Saving Private Ryan – NOT! | GOP Scurries in Opposite Direction of Paul Ryan’s Medicare Debacle!

Not even Paul’s long-lost brother can save  Private Ryan from his disastrous plan to  decimate Medicare.

Here’s Paulie SPINNING that shit for Medicare/ Voucher  plan like a deluxe Maytag

Here’s the Senate vote on the bill:

Senate rejects Ryan budget


“Ryan’s budget fell by a vote of 40 to 57 after every Democrat lined up against it except for Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) who did not vote.


Rand Paul and three GOP centrists — Sens. Olympia Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine) and Scott Brown (Mass.) — announced their opposition before the vote.

You can read the rest of the article here.

3 Chics can never post this video enough.  Let  Fox’s Neil Cavuto, the last of the Eddie Munster triplets introduce the clip  LOL

Gawd, the three of them look like the Stepford men.  And they say all Blacks look alike.



This entry was posted in Ametia's Rant, Current Events, Economy, Health, Politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Saving Private Ryan – NOT! | GOP Scurries in Opposite Direction of Paul Ryan’s Medicare Debacle!

  1. Ametia says:

    Thank you, Ezra!

    Posted at 04:10 PM ET, 05/27/2011
    Responding to Ryan
    By Ezra Klein

    Let me begin by saying that though I’m eager to do an interview where we can really engage with one another’s arguments, I appreciate Paul Ryan response to my questions and hope we can continue the dialogue. In this post, I’m going to focus on his two most important arguments: the one for why his plan will work, and the one for why other plans failed. The first argument can be summed up as “look at Medicare Part D,” the second as “look at the rest of the world.”

    ”Our premium-support plan is modeled after the Medicare Part D prescription-drug program,” Ryan writes, “in which providers compete against each other for seniors’ business. Medicare Part D came in 40 percent below cost projections done at the time of enactment — that’s almost unheard of for a government program.”

    ”Medicare Part D” is wonk-talk for the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. Signed into law in 2003, Medicare Part D has been cheaper than originally estimated. But it hasn’t been cheap enough to make Ryan’s plan work, and nor is Ryan’s plan as closely related to Part D as he suggests.

    Let’s start with the costs. Since 2006 — the first year of the benefit — Medicare Part D’s average premium has risen by 57 percent (pdf). Between 2010 and 2011, premiums rose by 10 percent. And going forward, the program’s actuaries expect (pdf) expenditures “to grow at an average annual rate of 9.7 percent for the 10-year period 2011 to 2020.” That may be an excellent performance when compared with the Congressional Budget Office’s initial projections. But it’s a lot faster than inflation, which is what Ryan needs for his plan to work.

    Moreover, Part D’s performance vis-a-vis the early projections has had less to do with the program itself and more to do with sectorwide trends in the pharmaceuticals market, where older drugs are slipping out of patent and the development of new drugs has slowed. As the actuaries write, “The reduced estimates reflect a higher market penetration of generic drugs and a decline in the number of new drug products that are expected to reach the market during this period.” That’s why the drug savings haven’t been limited to Medicare: National drug spending is 35 percent lower (pdf) than projected in 2006. Medicare Part D is part of, rather than the driver of, that trend. And that trend, of course, is a bad one: it’s lower costs through less innovation, which isn’t want Ryan wants and isn’t what I want.

    Read the rest here:

  2. Sam says:

    The jackals (Repugnants) have to be removed from America’s midst

  3. ***dead*** at the picture of the Munster kid!

  4. Ametia says:

    What’s Bill Clinton up to?

    On Medicare, Bill Clinton Tells Rep. Paul Ryan ‘Give Me A Call’
    video by Mark Joyella | 3:34 pm, May 25th, 2011

    ABC News’ Jonathan Karl was with Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan today, catching an impromptu meeting between Ryan and former President Bill Clinton. Clinton had just spoken to an audience at a forum on the national debt held by the Pete Peterson Foundation, and he told Ryan what he’d said about yesterday’s special election in New York–with a Democrat emerging as the winner in a solidly Republican district–which has been seen as a repudiation of Ryan’s Medicare plan. “So anyway, I told them before you got here, I said I’m glad we won this race in New York,” Clinton said, adding “I hope Democrats don’t use this as an excuse to do nothing.”

    Ryan told Clinton he’s concerned the election results will freeze action on spending. He asked Clinton for help:

    “My guess is it’s going to sink into paralysis is what’s going to happen. And you know the math. It’s just, I mean, we knew we were putting ourselves out there. You gotta start this. You gotta get out there. You gotta get this thing moving,” Ryan said.

    Clinton told Ryan that if he ever wanted to talk about it, he should “give me a call.” Ryan said he would.

    ABC reports Clinton had tied the New York election to Medicare in his public remarks, but said a voter rejection of Ryan’s plan was not an excuse to do nothing:

    “It was about Medicare,” Clinton said during a speech to the debt forum minutes before he met Ryan back stage. Clinton was referring to Ryan’s controversial budget plan, passed by the House this year, which wouldtransform Medicare for those under the age of 55.

    “You shouldn’t draw the conclusion that the New York race means that nobody can do anything solve the rising Medicare costs,” said during his speech. “I just don’t agree with that. I think you should draw the conclusion that the people made a judgment that this proposal in the Republican is not the right one. I agree with that, but I’m afraid that the Democrats will draw the conclusion that because Congressman Ryan’s proposal, I think, is not the best one, that we shouldn’t do anything and I completely disagree with that.”

    Watch it here, from ABC News:

  5. creolechild says:

    Ametia- I had chest pains from laughing so hard at what you posted. (Good thing I have health insurance in case something goes drastically wrong!)

    Now, about Cavuto’s claims regarding Medicare. Let’s look at some facts, as opposed to “spin,” “distortions,” “misinformation,” and “lies.”


    “I keep hearing that Social Security isn’t going to be there for my generation. Is that true?”

    “When it comes to the question “will Social Security be there for me?” the first thing to remember is that, it is there for you today in the form of disability and survivor’s insurance.”

    “But as far as the long term solvency of the program and whether Social Security is “going broke,” it is really important to understand that when people use the term bankruptcy when talking about the Social Security trust funds, it is not bankruptcy in the same sense as when a person goes bankrupt.”

    “Without any changes to the program, according to the most recent Social Security Board of Trustees Report, Social Security will be able to pay full benefits until 2037.”

    “After 2037, again, without any changes to the program, Social Security will still be able to pay about 75% of the scheduled payments we would normally pay to each eligible person. While 75% is not ideal, the fact is that Social Security will not be broke nor will it be insolvent in the way most of us think of those terms.”

    “Social Security will still be able to pay 75% after 2037 because millions of people will continue to work and pay payroll taxes. The payroll taxes of today’s workers fund the benefits of today’s retirees. When today’s young workers reach retirement age, and are ready to collect benefits, their kids and grandkids, the workers of tomorrow, will fund their Social Security benefits.”

    “The Social Security program is still strong and will be for decades to come. Social Security has successfully adapted to
    the changing needs of the American public over the course of its 75-year history and we will continue to adapt to the changing needs of the people we serve. Any changes to Social Security will need to be worked out between congress and the administration.”

    • Ametia says:

      LOL I should post a warning on some of my post. My humor gets the best of me sometimes, but I have to do it, to keep from crying. That’s my girl. I knew you’d breakdown the spin and lies and bring the FACTS.

      Fox viewers, keep listening to Neil Cavuto and thinking that you or your family won’t be in that wheelchair going over the cliff.

      Thank you.

Leave a Reply