"GET YOUR GOVERNMENT HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE!!!"

gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
edited May 2011 in A Moving Train
i remember a litle over a year ago when the elderly and members of the tea party were bringing guns to town hall meetings and interrupting the proceedings during the health insurance reform debate and they would stand up and yell and scream things like "don't touch my medicare" and "get your government hands off of my medicare" because they did not want anything in those programs to change or be cut. medicare and medicaid funding and benefits were never even threatened during that debate. fast forward to april 2011, Paul Ryan's budget proposal is going to do just that, SLASH MEDICARE BENEFITS.

my question for those same protestors and for the tea partiers who wanted to preserve medicare is this:

WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE NOW THAT YOUR MEDICARE IS ACTUALLY IN JEOPARDY OF BEING SLASHED????

WHERE ARE THE PROTESTORS NOW???

WHERE IS ALL OF THE YELLING AND MOANING NOW??

my theory remains that these people are so blinded by their partisanship that if any president other than obama suggested these changes they would have gotten behind it. but since it was obama's initiative they opposed it just to oppose it just because it was obama and not mccain.

all i am asking is that these peope at least be consistent with whatever their positions are on the issues. they were against touching medicare before, now when it is most likely going to be cut there is not peep....interesting...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • __ Posts: 6,651
    Excellent point
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    _ wrote:
    Excellent point
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    i still think it's funny paul ryan wants to turn medicare into a voucher program.
    for what? 1/5 less debt?
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Just like - "Get the troops home NOW", huh?

    Politics is all a big joke.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    know1 wrote:
    Just like - "Get the troops home NOW", huh?

    Politics is all a big joke.
    no, not like that at all.

    we want the troops home for many reasons. bringing troops home would not have negative affects on the troops. if anything, it would save their lives and get them out of that hellhole. not to mention bringing them home would decrease that government spending everyone is bitching about now. and also, some of us are morally opposed to what we are doing over there so we want them home for that reason as well.

    this is completely different.

    these people were complaining because they felt that their own entitlement program was going to be threatened when they were debating legislation to streamline the insurance industry and outline what insurance companies could and could not do, (ie: withhold coverage for pre-existing conditions, drop you if you get sick, gouge you on your premiums, not cover standard tests, take your child off of your insurance at age 20, etc...) these changes were to give insurance to millions more people AND not touch medicare. they were bitching that their benefits were going to be cut, which they weren't, and were OUTRAGED about it. now that they most likely will be cut, there is silence. it does not make any sense.

    so the moral of the post is:

    bringing troops home now benefits everyone.

    cutting medicare screws a lot of people.

    not the same thing, not even close...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    know1 wrote:
    Just like - "Get the troops home NOW", huh?

    Politics is all a big joke.
    no, not like that at all.

    we want the troops home for many reasons. bringing troops home would not have negative affects on the troops. if anything, it would save their lives and get them out of that hellhole. not to mention bringing them home would decrease that government spending everyone is bitching about now. and also, some of us are morally opposed to what we are doing over there so we want them home for that reason as well.

    this is completely different.

    these people were complaining because they felt that their own entitlement program was going to be threatened when they were debating legislation to streamline the insurance industry and outline what insurance companies could and could not do, (ie: withhold coverage for pre-existing conditions, drop you if you get sick, gouge you on your premiums, not cover standard tests, take your child off of your insurance at age 20, etc...) these changes were to give insurance to millions more people AND not touch medicare. they were bitching that their benefits were going to be cut, which they weren't, and were OUTRAGED about it. now that they most likely will be cut, there is silence. it does not make any sense.

    so the moral of the post is:

    bringing troops home now benefits everyone.

    cutting medicare screws a lot of people.

    not the same thing, not even close...


    I think know1 was referring to how much outrage there was over the wars when Bush was in office and now not so much....at least that is how I took it.

    Issue of the day...that is the best way to describe american politics...

    you are right, people should try the best they can to reconcile their beliefs, but I think we all realize that it is not possible to be 100% consistent across the board...the best someone can do is try...I do my best to be consistent but unfortunately personally held beliefs and the idea of government are not that easily separated for most people...
    A year from now something new will be on the main stage and people will decide what side they want to be on.

