Fox News and The Stiletto put together a great peice on how The Discredited New York Times, White House Advisors and liberal supporters all had to back-peddle because of no longer relevant Governor Palin:
On a Facebook post, Governor Palin puts the lie to The New York Times' assertion that "the rumor that government-sponsored 'death panels' to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere" (emphasis added by The Stiletto).
Had Times reporters Jim Rutenberg and Jackie Calmes read her commentary -- which was posted the day before their article was published -- they would have known that the death panels are real, and where to read up on the details. Palin makes a solid case that health care "reform," as originally envisioned by Democrats, would lead to rationed care and put a price tag on the value of people's lives based on their economic productivity.
Palin cites and explains the ramifications of Section 1233 ("Advance Care Planning Consultation," pages 424 to 434) of the House's proposed bill, "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009,'' and quotes from "Principles For Allocation Of Scarce Medical Interventions" (The Lancet, January 31, 2009), a paper co-authored by one of President Obama's health care policy advisors, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel -- whose brother, Rahm, is the president's chief of staff.
Believe it or not, the rationing scheme Dr. Emanuel advocates in The Lancet is a softening of his views on which lives are worth saving. Though Palin was mocked -- surprise! -- for her "death panel" analysis, it's now Dr. Emanuel who is backpedaling from an article he co-authored 13 years ago, The Washington Times reports:
"When I began working in the health policy area about 20 years ago ... I thought we would definitely have to ration care, that there was a need to make a decision and deny people care," said Dr. Emanuel ... during a phone interview. ...
He wrote [in a short article published in a bioethics journal in 1996] that "services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed."
"An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia," he wrote in the paper published by The Hastings Center, a nonpartisan, non-profit bioethics research institute. ...
The charges of rationing, or concerns about his language in journal articles, Dr. Emanuel said, is somewhat understandable given that he was "writing really for political philosophers, and for the average person it's not what they're used to reading, even if they've had a good liberal education."
Palin can also put another notch on her belt when it comes to influencing health care "reform" -- the Senate will drop language "encouraging" doctors to initiate conversations with patients about hospice and palliative end-of-life care from its bill, The Boston Globe reports:
Palin was hardly the only one to look at the House bill and realize its implications. In a commentary posted on The Daily Beast, "thinker" Lee Siegel -- who believes "the absence of universal health care is America's burning shame" -- calls rationing end-of-life care "morally revolting."
The Stiletto seems to recall pundits across the political spectrum writing Palin off as irrelevant after she voluntarily stepped down from public office in July. Guess they were -- what is the word? -- wrong.
Full Article At: