How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 By any other name   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

By any other name

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


0 posted 01-15-2011 06:00 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

PolitiFact editors and reporters have chosen "government takeover of health care" as the 2010 Lie of the Year. Uttered by dozens of politicians and pundits, it played an important role in shaping public opinion about the health care plan and was a significant factor in the Democrats' shellacking in the November elections.

Readers of PolitiFact, the St. Petersburg Times' independent fact-checking website, also chose it as the year's most significant falsehood by an overwhelming margin. (Their second-place choice was Rep. Michele Bachmann's claim that Obama was going to spend $200 million a day on a trip to India, a falsity that still sprouts.)

By selecting "government takeover' as Lie of the Year, PolitiFact is not making a judgment on whether the health care law is good policy.

The phrase is simply not true.

Said Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill:  "The label 'government takeover" has no basis in reality, but instead reflects a political dynamic where conservatives label any increase in government authority in health care as a 'takeover.' "
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/dec/16/lie-year-gove rnment-takeover-health-care/



quote:

PolitiFact's Lie of the Year: 'Death panels'

By Angie Drobnic Holan
Published on Friday, December 18th, 2009 at 5:15 p.m.
Of all the falsehoods and distortions in the political discourse this year, one stood out from the rest.

"Death panels."

The claim set political debate afire when it was made in August, raising issues from the role of government in health care to the bounds of acceptable political discussion. In a nod to the way technology has transformed politics, the statement wasn't made in an interview or a television ad. Sarah Palin posted it on her Facebook page.

Her assertion — that the government would set up boards to determine whether seniors and the disabled were worthy of care — spread through newscasts, talk shows, blogs and town hall meetings. Opponents of health care legislation said it revealed the real goals of the Democratic proposals. Advocates for health reform said it showed the depths to which their opponents would sink. Still others scratched their heads and said, "Death panels? Really ?"

The editors of PolitiFact.com, the fact-checking Web site of the St. Petersburg Times , have chosen it as our inaugural "Lie of the Year."

PolitiFact readers overwhelmingly supported the decision. Nearly 5,000 voted in a national poll to name the biggest lie, and 61 percent chose "death panels" from a field of eight finalists. ( See the complete results .)

This is the story of how two words generated intense heat in the national debate over health care.
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/dec/18/politifact-lie-year-death-pan els/



quote:

A ‘Job-Killing’ Law?
House Republicans misrepresent the facts. Experts predict the health care law will have little effect on employment.

January 7, 2011
Bookmark and Share
Summary

When it comes to truth in labeling, House Republicans are getting off to a poor start with their constantly repeated references to the new health care law as "job-killing."

We find:

    * Independent, nonpartisan experts project only a "small" or "minimal" impact on jobs, even before taking likely job gains in the health care and insurance industries into account.
    * The House Republican leadership, in a report issued Jan. 6, badly misrepresents what the Congressional Budget Office has said about the law. In fact, CBO is among those saying the effect "will probably be small."
    * The GOP also cites a study projecting a 1.6 million job loss — but fails to mention that the study refers to a hypothetical employer mandate that is not part of the new law.
    * The same study cited by the GOP also predicts an offsetting gain of 890,000 jobs in hospitals, doctors’ offices and insurance companies — a factor not mentioned by the House leadership.

There’s little doubt that the new law will likely lead to somewhat fewer low-wage jobs. That’s mainly because of the law’s requirement that, generally, firms with more than 50 workers pay a penalty if they fail to provide health coverage for their workers. One leading health care expert, John Sheils of The Lewin Group, puts the loss at between 150,000 and 300,000 jobs, at or near the minimum wage. And Sheils says that relatively small loss would be partly offset by gains in the health care industry.
Analysis

Attaching misleading labels to legislation is a well-worn tactic in Washington. Conservatives got rid of most of the estate tax after labeling it a "death tax," as though it taxed death instead of multimillion-dollar fortunes. And liberals once won passage of an "assault weapons ban" that didn’t really ban fully automatic military assault rifles, which were already illegal for civilians to own without a very-hard-to-get federal license. Now House Republicans are seeking to repeal what they call "Obamacare: A budget-busting, job-killing health care law." That’s the title of a study issued by the House Republican leadership Jan. 6.

And the GOP is clearly pushing the "job-killer" claim. House Speaker John Boehner used the phrase "job-killing" to describe the health care law seven times on Thursday in a press conference that lasted less than 14 minutes — that’s once every 2 minutes. He also used the phrases "destroy jobs" and "destroying jobs" once each when talking about the law. Perhaps not surprisingly, the Republicans named their bill to repeal the health care law: "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act."

