Well thank goodness these "P-word" journalists are here to straighten this miss out!

Edit:

I have a followup question and what I think is the quickest way to fix the increasing costs of Health Care in this country. Has anyone seen the commericals for 1-800-BAD-DRUG? I'm pretty sure they're a large part of the problem...

They (journalists) should focus more on the particulars of the bill.

But exactly who is it, (and at whose behest), that does one story after another on the dissenters?  Who focuses on  who the dissenters are,  speculation about who is "backing and organizing them" and kvetching about the fact that they go to town hall meetings and  don't sit down and shut up? Who is it that attacks them as the Brooks Brothers Brigade, people who are "too well dressed" to be legitimate, and basically belittling them instead of arguing that their concerns are misguided or mistaken.

The Obama administration, in spite of claiming that they want to educate people about this bill , don't seem too eager to talk about it either; instead they spend their time setting up websites to track, and Pelosi and Reid spend their time attacking opponents.

The only ones really talking about the bill itself, are its opponents!

Below find an article that appeared in the New York Post on 24 July 2009. It was written by ex New York Lt. Governor and Ph.D Betsy McCaughey, an expert on healthcare. It is one of the best pieces that I have read on the subject. It will, it did me, chill you to the bone.

I urge all that read this article to pickup your telephone, write a letter or e-mail your representatives and tell them you do not want Obamacare. Here is the article:

DEADLY DOCTORS
O ADVISORS WANT TO RATION CARE
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY

July 24, 2009 --
THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.

Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.

Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change," he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).

Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).

The bills being rushed through Congress will be paid for largely by a $500 billion-plus cut in Medicare over 10 years. Knowing how unpopular the cuts will be, the president's budget director, Peter Orszag, urged Congress this week to delegate its own authority over Medicare to a new, presidentially-appointed bureaucracy that wouldn't be accountable to the public.

Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors' lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too "enamored with technology" and is determined to reduce access to it.

Dr. David Blumenthal, another key Obama adviser, agrees. He recommends slowing medical innovation to control health spending.

Blumenthal has long advocated government health-spending controls, though he concedes they're "associated with longer waits" and "reduced availability of new and expensive treatments and devices" (New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 2001). But he calls it "debatable" whether the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. (Ask a cancer patient, and you'll get a different answer. Delay lowers your chances of survival.)

Obama appointed Blumenthal as national coordinator of health-information technology, a job that involves making sure doctors obey electronically delivered guidelines about what care the government deems appropriate and cost effective.

In the April 9 New England Journal of Medicine, Blumenthal predicted that many doctors would resist "embedded clinical decision support" -- a euphemism for computers telling doctors what to do.

Americans need to know what the president's health advisers have in mind for them. Emanuel sees even basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much: "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy . . . physicians' offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms" (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

No one has leveled with the public about these dangerous views. Nor have most people heard about the arm-twisting, Chicago-style tactics being used to force support. In a Nov. 16, 2008, Health Care Watch column, Emanuel explained how business should be done: "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

Do we want a "reform" that empowers people like this to decide for us?

Betsy McCaughey is founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor. For more information on the status health care legislation, visit www.defendyourhealth....

thrown a complete monkey wrench into the narrative of the ObamaCare sales effort by bringing up an issue that has caught the attention of many people.  Hard to find anything more emotionally impacting than end of life and denial of service.  That carries a lot more weight than bending the cost curve over time.

A great deal of effort is now being expended by the ObamaCare sales force in the media insisting that the issue should not even be raised, and attempting to dismiss it.  Nothing stokes the fire faster than someone attempting to dismiss your concerns.

One can agree or disagree with what Palin said.  But as your article describes, she has changed the whole tenor of the debate and thrown the sales staff off stride.  Which is exactly what was needed.  I know enough about ObamaCare that I don't want a polite discussion after which it is enacted into law.  I want a stop.  

Palin's contribution in derailing this is being underestimated.  It was a very skillful play on her part. 

Raise the bar = shut off debate.

If these lying scum basta**s really wanted debate, they'd be the ones at the townhall meetings demanding answers from the politicians.