    I have long thought that if one of the political parties came out and said something as simple as we are for the handicapped, the other party would come out and say that they hate the handicapped and they need to go...they consistantly have to pick the other side of the issue and until we get over the idea of two party politics these strange seemingly oppositional positions will be held...in fact that is the biggest barrier to the libertarians gaining mainstream support...not enough contradiction.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    I think know1 was referring to how much outrage there was over the wars when Bush was in office and now not so much....at least that is how I took it.

    Issue of the day...that is the best way to describe american politics...

    you are right, people should try the best they can to reconcile their beliefs, but I think we all realize that it is not possible to be 100% consistent across the board...the best someone can do is try...I do my best to be consistent but unfortunately personally held beliefs and the idea of government are not that easily separated for most people...
    A year from now something new will be on the main stage and people will decide what side they want to be on.

    I have long thought that if one of the political parties came out and said something as simple as we are for the handicapped, the other party would come out and say that they hate the handicapped and they need to go...they consistantly have to pick the other side of the issue and until we get over the idea of two party politics these strange seemingly oppositional positions will be held...in fact that is the biggest barrier to the libertarians gaining mainstream support...not enough contradiction.
    after re-reading know1's post i can see it that way as well.

    how can people who were scared of losing benefits fight tooth and nail against a boogeyman who was not going to take away benefits in the first place, yet seemingly go along with the plan to cut those benefits a year later? i know 5 year olds who are more able to grasp this lunacy than most of those who were against this before they are seemingly for it.

    but old people get senile, so they don't know what they are arguing and yelling about, right?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    I think know1 was referring to how much outrage there was over the wars when Bush was in office and now not so much....at least that is how I took it.

    Issue of the day...that is the best way to describe american politics...

    you are right, people should try the best they can to reconcile their beliefs, but I think we all realize that it is not possible to be 100% consistent across the board...the best someone can do is try...I do my best to be consistent but unfortunately personally held beliefs and the idea of government are not that easily separated for most people...
    A year from now something new will be on the main stage and people will decide what side they want to be on.

    I have long thought that if one of the political parties came out and said something as simple as we are for the handicapped, the other party would come out and say that they hate the handicapped and they need to go...they consistantly have to pick the other side of the issue and until we get over the idea of two party politics these strange seemingly oppositional positions will be held...in fact that is the biggest barrier to the libertarians gaining mainstream support...not enough contradiction.
    after re-reading know1's post i can see it that way as well.

    how can people who were scared of losing benefits fight tooth and nail against a boogeyman who was not going to take away benefits in the first place, yet seemingly go along with the plan to cut those benefits a year later? i know 5 year olds who are more able to grasp this lunacy than most of those who were against this before they are seemingly for it.

    but old people get senile, so they don't know what they are arguing and yelling about, right?

    well as we both know the Republican resistance machine is very strong. I think the lack of outrage stems from the fact that nothing is changing for the people who are on it now.
    but yes, adults in politics could learn a lot from 5 year olds
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • pjfan021pjfan021 Posts: 684
    i think they're some of the same people who bitch about high taxes even though they actually have gotten a tax break in the past couple years. Left or right, it doesn't matter, people don't inform themselves at all and just believe what they're told a lot of times.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    why isn't fox news telling these people to be angry now? why are angry seniors not showing up at townhalls and raising hell now that there IS an immenent threat to their medicare?

    because they are not being told to be angry. fox wants voters to be stupid and ignorant of the facts. it is easy to control a popiation that does not know the facts, and a population that is scared of a boogeyman that does not exist. so much so that when there is a real boogeyman the people will not believe it...

    before it was "obama care is bad and a threat to democracy and he is gonna take your medicare away" and fox news told this to their audience day after day. now fox is not riling up the base about their medicare reductions, rather they are harping about deficits. are old people angry when they are told they will lose benefits, which was an out and out lie, and now are they being told that cutting medicare is good for them to get the country out of debt? it just does not make sense...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • youngsteryoungster Boston Posts: 6,576
    why isn't fox news telling these people to be angry now? why are angry seniors not showing up at townhalls and raising hell now that there IS an immenent threat to their medicare?

    You mean the same Fox news who said that it was "socialist" when Obama suggested that CEO pay be limited to $500,000/year, but were totally in favor of what Scott Walker did in Wisconsin by stripping collective bargaining rights of public employees so that they can lower the deficit.
    He who forgets will be destined to remember.

