”

Barry is out selling “his” health care legislation, which Congress hasn’t finished drafting for him. And what they have written, he hasn’t read.

What was the reasoning behind “Hope” or “Change”?