Type to search

GOP Rogues’ Gallery: Five Republicans Who’ve Admitted They’re Out To Kill Medicare And Social Security

Memo Pad Politics

GOP Rogues’ Gallery: Five Republicans Who’ve Admitted They’re Out To Kill Medicare And Social Security


We can stop pretending. For months we’ve had to hear Paul Ryan and his pals on the right explain that they’re trying to “save” Medicare and Social Security as they pitched plans that would do the exact opposite.

Finally, thanks to the miracle of recorded sound and a campaign where candidates are forced to speak without a script, the truth is coming out. As Talking Points Memo’s Brian Beutler says, “Democrats support single-payer health care for seniors, Republicans don’t, and want to replace the existing system with something else entirely.”

For everyone who thought the GOP learned a lesson in 2005 when their plan to privatize Social Security was so roundly rejected by voters that it didn’t even get a vote, here are five Republicans who have admitted that their goal is to end the bedrock programs of the New Deal and the Great Society.


  1. Not_Phyllis September 28, 2012

    Dear Gawd…

    1. Daniel Jones September 29, 2012

      Yup. Putting it in the si9mplest of terms, America is outgrowing these robber barons at long last, and now we’re seeing the stuff they have been hiding as private opinion .

  2. Hugh September 29, 2012

    How do these people get in office? Oh maybe they dont speak the truth at election time..

    1. Gammaanya September 29, 2012

      They don’t but power of money and stupid people always gets them in.

  3. dtgraham September 29, 2012

    “Social security is by far the best example of a program violently tossing aside any respect for our founding principles.”— Rick Perry.

    Right, because the founding principles insist that poorer seniors be tossed out onto the sidewalk to die if they don’t have enough money. This is not normal political conservatism and isn’t normal anything actually, and Americans are beginning to realize it. Hence the beatdown that Obama is giving Romney in the polls, which is beginning to spill over into senate and congressional races.

    I’ve heard that America is a center-right nation. That sounds about right (for present times). However, what that also means is that America is not a far right nation and is not a libertarian nation either. The GOP have simply gone too far. It’s finally too much. It may appear that they believe in no government, no taxation, every dog for himself, (like that would be acceptable) but when it comes to women’s bodies, gay people and other social issues, they want complete government control. It’s some weird hybrid that appeals only to the wealthy and evangelicals.

    Couponing medicare , privatizing social security, gutting medicaid, while cutting the rich guy’s taxes is finally going too far. It’s fine to be fiscally conservative and concerned about the treasury, but they don’t seem to be any of that. Their main concern seems to be tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts, while giving the pentagon a blank check and rolling back the 20th century on voting rights, women’s issues, labour rights, racial equality, human rights, environmental standards, the New Deal, and the Great Society.

    I’m fully aware that America is more politically conservative than most of the wealthy, advanced democracies, but there’s a limit to it. The Republicans are now starting to take it to beyond what most Americans are comfortable with.

    1. Hugh September 29, 2012

      Very well stated, you said it all, without the backing sfrom suuper PAC’s

    2. Gammaanya September 29, 2012

      Sorry to say, most American’s will vote agains themselves because they just racists. I don’t believe in pols and money talks BS walks. Some just lazty to do any research, to think on their own, some just don’t care. If they did NONE of the Idiots in Republican party would be in the office. Look at Missouri, Indiana, both guys said they will do away with SS, medicare, fair pay, etc,etc. They got in and making money, vote/filibuster everything Democrats wanted to do. They even stopped the Veterans Job bill. Pay back for the ultimate sacrifices – what did the contribute/sacrifice -? NOTHING but reap the benefits of others . They are the takers and moochers. Who is guilty?? Look in the mirror.. They just don’t see it, they just wanted black man out of the office Period. They would rather die and let the country wither but the man have to go. Shame that in this Century, age and technology we act like it’s a 17 century. Wit R/R we might be having witch hunts and burn them at the stakes and later Mormons will baptize them.
      How people like Bachmann, West, Walsh, King etc got in??? LIES, and MONEY.
      For them it’s a cushy , secure, well paying job and the benefits , all on your payola.
      R/R will win, too much money was pumped and Faux News, Rushie, Hannity WILL NOT let that happened – they will spin it, distort and the haters will lap it up. Old folks in Florida, half of them senile, will site with R/R, they just don’t understand, all they hear is 716B taken from them, and R/R will put it back and more. That;s what they care about. Voter suppression in full swing in all states. If some don’t understand that their most precious right to Vote is practically taken away. None of them took the streets to protest and we have corrupted justice system to begin with. Justice should be blind, to race, religion, gender etc, Here justice can be bought and is with more money. Electing Bush twice should be a lesson, nobody learn anything and NEVER will. HATE is a powerful motivator and is selfdestructive. Have any of you noticed that in R/R no black/Hispanic advisors – all Bush dumbos.

      1. nurselaidoff September 29, 2012

        Very poorly said….So if someone doesn’t vote for Obama, they are racists? So using the same logic, if people didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton in 2008 they are anti woman. And if you don’t support Allen West (R) from Florida, or Bobby Jindal (R) from Louisiana, you are a racist? And how about the portion of America that votes for Obama just because he is black? Isn’t that also racism?
        Racism is being thrown around as a code word for someone that doesn’t agree with your political stance. It is part of the lack of civility that has entered into political discussions over that last few years. Add in class warfare and you have the current mess that Obama has put us into to get re elected.
        I agree, many are too lazy to do the research that they should do to make a political choice. But if you aren’t watching Fox news, CNN, MSNBC and looking at both liberal and conservative publications, you aren’t doing any research at all.
        I am finding that Fox news often covers important news that is often over looked by the main stream media.
        For example, the death of our ambassador in Libya which the Obama administration kept blaming on a movie and a spontaneous uprising. Fox news questioned that from the beginning and kept covering it. The mainstream media didn’t pick that up until weeks later. Who brings rocket launchers to a spontaneous uprising? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out it was a terrorist attack. It was clear that this was a cover up from the Obama administration and the mainstream media helped with it by omission. The Obama administration didn’t want a black eye on their middle east policy (or lack of middle east policy).
        My point being, if you don’t watch all of these stations including Fox, you are not doing any research at all and you are going to be missing key pieces of news.

        1. Justin Napolitano September 29, 2012

          Nurse, just like most Republicans, you shoot first and aim second. No one has said there was a cover up and besides the investigation is continuing. If this was a terrorist attack it didn’t have very much effect and many Muslims have also said that it was against their beliefs to show violence like this event..
          Never the less you and others should be supporting our President and our country instead of shooting off your mouth, like Romney, before knowing the facts.

    3. latebloomingrandma September 29, 2012

      I agree 100% with everything you said. However, if you’ve ever tried to talk to people who are exclusive Fox News viewers, you enter some kind of alternate universe. The longer they tune in, I think it alters their brain wiring. Where I live, many people rely on Faux News. It’s disheartening, and tragic, actually. They are convinced they have “truth” on their side and are impervious to other views. Throw in Limbaugh and other toxic radioheads, America has been dumbed down and divided. One of the great side effects of a free society, I guess.

    4. Fern Woodfork September 29, 2012

      And This Is The Very Thing That Going To Get The American Taliban Booted Of The Island For Good!!! Ask Paul Ryan They Booed The Shit Out Of Him At The Yearly AARP Meeting Then All You Saw Wheelchairs And Canes Heading For The EXIT Door!!! The Fact That People Have Been Paying Into This Program For Decades Then Here Come Some Wealthy ASSHOLES Trying To Change It!! The GOP/Tea Party American Taliban Vision For America Looks More And More Like A Third World Country!!!

