Media critic says press needs to call out Palin on ‘death panels’ claim
The Washington Posts’ Howard Kurtz says the media needs to report that the words coming out of Sarah Palin’s mouth are not true:
Yes, there is a point where the media should say a politician is wrong, and this is the point. There may or may not be a legitimate discussion about the end-of-life counseling in the Obama health plan (which is voluntary, by the way) and whether it is intrusive. It’s a long way from that to “death panels,” even by the loose rhetorical standards of modern politics. I was surprised that the ex-governor’s Facebook comments didn’t get much pickup at first, though that is starting to change in the last couple of days. As I noted in this morning’s column, wasn’t it Sarah Palin who demanded that journalists “quick making things up”?
Kurtz also noted in the discussion that Palin criticizes the media for mentioning her son Trig, but then she uses him and his medical conditions in her “death panels” claim:
The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome 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. Such a system is downright evil.
As I’ve noted earlier, there is nothing even resembling a “death panel” in the plan. Nada. It’s just not there.







Certainly no american government would ever deny life saving treatment. Nope, not here in the USA. We can trust the government.
Oh, have you seen this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6ojBgTyA7I
Palin?
James, who pays you at the end of the day?
I’m not a big fan of Palin, first of all, but anytime anyone speaks truth it shouldn’t be just swept away because it’s not communicated well.
As to who pays me, I work for a non-insurance, non-profit health care ministry. We do charitable work helping families share one another’s health care expenses nationally.
I am in favor of health care reform that divorces health care dollars from employment (needs tax reform) and increases choices for patients (including through de-regulation where necessary) but what is being proposed will move bad decisions from insurers to the government, after which there is no court of appeal.
Did you watch the video? If you want to deny that governments would turn down life saving procedures for people on a public plan, just watch that news story I linked to and you might be surprised at what’s *already* gone on.
More freedom, more choices and we’ll have better health care for less cost. More government means fewer choices and we’ll have either more expensive care funded by tax $$ or less care to choose from.
Oh, and I get paid weekly, not at the end of every day.
You are a professional lie spreader remotely paid by big insurance and … “James Lansberry” – Google Search http://bit.ly/1JioU Should I call you Doctor? And you get paid weekly? Doctor?
FYI … I have always been paid at the end of the month.
I’m calling a foul. There is absolutely no reason to call James a liar. He has a perspectrive that differs from yours. And he has the right to his opinion. Please refrain from doing it asgain.
Thanks Billy. I find it somewhat humorous when I get accused of being a shill for insurance companies, when I’ve spent most of my non-profit career differentiating what we do from insurance and explaining why I think it’s superior and more personal.
You may have found one site where I was called “doctor” but if you look at that site I corrected the misnomer in the comments. The radio bookers have not always been detail oriented in reading my bio.
Again, Billy, thanks for defending my integrity. While we often disagree, I consider you to be honest and straightforward, and this debate can use a lot more of that.
Yeah, we wouldn’t want anyone eliminating the need for your gracious charity, after all. ¬_¬