To enraged Obama supporters and liberal politicians who respond to Sarah Palin and other fishy e-mailers by screaming: "But that's not in the bill! That's not in the bill!" let me grant your argument for the time being. Your disgust with Sarah Palin's comments indicates that you actually agree with her.
Like many (such as Bob Beckle) who blow a gasket when defending Obama against emphatic assertions that the President supports infanticide, you seem to be saying but hey, if Sarah Palin's description of the health care bill is accurate and/or if pro-lifers' characterization of Obama supporting infanticide is accurate, then of course the labeling of these policies as evil would indeed be justified.
If the proposed health care bill is based on a subjective (or objective) judgment of an individual's "level of productivity in society," and senior citizens, a fetus, or a baby with Down Syndrome would have to stand in front of a "death panel" of bureaucrats, that policy would indeed be evil. Likewise, if Obama did vote against a bill that would outlaw infanticide, that individual who voted against such a bill would indeed be evil.
At my town hall meeting, I plan to ask my member of Congress: "I understand you believe end of life issues will rest solely with the patient and not with an appointed Czar. Hypothetically, if you should learn this is in fact not the case, would you then vote "no" on this bill?"
P.S., By the way, Sarah Palin is of course correct. These abominable provisions are in HR 3200. However, I'd only point this out to my member of Congress the day after the town hall meeting if he responds in the affirmative to my question. Otherwise, it's obvious the truth or falseness of Sarah Palin's statement is irrelevant to them.
By the way, Obama's Science Czar John Holdren certainly has no qualms about HR 3200.