Neocon Paul Ryan Would Emasculate Social Security to Pay International Bankers!

[imblessed]

Neocon Paul Ryan Would Emasculate Social Security to Pay International Bankers!

Posted by Bill Rummel

Indeed, he would. Romney's selection as his VP running mate would do just that in addition to gutting - or eliminating - Medicare and Medicaid to reward his handlers.

This venue is consistent with Romney's objectives, so what's the big fuss? How any honest candidate can steal from taxpayers whom have been making contributions to their entire working lives should be beyond the comprehension of all Americanists.

You're right, it's not HONEST. It's backdoor thievery. That, and perpetual wars on behalf of the NWO. In effect, those policies are anti-American. That my friend, is what the 'big fuss' is all about! It's Monstrous.

You're a Republican, and still not know what the Neoconservatives who run your Party have running through their veins? The neocons are simply the other talon from the same bird currently astride Obama. Check them out. The Neocons are loyal tenants of Socialism in the right hand margin of this Socialist schematic created by the Democratic Socialists of America.

http://chasvoice.blogspot.com/2012/05/banking-cartels-think-they-are-going-to.html

[Unitedrich]

Sorry,

Not buying it. Propaganda at its finest. We have a choice of 4 more years of nothingness, or the alternative to that. For me and mine it is the alternative.

[Butifldrm]

Neocon Paul Ryan Would Emasculate Social Security to Pay International Bankers!

So why are you trying to play Craps, when we are defintely playing Monopoly?

[cris]

Dont let the Libs fool ya folks...O'blah and his cronies are the

ones trying to steal from Grandma, to give to his supporters

Shocker: Obamacare Steals Nearly $1 TRILLION From Medicare to Fund Itself

By Gary P Jackson

When the evil ObamaCare legislation was first put in motion, the Congressional Budget office told the American people it would steal $500 billion from an already broke Medicare system.

Now the CBO has revised their numbers upward. What’s troubling is not just this upward revision, but the fact we know the CBO is likely understating the the numbers still.

This shouldn’t shock people who understand what ObamaCare is all about. Sarah Palin noted there were death panels in this thing. Unelected, unaccountable government panels that will decide who lives or dies.

For those that still don’t get it, you need to read Dr Ezekiel Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” and understand how cold and calculating the people who created ObamaCare are.

In the minds of the monsters who created ObamaCare, health care is a commodity, and a scarce one at that. They understand that funds will be scarce as well, so there will be rationing. Under their system, patients will get treatments considered “scarce medical interventions” based on how much they “contribute to society.” This is an age based deal, with people aged 25-30 considered the most important, and most “deserving” of critical care, and the priorities for older folks absolutely collapses after this.

The fact that ObamaCare steals nearly $1 Trillion from Medicare, health care funds used to treat the elderly and disabled, only reinforces the evil that is the “Complete Lives System” which is the basis for the death panels Sarah Palin spoke of.

Joseph Mengele would be proud. In Barack Obama’s America, life is not precious.

Paul Ryans medicare Plan

After O'bamacare is eliminated

The Ryan program stops the raid on Medicare. In the year 2019, according to Medicare’s own

actuaries, Medicare will spend $14,731 per senior,under the Obama health law, instead of

$16,162 if the Obama health law had not been enacted.

Ryan’s “premium support” is modeled after how the Medicare Part D drug benefit currently

works. Seniors have a choice, and the competition between drug plans has kept costs below what

was predicted — nearly a first for a government program.

The expectation is that the competition among private health plans will help do the same. The

shame is that Ryan’s proposal for guaranteed premium support wouldn’t start until 2022.

The intent is to spare today’s seniors and baby boomers entering Medicare from sudden change.

Even without premium support, seniors will fare better between now and 2022 under the Ryan

proposal.

FEDERAL PRIVATIZATION: THE RYAN PLAN

Social Security

“A Roadmap for America’s Future” contains a plan to privatize Social Security. That plan would give workers under age 55 an option of investing about a third of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts. It would guarantee that the account would never be less than the amount placed into the account plus inflation. The account would belong to the individual and could be inherited. Individuals would invest a portion of their contributions in a limited number of funds managed by the federal government. That portion would increase over time to a maximum of 5.2 percent of the current 12.4 percent Social Security payroll tax. Retirement age would very gradually rise to age 70, instead of age 67. In addition, a one-time payment of $2 billion would be required to assure continued benefits to those over age 55 and others not participating in the privatization plan.

