NYT columnist Paul Krugman advocates for “Death Panels”

Surely, many of us remember this video of an interview with an “advice columnist” from the UK.

Her name is Virginia Ironside and she was appearing on a segment called, “Can abortion be a kindness?” on a BBC program. Here are some of her comments:

Miss Ironside said: ‘If a baby’s going to be born severely disabled or totally unwanted, surely an abortion is the act of a loving mother.’
She added: ‘If I were the mother of a suffering child – I mean a deeply suffering child – I would be the first to want to put a pillow over its face… If it was a child I really loved, who was in agony, I think any good mother would.’

Pretty appalling and completely un-American, right? I mean, we’d never see any type of advocation for needless death in America, right? We as ALL Americans certainly object to promoting the notion that there is a justifiable reason for the death of a living person. After all, we have the premier healthcare abilities in the world and we would obviously encourage the use of those abilities to save lives, right?

Well, not so fast… In the year 2010 in America on national television we have a similar attitude about the value of life, or should I say the absolute lack of value for life. During a Roundtable discussion on ABC’s “This Week”, Paul Krugman(a New York Times columnist) discusses his belief that there will be a justifiable need to utilize the “Death Panels” in order to balance the budget. WAIT! WHAT? Let’s kill people to balance the budget? Here are his comments:

[gigya src=”http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hdSUSUaGnz” width=”518″ height=”419″ quality=”high” wmode=”transparent” allowFullScreen=”true” ]

PAUL KRUGMAN: If they were going to do reality therapy, they should have said, OK, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for. And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, it should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.

If it’s not even — if the commission isn’t even brave enough to take on the death panels people, then it’s doing no good at all. It’s not educating the public. It’s not telling people about the kinds of choices that need to be made.

Ah, but he wasn’t quite done yet. He must need to be more clear, right?…

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST: But what is going to happen? I mean, are you clear on where a compromise is going to be? It’s got to be discussed before the end of the year, no?

KRUGMAN: No. Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It’s going to be that we’re actually going to take Medicare under control, and we’re going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it’s not going to happen now.

Obviously, this is pretty harsh stuff here. Maybe he would like to further clarify what he meant because the $#!+ may just hit the fan…

So, what I said is that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on “death panels and sales taxes”. What I meant is that

(a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care

You can read more here but it doesn’t get much better. Now that kind of sounds familiar. Oh yeah, it was said something like this:

“We’re going to have to, if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

Except that was in September 2007 by a former Labor Secretary under Clinton, Robert Reich who also serves as an economics adviser for current President Obama.

Again, read more about it here. The article is quite enlightening and actually has a humorous slap at Alan Grayson in it. Robert Reich also felt the need to continue on with his opinion of what healthcare reform should look like in the future…

“Also I’m going to use the bargaining leverage of the federal government in terms of Medicare, Medicaid—we already have a lot of bargaining leverage—to force drug companies and insurance companies and medical suppliers to reduce their costs. What that means, less innovation and that means less new products and less new drugs on the market which means you are probably not going to live much longer than your parents. Thank you.”

There can’t be any mistaking what is intended by the liberals when it comes to the application of Obamacare. We see them say it in their own words. As if they weren’t clear enough the first time, we see them reiterate their statements. And then when they decide they need to alleviate any misunderstandings after the recoil, they still talk the same talk.

So, I ask you… Is this the healthcare change that we voted for? Is this the healthcare that we need for our elders? Is this how we should honor our mom’s and dad’s lives and the love they gave us through the years? I don’t think so… Do you still feel that way?

This entry was posted in Current Issues, Ethics, Government, Healthcare, President Obama and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s