RUSH IS RIGHT -- & This lie was obvious back as far as 2010

... at least that far back. But people (particularly liberal people) were mesmerized into thinking that the AFFORDABLE Care Act was going to either 1) be free for them, or 2) make insurance premiums AFFORDABLE.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/rush-limbaugh-obama-has-his-watergate/

To anyone paying attention from 3 years back - this was a GIFT to the insurance companies. That's where I have disagreed with Rush from the get-go. He keeps preaching that the aim has always been to destroy the insurance industry. No, this was a GIFT to the insurance giants, just like TARP was a gift to the banksters.

The president's own words at that phoney baloney town hall: If we are going to give the insurance companies ..."... ALL THESE NEW CUSTOMERS". Exactly - in THAT, he told the truth. But few were listening. Instead the lemmings had their little heart strings tugged by the mainstream media guys and gals. A condensation of 3 years or so of what was broadcast by (as Rush says) the official PR firm for the Democrat party, the mainstream media, would go something like this:

"Oooohhhhhh (soft and trembly voice) we have to have health care for the poor, and people with pre-existing conditions..."
[The media never once that I heard made the distinction between INSURANCE and HEALTH CARE. Which are 2 DIFFERENT THINGS.]

"Ooooohhhh, 30 million Americans are uninsured, it's a tragedy, bleah bleah bleah."
[They didn't enumerate how many Americans have been doing fine, taking care of their own health, or paying their own doctor and/or hospital bills.]

"Oooooohhhh... health care, health care, health care."
[Again, the so-called AFFORDABLE Care Act is about forced insurance payments - NOT about health care. After $400 to $1600 monthly insurance premiums and $4000 to $7000 annual deductibles, NOBODY HAS ANY MONEY LEFT TO ACTUALLY VISIT THE DOCTOR.

Bottom line - what I love MUCH MORE than Obama being exposed and discredited is that the MAINSTREAM MEDIA is left exposed and discredited, FINALLY. It's been a long time coming.

Michael Savage is right though - more right than Rush. This thing (Affordable Care Act) is going to crumble under its own weight. 2014 is right around the corner, and Democrat Senators, in particular, are painfully aware of that fact.

No votes yet

This article is good, but the comments below it are hysterical. I agree with the commenter who says, leave the penalties in place (because they are a "winner" for Republicans in the 2014 mid-terms - only Democrat-inflicted pain will ever get through to the lemmings in the populace). Another poster puts it just right - he/she hopes those who voted for BO "take it in the pants" as a result of the ACA.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/10/25/worried-about-2014-elections-democ...

The affordable Care Act was the result of Blue Dog Democrats and Republican blocking a singlepayer system.. The United States pays twice the costs for healthcare above any other country but has lower out comes. Why? Its a for profit system motivated by greed and not health care.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Dog breath, do you consider yourself a socialist?

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

Flowerboy I consider myself an American who is concerned about his country. All our trading partners have socialized healthcare and all have minimal defense spending compare to bloated America. In order to compete in this world economy we need to compete also with healthcare and military spending. We cannot waste our seed corn on these two budget killers. We will never get this economy going if all Americans cannot prosper.

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

that, by your own description, you fit right into the following deceived group:

(excerpted from the article at henrymakow.com "Mommy Was a Commie" 2003 (re Betty Friedan)

"Willi Munzenberg, an early confidante of Lenin, organized the Popular Fronts in the 1920's and 1930's and referred to them as "my innocents clubs". He pioneered the protest march, the demonstration, the radical bookstore and publication, the arts festival, and the recruitment of celebrities ("fellow travellers.") In the words of historian Stephen Koch, Munzenberg "was amazingly successful at mobilizing the intelligentsia of the West on behalf of a moralistic set of political attitudes responsive to Soviet needs. In the process, he organized and defined the 'enlightened' moral agenda of his era." (Double Lives: Spies and Writers in the Secret Soviet War of Ideas Against the West, New York, 1994, p.14.) In a 1989 interview, Babette Gross, the wife of Willy Munstenberg, described the Popular Front modus operandi:

"You do not endorse Stalin. You do not call yourself a Communist. You do not call upon people to support the Soviets. Never. YOU CLAIM TO BE AN INDEPENDENT MINDED IDEALIST. YOU DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND POLITICS BUT YOU CLAIM THE LITTLE GUY IS GETTING A LOUSY BREAK." (Koch, p. 220)

****************************************
My, how easy it was for the Communists to dupe the average-Joe American.

The complete article on Friedan (Mommy Was a Commie) is archived at henrymakow.com. Look over to the left-hand side for that and other archived articles. As the article notes, had Friedan's ultra-communist party background been known at the time, her book would never have sold a large number of copies. I recall a co-worker back in the 1970's had to explain to me who/what BF was. The co-worker, being a fellow Christian, had nothing but contempt for Friedan. But lots of Americans have been tricked and fooled by the "Popular Front".

Farmergal its best described by the late George Carlin

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

Does that idiot deliver flowers or pizzas, which one is it? You sure he's not a paper boy?

Hope I didn't offend anyone!

95% of the tax revenue into the federal government is swallowed up in this order, FY 2012, for the top four line items:

medicare/medicaid $872B
social security $829B
military $688B
debt interest $225B

I like how you tag the military when it's NUMBER THREE in the list of obscene spending.

