Group “Warning” Elderly About Dangers Of Health Care Reform Tried To Privatize Social Security
Elderly people who are frightened by a conservative group’s ads warning them that health care reform could lead to their extermination at the hands of government bureaucrats might want to keep this in mind: The same group invested huge money in the push to privatize their Social Security.
The 60 Plus Association — which is running a national ad warning that health care reform would mean bureaucrats would decide whether old folks are “worth the cost” — has already gotten attention for some of its previous right wing advocacy.
But little to no attention has been paid to the group’s efforts to privatize Social Security, the effort which could arguably do the most to discredit it among the seniors that are the primary target of the group’s lurid health care scaremongering right now.
A Democrat points me to this piece from National Journal’s archives that show the 60 Plus Association spending big bucks on the Social Security privatization push as far back as 2001. The group’s president, Jim Martin, was one of an exclusive group of top level anti-Social Security right wingers that included Grover Norquist, and Martin that year bankrolled the privatization push to the tune of more than $1 million.
In 2005, when George W. Bush’s privatization push started to gather steam, the group hailed Bush and the Republican Party’s “leadership” on the issue, describing itself as a “strong proponent for personal retirement accounts.”
The talking point writes itself: Seniors, every time you hear ads “warning” you about the “dangers” of health care reform, supposedly for your own good, keep in mind that these ads were bankrolled by the same forces that spent huge money trying to protect you from your own Social Security.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Well, when you get two completely different stories from your sitting President, what are seniors supposed to think. After you read below, what’s a senior supposed to think?
President Obama told a town hall audience in New Hampshire that he is “not in favor” of so-called “death panels” in which the government would decide who does and does not qualify for care to keep them alive.
BUT!!
from a NY TIMES article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/magazine/03Obama-t.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
THE PRESIDENT: So that’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that’s also a huge driver of cost, right?
I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.
DAVID LEONHARDT: So how do you — how do we deal with it?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.
@Greg:
Close, but I’d change the end:
‘Seniors, every time you hear ads warning you about the “dangers” of health care reform, supposedly for your own good, keep in mind that these ads ARE bankrolled by the same forces that spent huge money trying to privatize Social Security by placing the fate of seniors’ retirement on the stock market.’
BBQ — yep, yours wins, hands down.
I agree that the President is not on message. I think he gives too many interviews to individual journalists and he tries to respond in detail to provisions that are in draft form in several draft bills. That is manna for those ready to pounce on inconsistencies.
What the White House lacks is consistency. Too much gassing with too many senators and congressmen/women without a draft bill in place that citizens can read for themselves.
As for our seniors: you know my parents are seniors and they swallow a lot of stuff because they see it on tv. It’s unfortunate. But they don’t seem to recall the Social Security debate. They take in ads attacking the current health care proposals like ducks to water. Even I have a tough time explaining that Medicare is a govt program. My parents graduated from high school and they worked hard to give us a good start in life. Where has all their drive and healthy scepticism gone?
Given that Birther Pat Boone is the spox for 60 Plus, what more could be expected but fearmongering?
Hey, at least 60 Plus is consistent. 60 Plus and the protesters want government’s hands off of their healthcare, and 60 Plus wanted government’s hands off of the social safety net for seniors.
I say we give them a big “Vaya con Dios” let all the “hands off” people opt out of Social Security and Medicare. We can cut down the cost of opening the inevitable elderly debtor’s prisons by converting the extant FEMA concentration camps and death trains for that purpose. Halliburton can farm out the administration of the prisons to 60 Plus….
I see one of the resident Astroturfers has already jumped on this thread, to spread their Big Lie about how the President wants death panels for the elderly.
The President’s maternal grandmother just passed, and she was given proper care for many years.
The President and the First Lady have the First Lady’s mother living with them, and they have no intention of doing anything to shorten her life, anymore than they did to shorten the live of the President’s grandmother.
When you see someone, who is on here all the time, spreading the Big Lie about the President’s intentions, then you know that you are hearing from a paid shill. Do not dialog with such a cynical and manipulative creep.
It is alright to have honest disagreements about the merits of various proposal, but when you have some paid jerk continuing to spread astroturfers lies, then you should shun that creep.
