Friday, August 07, 2009

Town Hall with AARP

I got my first invitation from AARP around the time I turned 40, and I threw it away, insulted that they thought I was old enough to join.

Sometime after that I learned that AARP is a major supporter of Democrats and liberal causes. I have since refused to join that organization, even in my advanced old age, and even though I could get bargains (on insurance at least) through them. I will not knowingly put my money somewhere that it will work against what I believe in. So AARP (and Ben & Jerry's, too) is out until they change their Lefty ways.

Then I saw this video that Duane Patterson (Generalissimo) posted on Hugh Hewitt's blog. It's a town hall meeting held by AARP with the intent to have a discussion with the seniors in the audience. But the seniors weren't buying the AARP talking points.

The citizens of the country are upset, and the self-appointed ruling-class elites aren't accustomed to having their pronouncements contradicted, so they just take their ball and go home.

As long as Congress and their supporters keep trying to ram through the complete destruction of finest (though imperfect) medical system in the world, we must oppose them. And when efforts to pass the current "reform" plans fail, the radicals will simply try stealth tactics to achieve the same ends. We must not lose our vigilance as long as Democrats hold the majority in Congress.


Here's the audio of Hugh Hewitt's discussion of the video on his radio show. Classic!


Malott said...


The video was great. It revealed so well the respect AARP has for its members and their concerns.

Tsofah said...

Skye, you must be mistaken that regular folks are involved in this displeasing discourse! According to Pelosi, Keith Oberman, and Pres. Obama - it's people hired and flown in by insurance companies that are staging all this!

I guess they forgot most of us have our own opinions that disagree with the current administrations plans for healthcare coverage...

paw said...

By self appointed you must mean elected, and by pronouncements you must mean the democratic process. And if I tried to run an Elks meeting from the middle row, I'd fully expect to be ejected or that the meeting would be shut down, because that's the way things are in an civil society.

SkyePuppy said...


By self-appointed I mean self-appointed. They were elected to represent their constituents. They have since appointed themselves to rule the country.

By pronouncements I mean declarations of falsehoods parading as facts ("I guarantee if you're happy with your health plan and your doctor, you can keep them.").

Where were you when Code Pink disrupted meetings under the Bush administration? Where were you when leftists shouted down conservative speakers at universities around the country? How loudly did you decry the lack of civility back then?

I agree that people need to wait for the discussion time, but to expect them to sit quietly and take it when they're being insulted or condescended to is a bit much. "This may be fun for you..." should have been followed by an apology when the audience objected, but the sweet, civil lady from AARP took offense instead.

Overall, the Democrats and their cohorts in the healt care debate think they are our betters and that we should just shut up and let them railroad us into the tyranny of utopia. Sorry, but they've gone too far this time.

Tsofah said...


Well said!

paw said...

In all respect, you don't know what I decry. Just consider that before getting your brush out.

More than anything, I'm tired of the argument that goes "before you criticize this you must condemn that."

It's funny to hear you guys bandy about the word tyranny. Tyranny is disappearing people, sending them to other countries for torture, holding them without process on the say-so of one man. That's been the definition of tyranny since the Magna Carta. Let's hear you decry that before you drop the tyranny bomb.

Yeah, I thought so. That game doesn't get us anywhere, doesn't it. Let's not, ok?

Unlike privatizing social security in 04, health reform was definitely on the ballot in 08. Dems ran on that. They won. They are serving their constituents. They are in good faith trying to work with Republicans, to the dismay and alienation of the left. I'm sure you recall the phrase elections have consequences.

SkyePuppy said...


I didn't say what you decried, I asked. And it was in the interest of looking for consistency from you. If dissension and protest is OK for one side, it should be OK for both.

Tyranny: arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.

We're not there yet, and I didn't say we are, but the push is in that direction. Obama's Health Care Czar's call for snitching on your emailing neighbors for opposing Obamacare is but one step along that path.

Funny, but I remember the election being about Hope and Change and pulling our troops out of Iraq pronto.

You're absolutely right that elections have consequences, and the consequence of this one is that if Obamacare gets enacted like the House version, we're all screwed. Except for the self-appointed ruling-class elites, of course.

paw said...

Keep screaming into the wind about self-appointed whatever. Your bed, you lie in it. It's foolish, and everyone who is not read into your deal knows it.

Over and out, Mon. C.

Congrats on the house and best wishes all around. Strange times, eh?

janice said...

All of your points are valid and specific facts.....

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to email this post to the "thug-in-chief".....