    5. montanabill September 29, 2012

      You don’t know the first thing about Social Securities finances, Medicare’s finances, proposed GOP tax policy, or anything about much of anything especially the phony drummed up ‘wars on (subject du jour)’.

      Do you have the foggiest idea what being $16 trillion headed for $20 trillion in debt means? Do you have the foggiest notion of what will happen when SS and Medicare run out of money in just a few short years? Do you have any idea what the New Deal and the Great Society actually accomplished? Do you believe the President’s call for the ‘middle class’ to lead us out of his depression and do you have even the slightest idea how that could happen? Do you have any idea just how the President intends to spur job growth or do you expect jobs to simply materialize?

      Do you really believe the Republicans believe in the things you are claiming? If so, you have not been paying the slightest attention or simply filter out information contrary to your biases.

      All the polls show the majority of Americans think the President is doing a bad job on the economy, is bad at foreign policy and they don’t like Obamacare. But since they are getting their ‘Obama phones’, that seems to be more important.

      1. Justin Napolitano September 29, 2012

        Montana, Social Security is sound for at least 25 years and Medicare for 10. Just slight adjustments are needed to keep them fully funded like taxing all income up to $500,000.00 for Social Security and increasing the rate for Medicare, after someone earns $250,000.00, just a little. It is not necessary to do anything drastic like what is being proposed by the Republicans.

        1. montanabill September 30, 2012

          Do the math.

          1. dtgraham September 30, 2012

            Hey Bill, try doing the math on this. The federal government’s budgets are already bleeding red and Romney says he wants a 20% across the board tax cut which will obviously disproportionately benefit the wealthy. You’re unclear what deductions and loopholes he’ll close to keep it revenue neutral? Can’t blame you there. Both Romney and Ryan repeatedly refuse to give any details on that whenever they’re asked. After all, “the devil is in the details and the angel is in the policy” don’t you know.

            There are no where near enough corporate yacht loopholes to be closed that would ever make up for that kind of revenue loss and Romney knows it. The speculation is that the mortgage deduction would have to be hit. I’ve heard talk of Pell grants getting it and Ryan has already proposed huge cuts to medicaid, and the latter is not speculation.

            This guy is either going to seriously hurt lower and middle income people or he’s going to blow up the United State’s finances so badly you may never recover.

            Of course, that’s if he actually does it. Almost every day, any more, his people issue a statement saying the governor misspoke the day before and didn’t mean what he clearly said. Who knows where he really stands on anything. He’s the worst serial liar I’ve ever seen run for President.

          2. montanabill October 1, 2012

            If Romney can’t produce a revenue neutral tax bill, it will not be offered. It would be futile. I’m a little confused. All I hear from liberals is about the big tax breaks that the rich get, yet when pressed, the best you can offer is something about corporate yachts? How many corporate yachts do think there are and what do they have to do with an individual’s taxes? If the rich are getting all these gigantic tax breaks, I would think you would be happy to have them taken away.

            The talk you have heard about Pell Grants is from your side. Ryan has a complete plan, not just huge cuts to Medicare (like Obama did) and his plan would not affect those who want to keep the same benefits they get now. More left side scare material.

            Speaking of serial liars, been paying attention to Obama’s statements about Libya?

          3. dtgraham October 1, 2012

            There have been a lot of tax bills and budgets that weren’t revenue neutral over the last 10 years that were offered and passed. Why do you think things are where they are today.

            When trying to answer the so called class warfare argument and justify those kinds of tax cuts, Romney insisted that closing loopholes and deductions for the wealthy would leave them in the same position and the whole thing would be revenue neutral. I used corporate yachts as a silly example, but the point is that budget analysts say there aren’t enough special deductions “for the wealthy” to ever cover that kind of revenue loss. He’ll have to go a lot deeper than that but he won’t talk about it.

            Romney and Obama are both cutting about 700 billion from Medicare. If you’re an insurance company participating in Medicare advantage, you’re getting the same cut no matter who wins.

            Romney/Ryan are claiming that they take the money saved and put it toward deficit reduction while Obama takes that money and spends it on health care for poor people.

            However, Romney/Ryan also add a trillion dollars in new government spending on the defence budget. They also have trillions of dollars in tax cuts that they haven’t explained how they’re going to pay for. These decisions make future cuts to medicare more likely. Obama cuts defence spending by hundreds of billions, raises about 1.5 trillion in new taxes, and puts all that money into deficit reduction like Clinton did in the 90’s. That would make future medicare cuts less likely. That’s if he gets the chance. Depends on the new Congress.

            Ryan has a complete plan alright. To completely gut the transportation budget, infrastructure, education and training, and income support for the poor. He cuts 3.1 trillion in medicaid and medicare in his proposals. He’s no deficit hawk. He voted right along with Bush in the 2000’s. He is, or has become, a libertarian reformer.

          4. montanabill October 1, 2012

            When Bush 1 was offered the deal of ‘we’ll cut spending if you’ll agree to raise taxes’, you know what happened. The greatest increase in income to the government came as the result of Bush 2’s tax cuts. As with Reagan’s tax cuts, which did the same at the time, Congress didn’t use the increased revenue to pay down the debt, they simply went to bigger spending. Obama was one of those in the Congress under Bush that pushed and voted for ever increased spending. Then, as President, he signed all the big spending bills while blaming Bush for the spending.

            You are right. There are not enough special deductions for the rich to cover any revenue loss. I’ve noted before when the ‘big deductions for the rich’ claims appeared in these comment sections, that little clause: ‘ must be above x% of net income’ wipes out virtually every deduction for high income earners. But the bottom line is that our tax code needs to be virtually thrown out and something far simpler needs to replace it.

            I haven’t seen any particulars on an Obama plan to cut hundreds of billions from defense. The wars were and are being financed by borrowed money, so there is no debt reduction that will occur when that stops. Debt increase will simply slow down. With the middle east in so much turmoil, cutting very much from defense might be very fool hardy. The $1.5 trillion in new taxes is over a decade or $150 billion a year. Since we have roughly $1 trillion per year in deficit spending, reducing it by $150 billion is a drop in the bucket. Still leaves $850 billion in deficit spending. The $1.2 trillion saving from winding down the wars is illusionary since last year’s spending on Afghanistan was about $6.2 billion. That leaves a $744 billion annual deficit.

            Then we will reap the added benefit of the top earners doing whatever they can to protect their assets, and they can be quite creative. So instead of having money to invest in U.S. businesses, you probably see a lot more money and resource flowing overseas to places with lower taxes. Watch France.

          5. dtgraham October 2, 2012

            Debt was being paid down in the 90’s. Some of the tax increase did go to debt reduction. I’ve long believed that the 90’s tax rates seemed about right and need to be brought back for everyone, not the top 1% or whatever. It was an island of fiscal sanity over the last 31 years. The increases did nothing to impede strong economic growth. I understand that it was a bit of a dot com bubble economy then and this is a different situation, but how have those Bush tax cuts worked out? Job creation was abysmal in the 2000’s despite Bush’s own housing bubble economy keeping unemployment rates reasonable. Then 2008 came and we still have all of the Bush tax cuts. So, where are the jobs from this magic elixir?

            I think it’s time to revisit earlier tax rates as the fiscal situation is starting to get out of hand with no end in sight. As Ben Stein once told Laura Ingraham, the supply siders don’t have any data to support their theory of reasonable changes in tax rates, one way or the other, having a drastic effect on economic growth. Tax receipts under Bush II represented 17.9% of GDP. Under Clinton, they were at 19.1%. When asked much later if Tax receipts rose or fell under Bush II, Arthur Laffer literally said that he didn’t know but added that he was still convinced they were the right thing to do. That has religious undertones to me.

