Obama's Death Panel

[snafu]

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Barack Obama's health plan "downright evil" Friday in her first online comments since leaving office, saying in a Facebook posting that he would create a "death panel" that would deny care to the neediest Americans.

Palin says Obama's health plan is 'downright evil': Politics | adn.com

[hugo]

It is sad that we cannot have a rational debate on this issue.

[Ali]

I find it really odd and unprofessional that so many dealings with Sarah Palin as of late have come about from her postings on Facebook.

 

Just my opinion.

[snafu]

I find it really odd and unprofessional that so many dealings with Sarah Palin as of late have come about from her postings on Facebook.Just my opinion.

That was the whole reason for giving up her position as governor. She will be able to use the new concept of using the internet as a platform.

[Phreakwars]

That was the whole reason for giving up her position as governor. She will be able to use the new concept of using the internet as a platform.

Well, I guess all I would have to say about that, is it WOULD be a good idea, but having messages from allegedly YOU on a blog is not gonna get any message out unless you yourself are seen saying it.

 

Being a big hit with the internet crowd doesn't mean party success. It's just means you have a popular blog. The real test is actual interaction instead of blog comments and responses.

 

I know of several people (not on this site) that share a user name account but are actually a couple different people.

 

What's not to say Sarah Palin would not be doing the same? She obviously had speech writers helping her before. If Obama hiding behind a teleprompter is so gosh darn awful, then what type of credibility do you think one could expect hiding behind a keyboard?

 

.

 

.

[hugo]

Well, I guess all I would have to say about that, is it WOULD be a good idea, but having messages from allegedly YOU on a blog is not gonna get any message out unless you yourself are seen saying it. Being a big hit with the internet crowd doesn't mean party success. It's just means you have a popular blog. The real test is actual interaction instead of blog comments and responses.

 

I know of several people (not on this site) that share a user name account but are actually a couple different people.

 

What's not to say Sarah Palin would not be doing the same? She obviously had speech writers helping her before. If Obama hiding behind a teleprompter is so gosh darn awful, then what type of credibility do you think one could expect hiding behind a keyboard?

 

.

 

.

If she has speech writers, she better fire them. They are making her look like a raving lunatic.

[snafu]

If she has speech writers, she better fire them. They are making her look like a raving lunatic.

You don't see some sort of panel determining who gets treatment and who doesn't? It's happing everywhere else that has government controlled health care. You can call it what you want but it gets the same results.

[Phreakwars]

You don't see some sort of panel determining who gets treatment and who doesn't? It's happing everywhere else that has government controlled health care. You can call it what you want but it gets the same results.

READ THE BILL.

 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3200IH/pdf/BILLS-111hr3200IH.pdf

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

READ THE BILL.http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3200IH/pdf/BILLS-111hr3200IH.pdf

 

.

 

.

Actually you have to go back to the stimulus bill. That's where the framework was passed to establish the Tom Daschle/Great Britain style medical advisory council, so yes Pres. Obama has signed a bill making this law.

[Phreakwars]

Show me the bill and lines please.

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

Show me the bill and lines please..

 

.

No need. It's no longer just a bill. It's been established in law in the "stimulus package" with a panel already in place that includes Rahm Emanuel's brother...

 

Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research Membership

 

Ezekiel J. Emanuel, who wrote an article for The Hastings Center Report in 1996, in which he suggested that public deliberative forums should decide which health services should be socially guaranteed, and that those services "that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations" might be considered by this deliberative body as "basic", while "services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed". He goes on to give examples illustrating these two concepts: "not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia", (like your uncle, Phreak) while "guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason"

[Phreakwars]

So if it's already in the Stimulus you should be able to point out the wording for me so I can see it myself. It's already a LAW supposedly, so it MUST be on the books. I'm just asking which lines, I'm not able to find it on google anywhere, help me out. Should I try Microsoft's new BING search engine?

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

So if it's already in the Stimulus you should be able to point out the wording for me so I can see it myself. It's already a LAW supposedly, so it MUST be on the books. I'm just asking which lines, I'm not able to find it on google anywhere, help me out. Should I try Microsoft's new BING search engine?.

 

.

Clicky, clicky on the title of the program on my previous post.

 

Sorry my direct link to the law didn't help you out.

 

Don't know about BING, never used it.

