Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for August 19th, 2009

Update:

Dr. Emanuel, a bioethicist, believes that doctors and hospitals should apply a rationing scheme he calls “complete life” for such medical services as ICU beds, heart transplants and vaccines during a flu pandemic. Under this scheme, adolescents and young adults would get priority over infants and the elderly, because “they have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants — have not yet received these investments.”

I have heard any number of advocates and apologists for health care reform, and they flatly deny that there is any wording that supports “death panels”.  They mock such concerns and dismiss them.

But here is the thing… when making a law or institution, the original  intent will not matter at a later date in the real world… you should always assume that the worst possible outcome allowed by the letter of the law (or the lack thereof) will be used and come to pass.

How else would we get a “living constitution,” or the idea that the 2nd amendment is acceptable some times but not others, or that separation of church and state means that a prayer/observance/motto/relic/book cannot be given a place in a public building?

Here’s an example, many thanks to Sarah Palin:

Palin can also put another notch on her belt when it comes to influencing health care “reform” — the Senate will drop language “encouraging” doctors to initiate conversations with patients about hospice and palliative end-of-life care from its bill, The Boston Globe reports:

Senator Chuck Grassley, the Senate Finance Committee’s top Republican and one of six committee members trying to hash out a bipartisan bill, said yesterday that the provision could be misinterpreted and that it will not be contained in the committee’s proposed legislation. ..

“Could be misinterpreted?”  No, try “Will be misinterpreted.”

Moving on…

Palin was hardly the only one to look at the House bill and realize its implications. In a commentary posted on The Daily Beast, “thinker” Lee Siegel — who believes “the absence of universal health care is America’s burning shame” — calls rationing end-of-life care “morally revolting”:

Determining which treatments are “cost effective” at the end of a person’s life and which are not is one of Obama’s priorities. It’s one of the principal ways he counts on saving money and making universal health care affordable.

This is the Big Brother nightmare of oppressive government that the shrewd propagandists on the right are always blathering on about. Except that this time, they could not be more right. …

****

We’ve known that our social programs have been in dire straits for a while now.

Spencer Bachus – SS could be in default in 2 years.

If we add noises of concern about Medicare, Medicaid, and the Veteran’s Affairs Hospitals we see a pattern, a common thread.

Guess what?  Large government programs do not work.

Let’s add health care!  It’s proven that we can give poor-to-mediocre care to veterans, so let’s give that same caring to everyone!

catbarf

Sent to me, don't know the source. Anyone cares to claim it I'll gladly shout your name to the rooftops. This is funny!

Watch for the Obamessaiah to explain away his flip-flops as being the product of a passionate and emotional… feeling… and that we should judge him (and give him a pass) on his caring and compassion.

Whinging by the dems:

“We were forced into this by Republicans,” one official said.

Ken Spain, a spokesman for the National Republican Campaign Committee, said blaming the GOP is “laughable.”

“Apparently having a filibuster-proof majority, a 40-seat advantage in the House, and a president who was once really popular isn’t enough,” Spain said in a statement. “Maybe if people actually liked the bill, Democrats’ wouldn’t have such a tough time whipping up bipartisan votes, much less vulnerable Democrats within their own party.”

g

Read Full Post »