Death Panels Down Under?

September 25, 2009

But… But… The Left and the media (and some Republican snobs) told us Sarah Palin didn’t know what she was talking about, that she should leave the room, for her metaphorical reference to health care rationing creating “death panels.” Even the President went after her:

Still, given all the misinformation that’s been spread over the past few months, I realize — I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight, I want to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.

Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but by prominent politicians that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens.

Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie plain and simple.

Maybe they should have asked the Australians:

Nicola Roxon … is the health minister of Australia. She has come up with a new way to save money, by denying “expensive” medications to cancer patients.

Australia already controls drugs via its Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.

Roxon is lobbying the committee to further restrict the dispensing of drugs.

Dying cancer patients could be weaned off taxpayer-funded drugs as the Federal Government is confronted with spiralling health costs,” the Courier-Mail reported.

Emphases added.

To control costs, the Australian Government proposes to decide who does and who does not receive needed medications. Those most affected will be those who most need the drugs, and that population is largely composed of the elderly, who are more prone to these diseases. Sounds like a “death panel” to me.

Maybe the lady knows what she is talking about.

UPDATE: And the Baucus “compromise” bill contains the functional equivalent. No “death panels,” Mr. President? You sure?

Blissful ignorance?

September 25, 2009

Nate Beeler in the Washington Examiner:



Fun while it lasted

September 25, 2009

Nearly three weeks ago, the hits on this blog skyrocketed when, as far as I can tell, a popular author linked to this post. to say the least, it was dramatic:


I thought the “aftershock” would last for a day, two at most, so the slower descent surprised me. It kind of resembles a slope for thrill-crazed skiiers. 🙂

In any event, things look back to normal, now. Whoever the “unknown linker” was, thanks!  Not worthy

Netanyahu for President!

September 25, 2009

Okay, okay. It’s constitutionally impossible, but I can still wish for a president who can address the world with genuine moral clarity. From his address to the UN yesterday:

Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state.

What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You’re wrong.

History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others.

This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.

Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization.

It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.

Go, Bibi, go!!  Applause Dancing

For even more uncompromising moral clarity, let me recommend a good book.

(via Fausta)