UPDATED: The GOP’s New Talking Point: They Shoot Old People, Don’t They
Talk about scare tactics and preying on the elderly.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX): We’ve been battling this socialist health care, the nationalization of health care, that is going to absolutely kill senior citizens. They’ll put them on lists and force them to die early because they won’t get the treatment as early as they need. […] I would rather stop this socialization of health care because once the government pays for your health care, they have every right to tell you what you eat, what you drink, how you exercise, where you live. […] But if we’re going to pay 700 million dollars like we voted last Friday to put condoms on wild horses, and I know it just says an un-permanent enhanced contraception whatever the heck that is. I guess it follows that they’re eventually get around to doing it to us.
And then there’s Virginia Foxx (R-NC) who claims that the Republican Plan (Umm… what plan?), unlike the Dem plan, “is pro-life because it will not put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government.”
How is it possible to have a serious debate with people who talk like this? But, then again, I’m not their intended audience since I’ve traveled abroad, have family that live in Italy, Canada, Great Britian, and Australia, and actually have experienced socialized medicine. I know they’re lying.
UPDATE: TPM debunks the lie easily enough.
The provision at issue would require Medicare, for the first time, to cover advanced care consultations for seniors once every five years, or more frequently if the patient has a life threatening disease. These consultations include “an explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.”
Seniors are in no way required to take advantage of this benefit. (Politico renders this information as: “it does not mandate individuals to take advantage of the benefit, proponents say.”) Indeed, the chief proponent of the notion that the consultations are required, reform opponent Betsy McCaughey, is reduced to arguing that, though they’re not technically mandated, seniors might feel pressured by doctors or nurses who suggest having such sessions.
Nor is there any reasonable basis for believing that these consultations, if chosen, would do anything to promote euthanasia — which is illegal in 48 states anyway. Discussions between sick or elderly people and their doctors about end-of-life treatment have long been an accepted part of modern patient care. As Politico itself notes, in 2003, a Bush administration agency “issued a 20-page report outlining a five-part process for physicians to discuss end-of-life care with their patients.” And since 1990, Congress has required health-care agencies to inform patients about state laws regarding advance directives such as a living will.
Everybody got that? You can stop hiding Grandma now.
Tags: Republican Crazy, Republican Liars
Charlie Copeland has bought into this talking point. So much for Charlie ever running as a mainstream candidate.
David Anderson too, but you’d expect that from him.
Actually this is the Anderson link I meant to post.
what do you think the purpose of the government employed end of life councilors is?
They aren’t employing end of life councilors. And we already know you, anoni, to be a liar on this business so haul your butt back to DelawarePolitics where they’ll appreciate you.
what do you think the purpose of the government employed end of life councilors is?
To make sure you are informed about your end-of-life options. If you feel that strongly about it, why not have a living will?
Note: Your living will can say either “Do Not Resuscitate” or it can say “Please Do Resuscitate No Matter What!!” It’s your choice, but it is better for everyone including yourself if you make the choice.
In the absence of a living will, the default policy is full resuscitation, as it should be. But if you have ever worked with the dying, it is horrifying and ugly when frail 90-year olds with multiple organ failure or literally drowning in their own blood, have trachs cut and inserted while grown men break most of their ribs. That is not a humane way to die.
Oh, and by the way, please explain how the people who counsel you on this are “government employed.” This counselling actually is being done now by most private physicians who work with the dying. All nurses are trained on end-of-life issues as part of their curriculum.
Is it even the government’s business? Does the government have any legitimate role in such counseling? After all, there is nothing more fundamental to defining one’s concept of existence than end of life decisions, and the government inserting itself into the process with mandatory end-of-life counseling is AT LEAST as intrusive as you claim government asserting itself into the abortion decision is.
Rachel Maddow had a great piece on this issue last night. See:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32195170
Sorry, I don’t know how to do linkies. Perhaps one of you can help?
R
Oh! It did it automatically. Clever!
cassy, have someone read the bill to you starting at page 424.
I’ve actually read the bill starting before page 424 — which is key and which will go way over your head — and this bill does not provide for government employed end of life councilors.
I’d recommend that you read the bill, but I guess you’d have to be a whole lot less lazy to do that.
are you still mad about failing accounting… blame Digby, he was a lousy study partner.
The end-of-life counselling, and requirements for language access, are the current best practices in most hospitals, and are already being done. If I am paying for medical care (as as taxpayer) I want these practices to be required. They are good policies on humanitarian grounds.
Choice is still retained. You can choose “No DNR” or you can refuse your translator and have your doctor explain your diagnosis via a game of “Charades.”
anoni, give us section numbers, and a link to the bill you are working with. Otherwise your page numbers make no sense.