[Phreakwars]

Ezekiel J. Emanuel's article is the proof? I looked on that page, I couldn't find anything about any death panels, or nothing about the Bill.

 

I'll look some more.... Yahoo didn't work... maybe if I searched using alta vista world translator and set my language to "chicken little". :rolleyes:

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

Ezekiel J. Emanuel's article is the proof? I looked on that page, I couldn't find anything about any death panels, or nothing about the Bill. I'll look some more.... Yahoo didn't work... maybe if I searched using alta vista world translator and set my language to "chicken little". :rolleyes:

 

.

 

.

All I said is to look at those in power and advising the President.

 

Ezikial Emanuel - We've established his view.

 

John Holdren - Obama science and technology advisor who along with Paul Erlich believe in the following...

 

Indeed, it has been concluded that

compulsory population-control laws,

even including laws requiring compulsory abortion

, could be

sustained under the existing Constitution

if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.

It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions

, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.

Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods

is a suggestion

that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult

political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems

. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development.

To be acceptable

, such a substance would have to meet some rather

stiff requirements

: it must be

uniformly effective

, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be

free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects

; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people,

pets, or livestock

.

Holdren is also a big supporter and fan of Peter Singer who believes that animals should have the right to human civil courts of law, and legal representation in courts and also that abortions should be allowed up to 20 days after birth and advocates for euthenasia of disabled babies.Tom Daschle - http://justbs.us/on-topic-bs/34832-this-really-frightens-me.html Yea, his tax cheatin' ass is still around and advising Obama.

[Phreakwars]

OK so they believe in that, show me the death squad policy. Come on man, you can do better then that.

 

So where is the SOURCE of this whole talk about death squads and what have you, I wanna know on what basis these claims are being made as FACTUAL.

 

I could write a column on how to make meth, does that make me a meth maker?

 

Replace the word meth with death.

 

And stay on topic, were talking about death squads, not Tom Dachle.

 

Your supposed to be convincing me this exists, not telling me about Dachle.

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

OK so they believe in that, show me the death squad policy. Come on man, you can do better then that. So where is the SOURCE of this whole talk about death squads and what have you, I wanna know on what basis these claims are being made as FACTUAL.

 

I could write a column on how to make meth, does that make me a meth maker?

 

Replace the word meth with death.

 

And stay on topic, were talking about death squads, not Tom Dachle.

 

Your supposed to be convincing me this exists, not telling me about Dachle.

 

.

 

.

I never said anything about a death squad, in those words. I have been showing and expressing that the plan, and the idea that is being put in place is the framework for a Great Britain style council that decides who gets what health care based on certain criteria.

 

If you even try to deny that this is in place and that's obviously the goal, otherwise one stage wouldn't have been put in place back in the "stimulus bill" and now the rest is being put in place under the proposed health care bills, you will have no credibility other than a partisan hack.

 

There is no other explination why that council was put in place, but my scenerio.

 

There was a hiccup when Daschle was bumped as one of the many Democratic tax cheats, but it wasn't important. He moved right in with John Podesta with the Center for American Progress and meets at the White House all the time, but has no Constitutional regulations on him.

 

That's the only reason they didn't fight for Daschle like they did for Turbo Tax Timmy.

 

He could do the same thing but make more money with the CAP.

 

This isn't even a hidden conspiracy. It's right there in front of you.

 

How about a friendly bet. I'm willing to put up $100 that in 10 years there will be a Federal Bureaucracy that determines who is eligible for certain types of treatments, depending on age, disease, progression of disease, and availability.

[Phreakwars]

I'll only rebut the first sentence, the rest is hogwash..

 

YOU SHOWED ME NO PLAN WHAT SO EVER. I'm not denying anythings in place, I just want confirmation of it's existence. You haven't shown me big foot yet, just talk of it's sightings.

 

Even the Libertarian Hugo can easily see through that chicken little myth.

 

If it's already on the books, then you should have been able to rebut me by now, you can't because you keep looking and looking all over google so you can get that edge, you keep coming up short, so you back peddle a bit more, shuffle your talking point cards around a bit, try a couple more google search terms... and still... NOTHING.

 

Just admit defeat, you can't prove it because it doesn't exist.

