Former governor and VP candidate Sarah Palin wrote a pretty good op-ed for the Wall Street Journal on the health care situation - one where she points out, repeatedly, that we're being asked to blindly fund a government program that will affect every aspect of our life and will not save us money in either the short or long term. As Ace of Spades notes, this is not going to cover new ground for the people already intimately familiar with the debate - but for those who aren't, it will give a good idea of conservative objections to Obamacare, not to mention providing the alternatives that the Democrats are pretending that the Republicans aren't providing. All in all, useful and timely.
And, as an added, special bonus, it includes the written equivalent of a smack on the nose:
Now look at one way Mr. Obama wants to eliminate inefficiency and waste: He's asked Congress to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Council—an unelected, largely unaccountable group of experts charged with containing Medicare costs. In an interview with the New York Times in April, the president suggested that such a group, working outside of "normal political channels," should guide decisions regarding that "huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives . . . ."
Given such statements, is it any wonder that many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats' proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their health care by—dare I say it—death panels? Establishment voices dismissed that phrase, but it rang true for many Americans. Working through "normal political channels," they made themselves heard, and as a result Congress will likely reject a wrong-headed proposal to authorize end-of-life counseling in this cost-cutting context. But the fact remains that the Democrats' proposals would still empower unelected bureaucrats to make decisions affecting life or death health-care matters. Such government overreaching is what we've come to expect from this administration.
Bolding mine - and I laughed when I read it. I am actually not a heavy Palin booster - it's much more accurate to say that I am instinctively and reflexively opposed to people who cannot write about their political enemies without immediately allowing themselves to write hateful things, which is a frighteningly common problem for Palin critics - but there's something exceptionally fun about seeing lines like that. The entire 'death panels' issue was one that the media kept worrying at and worrying at, and even the ones that deigned to admit that THAT WOMAN had an actual point were ever-so-disapproving at the way that Palin expressed it. The unapologetic and humorous (that's important) way that the former governor referred back to it is refreshing.
It'll also be infuriating, if people like Marc Ambinder are any guide. To the point where spelling suffers and Freudian slips rule the day:
I imagine that there are in fact many people out there who would like to be the ones who get to speak for the party's 'principals.' I wouldn't mind getting the job myself - or at least the opportunity to give those principals a polite, yet emphatic, rant about how they need to work for the grassroots (which includes showing those grassroots how they're working for them). But then, I also wouldn't mind getting a pony - and the lack of either doesn't cause me to write somewhat bitter articles about my inability to just call up the Wall Street Journal and place an op-ed any time that I like.
Not that I'm suggesting anything, of course.
Crossposted to Moe Lane.