Why is MSNBC Allowing Matthews to Repeat "Deathers" Rhetoric as Maddow Debunks Him on the Same Day?
By Heather Thursday Jul 30, 2009 9:00am
John Amato: When did a living will become a bad thing and one that marks you for death? This is insanity. I've had a living will for ten years already approximately and I had one drawn up for legal reasons as well as medical. I remember when people were running to be able to sell loving wills to make a few bucks.
On one hand Tweety can debunk Glenn Beck and the birthers and on the other hand he can sound just as nutty.
C&Ler Jolynn emailed me this: If Terri Schiavo had an End of Life Consultation and a Living Will, she could have saved everyone a lot of money and heartache. Matthews is an idiot.
Why is Chris Matthews carrying water for the "deathers" -- as Rachel Maddow aptly called them on her show -- and conflating end of life counseling with abortion, and something to fear, while his network has allowed Maddow to do a thorough debunking of both those talking points and where they came from?
Matthews went so far as to conflate end-of-life counseling with the government paying for abortions, and called them both "social policy". So Chris, are you now trying to find a nice way to call the President a "socialist" without coming right out and saying so? And why is it something to be afraid of if someone under the age of 65 is allowed to get some help with making a living will?
Matthews: It's a provision that allows you to get counseling every five years or so. I wonder what the hell this provision's doing in a bill that's aimed at people who are younger. It's not Medicare recipiants, people over sixty five. Why do we want to be visited every five years by somebody to talk about how you want to die? I think it's crazy this in in there, but your thoughts.
Romano: But it's not in there. I mean basically...
Matthews: It is in there!! (crosstalk) It's in the bill, in the Dingel bill..
Romano: Chris, first of all, it's an extension of a 1999 bill that was enacted during the Bush administration and it's a self determination and a patients' rights bill, and all it really says is that Medicare will pay if somebody wants to go and have a consultation. It doesn't sa you have to have a consultation...
Matthews: It's not about Medicare Lois. You already have that in Medicare. This is about people under sixty five, younger people. This is not about Medicare, we've got it in Medicare coverage. I'm not saying that. This is about a health care bill to help people in their middle years and their younger years. Why would you have this conversation with them?
Uhhhh..Chris, because maybe people under age 65 who are ill might want access to this sort of counseling? Matthews goes on to fear monger about the counseling and compare it to something that goes on in...gasp..Europe.
Matthews: I just have a sense this is put in by a lobbyist who wanted this in for hospice care. Somebody pushed this in there. It's the kind of social policy dynamite that sounds like Denmark or Scandanavia, and it's that kind of mind set that drives a lot of moderates and conservatives crazy.
Politico's Jonathan Martin does his best to continue Matthews fear mongering. Nice job with helping out the likes of Virginia Foxx there Martin. Matthews gets in a shot at the "lefties" and then does this bit or mental acrobatics:
Matthews: I think it's like the abortion issue that's been jammed into this thing, there shouldn't, we have the Hyde amendment Lois that says the government will not pay for abortion. People were talking about putting that into the bill here. Pro-choice that want the government to pay for abortions. There's a lot of social policy being jammed at us on what is essentially a financing issue.
I've got news for you, Chris. This doesn't drive moderates crazy. It drives crazy people to be even more crazy, and you're not helping the situation with this kind of talk.
Thankfully Rachel Maddow added some sanity to the network's coverage for the day, and reminded everyone just where this "deathers" rhetoric came from. Video below the fold.
Rachel again debunks the rhetoric that health care reform is going to kill old people, and explains just who the "deathers" are and where that conspiracy theory came from....Betsy McCaughey.
Login or Register to post comments.
Because Chris Matthews is another highly paid corporate whore, who loves the sound of his own important voice.
... manufactured controversy as opposed to facts.
They both smell the same.
As in used underware.
...and, I might add...he is an (reeks from it) avowed Catholic and is wetting his panties over stupid "scare tactics" by the "republican wingnuts"...and can't separate the two.
Is it because he is "stupid"? Is it for ratings?
On the other hand...who the hell listens to Matthews anymore.
End of story.
and support Obama's new soylent green initiative. Let the government know exactly how you want to die, so we can more efficiently convert you into a healthy, tasty snack.
so, he's a little concerned that the 'real' Liberals will be sending the Grim Reaper to his door as son as this bill is jammed....
