Thank you, Exapno Mapcase!! As far as the phrase “death panel” only being repeated by the left wing, there’s this: http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/08/13/conservative-media-death-panels-lie-returns-in/195381
I would sarcastically say “Continue, [del]Governor Romney[/del] adaher” again, but Fear Itself’s point stands. More politely, when you make extraordinary claims, you need extraordinary evidence to support your claims. Take a moment out of your busy day and Google something.
I’m not comparing anything to anything. I’m making a direct statement that you pulled nonsense of your ass and won’t cop to it.
Wow. Even I didn’t think they were still going back to that well so recently. That deserves some highlights:
I’m wondering now if a theory proposed before is valid: it proposes that the points of **adaher **are so twisted that they create such rifts in the time and space continuum that it compels the universe to go back or forwards in time to make sure reality turns out to be the exact opposite of the point he is trying to make. 
Like I said, quit whining. Not only did the President lie directly to the American people in three big subjects of concern to them regarding this bill, but his supporters mostly joined in the lie. Ignorance was not being fought here while that was going on. Well, except to point out that there were no death panels. Very helpful.
Also, those statements refer to somethign specific: IPAB. You may not like the characterization of IPAB as a death panel, but it is entirely legitimate given that it is supposed to rule on what gets paid for and what doesn’t. While Democrats don’t call it a death panel, they are just as concerned about what IPAB means for Medicare beneficiaries.
That is nice, but your point was that it was a lie from the left. In reality the right is glad to use it still, and no, there is usually no clarification about being specific when told to the peanut gallery.
And who was that woman who went onto The Daily Show with her binder to talk about death panels and other problems with the bill, resulting in The Most Embarrassing Interview in Television History?
Betsy McCaughey (Video at the end of the artice.)
Of course. You realize the way congressional staff and the rest of America is being treated are different, right?
That’s a different issue (but a legitimate complaint).
The issue of people being dropped NOW for inadequate plans was mitigated by many being immediately picked back up by the same insurer with a plan that qualified.
BULLSHIT.
This is bullshit. I have explained why. Repeating yourself isn’t going to work.
Sure - after it was repeated again and again by conservatives.
This is utter bullshit. It’s your highly selective memory at work.
Google it, and you’ll see frequent claims by other right-wing sources about “death panels” long after Palin’s.
(I also found a Fox News story claiming that Mark Halperin of Time Magazine had said recently that death panels exist, followed by a story where he said he had actually said the opposite. Typical.)
More bullshit.
ALL insurance decides what gets paid for and what doesn’t. Of course it does. It only pays for treatments that are proven effective and medically necessary. If that’s a “death panel” then your private insurance company has a “death panel” too. So all you’ve done is cheapen the term used to describe a legitimate and necessary function of all insurance in your zeal to attack ACA.
Also, FWIW, Palin’s original comment claimed that there was some panel somewhere that would judge the value of human beings, such as her child with Down Syndrome to which she referred in the comment, and decide whether they would get medical treatment. It was utter paranoid lunacy, and it was a reference to the living wills section of the ACA, not to the “rationing” section.
(Oh, and in my research I saw references to Gingrich, Beck, Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin all repeating the death panel lie that you claim was only repeated by liberals).
I’ve heard what private insurance companies do as a lot worse than a mere “death panel”. If the public knew that part of health insurance reform was having the government say “no” the same way private companies do, it would never have passed.
With private insurance, you’ve got people in the way between you and your treatment who have as their job performance measure the amount of money they can save the company by disapproving what you need. IF you have the time and knowledge and a healthcare provider who will go to bat for you, they MIGHT change their mind. This is why we need the public option, so that the preservation of profit motivation doesn’t enter into the equation.
Sarah Palin’s death panel nonsense was just the paranoid rantings of a stupid little twit.
Right. Because restrictions on healthcare based on finite resources are somehow likely to be worse than restrictions on healthcare incentivized by financial rewards for denying care?
Anyone who believes that you can have everything you want for free is delusional. But a neutral body (the government) with no incentive to deny healthcare is far better than an interested party that has every reason to keep as many people as possible from getting treatment.
So now your story is that the public didn’t want what it already had in the private sector?
Just a side note - we can, and do, have private non-profit insurance now. It’s possible without a public option, though it’s not accessible to everyone.
You guys are forgetting something about the profit motive: those who seek profit are working for their customers.
Bureaucrats work for the government and have no accountability whatsoever to patients. Just like a private company, it’s all about the bottom line.
And the worst part is that if you are denied treatment by the government, the NY Times won’t write a sympathetic story about how mean they were to you. That only happens if the mean was is called Cigna or Blue Cross. Private companies can be pressured to change decisions and the government has protections and ways for you to appeal. When the government makes a decision, it’s final and no one’s going to give a damn about you. You are simply collateral damage in the war for social justice.
NO. If I have Blue Cross (I don’t, but let’s use this name as a placeholder), they’ve already got my money. I’m not going to stop paying premiums because they screw me over, I probably have little choice. Maybe I can choose another company at next enrollment period, maybe I can’t. So Blue Cross has zero incentive to pay for my treatment, once they have my premium their goal is to keep as much of it as possible. “Working for their customers?” What color is the sky on your planet? They work for their shareholders.
Yes, we get it. You’ve beaten that into us. It doesn’t matter what your words actually say. We’re not supposed to pay any attention to their meaning. They’re just placeholders for “liberals/Democrats are wrong”. Free range words, they roam across the internet unconfined by reality. They are organic, true-blue-American words, noble of heart and pure of soul, saluting the Boy Scouts and obeying every Boy Scout law, except of course for Trustworthy, which they are not. Obedient, though - man sakes alive, are they Obedient, at least to the right’s talking points.