The note in question is supposed to be Palin's response to Obama's response to Palin's infamous "death panel" Facebook note. Here's a sampling of it:
Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these "unproductive" members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.
The President made light of these concerns. He said:
"Let me just be specific about some things that I've been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that we don't, it's too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they're ready on their own terms. It wasn't forcing anybody to do anything." <1>
The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled "Advance Care Planning Consultation." <2> With all due respect, it's misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.
<snip>
Now, let's just stop there because it doesn't even really take a careful examination of the entire note to deduce that it simply could not have been written by Sarah Palin, which leads one to pretty much dismiss all of the points it attempts to make. In fact, a cursory glance is more than suffice to come to that realization as the note is obviously meticulously researched and footnoted, appears to be entirely grammatically correct (It even contains semicolons!), presents rather cogent arguments in an reasoned attempt to persuade, and on the whole is written articulately. In short, whoever composed this particular note is everything that Sarah Palin is not: thoughtful, patient, dedicated, thorough, and rational, traits that any casual, non-delusional observer of Sarah Palin would never, ever associate with her.
Another key indicator in determining that Sarah Palin did not write this particular note are the host of Palin rhetorical hallmarks missing from it. Just ask yourself this question: Is it possible for Sarah Palin to compose anything clocking in at just under 1000 words that's completely devoid of references to God, the troops, the liberal media, Alaska, Ronald Reagan, her baby with Down Syndrome, or a hilariously painful attempt to channel her inner Jack London with some great poetic flourish? No! There is absolutely no consistency between this Facebook note and anything we've ever seen written or spoken by Sarah Palin.
<snip>
Best comment about this article: Footnotes? Girlfriend, please. Palin thinks "footnotes" is a shoe store. :rofl:
http://gawker.com/5336475/theres-just-no-way-sarah-palins-writing-her-facebook-notes?skyline=true&s=xAgreed. A brazillion Sarah Palins with a brazillion typewriters couldn't write anything this cogent in a brazillion years.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