@liam
You’re following talking points perfectly…don’t try to dialougue with the opposition. They will present facts and words directly from the president. Just ignore them and call them astroturfers. Ah, Projection, I encourage you to visit this site.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Liam – Thanks for the reminder. It is impossible to debate with those who hold a clenched fist, and it is obvious to me that many on the “just say no” side to health care are not discussing in good faith.
Sometimes it is hard to remember it’s not my job to try to chat with those who have no ears to hear.
@angela
I’m always willing to listen. If you’d like to respond to my original post and debate the merits of it, please do. Actually, I’m in the “just say yes” category of healthcare reform. I’m sure you’d love to hear my recommendations for change.
@JoeSixpack
You’re pulling false statements out of your diseased cornhole perfectly…don’t let the naysaying opposition dissuade you from pulling other objects out of there.
Yeah, phuuck off.
@jak
Stay classy Jak. Stay classy.
@JoeSixpack
Calls for civility from the likes of you is like getting dating advice from a rapist..
Joesixpack – you posted the same thing on the last thread last evening. I’ve put the question back to you there but I’ll add it here as well. I’d like to see your answer…
No, it’s not hypocritical. It’s honest about a deeply complex set of questions. Let me ask you a question, JSP. Your mother has had the last of a series of strokes at age 93. She is now comatose and there is no reasonable prospect that, even if she regains some degree of consciousness, she will have anything like normal brain function and the nature of her ailments make it clear that her pain will be severe. On top of that, numerous organs are slowly failing. Her breathing would cease soon after she is taken off a respirator. Further, you live in a country without government-managed and funded medicare so YOU and your family must bear all the costs involved in her continuing hospitalization.
Would you and your family discuss with her doctors what now ought to be the proper course of action? Would you call yourself a death panel?
@Angela,
Notice how he just outed himself. He did not deny that he was a paid shill, he just complained about getting exposed. This is the same guy who yesterday posted that he had tracked the postings of someone, who posts on here, over other blog sites. That is the work of a paid operative doing opposition research, and trying to smear the person for having posted opinions on more than one blog.
The amazing thing is that this paid shill, who was tracking the person, does the exact same thing himself, posting on several sites.
When they give their selves labels that sound like they are just regular blue collar guys, then you know that they are just trying to con working class people, by pretending to be one of them, when they really never got dirt under their nails in their entire lives.
@bernie
thanks for the question.
First, let me say I’m not against these panels, just would like to see them be the family and not the government.
So yes, I would consider my family to be the death panel for my mother.
However, its our current president was the one who told a woman on an ABC Healthcare townhall that her 93 year old mother probably shouldn’t have been given a pacemaker, instead a painkiller.
That’s why govt shouldn’t make the decisions, even though taxpayer(not government) is footing the bill.
Alright, let me have it.
Is JoeSixpack sbj? Just wondering….
@liam
no way I can prove and no way you can prove it that either of are paid shills.
I am not and this is the only site I comment on. Its the truth, but you have no reason to believe me.
Liam – there’s no good reason to assume he/she is anything other than what you are I are…individuals writing our opinions here. I’ve received the same sort of accusation more times than I can count.
@Bernie,
The guy presents the discredited claims about Government death panels, over and over. He did tracking research on a poster, and then wrote in a challenging manner, on this site, about why that person was doing such a thing. That is not the work of just a regular person. That is work of a pro at the propaganda game.
By their deeds shall ye know them.
Look at what he opened up with. An intentional distortion of what the President said. He is still harping on that death panel rubbish, even when he answered the question about what he would do about someone in his own family.
He keeps on repeating The Big Lie. That is classic subliminal message planting, until it becomes accepted as fact.
He is sooooo worried about the Death Panel. Sure he is, My Arse!!!
Greg
Rachel Maddow has been doing a great job and she has used your information several times to expose 60 plus for the big business organization that they are. They really have nothing to do with seniors issues. I don’t know if you have seen this before but check out who is actually behind 60 plus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XChjPdm470
Joe – that an honest and thoughtful answer. Thankyou.
Let me describe how this works in Canada. These decisions are made by the family and the doctor(s). If there’s a decision to continue extending life, even in such a situation as I’ve described, the costs of that continuing care will be covered by the Medicare program. No government official enters the equation at any point. There is, of course, no reason at all why the US system might not be set up in the same manner.
Where government has its proper responsibility here is to arrange matters so that both doctors/hospitals and citizens are as well informed as possible regarding options and regarding probable outcomes. From such an educated and honest assessment, most families will make as good a decision as is possible in a situation where no happy decisions are really available.