Tweety's a survivalist; he'll twist in whatever wind that'll keep him on the air. Anyone remember his homo-erotic tirade about Bush when he landed on the USS Lincoln?
I wonder if the pro-life "deathers" would make a living will exception for the under 65 soldiers going off to combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan their wonderful pro-life Kristchun president started 6 and a half years ago?
Thank You! I was beginning to think i was the only one who remembered the sycophantic boy crush tweety had for Lt.Dubya
and his codpiece.
That's because the rest of us have been trying to forget it!
Is Matthews trying to imply that living wills are only for old or sick people? Is he fucking HIGH? What the hell is wrong with this guy?
had a living will when he had surgery last year. When he suffered irreversible brain damage due to complications from the anesthesia, it was because of his living will, and his Medical Directive, that we were able to follow his wishes to not keep him on life support, but, instead, let him go.
Everyone should have a Living Will.
...how painful that must have been. Thank you for sharing. Living wills are not just for the elderly. There really is no age limit other than you have to be 18 I believe.
I can only imagine. Sorry I missed your post earlier, but upon seeing it now, I cried a bit for you, and it has prompted my resolve to encourage my own 23yo son to follow suit with his own documented wishes. Again- am so sorry for your difficult loss. Thank you
What a terrible tragedy to lose your 18 YO son. Our thoughts and prayers go to you. Thank you for sharing.
for losing your son.
Thanks for sharing. You and he did the best you could.
the first of my 15 surgeries on my left foot and ankle started in 1985. In fact, before each operation, the medical staff would make sure that I had a document in place.
Because the voice in his ear from god, you know, the bastard that GE tells what someone can be, do, say, look like, act like, respond like, has told him to go ahead and act like a lunatic that has gone on overdrive. Lunatics usually only have a problem for a few days a month when the full moon makes them howl and get overly silly. Now we find the condition afflicting the otherwise reasonably monotonous empty suits a permanent debilitation. god knows, and they listen.
it's tv, it's all fake and it pretends to be real. The reverse engineering about for profit tv shows does not maketh this rocketeth sthience.
Every time I have to go to a hospital they ask if I have a living will and if want a copy to fill out. Considering all the Medical mistakes made in hospitals today which kill patients may be that's not such a bad idea?
My worry since, hospitals now are places of 'business' is that a living will might temp some immoral hospitals to euthansize my young son, so they could 'harvest' his organs. I read a book by a doctor who used just exactly that theme in his novels, and it didn't seem that far-fetched. Forgot his name. Think the novel was Body Count.
Wouldn't invalidate the argument for a living will, but trust in the medical industry is not always well-placed. I am not an organ donor because I don't trust hospitals.
√
with a tinge of spirituality.
Amended: Previous psychologists tried to explain religion in terms of just one or two overarching psychological needs. The most common reason they cite is that people embrace religion because of a fear of death, as expressed in the saying ‘there are no atheists in foxholes,” Reiss said.
[ http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/religdes.htm ]
Terri Schiavo
I don't fear socialism or terrorism, I fear not being the master of my own destiny, which is the one thing (besides $) that conservatives are gunning for.
... are living in a self-inflicted purgatory. They treat change as something that is optional, something that can be indefinitely stymied and fought off. Therefore, change is something to be feared and fought against.
A side note:
THE VOLUME RECORDED/PLAYBACK needs attention.
I have everything full tilt 100% and yet, the sound is but a wisper.
[It's okay for me-Sitemonitor]
Sound is not a problem here. I hope this helps?
PS. If ya got powered speakers, are they getting juice? Did you check sound properties in the control panel - (XP)
Kink in your speaker wires?
Thanks T_C and Andy K,
I'll check it out.
as soon as I heard what he was saying. I found out my hand was working quicker than the eye and I was hitting the mute button.
Maybe your tweety is resonating against your woofy.
Matthews is really off the rails here. It's a simple little measure that could provide [OPTIONAL] pre-planning to those difficult times we all will face. He sure did get huffy about it. What a moron.
Jonathan Martin laid bare what is wrong with so much of modern journalism. He essentially admitted that the right will pull out anything they can that will make the bill look bad, and go on and on about it, even distort it he seems to suggest, to scare people. He says it without irony or self-awareness. He says it within the context of accepting that this is a dishonest and cynical strategy, and that the media will be used to spread the Republican distortions. He doesn't even squirm at the fact that he was taking part in spreading the lie.
