Consider the slight of hand, referring to the perspectives of Rahm Emanuel’s brother but leading the inattentive reader to believe that these are the views of the President’s Chief of Staff.

Consider the implication to the readers paying attention, that the Chief of Staff is either controlled by his brother’s position or that they share the same belief. The author’s primary argument is thus predicated on an overwhelming logical leap and the author provides no support for it.

Consider that, while not a delightful topic for the laymen, everyone participating in healthcare has to make decisions about medical priority. Medical ethicists constantly wrestle with the very question of to whom to render care, when to render that care and for how long. That Emanuel’s brother is talking about these issues is not alarming in the slightest.

Consider that the weight of the comments taken from Emanuel’s brother are out of context and well over a decade out of date.

Consider that it uses inflammatory language to suggest the White House will control healthcare. The author gets by with generalizations but in reality the Fed will not be micro-managing healthcare. To the extent that it will be involved, the author fails to acknowledge that essentially *all* federal programs are run by agencies that ultimately report to the White House, as that is the function of the Executive Branch.

Finally, then, consider the author’s suggestion that the Chief of Staff will somehow be responsible for direction policy under the health plan. It’s highly doubtful that the President, would involve himself in the minutia of the plan. This job will be handled by various regulatory agencies with experience in the matter.

So with that, Drea, I’ll presume you posted this with a little tongue-in-cheek, expecting your generally educated readership to see how some really good PR people have been able to utterly confuse the public into questioning something that is actually to their benefit.