Sarah Palin Stars In Night Of The Living Death Panels Sequel: The Re-Dumbification

Now that Sarah Palin has been unceremoniously jettisoned from her Fox News post, she has deemed it necessary to whip up as much controversy as possible in order to keep from becoming nothing more than a creepy memory and the reason for John McCain’s eternal damnation to Hell. That’s why she ditched her unsuccessful Internet video subscription service hoping more people would watch if they didn’t have to pay.

Sarah Palin Death Panels

To that end, Palin has posted a screed on her Facebook page declaring in all caps that “DEATH PANELS STILL NOT DEAD.” As the title suggests, Palin continues to suffer from an acute ignorance of law, facts, and common sense. Her blitheringly dumb resurrection of the Death Panel nonsense begins with the hilariously oblivious assertion that it’s the politicians who don’t get it.

“Their ‘Death Panels’ still won’t die. Last night Obamacare masterminds decided they’ll pay healthcare providers for vulnerable patients’ ‘end-of-life’ plans. Remember that’s the strange, intrusive, unaffordable, and unnecessary scheme that was actually stripped from Obamacare five years ago, once we ‘found out what’s in it.’ So now that part of this socialistic healthcare takeover is back.”

Palin then launches into a self-defense of her faulty grasp of what “end-of-life” plans (aka Advanced Directives) are. And she predictably slams the media for correctly noting that she has been “universally discredited” on this subject. She rants about the non-existent government rationing of healthcare and criticizes the imaginary “faceless bureaucrats” who she says “will measure a person’s worth.” She preaches about the “sanctity of life” in her trademark politi-vangelical style bemoaning that “a bloated bureaucracy and weak-kneed politicians sent millions of Americans into financial distress, unseen in history, with this leftist scheme called Obamacare.” Of course the documented truth is that, since the Affordable Care Act was implemented, more Americans are covered by insurance than ever before, and fewer are facing financial difficulties and bankruptcies due to medical bills.

What launched Palin into this confused orbit was news that Medicare is considering reimbursing doctors for consulting with patients about Advanced Directives. And while Palin calls it an “unnecessary scheme,” it is something virtually every medical professional and patient advocate recommends. The Medicare proposal does not require consultations, nor steers patients toward any specific preference of care. So in effect, what Palin is objecting to is giving people more control over their medical care. And when she fails to make a coherent case against Advanced Directives, she diverts her argument to a completely different and equally benign part of the Affordable Care Act, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, which is a doctor-run advisory group tasked with identifying the best practices in health care to insure the best medical outcomes and to avoid unnecessary or exploitative procedures.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

None of this is new. Palin has been on a rampage against these useful services for as long as they have been public. And for all of that time she has intensely misunderstood them. A year ago Fox News railed against Medicare’s exploration of this policy, making the same irrational arguments that Palin makes. In short, conservative wingnuts believe that it is a God-given right to be denied healthcare by the faceless bureaucrats at greedy insurance companies. But it is submission to tyranny if the government steps in and makes such care available and affordable. Palin et al prefer the old ways when Americans went bankrupt (or died) because they didn’t have insurance or their coverage was insufficient. And it is obvious that this zombie lie about Death Panels is going to be a cornerstone of conservative politics for the foreseeable future, despite how thoroughly it has been debunked by knowledgeable sources.

Update 7/14/2015: Sean Hannity weighed in on this with his predictably inane commentary saying…

“Remember all the talk about Gov. Palin talking about Death Panels? For those of you who were wondering what ever happened to the Death Panels, you don’t have to wonder much longer. You probably won’t. They’re currently being implemented under “Dying for Dollars,” a strategy where the administration pays doctors to persuade elderly patients to end their lives by discontinuing treatment.”

What a boob. He apparently has forgotten that end-of-life counseling may also result in patients choosing to prolong their lives with every expensive medical procedure that exists. It’s the patient’s choice. That’s the whole point. Hannity and Palin are arguing to prohibit patients from being able to make their choices known. What’s really sad is that they have so many people who blindly believe what they spew.


12 thoughts on “Sarah Palin Stars In Night Of The Living Death Panels Sequel: The Re-Dumbification

  1. She attacks socialism as if it is a bad thing. The ACA or Obamacare could do a lot more but is a lot more than what we had. Unfortunately progress in this country is painstakingly slow. Whenever we progress it is usually in small increments but at least we are making some progress. The neo-Confederates, which makes up pretty much the entire Republican party, are holding us back from progressing as fast as I’d like. They can slow it down but they can’t stop it. Palin has become useless to the Republicans.

