AARP LIES LIKE HELL AND SO DOES OBAMA. DECIDE FOR YOUR SELF !

DECIDE FOR YOURSELF. I have ! AND.. THEY REALLY SUX !
http://aarplies.com/

Is AARP's Facts Vs. Myth Website lying?! Read from the bill here and decide for yourself.
And we challenge AARP to put data and links on their website and remove their misinformation.

Updated Saturday 8/15/09, 8:45 pm PDTLatest updates: Medicare Advantage to be eliminated
Extra update: Another GREAT alternative health care plan from Whole Foods' CEO
Sen. Arlen Spector (R, er, D) caught clueless about what's in the Bill
We were shocked when we compared the most recent House bill (H.R.3200 - America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009) with the AARP website.
The AARP website misrepresents what is in the Bill.
All we want is honest information so we as voters can decide. Please read and decide for yourself, and let's have our Representatives and Senators quote from the bill and defend and convince us with FACTS, instead of trying to snow us with "trust us" (watch Sen. Arlen Specter lie and make a fool of himself). NOTE THAT EVERY CLAIM ON THIS WEBSITE HAS LINKS TO THE ACTUAL BILL OR VIDEO OF SPEECHES -- SO YOU CAN DECIDE.
First, we'll summarize the problem and the obvious solutions, and then we'll refute the AARP "Facts vs. Myths" webpage section-by-section. Obviously, we are NOT affiliated with AARP, nor any other group -- we're indepdent thinkers and voters, who can't stand disinformation. We reference sources for all linked information and include excerpts without claiming ownership or authorship. And we DID call AARP and try to get them to change their misleading website but they refused, so we had to make this website.
Also, here's a good summary table of some of the House and Senate Bills from Examiner.com.
And another good summary with even more scary details, here, from The Free Republic
And a doctor's analysis of the bill, here
What should you do if you agree that AARP is being misleading?
Call your local Representative and Senator TODAY and tell them how you feel
Call AARP TODAY at 1-888-687-2277 and CANCEL your AARP membership (so they know you mean it !)
The ways to reduce costs for healthcare are to:
Increase insurance company competition -- allow writing of policies across state lines.
Reduce government regulation and requirements of extra coverages in ALL policies only used by very few customers (they could be required for certain policies just like 'assigned risk' in auto insurance, and yes, those policies would cost more, but also cover more, and people could choose)
Have a considered (= 3-5 months of debate), public discussion of ways to help the 9-12 million US Citizens who can't afford health insurance.This is much cheaper than ANY option in the current bill!
Work on tort reform (to limit legal judgments, so insurance costs don't need to be so high).
Encourage Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) so you can control where you spend your money
Don't put the US Government and your tax dollars into running another bureacracy. A Single-Payer health system will not make money or even cover its costs, but will undercut the free market and subsidize itself off your taxes -- actually increasing the cost to you while reducing care -- it's a death spiral !
NOBODY IS SUGGESTING DOING NOTHING!Here's another great set of alternatives from Whole Foods' CEO
Why we don't trust our Representatives and Senators:
Congress won't be required to enroll. Why isn't it good enough for them but good enough for us? (The current bill exempts Congress -- and Members even refused good faith attempts to fix this: "On July 16, Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., went further and offered an amendment to the House version during the Ways and Means Committee markup that would require members of Congress to enroll in its own government-run health care program. Democrats defeated the amendment, 23 to 18.)"
Will the government be the only insurance company? (This is called "SINGLE PAYER")Will this force the private insurance companies out of business? President Obama has said that it will and that IS HIS INTENT. He has said it may take 10 or 15 years, but that's his plan. You can debate the result, but not what's on record. Watch the video here and watch another video here.
When the President keeps saying, "If you like your current health plan, you can keep it," that's a lie: No, you can't. And in his videos (paragraph above) he repeatedly gives his "vision."
If you're a Senior Citizen, note that the Bill will penalize hospitals for readmitting you (as often happens when you're being treated for several things when you're older). See Section 1151 REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOSPITAL READMISSIONS..
Medicare Advantage Insurance Options will be limited by the whims of one person appointed by the President. From Section 1162 (E): "(iv) AUTHORITY TO DISQUALIFY CERTAIN PLANS- In applying clauses (ii) and (iii), the Secretary may determine not to identify a Medicare Advantage plan if the Secretary has identified deficiencies in the plan's compliance with rules for such plans under this part." And President Obama confirmed his plan to STOP MEDICARE ADVANTAGE AS A "WASTE OF MONEY" DURING HIS TOWNHALL MEETING IN MONTANA: Obama says he can get savings of "about $177 billion over 10 years. That's how much we think we could save by eliminating subsidies to insurance companies that are offering what's called Medicare Advantage. It doesn't help seniors any more than regular Medicare does." (<-- you can click on the link, and the use control-F to search for the phrase 'medicare advantage' to find the quote) If you have a Health Savings Account (HSA), that will be illegal under the new plan. Why? Because they are not included in the definition of a'Qualified Health Plan.' BOTH Democrats and Republicans of good character tried to add that definition. It was denied. Does that seem like sneaky lawerly tricks to you? Yup, to us, too. Again, read the data and be an informed voter:"To protect the existing coverage of Americans who currently have these plans, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT), and Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) offered an amendment that would include health benefits plans with HSAs in the bill's definition of a 'qualified health benefits plan.' The Committee majority defeated this amendment. In other words, Americans who wish to buy HSA plans would be stripped of their freedom to choose them."
Tort reform is not addressed in the current bill, but tax penalties for US citizens and exemptions from penalties for illegal immigrants are included: Sec. 59B, Pg. 170, Line 1 - "Any NONRESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes."
Still Reading? GREAT! Now let's look at the misleading AARP site(you can click on any of the images below to enlarge it and see the AARP site)



Myths? Ha! Unlike AARP, we use data to back up our claims. Does AARP refuse to use REAL DATA with citations from the BILL because they are lying, or lazy, or both?! Or do they just think you won't find out?!
The real myth is that we need to do something, anything before we've had time to discuss and debate it, make sure we can pay for it, and not throw away our current health system when it's the envy of the world!

