For all the liberals in the press who continue using PolitiFact as a serious credential for proving Governor Palin wrong on “death panels,” I cannot help but wonder how similar organizations rate the lies from Obama. Further why don’t the “real reporters” out there like Leonard Pitts, Jr. or Robin Abcarian (or as I like to call them, “real” Palin-obsessionists) do their jobs at pointing out that perhaps such ratings of President Obama fail to exist at all?
We were told during the 2008 campaign by then-Candidate Obama that all health care negotiations would be held on C-Span. That turned out to be a lie.
We were told in 2009 that if we allowed the Democrat House, Senate, and White House to fecklessly spend one-trillion dollars on a failed stimulus, unemployment wouldn’t go above 8%. That turned out to be a lie.
We were told that people could keep the health insurance they had if they liked it while the President was trying to sell Obamacare to the people. That turned out to be a lie.
And finally, we watched the President argue with George Stephanopoulos on ABC saying the penalty for not having health insurance was “not a tax.” Due to the Supreme Court ruling last week, we now know his proclamation was yet another revealed untruth that came from his mouth. In fact, as Governor Palin said, the only thing he has lived up to is his promise to “fundamentally transform” America.
So where did these rank on PolitiFact’s distinguished list? Further, are “real reporters” and similar anti-Palin obsessionists noticing their lack of presence in the land of hullabaloo?
When Governor Palin wrote her Facebook post in 2009, it had nothing to do with what Robin Abcarian proclaimed it was in her LA Times article:
“Originally, she [Palin] coined the term ["death panels"] based on a component of the health care reform bill that would have allowed Medicare to cover end-of-life counseling by physicians.”
Wrong. Palin made no mention in her original post about physicians having end-of-life discussions with patients. In fact, here are Governor Palin’s words:
“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.”
She was referring to a speech Michele Bachmann gave on the House Floor where she quoted an article written in the New York Post saying that President Obama’s top health adviser (Zeke Emanuel) advocated the prioritizing of health services as measured by the patients’ likely productivity. The article states:
“Emanuel, however, believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96).
Translation: Don’t give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy.
He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).”
Since that article surfaced and after Michele Bachmann and Governor Palin brought light to it, many in the media claimed the good doctor had been misrepresented by the article cited.
Those merits can be debated back and forth from now until the end of time. But that aside, Governor Palin’s Facebook post made one mention of it. The rest of it explicitly dealt with the common sense of what happens when a government, known for outspending its inflows, promises or advocates any type of federal mandate on healthcare. Especially when the architect of the plan continues to say that costs will go down (refuted many times) and that quality of care will go up. We can quote the CBO to our hearts content on this falsehood. But do we really have to look further than Social Security or Medicare or any other federal program to get a sense of where a massive government intrusion into our lives will go in terms of cost?
Since Obama is on record as saying he supports an eventual single payer plan down the road, most of us know that Obamacare with its existing mandate seeks to create a path to get to the ultimate goal of a full out public option.
All of this is done fecklessly in the name of charity while what it really does is takes from Americans their privacy, their money, and their choices.
All Governor Palin had to do was observe the last five decades of Britain’s health care system. In the U.K., waiting lists for care continue to cause deaths, increased sickness, and turmoil.
In 2004, a woman ill with breast cancer was placed on an extended waiting list:
“A mother on a 17-week breast cancer waiting list is being denied treatment when she needs it most, doctors’ leaders have warned.
Theresa Debono, 40, from Cardiff, is on the long waiting list for a mammogram at the city’s University Hospital of Wales despite official guidelines which say she should be seen within 10 days.
The British Medical Association warned that as the key to successful treatment was an early diagnosis, it was all the more important that the mother-of-two was seen quickly.”
Earlier this year, a baby became very sick after being delivered due to the mother having to wait two hours for an ambulance:
“Sarah Jenkins, 22, was at the birthing centre in Braintree, Essex, when midwives recommended a Caesarean at Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, 20 minutes away.
But the ambulance for baby Riley took nearly two hours to arrive.
East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust has started an investigation.
The family fear his health problems were caused by the delay.
Riley was rushed to Broomfield Hospital and then transferred to Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge where he was put on a life support system.”
Last year, parents of sick children had to scurry around the countryside looking for care for their children due to a hospital in one particular part of Britain having extraordinarily long waiting lists for care:
“Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (CMFT) said it was trying to cut the waiting list, which stands at about 1,500.
So far about 900 children and their families have chosen to go to other hospitals, both private and NHS-run.
The trust said some children had been treated as far away as Liverpool.”
The stories go on and on. One similarity in each horror story coming from the UK with regards to healthcare seems to all contain the same acronym: the NHS (National Health Service).
As Governor Palin predicted with the use of this type of history (I simply gave more recent events) in the United Kingdom as well as common-economic sense, Obamacare has its own pre-version of the NHS. It’s called IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board).
When Governor Palin reminded us of the “death panels,” she posted a link to an article in the American Spectator on this newly developed bureaucracy. In the article, it states:
“Obamacare opponents have been screaming about this committee since it was first added to the “reform” bill. And, since that time, anyone with the temerity to call it by its proper name — death panel — has been vilified by the Democrats and the “news” media. Nonetheless, that’s precisely what IPAB will be. Its sole purpose is to cut funding for some health care services seniors now take for granted. And those cuts will kill people.”
So, as it turns out, Governor Palin was right. Never once did any of the aforementioned “real reporters” discuss this. They didn’t argue it. In lieu of reporting the facts or providing a reasoned rebuttal to it, they sputtered the same talking points they prattled on about in 2009.
And going further, there is something that nobody has mentioned yet in this debacle. Obamacare is not just about controlling more of our lives, prohibiting job growth, or taking more of what we earn. It also serves to perpetuate the familiar Democrat mantra of class warfare. The only exception to this rule of course are the well-to-do union heads whose accompanying Cadillac plans continue to get a pass from this horrible law.
Again, we don’t have to look any further than Britain to understand what is to come.
In 1987 before winning her third term as Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher was put in the position of having to defend her choice to pay for her own private healthcare. After the government got its citizenry used to a health care plan designed to control, the opposition to Thatcher used her private choice as a political tool against her.
Her political opponents as well as the press believed her explanation to be a “gaffe”: (emphasis)
“Her biggest gaffe did little to help her uncaring reputation. When discussing private health care, she remarked that she wanted to be able to enter hospital when “I want, at the time I want and with the doctor I want. . . I exercise my right as a free citizen to spend my money in my own way.”
This view, that so many of us here in the United States take for granted, was ridiculed in the UK by a liberal opposition and a liberal press.
Make no mistake folks. Obama knew exactly what he was doing with his plans to “fundamentally transform” America. It is all by design and if this plan flowers into full form, you’ll find out that for years to come, it still has many colors to bear. What seems ridiculous now might not be so ridiculous tomorrow.
Governor Palin serves as an inconvenient truth with her stand for common sense, liberty, and freedom in a way no different than Thatcher served in opposition to big government liberals in the United Kingdom. Her road will encounter profound challenges, but I know in my heart she will continue and that we must support her in making sure Obama is replaced in November and we elect a conservative Senate to get this “mother of all job-killers” repealed.