What's a "Death Panel"? (Freep Wikipedia's Anti-Palin rant)

Pinging my list for help. Sorry for the slight OT use of the list, but this is a good cause and will only take a few minutes.

Your Death Panel article link was wrong. Here is the correct one.

Wikipedia is an outstanding resource on rock and mathematics.

The anal libtards get all freaky on conservatives though...

Your first mistake is trying to reason with leftards.

Can’t be done.

This “Dr. Fleischman” creepwad seems actually to be denying that “death panel” is in common usage.

What an asshat.

A quick Google returns 522 million hits, more than one for every man, woman, and child in America. How many does he want?

These people are closed-minded bigots; their hatred for all things good limits what they are able to perceive.

you HAVE heard of all the tales of conservatives getting all freaky on anal libtards haint cha...hmmmm...noooo..hmmm...there musta ben no survivors...

What's a "Death Panel"? (Freep Wikipedia's Anti-Palin rant) http://t.co/dFLrBtgNWt #tcot #ccot— First inThe Americas (@Solutrean) November 15, 2013

Death Panel.....here's some pointers from the UK National Health Service on how it works....

I see not just amputations on the wrong limb....but on the wrong patient.

and don't expect quick response for a broken arm:

And so you have an acute appendix....?

Mark Wattson, 35, from Swindon may have been the victim of botched surgery after he had to have his appendix removed twice

To his shock, surgeons from the same team told him that not only was his appendix still inside him, but it had ruptured - a potentially fatal complication.

In a second operation it was finally removed, leaving Mr Wattson fearing another organ might have been taken out during the first procedure.

The blunder has left Mr Wattson jobless, as bosses at the shop where he worked did not believe his story and sacked him.

Mr Wattson told of the moment he realised there had been a serious mistake.

'I was lying on a stretcher in terrible pain and a doctor came up to me and said that my appendix had burst,' he said.

'I couldn't believe what I was hearing. I told these people I had my appendix out just four weeks earlier but there it was on the scanner screen for all to see.

'I thought, "What the hell did they slice me open for in the first place?"

'I feel that if the surgery had been done correctly in the first place I wouldn't be in the mess I am today. I'm disgusted by the whole experience.'

Mr Wattson first went under the knife on July 7 after experiencing severe abdominal pain for several weeks. He was discharged but exactly a month later he had to dial 999 after collapsing in agony. Mr Wattson

Mr Wattson was readmitted to the Great Western Hospital in Swindon after his appendix ruptured.

Nurse will see you now

130,000 elderly patients killed every year by ‘death pathway’, claims leading UK doctor

by Thaddeus Baklinski Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:02 EST Tags: euthanasia, patrick pullicino, uk

LONDON, June 21, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An eminent British doctor told a meeting of the Royal Society of Medicine in London that every year 130,000 elderly patients that die while under the care of the National Health Service (NHS) have been effectively euthanized by being put on the controversial Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), a protocol for care of the terminally ill that he described as a “death pathway.”

Sit back and enjoy your Obamacare.

That nurse is making me long for the comfort of a 12 gauge, in a “That outfit is creeping me the hell out” sort of way.

....well in the UK you would have to make do with a sharp stick, since guns, shotguns, knives and other dangerous tools are banned.

But it's OK since you would be in great company as the wards are still those designed by Florence Nightingale.

(problem is that the "open plan" layout promotes cross infection ....like those nasty flesh eating bacterias)

Try renting or buying the book Damaged Care. It is the true story of the HMO’s death panels.

What is the retention rate, or better yet the lifespan of doctors in the UK???

I have a feeling that if this begins to manifest itself here in the good ole USofA, that there may be a shortage of doctors in the near future...

Then what are they gonna do???

I also see the people in those kush, non-physician medical insurance review boards becoming extinct as well...

Anyway you look at this, there is no real winning senario here for communism...

We may vbery well have to suffer a little more, but the backlash (I feel) is primed and ready to be unleashed, and these goobers are nowhere near prepared for the attention that is about to focus on them...

Job security??? Hehehe, the more people end up with botched procedures, and arms looking like this...

The need to “spread the wealth/pain” will reach new hieghts...

This is just a gut-feeling I have...We can stave off this un-necessary, and potential response, if we can do everything we can to make this Tax go away...It may take 2-3 years, but the ends justify the means...

It was never about Healthcare in the first place, so why are we struggling to debate and converse about something that this whole thing is NOT about???

We gave the elected caste of knuckleheads their chance to defund it, get rid of it, and they failed miserably...

The people in this country will have the last laugh...

Elections have consequenses, and the conservative movement in this country has been losing the battles since 2006...With only a minor saving grace in 2010...We got lucky there...

“What are YOU prepared to do about it, and what are YOU willing to sacrifice to succeed?”

Those stodgy old white guys 230+ years ago were not fiddle farting around...they may have had their personal and professional dissagreements on how the thing should go, but after a few pints at the local pub, after a long day of debate, they parted on amiable terms, went home, and in those evenings sat with their families and made musket balls...They knew what they were doing would bring a fight, and for all intents and purposes:

“Prudence and Preparedness, will triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia everytime!” ~ Stevie-D (1992)

Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Global warming

http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia:_Global_warming

wiki graffiti has a "long diatribe against Gov. Palin"? Imagine that.

I do use wiki sometimes but on political issues and matters related in any way to ideology it should just convert to a place to debate and stop the ruse of being an encyclopedia. We get enough of that kind of crap from the employees of the MSM.

Here is the page to comment on, please. Appreciate the help from several of you so far! Keep it up!

Talk: Death Panel

Wow.

That article has got to be the most blatantly politically biased article I have ever seen on Wikipedia. Over and over again, it goes out of its way to attack Conservatives (including a weird, tangential reference to Texas “Death Panels” supposedly signed into law by Bush).

Among their credible sources is uber-liberal Media Matters, and quite Liberal Politifact.

The whole thing reads like a White House Press Release. How could ANYONE at Wikipedia NOT see how unacceptably biased that whole page is?

Ping to Sarah's Awesome List!
By Popular Request, what is history but a lie agreed upon?
Ubama NEVER promised you could keep your plan.

We have always been at War with Eurasia too.

Former Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey leads 'death panel' charge writing up talking points August 12, 2009

Concerning the "Death Panels"

August 12, 2009 at 8:55pm

Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

The President made light of these concerns. He said:

“Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” [1]

The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” [2] With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones.... If it’s all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” [6]

As Lane also points out:

Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.

Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. [7]

Even columnist Eugene Robinson, a self-described “true believer” who “will almost certainly support” “whatever reform package finally emerges”, agrees that “If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.” [8]

So are these usually friendly pundits wrong? Is this all just a “rumor” to be “disposed of”, as President Obama says? Not according to Democratic New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Chairman of the New York State Senate Aging Committee, who writes:

Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives.... It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen ... should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign. [9]

Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens....An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]

President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.

- Sarah Palin

SEE REFERENCES AT LINK

Truthfully the only thing she’s wrong on is that if these things get going, they’re not going to be the type of panels you can show up and argue your case before. The rules are going to be written by committee, implemented by committee and presented to you as a fait accompli. What, you thought it’d be any easier to get out-of-the-box treatment under Obamacare, let alone single-payer, than it is now?