Sarah Palin on Obama’s “Death Panel”
I love that woman! Saying what we’re all thinking? How dare she. Whoever came up with the phrase “death panel” gets a raise. Even Barack Obama is wondering why he didn’t think of it.
“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.”
Like I wrote earlier, read it. I admit I have not found the phrase death panel in HR 3200 but I’m only about halfway into it. (I can’t say anything about the Senate version because even though they’ve supposedly decided on legislation, they have yet to release it to the public.) What I can tell you is that HR 3200 creates 40+ new Federal agencies, committees and panels, etc and they all have decisions to make. Obama and his administration will get first crack at filling up all these 40+ Federal agencies, committees and panels, etc. And we’re hearing some pretty alarming reports about how those in the administration feel about caring for those not very productive members of our society.
Ezekiel Emanuel, for instance – from zimbio.com
“This civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health care resources. Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity – those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations – are to be socially guaranteed as basic.”
Or maybe John Holdren – from zombietime.com
Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.
In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?
Well, at least the 50% of us paying 97% of income taxes should be safe, right? Right?
H/T Michelle Malkin - you’ll love the UK NHS story links
Popularity: 7% [?]
Review this site
[...] also not forget about Obama’s “Science Czar”, John Holdren (h/t to GOPMOM): “John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization [...]
I don’t think of too many children as a crisis. I think of them as a form of carbon sequestration. Gotta save the planet…
I suppose that’s better than thinking of them as a punishment.
I suppose you condone the woman with the sign in Portsmouth, NH yesterday that recommended that the President of the US should be euthanized. Highly educated person that you are, you know that is means that she is advocating the murder of the President of the US. I weep for this country, & especially for my adopted state of NH. That my father, & dozens of members of my extended family risked their lives in WWII, Korea, & Vietnam, so that this person could spout treason & sedition against this country is right now, making me almost physically sick.
You should also realize, if you are at all well informed, that several Republican legislators were behind what you term the “Death Panel”, & that it has nothing to do with putting people to death when they are no longer “useful”. It is merely a provision that provides for Medicare reimbursement to doctors when they talk to patients about their end of life wishes – you have heard of a Living Will? This has nothing to do with “Death Panels”, & are to prevent situations such as the one Terri Schiavo (sp?) found herself in. If you have any legitimate ammunition against Pres. Obama, or Universal Health Care, let’s hear it instead of hysterical rabble rousing. Shame, shame on us! The President appeared in Montana today & nobody was caught packing guns, or knives, or suggesting he should be murdered. Shame on you for not respecting the office of the President, Shame!!! As much as I despised George Bush, I would never dream of comparing him to a Nazi, or suggesting, even privately, that he be – Mary, Mother of God, help me, I am going insane – murdered. If you can give me a rational reason why you are spouting the phrase “Death Panels”, let’s hear it, otherwise, forget it.
The nuns didn’t teach you very well!!!
Susan, How can you go after me for being one part of a crowd I had no control over whatsoever and never condoned any language threatening Obama and make hysterical statements about how sad you are for our country while at the same time mentioning all the outrageous things the Left did (and still does) re: W and say you are not responsible because you were not part of it? Any synapses happening up there?
I spout the phrase Death Panel because it gets people’s attention – even Obama found it worthy of addressing.
What are all those 50+ committees going to be deciding if not who gets what care when?
Because I am upset that there are people comparing our President ot Hitler, and saying that he should be “euthenized”, etc. and that there are few conservatives condemning this behaviour. When you use the phrase “Death Panel”, you put yourself in the same league as these people, if not, you should be, as a conservative, condemning & distancing yourself from them. Yes, I am becoming hysterical when I read about the dozen people wearing firarms at a Town Hall meeting where he is scheduled to speak. I am not sure what you are getting at with your one, very long sentence, but I am not condoning any violent acts on the part of the “Left”. Pres. Bush would not have countenanced the rudeness & implied threats that Pres. Obama is now facing. As far as having “no control” over these crowds, I am assuming you had some part of organizing the Tea Party Demonstration. This seems to have been the beginning of the atmosphere of anger, implied violence, & hysteria that have permeated the Tea Party & the recent Town Halls. By not condemning this type of behaviour, yes, you are condoning it.