    9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
    5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
    8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
    EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    youngster wrote:
    why isn't fox news telling these people to be angry now? why are angry seniors not showing up at townhalls and raising hell now that there IS an immenent threat to their medicare?

    You mean the same Fox news who said that it was "socialist" when Obama suggested that CEO pay be limited to $500,000/year, but were totally in favor of what Scott Walker did in Wisconsin by stripping collective bargaining rights of public employees so that they can lower the deficit.
    yep, that fox news...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    youngster wrote:
    why isn't fox news telling these people to be angry now? why are angry seniors not showing up at townhalls and raising hell now that there IS an immenent threat to their medicare?

    You mean the same Fox news who said that it was "socialist" when Obama suggested that CEO pay be limited to $500,000/year, but were totally in favor of what Scott Walker did in Wisconsin by stripping collective bargaining rights of public employees so that they can lower the deficit.
    yep, that fox news...
    I've seen that Fox News...and have been forced to watch it whenever I'm at my uncle's house.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • jethrojam420jethrojam420 Foxborough MA Posts: 1,075
    I've seen that Fox News...and have been forced to watch it whenever I'm at my uncle's house.[/quote]


    I'm all for family, but honestly if anyone tried to make me watch anything as bad as Fox news i would avoid the visit and join him for dinner at a restaurant or something. yes i hate fox news THAT much
    8/29/00*5/2/03*7/2/03*7/3/03*7/11/03*9/28/04*5/24/06*6/28/08*5/15/10*5/17/10* 10/16/13*10/25/13* 4/28/16*4/28/16*8/5/16*8/7/16 EV 6/15/11 Brad 10/27/02
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    I've seen that Fox News...and have been forced to watch it whenever I'm at my uncle's house.


    I'm all for family, but honestly if anyone tried to make me watch anything as bad as Fox news i would avoid the visit and join him for dinner at a restaurant or something. yes i hate fox news THAT much[/quote]
    The worst part is he loves his Glen Beck. Gives me a good reason to nap.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Newch91 wrote:
    The worst part is he loves his Glen Beck. Gives me a good reason to nap.
    if it gave everyone who watches beck an excuse to nap the country would not absorb his crap like they do presently...the country would surely be less divided..
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    People did not like the fact that they did not know what was in the bill. Everyone has to agree our representatives should read the bills before they pass them. What the people want are honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks.
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    aerial wrote:
    People did not like the fact that they did not know what was in the bill. Everyone has to agree our representatives should read the bills before they pass them. What the people want are honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks.
    so it is ok if people don't know what is being cut from the budget then? :?

    there was outrage when people thought their medicare was going to be cut. that outrage was proven to be unfounded. now they are being told their medicare is being cut, and there is no outrage, not even a peep...it is amazing how people will be so agreeable to things that are against their own interests...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • pjfan021pjfan021 Posts: 684
    aerial wrote:
    People did not like the fact that they did not know what was in the bill. Everyone has to agree our representatives should read the bills before they pass them. What the people want are honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks.

    some earmarks are a good thing. Some earmarks lead to your state getting money for road construction and funds to help build new airports and convenient things that states need. Also, earmarks make up barely any of our spending and will not fix any budget problems.
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    pjfan021 wrote:
    aerial wrote:
    People did not like the fact that they did not know what was in the bill. Everyone has to agree our representatives should read the bills before they pass them. What the people want are honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks.

    some earmarks are a good thing. Some earmarks lead to your state getting money for road construction and funds to help build new airports and convenient things that states need. Also, earmarks make up barely any of our spending and will not fix any budget problems.
    If they are good things, let them be voted on and approved separately. Why hide them in a different agenda?

    Much like term limits, earmarks are an issue that lawmakers want to avoid because ending earmarks takes away a very important fundraising and power-expanding tool.

    In regards to the earmarks not amounting to much of our budget, that is true considering how out of control our spending budget is. But earmarks still average $20-$30B each year.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Jason P wrote:
    If they are good things, let them be voted on and approved separately. Why hide them in a different agenda?

    Much like term limits, earmarks are an issue that lawmakers want to avoid because ending earmarks takes away a very important fundraising and power-expanding tool.