Liam – as you know, you and I share notions here whereas Joe and I do not. But on the matter of his motivations, you and I have to differ, I guess.
Bernie
I have to side with Liam on this one. Either he is a paid shill or WOEFUL uninformed. Notice that he keeps posting President Obama’s words which directly contradict his own point. Or maybe he doesn’t realize what the phrase “not determinative” really means.
How do you even debate something like that?
You don’t because its not about health care reform, its about trying to point to a shiny object in the room. Makes you wonder about their motivations. That’s all I’m saying. And we should all keep in mind that John McCain DID employ people that were paid to leave supportive comments on blogs around the net.
@bernie
Thank you for your honesty. I know we may not agree on everything, but atleast we can discuss things rationally.
@liam
I guess you aren’t really reading my posts since you think I’m trotting out lies. I’m presenting you with our Presidents own words and articles from a liberal leaning newspaper. Go ahead, call me crazy, but I think it makes you look more crazy by doing it.
Alright, I must get back to work. I will check back later this evening as I enjoy Greg’s work and all of the posters insights.
sg – I do understand that there are folks operating on boards like this one who are functioning (paid or unpaid) in alignment with or under the direction of PR firms. But I’ve been on boards such as this one for long enough that I understand they constitute a very small percentage of posters, even of that set of posters who initially look as if they might be. It’s on that experiential basis that I give folks like Joe the benefit of the doubt. As I mentioned before, I’ve been accused of the same thing myself probably thirty or forty times so I know how this stuff can be misconstrued. And if I’m wrong, it doesn’t really matter anyway. Other folks can engage Joe or myself in whatever manner they feel appropriate.
Hey SG — yeah, I did see that Maddow episode. Great stuff. She’s really been on a roll on this.
The insurance companies receive a huge, unwarranted subsidy ($170 billion according to Obama) for the Medicare “Advantage” programs, corporate welfare awarded by Bush. Presumably they are very much interested in the status quo here.
When has the guy with the phony blue collar name, every stood up for someone on the other side of the aisle.
I stood up for Senator Isakson yesterday, even though he and I are from the complete opposite sides of the political spectrum.
That is what a honest discussion is all about. I was not a Reagan supporter, but he and Tip O’Neill were able to disagree without telling big lies about each other’s positions.
There is nothing in the words, that Mr. Faux Blue Collar keeps citing, that says that the President wants a panel which would decide who should live, and who should die, yet Mr. Faux Blue Collar guy, keeps on claiming that is what the President has called for.
When someone keeps on distorting the facts, over and over, then, like Sgwhite said, they are either a cynical manipulative shill, or someone with the IQ, and comprehension skills of an anvil.
His writings suggest that he is not that dim witted, so that leaves……..
DAVID LEONHARDT: So how do you — how do we deal with it?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.
Joe, I think it’s obvious what was implied. The inviewer asked “How do WE deal with [end of life care]“. By we, i take the inviewer to mean that how should each family deal with this issue. And the president says you should have a conversation with doctors, ethicist, etc. Meanwhile, politicians should have conversations with these people to facilitate legislation that allows them to give you and your family the best opinions available (”that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance”). Furthmore, “It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance” That’s a direct quote from you posted. The independent board can’t and shouldn’t force you to choose, but they should give you the best advice on a course of action. Lastly, as it is in the bill right now, there is only legislation to compensate the doctors that give you this advice. It gives them no power whatsoever over your families capability of making life/death decisions.
I think you need to take off the left/right lens a bit and look at the statements, the legislation, and context. I can tell you, as a programmer, the spoken word is a terrible way to communicate intent.
Liam – It’s ok, we don’t have to have the same notion here.
If you look at the commentary that is now coming out of Britain by citizens who actually do know from life experience how the NHS operates and who are utterly amazed at the disinformation that exists in the US, you’ll get a good perspective on how Canadians also regard all of this. It has been my experience in talking to many on the right here about government-managed health programs and insurance programs that they will simply not believe me when I describe Canada’s situation. They have been steeped in an ideological perspective and in misinformation for so long that many simply cannot escape it. They will hold their presuppositions quite regardless of information which contradicts it. It is disheartening (we clearly aren’t a very bright species) but it is the way it is.