Then, at about the 5:10 mark, I think he checks his Blackberry. He might even be texting. I guess he's a busy, important guy. Can't spend the whole day doing the Republicans dirty work.
Having too-recently gone through the painful process of making end-of-life decisions for my husband, I can tell you that even though I knew I was doing exactly what he would have wanted, it would have been less painful for me and his family if those wishes were written down in a living will.
Oh, and Chris Matthews? A-hole.
Matthews is an idiot if he thinks only the elderly have end-of-life issues. My wife is a PEDIATRIC hospice nurse, and she works overtime, every day of the week. The issues that families face at the natural end of life of a loved one - whether it's an elderly parent or (too) young child - are complicated, expensive, lengthy, and require intervention. She counsels families daily, sometimes for months, until the end comes. Hospice even provides a comfortable place where people can die, so that the family home is not associated with the memory. A health care bill that provides for this type of care is not morbid and certainly not aimed incorrectly if it covers all of us. It would be remarkably caring and intelligent to provide this service. Families need this.
I'm watching this and I don't think I could wince any more.
Living Wills are something that all people need to have in order pretty much when they become adults. Car accidents happen. If you end up in a hospital on a respirator with very little brain function, you should be allowed to say "you know what, I do not wish to be kept alive by extraordinary means such as that." Conversely, you can say "I do wish to be kept alive by whatever means necessary."
THAT IS WHAT A LIVING WILL IS. It's a means of conveying your desire for medical care when you are not in a position to convey that information at that moment.
To twist this into "you have to tell the government how you want to die" and keep hammering at this really tips Tweety's hand. It's NOT SOCIAL POLICY. Having a Living Will does not mean that you're pro-euthanasia, it means that you either do or do not want to be resuscitated in the event that your body is shutting down, and that the decision rests in your hands and not in the hands of the doctors making a snap decision based on their own preference. In fact, it's the exact opposite of the government telling people when they can die. It's the government encouraging people to take an active stance in their own medical care.
Ultimately, the government covering and encouraging people to have a living will drafted up as part of their coverage is very canny. I suspect most people would prefer NOT to languish on indefinitely as a result of being hooked up to ventilators and feeding tubes while being in a vegetative state. It would save tremendous amounts of money to not have those people kept alive using expensive equipment when they would rather not be kept alive. It would save on liability lawsuits as well, if you have a clearly-relayed Living Will that was available to doctors and EMTs, they could know that whatever action they were instructed to take was the action that the patient wished.
... my mother-in-law is in her 80's and suffering from a recurring bout of cancer. We're at the point where further chemotherapy is impractical - her overall condition won't let her complete the full course.
We had a hospice nurse come in and explain a DNR (do not resuscitate) order to everyone, which Mom agreed to ... because in the county in which she resides, in the absence of a DNR, the paramedics will undertake whatever steps are necessary to keep the patient alive. If they have to hook you up to machines to keep you breathing and your heart pumping, they'll do it.
There's no hit squad from the government showing up to say, "Screw the old lady, pull the plug."
Matthews should be ashamed for parroting such irresponsible and non-factual garbage.
by Republicans what's right and wrong.
At the very end of the clip after the lady explained that none of the counseling is mandatory and nobody is being forced to decide "how to die," Matthews still asks, "Then why is it in there?" TOTALLY IGNORING WHAT THE LADY JUST SAID.
In David Gregory's recent interview of Robert Gibbs, Gregory pulled the same trick Matthews just did. Gibbs was explaining how the Huffington Post's press conference question was not planted. Gibbs made it clear that Obama had no idea what the question was going to be and that the question was a very challenging one. Gregory also totally ignored the explanation and said, "Would you do it again?"
David Gregory is unwatchable ... a snarky, intellectual lightweight, who works himself up into phony little hissy fits. He's a hyperventilating A**HOLE. Other than that, I have no problem with him :)
Now that's funny.
does it take for anyone to realize that this is another lie put out by the right wing fascist neocon corporatists. Matthews proves that he is not the sharpest knife in thee drawer.
Boy, Tweety can just drive you nuts sometimes. He spews utter nonsense and then screams over anyone (i.e. Romano) who attempts to correct the record.
I almost threw my bourbon and ginger at the TV ... then thought what a waste ... when Tweety stated that Obama and the Dems were selling health care reform in terms of wealth "redistribution". No they're not A**HOLE! That is how the Repugs frame the issue ... then, the news media obediently regurgitates it. It is one thing to criticize the effectiveness of the Democratic PR machine, it is another to completely misrepresent what is being said.
