Death panels: They don’t have to be true if they could possibly be true someday

Jonah Goldberg writes about whether “death panels” actually exist, and comes up with a novel answer: Yes and no.

As a matter of the finer points of policy discussion, I think the death-panel label is awfully blunt and inexact.

But in the arena of a vital political contest, I think M&S are right that it distilled some important issues down to an important truth: if Obama, Pelosi, Waxman et al get their way, the relationship between the citizen and the state is profoundly, and perhaps permanently, altered and down that path lurks death panels.

So: No, death panels were never part of proposed health reform. BUT: Hey, it’s politics! And since health reform is different from the status quo — well, we certainly wouldn’t be surprised if death panels actually happened someday, because that’s the kind of thing that happens when change happens.

Funny thing is, I think this is Goldberg’s attempt at intellectual honesty.

UPDATE: Over at Andrew Sullivan’s blog, Conor Clarke makes much the same point in response to a WSJ op-ed piece:

Second — and this gets to the heart of the slippery debate — hypothetical arguments are totally non-falsifiable. It Betsy McCaughey says the text of the House health-care bill will create death panels, it’s pretty easy to prove her wrong. But if Andrew Klavan then pops up, all bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, with the Hegelian argument that the “logic” of history points towards death panels … well, that’s rather more difficult, and rather more frustrating. The “logic” of history might point toward many things. But until time machines come along, I’m of the opinion that we should stick to the text of the bill.