Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

August 9, 2009

GINGRICH HAS PALIN'S BACK.... I can't tell what's worse, Sarah Palin's insane "death panels" argument, or the willingness of prominent far-right officials to pretend this is a legitimate attack on health care reform.

During an exclusive debate on health care reform this morning between former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, Gingrich defended Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's recent comments on her Facebook page that Obama's health care reform would promote 'death panels' in deciding euthanasia.

"Communal standards historically is a very dangerous concept," Gingrich told me.

"You are asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there are clearly people in American who believe in establishing euthanasia, including selective standards."

There are two relevant questions here. First, why was Newt Gingrich, the disgraced former House Speaker who was driven from office by his own party 11 years ago, invited to appear as some kind of credible policy expert on "This Week"?

Second, what is Gingrich talking about? We're talking about a provision in the House bill that would allow Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling sessions on advance care planning. The idea came from a Republican senator, Maine's Susan Collins, who's argued that the measure would improve Medicare's "care for patients at the end of their lives."

Either Gingrich knows this, in which case he was lying, or he doesn't, in which case he shouldn't be spouting nonsense on national television.

Steve Benen 10:45 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (61)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

NEWT GINGRICH The Future of the Republican Party -- Wah Hoo!

Posted by: neill on August 9, 2009 at 10:53 AM | PERMALINK

Well this is actually an excellent turn of events. The Republican Party had the option to keep a distance and remain silent on the toxic protests and increasingly violent rhetoric, but they're publically and officially throwing themselves in with these kooks. They've become the official party of the lunatic fringe. And the congressman who raised the question of Obama's birth certificate? Perfect, perfect. The birthers are national joke, a soundly discredited group of morons. Joining the healthcare protesters with the birthers discredits any legitimacy anyone (including the media) might try to lend these protesters.

Keep it up Republicans.

Posted by: Saint Zak on August 9, 2009 at 10:57 AM | PERMALINK

Gingrich is lying. The networks shouldn't invite him to spout his lying nonsense on national television. The networks have different objectives than you do.

Posted by: qwerty on August 9, 2009 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINK

As long as the media presents things like this as acceptable discourse and opposing viewpoints, rather than actually coming out & saying, "fella, you're lying through your teeth" this will go on.

It's been going on for a long time, you know.

Posted by: zhak on August 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK

The sad fact of the matter is, conservatives will acknowledge as an expert anyone who says what they want to hear - Exhibit A; Joe the Plumber, invited to speak on all manner of subjects about which he knew less than nothing.

Isn't Gingrich the same Gingrich (and it's hard to believe it's a common name) who claimed high-profile Republicans were courting him for a presidential run in '08? Gee, I hope they do it again, and that he accepts.

It's really pitiful how long it takes to percolate through the American brain that what they are chewing on is a lie. Examples abound: Iraq has WMD, Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9-11 attacks, Iran is manufacturing a nuclear weapon, Elvis Presley is dead.....oh, wait, that last one is true. Seriously, even if the media refuses to use the word, "lie", or even admit that what is being discussed is....umm...not factual - why is it that other nations are easily capable of discarding the premise as a lie? Why do nutty and plainly foolish concepts totter on day after day in what is supposed to be an advanced and progressive nation?

Yes, conservative activists supported by big-name Republicans are doing their level best to start a civil war - but why is it playing so well?

Posted by: Mark on August 9, 2009 at 11:03 AM | PERMALINK

Stephanopoulous tried to call him on it, but Gingrich had his talking point down cold, so he stuck with it. At that point, George should have cut him off and smacked him around for such nonsense, but he sort of gave up. It was sad. And Howard Dean didn't whack him around either. Lame.

Posted by: swarty on August 9, 2009 at 11:05 AM | PERMALINK

The irony is that Sarah Palin probably has government health insurance and had government health insurance via the state of Alaska when Trig was born. Newt Gingrich had it too at one point, hell, he might even still have it now.