Me no watch, Tweety. Me find him more confusing than birth certificate.
agree!!
These so called journalists?? just say what is scripted in front of them from their bosses. I won't ever believe anything I read or hear anymore as the truth. The Journalists we have today suck.
we don't have any journalists today----with maybe the exception of Bill Moyers. All that's left is stenographers and bloviators.
... management is freaking out about the internet, but their strategy is to:
- Direct people to their own website.
- Cut back on staff.
Sure, the internet provides immediacy, but it's not anything we can't also attain in a server-based, non-linear environment.
What people are looking for is CONTENT. The same-old, same-old - streamed to be available on the web - isn't going to cut it. Having reporters shoot and edit their own stories isn't going to cut it.
The collapse just keeps continuing. Normal human speech twisted and subverted - EFFECTIVELY, TOO OFTEN - to partisan agenda.
I was hit with two potentially lethal medical crises when I was in my 30s. I had to scramble while under huge physical and mental distress to have the right documents drawn up, outlining my preferences for end of life care -or no care. It was equally hard on my family.
Matthews is an a-hole. Tragically, no speakers on the pro-healthcare circuit are doing a good job clarifying things for idiots on the fringe. That turf is pwned by the Repugs.
Just a little more cash in his pocket for absolute lying. That's the way the criminal Reslugs do their business as usual.
Truly. He just goes on a tweetin' out both sides of his beak, often oblivious.
shit...no one is keeping me alive on machines...fuck that shit
and fuck mathews
in Rachel we trust, thank you for saving us from evil, Rachel.
I thought Chris dialed back the Beck rhetoric as well. the female guest he had on for that Beck segment was so GREAT!.
matthews' argument against a living will if under 65 is idiotic. its the responsible thing to do if you are unmarried but in a committed relationship, or if you are married and have children over 18yo so there are no family battles about what to do should you become ill (people DO die before the age of 65...)
... I've been dying to make out a living will. ;)
Please remember to tip your waitresses' and waiters'. :)
→ → → [ http://crooksandliars.com/donate ]
I've had a living will since I inherited some money. And I refreshed it when I had cancer. And when I had my surgery. It's an important thing to do. And you have to do it a few times, so you show you meant what you said, or that you are paying attention to stuff when you change something. Makes it pretty clear to anyone who may have to deal with the reality of helping someone die the way they want to. It's the most, then least personal of acts.
The shit doesn't mean I want to die, it means I want things handled a certain way and no one has to guess or fight over what they thought I meant.
I have a shitty dysfunctional family. I don't need to make it worse.
My Hammond is going to some down-on-his-luck, unemployed roller rink organist.
Seriously, I've checked off the organ donor box on my license, but I don't think anyone would want my eyes or lungs...and maybe not my liver, either.
it's your largest organ.
And I think the whole cancer thing might put my stuff in the bin, but hey, you never know.
I only hope Andy wasn't offended by "it's you largest organ" ;)
to Glenn but I'm afraid he'd abuse it. It would be like putting a preschooler at the controls of a 747.
Here he goes again whoring himself out to his corporate pimps and their craven obsession with profit and ratings. Don't have a controversy? Well just make shit up then, I guess. It really gets tiresome hearing these blatant manipulators and liars pretend they are competent "journalists."
Matthews seems to have some sort of sadistic delight in whipping up controversy so that he keeps the spotlight of attention focused on himself. He and his other depraved media prostitute colleagues (with some exceptions)need to get some professional help with their self centeredness issues and slavish addiction to profit.
You've pegged him fairtheewell!
Nobody knows what tomorrow will bring. It is important to have your idea of what is best for you in every scenario (death - or major injury or illness) written down. Even talking to your spouse or relative can end up misconstrued or misunderstood by others.
I had to quit all the cable shows. It makes it hard to get excited about anything Tweety says.
He is out of my life, it wasn't him it was me. No really. . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZ295uPT13Q&fe...
Brings back memories!
Excellent!
Maddow doesn't call out Matthews by name, nor will she call out any other MSNBC talking head (joe, meeka et al). If a MSNBC talking head is a guest she will challenge them when unavoidable (Bu-canon).
I know its business but I am so sick of the corporate control that I no longer watch any of them on a daily basis.
There is no reasoning with "shit for brains" Matthews.