Privatization would shift the risk of an increase or decline in the value of investments to the beneficiary. It would not necessarily fund the social insurance programs providing for disability insurance and survivors insurance. It would require a large “transition cost” to pay benefits to beneficiaries under the current plan. Those benefits are now paid for by current wage earners. Under privatization, money contributed by a current wage earner would go directly into that wage earner’s individual plan. Privatization would also permit individuals to make decisions about their retirement funds and benefit from increased value in their investments. It could open up new funds for investment in the economy because additional money would be going into the stock market.

[cris]

This is an important part of the last post....This is the practice and process

called Bioethics this idea is being taught to our kids in Universities today.

The intent is to go after the disabled, and elderly, because they dont represent

a useful benefit to society.

In ObamaCare, health care is a commodity, and a scarce one at that. They understand that funds will be scarce as well, so there will be rationing. Under their system, patients will get treatments considered “scarce medical interventions” based on how much they “contribute to society.” This is an age based deal, with people aged 25-30 considered the most important, and most “deserving” of critical care, and the priorities for older folks absolutely collapses after this.

THE KILLING-FOR-ORGANS PUSHERS-BIOETHICS

By: Wesley J. Smith

The Daily Caller

February 10, 2012

If you want to see where our culture may next go off the rails, read professional journals. There, in often eye-crossing and passive arcane prose of the medical intelligentsia, you will discover an astonishing level of antipathy to the sanctity of human life — to the point now that some advocate killing the profoundly disabled for their organs.

Case in point: “What Makes Killing Wrong?” an article published in the January 19, 2012 edition of the Journal of Medical Ethics. The authors argue that death and total disability are morally indistinguishable, and therefore harvesting organs from living disabled patients is not morally wrong. Bioethicists Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, of Duke University, and Franklin G. Miller, from the National Institutes of Health’s Department of Bioethics (which should really get the alarm bells ringing!) arrive at their shocking (for most of us) conclusion by claiming that murdering the hypothetical “Betty” isn’t wrong because it kills her, but rather, because it “makes her unable to do anything, including walking, talking, and even thinking and feeling.”

How do they get from deconstructing the definition of death to harvesting the disabled? First, they change the scenario so that Betty is not killed but severely brain damaged to the point that she is “totally disabled.” But their definition of that term encompasses hundreds of thousands of living Americans who are our mothers, fathers, children, aunts and siblings, uncles, friends and cousins — people with profound disabilities like that experienced by Terri Schiavo and my late Uncle Bruno as he lived through the late stages of his Alzheimer’s disease:

Since Betty “is no worse off being dead than totally disabled,” they opine, it is no worse “to kill Betty than to totally disable her.” Not only that, but according to the authors, “there is nothing bad about death or killing other than disability or disabling,” and since she is already so debilitated, then nothing wrong is done by harvesting her organs and thus ending her biological existence. And thus, in the space of not quite five pages, killing the innocent ceases to be wrong and the intrinsic dignity of human life is thrown out the window, transforming vulnerable human beings into objectified and exploitable human resources.

Alas, Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller are not on the fringe. they can hardly be called radical — at least by the standards of the medical/bioethical intelligentsia. Indeed, for more than a decade articles have been published in the world’s most notable medical and bioethics journals arguing in favor of killing profoundly disabled patients for their organs.

[carlos in san diego]

Sorry,

Not buying it. Propaganda at its finest. We have a choice of 4 more years of nothingness, or the alternative to that. For me and mine it is the alternative.

You will believe it when it happens, and it will happen! The neo-con fascists will do it. It's been a part of their plan all along. Ryan and the rest of the sell outs are only following orders from their Elite masters!

If you believe what you are being told is propaganda then your in for a very rude wake up call one day. If you want to know the truth watch the movie "Ethos" available on NETFLIX.

What we have been told by our controlled media, and our puppet politicians is the real propaganda! Until you know the truth you will always be just another victim of the Elite, another one among many millions!