    In regards to the earmarks not amounting to much of our budget, that is true considering how out of control our spending budget is. But earmarks still average $20-$30B each year.
    it is a small drop in the bucket when compared with what we spend on war, occupation, and defense. that money needs to be spent on other things, like medicare and universal health insurance.

    earmarks will never ever be eliminated. they are too important to states that can't afford things like highway and road maintenence and care. and a senator or rep who fails to bring money to their state for these projects typically does not stay a senator or rep for long...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    Jason P wrote:
    If they are good things, let them be voted on and approved separately. Why hide them in a different agenda?

    Much like term limits, earmarks are an issue that lawmakers want to avoid because ending earmarks takes away a very important fundraising and power-expanding tool.

    In regards to the earmarks not amounting to much of our budget, that is true considering how out of control our spending budget is. But earmarks still average $20-$30B each year.
    it is a small drop in the bucket when compared with what we spend on war, occupation, and defense. that money needs to be spent on other things, like medicare and universal health insurance.

    earmarks will never ever be eliminated. they are too important to states that can't afford things like highway and road maintenence and care. and a senator or rep who fails to bring money to their state for these projects typically does not stay a senator or rep for long...
    It's a small drop in the bucket, but we need to start with small drops in order to make progress. The big drops (healthcare, defense, etc) appear to be in political gridlock.

    If a state project is that important, the states should be addressing it. If a senator from Connecticut decides to fund a water taxi service to an abandoned island for $1.9M, I don't think they should just be able to write it into a bill and basically steal the money. With earmarks, it's easy for them to do.

    Earmarks in theory should be good. In reality, they are just one more tool of corruption.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    i don't know how the thread got derailed by talking about earmarks, but i read yesterday that people are going to start interrupting townhall meetings of gop and tea party reps to hold them accountable. we will see how they like it i guess...i saw a nice video of paul ryan being booed by old people in his jurisdiction. it was a civil exchange, and pointed, good questions were asked, yet when he gave a squirly response they called him on it.

    i will never understand how poor and elderly can and will continue to vote for the gop. it is like they vote for these people only so that they can be bent over that much further...

    it is still my opinion that the people are outraged when they don't need to be and when they need to be they are asleep at the switch.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,436
    I think what this thread leads to is something I read (couldn't find it again, unfortunately) that stated a contradiction that many right wing people show by their words and actions: They are against big government accept when they're not. An example of this is a guy I know who rails against big government and yet he retired in his early 50's and earns as much money from his retirement bennefits as he made while working. Where does his retirement check come from? The U.S. Treasury. :?
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    brianlux wrote:
    I think what this thread leads to is something I read (couldn't find it again, unfortunately) that stated a contradiction that many right wing people show by their words and actions: They are against big government accept when they're not. An example of this is a guy I know who rails against big government and yet he retired in his early 50's and earns as much money from his retirement bennefits as he made while working. Where does his retirement check come from? The U.S. Treasury. :?
    these people's rationale drips with contradiction and irony. i think you are right where you said they are against big government except for when they aren't. your friend should be opposed to his own pension and give it back if he is against big government. funny thing is if you suggest that to him he will probably punch you in the nose. i wonder what he feels about the pension and union issues in wisconsin, ohio, and indiana...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    aerial wrote:
    People did not like the fact that they did not know what was in the bill. Everyone has to agree our representatives should read the bills before they pass them. What the people want are honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks.
    ...
    If 'The People' want are "honest representatives that represent Americans, and bills that have NO earmarks'... then WHY to 'The People' keep voting in the SAME FUCKING POLITICIANS???
    I'll tell you why... because some people wil only vote for a person with a (D) or an (R) next to their name. And if they recognize that name and it has the correct letter next to their name... they vote for them.
    Politicians don't give themselves their jobs... 'The People' do.
    Also... the House and Senate Bills are available for YOU to read (ref. http://thomas.loc.gov/)... try reading them yourself, if they are that important to you.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Jason P wrote:
    But earmarks still average $20-$30B each year.

    shit, that's only 2 weeks cost of war in Afganistan alone :o
  • Newch91Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    I want to know where are the jobs the Republicans/Tea Bag party were talking about last year.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    last i checked Obama was in charge
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Newch91 wrote:
    I want to know where are the jobs the Republicans/Tea Bag party were talking about last year.
    i want to know that as well.

    wouldn't cutting funding for some of these government programs actually cut or destroy jobs instead of creating them?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Sign In or Register to comment.