Our entitlement system is the main budget killer. As a stinking Liberal, you can't admit that. I truly believe you can't even understand that. You probably believe in the full flowering of that mental illness called "Liberalism" that every penny spent in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security is somehow "due" Americans.

And yet you cannot use MATH and say that those are due Americans, when 25% to 40% of each yearly federal budget is borrowed. The borrowing implies that every program within it, including M/M, SS and the military, are overfunded by 25% to 40%. Therefore cuts need to be made to every program out there, starting at 25%. Our borrowing to fund your stupid welfare state is killing us. You point fingers like a child does, but a parent well knows that when all the children point fingers at each other, the best solution is to punish them all.

You don’t get Social Security unless you pay into it. It’s not an entitlement because there is the requirement that one has to have put into it in order to receive from it. When you talk about borrowing and Social Security, it is the government that borrowed from Social Security, not the government borrowing to pay Social Security.

"When you talk about borrowing and Social Security, it is the government that borrowed from Social Security, not the government borrowing to pay Social Security."

Actually it's both.

They borrowed from Social Security. Now to pay the interest and the principle back to Social Security they must borrow. They took the "lockbox" unlocked it and filled it with IOU's.

Disagree? Then why did Geitner suggest that SS payments would not be made if the debt limit was not raised?

MikeyA

Oh, I agree it’s both. I’m just making the point that the money for Social Security is “due” to those who put into it. It’s not their fault the lockbox got raided. Social Security in and of itself is not the problem. It was funded, funded by a huge population of “Baby Boomers” that out numbered their parents. By all rights, at this point in history, Social Security should be totally solvent for years to come. It’s not right to be treating it as some kind of giveaway from tax dollars.

SS is exactly an entitlement. If it wasn't an entitlement, then we'd have individual accounts with limits obviously imposed. The Boomers are specifically enjoying such a lack, therefore they're being entitled. In addition, we have gross obscenities like SSI and SSDI. So you're saying those aren't entitlements?

And I'm saying once again that your opinion on these matters doesn't overcome being broke. We borrow heavily to spend our budget, every year. This has to end. I don't care how it ends, by the pen or the sword. You're whining by using the E-word, which summed with all other whining, keeps the borrowing machine running. That ends in the sword. That means civil war, or what Russia had to endure, which may as well have been civil war. I propose stopping the borrowing and bringing spending back into line with revenue, which is what sanity is, and that ends with the pen, not the sword.

The laws of budgetary economics don't get repealed just because it's a federal government. Eventually you have to stop with the borrowing and live within your means. That means budget cuts. And if you won't take a cut here, and others won't take a cut there, then the Solomonic solution is obvious: Cut the baby in half. Or you get the sword in your own belly. Choose.

We do have separate accounts with Social Security. Remember, not everyone gets Social Security, only those who paid in? That means they keep track of who puts in, with an account. Account means to keep track of. You even have an account number. It’s called a “Social Security number”. I know you’ve heard of that.

I’m not going to spend much time on you, so I’m just going to explain it to you once and get on with the rest of my week. Social Security is only part of the borrowing because it got raided. That is fact. You, unwittingly on the side of the raiders in this case, can not change that fact. Instead of rambling about swords and complaining about Social Security, try exposing the habits of the crooks that raided Social Security. Then maybe “We The People” can get our government to a place where borrowing and spending can balance. In the mean time, don’t tell me people who paid money all their lives are getting some kind of hand out.

You can't be this dense. You have no account, since there's no LIMIT. Once you start collecting SS there's no limit to how much you can withdraw. You collect SS for as long as you live. The 'account' merely keeps track of who you are and how much you put in, which determines your benefit amount.

Get it? It's not a true account if there's no limit. That's why SS isn't an entitlement. And SSI and SSDI further illustrate how it's almost purely a welfare program. SS is welfare. Period.

And what's going to happen, pen or sword, will happen since we've lost all other choices. I'm betting on the sword, since Americans are morons and live in a fog of delusion.

P.S. I'm telling you it's a hand out since those are the facts. Deal with it.

"Get it? It's not a true account if there's no limit. That's why SS isn't an entitlement. And SSI and SSDI further illustrate how it's almost purely a welfare program. SS is welfare. Period."

I agree with you when you say "SS isn't an entitlement". There is one way, however, that it is an entitlement: those that pay into it are entitled to its benefits.
I hope you have a job.

Then we must clarify to precision: You're not entitled to more money than you paid in.

Money you paid in = Yours.
Money you didn't pay in = Somebody else's.
Money you paid in and you get back = Entitlement.
Money you didn't pay in but you get anyway = Welfare.

How the Super-Rich Are Abandoning America, Leaving the Ship of State to Sink
Monday, 04 November 2013
By PAUL BUCHHEIT
http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18291-how-the-super-rich-...

Statements made are the opinion of the writer who is exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and are generally permitted.

QUICK QUICK QUICK, cut and paste! Cut and paste!

Anything to blot out the truth, eh?

Rush is a drug addict. By all means listen to him.LOL

Hope I didn't offend anyone!

And your a moron for thinking he is... LOL

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.