REAL FACT: You'll get to keep your insurance for only 5 years (page 17), OR LESS if *anything* changes in your health plan, INCLUDING if you change jobs. Then, you MUST enroll in the US Gov't Health Plan (page 21+ ). You may get to choose your own doctor, but that is misleading because the doctor may not accept your insurance, or may have US Government guidance on what procedures to perform, etc. Read the bill, please! Do you think that healthcare bills that are 1,018 pages long are designed to make it hard for YOU to read and understand and be informed on what's going on?! Us, too! See what can you do.
REAL FACT: So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised, BUT: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. And once the bill takes effect in about 2 years, insurance companies are prohibited from writing new policies.

REAL FACT: We're only talking about the House Proposal, since the Senate's isn't public and the White House hasn't published anything (so much for leadership, or rather political deniability),or do you have special information, AARP? The Bill won't "stand between individuals and their doctors" but it will define what can be in medical plan (page 16) and while it will allow the "best possible care", it WILL DEFINE "what best care is possible"! (page 16)

REAL FACT: The White House looks like it's cutting temporary side-deal with the drug companies (in typical Chicago-thug fashion), so drug prices might not go up for now, but long term, it's a Faustian deal once the government's the only buyer.
REAL FACT: The Bill doesn't "prevent" hospital readmissions for seniors, it just reduces the payments to hospitals if they do so (See Section 1151 REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOSPITAL READMISSIONS). To us, AARP is telling the truth here, but is misleading you!

REAL FACT: The President's "commitments" have quadrupled our national debt in less than 6 months, and the CBO's cost estimate for the current Bill recently jumped from "only" $200 billion to now closer to $1-1.5 TRILLION over just the next 10 years, with deficits never stopping and the debt just increasing!


REAL FACT: No one is suggesting doing nothing, but doing the wrong thing is something we can't afford and may push us into losing our National debt rating resulting in higher interest rates and much worse economic times. Doing the right things (see above), and carefully improving our current system, are the right things to do.

REAL FACT: Again, misleading. The government cannot refuse to treat you, but it defines what care you must "choose" to receive. YOU still "choose" to accept what they offer, OR to die (not something you have much choice in, as we see it).
REAL FACT: The current plan Section 1233 spells out "end of life planning," Obama has suggested people get "a pain pill instead of surgery," and there will be healthcare recommended practices board (a "healthcare benefits advisory board"). But still, it will be your "choice" to live or die. Right.

OBAMA AND DEAD FISH EMANUEL'S BROTHER DR. DEATH HATES OLD PEOPLE

Emanuel: Believes in withholding care from elderly for greater good.


DEADLY DOCTORS
OBAMA ADVISERS WANT TO RATION CARE


THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the de cisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.

Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.

Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change," he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).

Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, "as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others" (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).

Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.

Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).

Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years" (Lancet, Jan. 31).

The bills being rushed through Congress will be paid for largely by a $500 billion-plus cut in Medicare over 10 years. Knowing how unpopular the cuts will be, the president's budget director, Peter Orszag, urged Congress this week to delegate its own authority over Medicare to a new, presidentially-appointed bureaucracy that wouldn't be accountable to the public.

Since Medicare was founded in 1965, seniors' lives have been transformed by new medical treatments such as angioplasty, bypass surgery and hip and knee replacements. These innovations allow the elderly to lead active lives. But Emanuel criticizes Americans for being too "enamored with technology" and is determined to reduce access to it.

Dr. David Blumenthal, another key Obama adviser, agrees. He recommends slowing medical innovation to control health spending.

Blumenthal has long advocated government health-spending controls, though he concedes they're "associated with longer waits" and "reduced availability of new and expensive treatments and devices" (New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 2001). But he calls it "debatable" whether the timely care Americans get is worth the cost. (Ask a cancer patient, and you'll get a different answer. Delay lowers your chances of survival.)

Obama appointed Blumenthal as national coordinator of health-information technology, a job that involves making sure doctors obey electronically deivered guidelines about what care the government deems appropriate and cost effective.

In the April 9 New England Journal of Medicine, Blumenthal predicted that many doctors would resist "embedded clinical decision support" -- a euphemism for computers telling doctors what to do.

Americans need to know what the president's health advisers have in mind for them. Emanuel sees even basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much: "Hospital rooms in the United States offer more privacy . . . physicians' offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms" (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

No one has leveled with the public about these dangerous views. Nor have most people heard about the arm-twisting, Chicago-style tactics being used to force support. In a Nov. 16, 2008, Health Care Watch column, Emanuel explained how business should be done: "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda. If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

Do we want a "reform" that empowers people like this to decide for us?

Betsy McCaughey is founder of the Committee to Reduce Infec tion Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm?page=0
By BETSY MCCAUGHEY

THE AARP MEETING IN DALLAS~AARP IS A SCUMBAG ORGANIZATION ! LIARS

Revolt against AARP in Dallas: “Do you work for us or do we work for you?”

By Michelle Malkin • August 6, 2009 02:21 PM

Watch the senior citizen “hooligans” and “civic vigilantes” in Dallas question a condescending AARP representative about Obamacare. Dues-paying members are speaking up about the organization’s sellout of its members — and the AARP brass is not happy. Yes, the winds of real hope and change are blowing:



http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/06/revolt-against-aarp-in-dallas-do-you-work-for-us-or-do-we-work-for-you/