But is the health care law really "job-killing" as claimed? We find that to be another case of exaggerated and misleading labeling.
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/01/a-job-killing-law/


Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


1 posted 01-15-2011 07:10 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I'd say that a 2,000 page law that levies all sorts of new taxes, imposes fines, mandates private physicians to comply with government regulations regarding treatment options under threat of fines and sanctions, mandates insurers to offer only policies approved by the government, creates 111 new government boards, bureaucracies, commissions and programs, and gives free reign to those government bureaucrats to flesh out the fine details of the law, sure sounds like a government takeover of healthcare to me.

Ditto for the 'death panels' and 'job killing law' by virtue of the all-encompassing government intrusion into the healthcare insurance and delivery sectors.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


2 posted 01-15-2011 08:48 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 25, 2010

WASHINGTON — When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.

Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

Congressional supporters of the new policy, though pleased, have kept quiet. They fear provoking another furor like the one in 2009 when Republicans seized on the idea of end-of-life counseling to argue that the Democrats’ bill would allow the government to cut off care for the critically ill.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/politics/26death.html


Death Panels Revisited
The left won't admit that Sarah Palin had a point about rationed care.

At a stroke, Medicare chief Donald Berwick has revived the "death panel" debate from two summers ago. Allow us to referee, because this topic has been badly distorted by the political process—and in a rational world, it wouldn't be a political question at all.

On Sunday, Robert Pear reported in the New York Times that Medicare will now pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling as part of seniors' annual physicals. A similar provision was originally included in ObamaCare, but Democrats stripped it out amid the death panel furor. Now Medicare will enact the same policy through regulation.

We hadn't heard about this development until Mr. Pear's story, but evidently Medicare tried to prevent the change from becoming public knowledge. The provision is buried in thousands of Federal Register pages setting Medicare's hospital and physician price controls for 2011 and concludes that such consultations count as a form of preventative care.

The office of Oregon Democrat Earl Blumenauer, the author of the original rider who then lobbied Medicare to cover the service, sent an email to supporters cheering this "victory" but asked that they not tell anyone for fear of perpetuating "the 'death panel' myth." The email added that "Thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it, but we will be keeping a close watch."

Democrats and the press corps accused Mrs. Palin of misrepresentation to avoid reckoning with this inexorable rationing reality that President Obama has himself implicitly acknowledged. In a 2009 interview with ObamaCare advocate David Leonhardt of the New York Times, he called for "a very difficult democratic conversation" about the costs that are incurred in the last six months of life. The President even mused about whether his own grandmother's hip replacement following a terminal cancer diagnosis represented "a sustainable model."

The real problem is the political claim that Medicare and other entitlements are imposing on the culture of U.S. health care. Everyone, on the left and right, now behaves as if every medical issue is a political matter that the government or some technocratic panel can and should decide. No wonder "the 'death panel' myth" has such currency among Americans who won't be doing the deciding.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203731004576045702803914780.html


As far as Politifact is concerned, any agency that declares the White House had nothing to do with the planning of the memorial simply because the University says it didn't, doesn't rank very high in either investigation or intelligence.

Good title, reb. Yes, a death panel by any other name is still a death panel.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


3 posted 01-15-2011 09:58 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

They're bringing back the extension of end of life counselling?

Well that's one piece of good news. I thought it was a really good idea when George Bush signed it into law. I must confess it was a little confusing when the Republicans, who had introduced the idea in the first place, attacked the proposed extension in the latest health care bill.

Mind you, the Republicans didn't call it a "Death Panel" when it was a Republican idea, perhaps that had something to do with their apparent u-turn.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


4 posted 01-15-2011 09:58 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

I don't understand how anyone can be opposed to counseling people about their options, be it for end-of-life care, planned parenting, or how best to meet your tax obligations. I would call that education, not death panels.

Death panels? Orwell was a genius. It's sad so few of today's citizens have read what he had to say. Or, at least, have failed to heed his warnings.

How about we stop assigning meaningless (literally, without meaning) labels and talk about specific issues.

quote:
As far as Politifact is concerned, any agency that declares the White House had nothing to do with the planning of the memorial simply because the University says it didn't, doesn't rank very high in either investigation or intelligence.

LOL. Yea, Mike, let's not allow the truth to confuse us. Universities lie all the time, don't they? Our politicians have a long history of being honest with us, right?


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 01-15-2011 10:18 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ron, please don't tell me you actually think that the White House had nothing to do with the planning or logistics of the gathering. You think maybe Obama just said, "You guys go ahead and set it up any way you want and I'll be there"? He had a national audience, millions of people to speak to,  and you think they just left it to the university to handle all the details? Say it isn't so, Ron...

