Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by ExpectantlyIronic, Aug 6, 2009.

  1. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    The economist Arthur Laffer recently said on CNN, "If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they're run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid, and health care done by the government." [source] You may recognize Arthur Laffer's name from the Laffer curve, which was named after him. It seems to me opponents of healthcare reform are deliberately lying to push their agenda, and that the lies are widespread, as evidenced further by the question recently posed to Obama concerning government agents asking old people how they'd like to die.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2009

  2. CaptainObvious

    CaptainObvious Son of Liberty V.I.P.

    I don't know. I don't think Laffer in that quote necessarily lied, that's his opinion, that a national health plan would be run as inefficiently as some other government run offices. Which, to be honest, some are run well, ie the military, and others are not, ie Social Security.

    I don't think opponents of Obama's health care plan are lying, in reading some of the plan there certain is A LOT of ambiguity, some of which can be interpreted to mean the government would have access to everyone's medical records, access to bank accounts, and rationed care. To interpret the provisions that way are lies, they're interpretations. Interpretations not pulled out of thin air, but serious questions regarding the ambiguity of the language.

    What bothers me more than people opposing the plan is Obama calling the people who oppose the plan destructive (Since when is dissent destructive? Are we to just accept everything he wants without question) as well as him claiming these people are astroturf movements (isn't that ironic coming from a former community organizer?)

    The thing is this is a 1000 page bill that completely overhauls an entire industry. I think it says a lot that he wanted it passed so quickly before it could be read.
  3. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    Medicare and Medicaid are government programs. He said they weren't. So he absolutely lied.
  4. CaptainObvious

    CaptainObvious Son of Liberty V.I.P.

    Ah, I missread it. I read it that Obama's program would be run as bad as other government programs.
  5. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    I've also heard that some are saying the bill calls for killing the sick in certain circumstances, which is how they're choosing to describe a provision that provides funding for living-wills. That's not people having a different interpretation of an ambiguous provision, but a deliberate mischaracterization made to manufacture fear. Now, I'm sure the bill has flaws, and there's plenty to debate about it, but I don't get the impression that some opponents of the bill have a strong case, if they need to lie and try and sell wild conspiracy theories.
  6. Mirage

    Mirage Administrator Staff Member V.I.P.

    Well, the "killing the sick" areas are definitely open to interpretation. With the "living document" belief that so many people subscribe to lately, people are simply reading into it a bit to see what it could eventually call for.

    There is provision in it for mandatory "end of life counseling" once every 5 years for everybody age 55 and older. Why mandatory? And why every 5 years? And what will this counseling consist of? From what I've heard it hasn't actually been planned out yet. So why mention it at all, let alone make it mandatory?

    I'm scratching my head on that one for sure.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2009
  7. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    Describing a provision that provides funding for living-wills as "killing the sick" is not an interpretation at all. It's a gross mischaracterization intentionally done to mislead.

    PolitiFact says that's a lie:

    "For our ruling on this one, there's really no gray area here. McCaughey incorrectly states that the bill would require Medicare patients to have these counseling sessions and she is suggesting that the government is somehow trying to interfere with a very personal decision. And her claim that the sessions would "tell [seniors] how to end their life sooner" is an outright distortion. Rather, the sessions are an option for elderly patients who want to learn more about living wills, health care proxies and other forms of end-of-life planning. McCaughey isn't just wrong, she's spreading a ridiculous falsehood. That's a Pants on Fire."
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2009
  8. CaptainObvious

    CaptainObvious Son of Liberty V.I.P.

    Courts make much grosser interpretations of statutes all throughout history. We've gone from the national government prohibited from establishing a national religion all the way to a completely secular society, which wasn't intended. Despite a CLEAR right of people to bear arms that amendment is STILL debated and argued. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that someone could easily interpret that provision that way.
  9. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    Then someone could clearly interpret legislation already on the books concerning living wills that way. Yet, said legislation is about as non-controversial as things come in politics. So, once again, people are deliberately lying and mischaracterizing provisions in the bill to advance their agenda. This business about fearing how the courts will interpret such provisions, seems a shoddy attempt to cover for such lies, particularily given I don't think such rational was given by the people who began spreading them, when they began spreading them.
    Let's look at some of the lies:

    "[The health care reform bill] would make it mandatory — absolutely require — that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner." -Betsy McCaughey

    Notice the word "absolutely". Does she sound like she's pointing out a possible very gross misinterpretation of the bill? No, she's absolutely lying. And Rush?

    "Mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the seasoned citizen is sick or in a nursing home. ... That's an invasion of the right to privacy. We can't have counseling for mothers who are thinking of terminating their pregnancy, but we can go in there and counsel people about to die." -Rush Limbaugh

    Doesn't sound like he's pointing out a potential gross misinterpretation of the bill to me. He's either lying, or failing terribly at fact checking.
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2009
  10. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    Found another doozy, that's not so much a lie as a brilliant failure to check the facts (probably...). This one comes courtesy of an Investors business Daily editorial:

    Stephen Hawking was born in the U.K. and has lived there his entire life. In fact, he's in a British hospital right now.
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2009
    Bananas likes this.

Share This Page