That is the most obvious line of questioning that needs to be persued whenever someone who WORKS FOR THE GOVNERMENT complains about government health insurance. Please, Mr. or Ms. Politician, tell us how awful your health insurance is, that it is so awful that you opted out of it and pay for private insurance out-of-pocket?

Posted by: zoe kentucky on August 9, 2009 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, conservative activists supported by big-name Republicans are doing their level best to start a civil war - but why is it playing so well?

It's playing really well among die-hard Republicans, FoxNews watchers, Rush and Beck fans, and McCain/Palin voters, for sure. But among the rest of us? Not so much. I think it's absurd to call it anything close to a civil war, it's one side behaving like ignorant, misinformed idiots who will believe anything that a GOPers says. "Keep the government off of my medicare!" Need we say more?

They hate Obama, hate Democrats, and they've been like this before-- anyone remember the Clinton years? The big difference now is that it took them a few years to become this unhinged, this time they started off riotiously angry, it's like they picked up where they left off 9 years ago. They don't want the country to like Obama and are doing their damnest to destroy him early on. That is the one thing they learned from the Clinton years, don't let the American public get too comfortable with their likable president-- demonize him early and often.

How soon do you think they're going to be calling for Obama's impeachment? I say give it another 3-6 months.

Posted by: zoe kentucky on August 9, 2009 at 11:15 AM | PERMALINK

On page 666 of the health care plan, Obama wants to kill everyone over 60 and use the corpses for bio-fuels. It's true!

Posted by: Conservatroll on August 9, 2009 at 11:18 AM | PERMALINK

David Brooks just dismissed Palin as "crazy" -- twice, in fact -- on Meet the Press.

Posted by: TR on August 9, 2009 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK

Converting old goats and biddies to clean energy.

Posted by: MatthewRQuarreler on August 9, 2009 at 11:25 AM | PERMALINK

"Community standards" means no screening for pre-existing conditions; i.e., everyone in a given health care market is offered coverage and pays the same premium. How this would lead to euthanasia jeebus only knows.

Even if the insurance under the reform denied a particular treatment (as insurance companies currently do every day), you would still be free to purchase the care yourself.

Posted by: kth on August 9, 2009 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

Reading, watching, thinking and writing about health care reform at this juncture reminds me of what the late Frank Zappa observed: Scientists believe hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but hydrogen is not the most abundant element in the universe, stupidity is!

Too bad Newt wasn't any younger. I'd suggest, if he were, to have him spend his youth in asia! -Kevo

Posted by: kevo on August 9, 2009 at 11:27 AM | PERMALINK

What people tend to overlook is that TeeVee "news' is a Bidnez.

No different, really, than the supermarket tabloids, with their outrageous cover stories.

And a certain percentage of viewers/shoppers reach for them each week, and drop them on the conveyor belt, along with the American Food Pyramid- Salt, Fat, and Sugar. . .

Posted by: DAY on August 9, 2009 at 11:32 AM | PERMALINK

The idea came from a Republican senator, Maine's Susan Collins, who's argued that the measure would improve Medicare's "care for patients at the end of their lives."

I haven't seen Collins on air publicly defending her recommendation. Has anyone?

Posted by: Jack Lindahl on August 9, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

I haven't seen Collins on air publicly defending her recommendation. Has anyone?

She'll make an appearance as soon as her staffers tell her what to think, and enough cameras turn up. (See 'Stimulus bill'...)

Posted by: Davis X. Machina on August 9, 2009 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK

just thinking that, if Palin doesn't run for president (and she probably won't), her endorsement would be far and away the biggest prize to be had in the primary contest. So maybe put Newt's remarks in that light.

Posted by: kth on August 9, 2009 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

I think the strategy here is that when a winger makes some new absurd or repellent statement, there is always another winger to back him up. This effectively stops any rightwing statement from being beyond the pale, because no one is ever isolated or mocked as a nut for anything he or she says. It also creates a dynamic where the public discourse can spiral ever downward.

