The sweet irony of being attacked for lack of reading comprehension.
I don't know Jazz Shaw, but I've read his stuff on The Moderate Voice and Pajamas Media with some agreement. However, failing to agree with Rick Moran's assessment that Sarah Palin's opinion that possible aspects of the healthcare legislation are
unconscionable, outrageous, and either a deliberate lie, or proof that she really is an airheadmarks me as afflicted with "Reading Incomprehension" (emphasis mine)
But there’s one teeny, tiny point which Smitty is missing in his criticism of Right Wing Nuthouse's proprietor. Rick - along with the rest of us - are not talking about random editorials published by public officials. We’re talking about legislation, either extant or proposed, which has shown up in committee on the floor of the House and/or Senate. And these so called "Death Panels" are simply not there.So, the crux of the debate seems to be whether:
- one can assume that a bureaucratic entity spawned by some future, final legislation (currently 1k+ pages, rumored to have malignant tumor) would contain panels, or if you don't like the term: board, working group, committee, team, reviewers,
- one can infer that such a hypothetical collection of folks would make decisions affecting life,
- one can attach a qualitative label such as "death panel" to such a hypothetical entity,
Young or old, one would certainly be perfectly within their rights to express concern if they thought some sort of Spartan fitness test could potentially be applied to them in the future.
Of course it's not there
As we bandy about the final shape of legislation, which is about as predictable as the weather, we can feel confident that there will be no "Article 1482: Death Panel" in the final version submitted for vote.
Of course, history is replete with examples of why all of government-controlled health care is a bad idea. Social Security and Medicare. British NHS. Events in the last century that would be true demagoguery to bring in, yet which we entirely forget at our peril.
At the time of this writing, We Just Don't Know. We do have a congress and administration whose goalposts are both wheeled and motorized. The concern is merited.
"The big point these Palin die-hards are missing here was best summed up by Rick in another portion of his column which Smitty also apparently failed to read:"
The damn bill is plenty bad enough without lying about it. Jesus Christ! Your loyal subjects, who don’t think you can do any wrong, are smart enough to figure that out without you having to demagogue the issue like a Democrat, for God’s sake!Look, we've already agreed that the bill doesn't exist in a final, presidential signature (+ signing statement) form. How does Moran call anyone a 'liar' concerning an unfinished product? His title said, paraphrasing, that everyone else is doing it (demagoguery) so why not him?
Sure, in that context, accusing someone of lying works, I guess. Strikes me as a blowhard move, and I said so.
But, speaking of literacy, Jazz, I also fell short of being a die-hard Palin supporter:
It remains to be seen, but it may just be possible that Sarah Palin has as good an platform as anyone. I can, and do, see the wisdom in playing a cautious hand. Some of the Palin blogs, for example, seem as blatantly worshipful as the crappiest Obama pap.What I don't mind being called is a die-hard Federalist. When these Progressive nitwits come up with an Amendment to overturn Amendment 10, I'll be able to shut up about the fundamental inappropriateness of the entire question. And if your reply is "Only DC can do something about health care," my reply is "We move closer to the root of the problem. Continue your analysis."
Nevertheless, a strongly Federalist platform is exactly what's needed. Should she deliver such, with the kind of thoughtful analysis shown here, which you seem intent on deeming dishonest, then we'll just mentally group you with the Brooks/Noonan Axis of Useless.
No, I'm not a hard-core Palinista. I'll even entertain supporting Mitt Romney. Because it's platform over personality. Voting Sarah over her genetic information is as overtly stupid as voting Obama over his.
At any rate, Jazz, thanks for noticing my humble post.
Here's Newt Gingrich supporting Sarah.
Howard "ROOOAAR" Dean: 'She made that up'.