DeathPanels are Back

Yes folks the the beauracracy that will establish who gets health care and who does not are back and it still in this bill. I know all the arguments that private insurance has "deathpanels" but are you not aware that any business or individuals for that matter has the right to deny you something that they have especially if they did not agree to give you those things in the first place in something stated in a CONTRACT.

This is the price we pay for freedom because freedom does not mean we can force our will onto others and deny them their freedom but the right to execute the powers we have in our own life without the hinderence of government.

And yes, I would prefer private insurance death panels over government death panels because at least then if I had money I can get that deathpanel to give me things. I will not be able to do that in a government insurance scheme.



This bill and each one they have drafted or partially drafted so far is full of so much trash, they are just more government infractions on rights, waste of money and driving us end user coasts to us.

Even if it is possible for the republican and democrats to negotiate out a bill for passage and white house approval, given the posture in Washington right now, it will hurt the citizen.

The liberals are attacking the problems wrong and the republicans are not standing firm enough.

Mike

Far be it from me to jock Republicans on standing strong, but they did only lose 1 vote in the House and Dems lost 37. They do deserve some credit for demonstrating true bipartisanship in the leading the bipartisan charge against this mess.
 
Luissia end of life counceling is when a government worker tells you that you are to old, or you are not of the right party affiliation, and it would cost more money than you are worth to keep you alive for your last few years and this is also when they give you a few bottles of asprin to take while you wait to die!!!! All you Obama lovers, supporters and kool aid drinkers you wanted a Cuba style healthcare system . nows thank your Democrat leaders in congress cause you might get what you wished for. Get ready for Rationing and substandard healthcare.
 
Luissia end of life counceling is when a government worker tells you that you are to old, or you are not of the right party affiliation, and it would cost more money than you are worth to keep you alive for your last few years and this is also when they give you a few bottles of asprin to take while you wait to die!!!! All you Obama lovers, supporters and kool aid drinkers you wanted a Cuba style healthcare system . nows thank your Democrat leaders in congress cause you might get what you wished for. Get ready for Rationing and substandard healthcare.

That's just political partisanship.

The objection should not be about end of life counceling. End of life counceling is not a bad thing. The bad part is the rest of the 'rationing' that will eventually become part of this system. That means treating very young children, the disabled, etc as less human, less valuable to society. That's the basis of the research and that's what the idiots pushing this don't want anyone to talk about.
 
If you believe the government is going to have "death panels", I have a bridge I'd love to sell you:
Brooklyn-Bridge-1.jpg


It's going cheap!!!
 
If you believe the government is going to have "death panels", I have a bridge I'd love to sell you:

It's going cheap!!!

The phrase 'death panels' is stupid and emotive. The fact is that, according to the research that the bill is based on, the things I have already outlined - ie that very young children, the disabled, and the elderly will be treated as less important in a rationed care system. This might be fine and dandy if you have no children, no disaabled relatives and no old people in your family but lots of Americans may see it differently.

I've read Dr Emanuel's research - and I understand academic language so I know that they use phrases that laypeople may see as provocative - however, it's there in black and white. Dr Emanuel himself recognizes that - no matter what - there will be a rationed system and that hard decisions will be required. In his own conclusions he outlines how the goverment can make those decisions. Which is why people like Sarah Palin speak out about it - because she has a disabled child.

Since when has it be such a bad thing in this country to ask questions? You do realize that we are all aware of the Alinsky way of 'dismissing' those who disagree with you, right? The 'ridicule the opposition' thing doesn't work anymore - we're all wise to it. Find another tactic.
 
I'm not the one posting threads about "death panels".

If you believe the bill passed by the House has built-in provisions that will mandate, or even allow, the government to ration out health-care based on a person's age, or political persuasion, or whether they have a disability, then by all means, start a thread on that topic - I would actually look forward to that discussion.

But this thread is clearly "Death Panels are Back", and I'm exercising my free-speech rights by laughing my ass off, in public, at people who buy into that.

If you were actually right, and the bill would make decisions on life-saving care based on a disability, say, that would be illegal (under the Americans with Disabilities Act), and if it discriminates on the basis of age, that would unconstitutional, under the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't really care what Dr. Emmanual wrote - I care what is actually in the bill. If you want to discuss it, why not drop the attitude, and the snarky, "we're wise to it", "when is it wrong to ask questions", stuff - I never said it was, I'm not trying to be dismissive of anybody's rational argument.

But it's funny as hell to me that some right-wingers are convinced the government is going to come for Grandma's kidney or something.
 
I'm not the one posting threads about "death panels".

If you believe the bill passed by the House has built-in provisions that will mandate, or even allow, the government to ration out health-care based on a person's age, or political persuasion, or whether they have a disability, then by all means, start a thread on that topic - I would actually look forward to that discussion.

But this thread is clearly "Death Panels are Back", and I'm exercising my free-speech rights by laughing my ass off, in public, at people who buy into that.

If you were actually right, and the bill would make decisions on life-saving care based on a disability, say, that would be illegal (under the Americans with Disabilities Act), and if it discriminates on the basis of age, that would unconstitutional, under the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't really care what Dr. Emmanual wrote - I care what is actually in the bill. If you want to discuss it, why not drop the attitude, and the snarky, "we're wise to it", "when is it wrong to ask questions", stuff - I never said it was, I'm not trying to be dismissive of anybody's rational argument.

