Why I don't back Paul Ryan's Medicare plan: Scott Brown

Democracy4Sale wrote: Oh... It's over a year old?...So, that means that Scott Brown is free to flip-flop on it? (Like Mitt-the-Twit Romney? Gov. Etch-a-Sketch-in-Chief?)

Who knew?!?!?

:rofl rofllol rofllol rofllol

Only someone with guano for brains would pretend that a comment made on a plan which has since been significantly altered is as relevant today as it was the day it was released. Either you are desperately out of touch or you are intending to be deceitful and got caught in your deception. Personally, I'm leaning towards the second option myself.

Significantly altered? Please enlighten us on the significant changes made within the last year.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Actually, I totally understand why Scott Brown would prefer being a RINO Senator in office over being replaced by that Indian Squaw(D) who is running against him. To appeal to Massachussets voters, he has to show a more moderate side.

And I honestly think he is more of a liberal Republican. Of course, the Massachussets Dem Party is probably portraying him to the right of Ron Paul.

And yet another offensive racist remark.

They can't help themselves....

archer wrote: The conservatives here will point out where a democrat disagrees with Obama and use it to bash Obama, but if a liberal points out where a Republican disagrees with their chosen one, Paul Ryan....they squeal like little piggies and make excuses. Fun to watch don't ya think?

Difference between Ryan and the Democrats? When Ryan comes up with something that raises objections, he's willing to work with the other side on a possible solution that reduces the opposition to the initial plan. His inclusion of the option to retain MediCare as is for those under 55 in the 2012 version is a perfect example of someone who is willing to seek a compromise that everyone can live with. And yet, the Democrats choose deception over accuracy yet again and try to portray the initial plan as the only one which has been offered for consideration as they seek to put their MediScare plan into action after Ryan was named as Romney's choice for VP. First they come up with ads which seek to portray current recipients as being subject to the proposed changes, which was never true of either version, and now they seek to convince you that the original plan is the only one submitted.

One can't help but feel sorry for them now that it has become readily apparent that the only platform that the Democrats have to run on in 2012 is baseless fear mongering.

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote: The conservatives here will point out where a democrat disagrees with Obama and use it to bash Obama, but if a liberal points out where a Republican disagrees with their chosen one, Paul Ryan....they squeal like little piggies and make excuses. Fun to watch don't ya think?

Difference between Ryan and the Democrats? When Ryan comes up with something that raises objections, he's willing to work with the other side on a possible solution that reduces the opposition to the initial plan. His inclusion of the option to retain MediCare as is for those under 55 in the 2012 version is a perfect example of someone who is willing to seek a compromise that everyone can live with. And yet, the Democrats choose deception over accuracy yet again and try to portray the initial plan as the only one which has been offered for consideration as they seek to put their MediScare plan into action after Ryan was named as Romney's choice for VP. First they come up with ads which seek to portray current recipients as being subject to the proposed changes, which was never true of either version, and now they seek to convince you that the original plan is the only one submitted.

One can't help but feel sorry for them now that it has become readily apparent that the only platform that the Democrats have to run on in 2012 is baseless fear mongering.

Is that why he has been so successful in getting his legislation passed? That is why he has been able to get his massive total of 2 bills covering renaming a post office and changing the excise taxes on arrows passed in 13 years while collecting over a million dollars in tax payer funds? What a talent!

archer wrote: Significantly altered? Please enlighten us on the significant changes made within the last year.

So you too are unaware that the proposal to turn it into a voucher only program for those under the age of 55 was changed to include an option for those in that age category to pick either the voucher or to enter MediCare as if nothing had changed? I thought that you of all people would have picked up on that archer, given it preserves the ability of your children and grandchildren to receive the same benefits as you are currently receiving. I guess I give you more credit than you deserve sometimes.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote: The conservatives here will point out where a democrat disagrees with Obama and use it to bash Obama, but if a liberal points out where a Republican disagrees with their chosen one, Paul Ryan....they squeal like little piggies and make excuses. Fun to watch don't ya think?

Difference between Ryan and the Democrats? When Ryan comes up with something that raises objections, he's willing to work with the other side on a possible solution that reduces the opposition to the initial plan. His inclusion of the option to retain MediCare as is for those under 55 in the 2012 version is a perfect example of someone who is willing to seek a compromise that everyone can live with. And yet, the Democrats choose deception over accuracy yet again and try to portray the initial plan as the only one which has been offered for consideration as they seek to put their MediScare plan into action after Ryan was named as Romney's choice for VP. First they come up with ads which seek to portray current recipients as being subject to the proposed changes, which was never true of either version, and now they seek to convince you that the original plan is the only one submitted.

One can't help but feel sorry for them now that it has become readily apparent that the only platform that the Democrats have to run on in 2012 is baseless fear mongering.

Is that why he has been so successful in getting his legislation passed? That is why he has been able to get his massive total of 2 bills covering renaming a post office and changing the excise taxes on arrows passed in 13 years while collecting over a million dollars in tax payer funds? What a talent!

Boy, I'M impressed....

(I understand he's helped the sales of Randroid books a little, since he requires his staff to read them...)

archer wrote: Significantly altered? Please enlighten us on the significant changes made within the last year.

But the ads dig up that old claim about Ryan’s 2011 proposal. It’s true that an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that seniors on the private plans would pay more than they would under traditional Medicare. And the CBO analysis indicated that a 65-year-old in 2022 could pay about $6,000 more than he or she would for the year under traditional Medicare. The government subsidies would increase with the rate of inflation, which critics argued was not much when dealing with health costs that, for years, have risen much faster than the general inflation rate. Ryan did say that low-income beneficiaries would get more money from the government to help cover costs, but the details on how much and who would qualify were not yet fleshed out.

But Ryan’s new plan, released this year, is more generous in terms of what it would provide for subsidies, and it keeps traditional Medicare as an option for all beneficiaries, both current and future.

Brown, in his one year old article was talking about the previous Ryan plan which the CBO said could cost $6K more, and that was his first point in the article. Ryan's current plan keeps traditional Medicare as an option. There are other differences which can be seen in the link.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/no-end-to-end-medicare-claim/

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Actually, I totally understand why Scott Brown would prefer being a RINO Senator in office over being replaced by that Indian Squaw(D) who is running against him. To appeal to Massachussets voters, he has to show a more moderate side.

And I honestly think he is more of a liberal Republican. Of course, the Massachussets Dem Party is probably portraying him to the right of Ron Paul.

And yet another offensive racist remark.

rofllol rofllol

Do you find offensive racist remarks funny bob?