I have lived through enough assassinations & attempts for one lifetime.
So Susan, let me get this straight. I’m supposed to walk up to someone “armed” at a town hall and tell the where to stick their gun? While I’m sure that would make many of my detractors happy, I frankly see nothing wrong with carrying a firearm when one is permitted because one has completed the government mandated training.
How more far out there could you be? Were you even conscious during the Bush administration? Using a term is equivalent to contemplating an assassination? Take your arguments over to Kos. I too have lived through a few assassination attempts – the Pope and President Reagan really stick out in my mind as I was so young. I have not come across anyone who condones or supports any plan or idea to assassinate anyone. I am not responsible for anyone else’s actions – maybe if more Americans believed in being responsible for themselves, we’d be on a better position entirely.
Repeating the term “death panel” does not have anything to do with violence towards Obama – it has to do with government violence against the people. As long as the government keeps pursuing a takeover of our healthcare system, I will continue to use the phrase – right up until said death panel pulls my plug.
Spend more time reading the bill(s) and less time watching CNN and MSNBC. My being an organizer of the Boston Tea Party has and had nothing to do with any violence against anyone. If anything, the new “Tea Partiers” are surprisingly mild compared to the originals. Your position is absolutely ridiculous and simply indicates that you’ve bought the WH theme that we’re the crazy ones, as opposed to those old enough to have “lived through many assassination attempts” being willing to hand over their health to a government that cannot deliver a postcard without going bankrupt.
People being angry at the government and whoever is in it is nothing new. I really think you’re watching too much news and not doing enough thinking. The verbal threats and physical assaults against appearances of President Bush were far more violent than anything Obama has faced – you just never saw it on TV because the media chose not to show it. I think you would be pleasantly surprised if you met some of the “tea partiers”. Yes, some of them are a bit over the top but most are well informed and strongly hold to their convictions and are concerned about the future of our nation – a future the Obama admin undermines daily. Why don’t you go to one of these meetings? Yes, people are angry (rightly so) and a few behave badly – shouting at Congressional reps during a town hall is rude, especially when others are listening. But not answering a question or spouting verbatim WH talking points or deliberating voting against the will of those you represent is reprehensible.
I don’t know why I am continuing this argument, but I like to beat my head against the wall sometimes.
No, you don’t confront someone at a town hall. I do expect you, as a conservative blogger, to take a stand against the extremists on your own side. By your silence you are giving them your tacit approval.
You also seem to like to get a bit personal, i.e., “was I a bit conscious”, plus the comments about my “synapses”, not sure what those comments are supposed to mean.
How do you know where I get my news? I don’t have a television, & use the Internet & newspapers & always try to consider different views.
There are people now deciding on who who gets health care, they would be the insurance companies.
I would like to hear a rational, considered argument against the Health Care bill of the President’s, along with some suggestions for alternatives.
I have even heard of people suggesting that the bill might lead to mandatory sterilizations, that is definitely “hysterical”.
Stop continuing the argument, then. It is clear you have no real grasp of the proposed reforms Congress and Obama are pushing – or rather, takeover. I don’t know whether it’s stubbornness or just stupidity but unless you go read the bill, read the facts, you’ll continue to be one of the sheeple who continues to believe that healthcare and health insurance are “rights” guaranteed by the constitution and we should just suck it up and pay.
