Posted on 12/21/2009 8:47:07 PM PST by Jack Black
PolitiFact's Lie of the Year: 'Death panels' By Angie Drobnic Holan Published on Friday, December 18th, 2009 at 5:15 p.m.
Related rulings:
Seniors and the disabled "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." Sarah Palin, Friday, August 7th, 2009.
Ruling: Pants on Fire! | Details
Bookmark this story: Buzz up!ShareThis A winner in our "Lie of the Year" contest! Of all the falsehoods and distortions in the political discourse this year, one stood out from the rest.
"Death panels."
The claim set political debate afire when it was made in August, raising issues from the role of government in health care to the bounds of acceptable political discussion. In a nod to the way technology has transformed politics, the statement wasn't made in an interview or a television ad. Sarah Palin posted it on her Facebook page.
Her assertion — that the government would set up boards to determine whether seniors and the disabled were worthy of care — spread through newscasts, talk shows, blogs and town hall meetings. Opponents of health care legislation said it revealed the real goals of the Democratic proposals. Advocates for health reform said it showed the depths to which their opponents would sink. Still others scratched their heads and said, "Death panels? Really?"
The editors of PolitiFact.com, the fact-checking Web site of the St. Petersburg Times, have chosen it as our inaugural "Lie of the Year."
Main switchboard: (727) 893-8111
Option #9 then #5 will get you the 24 Hour News Room.
Have at it. THEY ARE SCUM AND NEED TO HEAR IT.
I thought the most popular quote of the year was “You Lie!”
Whats a newspaper?
Wrong!
The biggest lie of the year is at the University of East Anglia.
(Don’t ever sit on a Death Panel. It will be a good way to receive what you would deal out to others.)
A place to get Sunday coupons, nothing else.
A Death Panel by any other name will still issue a death sentence.
I showed how the author of the piece is misleading two days ago:
http://24ahead.com/politifact-lie-year-misleads-angie-drobnic-holan-sarah-palin
Anyone who tells you to ignore things like this doesn’t understand how things work. And, almost all of those who comment on articles like this don’t understand how to strike back effectively.
Here’s a hint: I’m on the first page of Google results for the author’s name, and - if others were more interested in doing things that were effective - my post or one like it would be on the first page of search results for a more general term. You have to show PFact’s audience how they’re being misled, and that’s not going to happen in echo chambers or through ranting or through ignoring them.
Yeah, with ClimateGate breaking and a lunatic in the White House yeah Death Panels are the biggest lie.
When will the media finally finish sucking up its own ass?
Palin predicted that passage of health care reform would lead to the equivalent of ‘death panels’ deciding what level of triaged care would be appropriate for the sick, based on age, etc. It was a prediction. It hasn’t come to be yet. How can it be said to be a lie? How can a prediction be a lie?
It’s what your budgie shites on.
They just won their own award.
Well, I took them at there word and sent the below Op-ed to Angie Holan.
The contention of Congress, Barack Obama, and others that legislation does not mandate end of life discussions might be literally be truthful, but lacks credibility. Sarah Palin points out that fraud and the following explains more fully that deception.
Health care reform means government intervention to control health care, and not only through legislation, but by application of Congressional intent. As with any other commodity or service the two control methods are price or technical allocation methodologies. Governments specialize in the latter.
The stimulus bill created the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology and the Health Information Technology Research Centers. These bureaucracies duplicate private sector information bases, utilizing computer technology for coordination and flow of recommendations and policies for medical knowledge. Now passage of HR 3962, and passage of Senate legislation, adds over 100 new boards, commissions and programs. These bureaucracies provide the framework for boundless regulatory masterpieces constraining human freedom. The HHS Secretary will use the bureaucracies to implement Congressional intent.
Regulations developed reflect the momentum of congressional intent; not the will of the people. The regulations would utilize disquieting legislative provisions, selected legislator speeches, and selected expert testimony to incorporate ideas politicians consider too sensitive for public debate. Medical professionals would join other private sector professionals such as education financial aid directors and CPA’s I know, who often serve as federal agents instead of client advocates.
Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer recently presented in the New York Times Congressional intent without equivocation. “Rationing health care means getting value for the billions spent by setting limits on which treatments should be paid for from the public purse….There’s no doubt that it’s tough – politically, emotionally, and ethically - to make a decision that means that someone will die sooner than they would have if the decision had gone the other way….If the U.S. system spent less on expensive treatments for those who, with or without drugs, have at most a few months to live, it would be better able to save lives of more people who, if they get the treatment they need, might live for several decades….The task of health care bureaucrats is then to get the best value for resources they have been allocated….If a teenager can be expected to live another 70 years, saving that life gains 70 years, whereas a person of 85 can be expected to live another 5 years, then saving the 85-year-old will gain of only 5 life-years. That suggests saving one teenager is equivalent to saving 14 85-year-olds”.
Peter Singer’s rational, scientific approach reminds me of the Geneva Conventions, which attempt rational, moral threads to grasp during the barbarity of war. For my Navy experience pulverizing a major enemy base camp in Vietnam, I especially like the clear and obvious reading of Articles 28 and 29 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The VC were responsible for any civilian deaths on that base. Those civilians qualified as Protected Persons within the enemy’s physical control, and could not be used to render certain points and areas immune from military operations.
The passages formed the basis for rules of engagement we followed when attacking a legitimate military target. I was also blessed by not having to clean up after-wards for the mess I helped make. However, I am sure our task force was an effective “death panel”. We permanently shattered that VC main force unit, forcing it to surrender control of the region to South Vietnamese civil authority.
Physicians currently discuss end of life issues when explaining proposed procedures and drugs, so new legislation only confiscates privacy and freedom. The result of regulations would be to place everyone on pathways to federally defined, cost effective, approved treatments. Seniors and the disabled would reside in second class citizenship. Popular philosophies as discussed above allocate a scarcity of health resources as created by government by finding these people deficient in societal contributions compared to active workers and youth.
Worthwhile initiatives would locate dialogue and diagnosis with families, nurses, and doctors; not with lawyers, insurance companies, academics, and bureaucrats. Worthwhile initiatives would also free the private sector from government constraints preventing greater heath care supply at lower cost. However, such suggestions are not contemplated or appreciated.
It seems GeeDubya used that tactic and it failed.
I sent a letter too, but it was more snide and not as well written as yours. But I did ask her to let me know if there was any country in the world with government health care that WASN’T rationed.
It’s so amazing how stupid people can be. Kids think they’ll live forever, but you would think more older people would realize they are going on the chopping block for this.
It has come to pass it exists already,it has a 1.1 billion dollar budget and was passed in the stimulus Bill .
LETS GET EDUCATED FOLKS! The Chairman is Ezekiel Emmanuel Dr. Death, the Author of this Quality of life Bull crap WHICH IS IN THE MANAGERS AMENDMENT Harry Reid crafted in the Senate. The Death panel is called Comparitive effectiveness research Panel. Look it up , This panel and Kathleen Sebelius,The abortion Queen, are going to determine who gets what treatment and who doesnt based on age and COST. This newspaper is spreading misinformation or is trying to determine the publics depth of ignorance on this and judging from the response in this thread there is a Chasm of ignorance .
I’m pretty sure the biggest lie told in 2009 was “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.