No, Ron, in  this case the university lied along with the politicians....and they both have a long history of that. Liberal universities and liberal politicians go well, hand in hand.....
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


6 posted 01-15-2011 10:20 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


quote:
I would call that education, not death panels


Pretty close to what the Republicans called it when they introduced the idea Ron, I just checked, they called it "Consultation Services".

That has a much better ring to it than "Death Panels", don't you think? It's also very descriptive of what it actual is too - I guess a rose by any other name doesn't always smell as sweet.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 01-15-2011 10:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The President even mused about whether his own grandmother's hip replacement following a terminal cancer diagnosis represented "a sustainable model."

So Obama would be educating his grandmother???
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


8 posted 01-15-2011 10:37 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


I'm not buying the whole conspiracy theory about the memorial service, it doesn't make any logical sense.

First you'd have to believe that Obama and his team actually sat down and thought it would be a good idea to hand out t-shirts and party balloons at a memorial service and that the Republicans wouldn't make political hay off it.

Then you'd have to believe that Obama could actually convince the crowd to play along - Were they all diehard liberal plants, were there any Republicans there at all and if so how did they convince them to play along with Obama's cunning plan did they pay them?

We're asked to believe this nonsense based on the fact that the Obama team are super slick marketing and PR geniuses which, if you think about it, is in fact the perfect argument NOT to believe it.

Anyone with an ounce of sense would have seen what a completely numb idea it would be to try to turn a memorial event into a political rally.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 01-15-2011 10:48 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

..and yet it turned into a political rally....go figure  

To my mind, anyone with an ounce of sense would realize that the university would not even consider the t-shirt deal without consulting with Obama's team first.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


10 posted 01-15-2011 11:22 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
So Obama would be educating his grandmother???

I can't speak for the President, Mike, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me. When I was younger (about Obama's age, I would guess), I believed we should fight for every single breath of life. Every moment, I believed, was precious. Then I got older. I started watching people die. My mom, my dad, my sister. A few others. Almost every single one of them suffered through medical procedures that were ultimately unnecessary and unhelpful. My parents, in particular, spent every moment of their last few months in pain, recuperating from extremely invasive surgeries.

Does that mean they shouldn't have had them? Shouldn't have tried? No, not necessarily. But they certainly should have been better educated about what to expect. They should have been counseled, realistically, on what their options were and what the consequences of each of those options might be. They weren't. Almost no one ever is.

quote:
..and yet it turned into a political rally

In what way, Mike? Was anyone asked to vote for something or someone?

I didn't see it as a political rally at all. I saw it as an American rally.


Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


11 posted 01-15-2011 11:23 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

If it was a planned political rally why did Obama forget to give a party political speech?

The text of the speech is here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20028366-503544.html

Is it a political speech or a fitting address by the President of the United States?

As an independent observer, I'd have to say that it's the latter.

quote:
anyone with an ounce of sense would realize that the university would not even consider the t-shirt deal without consulting with Obama's team first


Why? Do the tea party organisers consult guest speakers about what the crowd should wear? Could Obama, in a fit of pique, threaten to call the whole thing off unless all attendees wore dinner suits and black ties? If so your President has far too much power.

That's ignoring the fact that, given even a basic understanding of your average student's dress sense, the t-shirts they eventually wore were probably a heck of an improvement over the t-shirts that they might have worn.



Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


12 posted 01-15-2011 11:43 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Does that mean they shouldn't have had them? Shouldn't have tried? No, not necessarily. But they certainly should have been better educated about what to expect. They should have been counseled, realistically, on what their options were and what the consequences of each of those options might be. They weren't. Almost no one ever is.

I agree with that, Ron. However, do you think that's all it is about? Counceling them on their options? SO what will happen, after counceling, if they choose life, choose to fight the fight, no matter what? Will this health plan that the government is paying for say, "Ok, no problem. You fight and we'll continue to pick up the tab."? Or would it be more realistic for the government panel to say, "Sorry, but you are not going to get better and we are not going through the expense of keeping you alive" ?

When did it become a political rally?? As soon as the t-shirts were distributed.


Theme of “Together We Thrive” T-shirt came from Obama’s Organizing for America
By Judi McLeod  Friday, January 14, 2011

The “Together We Thrive” T-shirts that starred at Wednesday’s Arizona `Memorial’ originated from Organizing for America (here), a sad fact unearthed by The Drumbeat of Liberty and the Preservation of Freedom editor and Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Robert Rohlfing.