I have repeatedly stated my position on reforms that might actually accomplish the stated goal – covering the Americans that want health insurance, of which there are maybe 10 million, but truly cannot afford it. We have a pretty solid and successful history in the US of addressing social inequalities with free market solutions. Why don’t we try – tort reform with limits on awards, less regulation on what insurance policies must cover and more options for consumers, eliminate employer coverage and make everyone a free agent a la the auto insurance industry (so that your policy depends on you not the 30 or 300 or 3000 people you work with), tax breaks for insurers who provide low-cost policies for families in need, and tax breaks for insurers who offer high risk policies (pre-existing conditions, obesity, bad genetics, birth “defects”, etc). And remember, a pre-existing condition is only an issue when you must change insurers, as when a job changes or you move. If we were buying on the open market, this would be a non-issue. So, I have though about this, talked to doctors and insurers and friends and family and come up with a few solutions that equal lower prices without reducing care or obliterating the R&D industry in our nation.
Health insurance companies do not decide who gets healthcare, they decide whether they are willing to risk insuring a person, which is their prerogative as a publicly held company answerable to shareholders. How exactly will the government pay for all the healthcare of the 50 some million people they say they will now cover when they cannot provide for those in Medicare/Medicaid/VA? Have you given this any thought? How many rich people do you think there are? I don’t know any. Why would we scrap a system that works for 80% or us – according to 80% of us – for a system that does not work anywhere? I agree that some reform is necessary. I just prefer, as do most Americans, to take my chances on free market reform as opposed to a government takeover of 1/6th of our national economy.
And again, the behavior of others at Town Halls is not my responsibility. I have never advocated any bad behavior. I regularly encourage people to call, email and write to their reps. I encourage them to write “letters to the editor”. I encourage them to volunteer politically and to run for office. And this is what I encouraged at the Tea Party I helped organize – which was a very pleasant and peaceful event, with people talking and planning and networking. But if you think I’m going to start lecturing people on the appropriate ways to lecture those reps that are lecturing them, I’m sorry but I’m not gonna’ do it. (Although I did request, at the Boston event, that peoples signs and t-shirts be child appropriate.)
People are genuinely and rightly angry. We have a leadership class that is not listening. We have a leadership class that is acting contrary to the wishes of the overwhelming majority of us. We have a leadership class that is acting illegally based on our constitution and enacting policies that undermine the power of that constitution, thereby undermining the power of the citizenry. And they’re doing it without the promised “transparency”. They are simply coalescing as much power as they can so as to stay in power so as to coalesce more power to stay in power to get more power to keep the power… How admirable is that? And why shouldn’t we be angry?
As to your what does it matter where I get my news – this is why it matters!!!!
HotAir
I suppose I am trying to convince you that you are aligning, in my own & in other’s minds, yourself with people who are: waving pictures of the POTUS altered to look like Hitler, suggesting that Health Care reform is comparable to the Holocaust, or, worst of all, the man with the “Occasionally the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots & tyrants” sign. Anyone with a sign such as this is coming close to advocating violence against the Government. As you have obviuosly given this some thought, and, I will admit, have some ideas about this issue, I am puzzled as to why you would not want to, as I would, distance yourself from those people quickly & decisively.
Yes, I understand that people are angry, but they don’t seem to be able to think beyond “death panels”, Nazi references, hysteria about immigrants, & mis-applied slogans.
Where were all you scholars of the constitution when Bush & his friends were passing the Patriot Act, when he & his administration where suspending the constitutional rights of the prisoners at Guantanamo?
Where is the outrage over the half trillion dollars spent on the war?
You are contradicting yourself in your first sentence in the third paragraph. Of course health insurance comapnies decide who gets health care. If you can’t afford or are denied health insurance you have to pay for health care yourself, which effectively denies health care to some people.
My own health insurance was cancelled a cpoule of weeks after the birth of my second child. I could not purchase new insurance because of a “pre-existing” condition, i.e., I had been to the emergency room for a sprained back. So there is a person in good health, in their mid-30’s, who is denied health insurance.
How about the people who lose their jobs because of cancer or other serious illnesses, & consequently lose their insurance?
I have also heard about people losing coverage because of their employer changing insurers.