Your thinking is that we must accept the least of two evils...well, since that is the case, then there is obviously no choice at all! And if the election does not give us true choices: then, ask yourself who is benefiting? It's clearly not us...so who is the beneficiary?

Then you need to follow the money, and who are the largest campaign contributors? Large corporations. Who owns the corporations? The Elite. Carlos

Carlos

[cris]

Its not the choice between two evils

One guy....O'blah, is a truley evil puppet of George Soros and his Lib sycophants

The other guy....Romney, is one of the cleanest politicians I've ever seen

Easy choice.

[carlos in san diego]

Dont let the Libs fool ya folks...O'blah and his cronies are the

ones trying to steal from Grandma, to give to his supporters

Shocker: Obamacare Steals Nearly $1 TRILLION From Medicare to Fund Itself

By Gary P Jackson

When the evil ObamaCare legislation was first put in motion, the Congressional Budget office told the American people it would steal $500 billion from an already broke Medicare system.

Now the CBO has revised their numbers upward. What’s troubling is not just this upward revision, but the fact we know the CBO is likely understating the the numbers still.

This shouldn’t shock people who understand what ObamaCare is all about. Sarah Palin noted there were death panels in this thing. Unelected, unaccountable government panels that will decide who lives or dies.

For those that still don’t get it, you need to read Dr Ezekiel Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” and understand how cold and calculating the people who created ObamaCare are.

In the minds of the monsters who created ObamaCare, health care is a commodity, and a scarce one at that. They understand that funds will be scarce as well, so there will be rationing. Under their system, patients will get treatments considered “scarce medical interventions” based on how much they “contribute to society.” This is an age based deal, with people aged 25-30 considered the most important, and most “deserving” of critical care, and the priorities for older folks absolutely collapses after this.

The fact that ObamaCare steals nearly $1 Trillion from Medicare, health care funds used to treat the elderly and disabled, only reinforces the evil that is the “Complete Lives System” which is the basis for the death panels Sarah Palin spoke of.

Joseph Mengele would be proud. In Barack Obama’s America, life is not precious.

Paul Ryans medicare Plan

After O'bamacare is eliminated

The Ryan program stops the raid on Medicare. In the year 2019, according to Medicare’s own

actuaries, Medicare will spend $14,731 per senior,under the Obama health law, instead of

$16,162 if the Obama health law had not been enacted.

Ryan’s “premium support” is modeled after how the Medicare Part D drug benefit currently

works. Seniors have a choice, and the competition between drug plans has kept costs below what

was predicted — nearly a first for a government program.

The expectation is that the competition among private health plans will help do the same. The

shame is that Ryan’s proposal for guaranteed premium support wouldn’t start until 2022.

The intent is to spare today’s seniors and baby boomers entering Medicare from sudden change.

Even without premium support, seniors will fare better between now and 2022 under the Ryan

proposal.

FEDERAL PRIVATIZATION: THE RYAN PLAN

Social Security

“A Roadmap for America’s Future” contains a plan to privatize Social Security. That plan would give workers under age 55 an option of investing about a third of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts. It would guarantee that the account would never be less than the amount placed into the account plus inflation. The account would belong to the individual and could be inherited. Individuals would invest a portion of their contributions in a limited number of funds managed by the federal government. That portion would increase over time to a maximum of 5.2 percent of the current 12.4 percent Social Security payroll tax. Retirement age would very gradually rise to age 70, instead of age 67. In addition, a one-time payment of $2 billion would be required to assure continued benefits to those over age 55 and others not participating in the privatization plan.

Privatization would shift the risk of an increase or decline in the value of investments to the beneficiary. It would not necessarily fund the social insurance programs providing for disability insurance and survivors insurance. It would require a large “transition cost” to pay benefits to beneficiaries under the current plan. Those benefits are now paid for by current wage earners. Under privatization, money contributed by a current wage earner would go directly into that wage earner’s individual plan. Privatization would also permit individuals to make decisions about their retirement funds and benefit from increased value in their investments. It could open up new funds for investment in the economy because additional money would be going into the stock market.

Cris: Why do you continue to support the criminal element that now runs our government? Is it because your vote was partially responsible for putting them in office and your not man enough to admit to yourself that you were DEAD WRONG! So you continue to propagate their myth by continuing the lies, half truths, and distortions?