The most recent version I could find is dated July 15 4:24 pm (1040 pp).
p. 424 describes “language access” (requirement to provide translators to those who need it.
The end-of-life counselling, and requirements for language access, are the current best practices in most hospitals, and are already being done. If I am paying for medical care (as as taxpayer) I want these practices to be required. They are good policies on humanitarian grounds.
So if the plan pays for abortion, we can stick in all sorts of counseling requirements for abortion! Great news for us on the pro-life side. After all, since I as a taxpayer am paying for medical care, I want to see those good humanitarian policies requiring information on fetal development and fetal pain — as well as showing an ultrasound and counseling of other options — required on humanitarian grounds.
I already did some debunking of anoni’s stupidity here and here. There’s way more debunking to do, but this was a reasonable sample of the idiot talking points and since none of them turned out to be found in the bill, I presume anoni is the usual repub liar here. One who can’t decide if you need either accounting skills or reading skills to actually check on what he says.
Apparently he thinks that if he repeats this crap often enough here it will suddenly be true. He mistakes us for the wingnuts he is accustomed to talking to.
Come to think of it, I couldn’t find in the bill where it says abortion is paid for. I’m not saying it’s not there, I just couldn’t find it.
The great thing about a pdf file is that it is searchable. I just searched for “abortion” and the word does not appear in the bill.
section 1233
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
silly cassy thinks saying liar = debunking
anoni – 1233 is the section requiring counselling for advance care planning (i.e., living wills). There is nothing radical about it; it simply codifies what hospitals are already doing.
anoni,
Your ass has just been handed to you. Abortion does not appear. Also, your “World of Warcraft” wife is a dude.
Well at least you are off the stupid page numbers.
And this section still does not say that the government is employing end of life councilors.
So you are still a liar on this thing.
Chubby,
it’s a little early to be hitting the bottle, “Abortion” doesn’t appear in any of my comments.
what is “Wold of Warcraft”?
I think they would probably use a euphemism rather than abortion, but I still couldn’t find it using keywords like “pregnant” or “pregnancy,” etc.
Might be in an amendment that hasn’t been consolidated into the bill.
Maybe some diligent wingnut can redeem themselves by finding it.
But for the government to REQUIRE the counseling is radical. What happens if I try to refuse the counseling?
Anoni is the euthanasia wingnut, RWR is the abortion wingnut. They are sharing the load.
Then RWR, perhaps you could cite the exact text of the bill that REQUIRES end of life counseling.
What happens if I try to refuse the counseling?
I’m pretty sure you would just be marked as “No DNR.” But the attempt to provide counseling would have been made as per requirements.
Not sure if the bill states it that way, but that is how hospitals handle it now.
I don’t think they’d prop open your eyelids “Clockwork Orange” style and make you watch something.
And I’m not arguing the abortion thing one way or another — except by analogy.
If the “we’re paying for it” argument makes it legitimate to require this counseling, then by the same token it ought to legitimate all sorts of pre-abortion counseling if abortion is covered by ObamaCare.
If you object to the mandatory pre-abortion counseling, how can you then support the mandatory end-of-life counseling?
It is there, Cass… Search for Advance Care; it’s in section 1233.
It is unremarkable language and is based on what hospitals and hospices are already doing. Nothing like what these loonies are claiming.
I won’t bother citing it — the entire premise of the discussion here is that the requirement exists. Are you now telling me that there is no requirement that the counseling be provided?
Good Lord, the conservative talking points on the healthcare bill are more stupid than normal. They have their own made-up bill and now they think the bill is require euthenasia or something. Yes, it’s much better for doctors to try to read the minds of people in the hospital rather than have someone explain things to them. Because that’s the status quo, and conservatives love them some status quo.
I think you are missing the point about “mandatory” counseling. It is mandatory that it be offered, not mandatory that it be accepted.
and – Who objected to pre-abortion counseling? Planned Parenthood does it all the time, educating their patients on all their options including adoption, and how to obtain support as a single mother. I am all for pre-abortion counseling.
If the woman’s care requires an ultrasound, of course she should see it if she wants.
If there are multiple mainstream, scientifically vetted studies on fetal pain, put ’em in the packet.
But for the government to REQUIRE the counseling is radical. What happens if I try to refuse the counseling?
feh, I maybe lazy and dumb, but I sure know when one acts dumb…
When I go to get my WIC they offer counseling and stuff. I sort of have to put up with it if Ize take the checks. Which I does. It am so radical those people. They tell me to stop feedin my baby grape punch and cheetos. I laugh it off, he loves that stuff…wooooowheeeee he lives on that stuff when my formula runs out!
one time I refused the counseling! you no whad dem sumbitches did? mercy! they tried to help me some mo
radicals, I upped and left dat mug
after i got da chex
I think you are missing the point about “mandatory” counseling. It is mandatory that it be offered, not mandatory that it be accepted.