            What changed after 2000? Two wars with two rounds of personal tax cuts and one round of capital gains tax cuts. Alright, throw in Medicare part D. Can you think of anything else? Remember that group of economists (some of them Nobel winners) who sent a letter to Bush practically begging him not to engage in tax cuts with what was going on at the time. Incidentally, Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has pegged the cost of the Iraq war far higher than others, taking different cost factors into account. Can’t remember the exact figure he stated. It’s easy to look up.

            You have to remember what Obama faced on Jan 20th, 2009. Like Bush near the end, he had to spend, although I wish it had been done differently. Too small with too large a tax cut component. I’ll agree with U.S. conservatives on one thing: Obama is just peeing in the wind with finally ending the sunset clause on Bush’s tax cuts for only the top 1 or 2%. That’s symbolic as much as anything.

          6. montanabill October 2, 2012

            How did the Bush tax cuts work out? Unemployment until 9/11 was about 4.7%. After the hit to the economy of 9/11, unemployment rose to to 6%, falling back to 4.6% the last year of his Presidency before the NRA/Frank fiasco. Since unemployment was low, job growth was also low so trying to use it as a measure is very misleading, which is why Democrats love to use it.
            Revenues in 2001 were about $3.5 trillion falling after 9/11 to $3.3 trillion. After the tax cuts, revenues rose to $5.2 trillion in 2007, the most ever. By then, Democrats controlled the Congress and spending.

          7. dtgraham October 3, 2012

            Unemployment was low in the 90’s but growth was high (4.1% in the years immediately following the tax increase). The CRA being responsible for 2008 is beyond ridiculous and I’m tired of arguing it.

            montana, this Bush tax revenue fantasy has been thoroughly debunked, although I know that the American conservative alternative media has their own “special” facts and numbers…I’m quite aware of that.

            The Economic Policy Institute noted that the “decade of the Bush tax cuts has, on avg., lowered revenue levels as a share of the economy more than any decade since the 1950’s.”

            Numerous economists that have served in the Bush admin. have publicly conceded that the Bush tax cuts did not result in increased federal revenue.

            Alan Viard, senior economist at the council of economic advisers during Bush’s 1st term, was quoted as saying: “federal revenue is lower today (not a recent quote) than it would have been without the tax cuts.” “There’s really no dispute among economists about that.” These quotes from economists go on and on.

            Treasury revenues continued to hemorrhage and fell to 17.5% of GDP in 2008 from 20.6% in 2000. According to the C.B.O., by the end of 2008 legislated tax cuts reduced revenues and increased the national debt by 1.6 trillion. Slower than expected growth (despite the tax cuts) further reduced revenues by 1.4 trillion. The rest of the debt increase was a hike in spending not offset by other spending reductions or tax increases. That’s thanks to Bush eliminating Paygo in 2002. Incidentally, a doubling of the child tax credit is part of Romney’s 47%.

          8. montanabill October 3, 2012

            No other circumstance caused the collapse of the economy except CRA, Barney Frank, Fannie and Freddie. And there is no argument that can be made that the housing bubble which caused the collapse was caused any other way.

            The figures came from the U.S. government. You can call it fantasy all you want, or the Economic Policy Institute can dispute it, or you can trot out any other so-called ‘experts’, but the numbers are the numbers. Look it up on the government’s own sites.

          9. dtgraham October 5, 2012

            The Commodities Futures Modernization Act, allowing mergers with other sectors, signing off on unlimited proprietary bets and trading with in-house money, and other deregulatory measures, allowed the banks to bundle mortgage backed derivatives with a bunch of other toxic assets and then peddle these investments (that no one could calculate the value of) as grade A. An entire industry and investment class of assets arose that didn’t get traded on any exchange with the proper oversight from the SEC. It’s a completely unregulated market with no transparency, no capital reserve requirements, no prohibition on fraud or manipulation and no regulation of intermediaries. All of the fundamental templates that were learned from the great depression as to what’s needed to have markets function smoothly, are gone. The Financial Crises Inquiry Commission issued their report in January of 2011 and found that the CRA was a factor but a very small one. “Not significant” in their words.

            By the way Bill, you asked me about Libya. It’s looking more and more like the White House had advance warnings and screwed up on them. Stevens himself expressed concerns about his safety apparently. Now we’re hearing that the White House was informed by intelligence analysts with 24 hours of the attack that it was a pre planned terrorist operation. My hunch is that they were trying use the video as a convenient cover for ignoring warnings. Riots continued all over the Arab world for weeks after 9/11 so the video may have had a lot to do with that anyway. Obama has a lot of catching up to do with Romney, as far as being a liar, but in the end he’s just a politician too.

      2. Hillbilly September 29, 2012

        montanabill, you are wrong, we do know about all this stuff and we know it because we do our own research on these things and don’t watch Fox news nor listen to people like Rush Limbaugh. We know what Republican policies are because we have heard about them straight from the mouths of Republicans in office and running for office. I don’t filter out what the Republicans are saying or doing because I am trying to understand how any one can support a party that doesn’t represent you unless you have millions or billions is banks in the US and overseas. A party that has said since the 1980’s that cutting taxes for the rich creates jobs and a fact that has been proven time and time again to be wrong. I know that because I got laid off both times tax cuts were given to the rich to create jobs, the first time I got lucky I found a job in a year’s time after my unemployment benefits ran out and I had used all my savings while looking for that job. The 2nd time in 2004, I went through my unemployment benefits,used all my savings and had to have money help from my siblings and still did not find job, instead I had to take early retirement in to survive under the tax cuts for the rich to create jobs theory and the tax holiday given the rich in 2004 or 2005, don’t remember exact year on their promise to create jobs if they could bring billions in off shore accounts and not pay taxes. How many jobs were created with this money not one and there was no taxes paid on these billions brought in because Bush 2 gave the millionaires and billionaires and big corporations a tax free holiday. As for the polls you and I aren’t looking at the same polls, the polls I see say that Obama is doing a great job on economy especially considering what he inherited from Bush 2 when he took office and the fact he has tried to work with the party of no since he took office, he is better at foreign policy that Romney will ever be and the majority of people like the Affordable Medical Act more than they ever have since they have begin to research it their self instead of listening to people like you, Limbaugh and the Republican party.

      3. dtgraham September 29, 2012

        “Do you really believe the Republicans believe in the things you are claiming?”

        For Christ sake Bill, I started out by quoting Rick Perry saying the exact thing that I’m claiming the Republicans believe. There are a lot of other Republicans saying similar things that I won’t go into. As Justin pointed out below, I’ve seen all of the numbers and projections on “entitlement” finances… and you have too. You guys on the right that do have some brains just like to play dumb on it when it suits you.

        What I said cut a little too close to home didn’t it? I can tell by your indignation and anger.

    6. notafoxfan September 29, 2012

      excellent commentary and well said..i agree 100% as well, and just as “latebloomingrandma” said,people who watch fox news exclusively do live in alterative universe land, and refuse to listen to any other way of thinking..what amazes me is those who listen to rush limbaugh and hang on his every evil deceitful word!

  4. bcarreiro September 29, 2012

    How about we reduce the salaries of elected officials by 20% and stop the overcreating in office that will put an end to republicans trying write off everything they own…u dont own the people who have put their man hours in… maybe u could try working for once.

