Howard Dean: “Palin was right about ‘death panels'”

July 29, 2013

That’s not an exact quote, but a paraphrasing what the former Vermont governor and 2004 presidential flame-out said in a Wall St. Journal article yesterday. Here’s the money quote:

One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure. What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.

Emphases added.

When Palin made her first comments about “death panels,” (see also here and here) she was widely derided by the Left and the Establishment Right. And yet now we have a major figure on the left wing of the Democratic Party, a man known to favor some form of nationalized medicine, in effect saying she was right all along, because rationed medical care means having to deny it. In other words, IPAB will choose who gets what treatment, who lives and who dies, taking that decision away from the doctor and his patient.

I’d call that a “death panel.”

Now, Howard still favors way too much government intervention in health care, but I’d call this progress. He’s yet another important voice on the Left saying this is a looming train wreck. With many on the Right calling for defunding Obamacare, we may yet be able to form a coalition to at least suspend the implementation of this anti-constitutional monstrosity.

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin was right. Too bad more people in power didn’t listen to her way back then.

"Well, I tried to tell them."

“Well, I tried to tell them.”

via Twitchy

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Quote of the Day: Bob #Menendez follies edition

February 1, 2013

Via Breitbart:

So a United States Senator slated to become Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee strong-arms the U.S. State Department to approve a 20-year, $1 billion federal contract for Dominican port security with a firm owned by a Florida opthamologist / Medicaid fraud with no security background who…

Read the rest for the punchline.

So true. So very maddeningly true.


Republican backstabbers* try to do to Paul Ryan what they did to Sarah Palin

August 14, 2012

Republican insiders “help” Paul Ryan

Hey, Congressman Ryan! Need some help pulling that knife out of your back that was stuck there by unnamed Republicans?

You’ve heard them on television and read them on POLITICO — cheerful, defiant statements from Republican political professionals about Mitt Romney’s bold masterstroke in tapping Paul Ryan as his running mate, and turning the 2012 presidential race into a serious, far-reaching debate about budgets and the nation’s future.

Don’t buy it.

Away from the cameras, and with all the usual assurances that people aren’t being quoted by name, there is an unmistakable consensus among Republican operatives in Washington: Romney has taken a risk with Ryan that has only a modest chance of going right — and a huge chance of going horribly wrong.

In more than three dozen interviews with Republican strategists and campaign operatives — old hands and rising next-generation conservatives alike — the most common reactions to Ryan ranged from gnawing apprehension to hair-on-fire anger that Romney has practically ceded the election.

It is not that the public professions of excitement about the Ryan selection are totally insincere. It is that many of the most optimistic Republican operatives will privately acknowledge that their views are being shaped more by fingers-crossed hope than by a hard-headed appraisal of what’s most likely to happen.

And the more pessimistic strategists don’t even feign good cheer: They think the Ryan pick is a disaster for the GOP. Many of these people don’t care that much about Romney — they always felt he faced an improbable path to victory — but are worried that Ryan’s vocal views about overhauling Medicare will be a millstone for other GOP candidates in critical House and Senate races.

Let’s get to the caveats: No one is asserting that Washington operatives in either party are oracles or seers. What’s more, it is not as if there is anything like unanimity in GOP circles about the merits of the Ryan pick, though the mood of anxiety and skepticism is overwhelming.

Most of all, if you are one of those people who thinks if someone has something negative to say, they should have the guts to put their name on it, you won’t find much to impress you in this article. Nearly all the Republican professionals interviewed for this story said they would share their unfiltered views only “on background” rules of attribution.

You can guess what the criticisms are: “too young;” “too radical;” and my favorite, “not ready to be president.” As if Joe Biden is ready for anything other than a straightjacket?? If this looks familiar, it’s because this is almost exactly what was done to Sarah Palin in 2008 by anonymous DC insiders who felt threatened by a genuine reformer and someone who wasn’t “in the club.”

Now it’s Paul Ryan’s turn: another young, charismatic reformer who actually believes one can be honest with the American people about the problems we face. More worried about preserving their cushy staff and consulting jobs than dealing with our looming fiscal train wreck, Republican “pros” run to Center-Left shill Politico to make their fears known (and suck up to the other side)  –“But, oh, don’t quote me by name, but Ryan’s budget plan is just too radical, and his Medicare plan will scare the elderly, and… and… and can I still come to next week’s cocktail party?”

Bah! These “pros” make me want to puke.

Math. Doesn’t. Lie.

We are running out of time before the clock strikes midnight and we turn into a Greek pumpkin. The Republican ticket is the only one even close to offering a real solution, and yet these “wise old hands” are doing everything they can to tear it down — and for what? So they can a have a frisson of excitement from playing “Secret Source?” For a pat on the head and a reassurance that they’re still important?

As a friend suggested, I wonder how many of these “loyal-but” Republicans are ex-McCain campaign staffers?

God save us from our enemies, for our “allies” are bad enough.

RELATED: A similar story in The Hill. Ed Morrissey reports on an IBD article that argues Ryan’s plan is hardly radical, no matter what pants-wetting Republican insiders might say.

*I had another word in mind, beginning with “chicken,” but this is a family show.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Sentenced to death for being old

April 8, 2012

Your ObamaCare health consultant

One of the ways socialized medicine controls cost is to ration care, denying treatment when it’s determined not to be “cost-effective.” Particularly vulnerable are the elderly, who tend to need medical services the most but, according to some people (1) with with connections to the president, really haven’t got much time left, anyway, so care given to them would be better-directed toward those with more to contribute to society.

If you want to see how that works out in practice, just look to the UK, where they’ve had socialized medicine under the NHS since the 1940s.