 

Palin has taken to hiding behind a keyboard and spewing propaganda. She probably made a few contacts in Washington after McCain brought her in, that would hook her up with some decent cash for spreading their B.S., figured it was better pay and a safer bet then being a Governor, and off she goes.

 

She's making herself look like a crazed lunatic... but, whatever brings in the bacon I guess.

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

I'll only rebut the first sentence, the rest is hogwash..YOU SHOWED ME NO PLAN WHAT SO EVER. I'm not denying anythings in place, I just want confirmation of it's existence. You haven't shown me big foot yet, just talk of it's sightings.

 

Even the Libertarian Hugo can easily see through that chicken little myth.

 

If it's already on the books, then you should have been able to rebut me by now, you can't because you keep looking and looking all over google so you can get that edge, you keep coming up short, so you back peddle a bit more, shuffle your talking point cards around a bit, try a couple more google search terms... and still... NOTHING.

 

Just admit defeat, you can't prove it because it doesn't exist.

 

Palin has taken to hiding behind a keyboard and spewing propaganda. She probably made a few contacts in Washington after McCain brought her in, that would hook her up with some decent cash for spreading their B.S., figured it was better pay and a safer bet then being a Governor, and off she goes.

 

She's making herself look like a crazed lunatic... but, whatever brings in the bacon I guess.

 

.

 

.

I can't prove, what is inevitable but hasn't happened yet. How about going on record and accept my wager?

 

How about a friendly bet. I'm willing to put up $100 that in 10 years there will be a Federal Bureaucracy that determines who is eligible for certain types of treatments, depending on age, disease, progression of disease, and availability.

[snafu]

Healthcare Reform: HR 3200 and “Big Brother” in Your Life | The Doc Is In

 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf (I haven't gone through this yet)

[hugo]

Whether it be private or public insurers must ration services to control costs.

[RoyalOrleans]

Ten little things the media won't tell you about American healthcare. An interesting report was prepared by a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of radiology and chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical School by the name of Scott W. Atlas. He has prepared ten reasons why America's health care system is in better condition than you might suppose. Here's an overview, but the whole thing is worth a read. This is for all of your liberal friends who are convinced that a single-payer, government healthcare system is going to "save" our healthcare system.

 

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

 

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

 

3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

 

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

 

5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

 

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

 

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

 

8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

 

9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

 

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

 

Well .. remember. No matter how good our medical care is today, it simply doesn't empower politicians enough. That's the goal of ObamaCare, and the sooner you realize that the better prepared you are to fight for your freedom. ObamaCare is not about improving health care in the United States. It is ALL about increasing the power that political hacks have over your life and your bank accounts.

[Phreakwars]

I can't prove, what is inevitable but hasn't happened yet. How about going on record and accept my wager?

Ahh, I see you have reached stage 3 of the death of the myth... BARGAINING. Don't worry, only depression and acceptance are left.

 

.

 

.

[Phreakwars]

Ten little things the media won't tell you about American healthcare. An interesting report was prepared by a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of radiology and chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical School by the name of Scott W. Atlas. He has prepared ten reasons why America's health care system is in better condition than you might suppose. Here's an overview' date=' but the whole thing is worth a read. This is for all of your liberal friends who are convinced that a single-payer, government healthcare system is going to "save" our healthcare system.1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

 

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

 

3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

 

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

 

5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

 

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

 

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

 

8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

 

9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

 

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

 

Well .. remember. No matter how good our medical care is today, it simply doesn't empower politicians enough. That's the goal of ObamaCare, and the sooner you realize that the better prepared you are to fight for your freedom. ObamaCare is not about improving health care in the United States. It is ALL about increasing the power that political hacks have over your life and your bank accounts.

Are you representing THIS as a fact?

 

Because at the top of the page it says: Here’s a Second Opinion

 

Followed by that stuff you posted, and not followed by any data research done.

 

Just like the DEATH PANEL myth, I wanna see the data for this as well.

 

.

 

.

[IWS]

Are you representing THIS as a fact?Because at the top of the page it says: Here?s a Second Opinion

 

Followed by that stuff you posted, and not followed by any data research done.

 

Just like the DEATH PANEL myth, I wanna see the data for this as well.

 

.

 

.

It was a reference to the old medical saying of getting a second opinion on a diagnosis, by another doctor, before acting.