This is not actually what everyone was referring to; in fact, it is a response to Obama's response to Palin's original formulation (Obama was leaving anonymous the claim about "death panels", but everyone in the USA knows who made it.) I have read it through. The argument is tendentious at best. It is an accumulation of ifs and mights, predicated upon the claim that in any conflict between patient welfare and cost-cutting, the cost-cutting would prevail. What Mrs.Palin has done is at best to demonstrate that if that central assumption is accepted in each and every case, then she had a right to speak as she did.