I'm watching the Huckabee show on FOX. He made a good point. Instead of taking the "pain pill', Ted Kennedy fought with all he had and tried to get the best healthcare he could. So why should we poor slobs have to take the pain pills Barry? I guess we just arent good enough to live.
Good job making shit up, though.
You should try out to be one of Palin's bullshit writers.
Watch the video that Tiribulus linked up. Looks like you already have a job at Acorn or Media Matters.
In the video Obama is not advocating that people simply take a pill to numb the pain as they die if there are viable treatments available. What he said was that where there are no viable treatments available, then treatments should not be given just for the sake of treatment--that is a waste.
Of course you could argue that if the government is somehow allowed to regulate what treatments are "viable" for which patients then the government will in a deplorable way allow cost to affect their judgments of just what is viable. You could argue that, but nevertheless Obama never ostensively said that where medically viable treatments exist one should forgo them and just take a pill if they are too old. Hence the premise of this thread is false, just like Palin's comments about "death panels".
Two parting points:
First, regarding giving the government control of such things, it didn't sound like Obama was talking about any government panel actually having control who gets end of life care--simply there being a government panel to amass and disseminate information about end of life care. Again you could argue that they are lying or have more evil intentions, or could point me towards statements that say otherwise, but I'll take them at their word for now.
Second, regarding the women's in the videos story, what was the point? I suppose her point was that doctors often make mistakes in prescribing care. One cardiologist didn't want to give a 100 year old women a pacemaker, another thought it was worth a shot. So what? Doctors disagree all the time. What does this have to do with health care reform? Individual doctors certainly won't be writing policy for health care reform, and the principle of charity would have you assume that whoever is actually writing policy will go with the more liberal assumptions.
I'm not even for the sort of health care reform on the table now and even I think much of this "death panal" criticism is bullshit. Some of you need to improve your overall literally and reading comprehension.
I disagree, but this is good, debating is cool.
I don't think Obama is outright gonna say take the pill. People like him are all about subltey, and knowing some his past,I don't trust this guy as far as could throw him.
There was a treatment option available but the first doctor didn't want to do it. The second doctr did. If that was your mom, and we had government controlled healthcare would you really want to have your "case" reviewed by some government employee to see if your mom can get the treatment she wants and needs? I think I get what your saying, Obama didnt outright say what he whats to do, but in many cases he hardly does.
You can't be serious with this. Are you really saying that once the inevitable strangling money crunch begins which will be immediately because were already there and haven't even begun this titanic health care thing yet, that they won't be taking EVERY opportunity to save money. And you're right, doctors most assuredly will not be making policy. Statist economists will. You're a smart guy, I've seen it, but you are proof positive that intelligence and education don't mean shit when it comes to politics if you really believe that this whole healthcare/insurance debacle is not about engineering an efficient utopian society.
Several of Obama's advisors on this are on record as saying that they support the calculating of worthy investment in your life by what kind of financial return they can get on their investment in the form of production and taxes. Read, they will not invest in your well being beyond what they perceive in their twisted communist minds as the likelihood of you paying them back. Check it out and get back to me on how inocuous you still believe their intentions are.
They cannot have people wasting money that they think is theirs on family members or themselves when it could be much better spent on somebody still young and or mobile enough to, by their definition "contribute".
Aside from all this, we are still in the United States aren't we? At what point did it become a function of DC to even address a pacemaker for somebody's 100 year old grandmother or anybody else at all? What's happened to this country?
About them wanting to save money, to some degree you are assuredly correct. I suppose I'm just a bit less pessimistic about it than you are. Besides, everything you've said regarding how a possible future government run health care program and it's statist economists will ration care applies equally well to present existing private run health care programs ("Insurance" companies) and their private analysts. Only a month or two ago CEO of several major insurance companies were drug before congress to explain some of their abhorrent practices regarding cost cutting via canceling policies for trivial reasons. The point is that the gruesome image you describe of a bureaucrat deciding who lives and who dies based on some cost vs. benefit algorithm is already a reality in private insurance companies. The only difference between your potential statist bureaucrats and the private insurance analysit is that one ways the cost vs. potential future premium payments while the other ways the cost vs. potential future taxes (I guess?).
So anyway, while this all doesn't somehow make it ok for the government to do the same thing, I just don't understand why the same conservatives who rally against government health care based on this issue aren't at the same time rallying against private insurance.
In any case I don't think I'm politically naive, just cynical.
I'd be interested in references or links if you have them. I'm a bit too lazy to look it up myself.
At this point no one has said that, despite what the OP has tried to get us to infer from Obama's remarks.
drop dead obamaist
Or the Star, Inquirer. Hell, maybe Springer is hiring.
You guys are failing to take into account that Obama is a nazi. Once you realize that, you'll realize that, of course, he's setting up death panels and telling old ladies to die.
"Soylent Green is made out of people!"
--- Charleton Heston
George Soros does NOT hire Nazis. They might appear to be, but they are not.
Nazis destroy their home town to destroy their birth records (like Hitler did) and family history. Barry never did that to the town in Kenya where he was born.
You mean our dear president Hussein?
How'd you know??? Have Obamanomics got you out of work and looking for a job?
So do you really think Barry is gonna keep his word? He speaks in those vague terms for a reason, that way he can't get caught lying. Another point I'd like to make is, where is this money for healthcare going to come from. The US doen't have the production that it used to because everything is made in China. He could print the money but al that does is cause more inflation.
You can't say that!!! Your a rraaacccciiissssssttttt!!!!
Wow. Guess you really told me off, huh?
The idiots and liars spewing the "death panel" and "pain pill" bullshit should stop and think about how often private insurance companies deny coverage for "experimental" treatments, or just use delaying tactics and their own appeals process in the hope that by the time they are forced to approve treatment it will no longer be necessary. Deceased people don't require expensive treatments. This shit happens every day, day in and day out, and yet for some reason it was never a problem until the government gets involved? Fucking insane.
Keep sucking on that insurance company dick, once they've got what they want they'll brush you off like the parasite they've always considered you to be.