Posted by: Karen on August 9, 2009 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

Karen's got it.

Posted by: shortstop on August 9, 2009 at 12:01 PM | PERMALINK

These people are such goddam liars. I hate talking like that, but in times like these ... And private insurers really do kill thousands by refusing to pay for care - but those liars have to refer to a voluntary program offered by a Republican (they hate their own moderates, BTW.)

Considering the adultery, financial manipulation, neocon meddling etc. of such people it is clear that this is a true personality disorder: they are feral narcissists, not legitimate philosophical "conservatives" like David Frum and Andrew Sullivan could be thought as.

Posted by: N e i l B on August 9, 2009 at 12:20 PM | PERMALINK

PS, it's a sad time when the MSM won't do their job, and only outraged flabby conservatives like David Brooks can get away with attacking this filth (in the "one of their own" way that minority comics can, but also since the MSM needs the respectable center-rightists to take the place of true progressives, it will get out.)

Posted by: N e i l B ♫ on August 9, 2009 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

When Jim Jeffords in 2001 tried to put into the budget more money to aid families with disabled children, didn't someone in the Republican leadership tell him that helping disabled kids was a Democratic issue, not a Republican issue? Does anybody have that quote/link?

Posted by: Misplaced Patriot on August 9, 2009 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

This post needs a correction: Palin wasn't just talking about euthanasia. She specifically referred to her baby, Trig, potentially being deemed unworthy of healthcare by this so-called "death panel" based upon his "level of productivity in society," which are phrases she herself put in quotes; as if they were official parts of the legislation. Apparently, Obama's now going after the special needs people, too.

That's the craziest part about her claim in that she went MUCH further than anyone else I had heard before, at least from a national figure. Now it's not just the oldies who Obama is trying to kill but potentially ANYONE who is deemed too unproductive to deserve healthcare. And for as much as Gingrich is defending her, he's actually walking her crazy back quite a bit, taking it to where all the other crazies were; while also being more subtle about it.

But as I predicted at my blog, while conservatives were likely to defend her, I doubted any of them would be crazy enough to repeat what she said; but instead would tamper it down and make it sound less crazy. So far, Gingrich has done exactly that. He's walking the fine line that she completely trashed with her statement. Sure, what he's saying is crazy, but it's not PALIN crazy. And one big difference is that he knows he's lying, while she doesn't.

For anyone interested, you can read more here:
Sarah Palin and the Death Panel

Posted by: Doctor Biobrain on August 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Newt Gingrich is the puppet master of conservative fear-mongering. Truth be damned; it's all about manipulating the ignorant masses. What better way to get others to do your dirty work that to represent yourself as a family values Christian and tap into the fears of the elderly to incite anger, hate, and violence. What is the term for those who use faith and country to inspire others to commit evil to suit political purposes?

Posted by: CarolA on August 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, the Palin smear is "based" less upon the Medicare counseling angle than it is on the Ezekiel Emanuel attack front. Some of the language Palin used is straight out of a paper written by Emanuel 13 years ago. Emanuel, being a bioethicist, has had to write on the tough choices that have to be made in health care--and that opens you up for attack no matter what.

ANY choice about providing finite resources to more patients than the resources can handle can ALWAYS be attacked as if the person making the choice is "condemning" to death the patients not chosen. Emanuel outlined a system of prioritizing care that put curable young patients ahead of older patients with incurable ailments--and that has been warped into the "euthanasia" claim.

Of course, (1) Emanuel made no such proposal to euthanize people, but rather to limit social insurance coverage if resources are not available, and more importantly (2) this was a personal view held by a single advisor out of many and not built into the plan being offered before Congress.

In short, it's a distortion which would be inapplicable even if it were true.

But that's the angle they're coming from, not the counseling sessions in Medicare.