So it’s ok for an insurance company to cancel someone’s insurance because they have a major illness, & it’s ok for every other private insurance company to deny these people coverage? I don’t think that the government should have to pick up the slack here. Wouldn’t we, or the US Government, be subsidizing the insurance companies by letting them only insure the youngest & healthiest?
Please don’t call me a “sheeple”, though you might find “sheeple” on both sides of this debate, I am not one..
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
1. The people at the town halls with the nazi/Hitler signs are Lyndon LaRouche nuts, not normal Americans who know, from reading the bill, that it is bad news for everyone. And I’m not going to stay home because of a few badly behaved people. This is America, Susan. Still free for now. And if those of us who are informed, logical and reasonable stayed home, where would that get us? In a 2 year long gov clinic line for a physical. The term death panel is still correct when the committees the gov wants to form are making decisions based on stats of who gets what care when. People will die whether they have insurance or not or money or not because the gov will not treat them. At this point, I can only assume that you are in favor of the very young and the old, being takers and not givers in the system, are less deserving of care. Now who is the extremist?
2. You should have, at the beginning, noted your personal story and therefore your personal bias against insurers and your favoritism towards healthcare/health insurance/whatever they’re calling it today reform. And in response, why not just address the specific issues – policies for pre-existing conditions. I made suggestions above that cover this. If companies compete and you no longer rely on your employer for insurance (which will mean a higher salary, BTW, so you can go buy your own policy), you are a free agent and companies will, as they always have, provide a product for you. And again, why not offer incentives to co’s offering policies to those “difficult to cover”? Ever heard of Progressive Insurance – how do you think they got started – supplying auto policies to those who could not get auto insurance. What do you do? Do you have any idea how a free market (with some gov regulations to protect the truly stupid) operates and how successful it always is?
3. I did not contradict myself, you did not read clearly enough. I said insurance companies decide on risk, not who they like and who they don’t like. Someone who is a higher risk ie has a “pre-existing condition” will most likely cost the company more so therefore should pay more. Gov mandates do not allow for higher rates so therefore the co only has the choice to deny coverage. Eliminate the mandate and allow co’s to compete. If we apply your logic to the auto insurance industry, no one would be able to afford auto insurance. (Of course, that means we’d all be walking and I’m sure you’d be thrilled by that.)
4. Regarding Bush and the war and the Patriot Act – I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with the gov running a short term deficit to fight a war against enemies of our nation. And I have no real issue with the Patriot Act, as it operated under the Bush admin. I’m not a terrorist and do not behave in a way that would draw the attention of law enforcement. Or at least that was true under the Bush admin. According to you and the changes and strengthening of the Patriot Act under the Obama admin, I’m not so sure. According to you, I incite violence and am practically an enemy of the state. So yeah, now I’m a bit concerned. I trusted the Bush admin not to abuse, as policy, the Patriot Act. I expect the Obama admin to regularly abuse it against American citizens. (Recall flag@whitehouse.gov?) And don’t get me started on Guantanamo. The fact that my tax dollars go to pay for cable tv and specialized diets for those terrorists while I struggle to pay my kid’s tuition really ticks me off. Guantanamo and possibly prison is the best thing that ever happened to those guys. It’s a freakin’ Club Med compared to the mountains of Afghanistan or the desserts of Iraq.
Would you just clear the fog away and try to logically look at this? This bill creates a huge, trillion-dollar- tens-of-thousands-of-gov-jobs-bureaucracy that tracks our health and lives and bank accounts (!) in a field where they have already shown they cannot provide service (Medicare/Medicaid/VA). Why would we sign on to this, all the crazy death panel, forced abortion and sterilization rhetoric aside? Why would we do this? Why? Why? Why? 80% of us are happy to stay with our current situation, a number that increases the closer we get to this takeover.
