Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Barack Obama's health plan "downright evil" Friday in her first online comments since leaving office, saying in a Facebook posting that he would create a "death panel" that would deny care to the neediest Am
Apprently(despite her knowledge of foreign affairs cuz she lives next door to Russia
So the question the right should be asing is, would you rather be judged by a "death panel" that is trying to win votes, or one that is trying to make money? It is far more benifitial in the way of votes for the government to approve care then it is benifitial in the way of making money for insurance corperatios to approve care.
Of course Ms. Palin is just in it for the attention. If she wanted to release a proper press story she would have done so to a legitimate outlet and not Facebook. She reminds me of those people who have status messages screaming for attention. She is best ignored.
Generic.
Those sulfa drugs are twenty-five, thirty bucks. Way too much to spend on a malcontent reactionary like her.
Of course Ms. Palin is just in it for the attention. If she wanted to release a proper press story she would have done so to a legitimate outlet and not Facebook. She reminds me of those people who have status messages screaming for attention. She is best ignored.
Actual she did release an opinion in "a proper press story". She took a lot of flak for that too. I think it was the Washington Post. I think it concerned energy. The left didn't think she should be allowed to speak from a platform they considered theirs. That's the gist I got from the comments anyway.
I can explain where she's coming from with this one, if you like. Might as well have some actual info to go with the vitriol.
Actually, you're probably right in thinking it's most likely at least a little bit paranoid. You're wrong if you're thinking it comes out of nowhere.
Here's Republican rep Michelle Bachman saying pretty much the same thing.
The stuff she's quoting concerning the president's advisors is coming from an Op-ed in, I think it might have been, the Wall Street Journal. (Something like WSJ anyway. It was reputable. I remember that much.)
I read the critique of it from the left. The guy made a strong argument for the idea the thoughts of the advisor were taken out of context. According to him the advisor's specialty is medical ethics, and he was talking more about the ethical problems with different solutions. The critic claims the quotes are incomplete.
The controversy comes from a passage in the Health care bill. Don't try this link unless you have a strong computer, but I believe it's on page 425 of this PDF of the bill.
I couldn't get the link to run myself, but Rachel Maddow says the passage only concerns living wills, and it was a Republican who added it. I've read little bits about it elsewhere though, and it would seem to concern more than that. The language seems a little ambiguous, and it could possibly be warped by either side to mean what they want it to. On the other hand, if that's true, and say the party in power did want to abuse it there's the same problem of tricky language which could mean whatever the abuser wanted it to.
Moreover, she shouldn't be allowed to speak for a few reasons.
1. She mangles the English language more than GWB ever did (which is no mean feat)
2. Everything she says is an affront to people with a level of education higher than primary school.
3. She never knows what the fuck she is talking about. All of her speeches are nothing more than a mish-mash of hastily memorized platitudes and catch phrases with no meaning whatsoever.
First off, the Washington Post isn't a left wing rag.
I didn't say it was. I said there were many comments following the article (I believe it was in Washington post, but maybe not) which objected to right wing opinion being there. If you want to pressure me for an opinion though, I do believe the more repeated tendency in WaPo is to lean liberal, and Pro-Obama (so wouldn't that be left).
Speaking of mangling the English language though, another critique that turned up in multiple comments to Sarah's Op-ed on energy, was the allegation it was too well written to believe Sarah wrote it. They called foul, and claimed it was the work of a ghost writer. I didn't read the Facebook one. Are you saying it was badly written?
If McCain had won the election I wouls be very concerned about his heath. The thought of this wacko running the US would scare the hell out of anybody, eccet Bin Ladin, Chavev, Kim Il Sung, Putin and Raul Castro.
Even her slutty flight attendant look isn't worth that.
It good she reigned as Governer before she fouls up Alaske.