He has his own agenda, he thinks he's smart and tries like hell to show it. It never works of course, yet his ego buys it.
The man is not all that intelligent and if she wanted to, Maddow would eat his lunch with any debate. She'll never get that chance because like most MSNBC male talking heads, Matthews is a pussy and won't ever engage her. I'm reasonably sure the Olbermann would enjoy the challenge, but Tweety? Not so much.
The almost knee-jerk tendency to dismiss all concerns of the right is simply silly, and does little to swell our own numbers. There is legitimate concern here.
If we force the elderly to have a living will, will we then base their care on certain will configurations? Will we give free health care always? Or only up to the 'do not resuscitate' mark, and require anything beyond that to be provided by some sort of supplemental insurance?
None of us know how this system will morph when and if we add nearly 50 million more people to it, especially during difficult economic times.
While it may be convenient to think that we would always provide the elderly and disabled the best care possible, in reality we should know that history shows us that these are the two groups who generally get short shrift in socialized health care systems. Ignoring their concerns, and mocking them in the process, is unwise.
God damn it I sure wishy Tweety would think a little bit becore he starts to move his lips.
If people have a living will when they are 30 years old their family would know how they feel about being plugged into a wall while in a nonreversible coma after being in a auto accident or something. Imagine the money it would save somebody's family if they knew their husband, son, father, whatever didn't want to be hooked up to life support with no way to turn it off and no possibility for recovery. Like Amato said it sure would have helped with the Shivo nightmare. This is not brain surgery, Tweety. Fuck man, think!!!!!!
"It's a provision that allows you to get counseling every five years or so."
If you want it. This is not compulsory.
Making it an available service to those who want or need it should be a good thing.
Jesus H. Christ in a puickup truck... I wish I could talk to somebody about this so that I could know all the particulars. What's the fucking problem Tweety???? What an I missing here?
I used to enjoy this blog because it questioned the government and authority, now it is just propping up a tyrannical leader, Obama. He is almost as bad as Bush. You challenge Mathhews because it sounds like he's calling Obama a socialist, when he is not. You can't even handle the appearance of criticism towards Obama.
I was a fan of Nadar, but I'm glad Obama won now. I would have never known how biased and hypocritical this blog was if "your guy" didn't win.
...to whatever right wing blog you normally frequent. If you have never seen criticism of Obama on this site, you have never been here before.
welcomebackcarter
Don't you get it? The media spew this nonsense and Joe Sixpack and Betty Winebox eat it up. The media do not call bullshit on themselves so it is nice for me to know what they are saying and how they are twisting it. When Bush was ruining the country Tweety was feeling tingles up his leg and comparing him to Lincoln in a positive way. We need to know this so we can let these media outlets know that it is wrong and we will not put up with it. What's wrong with showing how these guys are trying to take Obama or his policies down with false accusations?
welcomebackcarter
You keep coming on this site and spew right wing talking points. Do they pay you to try to interject bullshit on left wing sites?
Actually...they do. That's a known fact, Cap'n.
I'm glad C&L's made available a site where you can ease your mind... I believe it's medicinal as well. Thanks for your opinion and I'm sure glad you were able to get that off your chest / mind... so to speak. ;)
Hope your feeling better?
Many of us here view the government as a useful tool to help facilitate equity and justice for all, not the implacable enemy to be despised or the oppressor that keeps you from doing whatever you want.
Libertarians like you are just as selfish as the GOP---you want the good that comes with government programs like fire, police, roads, etc. but just don't want your taxes to pay for them, preferring to keep them for your selfish use instead.
Sorry, buster, there is no such thing as something for nothing. If you live in California for example, that ought to be obvious.
Many of us here view the government as a useful tool to help facilitate equity and justice for all, not the implacable enemy to be despised or the oppressor that keeps you from doing whatever you want.
Libertarians like you are just as selfish as the GOP---you want the good that comes with government programs like fire, police, roads, etc. but just don't want your taxes to pay for them, preferring to keep them for your selfish use instead.
Sorry, buster, there is no such thing as something for nothing. If you live in California for example, that ought to be obvious.
Many of us here view the government as a useful tool to help facilitate equity and justice for all, not the implacable enemy to be despised or the oppressor that keeps you from doing whatever you want.
Libertarians like you are just as selfish as the GOP---you want the good that comes with government programs like fire, police, roads, etc. but just don't want your taxes to pay for them, preferring to keep them for your selfish use instead.