But it's funny as hell to me that some right-wingers are convinced the government is going to come for Grandma's kidney or something.

One can not have a reasoned intelligent conversation with rabid political hacks to blind to see the truth to begin with. That would include left and right. You qualify as one with this post.
 
I'm not the one posting threads about "death panels".

If you believe the bill passed by the House has built-in provisions that will mandate, or even allow, the government to ration out health-care based on a person's age, or political persuasion, or whether they have a disability, then by all means, start a thread on that topic - I would actually look forward to that discussion.

But this thread is clearly "Death Panels are Back", and I'm exercising my free-speech rights by laughing my ass off, in public, at people who buy into that.

If you were actually right, and the bill would make decisions on life-saving care based on a disability, say, that would be illegal (under the Americans with Disabilities Act), and if it discriminates on the basis of age, that would unconstitutional, under the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't really care what Dr. Emmanual wrote - I care what is actually in the bill. If you want to discuss it, why not drop the attitude, and the snarky, "we're wise to it", "when is it wrong to ask questions", stuff - I never said it was, I'm not trying to be dismissive of anybody's rational argument.

But it's funny as hell to me that some right-wingers are convinced the government is going to come for Grandma's kidney or something.

One can not have a reasoned intelligent conversation with rabid political hacks to blind to see the truth to begin with. That would include left and right. You qualify as one with this post.

If that post, in your mind, is indicative of a "rabid political hack", then we truly have nothing else to discuss, since you're being disingenuous, or else you are what you accuse me of (or both).
 
I'm not the one posting threads about "death panels".

If you believe the bill passed by the House has built-in provisions that will mandate, or even allow, the government to ration out health-care based on a person's age, or political persuasion, or whether they have a disability, then by all means, start a thread on that topic - I would actually look forward to that discussion.

But this thread is clearly "Death Panels are Back", and I'm exercising my free-speech rights by laughing my ass off, in public, at people who buy into that.

If you were actually right, and the bill would make decisions on life-saving care based on a disability, say, that would be illegal (under the Americans with Disabilities Act), and if it discriminates on the basis of age, that would unconstitutional, under the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't really care what Dr. Emmanual wrote - I care what is actually in the bill. If you want to discuss it, why not drop the attitude, and the snarky, "we're wise to it", "when is it wrong to ask questions", stuff - I never said it was, I'm not trying to be dismissive of anybody's rational argument.

But it's funny as hell to me that some right-wingers are convinced the government is going to come for Grandma's kidney or something.

One can not have a reasoned intelligent conversation with rabid political hacks to blind to see the truth to begin with. That would include left and right. You qualify as one with this post.

Too right. There are subjects that are worth a bit of political grandstanding but health care is not one of them.

However, when a poster responds with 'I don't care about the research that the bill is based on' then you know you're debating with a closed mind. It's pointless to discuss this logically with the uninformed. I suspect you and I are on the same page!
 
I'm not the one posting threads about "death panels".

If you believe the bill passed by the House has built-in provisions that will mandate, or even allow, the government to ration out health-care based on a person's age, or political persuasion, or whether they have a disability, then by all means, start a thread on that topic - I would actually look forward to that discussion.

But this thread is clearly "Death Panels are Back", and I'm exercising my free-speech rights by laughing my ass off, in public, at people who buy into that.

If you were actually right, and the bill would make decisions on life-saving care based on a disability, say, that would be illegal (under the Americans with Disabilities Act), and if it discriminates on the basis of age, that would unconstitutional, under the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't really care what Dr. Emmanual wrote - I care what is actually in the bill. If you want to discuss it, why not drop the attitude, and the snarky, "we're wise to it", "when is it wrong to ask questions", stuff - I never said it was, I'm not trying to be dismissive of anybody's rational argument.

But it's funny as hell to me that some right-wingers are convinced the government is going to come for Grandma's kidney or something.

One can not have a reasoned intelligent conversation with rabid political hacks to blind to see the truth to begin with. That would include left and right. You qualify as one with this post.

Too right. There are subjects that are worth a bit of political grandstanding but health care is not one of them.

However, when a poster responds with 'I don't care about the research that the bill is based on' then you know you're debating with a closed mind. It's pointless to discuss this logically with the uninformed. I suspect you and I are on the same page!

I made a thread about rationing lets see if this person participates.
 
One can not have a reasoned intelligent conversation with rabid political hacks to blind to see the truth to begin with. That would include left and right. You qualify as one with this post.

Too right. There are subjects that are worth a bit of political grandstanding but health care is not one of them.

However, when a poster responds with 'I don't care about the research that the bill is based on' then you know you're debating with a closed mind. It's pointless to discuss this logically with the uninformed. I suspect you and I are on the same page!

I made a thread about rationing lets see if this person participates.

Well, anyone who supports something without considering the research behind it, is - in my humble opinion - an ass.
 
Add 50 million people that the dems say don't have insurance into the system, take out 500 billion from medicare and not add anymore doctors to the medical industry, start telling current doctors how to practice forcing many good doctors to quit the field, you will end up with death panels for the seniors and rationing for the rest of the citizen. here is your HOPE AND CHANGE!!!!!
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top