This is my point — I see the section on Advanced Care planning, but this looks like the definition of the parameters of what this consists of (and is unremarkable like you say) but I see nothing in this section that requires anyone to take advantage of it.
I won’t bother citing it — the entire premise of the discussion here is that the requirement exists. Are you now telling me that there is no requirement that the counseling be provided?
And you, RWR, have been here long enough to know better than this. You can back up your assertions with text from the bill or you are just repeating talking points. Again. Just because you and anoni have a “premise” is no indication that it exists and you already know that giving you the benefit of the doubt that you know what you are talking about is not what we are going to do.
If you have claims to make abut this bill — you will do us the favor of citing text from the bill that supports your claim.
Put up or shut up.
Oh and by the way UI, comment of the day:
The literally are relying on reworked texts of the bill to make their points. Case in point, here is one that they prefer only after it has been Twittered by some wingnut.
That’s the silly thing, anon. There is no “bill” yet. There’s multiple drafts of bills. I think we should take a look at them but be very, very skeptical of any summaries unless we know the source of the summary. Like the CRI, for one.
There are two bills voted out of committee. The Kennedy bill and H. R. 3200 are both real bills. The house bill is supported by the Speaker and she would love a vote on it. This bill is the Nightmare on Pennsylvania Ave. You can only support it by avoiding discussion of its contents.
Another conservative talking point bites the dust.
BTW, I think anyone who doesn’t have a living will is nuts.
The only people avoiding a discussion of the contents of HR 3200 are your guys, David, show feel the need to not only NOT read the bill, but make up a bunch of incredibly dishonest talking points about it. And the actually cite the bill as their (unread) proof. Guess that blows all of your Read The Bill crap all to hell, doesn’t it? Since the one you site is around and available,yet you are too lazy to read it.
Gee, cassie — you are insisting that we read the bill. Will you join with conservatives who demand that every member of the House and Senate read the entire bill before voting on it?
I am going to insist that conservatives pretending to argue this bill here demonstrate that they’ve read it. It is out there, ready to be argued. Just lying about it when it is there clear as day doesn’t help your case.
but cassy, UI says there is no bill to read. so what did you read? is UI a liar?
UI says there are multiple drafts of bills. Which is true. And that cut and paste job you did here trying to spread those untrue talking points specifically referenced HR3200 AND pages from it — right? You referenced HR3200 and a section from it above — right?
It isn’t unreasonable to ask you to read your own damn citations — but I forgot. Reading is NOT Fundamental for you.
Of course they’re not going to read the drafts of the bill. If they did they would have to actually discuss content and drop their talking points.
I am going to insist that conservatives pretending to argue this bill here demonstrate that they’ve read it. It is out there, ready to be argued. Just lying about it when it is there clear as day doesn’t help your case.
Reading and understanding are 2 different things. I can show you facts. Put them right in your face, spell them out for you like you’re a 2 year old, and you will STILL deny that they exist.
rubber/glue?
I’m just too damned old.
I remember under St. Ronnie, when the cry was “they’re killing old people” because the DRGs wouldn’t let them stay in the hospital.
I remember under Clinton, when the cry was “they’re killing old people” because the guv’mint would decide whether or not you got care.
Last I looked, the average life span in the U.S. was still increasing.
We old folks must be gettin’ harder and harder to kill….
LOL VC.
I’m sorry but Cassandra has pwnd all of you conservatives. If you’re going to talk about “the bill” you need to tell us which bill you’re referring to and tell us the actual part you’re referring to. I’m too lazy to read the fake bills the conservatives are spreading around.
Great update, pandora!
And shame on Charlie Copeland for fearmongering on this thing. Resorting to claiming that old people will lose their lives or have their care rationed is the worst sort of dishonesty. And exactly the kind of dishonesty on display throughout the GOP during the Schiavo incident that he thinks was ohso politicized.
Cassandra,
Fear-mongering is all they’ve got left since they are on the wrong side of the issue.
UI – The same can be said of the left on a whole host of issues. Health care as well. All we keep hearing is how the health care system is broken and must be fixed NOW.
so it doesn’t need to be fixed now?
grow a brain, dude. there is a fundamental difference in stating the pitfalls of the status quo, which there is ample evidence, and the hypothetical fear-mongering of “what if”.
