Thank You for Pissing in the Well, Chuck.
For the last couple of weeks or so the media has been highlighting the exciting events at local town hall meetings "debating" health care reform. Some of the anger is genuine, yet misplaced (these are the people who will never accept Barack Obama as President of the United States). Other people get their anger from spurious sources, egged on and paid for by the corporations who would prefer the system to remain as it is (it's part of the reason why their efforts have been dubbed Astroturf™ rather than grassroots). What has brought many people to an apoplectic frenzy recently are the comments made by former Alaskan governor (and media attention whore) Sarah Palin.
In an interview on Saturday, 08 August 2009 she stated that she did not want her parents or her youngest child (who has Down's Syndrome) to go before a "Death Panel" if the proposed government-funded health care plan deemed them too expensive to care for. This is disgustingly cynical for two reasons. First, this convolutedly misinterprets a provision in the bill that would reimburse people for end-of-life counseling (living wills, hospice care for terminally ill people, et cetera); it's something that some private insurance already provides its customers. Secondly, her assertion projects what many private insurers already do; there are countless examples of insurance companies cutting their customers loose because they become too sick or not insuring them because they have any preexisting condition.
It was bad enough when pundits, commentators, and telegenic private citizens said this on camera, allowing everyone within earshot to hear this disingenuous drivel. However, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) made it infinitely worse by confirming Palin's nakedly false assertion of the End-of-Life Counseling provision in the pending health care legislation. Making that statement at an Iowa town hall gathering about health care gave Grassley the cover to effectively weaken the bill.
Senator Grassley is running for reelection in November 2010. I hope he has to drink long and deep from the well between now and then (especially if his efforts are made fruitless).
In an interview on Saturday, 08 August 2009 she stated that she did not want her parents or her youngest child (who has Down's Syndrome) to go before a "Death Panel" if the proposed government-funded health care plan deemed them too expensive to care for. This is disgustingly cynical for two reasons. First, this convolutedly misinterprets a provision in the bill that would reimburse people for end-of-life counseling (living wills, hospice care for terminally ill people, et cetera); it's something that some private insurance already provides its customers. Secondly, her assertion projects what many private insurers already do; there are countless examples of insurance companies cutting their customers loose because they become too sick or not insuring them because they have any preexisting condition.
It was bad enough when pundits, commentators, and telegenic private citizens said this on camera, allowing everyone within earshot to hear this disingenuous drivel. However, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) made it infinitely worse by confirming Palin's nakedly false assertion of the End-of-Life Counseling provision in the pending health care legislation. Making that statement at an Iowa town hall gathering about health care gave Grassley the cover to effectively weaken the bill.
Senator Grassley is running for reelection in November 2010. I hope he has to drink long and deep from the well between now and then (especially if his efforts are made fruitless).
Comments