Or are you here to monitor this site for your masters? Does your job description include the words "sell out?" Carlos

Its not the choice between two evils

One guy....O'blah, is a truley evil puppet of George Soros and his Lib sycophants

The other guy....Romney, is one of the cleanest politicians I've ever seen

Easy choice.

Your "friend" Romney...aka, "Mitt the twitt" is a vulture capitalist, this is your idea of a "good" choice? Carlos

[Lutie]

OMG If you people can't see the destruction this President has caused by now it's because you either feel obligated to vote for him or you really are just too stubborn to admit it.

[R2D2]

Are you talking about this kenyan, faggy, imposter president that ocupies the white house palace of kings today?

[Maggie123]

Are you talking about this kenyan, faggy, imposter president that ocupies the white house palace of kings today?

Well now I see why "Americans Hate Each Other's So Much".

I was wondering?

Edited August 12, 2012 by Maggie123

[mrmcwhipit]

Can you really not see where the country is heading under

Obama? It must be voters remorse that keeps the blinders

On so many. And he certainley has a way with the ladies ugh.

[Blondie121]

I was always under the impression that the President did not "rule" the United States. He/she can depend on help from Congress. Well, where was Obama's "help" when the Congress was clearly anti-Obama and as one member of the ruling body so aptly stated when Obama was elected: Our job is to ensure Obama fails. Well...... With that attitude no wonder the people of the U.S. were not represented in the best manner possible.

[dinar_stud]

Are you talking about this kenyan, faggy, imposter president that ocupies the white house palace of kings today?

Can you prove any of these claims with out a shadow of a doubt??? Or is this more of the same" my brothers, sister, uncle, grandmother, teacher, dog told me???

[rightsonword]

Can you really not see where the country is heading under

Obama? It must be voters remorse that keeps the blinders

On so many. And he certainley has a way with the ladies ugh.

Bush led us to war. Obama stayed in it.

Bush led the auto/wall street bailouts. Obama made sure they were passed. Romney supported it and Paul Ryan voted for it.

Bush pushed for further Medicare expansion which created bigger government and Obama is doing the same. Paul Ryan voted for Bush's expansion.

Bush pushed for the Patriot Act. Obama expanded on it with GOP/DEM approval. Willard supporting the expansions and Paul Ryan voting for it.

Obama put resources to fight in Libya and Syria, Romney supported it. Paul Ryan voted "No" on a bill to stop funding.

Obama funded Planned Parenthood. Romney supported funding Planned Parenthood.

Obama pushed for a debt ceiling increase due to surmounting debt created by Bush and Obama. Paul Ryan voted yes for it.

But Obama did repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" law and pushed for universal healthcare. What a mongrel!

So, what exactly makes Obama so bad and Willard/Ryan the saviors of America? Is it the tax breaks for the wealthy, while the middle class gets hosed?

[dinar_stud]

OMG If you people can't see the destruction this President has caused by now it's because you either feel obligated to vote for him or you really are just too stubborn to admit it.

The president alone is to blame?? What about congress that has done as Blondie 121 has stated?

The president can do nothing without Congress, and if Congress is so adamant to try and make it impossible to get anything done just to make the President a 1 term President, Congress is as guilty if not more, they have put their political believes and wants in front of the peoples needs.

[mrmcwhipit]

Bush led us to war. Obama stayed in it.

Bush led the auto/wall street bailouts. Obama made sure they were passed. Romney supported it and Paul Ryan voted for it.

Bush pushed for further Medicare expansion which created bigger government and Obama is doing the same. Paul Ryan voted for Bush's expansion.

Bush pushed for the Patriot Act. Obama expanded on it with GOP/DEM approval. Willard supporting the expansions and Paul Ryan voting for it.

Obama put resources to fight in Libya and Syria, Romney supported it. Paul Ryan voted "No" on a bill to stop funding.

Obama funded Planned Parenthood. Romney supported funding Planned Parenthood.

Obama pushed for a debt ceiling increase due to surmounting debt created by Bush and Obama. Paul Ryan voted yes for it.

But Obama did repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" law and pushed for universal healthcare. What a mongrel!