Sorry, buster, there is no such thing as something for nothing. If you live in California for example, that ought to be obvious.
You're a fan of a guy who could NEVER be elected, but COULD and DID siphon off enough of the non-nazi, non-idiot vote to throw the election? That bastard cost us the 2000 election, don't give me the "Al couldn't win his home state" bullcrap, No Nader (and his 6000 votes), No Florida recount, no Bush V. Gore, No Iraq war, No Carl Fucking Rove, don't EVER talk to us about that worthless piece of crap ever again.
Obama a TYRANNICAL LEADER? Are you FUCKING NUTS? Go back to wherever it is you come from!
is that like losing your virginity??
... but Chrissie is a young child. He cannot ... CANNOT go against his Republican family. Yes, it is funny to see him constantly cheering on the Catholics and Irish (because HE is Catholic and Irish), but isn't this obvious? He has said many times that much (most?) of his family are GOPers. Well, DUH, Chrissie.
Grow up! On second thought, if you haven't grown up yet, by your age (60s), you never will.
I saw the Matthews show and squirmed when Chris went on his little rant highlighted here. It's typical Tweety. About every third day he apparently feels he has to say something "controversial"...something beyond his obvious continuing fascination with Sarah Palin.
However, what's with this call for MSNBC to muzzle Matthews? What he's saying isn't anywhere near as objectionable as what Beck and Hannity get away with. I'm a bit ill at ease with having networks dictate what a host can or can not imply, if it's within reasonable limits.
I realize that this is the same basic approach as urging CNN to muzzle Dobbs. But Matthews doesn't gone on prolonged rants like Dobbs either.
Perhaps you would benefit from LISTENING to President Obama's COMPLETE response to this caller. What an ass hat!! Becoming a little more like dobbs when he pulls this shit for effect.
Sometimes I think this idiot is getting smarter, and then he takes TWO GIANT STEPS BACK.
Somewhat associated with the Deathers, is the real problem that is being obfuscated.....How do we as a society approach the question of "heroic treatment attempts" at or near end of life? That's a good part of the "Living Will" concern, and most hospitals will, upon admission, consult with the patient/family members about this very question. Yes, it's very reminiscent of Terri Schiavo. Remember how after that debacle there was a lot of government and media talk urging people (even younger than 65) to discuss
end of life treatment and hopefully codify their wishes.
End of life treatment, especially "heroic measures", is very costly. And does nothing but prolong a condition that is only considered "living" under the strictest of definitions.
My mother passed away in a hospital about a year ago. We specified when she was admitted that
we didn't want any heroic measures including resuscitation if here heart were to fail. As it was, she was hospitalized for 9 days prior to dying a natural death. And by the way, hospitals routinely "ration" the kind of treatment given people in an end of life condition.
But what you get are family members who can't bear to say "no" to any kind of technological intervention, no matter how costly. That's the discussion we as a nation need to have in rational manner. It won't happen, of course, but the "consultation" section in the Health Bill is a good first step.
patients about living wills, power of attorney, do they want to be a full code, &c. This "deather" argument is fucking insane. Why is noone in the MSM stating this publicly, that we have already been required to discuss these things with patients? Oh yeah, I forgot, the MSM are serving the Republican industrial complex. We nurses and doctors have been mandated for years to get this information from everyone coming into the health care system. I work in obstetrics (labor and birth) so I get weird looks from my young, healthy patients about end of life care. I tell them although they are fine now, it is important to think about, because we never know when we may be in an accident or have a catastrophic illness.
There is NO WAY legislators are conspiring to kill off senior citizens. Why is it when someone hears something so blatantly INSANE, they decide to believe (or to "believe") that insanity and perpetuate it? Is your political party that important to you that you would LIE? Are your television ratings!? Have you NO sense of decency?
Donnie Dumsfield was the point man for eliminating half of the world's population for the OLIGARCHY. It only came to light because some blog repeated it. So, relying on whores in congress not to try to eliminate the older people is something they are doing at this very moment.
I don't know how you can sleep.
Living wills can protect individuals from being forced to serve the purposes of others. A person could protect their family from involuntary financial devastation by an unscrupulous medical industry.
The medical industry can be like the sleazy one-night stand that demands child support, ruining the lives and plans of others.
The best reply to Deathers (and those ignoramuses who buy into it) is logic and history.
The two keystone programs put into law to help Senior Citizens are Social Security and Medicare.