It’s not that I’m not willing to debate it – I just have nothing left to say. You come at me with accusations, I answer and you come back with the same thing, same challenges. Now, it’s summer and I have some time on my hands, but you’re just not paying attention or, as I said, being intentionally obtuse. Or you’re a troll over at Kos. So unless you can come up with something that defends what they’re trying to do, I’m done.
First off, I am not suggesting you stay home, don’t know where you got that. You are a blogger, & I didn’t think you would want to be lumped in with the extremists. Please don’t refer to me as a a “troll”, or a “sheeple”, I am a human being, in using that language you are degrading yourself & this conversation, which I understand you are undertaking because you have nothing else to do.
As for my “personal story”, you have also told your own. It seems because you don’t have to drive very far to get superior care for your daughter you are satisfied with health care in this country. Fine, but not everyone has a positive story to tell.
Again, I don’t think you should compare auto to health insurance, though I will admit it’s an interesting idea. I could absorb the loss of one or both vehicles I own, but that would not apply to my health.
Could you direct me to the page in this bill that talks about the committees the government wants to form?
Wow. You are a moron, aren’t you? Oh wait, bleeding heart liberal – same thing.
First off, the only way you lose your auto insurance is if you’re a really, really, really, really bad driver – or you don’t pay. Being a bad driver has nothing to do with your health, unless you injure or kill yourself while driving. You know full well I was referring to the manner in which it is sold, the choices in policies and the basic tenet that no one gets turned down originally. I was pretty clear in my ideas and how they cover your concerns – no insurance due to pre-existing conditions and affordability and transferability. I was very clear about using auto insurance as a model to grow on.
You want to bicker back and forth over my choice of vehicle – not gonna’ happen. We’re fighting a war against a religion that wants to eliminate everyone of every other religion off the planet – because of their religion. There is no bargaining or negotiating with that. The only way to conquer that is to end tyranny and spread prosperity. People who have a CVS on every other corner and can buy food for their children have much better things to worry about than whether people in other nations are worshipping the same prophet as them. I would imagine we will be at war with some form of Islamic radicalism for the rest of my life – and yes, I’m just under 40 so that could be for a very long time. And just because I know it will tick you off, my husband’s SUV gets worse mileage than mine, but boy, it is pretty. He walks to work though – so it has very low carbon footprint.
Oh, and if you choose to live somewhere where healthcare is not available but you need access to it, move! Can 25 million illegal aliens be wrong? Or did you think Obama was gonna’ force doctors to move to where he “stations” them? Yeah, that ought to increase enrollment in med school.
I cannot give you a specific line in HR 3200 because it’s divided into many sections, 1000+ pages long. Don’t you think it’s a bit silly of you to rely on me to tell you what in the bill you should read? You should read the whole thing. You appear to have just as much free time this week as I do – stop surfing the net and start reading. But to make it easy for you, if I must, check on pages 425 and up for all the death panel sections – the sections the Senate (but not the House) says it will remove. The bit about committees and boards is mixed throughout. This bill does not provide care, it builds a bureaucracy. As I’ve said before, you could change all the “healthcare” phrases to “education” or “defense” or “backyard organic gardening” and it would still just create a lot of committees, boards, taxes, policies and mandates for tax paying citizens and corporations to adhere to and pay for. It does not provide for more care or better care. Why do you think they had to rename it to the health insurance reform bill? Providing someone with a mandatory health id card that shows they have insurance is easy. Providing them with an actual GP, specialists, alternative treatments, etc will be impossible.
Think about where you live and how many physicians, nurses, facilities would be needed to cover everyone in the area. Are they already in place? How many more will be added ? How long does it take to build a clinic, hospital, rehab facility? Where does the money come from to build it? Where do the care providers come from?