Man oh man. Does the term “You’ve got nothing.” mean anyhting to you Mike? If not, it should. All you come here with is weak ass, “Dems do it too” bullshit.
Maybe they really do believe that illegal alien Obama is going to kill all our parents. After all, these are the same people who believe Obama is coming to take our kids to reeducation camps.
The crazy hasn’t even begun to burn itself out. It is nonstop lies 24×7.
These wingnuts are dependent on the Lewin Group. They are the lobbyists for the biggest robber barons United Health Care. This group was hired to do a study on the cost of single payer health care, and the results were so devastating to the for profit greedy corporate whores and witch doctors, they refused to put into the public domain. However, some who did the study did release the report which is why the Senate Budget office won’t tell the people how MUCH savings there would be, how more jobs would remain or be created as a result of small business owners not paying their employees health care costs. Dr. Floyd McDowell has a copy of the report which proves not only would no more money be required from anyone, there is already 2.5 trillion in the system, but there is enough money already in the system to cover medical, dental, vision and everything damn health care issue. There are at last count 87 US legislators signed onto HR 676, a mirror of that bill is in our State legislature right now. John Sweeney, NJ asked Dr. McDowell to send him information on single payer which is why the NJ finally put his articles in the paper. They are now asking for supporters to write letters to the editor in support.
In Delaware there is already a $200 million shortfall for 2011 budget. If we dont do something now to prevent another budget crunch without the stimulus money, and without state workers taking another hit…we better ask the Senate Finance Committee to run the numbers for single payer in Delaware. What are we afraid of? The numbers will tell the truth! Medicaid in Delaware is going through the roof as more and more people lose their jobs. DHSS is already covering 40% of a $2 billion dollar medicaid program. Wake up! Smell the coffee…ask for the real numbers and lets have a Public Option in Delaware. If we dont do it, California will be the first. Their legislature put single payer up twice only to be voted down by the terminator, who has cut disabled, elderly, and essential programs. Jerry Brown is running for Governor in California and will support single payer. Maine legislature sent it up twice and was vetoed by that Repuke governor. There are many States now putting up their own public options as they watch the uninformed demorats and the greedy for profit corporate america whores line up with their lies and deceptions about health care in general. It is not sustainable everyone agrees with that!
Mike: the health care system is broke where are your facts to prove its fine? As the babyboomers age out and go on medicare the system we have will break the bank.
The lies are definitely being coordinated centrally.
Within 48 hours, the same hysterical bullshit about euthanasia has been repeated first by Charlie Copeland, David Anderson, and two Republican Congressmen.
Man oh man. Does the term “You’ve got nothing.” mean anyhting to you Mike?
Yes Jason, I’m quite familiar with it, since it’s the default position by which you make your arguments.
Anon – I never said the system was fine. Also, you want CALIFORNIA to be the 1st to go single-payer?! You’re kidding right? It’s a liberal utopia that’s drowning in debt, and you think it’s wise for them to institute another MASSIVE government program?
What California are you talking about Mike? The California of today is a tax cutter’s paradise. The “Club for Growth” utopia is being built there by Republicans as we speak. If the voters return Republicans to the state house and the Governor’s mansion it will be a total vindication of your looney tunes economic theories.
The California that is BILLIONS in debt, is sending out IOU’s because it’s insolvent and has no money. The California that has consistently raised taxes on the rich only to see tax revenues drop. Yes, the real California instead of the “tax cutter” paradise that exists only in your alternate reality.
Also, it’s funny you tell me i’ve “got nothing” when you close comments on a thread because you don’t like getting your ass handed to you by an intellectual superior.
mike w. California is drowning in debt BECAUSE the terminator failed to enact single payer which would have saved that state billions! Get some facts before inserting big foot into big mouth. I am not blaming the reBiblicans for this one. Huff Post has article up right now putting the blame on the lame BLUE DOGS! They are congratulating themselves for stalling the bill, “because the american people WANT us to SLOW down! WTF? 60 years isnt slow enough for these corporate whores?
If there is no public option NO ONE should support this watered down corporate giveaway. They will not permit us to purchase drugs from Canada just like Bush? No health care reform, just in time for the big ole SWINE flu fiasco this fall? Hope someone can find out where Carper and Castle will be holding their “town meetings”, I gotta couple of pies at the ready.
anon2,
Mike W thinks George Bush was a great President. Just sayin’
looks like CNN has gone over to the dark side.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/health_care_reform_obama.fortune/index.htm
5 freedoms you’d lose in health care reform
If you read the fine print in the Congressional plans, you’ll find that a lot of cherished aspects of the current system would disappear.