So, what exactly makes Obama so bad and Willard/Ryan the saviors of America? Is it the tax breaks for the wealthy, while the middle class gets hosed?

I guess you wont see where we are headed until your

Standing in the soup line.

[rightsonword]

I guess you wont see where we are headed until your

Standing in the soup line.

Well, seeing how I've shown that Obama is pretty much an extension of Bush and that Romney supported Obama's actions, while Paul Ryan voted for them, I'm able to see that neither Obama nor the Romney ticket are any good for America.

I've asked you this multiple times without an answer: Does it not bother you that Romney and Ryan say one thing and do another?

[Maggie123]

Bush led us to war. Obama stayed in it.

Bush led the auto/wall street bailouts. Obama made sure they were passed. Romney supported it and Paul Ryan voted for it.

Bush pushed for further Medicare expansion which created bigger government and Obama is doing the same. Paul Ryan voted for Bush's expansion.

Bush pushed for the Patriot Act. Obama expanded on it with GOP/DEM approval. Willard supporting the expansions and Paul Ryan voting for it.

Obama put resources to fight in Libya and Syria, Romney supported it. Paul Ryan voted "No" on a bill to stop funding.

Obama funded Planned Parenthood. Romney supported funding Planned Parenthood.

Obama pushed for a debt ceiling increase due to surmounting debt created by Bush and Obama. Paul Ryan voted yes for it.

But Obama did repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" law and pushed for universal healthcare. What a mongrel!

So, what exactly makes Obama so bad and Willard/Ryan the saviors of America? Is it the tax breaks for the wealthy, while the middle class gets hosed?

I honestly could tell you. Well I could, butt I won't. No one will listen anyway. Sheesh!

Maybe tomorrow...

Edited August 12, 2012 by Maggie123

[dinar_stud]

Obama pushed for a debt ceiling increase due to surmounting debt created by Bush and Obama. Paul Ryan voted yes for it.

You make it sound as if Obama was the only president to do it and the the worst.

1. Debt Ceiling Under Obama

"President Barack Obama"Alex Wong / Getty Images

The debt ceiling has been raised on three occasions under President Barack Obama. The debt ceiling was $11.315 trillion when the Democrat was sworn into office in January 2009 and increased by nearly $3 trillion or 26 percent by summer 2011, to $14.294 trillion.

See also: Did Obama Double the National Debt?

Under Obama the debt ceiling increased:

by $789 billion to $12.104 trillion in February 2009, Obama's first year in office, under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act;

by $290 billion to $12.394 trillion ten months later, in December 2009;

and by $1.9 trillion to $14.294 trillion two months later, in February 2010.

2. Debt Ceiling Under Bush

"President George W. Bush"The White House

The debt ceiling was raised on seven occasions during President George W. Bush's two terms in office, from $5.95 trillion in 2001 to nearly double that, $11.315 trillion, in 2009 - an increase of $5.365 trillion or 90 percent.

Under Bush the debt ceiling increased:

by $450 billion to $6.4 trillion in June 2002;

by $984 billion to $7.384 trillion 11 months later, in May 2003;

by $800 billion to $8.184 trillion 18 months later, in November 2004;

by $781 billion to $8.965 trillion 16 months later, in March 2006;

by $850 billion to $9.815 trillion 18 months later, in September 2007;

by $800 billion to $10.615 trillion 10 months later, in July 2008;

and by $700 billion to $11.315 trillion three months later, in October 2008.

3. Debt Ceiling Under Clinton

"President Bill Clinton"Getty Images

The debt ceiling was raised on four occasions during President Bill Clinton's two terms, from $4.145 trillion when he took office in 1993 to $5.95 trillion when he left the White House in 2001 - an increase of $1.805 trillion or 44 percent.

See also: National Debt Versus Federal Deficit

Under Clinton the debt ceiling increased:

by $225 billion to $4.37 trillion in April 1993;

by $530 billion to $4.9 trillion four months later, in August 1993;

by $600 billion to $5.5 trillion two years and seven months later, in March 1996;

and by $450 billion to $5.95 trillion 17 months later, in August 1997.