    • OMG – that first statement is amazing. It IS a bad thing if freedom and self respect are important to you. I personally like owning my own labor to do with as I please and provide the skills I’ve developed to whoever I want and to whoever pays me for them – and for as much as I can get. I really like owning MY own engineering skills and knowledge – society has no right to them unless I voluntarily allow it.

      • You’re confusing Democratic Socialism with Totalitarian Communism. If they were in any sense the same, the US would’ve been utterly destroyed by FDR’s New Deal and Scandinavia (and Germany, France, etc) would be unspeakable hell-holes that people would be desperate to escape from… but that’s not the case, is it? Words have meaning, Steve, please try to keep up.

        • I was wondering when someone would get after me on this – I should have defined what i meant better, but NO, I’m not confusing the two. Here is what I found at democratic socialists of – see the link below. The answers provided and the ideas put forth are confused and contradictory in my view – so I don’t think I’m confusing the 2. As with most progressive ideas – the theory never really deals with reality. I read what is on this website and it clearly steers clear of central planning – but as with most theories like this – it will NOT end up like the utopian world and/or system it is expected to be. So I get the rhetoric and theory – but have zero confidence it will turn out like anything you propose – sorry. An open free market with HONEST MONEY and PROPER JUSTICE will do much better at achieving your goals – assuming they are remotely related to being free. Your proposal will result in the totalitarian communism you say is not the goal.

          This site is so full of fantasy – it’s ridiculous. Don’t worry – I’m keeping up. What you need to think about is what system we have in place – it’s not free market capitalism – it’s some messed up centrally planned system run by bankers under the protection of our politicians and government – and that is both Democrats and Republicans.

        • Green Devil, let me add to my previous comment – it’s my opinion that NO current ideology – progressive, conservative or any of their strains is workable in their purest forms. Government should pull the best ideas from all of them, including ideas that may fall into the democratic socialist realm, and utilize them in governing. Some basic ideas should always be kept such as individual liberty, respect for private property, a strong and functioning justice system and the idea that the government derives it’s authority ONLY from the people it wishes to govern.

          • “Your proposal will result in the totalitarian communism you say is not the goal.”

            Ok, I made no proposal about what sort of utopian ideology we should pursue, I was calling you out on your outdated Cold War paradigm. The Red Menace is not a concern anymore. Russia and China are capitalists now. Some of the richest people in the world live (and pay taxes) in western Europe, where Democratic Socialism thrives. And the standards of living in those countries surpasses ours by a considerable margin, overall.

            I haven’t looked at the site you linked to yet, but it doesn’t really matter how unrealistic their worldview might be, since the “free market utopia” is equally unobtainable. Adam Smith and Karl Marx both wrote that any market economy that isn’t managed (intelligently) by a legal/governmental structure will be taken over by plutocrats in short order. History has confirmed that, over & over.

            Totalitarian Communism hasn’t gripped the EU or the Pacific Rim democracies, nor does it appear to be looming on the horizon. The most successful nations are democratic, multi-party systems, utilizing “capitalist” policies where applicable and “socialist” programs wherever the market fails to provide. I’m not ideological, I’m results-oriented. That’s what I’m looking at.

            Your follow-up comment is on point. No disagreement here.

            • Well said.

              It’s funny that Steve’s follow up comment is a complete repudiation of virtually everything he has posted here since he showed up. I agree with it 100%. After my saying that he may wish he could delete it. 😉

              It’s true that there are no perfect implementations of any political system (nor will there ever be). That’s why I am all for taking the best ideas from all of them. The word “socialism” has been demonized by the American right, but many of its tenets are already in place here and are among the most popular programs. They are not in conflict in any way with with any personal or economic freedom. I’ve always believed in capitalism to the extent that people should be free to prosper, but that doesn’t preclude having a society that values justice and cares about the less fortunate.

    • Excellent reference. Explained here by Monty Python’s John Cleese:

      • Cleeeeese!!!

        Those Monty Python guys were always ripping me off. The “Ministry of Silly Walks” was totally my idea! I also invented the internet. And Kentucky bourbon. You’re welcome.

      • Cleese indeed!

        Ode to Sean Hannity
        by John Cleese

        Aping urbanity
        Oozing with vanity
        Plump as a manatee
        Faking humanity
        Journalistic calamity
        Intellectual inanity
        Fox Noise insanity
        You’re a profanity

Comments are closed.