  5. Dominick Vila September 29, 2012

    What these Republicans are admitting is consistent with the efforts made by the Republican party to destroy Social Security, MEDICARE and MEDICAID during the past several decades. Their determination to replace the safety net with private enterprise is not based on cost effectiveness, evidence or fairness, but on deeply held ideological convictions.
    Subjecting a pension plan to the ups and downs of the stock market, replacing MEDICARE with vouchers to pay for part of insurance company premiums, and eliminating a program that allows poor senior citizens to pay for nursing home care and the poor to get the care they need to survive is a recipe for disaster. What the top 2% does not understand – or doesn’t care – is the fact that most American families live paycheck to paycheck and can not save for retirement or pay expensive premiums when they can no longer work.
    I realize that the forces of the anti-Christ could care less about the poor, those who work 50 or 60 hours a week making minimum wage and can only afford to rent a room and eat at McDonalds, but many of us do.

    1. LINDA September 29, 2012

      This goes along with the Bain philosophy that has been explained in Romney’s lastest video released by Mother Jones. If they can just get all of that $$$ into private hands to “manage” then “harvest” in 5-8 years, then they will own America’s economy in its entirety. The American people will have nothing left to fall back on once Wall Street and investment funds take over. We will all be at the mercy of these greedy bastards. That is, in my opinion, the “end game” being promoted by the Republicans who are paid off by the Koch Brothers and their ilk. This cannot happen and I have e-mailed President Obama about this. All of you should do the same.

      1. montanabill September 29, 2012

        I really saddens me to see stuff like this written which shows you know absolutely nothing about a subject and are willing to make your ignorance known to all. Call all the names you want and make all the unfounded accusations you want, but for goodness sake learn something about the subject before making a complete idiot of yourself.

        1. LINDA September 29, 2012

          Thanks for your verification. It seems I’ve hit a nerve!!!

          1. montanabill September 30, 2012

            Same kind of nerve I could hit on your side if were to claim Obama was not born in America. It was obvious you wrote about subjects that you knew very little about and were simply regurgitating stuff you had heard from other liberals.

          2. DurdyDawg October 1, 2012

            Ask any of you’re major political stiffs that question.. Not ONE of them will agree with you (in public) about Obama’s heritage or birth.. You’re listening to idiots who have no problem spewing lies. Go ahead, head on ask Romney if he knows (or even believes) that Obama is anything but an American.. Then ask any fed if it’s true. Quite listening to a donut mouth, a has-been sheriff and a blow-hard common tater, but if that’s you’re choice then go to the other side and revel in you’re sudden popularity as we don’t need you here (yawn).

          3. montanabill October 1, 2012

            You didn’t read far enough Durdy. I was not questioning Obama’s heritage. I was pointing out that those who do question it have been guilty of spouting stuff without any specific knowledge of the subject. Exactly like the left has been doing about Romney and capitalism.

        2. Justin Napolitano September 29, 2012

          Sorry. montana but evidence supports what Linda has written.
          The top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 90% but the top 1% want 99% of the wealth and will not stop, in that pursuit, until someone stops them.

          1. Plznnn September 29, 2012

            The bottom pay almost nothing but gets all the free government stuff, and are a burden of middle-class Americans, NOT the wealthy. In America, we can ALL strive to become wealthy, or do you agree with Socialists that we will ALL have the same thing. Who the hell would sacrifice and go to college to become a doctor, or scientist? BO would just redistribute their wealth so “greedy” people like you can just have money from other people’s sweat???

          2. english_teacher September 29, 2012

            What about the wealth redistribution that has taken place under Republican administrations?

            Or do you think the money fairy just decided to shift the largest percentage of wealth up to the 1% because they’re so much more deserving?

            Republican policies have done a better job of wealth redistribution than your fantasy statement about President Obama’s plans.

            No one is stopping Americans from striving to be wealthy. It’s just that the game is rigged so that only those at the top can win. If you’re not in the top 5%, your chances of getting there are slim to none.

          3. grandma_grapes September 29, 2012

            Stop worrying about what other people “have” and “get”.
            If you are motivated by money alone, you have a problem. Do good. Be a good person. What exactly do you “need” to be happy? If you are Christian, please read your Bible, New Testament. Jesus was into wealth redistribution, bigtime.
            I choose to live my life in the service of others. I have a place to live. I eat plenty. Everyone should have that at least, at very least. Most people are good.

          4. Polly Scanlon September 29, 2012

            Plznn –

            You are so poorly informed it is laughable. 1:4 of your so called “bottom” are elderly over the age of 65, some of whom must continue to work and pay payroll taxes because their fixed Social Security Benefits and Medicare Premiums, Co-Insurance and co-pays wipe out what little income they have and put them below the poverty line. They also pay a higher percentage of their incomes in state and local taxes (which in come states are levied on food and medicine) than the middle class. Less than 3% of the Federal and state budgets go to cash transfer programs such as SSI and you would be horrified to find out the number of millionaires who have their mothers in Medicaid-paid nursing homes and their ADHD children on SSI and Medicaid who also receive a cash check every month. The majority of your “bottom” are students, including graduate and professional degree students, e.g., medical, dental legal, etc., who will graduate with $250,000 in personal debt to be paid back to the lending agencies or worked off in community health clinics.

          5. patty September 30, 2012

            Plznnn, you have fallen for the All or Nothing
            fallacy. We aren’t just capitalists or socialists.
            We have the ability to invent what works for us,
            whether by borrowing or creating ideas and
            systems. We avoid tyranny by constantly adapting
            to circumstances while keeping a balance of the
            ideals we hold dear as our anchor.

            By the way I put myself through college and grad
            school, sacrificing as I went, in order to do what
            I wanted to do (which included my own business).
            I did not do it for wealth, though I saved well for
            my retirement.

            I don’t regret paying taxes, some of which goes
            for wars and other things I don’t want or approve.
            Paying them comes with the territory of living as a citizen
            of this great country.

          6. ROBERT C HASTINGS September 30, 2012

            stupidest BS I have ever read! Get your head out of your— and open your eyes, PLZNNN! The data is out there, but “none is so blind as he who will not see.”

          7. montanabill September 30, 2012

            Wealth envy and ignorance.

          8. Don September 30, 2012

            I am happy for anyone who has physical wealth but I have wealth that is more important, believing in God and the Lord Jesus Christ, and not to the political Conservatives who want to destroy everything we have put into Social Security since the beginning of our working lives.

          9. montanabill October 1, 2012

            Do you understand that Social Security as constructed will go broke within a few years? Even David Axlerod has admitted that Obama doesn’t have a plan to stop that. At no time has Romney ever put forth a plan to destroy SS or to tax SS benefits. Ryan has put forth the only plan offered to try to save Medicare. Nothing proposed by either one of them would affect your benefits in the slightest unless you are pretty young.
            Something has to be done to save both of these programs and pretending that we can wait until sometime in the future will only make the solution harder.

          10. Rodney October 2, 2012

            If you put social and medicare into the stock market and the market goes broke you lose your med. benefits it just that simple .By the way if your boy R.R.haddn,t raided social security with congress help to pay for his arm,s build up .social securitywould not be going broke congress was to pay back social back they didn,t and haven,t. How,s that star wars project going.30 YEARS AND IT STILL DOESN,T WORKAND YOU AND I ARE STILL PAYING FOR IT.

          11. montanabill October 2, 2012

            Whoa! You need to look up who approved raiding SS and actually started doing it and which party continually approved more raiding. Hint: it was long before Reagan.

            FYI, the Star Wars project has come a long way which is exactly why Russia didn’t want us putting it into neighboring countries. It would have made Putin’s dream of a Russia that could threaten the world as the U.S.S.R. did, mute.

            You also need to get a little education into the type of investments that you would be allowed to participate in with SS, if part of it became an investment account. You would not be allowed to buy stocks willy nilly. Nobody, that I know of, has advocated putting Medicare money into the stock market.

          12. Fern Woodfork September 30, 2012

            Justin Always Remember What Rick Santorum Said ” We Will Never Have The Smart People On Our Side” You Can Clearly See That Yourself!! LOL

          13. Jean Huggins September 30, 2012

            I agree with you Justin…The top 1% have 99% of the wealth. The best thing about that is it puts them in the minority, even better the rest of us are the majority and we can keep the Ryan/Romney clan from destroying our country…

          14. roskodog October 1, 2012

            after Mr. Obama and his cronies get done , there will not be a government. Were broke… That means were Broke… When we spend Trillions more thn we take in, That means were broken. try it in your own family and see how long you last…We are fools to worry about this 1 percent that has the wealth. They will continue with or without us or our Government. To blame Bush for our problems is so bizar. We are too blame for taking loans we knew we could,nt pay back. As for me I would vote for anyone but these 2 clowns. Bring on Jesse V
            , or Donnald Trump .

        3. Mr. Bombastic September 29, 2012

          Bill, your wasting your time trying to reason with these Morons! Liberal rags like the National Memo makes this crap up and the libs worship what they say like its thier “God”! They will continue to stick thier heads in the sand until it is to late, then whine and cry “how did this happen?”, but it will be to late. Government will control every aspect of our lives and there will be no middle class anymore!

          1. LINDA September 29, 2012

            Ah…I really did hit a nerve!!! What are you and Bill doing on this “rag” anyway?? Are the two of you being paid by Charles & David to monitor and counteract us mindless, idiotic, middle class “victims”??? I’m just saying….

          2. Douglas September 29, 2012

            Make this crap up? It is on film.

          3. jarheadgene October 1, 2012

            (you are not)DA BOMB…. You are ONE of the guys below….which is it? It is so late in this election cycle you may as well admit the truth.

          4. Rodney October 2, 2012


        4. Jenny Hawes Casella September 29, 2012

          Spoken like a true Republican.

        5. ROBERT C HASTINGS September 30, 2012

          Linda apparently HAS learned about this topic, and is venting her legitimate frustration at people like you who CLAIM to know, but in reality have no idea except your narrow little ideolgical window rose colored glass. Ronald Reagan is dead and so is his ideology. Trickle down has not worked for thirty years, and there is no evidence that it will.

          1. montanabill September 30, 2012

            If you have a job, there is your evidence.

          2. mikecoatl October 1, 2012

            Care to explain why unemployment is still 8%+, but taxes are lower than they have been in decades?

            Can’t do it. The very best we’ll hear is some blather about ‘crushing’ regulations and the like.

          3. montanabill October 1, 2012

            Actually, it is easy to do.

            Unemployment is high because businesses are afraid or unsure of Obama’s policies. Just that simple. The current tax rates have nothing to do with it. It is the constant threat of higher taxes, the demonization of success, the explosion of new regulations on all industries and the Hugo Chavez ‘share the wealth’ mindset that keeps business from wanting to take any expansion risks in the U.S.

            You obviously don’t have any idea how regulations affect business, but do yourself a favor. Do the research to see just how many new regulations have been created since 2009. Keep in mind that each of those regulations places limits on business and significantly increases the cost to operate. A good article to search for is “Red Tape Rising: a 2011 Mid-Year Report”.

        6. jarheadgene October 1, 2012

          YEEEEHAWWW Montana Bill….you are ONE of these two guys below.

          1. Fern Woodfork October 2, 2012

            Both Are The Toothless Hillbilly!!! Broke Ass Brain Dead Tea Bagging Trolls!! LOL

        7. Gary Godfrey October 1, 2012

          How about if you try to convince us with facts and figures rather than just calling people names (idiot). Show us with numbers how the voucher system Ryan and the Republicans want to put in place will not hurt seniors and lead to a reduction in the standard of living in the U.S. Show us that Romney did not mean what he said about the 47%; show us that Ryan’s recorded comments about Ayn Rand are not what he really believes. Show us as if we were all from Missouri.

          1. montanabill October 1, 2012

            Most of the time I do just that, but some rants are simply too off the wall to warrant a reasonable response. Show me where it says that you will be forced to accept a voucher if you wish to continue using the system exactly as we are using it today.
            The key word in the plan is ‘choice’. That seems to be the invisible word to Democrats.

            Obama has cut a huge chunk from Medicare and is currently starving SS (your ‘tax cut’). Both programs will shortly fail from lack of funds even without the cuts, so you show me how that will not lead to reduction in the standard of living.

            Maybe Romney did mean what he said about the 47%. Is it reasonable to think that people who are getting government goodies are going to vote against that? That number is actually higher than 47%.

            I’m afraid I didn’t hear Ryan talking about Ayn Rand, but I will offer one of her quotes: ” The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”

            By the way, I’ve also heard Obama channeling Hugo Chavez.

          2. dtgraham October 1, 2012

            There’s an audiotape of Ryan from 2005 saying that Rand was his biggest influence and the reason he got into politics. He then goes on to say that she is required reading for all of his new staffers. I’ve heard it several times.

            Obama cut funds to Medicare part D and insurance companies agreed to it because of all the extra customers they’ll get from the mandate.

            I think you might have a point about payroll tax cuts and SS as much as I hate to admit it.

            Do you believe that Ryan just wants to give people a choice? Nobody’s going to insure an 85 year old in the market and if they did, her voucher won’t go far. No one will go for that choice. They’ll just want their Medicare and it won’t be there.

          3. montanabill October 2, 2012

            So are you saying that we should not read or agree with any of the things Rand wrote?

            So what happens to the seniors who have Part D when the well runs dry? Insurance companies really didn’t have a choice and Obama needed the money to make his cost figures meet his projections (even as bogus as they were).

            My wife and I would love to opt out of Medicare and go with health saving accounts. However, if you receive SS, you are not allowed to drop Medicare unless you pay back every penny you have received from SS and then drop out. Keep in mind, when we started paying into SS, there was no Medicare and we have been paying into SS for over 50 years (still are). With a health saving account, we would have more control over which doctors we want to see, which hospitals we wanted to use and what treatments we could opt for, far more than we can under Medicare.
            So government is using Medicare to keep us under their control.

            Ryan’s plan does call for choice.

          4. dtgraham October 2, 2012

            My bad. That was Medicare Advantage, not part D. If money is no obstacle, then I suppose that choice of hospitals and doctors is an attractive feature but how many people would be financially able to build up a health savings account like that. I didn’t know that Medicare was that restrictive in which hospitals would accept it. Thought that was just mostly Medicaid. I thought it was like Canadian health care that way.

            I still don’t see how the Wyden compromise passes the smell test. The CBO projects that by 2022 seniors would have to pick up 61% of their health care costs and Ryan’s voucher will cover the rest. By 2030 that will rise to 68%. I know that the new version has a catastrophic care benefit, and the premium supports are at least indexed to the costs of available insurance plans but big whoop. Who would choose that over today’s system if there was an option? The tiny percentage who would wouldn’t be putting much of a bend in any cost curve.

            I also don’t see where this “option” is fully defined as being today’s Medicare exactly. He found one Democratic Senator to give him some cover and make it a little more sellable, but we know he doesn’t want any option and the whole thing doesn’t make a lot of sense the way it’s being sold. But……that’s my opinion.

            I don’t know, it just seems easy to solve problems on the backs of the poor and the powerless. There have got to be cost containment measures and things like increases in payroll taxes and/or general tax rates that would make Medicare sustainable, and there are. Obama’s Medicare panel is a start. How is it that other countries can cover every citizen in a single payer system and have it be sustainable as well, but the United States can’t even cover seniors in such a system? How could that be? Getting private health insurance companies involved in the coverage of sick geriatrics with taxpayer funded vouchers is just a mess and a nutty idea to me.

          5. montanabill October 2, 2012

            The point is not that some people couldn’t build up a health saving account for their needs. The point is that that government is becoming all controlling so that individual choice is lost.

            Here is an example of another Medicare restriction. I had a bout with vertigo. When the attack first hit, I was taken to the nearest hospital. My physician was not allowed to treat me there, so I received treatment from a completely unknown staff. Lots of tests ensued, but no treatment was authorized until I was released and sought my preferred specialist. I called the specialist of my choice for treatment. They said I had to have a referral from my primary care physician, the one who wasn’t allowed to treat me in the hospital. Knowing that would take days, I told them I would pay cash for service. They told me that since they take Medicare and I was on Medicare, they could not treat me in any way unless I had that referral. My doctor, when I finally was able to get through two days later, wanted to refer me to another specialist, not of my choice. Fortunately, I have a little clout and he finally agreed to refer me to the specialist of my choice.

            One of the reasons that it takes so long to now see my primary care physician is that he finally gave in to accepting Medicare patients and now has to see nearly 3 to 4 times the number of patients in the same amount of time in order for his practice to remain profitable. Just think how much fun this system is going to be when he has to add even more Obamacare patients or when it finally becomes single payer.

            Keep in mind that I am not poor or powerless, so what does the system do to them?

          6. dtgraham October 3, 2012

            Four things montana:

            i) That you don’t care whether lower and middle income people could ever build up an HSA that might be adequate is typical of today’s American conservatism, and there’s not much to say about that. It’s a difference in values and it is what it is as they say.

            ii) A choice in specialists seems like a bit of the proverbial red herring. How many folks would know, or even care, which hand surgery specialist or kidney cancer specialist is the best, especially when they’re desperate. They’re all experts with the same training. Referrals for specialists is how it works up here too but there’s nothing stopping you from telling the primary care physician which specialist you’d like. I imagine that’s a pretty rare request.

            iii) In the U.S. system, I think you should be able to bypass medicare with cash. I’m with you there.

            iv) Not sure how you define long for wait times. My wife has had health issues since 2009 and visits to our family doctor average about two times a year for her. We never wait longer than a week after making the appointment although it’s often 2-3 days, and he has a busy practice. This is full government single payer. If you needed a referral from a primary care physician at a walk-in clinic, it would be same day.

          7. montanabill October 3, 2012

            i) I’m not for forcing anyone to make the same choices that I would make. I just want the freedom for me and anyone else to be able to make them.

            ii) My story was real and factual.

            iv) It is what it is. Five years ago, I could schedule an appointment with my physician with no more than two days notice. Now, since his practice finally decided to accept Medicare patients, it requires a 35-45 day wait. Each practitioner will vary, but it will only get worse now that Obamacare has added millions more without adding a single doctor. In fact, it is chasing doctors from practice which will greatly aggravate the situation. The best and the brightest will and are finding other lines of work.

            In case you are wondering, my primary business is in the healthcare industry, so I’m very much aware of what is going on.

          8. dtgraham October 5, 2012

            I don’t doubt the facts of your story montana, and I don’t think that should have happened to you either. Those are administrative policies that can be changed and they’re not the same everywhere. In your business, I imagine you know that better than me.

      2. Plznnn September 29, 2012

        First of all, you need to stop getting all your false news from Mother Jones. QUit buying into the class warfare and “greedy” comments., Billionaire George Soros gives Democrats & Obama way more than the Koch brothers.
        Worry about what Obama does with OUR money, than with what Romney, or John Kerry does with theirs.

      3. Don September 30, 2012

        Wall Street will be dead as well as many middle class people have ashares in this place.

    2. ROBERT C HASTINGS September 30, 2012

      I agree wholeheartedly with what you have to say. However, one issue the right does NOT wish to deal with is that a lower and middle class with money to spend is is what drives our economy, and if through their devious and immoral machinations would deprive us of our sustenance, then our whole economy will come tumbling down. I am retired and on Social Security and Medicare, neither of which are free for I still pay into FICA, still pay income taxes, still pay for Medicare and a much-needed supplement for parts B and D. I am not getting anything free for over the 40 + years that I received legitimate wages I [aid all of my legally required taxes, and for every year I paid it was at a rate higher than Willard Mitt Romney paid. It is appropriate his first name brings to mind the image of a movie rat.

  6. joeykay September 29, 2012

    Why don’t the politicans get the message that the social security doesn’t belong to them its the peoples , and when are u bleeding hearts out there gonna stand up to these politicans and fight back .Why would u want to kiss there butts and how come theres only afew of us that are willin to stand up and be heard when this SSI belongs to everyone who pays into it.You people who sit back and let us who speak up and fight for u are just as much the problem as the politicans are.We still have freedom of speech so take advantage of it before the gouverment takes that away ( thats the next thing comming )

  7. Craig Chilton September 29, 2012

    If there’s a button in here to click on that will bring up a print version of the entire article on one page — a VERY desirable feature!! — I can’t find it. If it doesn’t yet exist, that would be a HUGE enhancement for this website!!

  8. sachfoxo September 29, 2012

    Paul Ryan has emphatically promised to end Medicare, as we know it – turning it into a voucher system. Now, he is lying to the seniors about President Obama’s plan to get to the waste fraud, abuse and mis-management on the provider side. Obama plan cuts no seniors – only providers, which are robbing the system, Big time.

  9. Grunge45 September 29, 2012

    Quick Tommy Thompson! Give up your Government health and social security plan! Now! Switch to your proposed voucher plan.Today!

  10. AttilatheBlond September 29, 2012

    Officeholders who serve the Hoarder Class (not the voters) are desperate to get all that $$ into Wall Street. The Hoarder Class wants to take our payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare and ‘privatize’ the money on The Street. They have fleeced just about anyone who has saved and invested prudently already and they need some new rube, err, investors or their house of cards all falls in and then their stocks lose value.

    Wall Street has been a Ponzi Scheme for some time now. When businesses that provided actual goods or services got taken over by various private equity companies who then ‘harvested them’ we stopped having a reality based economy and Wall Street succumbed to a terminal form of cancer. If they get their mitts on Social Security/medicare, that will only buy some time. The system is a failure if all they really produce is paperwork instruments to juggle companies, ‘harvest’ companies and make companies (and jobs) disappear.

    Just say no to money junkies.

    1. Justin Napolitano September 29, 2012

      I have a simple solution, tax the balls off of the rich so that they are forced to either invest it in their business or pay it to the government. That is what happened when tax rates were 70%. Now that they are 35% the rich don’t have to do a damn thing but collect their interest and capital gains. Tax their balls off, I say!

  11. Jules Guidry September 29, 2012

    Are the Republicans trying to do away Social Security? If Republicans have their way, Social Security and Medicare for seniors will disappear. What happens to our seniors then? Seniors will be at the mercy of the rich. We then become a burden on our children, or work til we die on the job, or placed in old age homes to die. Where is the dignity in that?

    1. nurselaidoff September 29, 2012

      No, Republicans are not trying to do away with social security. They want to reform it to keep it solvent. Their reform plan would not affect anyone the is over 55 years old at the time their plan would go into place. So current seniors will always be protected with social security.
      The hard truth, is that if there isn’t some type of reform, social security might not be around for other generations……We are putting a huge debt onto the younger generation, one that will guarentee that future generations will have a lower standard of living…..
      By the way, the Republicans don’t want to let seniors to die and go hungry and homeless. That is a scare tactic that our party uses to pull in unsuspecting seniors.
      It is the same scare tactics that Republicans use when they say that Obama is not an American and that he is a Muslim and a Socialist. Both are ridiculous and when ever I hear either of them, I don’t take the person making those points seriously. They are the extreme ends of both parties……

      1. Justin Napolitano September 29, 2012

        Nurse, Yes of course the Republicans want to do away with SS and Medicare because without those programs they can take over all of the wealth in this country and just tell the old, sick and handicapped to die. The Nazi’s would be proud.
        Let me tell you why these programs are underfunded and it is because of the millions of jobs that have been outsourced to China and other countries. If these jobs were still here then SS and Medicare would not have funding problems.
        Either way SS is secure for another 25 years and medicare for another 10. A lot can happen in the next 10 years and if we bring back the jobs these programs will be secure for many generations without any major changes.

        1. nurselaidoff September 29, 2012

          I agree that too many jobs are outsourced and would like to see them come back to the US. It is much cheaper for many organizations to outsource their labor costs to countries such as China, Taiwan etc. With the Chinese manipulating their currency, it has put American made goods at a further disadvantage.
          By outsourcing labor, companies also don’t have to deal with the Unions which can be very costly over time. Just look to Europe to see the labor issues that have popped up.
          Even if we had millions more jobs in the US, SS and Medicare would still be in trouble. As the baby boomer population ages, that will put significant stress on the entire health care system, SS and Medicare. Even during a good economy, politicians have known that the system needs to be reformed or it would sink. The problem is that most politicians (on both sides of the isle) have not had the guts to tackle this issue. They are more concerned about getting re elected than fixing a broken system.
          Not to mention that our National Debt (now over 16 trillion) is way out of control. I agree that a lot can happen in 10 years but if big steps aren’t taken to reduce our national debt we could follow in the direction of Greece and Spain (to mention a few).
          I disagree with your first paragraph. The republican’s want to reform SS and medicare. The US Government has proven to be very bad at business. Look at all the waste and fraud in Medicare. It is totally mismanaged by the Federal government. And yet despite all the proof of fraud and waste, the Federal govt. has done very little to improve the situation. Obama care is adding in another layer of bureaucracy and regulations and will further increase the cost of healthcare.
          I don’t think that it helps the Democrats message to be continuily be stating that the Republicans are going to kill off seniors and then compare them to Nazi’s. It is an argument that is on par with the birther arguments coming from the Republicans.

          1. mikecoatl October 1, 2012

            The belief that the GOP wants to ‘reform’ social security is naive at best. Ask yourself why they are so quiet when it comes to specifics. Or follow the Romney/Ryan/Koch line and try not to act surprised when the whole program is swallowed by the Wall Street casino. If you want to hear about “very bad at business”, Google ‘Lehman Brothers’. I just hope no Republican voters like you asks me for any help. They will get from me only four words:

            I TOLD YOU SO.

  12. Jules Guidry September 29, 2012

    What is to become of seniors if we lose Social Security? We become a burden to our children, or work till we die on the job, or be placed in some type of institution to live and die without dignity. Each week, we paid out of our earnings to provide for our care when we came to the of age retirement (F.I.C.A.). Is this fair? Think about this when you vote!

  13. MiddleAmericaMS September 29, 2012

    Ron Paul too.

    He says he doesn’t like SS, but doesn’t want to destroy it.

    Then goes on to say that he just wants youth to be able to opt-out, which would of course defund the program destroying it.


  14. quasm September 29, 2012

    The Social Security and Medicare programs, as presently constituted, are unsustainable. If a private corporation had sold such a plan its perpetrators would long ago have gone to prison. The ratio of workers needed to supply the retiree’s benefits will soon be down to one to one. Both programs will then fall of their own weight. Fiscal disaster will then ensue. These are the facts.

    The Democrats only plan is to demagog any Republican plan to make them viable using scare tactics and other people’s money to buy votes.

    Dik Thurston
    Colorado Springs

    1. 113121 September 29, 2012


    2. phantomoftheopera September 29, 2012

      not true. there are simple fixes–eg medicare/social security paid on all wages.

      only republicans believe this.

      and the republican plan is to let seniors die and go hungry and be homeless. what a ‘family value’!!!

  15. Baron Cormac September 29, 2012

    I remember a joke about Thompson when he was appointed Secretary for HHS – Don’t you have to be Human to qualify for that job?

  16. George Saufley September 29, 2012

    The consensus is that we have no consensus in this country, lack of coordination, panic attacks which cause us to over indulge do things that harm our health, out of control special interests, lobbies, making end runs around people’s real or mis-acessed vulnerabilities for profit, control and politics is likely to be costing us more money annually than the national debt since there is a potential for one to feed on each other. I am voting for the levelest of heads.

  17. tao99 September 29, 2012

    Republicans, including R&R, may say they want to save Medicare and Social Security, but it’s a blatant lie. If R&R are elected those two programs will be shreded. Medicare will become a voucher system,requiring you to find your own health insurance in the private market.Good luck. I reecently had open heart surgery and must take meds (Today I had to spend in excess of $100 for just one perscription) for the rest of my life, along with regular tests and follow up visits. Without Medicare, I’d be in the poor house. With it, the whole exciting and unexpected experience cost me virtually nothing. R&R can’t improve on this even if they intended to; and they don’t. They will gut the program, and the cost will be horrendous. Whatever happens in the debates will not change the fact that I will vote for the reelection of The President, and for every Democrat on the ticket; and the GOP is not goijng to disenfranchise me regardless of whatever voter suppression law the gov and the Republican-controlled legislature try to pass. These bottom feeders don’t represent Pennsylvanians!

  18. Jeannette Wuor September 29, 2012

    They will rather go with out medicare and medicaid than to see a black president in second term.Unless if there is secret plan for the chosen ones. That is to give certain groups these benefit and deny the others.

  19. Jeannette Wuor September 29, 2012

    It’s so sad that the very group of people who will enjoy these benefit are the very ones voting against the president.

  20. solver04 September 29, 2012

    They want to kill them in order to fund an Iranian war. GWB was stealing money from Medicare to fund “Cheneys war” against Iraq – As far back as the DAY the planes hit the twin towers. Conspiracy? No, fact. The new wanna be “regime” want to take the BILLIONS from Medicare as the down payment and privatize S. Security, collect as much interest as possible and grab the principle (and say they lost it) right before the DEregulation of Wall St. tanks the market and the country. They want to bankrupt us and start all over with the NEW Plutocratic society that makes the 1% and corporations our new government. Everything from the police dept’s to education will be privatized, homeowners will become renters that just barely make enough money for rent, food and healthcare under the “RIGHT TO WORK” country they create. The entitlements are just the beginning of their plans – They SAY it all the time and about 50% of the people think their great. Conspiracy? I hope WE don’t find out.

  21. joeykay September 29, 2012

    Well its nice to know that the comment I wrote didnt get on because it was the truth point blank …I wonder how many other honest comments were omitted because of the censorship here…ther wasn’t any bad langue used either just the truth

  22. ayayaboy September 29, 2012

    Republican policies are dire and dangerous to ordinary Americans.

  23. Hillbilly September 29, 2012

    Paul Ryan received a Social Security check each month after his father died at a young age. I don’t know how many years he received these checks but do know he received them long enough to pay his way thru college and law school with the Social Security money he received. He was paid this money as was his siblings and mother even thru they weren’t poor. From what I have read and researched his family was not ever poor because their father was a partner with other family members in a business that made them wealthy yet he and his siblings and his mother cashed those Social Security checks every month and used the money. Now he wants to keep other children that lose a parent when they are young from getting these checks and stop people like me from drawing Social Security after paying into it for over 50 years. If Congress and past Presidents had paid back the money they took out of Social Security over the years for pet projects or to bolster their bottom line when it comes to the national debt with the interest promised, Social Security would be stronger than it is and there wouldn’t be a chance of it going broke for the next 200 years.Mr. Ryan since you and your fellow Republicans want to do away with Social Security repay the Social Security fund the money you, your siblings and mother got after your dad died and all the members of Congress repay all the money you have taken from Social Security since the 1940’s with the interest promised on your IOUS to the Social Security fund then divide that money among the people that are on Society Security now & will be in the future. Don’t to forget to give us baby boomers the extra 2/3 in Social Security we have paid into Social Security since the 80’s when Reagan was president.That extra 2/3 % was money that was suppose to go straight to Social Security since we were paying it toward the money we would receive when we returned. Since the 80’s when Reagan was President we baby boomers having been paying for people that were already on Social Security and paying extra money on our own Social Security benefits. That is why my Social Security isn’t an entitlement but something I paid into for over 50.

  24. Donald September 29, 2012

    I have not forgotten when these Repubic cans held the elderly at bay not willing to budge on the vote to pass the budget I took names and told them they WILL be FIRED!!!!! ENOUGH of these polyticktians forgetting they work for we the people !

  25. Eileen Anderson September 29, 2012

    do under the table, then they can’t get any money. The jerks. If they do do this, then I want all of my SS and medicare that I have paid in since I was 16 yrs old on my first job up til now and thats a long time. I want my money you stuipd jerks who sit on thier but scathing it

  26. ivory69690 September 29, 2012

    GOP Rogues’ Gallery: Five Republicans Who’ve Admitted They’re Out To Kill Medicare And Social Security/// are the ppl. of this country so blind and stupid and have so much hate that thy would rather lose every thing just to not have a black man as Pres.? hey ding dongs theres only so much that can fit into 2% and wake up 98% you cant fit it into 2% dont let your hate get the best or the worse of you

  27. ivory69690 September 29, 2012

    how do these clowns that want to get rid of every thing still alive . maybe we should call the middle east and give a couple of those guys that like to strap bombs to them selfs and pull the string give them jobs over here

  28. Don B September 29, 2012

    If there is anythin more inefficient and non-cost-effective its providing GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS through private enterprise. Costs DO NOT LOWER, efficiency DOES NOT INCREASE, and you just have more possibility for graft and corruption through over-charges to the public. We’ve been fighting 2 “privatized” wars—Halliburton. Made billions and not on the up and up. When they thought there might be a Congressional investigation into their war-profiteering they picked up their dirty skirts and ran from Houston to Dubai!
    Privatization——I don’t collect Socail Security–I collect a pension from County I worked for. But years ago I payed into SS system. I hope it stays in place as is. This is an investment and savings program for those who are and will become elderly. Why would anyone want to turn over this money to the banksters and Wall Street Crooks to invest? Can we all say “Derivatives”?

  29. John Karpfinger September 29, 2012

    when congress gives up their perks health care, retirement, the gym etc then they can think of their shanagens till then hands off our social security and Obama care.

  30. Plznnn September 29, 2012

    How can you Obama Lovers not see that Obama took $716 BILLION from Medicare, and you’re still worried that the Republicans will hurt it? They are responsibly saving it for future generations, while Democrats have ignored this problem for so long, that it is becomming harder & harder to fix. If we don’t do what Ryan & Romney want to save these programs, there will be nothing left as S.S. & Medicare are already going bankrupt, and will if we ignore it.

    How does Obama & the Democrats propose fixing it? They aren’t.

    1. Bobo September 30, 2012

      You should research your $716 claim – it is not true. Your rant sounds like Fox News spin.
      Both sides have ignored this problem, which is true – but, the analysis of which approach is best is rightfully part of the overall soltuion to budget issues. In this regard, the GOP platform is woefully light on details. And, unfortunately, may cost them the election.
      If you are not trusted, you must be heavy on details. Don’t discount the real concern that Romney is Bush 2.0 (and that most Americans blame Bush for the deficit.)

  31. roskodog September 29, 2012

    you news people are so stupid. I wonder which party has stolen all the money from social security???? Now you have to find a way to blame someone else. Brilliant. I am some days embarassed that I am An American.. Get a real job

  32. 1HotFuzzyAzz4u September 29, 2012

    The republicans have for years try to take entilements away from well deserving people who have paid in to these services and now that they, the republicans think they can get away with ruining this great country of ours and what it was bulit on. Take hede all you who are and depend on these services, if WE don’t stop them now they have alot more in store for us. They want to eliminate the middle class so they can run this country for THEIR benifits and to line THEIR pockets on the backs of the working and poor people of this great country. Romney is only voicing what all those 2% want to do to this contry. They want the 47% to be dependent on them and they ripe the benifits by linning THEIR pockets and pocket books.

  33. Walter Gregory September 30, 2012

    Dominick Vila, AMEN!!!!

  34. Todd September 30, 2012

    Since Obamacare is the first step toward the communist style health care that the British are saddled with, why don’t you ask them how their”death panels” work so well. If you are deemed too old, or your care is too expensive, guess what, the government has decided you don’t qualify to be saved. Death sentence!!!! If this is what you want, and Obamacare is taking $1.3 BILLION out of medicare every week for the next 10 years, then be stupid and vote for Obama again

    1. mikecoatl October 1, 2012

      If I wanted to be stupid, I would post comments like yours.

  35. Jackmack September 30, 2012

    if this crap does not wake u up as Samuel Jackson would say ” WAKE THE F**K UP””

  36. Don September 30, 2012

    So, why are qe voting for these Jokers who want to take our Social Security and medicare away? Don’t they know they will be placing the country in a big mess with even more people losing their homes and many more living on the street. We won’t even have a nursing home to go to.

  37. daniel bostdorf September 30, 2012


    To “TODD” and “plznn” and others of that ilk……why don’t you use your real names or full name? What you hiding? At Least quasm seems to have postde real name….

    This article is about “GOP Rogues’ Gallery: Five Republicans Who’ve Admitted They’re Out To Kill Medicare And Social Security.”

    Not a friggin thing about Obama or any other subject.

    “We can stop pretending. For months we’ve had to hear Paul Ryan and his pals on the right explain that they’re trying to “save” Medicare and Social Security as they pitched plans that would do the exact opposite.”

    That’s it. The 5 Republican fascists that want to give it all to the 1%.

    “TODD” and “plznn” and others ..
    Stop distracting us with your right wing, Foxnews, Rove, Koch Brothers, Limbaugh Beck lies and distortions. Don’t you have any original thoughts of your own other than spewing back the propaganda of these fascists?

    No you don’t!

    Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels said it best:

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” (like Fox FAUX news, Limbaugh, Beck and Rove believe)

    or as Adolph Hitler stated:
”Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”

    Keep the lies and distortions coming “TODD” and “plznn” and others ….we know what you are. A tea party fascist with no original thoughts.

    Doing the dirty work of the right wing print and broadcast media propagandists.

    GO post at Fox FAUX news blogs….your message will be received rather well…

  38. Montely Wilson October 1, 2012

    Can you say reparations. I have paid into SS all my working life, and if it was a government deal and the government does away with, would they not owe me my contribution? Hmmmm. If so, I will invest it as I see fit, not as they instruct.

  39. Jerry Brooks October 1, 2012

    Why is Newt missing here? Wasn’t it he who used the term, “wither on the vine”?


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.