Of course, the whole "rationing" scare is a lie in itself--private insurance may not "ration," but it does worse--it denies far more medical care simply by denying claims, limiting coverage, or outright dropping coverage. The irony is that if Palin had only a private insurance option, then her baby would be denied care by the insurers on the basis of Down's being a "pre-existing" condition. She makes up fictional "death panels" in Obama's health care plan when she is pushing for exactly the conditions she reviles to continue--where Obama's plan would do away with them.

What a lying hypocrite.

Posted by: BlogD on August 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

"Communal standards historically is a very dangerous concept," Gingrich told me.

But aren't "communal standards" what the conservatives use to justify denying same-sex marriage and pro-life legislation?

I think Newt is sucking up to Sarah Palin because he wants to be her running mate in 2012.

Posted by: Mustang Bobby on August 9, 2009 at 1:10 PM | PERMALINK

Edit: That should be "and promoting pro-life legislation?"

Posted by: Mustang Bobby on August 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

BlogD is right; Palin wasn't referring to the end-of-life provision but to Ezekiel Emanuel's 13-year old ethics paper. Or rather, to her third-hand knowledge of that paper. If she had read it personally, she would see that Emanuel doesn't suggest putting Trig to death but does suggest the logical possibility that universal coverage might deny him basic service -- just as private insurance plans currently can.

Posted by: Grumpy on August 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM | PERMALINK

"GINGRICH HAS PALIN'S BACK"!

Well, I know what the phrase means, but it still conjures up some disgusting images in my rather filthy mind.

Couldn't we just say Newt is as stupid as Palin?

And, government retirement plans are very good. Both he and Palin are probably still on "socialized medicine".

Posted by: ROTFLOL!! on August 9, 2009 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

Sarah is too clueless to understand that the "death panels" already exist. If she doesn't believe it, she should apply for coverage for her child from Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna or any other health care insurer. Coverage would be denied within an hour.

Posted by: Pug on August 9, 2009 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK

The other issue to remember is what we are really arguing about is living wills and hospice care. Don't forget that some of the opponents are right-to-lifers that want people to be kept alive at all costs even against their will.

About ten years ago I had an elderly aunt dying from cancer. The hospital ignored a living will on file and kept providing unnecessary treatments. The doctor refused to transfer her to another doctor who would respect the living will until we threatened legal action. There was no counseling on hospice. They made her last days hellish.

My mother died a couple of years ago from cancer. We received hospice care and she died peacefully at home. It was what she wanted (and much less expensive than prolonging her life in a hospital).

Although the right is pretending to be protecting old people from euthanasia, they are really fighting people's right to die peacefully and with dignity.

Posted by: objectivedem on August 9, 2009 at 1:57 PM | PERMALINK

The problem: there are enough people, officially advising President Obama on health-care reform, who fervently endorse the age-centric, dollars-and-cents approach, that just about any charge put forth by Palin or senior citizens at town halls will have at least a kernel of truth in it.

Posted by: bmmg39 on August 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

"...Either Gingrich knows this, in which case he was lying, or he doesn't, in which case he shouldn't be spouting nonsense on national television..."

Either way...there he is spouting this nonsense on national TV. So few I know ever bother to watch this crap any longer because of the ridiculous voices they keep putting on.

Posted by: bjobotts on August 9, 2009 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

The problem: there are enough people, officially advising President Obama on health-care reform, who fervently endorse the age-centric, dollars-and-cents approach, that just about any charge put forth by Palin or senior citizens at town halls will have at least a kernel of truth in it.

I've got kernels in my shit after eating corn on the cob with more substance that this "kernel of truth".

Posted by: ROTFLOL!! on August 9, 2009 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK

For anyone interested, I specifically discussed how Gingrich isn't actually defending Palin's "death panel" and neither are the crazies who rushed to her defense against Stephanopoulos.
Crazy versus Palin Crazy

Posted by: Doctor Biobrain on August 9, 2009 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

Now that Palin has left her last employer, does she pay for her own health insurance, or does she have COBRA?

