Now we know why Tea Partiers don't want to pay the nation's bills.

And then we have Teabag leader Bachmann who never saw a spending bill she has not voted for but always manages to vote against letting the nation pay the bills she racket up.

And let's not mention the fact that she and her husband have been on the public dole for almost all their lives. The family farm gets federal subsidies. Her husband's bussiness is subsidized through Medicaid payments, and then there is Bachmann herself who has spent her entire professional career as a government employee. It's kind of ironic if not hypocritical that a person who has benefited so much from federal spending is now on an antigovernment tirade.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

I thought you'd like the picture.

Regarding your post, are you actually saying that Bachman's husband's clinic is federally subsidized because he sees patients that have Medicaid? Seriously? You might as well say he's being subsidized by Bluecross/ Blueshield! That is not a subsidy, that is payment for services rendered.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

fuzzy math is the way to serfdom . Ah yeah . As we watch the decline live on T.V. we now know why tea partiers don't want to pay the nations bills.
Wonder what the effect of dropped credit ratings will have , Kind of Scary . Maybe it will be like y2k. I feel a panic in the air . Confidence is at an all time low. What should we do ? Monday is coming fast . Can we do anything ? Restore Confidence in a day and a half ? Is that possible ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bachmann is on the receiving end of a lot of government money which seems to run counter to her antigovernment positions - makes her a hypocrite, but that seems to be the norm for people like her.

As for the tea bag, I think the teabaggers need to take heed of their own advice.

 

You can make that argument regarding farm subsidies(which are actual subsidies), but are you now backing off the charge regarding her husband allowing his patients to use their insurance somehow being a subsidy when it is in fact payment for services rendered?

 

I am not backing off of anything Mad. Her husbands clinic receives federal funds...that is a subsidy. It is not insurance that is being used. It is a federal program called Medicaid that is putting money into her husband's clinic.

Now add that to the farm subsidies her family farm has received and her federal paychecks. The teabag leader has benefited nicely from federal coffers.

 

The best way to deal with the nations debt, is to make each political party put their money where their mouth is. If one party is for a government social program that party will pay. Those who don't approve don't have to pay.

For example, if the democrats wish to support illegal aliens, we place an extra tax on the just the democrats ear marked for this purpose. Those against this giveaway, don't pay anything extra. This way everyone gets what they want or say they want. Replublicans like the miltary, so only they need to pay for that.

The problem the tea party has, is the democrats don't pay their way but try to other people to pay for their ideas. This is where the resistance begins, since most people are generous, but they don't like thieves and the mafia forcing them to pay for that which they don't even approve. The solution is to have each party pay as they go.

An analogy is your neighbor decides, it would be nice to have a new pool. That is fine, if he is willing to pay for it. But say through some legality he got your name on the loan, so you had to pay for his pool. You would feel ripped offf by a thief. The tea party does not like parasites and thieves who can sign your name to a debt you don't want. Citizens should have the legal right to purge such liabiity, shifting all the liabiltiy back to the neighbor. To shrink the government is about removing the long term liability you never agreed to have.

The neighbor would love to get you to pay for his pool. He can be the big shot with the nice pool while you get no credit but pick up the tab. It is all done with smoke and mirrors to get the vote of the other neighbors.

It should comes down to pay as you go, with each party paying for its own programs through party taxes. If the Republicans can do things via the free market, they pay less taxes. Maybe a 90% tax on all democrats and 15% on all republcans should pay the tab fairly.

 

Your model of every man for themselves is not a society. Actually, Democrats do pay for whatever tax increase that Democrats pass. We aren't paying for pools here, but making investments in the nation that benefit everyone. The problem is that Republicans don't want the country to progress, they are selfish rich pukes that don't want to pay the cost of a prosperous society, only reap the benefit. That makes them parasites.

 

Nice idea. I would love to have Republicans pay for the trillions they added to the debt and deficits. I would love to have them pay for Medicare Part D.

This is an over simplification. I practice, it would not work. But it would make Republicans/Tea Partiers shovel over a lot more money in taxes than what they have been.

Both parties by the way, like illegal aliens but for different reasons. That is why no one in Washington has gotten serious about the issue for decades.

No the problem the Tea Party has is it needs less hysteria, fewer pledges, and more knowledge and rational thought. If you really look at the nations fiscal situation, Democrats have been far more fiscally responsible than Republicans. It is the Democrats who should be pissed at Republican fiscall irresponsibility. Republicans/Tea Party like to tell a good story, love drama; but when it comes to actually being fiscally responsible, they are anything but (e.g. threatening to cause the nation to default, unfunded wars, unfunded entitlement expansions, etc.).

