22 Feb

Sarah Palin was right

In the summer of 2009, when the outrage over the Democrats’ emerging health care reform bills was at its height, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was excoriated by the left for saying:

“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

The roiling debate over the HHS decision to mandate universal coverage for contraceptive services takes us back to Palin’s remarks.

Obamacare requires health plans to offer certain benefits, like contraception services, annual physicals, vaccinations, and breastfeeding “support and supplies,” with no co-pay, co-insurance, or deductible. The benefits themselves are not the problem — wellness and prevention services are absolutely critical to reining in health care costs and contraception services should be available for those who want them, which they are. (I keep hearing how 98% of Catholics use birth control. Doesn’t this prove that access to contraception isn’t a problem?)

What’s dangerous about these mandates is that they give government the power to decide whether you’ll purchase insurance, who and what will be covered by that insurance, and if businesses are offering good enough insurance.

President Gerald Ford once said, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” For now, the government is giving — or requiring businesses to give — more health services to Americans through subsidies, mandates, and other means. But Obamacare, which grants the HHS secretary 1,968 new or expanded powers, also gives the government the power to take.

Read more

       

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.

52 Responses to Sarah Palin was right

  1. johngalt says: 51

    @retire05:

    I know you didn’t specifically point out me or anyone else. However, you did generalize with your statement on the “dislikes”.

    As for your #50, I too always thought that her acceptance as McCain’s running mate was both a plus and a minus. It was a plus in that she, herself, was thrust into the spotlight and conservatives found someone to admire and rally behind that otherwise wouldn’t have happened. It was a minus that it happened because of accepting the VP candidacy from McCain, who has never been what one could consider a true conservative, and was more aptly described as a RINO.

    I still like Palin, and if she chooses to run for the Presidency in the future, I will more than likely support her.

    ReplyReply
  2. retire05 says: 52

    @johngalt:

    Generalized? When did generalizations become specifics? I generalized, not naming anyone and yet you, and another, decided it was necessary to cry wolf. If I thought it was you, I would have said so. Dishonesty is not my forte.

    Palin accepting the VP nomination was nothing but a minus for her. Anyone with two grey cells bumping together knew, once McCain returned to D.C. to handle the “economy” crisis, that he was going to lose. Heck, most of us knew on Super Tuesday McCain was going to lose. What Palin did was kill her own political future by joining at the hip with McCain. Had she stayed where she was, and continued to govern her state, she would have been in a prime position to run this year for POTUS. And I think she would have had a real shot at it. No more. That is over, and she will never throw her hat in the ring now. Americans don’t like losers or quitters. And while I think the loss falls squarely on McCain’s shoulders, she lost, and then she quit.

    What would have happened had she run is that the left would have shown what a disaster Alaska is. It is the top (or perhaps now the second) top state that is a “leech” state whereas it gets more back from the federal government than it pays in. Her dealings with the oil companies would have been represented as socialism in its purest form. The list goes on. Palin did not serve long enough to enact any real reform in her state. She would have had more time in office by now, yes, but she would still have been presented as a novice. You see, only the left is willing to accept inexperience as a selling point.

    My objection to Mitt Romney is that he has done NOTHING since leaving office but run for another office. So perhaps you can explain to me exactly what it is that Sarah Palin has accomplished in the last three years besides throw red meat to her adoring wolves? After the November, 2008 election, Palin held real power. She could have used that power to rally the troops to really fight against Obama’s oppressive hand in goverment. She could have showed up in D.C., along with thousands of conservative Americans, descending on Congressional offices demanding that legislation be passed to thwart Obama. She could have stood on the steps of Congress and shouted to the world “We will not be silenced and we will be here until Congress listens to us.” She didn’t do that and wasted the power that was given her in 2008. Telling me that if she lived in South Carolina she would vote for Gingrich for no other reason that continuing the primary process is NOT being a leader. It is hedging your bets. She can now claim that her non-endorsement was not an endorsement. That’s not taking the high road, that’s taking the middle of the road.

    Rick Perry at least came out for another candidate, Newt, who promptly threw Perry under the bus the other night at the debate while Perry sat in the audience. I guess Rick Perry now knows there is no honor among thieves.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site