Posted by: Shirley Hall on August 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM | PERMALINK

Ezekial Emanuel is the brother of Rahm. Ezekial is an advisor to Obama on healthcare reform. Dr. Emanuel wrote an article for Lancet that answers Benen's question, "What is Gingrich talking about?" Dr. Emanuel is one of three advisers to Obama who subscribe to this philosophy. I recommend you download the PDF of his article, which is available here:
http://blog.jonolan.net/politics/complete-lives-system/

Posted by: Potter on August 9, 2009 at 5:41 PM | PERMALINK


I would direct the people writing these comments to the Washington Post, Sat. Aug 8, 2009. An article by Charles Lane entitled "Undue Influence". It is an informative piece on Section 1233. Palin may not be as far off the mark as you seem to think.

Posted by: Eileen Hannig on August 9, 2009 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK

Nearly forgot. Once you've read Ezekial's article, look in the mirror. Think about your age. Think about the age of your spouse, your parents, your children. What value do each of those lives have on Emanuel's graph? Are you sure you're ready to embrace this?

Posted by: Potter on August 9, 2009 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK

Palin was, of course, mistaken as usual, the ignorant slut. We would not have refused healthcare to her Down syndrome baby, because he wouldn't exist; we'd have forced her to have an abortion long (but not too long, naturally; those third trimester abortions are the bestest) before he was born.

Posted by: exlibra on August 9, 2009 at 6:05 PM | PERMALINK

Potter is potted. I've read Sec 1233 and it's rather key to remember that the sessions are voluntary and now, unlike for the last 20 years it's been available, the doctor can get reimbursement just for sitting down and talking about it.
Not only have we looked in the mirror, my wife and I have lived the issue with parents, aunts and uncles as well as her grandparents. Her grandmother died of liver cancer while occupying the first floor of the house they all lived in.
Just like the old days.

Posted by: TJM on August 9, 2009 at 9:01 PM | PERMALINK

Y'ALL republicans just be crazy. Total nut-cases at the very least.

It seems tragic to me that the republicans want to give every benefit of law and society to a blastocyst (child consisting of a few cells and no ability to survive on its' own), while doing everything in their power to make sure that that child or any other one can't possibly survive or thrive later on in life. They must be given opportunity of life, even if their parents aren't attached to them, or they are drug dealers, addicts or murderers.

Republicans WANT these children to grow up in these horrible environments.

I wonder if it is because it makes their loser children more likely to succeed?

Somebody please help me clear this up... I just can't understand how people could use their children in such a manner.

Yet, they want the death penalty for any minor infraction of their code. They are just as bad as the radical muslims in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Posted by: Doug Wieboldt on August 9, 2009 at 9:27 PM | PERMALINK

I like free health care. Can I have a free house too, and some spending money to go along with it please. I would like that. Someone else should pay for it, I shouldn't have to pay for it. I also want $4500 toward a car purchase. Rich people should just pay for everything so I don't have to work too hard.

Posted by: danno on August 9, 2009 at 10:38 PM | PERMALINK

I like free health care. Can I have a free house too, and some spending money to go along with it please.

Every industrialized country except the United States has universal health care, you fuckwit. It's not a pipe dream.

I like free health care. Can I have a free house too, and some spending money to go along with it please.

No, you're too dumb for any of those things, but I do have a free clue for you: you don't pay for the police or firefighters or military to protect you, you don't pay every time you drive on a paved road, you don't pay to make sure you don't get e. coli every time you eat meat, and you don't lob a quarter at someone every time you get a report from a government agency.

Those things are paid for in your taxes, as health care should be.

Here's another free clue, numbnuts: every ten years health care premiums double, while wages are stagnating, people have their policies arbitrarily canceled, and a huge number of people pay are un- or underinsured.