My mother has just started teaching nursing in NE Ohio and the “technical school” where she teaches pumps out LPN’s every 15 months. The enrollment is overflowing because of Obama’s promises of all those healthcare jobs. These (mostly) women can hardly read and write, if they pass the courses, 66% fail the state board and all they want is to be told the answers so they can get to work and start making money (to pay back their loans for school). Umm, is this the kind of nurse you want caring for you? Because it’s what we’re all gonna’ get – illiterate incompetents who cannot convert percentages into fractions (4th grade math) when dosing meds. Good luck. I’m thinking of going to nursing school just so that I can take care of my family if they need it. These are the same people who believed the election of Obama meant they’d get free gas and free mortgages. They have no idea what it will be like to have someone’s life depending on them. And this is what Obamacare will get you – mandates on how many “professionals” are needed, whether they are qualified or not. Oh, and nurses do not carry liability insurance – there is no suing a nurse when she accidentally overdoses granny. And there won’t be any suing those gov’t hospitals either, BTW. Just ask my sister-in-law.
So, you can continue to say this is a battle between good and evil and even agree with Obama when he tells us it is our “Christian duty” to provide insurance (he can’t say care because he knows he can’t provide it) all you want but the reality is no matter what the bill says, all that will change is that those of us who currently have access to excellent care will no longer be able to get it either. Unless you really are the richest of the rich – for them, nothing will change much, including that tool Ted Kennedy.
You really should do a bit more homework if you’re gonna’ come after someone. At least make it interesting and slightly difficult. I don’t write about something until and unless I’m strong and sure in my position. And based on the current admin’s definition, I’m proud to call myself an extremist. Because now extremist means constitutionalist. Remember the constitution, the document that limits the power of the fed and puts it in the hands of the citizenry and the states? Remember? Huh?
You can read HR 3200 here.
Thanks – I like it.
YES, YES, YES, I am a bleeding heart liberal & proud of it! Call me a moron if it makes you feel better. Assuming you & your husband are not & never have been a member of the military, I am still waiting, since you are so concerned by radical Islam’s threat to our civilization, for you to tell me when you are showing up at the recruiting office.
Those left wing bleeding hearts of the 60’s were partially responsible for the cozy, comfy situation your generation is enjoying. You can thank them for the abolishment of the draft, when you have a moment.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I am not that annoyed about your SUV’s.
Just out of curiousity, why would your husband buy a huge vehicle if he’s not going to use it very much?
If I am such a “moron”, why are you writing such lengthy responses to my posts?
Yes, people providing health care are often undereducated, but that is not the fault of the Obama administration. It’s been going on much longer.
If insurance companies wanted to offer health insurance that is along the lines of auto insurance, they have not said anything about it. They are not, in every state, bound by laws that force them to take or leave a customer, period. Their answer is to offer a high-cost, high deductible policy to people with pre-existing conditions. I don’t believe insurance co’s should be able to sell “health insurance” that does not pay for basic tests & has a high deductible. That is not really a “choice”, though it might be the lesser of two evils.
Even Judd Gregg, my own Senator from NH, admits that there are no death panels.
Susan, Susan, Susan. I’m supposed to thank you hippies for getting rid of the draft? Well, I’d gladly take the draft back if it meant we could get rid of all those aging potheads sucking down all my tax dollars with their social security and Medicare. And how about all your McMansions? And your “conspicuous comsumption”? And crappy television that teaches children that they are nothing if they don’t have a big house, five tv’s, big SUV’s (ironic), glitzy vacations and designer doggie outfits. If you flower children get credit for ending military drafts, you also get the AIDS epidemic. And drugs. And generational welfare and crack babies and the destruction of the public education system that served you so well – or maybe not. And Wall Street greedy scammer types. And for Pete’s sake, who the “F” do you think runs all those insurance companies you demonize? Honestly, this is a joke, right? I’m being punk’d? You fuckwits have had your forty years and you’ve destroyed everything your parents built. Now, step aside and let those of us who must now pay the bills fix everything.
