Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[HandBall]

Instead of fighting the imagery, it would be much better if the MSM and Obama would fight the substance of charges, and not the intentionally incendiary label attached to what WILL be government panels empowered to decide who lives and who dies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574356241709682828.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

[basketballdad]

Interesting to a degree but does not address any part of the bill currently before the House. I actually read the section related to the so called death panels. Once again, I do agree they hyperbole is high but coming just as far from the right as the left. The extremists that are shouting anything that will scare people without actually quoting any of the four bills in Congress that I see create tension but do nothing to reach solution. Counseling does not make a death sentence. For this article to be plausible by some extraordinary stretch one would have to assume the patient did not have control of their mental faculties, had no immediate family looking out for your interests, a corrupt doctor with a corrupt counselor giving the advice. Even then it would be hard to actually kill someone.

For the record, I am also not in favor of the current plans in Congress as they are written either but I prefer some actually facts rather than stories and what ifs. While I love my health insurance I do notice the substantial increase in premiums and how much my employer pays. I can't help but wonder if no reform how long can system keep on without buckling.

[basketballdad]

More facts today.

I was slightly wrong. The end of life counseling that some point to as a slippery slope toward death panels actually forbids any counseling that reccomends suicide or assisted suicide as an option. Not only do the so called death panels not exist the end of life counseling clause actually forbids any discussion of suicide or assisted suicide.  Just thought another fact might be in order.

[HandBall]

More facts today.

I was slightly wrong. The end of life counseling that some point to as a slippery slope toward death panels actually forbids any counseling that reccomends suicide or assisted suicide as an option. Not only do the so called death panels not exist the end of life counseling clause actually forbids any discussion of suicide or assisted suicide.  Just thought another fact might be in order.

While we're talking about facts, as the article below asks, if perhaps Obama was to reverse his decision on the VA Death Book that he revived, it might put some substance behind the emptiness of his words and the multiple stands he appears to take depending on who he's talking to.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358590107981718.html

Then when done with the Death Book reality, check out this reasonable path to expect of Obamacare already in Oregon, where a woman was denied the chemo treatment by a government panel, but told that funding for doctor-assisted suicide was available.


As for reading any legislation right now to fully understand what Obama, Pelosi and Reid will get in the end, remember that anything past by the House and the Senate will be reconciled by conference by Democrats in those bodies with the exclusion of Republicans. Then the result, regardless of how it differs with one or both of those approved bills, could be voted into law by a simple majority.

Obama has been very deceptive this last week in responding to the specific criticism of specific items, by citing the House bill when it benefits him, or citing the yet-unseen Senate bill when it benefits him. The reality is that the two bills could include just about anything the Dems wanted, and in the absence of any real Republican influence, write virtually anything into the conference bill and adopt it without a single Republican vote. And don't doubt for a second that Obama wouldn't go along with that, even if it cost him reelection, for he is a true believer in the radical principles of the extreme socialist left.

[basketballdad]

Sorry Handball, not interested in red herring and side detours. I don't care about Oregon as I don't live there and we are talking about the Federal bills. The so called Death Panels cannot be created by the executive branch. Two, after tracking the Senate bill, I noticed it also does not authorize suicide or assisted suicide as an option for any sort of counseling. I keep looking in both the Senate and House bills for a path to strangers deciding to kill the elderly and it does not exist. While the legislation needs some work and I have some issues with parts of it the idea that either the House or the Senate bill has anything in it authorizing anything remotely like a "death panel" is just flat out wrong. Yes during conference committee they can change it and if they do to authorize some board to decide whether you live or die I will jump on board your side. Until then I will have to by what is out there and none of it authorizes death panels, counseling people to commit suicide, or helping them to do it. Death panels is nothing more than inflammatory rhetoric to scare the uninformed. The fact that it partially works does not make it true.

[Tesoro]

Perhaps "the absence of any real Republican influence" noted by Handball is intentional.
Intentional by the Republicans, not the Democrats.

[basketballdad]

Republicans don't really want reform of any kind. First they were agains the public option. Then when the co-op idea came out they were against that. We know what they are against but don't have any idea of what they are far outside of the obvious "we need greater efficiencies in our medical system." The problem with that is no one is against that idea. Actual ideas of how to slow the growth of health care costs and increase health insurance for those who don't have it are not there. I am not convinced that the current bills are the right idea but have nothing to compare them to that is for sure.