God help you if you grow old, there:

When Kenneth Warden was diagnosed with terminal bladder cancer, his hospital consultant sent him home to die, ruling that at 78 he was too old to treat.

Even the palliative surgery or chemotherapy that could have eased his distressing symptoms were declared off-limits because of his age.

His distraught daughter Michele Halligan accepted the sad prognosis but was determined her father would spend his last months in comfort. So she paid for him to seen privately by a second doctor to discover what could be done to ease his symptoms.

Thanks to her tenacity, Kenneth got the drugs and surgery he needed — and as a result his cancer was actually cured. Four years on, he is a sprightly 82-year-old who works out at the gym, drives a sports car and competes in a rowing team.

‘You could call his recovery amazing,’ says Michele, 51. ‘It is certainly a gift. But the fact is that he was written off because of his age. He was left to suffer so much, and so unnecessarily.’

There’s much more to read in the article, the thrust of which is about age discrimination. It’s estimated that around 14,000 elderly Britons die because they are denied the care they need because their NHS doctor has decided they’re too old to undergo the therapy. And yet, as the case of Mr. Warden and others show, advances in geriatric medicine and surgery have greatly increased the chances of such treatment succeeding.

Left unspoken in the article is the origin of this discrimination against the elderly: the bureaucratic pressure to cut costs that in turn leads to decisions on who’s worth the expense of treating — and who isn’t.

In other words, “death panels.” And yet they called Sarah Palin an idiot and even told her to “leave the room.”

Seems to me she just looked across the Atlantic and saw the future.

via Peter Robinson at Ricochet

Footnote:
(1) Bioethicists, again. These people are starting to scare me.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


She’s definitely her mother’s daughter

March 19, 2012

Bristol Palin writes an open letter to President Obama in the wake of his crying crocodile tears of sympathy for progressive women who get called mean names: “Mr. President, When Should I Expect Your Call?

But here’s why I’m a little surprised my phone hasn’t rung.  Your $1,000,000 donor Bill Maher has said reprehensible things about my family.  He’s made fun of my brother because of his Down’s Syndrome. He’s said I was “f—-d so hard a baby fell out.”  (In a classy move, he did this while his producers put up the cover of my book, which tells about the forgiveness and redemption I’ve found in God after my past – very public — mistakes.)

If Maher talked about Malia and Sasha that way, you’d return his dirty money and the Secret Service would probably have to restrain you.  After all, I’ve always felt you understood my plight more than most because your mom was a teenager.  That’s why you stood up for me when you were campaigning against Sen. McCain and my mom — you said vicious attacks on me should be off limits.

Yet I wonder if the Presidency has changed you.  Now that you’re in office, it seems you’re only willing to defend certain women.  You’re only willing to take a moral stand when you know your liberal supporters will stand behind you.

Three points, nothing but net.

via Charlie Martin

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Palin. Breitbart. Nightstick. Boom.

March 16, 2012

Sarah Palin took to the electronic pages of Breitbart.com, both to pay tribute to the late Andrew Breitbart and to support Breitbart’s last mission: to “vet the Prez.” In it, she not only praises her friend, but also lambastes the corrupt media he so despised for doing anything but vetting Obama. It’s Palin at her best:

Barack Obama and I both served in political office in states with a serious corruption problem. Though there is a big difference between serving as the CEO of a city, then a state, and regulating domestic energy resources, and being a liberal Community Organizer, bear with me on the comparison. The difference between my record and Barack Obama’s is that I fought the corrupt political machine my entire career (and I have twenty years of scars to prove it) on the local, state, and national level. But Obama didn’t fight the corruption he encountered. He went along with it to advance his career. Graft, cronyism, and quid pro quo are the methods of the Chicago political machine from which he emerged.

You would think the media – those watchdogs of the public trust – would be interested in this. But they refused to vet Barack Obama. With tingles up their legs, they shielded him.

If the media had done their job of vetting him, we wouldn’t have been shocked that within days after Obama’s election, his close political associate Rod Blagojevich was caught trying to sell Obama’s vacant Senate seat.

If the media had done their job of vetting him, we wouldn’t be astonished to see all the billion dollar green energy kickbacks going to his campaign cronies as the nation heads towards bankruptcy.

If the media had done their job of vetting him, we wouldn’t be surprised that Obama brought these same Chicago “pay-to-play” practices to the White House.

This corruption was entirely predictable. But the mainstream media, who work under our Constitutional right of freedom of the press which our sons and daughters fight in war zones today to protect, dropped the ball and failed America by refusing to vet their chosen candidate.

So, as Breitbart declared in his last CPAC speech, we – the everyday patriotic citizens of the United States – will do the vetting the media refused to do.

Be sure to read the whole thing.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


(Video) Must-viewing: Sarah Palin at CPAC 2012

February 15, 2012

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) seems like such a natural venue for former Governor Sarah Palin that I’ve often wondered why she didn’t appear there in 2009-2011. It’s not as if she’d have encountered anything other than a rapturous audience.

Well, she fixed that in 2012, and the crowd loved her, as you’ll see especially when some hecklers tried to cut her off. Dopes.

Just under 40 minutes. Grab a coke and some popcorn, sit back, and enjoy:

PS: It’s no secret that I’m a big fan of Sarah Palin, and that I hope some day to cast a vote for her for president. I don’t think she’s perfect –we’re all human, after all– but she matches my beliefs regarding politics and the nature of American greatness more closely than any pol I’ve come across in recent years. And I think she has the right character for high office.

PPS: In case you missed it, I’m sure you’ll also enjoy MEP Daniel Hannan’s speech before CPAC.

PPPS: Sorry for the light posting of late. Things have just been hectic.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,501 other followers