Both carry the stamp of the Democratic Party (with no real help even from Republicans)
In addition, under LBJ, The War On Poverty specifically targeted poverty among senior citizens. The statistic are clear on how effective it was (ironically, disportionately directed at seniors in current Red states).
And a host of lesser but important pieces of legislation aimed at helping Seniors in various ways, nearly all bearing the stamp of the Democratic party.
So, before people buy into the baseless ranting of Republicans, I challenge them to explain how and why the liberal wing of the Democratic party, historically aligned with Seniors, is now "trying to kill them"? Besides being a load of crap, it makes no sense. And which is why the AARP also thinks Deathers are wingnuts.
And if Deathers try and claim that, well, FDR and LBJ weren't "liberals", I let Limbaugh respond:
"FDR is dead. Now we're going to kill of his policies."
I would love to hear Dems come to the House floor and use the argument and challenge that I've presented here. And see what Goehmer (Pyle) and Virginia Foxx and Michele Bachman might have to say.
But no, that would be too much like actually standing up and fighting back....
Ever notice how tweety literally spits out the lies??
Some very informed comments on this thread, and some sad ones to whom I send my blessings, but one point has been overlooked.
Many same-sex partners rely on Living Wills, Health Care Surrogates, Pre-Need Guardianship papers to participate (in some cases to even be allowed in the hospital room)in their loved ones medical care.
I have drafted co-habitation agreements, living wills, joint tenancy deeds, co-parenting agreements, pre-need guardianship, medical power-of-attorney , and final wills, all as a packet to get LGBT couples some legal protection in the event of a medical issue. (or legal issue)
All of these documents become crucial in a state that does not recognize any rights for same-sex partners, especially if the "in-laws" are not accepting of the relationship.
I'm going to assume that's a rhetorical question.
Living wills are part of health care (not health insurance) policy.
Everyone should know what a living will is and personally, I think everyone should have a living will -- even twenty-five year olds who think they are immortal (but are probably going to die in a car crash tomorrow because they were texting someone while they were operating a motor vehicle).
Matthews is an idiot.
I was shocked at what a horrible job Obama did in answering the woman's question. First, he responded to an elderly woman who was obviously deeply concerned in a flippant way that was neither informative nor helpful. He needed to reassure the woman and explain what a living will is and why people should have them. It has nothing to do with elderly people -- every adult should have a living will. The alternative is the Terry Schiavo nightmare.
The one group I can think of that attacks living wills and durable powers of attorney for health care are the members of Judie Brown's American Life League, which apparently views them as euthanasia warrants. The American Life League is also implacably opposed to legalized abortion, sale and distribution of contraceptives, and acts as if "just say no" will work. They were also closely allied with the groups picketing at the hospice where Terri Schiavo was dying. Apparently the lessons about the evils of the pill took hold too well with Judie Brown's daughter, as she got pregnant by her boyfriend, which is also a big breach of their principles. Oh well......
What. An. Idiot.
He makes the entire network look like a clown act. And this nutcase professes to be a Democrat?
Faux Noise cannot bring themselves to even consider the fact that right wing extremists should be classified as domestic terrorists if they resort to violence in the belief that they are advancing their cause. To do so would implicitly confirm their own culpability in inciting the extremists.
I think it’s about time that people were informed or reminded of the fact that Roe v Wade did not mark the commencement of abortions. What it did mark was the beginning of legally sanctioned, safe abortions performed by competent Doctors and practitioners. This, as opposed to the medically unsafe, self administered or back alley abortions performed with dirty equipment by incompetents, to which desperate women were previously driven. How can these facts be totally disregarded while at the same time claiming to believe that only by ending legal abortions can we preserve the sanctity of life?
Sorry, Accidently included my comment on another subject in first paragaph.
If you live in a state that has adopted the 2006 Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAGA), it is presumed that you are an organ donor unless they can find information contrary to their assumptions.
Getting your name off any list or removing your consent from your driver's license means absolutely nothing under the 2006 version of the act. Even if you have a written Advanced Healthcare Directive that forbids the use of machines to keep your body alive, they can do so as long as they are working on your family or legal decision makers to determine your intent.
Unfortunately, no state that has adopted the 2006 UAGA allows anyone register as a "no" or allows donation on condition of just compensation.
Until now: you can register your desire and options under the law at www.DoNotTransplant.com.
To learn more about your rights under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, visit www.DoNotTransplant.com
Login or Register to post comments.