« Was the budget deal an overreaction to the election? | Main | Facebook reading option »

April 13, 2011

Comments

It's ironic that Palin's star is fading just as the President proposes a 15-member appointive panel to limit coverage, i.e., a death panel. Paul Krugman's feeble defense is, "Remember: you can always buy whatever health care you want; the question is what taxpayers should pay for."

In response, Ann Althouse paraphrases Anatole France: "The law, in its majestic equality, permits rich and poor alike to pay for surgeries, medicine, and hospital stays."

Let me be clear. I have no objection to having a panel choose limitations on coverage. That's an aspect of any insuance. I have only a mild objection to the overly dramatic title, "death panel." Exaggeration and drama are normal in political discourse. My main complaint is with those who stubbornly repeated the mantra that there would no death panels and implied that anyone who disagreed must be lying or demented.

The most precious moment of the President's speech yesterday was on this very point:

Now, we believe the reforms we've proposed to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid will enable us to keep these commitments to our citizens while saving us $500 billion by 2023, and an additional $1 trillion in the decade after that. But if we're wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, then this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare.
By further improving Medicare! That's right, additional rationing of care wouldn't be a limitation we're forced by scarce resources to accept, it'd be new and improved Medicare.

In 1984, the Ministry of Truth promoted three slogans: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength. In the Obama rewrite, there's a fourth slogan: Diminished is Improved.

Gail Collins broke her rule, she mentioned Mitt Romney without mentioning the dog on top of the car.

The comments to this entry are closed.