 

This demonstrates the insidious nature of the left. First you demand that the federal government provide insurance, then you attempt to gag anyone who has anything whatsoever to do with said program.

Ignoring the obvious fact that a payment for a service is not a subsidy.

.
Here's another picture I thought you'd like:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

"then you attempt to gag anyone who has anything whatsoever to do with said program"

Only when they are hypocrites who decry government social spending on things like health care.

 

LOL, pointing out the hypocrisy of the teabag movement is not an attempt to gag. It is pointing out facts you and people like you would like to ignore. This is yet another example of people such as yourself pulling out that special Republican/Tea Party lexicon in order to get out of a tough spot - inventing new meanings for old established words and phrases.

The unpleasant fact for you and others on the right and in the teabag movement, is that your leaders (e.g. Bachmann) are hypocrites. She demagogues these programs while at the same time pocketing money from them.

Bachmann complains about government employees, and hell she has been one her entire professional life. First as an IRS lawyer and then as an elected official. I am sure Bachmann has a very nice government pension coming her way, in addition to all the government money she has already pocketed.

 

And those who don't agree to pay, would receive no program monies or other benefits - of course.

Right?

 

I'm the one changing the meaning of words when you are calling accepting a payment from a patient's insurance a subsidy???

Perhaps it was her experience in the belly of the beast that created the desire to tame it.



PS. Here's another Picture for you:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

 

The Tea Party movement is a collection of vicious fascists and capitalists; of course they do not want to pay the nations' bills! They want only to fulfill their own selfish greed.

 

No that is you setting up another straw man. Where did I say accepting payment from a patient's insurance as a subsidy? Come on Mad, let's see it. But you know you can't because I never said that. You said that.

Medicaid is not an insurance. You should know that. So I have to believe you are being deliberately dishonest here. Medicaid is a federal and state program that provides subsidies for medical care for the indigent. There is no insurance involved.

The facts are she and her family have benefited greately from the very government largess she complains about. If she were unhappy with beast as you infer, they why does she continue to accept government handouts? Why does she want even more government handouts?

If she were serious, why doesn't she refuse all government money? Why doesn't she refuse her government pension or her government provided healthcare?

 

Medicaid is not insurance? WTF? Ask any patient with Medicaid what their insurance is and they'll say Medicaid. Ask any doctor what kind of insurance he accepts and Medicaid will be listed there if he accepts it.

The subsidy in Medicaid goes to the patient who can't afford private insurance, not the doctor. If a doctor accepts Medicaid he's generally providing his services at a cut rate. In fact, didn't ObamaCare expand Medicaid as a way to cover the uninsured? Are you saying those people will still be uninsured?
.

 

Come on Mad, get real. You cannot be serious calling Medicaid insurance. You cannot be that dense. Medicaid is one of those entitlement programs that you and folks like you like you, including, Bachmman like to rale about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicaid

"Medicaid is the United States health program for certain people and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means-tested program that is jointly funded by the state and federal governments, and is managed by the states.[1] People served by Medicaid are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, including low-income adults, their children, and people with certain disabilities. Poverty alone does not necessarily qualify someone for Medicaid. Medicaid is the largest source of funding for medical and health-related services for people with limited income in the United States." - Wikipedia

Medicaid recipients don't pay insurance premiums. It is an entitlement. There is a difference.

 

You're really splitting hairs in saying it's not insurance. In common parlance, Medicare is government insurance for old people and Medicaid is government insurance for poor people. In all my dealings with Medicaid, I've never heard it referred to as anything but insurance. For instance, here's the Anthem site discussing Medicare versus Medicaid, you'll note that Medicaid is never referred to as anything but insurance.

The distinction you are making has to do entirely with the person being covered and absolutely nothing to do with the provider. From our end, Medicaid is just one more insurance program.

 

No I am not splitting hairs. I am being honest. Further your reference does not refer to Medicaid as insurance. It refers to it as a program,

"Medicare Vs Medicaid
Medicare and Medicaid are not always necessarily separate programs. In some instances, Medicare recipients with low incomes may also be eligible to receive aid from Medicaid. For those who are fully covered by Medicaid, the Medicare health care coverage is supplemented by services provided under their respective State's Medicaid program. Some such services include:
Nursing facility care beyond the 100-day limit provided by Medicare.
Prescription drugs.
Eyeglasses.
Hearing aids." - Anthem

Medicare and Medicaid are federal entitlement programs, you know the ones Republicans have been trying to gut this last year. So attempt as you have, Medicaid is not healthcare insurance as you have claimed. It is a federal and state program that provides healthcare services to indigent people.

The bottom line here is that Bachmann has been raling about federal entitlements and subsidies yet she has profited greatly from these programs. That is normally called hypocrisy outside Republican/Tea Party circles.