But these folks aren’t the only folks in the world and others, less susceptible to that sort of ideological brain-freeze, are kicking about too and in greater numbers (I think). They are often just less vocal. Many read but don’t wade into discussions like this one.
Patches said: “the spoken word is a terrible way to communicate intent.”
Indeed. And this is even much moreso the case where we are without the information provided by voice and facial expressions. Misperceptions on a board like this are common and understandable.
# joesixpack | August 12th, 2009 at 07:36 pm
@tena
Enough with the posting of the same article. We get it and have read it. Thanks.
# JoeSixpack | August 13th, 2009 at 08:33 am
President Obama told a town hall audience in New Hampshire that he is “not in favor” of so-called “death panels” in which the government would decide who does and does not qualify for care to keep them alive.
BUT!!
from a NY TIMES article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/magazine/03Obama-t.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
ETC.
# JoeSixpack | August 13th, 2009 at 08:48 am
Well, when you get two completely different stories from your sitting President, what are seniors supposed to think. After you read below, what’s a senior supposed to think?
President Obama told a town hall audience in New Hampshire that he is “not in favor” of so-called “death panels” in which the government would decide who does and does not qualify for care to keep them alive.
BUT!!
from a NY TIMES article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/magazine/03Obama-t.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
Joe, follow your own advice.
Joe, you do know that “end-of-life counseling” is not a “death panel” don’t you?
You also realize that any time you are admitted to the hospital, someone comes and asks you if you have a living will or medical power of attorney, and if you say “no” they ask you if you want to speak to someone about it, don’t you?
This is what is being suggested. Counseling about what your options are if something bad happens. This is not someone deciding whether or not your life is worth continuing. Pretending that it is does little more than reveal who you are getting your news from. You need to change the channel every once and a while, that **** will rot your brain in a hurry.
What appears to have been overlooked is; how the Republicans, in order to try and scare the elderly, have now abandoned their long held view, that Medicare was going broke, and needed to be reined in.
Now, just for political expedience, they are coming out for unlimited spending, on even the most hopeless of medical conditions for the elderly.
Keep in mind folks; when they warn against having any medical counseling being given to those very sick elderly, in their last year of life, what the Republicans are saying is that they want to have unlimited Medicare spending on the dying elderly.
How is that for such brazen two faced positioning.
According to the GOP, government is too big, and medicare spending is out of control, however lets us piss billions and billions more away each year on the incurable elderly.
Talk that point up to all the normal people of all ages. That is a truth that you can get across. They may be elderly, but they still will recognize the difference between double talk, and commonsense, if you lay it out for them.
I have 75 years / i have had a living will (advanced directive) since the Schiavo fiasco / additionally I also participated in a consultation with a doctor and my 90 year old mother in the topic of end of life care / this is an established practice and was arranged by he nursing home where she was living / furthermore my current doctor who keeps my bloodpressure prescriptions up to date also asked me if i had a living will and he was pleased to know that i had taken care of this. Such a simple issue but nothing is simple for people who live in fear / live in fear / die in fear.
According to the WSJ, the senate finance committee is contemplating dropping end of life counselling. This comes as a consequence of the fear/misinformation campaign being waged for the clear purpose of damaging healthcare reform and the president.
And this is a clear instance where the well-being of individuals in times of great crisis becomes of absolutely zero importance to entities whose fundamental concern is to make or increase profits.
@JoeSixpack = You missed the point, what you’re referring to is what Obama said. The point is, “THAT PROPOSAL IS NOT IN THIS BILL”.
Not sure how to get this across to you guys on the right, perhaps we should write it on a big stick and beat you with it. It is not about what anyone said or wrote in the past. It is about the proposals being presented and voted on. If Obama puts death panels in the bill then we can have this conversation.
Secondly JoeSixpack, who do you think is making those tough decisions today? Sure isn’t doctors and patients.
It appears that you have placed a lot of effort into your article and I require more of these on the net these days. I sincerely got a kick out of your post. I don’t really have much to say in response, I only wanted to comment to reply wonderful work.
Hi buddy, your blog’s design is simple and clean and i like it. Your blog posts are superb. Please keep them coming. Greets!!!
Advantageously, the article is in reality the greatest on this deserving topic. I concur with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your approaching updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the exceptional lucidity in your writing. I will directly grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. Pleasant work and much success in your business dealings!