In the controversy of the pep rally/rock concert style Memorial for those who lost their lives in Saturday’s Arizona tragedy, the mainstream media reported that the “Together We Thrive: Tucson & America” T-shirt given to mourners as they entered McKale Center was the idea of University of Arizona brass, not the Obama administration.

Yet the “Together We Thrive” slogan dates back to a post to Obama’s own Organizing for America in a Feb. 11, 2008 post by self-described “globalist” John Berry IV.

More than passing strange that the Obama campaign message of civility was the same on Feb. 11, 2008 as it was in his Wednesday Memorial speech, and the same one, too carried by the mainstream media in coverage of the Memorial.


    “For too long Americans have been set one against the other.  It is a side affect of a free market society,” Berry IV posted.  “How can profits be maximized, how can I get the work down for the lowest possible costs.  This continually sets one group against the other, especially in the blue collar sectors of America.  It has become part of the American Business model, whether it was indentured servants, slaves picking cotton, sharecroppers, the industrious people that built the railroads or today’s migrant workers.  As long as we remain divided, fighting for the scraps that America has to offer it will be one group against the other.

    “What I see in Obama is a chance for revolution. (Italics CFP’s).  A chance for every group to be heard; A chance to live the American dream that has been denied to so many…

    “In a previous career, I was the global leader of Diversity for a global fortune 500 corporation.  I have studied the affects of diverse groups working together and the results can not be denied.  Together we Thrive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

University of Arizona brass did not originate the “Together We Thrive” T-shirt.  They merely recycled it for Obama—and recycled it in time for what should have been a dignified Memorial for the dead.

If you were a mourner who took home a “Together We Thrive” T-shirt have a look at the bottom of your shirt.  “Rocking America and Rocking the Vote” is a common theme of the DNC,  and it’s right there on your Memorial T-shirt memento.


Welcome to the era of Obama, where cheering and standing ovations, for the first time in history, became part of the Requiem for the Dead.


http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/32138
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 01-15-2011 11:48 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Excellent response, Craig. The shirts were given out to upgrade the students' normal dress. Thank you for sharing that...
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


14 posted 01-16-2011 12:20 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

quote:
Thank you for sharing that...


No problem Mike, though I think you probably missed the fact that I said that with my tongue firmly in my cheek. That's ok though, it's easy to misinterpret someone's intentions from a short post on an internet forum.

It's slightly more difficult to miss the intention behind the claim that " Consultation Services" and "Death Panels", aren't one and the same thing. Or the intentions of the folk who are supplying that particular piece of misinformation.

For the record, one is a good description used by Republicans to describe the end of life counselling that they introduced into law.

The other is a not so good description of exactly the same thing, used by some Republican's to convince folk that it was a good idea when they suggested it, but that the Obama extension is just a conspiracy to kill your granny.


Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


15 posted 01-16-2011 12:52 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I agree with that, Ron. However, do you think that's all it is about?

Yes, Mike, I do. If you'd like to show me something concrete to change my mind I'm certainly willing to listen. You know, like maybe some language within the bill that suggests otherwise?

quote:
Or would it be more realistic for the government panel insurance company to say, "Sorry, but you are not going to get better and we are not going through the expense of keeping you alive" ?

Something concrete, Mike. Not conjecture?

quote:
When did it become a political rally?? As soon as the t-shirts were distributed.

Okay. I haven't seen the t-shirts, so I'll have to take your word for it. What or who did they ask people to vote for?

If it's true, Mike, I'm honestly not sure how I would feel about someone trying to make political points from what is clearly a senseless tragedy. I have to wonder, though, how using the memorial to criticize Obama is greatly different? Aren't you trying to make political points in much the same way?


Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


16 posted 01-16-2011 01:41 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

I'd say that a 2,000 page law



It doesn't matter how many pages it is Denise.  What matters is what's contained on the pages.

The problem with the debate in this country is that K street has so muddied up the water with money that neither "side" can even agree on what the meaning of "is" is.  

All I see in your posts is regurgitation of talking points that have been marketed into your head.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 01-16-2011 08:44 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Okay. I haven't seen the t-shirts, so I'll have to take your word for it. What or who did they ask people to vote for?

Ron, it's right there in the article. Those were the t-shirts, along with the "Rocking America and rocking the vote" slogan that Obama's Organizing for America" that was used in the push for Obama for president. You don't need to take a wild guess to know that Obama was who they asked the people to vote for.

If it's true, Mike,

If what's true? That it was the slogan for Obama's group Organizing for America? That the Rocking America and rocking the vote slogan was on the t-shirts? Then welcome to the light....