I can't wait until the day you lose your policy and need medical care and that stupid grin slowly disappears from your face as the realization dawns on you that you were your own worst enemy all along.

Posted by: trex on August 9, 2009 at 10:51 PM | PERMALINK

Is there anyone out there besides the fringe Republican zealots, or the Alaska sepratist people that still listen to Sarah Palin. Just as Dan Quayle was a bonanza for late night comedians, Sarah Palin is even better. Leno said one night: 'We can't make this stuff up.'

Posted by: tontis on August 10, 2009 at 1:01 AM | PERMALINK

"First, why was Newt Gingrich, the disgraced former House Speaker who was driven from office by his own party 11 years ago, invited to appear as some kind of credible policy expert on "This Week"?"
-Steve Benen

Newt was never "disgraced". He was wrongly accused of bogus charges of improperly teaching a history course which necessarily contained political analysis, which supposedly violated the tax-exempt status of his charitable organization. He was later cleared of all charges from this cheap smear.

Newt is indeed a credible policy expert, who is primarily responsible for the fantastic economic growth and prosperity of the 1990s. Just look at a chart of the S&P 500 and you will see that the economy took off in 1994 when he and the Contract With America swept into power to enable the Republicans to dominate both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years. Hopefully we will witness a similar event in 2010.

Clinton is given the credit, but does not deserve merit for the success of the 1990s; he was dragged kicking and screaming to end "welfare as we know it" and pushed to fulfill the rest of Newt's 10 policy positions from the Contract.

Newt was successfully demonized by the left, precisely because he was so effective. He was also abandoned by the cowards in the Republican party, when his negatives rose in the polls.

Newt is the most under-appreciated politician of the 20th century. He is a brilliant and honorable man and we owe him a great deal of respect.

Hope that helps.

Posted by: Freedom Fan on August 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM | PERMALINK

"Every industrialized country except the United States has universal health care, you fuckwit. It's not a pipe dream."
-trex

You can stick Britain's socialized health care where the sun don't shine.

Posted by: Freedom Fan on August 10, 2009 at 1:16 AM | PERMALINK

"Those things are paid for in your taxes, as health care should be."

Are you open to a 5% (or more) sales tax on every purchase you make to fund UHC?

Posted by: bt on August 10, 2009 at 1:54 AM | PERMALINK

Potter: You're still indulging in yet another level of the right-wing deception: that every word ever written by every last advisor to the health plan will become part of the health care bill.

Show me where the *legislation* says that. I betcha can't.

Posted by: BlogD on August 10, 2009 at 6:20 AM | PERMALINK

bottom line is its going to be about so called cost effectiveness (which is nothing more than another gov takeover) if the gov judges your not worth the price its lights out.

Posted by: icsdees on August 10, 2009 at 8:48 AM | PERMALINK

Newtie will say anything about anybody and on any subject if it will give him a few more minutes in the public limelight, a few more moments in front of that life giving microphone.

And he's really not lying. He has the ability, vital to any successful huckster, to convince himself that whatever happens to come out of his own mouth at any given moment is a Heaven-sent truth, even if it happens to contradict yesterday's Heaven-sent truth.

Posted by: Mandy Cat on August 10, 2009 at 9:39 AM | PERMALINK

Are you open to a 5% (or more) sales tax on every purchase you make to fund UHC?

Absofreakingloutely. Why does that idea freak you out so much?

Oooooooo-- I forgot, taxes are scary and bad because I don't like paying for things that help the common good of society or for my money to go to helping anyone else out but ME. Let's privatize EVERYTHING, make EVERYTHING that people need to surivive a for-profit scheme. That would make the whole world better-- because we don't want or need a middle class, small business entreprenuers, we only want the very rich and the very poor. (Obviously I'm assuming that I'll always be part of the very rich otherwise I would realize how screwed up this idea is.)

In a country as wealthy and powerful as ours, it's downright shameful that we have a system that is designed to profit off of the sick, where it's perfectly OK for poor people to be uninsured and denied basic medical care. The sicker you are the better off the insurance companies are, although don't get too sick or they'll just drop your coverage.