Neither my husband nor myself was ever in the military but many of our siblings, parents, uncles and grandparents have been, so please stop challenging my awareness of what it is to serve or sacrifice. I don’t have to live through it to understand how difficult it is and how terrible losing someone close must be. I don’t have to live through it to appreciate and honor the service and the sacrifice. Ironic that you continue to bring up the military, considering the system set up to care for them, the VA, is the one system in the USA today that actually does kill off patients. Read much?
It must be even worse, though, when people like you stand on the sidelines saying what a waste it all is. I cannot imagine how hurtful and damaging it is to those who serve and their families to hear hateful people like you, claiming “to better understand their pain”, spout off about how these people have died for nothing more than oil to fill someone’s gas tank. You should be truly ashamed of yourself, posing as some sort of spokesperson.
And you are a moron – a hateful, spiteful, selfish, self-centered, useless, stupid moron. You’re pathetic.
Go away.
Well, as suspected, Susan blew a gasket when she read this response and will not be back.
Oh well. Mission accomplished.
And you’ll love this – she thinks we’re the lunatics.
One more thing – did I ever say it was ok to fight a war over oil? I could have sworn I said I felt this to be an unjust accusation – just more propaganda from the left.
“Mad – You’re using your brain again. Stop. Start using your heart and your emotions and your appendix if that what it takes. Whatever gets you to the conclusion that we should never, ever drill our own oil again but also we shouldn’t get it from anyone we don’t like. And we can’t go fight a war for it, either, even if in the process we are liberating an entire nation from tyranny and death”.
GOPMOM – I am Susan’s friend, & she wanted me to point out, in case you did not receive her previous posts, that you seem to be advocating waging war for oil in the quote above.
For my own part, I would also like to point out, though Susan has warned that this might be falling on deaf ears, that the existence of Death Panels, along with the theory that “taxpayer” money is being sent to Brazil to help them drill for oil, have both been proven to be false.
Best, Bradford
OMG, you people are so funny.
I was using sarcasm re: fighting for oil. Ever heard of it? I had made pretty clear I did not believe the propaganda about fighting for oil. Again, sarcasm. It’s been a long time since I encountered such stupidity so I will begin, once again, to highlight sarcasm in my comments with the following, so as to eliminate confusion.
***text***
And I was also commenting to a regular who knows my tone – Susan is out of her element here.
I have said that I know the term “death panel” does not actually appear in the approximately 700 pages of HR 3200 I have read. I’m willing to bet it’s not in there anywhere. But that does not equate to the government having no decision-making power in who lives and who dies. The act alone of the gov telling doctors to have conversations with patients about how to end their lives – mandatory conversations – is reprehensible, especially when coming from the guys who write the checks that we cover. I realize these conversations are happening but mandating it – as is done in the VA system now that Obama is in the WH – is something entirely different. How any breathing human could believe this to be a good thing is beyond me. It’s as unbelievable as using tax payer dollars to spam the country with propaganda supporting this diabolical plan.
And $10 B of tax payer money is/has been loaned to Brazil for oil production. Whether they pay it back or not (and yes, they probably will) is not the point. The point is we should be drilling for our own oil, not lending borrowed $ to others so they can drill and then sell it to us. Wasn’t Susan’s point that we should not be buying foreign oil?
While I admire your coming to the aid of a friend, Susan clearly showed herself unable to debate issues and simply resorted to old and tired Liberal talking points – I am a conservative, therefore I am bad and have no redeemable qualities. If I say it, it must be evil and false. She’s too far gone to have any type of rational debate with. I feel sorry for her. Something is fundamentally wrong with her.
You GOP people are just plain nuts, this is not even ignorance anymore!
How original! Someone who thinks we in the GOP are all nuts.
So if you think I’m nuts and I think you’re nuts, is Barack Obama still an evil socialist dictator bent on destroying the United States of America?
Adis, They are neither nuts nor ignorant. They are just plain evil. They are also irrelevant. Do not waste your time. They do not even count anymore. Let them live in their own little bigot fantasy world. The rest of us can keep moving forward in reality.