Something concrete, Mike. Not conjecture?

No, Ron, I can't give something concrete to what has yet to happen, no more than I could give concrete evidence that the lion is going to eat the dead lamb at it's feet it just killed. One has to go by reason, logic and past history to project. Health care costs will go through the roof under the government takeover. They will have to explore every area they can to cut costs. There will be thousands, millions, of old people with one foot in the grave and one on a banana peel. Perhaps you don't feel that the government will look at this as an area where they can cut costs by ceasing to provide coverage to the elderly with a limited life span. I don't envision it the same way. A government board will then decide who deserves to continue receiving life-saving treatment and who doesn't. If that doesn't scare you, then you are a better man than I. (Actually, you are probably a better man than I, regardless)

I have to wonder, though, how using the memorial to criticize Obama is greatly different? Aren't you trying to make political points in much the same way?

Go by the progression, Ron. Obama gave a good speech. Had there not been the circus atmosphere, the t-shirt hand out, the pep rally cheers and the like, there would have been no criticism of Obama in this regard.

LR..and here I thought Clinton would be the only person with the audacity to say, "That all depends on what "is", is". Go figure...
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


18 posted 01-16-2011 10:32 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


quote:
A government board will then decide who deserves to continue receiving life-saving treatment and who doesn't.


Ah, I see.

It's not the end of life consultations that the Republicans introduced and then re-branded as death panels - it's another death panel that's got you so annoyed.

So you're saying that the recently passed heath care legislation contains a provision to implement a board who are going to pick and choose who gets treatment and who doesn't. If that's true it's absolutely despicable, I've no idea how I missed such a heinous inclusion.

Can you post the exact text relating to this death panel provision Mike, or give me the section reference so I can check out the text of the bill myself?

Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


19 posted 01-16-2011 12:46 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

If that's all you see, L.R., then perhaps you should go directly to the source for confirmation.

Uncas, the problem isn't with the voluntary option for end of life counseling, either as initiated by the Republicans or by the Democrats. Everyone should be given full-disclosure on treatment and non-treatment options, whereby they can make informed decisions.

The problem is that the current one is in conjunction with new boards and bureaucracies with the power and discretion to determine what the government will and will not pay for regarding treatment under Medicare and Medicaid based on value measurements like quality of life outcomes in light of age or other health issues, like with Obama's grandmother, for instance. Obama wasn't sure if that was the best use of money (hip replacement) in light of the fact that she had already been diagnosed with terminal cancer. That shouldn't be the govenrment's decision or an insurance company's decision, but the patient's decision only. When you have bureaucrats making those decisions that effect whether someone lives longer or dies sooner, then I think 'death panels' is a good description of what they are.

Here is a link that lists 159 new government, boards, bureaucracies, commissions and grants created by obamacare (the previous number of 111 under Pelosi's bill didn't list the grants, I don't believe):
http://fullmetalpatriot.blogspot.com/2010/04/list-of-159-new-government.html

*my spelling is becoming atrocious lately*
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


20 posted 01-16-2011 01:08 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


Do you have the text from the bill that describes the formation and implementation of the death panel you just described Denise? I don't recall seeing anything like that when I read the legislation, I obviously missed it. The section or page number would suffice.

Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


21 posted 01-16-2011 01:39 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

You can get the specific locations of the beauracracies, etc., in the list I provided. You can then invesigate, if you wish, the powers granted to them under the law to flesh out the details of the law, (as Pelosi said they would have during the 'debate' of the bill).

There is no need for the law itself to mention 'death panels' (by that name or any other descriptive), all it had to do was lay the groundwork by creating the beauracracies and then give them the unbridled power to act (flesh out the details) in accord with the administration's agenda.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


22 posted 01-16-2011 02:08 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


Denise,

What's the name of the death panel that's going to decide who lives and who dies?

If the bill outlines the creation of any, panel, commission or regulatory body it will also stipulate the function, funding and applicable members along with any powers granted to them. So which specific panel, commission or regulatory body are you talking about?


Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


23 posted 01-16-2011 02:44 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

My bet would be on one of the commissions or boards for Medicare and Medicaid that is charged with evaluating the value of expenditures.
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


24 posted 01-16-2011 03:01 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

quote:
My bet would be on one of the commissions or boards for Medicare and Medicaid that is charged with evaluating the value of expenditures


Your bet!

Are you saying that you don't actually know what the death panel is called? With respect Denise, if you don't know what it's called how the heck do you know what it's supposed to do or whether it actually exists at all?

I presumed that when you were talking about a death panel that you actually had some evidence that it existed in  the real world.

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> By any other name   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors