What the other side is saying .... we're THE GREEDY, THE PARTISAN, THE TIN FOIL HATS, THE DUPES, and THE WONKS

Huffpo --HERE. (by a former intern to Clinton's speechwriters)

I guess that puts me somewhere between a wonk and a dupe.

I'm not slightly embarrased, as Benen claims by ANYONE. The people who are worried about ACORN, sense something just as valuable about what underlies the ADMINISTRATION ( as opposed to those who voted for them) as Benen thinks he did about Cheney, you can be sure.

I'm not embarassed by Sarah Palin's Death Panel meme.

After all, when you have Ezekiel Emanuel advising that '15-40 year olds' will get the most benefits from this kind of system ('ethically'??) one can only presume that your child, born with genetic 'weakness' which will not be cured (sort of like old age cannot be cured?), will be seen not to be of maximum benefit to society, based on the reccomendations of some panel of accountants, doctors, nurses, lawyers and who knows political employees who make decisions and implement policy made in the Washington sausage machine.

Americans want all these deicisions to be between them and their doctor, EVEN IF IT'S THE ONE THEY SEE IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM when they get free or subsidized care because they have no insurance. Americans do NOT want goverment policy about their personal lives and health made by people who are totally unlike them and who think like Chuck Schumer says of congrssional and other govt shenanigans ..'the American people don't care about these things'.

Here's another direct quote of what Ezekiel is adivsing ... when things get tight....

Promoting and rewarding social usefulness.
Unlike the previous values, social value cannot direct allocation on its own. Rather, social value allocation prioritises specific individuals to enable them to promote other important values, or rewards them for having promoted these values.
In view of the multiplicity of reasonable values in society and in view of what is at stake, social value allocation must not legislate socially conventional, mainstream values.
When Seattle's dialysis policy favoured parents and church-goers, it was criticised: "The Pacific Northwest is no place for a Henry David Thoreau with kidney failure." Allocators must also avoid directing interventions earmarked for health needs to those not relevant to the health problem at hand, which covertly exacerbates scarcity For instance, funeral directors might be essential to preserving health in an influenza pandemic, but not during a shortage of intensive-care beds.

In other words **WE MIGHT DECIDE WHO HAS SOCIAL VALUE, AND 'REWARD' THOSE INDIVIDUALS WITH CARE BASED ON THAT, AND THE SOCIAL SITUATION AS WE SEE IT**.

Emanuel carefully says that such 'rewards' don't in fact become de facto 'legislation' (Darwin anyone?). But, come on.

This type of decision making has been RECOMMENDED for those times when 'authority' deems it proper. One can only wonder what the howling would be from Harry Reid, Jesse Jackson, Nancy Pelosi and Steve Benen if Bush had proposed this stricture and Dick Cheney would be making the decision as to who got that liver transplant or not based on ....

SOCIAL VALUE

'Gee, let's see now, should that be Bill Kristol, or Bill Keller? Maybe I should call my buds Charlie Krauthammer and Lou Libby and ask them?'

That's the quote from Emanuel ... now talk to me about tin foil hats.

The Republicans and the critics CONTINUE to fail however by not making plain what they are FOR as well as what they are against.

In this nation there are scores if not hundreds of types of plans and companies.

I can pick among TWO or three.

What level of difference between single payer Canada and just the two or three hideous insurance companies in Maine is there and WHY isn't the set of plans and companies in neighboring and distant states available and competing with each other here?

Why aren't the republicans spicing every criticism TV byte with a finish about what a free insurance market would do to health care monthly costs for citizens ... I mean it wouldn't be because of insurance company lobbying out of fear competition would drive prices down dramatically now, would it?

It's not just tort reform which is a problem.