Posted by: zoe kentucky on August 10, 2009 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

As i read the loving lefts case for why we should all pitch in I wonder how many would pitch in if they knew they were going to be sick and have to surrender to The National Health Care Office.

recall Star Trek? A war was faughtbut no one was killed. But if you were out during the attacks of ligth you were required to surrender to thedeath chamber becasue it was more civilized.....This is where theObama plan leads..You cansay that it doesn't and you can be mad at those who make theleap in theory BUT YOU CAN NOT BE SURE....AND WE DO NOT WANT TO FIND OUT if it isnow time not for Star Trek with captainJames T Kirk but maybe it is time for Carlton Heston as we approach Soilent Green

Doing a lot is not thesameas getting a lot done

Soilent Green

Posted by: tgtg on August 10, 2009 at 9:55 AM | PERMALINK

Hey steve..nice try with the little dime store explanation of Palin's Death Panel Charge......EVer heard of the Washington Post?....They'll help you understand what she and Gingrich were talking about....http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/07/AR2009080703043.html

Posted by: kevin b on August 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK

Jesus you Democrats are in deep doo doo when your own bought and paid for biased media start running articles that highlight what lying hypocrites your leaders are....Me..I'm enjoying the show

Posted by: kevin b on August 10, 2009 at 10:09 AM | PERMALINK

Isn't it funny how Obama supporters, who don't even know what is in the Government MANDATED Healthcare Bill, are now grasping at straws to keep the atention off of Obama's thugs who are now beating down Americans in another Communist styled effort to intimidate us into giving away yet more of our freedoms?

With the arrogant democrats it is all about having more power. With the republicans it is all about letting Americans make their own decisions.

Newt Gingrich fought to give us the first balanced budget in decades. Democrats arrogantly spend money like it grows on trees. Yes, let's smear Newt so we can pay for the Democrat Party's 14 TRILLION Dollar PLUS deficits which Obama's 12 CZARS [sound communist to you yet?] will manage.

Cradle to grave, you can be certain that Obama will assist you in ways that are best ... for Obama.

Posted by: DannoJyd on August 10, 2009 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINK

If you think Pathetic Palin has changed to Sensible Sarah...YOU NEED YOUR HEAD EXAMINED TOO...
There are no Death Panels!
There are no Euthanasia Boards!
There are no Kill the Non-productive Plots!

People DESERVE RESPECT when it comes to end of life care which is what it offers IF REQUESTED...
Not to "Die BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO HEALTHCARE!" you, EYE of NEWT, are an idiot!!!!!

I ought to know...I am a Doctor, are you?

Posted by: docoleb@yahoo.com on August 10, 2009 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

"Are you open to a 5% (or more) sales tax on every purchase you make to fund UHC?"

"Absofreakingloutely. Why does that idea freak you out so much? "

It doesn't. In fact it makes perfect sense. A pay as you go plan, with the collection mechanism in place and everybody pays and everybody is covered. None of this half assed incrementalist BS.

How about a $10 co-pay for each visit to the clinics and prescriptions at the $4 wal-mart price?

Have the neighborhood clinics set the bones, wipe the noses, stitch the cuts and send the more serious cases on to the regional hospital.

Posted by: bt on August 11, 2009 at 3:14 PM | PERMALINK

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel hasn't told OMB anything about Advance Care that Newt Gingrich hasn't proposed himself.

See:

http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/20317-newt-gingrich-advance-directive-advocate/

Posted by: Mike on August 15, 2009 at 12:04 AM | PERMALINK

As a Newbie, I am always searching online for articles that can help me. Thank you

Posted by: quick payday loans on October 24, 2010 at 11:23 PM | PERMALINK

I am assured, that you are wrong.

Posted by: easy closets on January 9, 2011 at 8:33 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly