Paul Ryan Booed at AARP Gathering

Yes! Very seriously. Not saying that the members lean left, but the leaders bend over backward left.

BTW, I am a member simple because I enjoy their discounts and it is required to get their medicare insurance which is far and away the cheapest. All of their propaganda goes straight to file 13 - and there is a lot of it and it is little but the government owes people this, that, and everything else.

 

You also called for such responsible allocation, though not for this particular issue, though you'd be right to do so, responsible allocation of funding is a core principle of money management.

 

Please stop saying things that I can "like"...it unnerves me.

 

Non-medical bureaucrats like...oh...insurance companies? If the death panels actually existed, they'd be a lot like insurance companies.

 

http://www.wrko.com/blog/todd/aarp-chief-cant-defend-liberal-slant

http://themoderatevoice.com/85656/aarp’s-partisan-liberal-agenda/

http://www.americanclarion.com/9286/2012/06/22/aarps-liberal-bent/

http://conpats.blogspot.com/2012/07/aarp-is-liberal-to-bone.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/we_didnt_leave_aarp.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444165804578008413907642282.html

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/66651-dems-tout-aarp-endorsement-republicans-blast-liberal-group

http://www.demint.senate.gov/public...ecord_id=c4b85d2c-7490-462e-ac7f-9f7ffa15b9d5

http://www.metrovoice.net/www.metro...articles/aarp_puts_ liberal_agenda_first.html

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Blogs...ews-GOP-Attack-on-AARP-Intensifies.aspx#page1

http://www.local4all.com/view_newsstory.php?news_id=643

 

Ask him to look into joining AMAC instead.

http://amac.us

 

Steer clear of Progressive Insurance, also:

PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE is owned by Peter Lewis: Who is he? Read this...

You've seen and probably smiled at the clever Progressive Insurance TV commercials.
Well, as Paul Harvey would say, "You're about to learn the rest of the story".

You know their TV commercials, the ones featuring the ditsy actress all dressed in white.
What you might not know is that the Chairman of Progressive is Peter Lewis,
one of the major funders of leftist causes in America.

Between 2001 and 2003, Lewis funneled $15 million to the ACLU,
the group most responsible for destroying what's left of Americas Judeo-Christian heritage.
(PS: The ACLU's founders are known communists / communist supporters.)

Lewis also gave $12.5 million to MoveOn.org and America Coming Together,
two key propaganda arms of the socialist left.

His funding for these groups was conditional on matching contributions from George Soros,
the America-hating socialist who is the chief financier of the Obama political machine.

Lewis made a fortune as a result of capitalism, but now finances a progressive movement that threatens
to destroy the American free enterprise system.

Peter Lewis is making a fortune off of people who buy his auto insurance that he then applies to
dismantle the very system that made him wealthy.

 

Did you write that screed yourself, CoinOKC? If not, why did you neglect to cite your source? Do you have no respect for copyright laws?

 

I have even less respect for those who shoot the messenger.

 

I merely asked some straight-forward questions, which you have dodged. Why is that?

 

Have pity on poor old Okie. After all, he is about to have his favorite candidate lose another election. He is such a big Romney fan as you can tell and he thinks because Romney didn't mess up too much during the primary debates, he will probably mop the floor with Obama and thus pull off this miraculous come from behind victory. Let him have his moment and then tease him on Nov 7th. That's my plan anyway. I am such a sore winner. ​

 

.

 

If you don't believe the facts I've presented, look them up yourself. You'll find that doing so is a good learning experience.

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/peterlewis.asp

I'm a bit confused here. I guess like usual, your arguments make me look like this =====>

What do you guys have against civil liberties? Why would you be against having MORE civil liberties?

And do you also condemn Sheldon Adelson for donating over 70 million dollars to elect Romney, a factor of 3 more than any other previous donor? He is a gambling billionaire that is under investigation for corrupt foreign practices in China. Is he OK with you guys? Or is it a bigger crime to want more civil liberties in this country? I'm just really amazed by the people you hate and the people you don't bother hating.

 

And do you also condemn Sheldon Adelson for donating over 70 million dollars to elect Romney, (Well, of course not! I'm all for furthering the conservative cause. It's the liberal agenda that I'm against). a factor of 3 more than any other previous donor? He is a gambling billionaire that is under investigation for corrupt foreign practices in China. Is he OK with you guys? (I won't condone illegal activity (has he been convicted?), but I can't help who donates to conservative causes. The same as you can't help that Peter Lewis donates to the liberal causes). Or is it a bigger crime to want more civil liberties in this country? (You may as well ask if it's an even bigger crime to want freedom from oppressive government in this country. Oppressive government is at the top of Obama's list of things to accomplish). I'm just really amazed by the people you hate and the people you don't bother hating. (Exactly. Why would anyone in their right mind NOT despise someone who signed the NDAA into law which is one of the most oppressive pieces of legislation to come out of Washington, DC since FDR interned the Japanese in WWII. Let alone the oppressive, new Obamacare tax).

I'm just so impressed that you actually kind of answered some real questions. You make good points. I do support people who support liberal causes as long as they are not trying to buy favor from politicians. I draw the line however where the liberal causes they may support are muddied in order to get away with corruption. While it is not illegal to support either liberal or conservative causes, if you are doing so to buy off a justice department investigation, then you are simply corrupt and wealthy enough to get away with it. In a capitalist society, money buys justice and every time someone gets away with it, it diminishes us all. Adelson has not been convicted but he certainly smells bad and that should be enough for any reputable candidate to not take his money but Romney doesn't have that much character because he is the ultimate product of capitalism. You have to admit that they make strange bedfellows.

Now you really didn't answer whether or not you want more civil liberties. The ACLU is the single biggest defender of civil liberties in the country and yet you seem to be against them. Hum? One can only conclude that you are against civil liberties. I'm not, I'm for more civil liberties.

For one of the most oppressive pieces of legislation to come out of Washington, you'd think I would have been oppressed by now. Not only have I not been oppressed, I hadn't even heard of the NDAA. So I looked it up and I am still wondering just how oppressive it could be. And if it were oppressive, wouldn't the ACLU being fighting it?

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a United States Federal Law specifying the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. (Wow! I feel so oppressed) How does this oppress me exactly? Is it more oppressive than the Patriot Act?

Since when is a tax oppressive. We are taxed all of the time. Is every tax oppressive to you? (I know you won't answer this one)

 

Please don't act so "holier than thou". Democrats have sided with crooks for a very long time. Take Marc Rich as one example.

No, you're not. You would like to see the Second Amendment abolished. How dare you try to take away our right to bear arms! That doesn't sound like you're a "civil libertarian" to me! Additionally, you condemned the producer of the anti-Islam film that some say supposedly sparked the recent unrest in the Middle East. You would curtail his First Amendment right to free speech if you could and you have certainly said so. Again, no "civil libertarian" in view... Regardless, I don't have a problem with the ACLU fighting for just causes such as their battle against the NDAA. But, I don't agree with their battle to kill babies in their pro-abortion stance. The ACLU does some good, but it's mostly outweighed by the bad.

The ACLU IS fighting it (one of the few good things they're doing). This is from their website:

On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA’s dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president — and all future presidents — to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/ndaa

Being taxed in order to support oppressive legislation (e.g., Obamacare) IS oppressive. So what if we're "taxed all the time"? That doesn't make it right, does it? Certainly not EVERY tax is oppressive, just the ones that support oppressive legislation.