4. Debt Ceiling Under Bush

"President George H.W. Bush"Bachrach / Getty Images

The debt ceiling was raised on four occasions during President George H.W. Bush's one term, from $2.8 trillion when he took office in 1989 to $4.145 trillion when he left the White House in 1993 - an increase of $1.345 trillion or 48 percent.

Under Bush the debt ceiling increased:

by $70 billion to $2.87 trillion in August 1989;

by $252.7 billion to $3.1227 trillion three months later, in November 1989;

by $107.3 billion to $3.23 trillion 11 months later, in October 1990;

and by $915 billion to $4.145 trillion one month later, in November 1990.

5. Debt Ceiling Under Reagan

"President Ronald Reagan"Hulton Archive

The debt ceiling was raised on 17 occasions under President Ronald Reagan, nearly tripling from $935.1 billion to $2.8 trillion.

Under Reagan the debt ceiling was raised to:

$985 billion in February 1981;

$999.8 billion in September 1981;

$1.0798 trillion September 1981;

$1.1431 trillion in June 1982;

$1.2902 trillion in September 1982;

$1.389 trillion in May 1993;

$1.49 trillion in November 1983;

$1.52 trillion in May 1984;

$1.573 trillion in July 1984;

$1.8238 trillion in October 1984;

$1.9038 trillion in November 1985;

$2.0787 trillion in December 1985;

$2.111 trillion in August 1986;

$2.3 trillion in October 1986;

$2.32 trillion in July 1987;

$2.352 trillion in August 1987;

and $2.8 trillion in September 1987.

Now crunch the numbers and tell me who has added more in the last 5 presidencies, you claim is biased and politicized

But Obama did repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" law and pushed for universal healthcare. What a mongrel!

And in a country that is home of the free you would prefer to curtail the rights of red blooded Americans because of their sexual orientation?? If they are willing to give the ultimate sacrifice for this country and die protecting it. Who died and made you king and gave you the right to deny them that honor??

Edited August 12, 2012 by dinar_stud

[rightsonword]

OK, Dinar_Stud. This has happened a couple of times now. Don't take offense at this, please, but you are horrible at sensing sarcasm.

Please reread what I wrote. It was showing how similar Obama/Bush/Romney are. It wasn't just an attack on the almighty (sarcasm) Obama. Jeeze, dude. It was an attempt to show how horrible they all are.

[mrmcwhipit]

Well, seeing how I've shown that Obama is pretty much an extension of Bush and that Romney supported Obama's actions, while Paul Ryan voted for them, I'm able to see that neither Obama nor the Romney ticket are any good for America.

I've asked you this multiple times without an answer: Does it not bother you that Romney and Ryan say one thing and do another?

You can compare all you want but nobody will ever

Be as bad as Obama and lie with such a straight and

Sincere face IMO

[rightsonword]

You can compare all you want but nobody will ever

Be as bad as Obama and lie with such a straight and

Sincere face IMO

Perhaps you are right. Obama is quite the puppet liar. But for me, the fact that the alternative has supported or voted for many things that Obama has pushed, for me it is warning sign to not trust them either.

[dinar_stud]

OK, Dinar_Stud. This has happened a couple of times now. Don't take offense at this, please, but you are horrible at sensing sarcasm.

Please reread what I wrote. It was showing how similar Obama/Bush/Romney are. It wasn't just an attack on the almighty (sarcasm) Obama. Jeeze, dude. It was an attempt to show how horrible they all are.

I dont take offense but if you are going to point fingers saying this guy ios bad and that guy is bad remember while you point 1 finger to them you are pointing 3 back at yourself.

Ron Paul is no better.

[cris]

Cris: Why do you continue to support the criminal element that now runs our government? Is it because your vote was partially responsible for putting them in office and your not man enough to admit to yourself that you were DEAD WRONG! So you continue to propagate their myth by continuing the lies, half truths, and distortions?

Or are you here to monitor this site for your masters? Does your job description include the words "sell out?" Carlos

Hey Carlos....Thats cute, what a winning personality you have,

Im wondering, does your life partner like it when you talk so manly

and assertive like that?

You're so persuasive too.....Dont vote, it doesnt matter....Soros taught

you well, but that schtick is old comrade.....That old octopus should

come up with a new one for you to use.....Day in & day out.

You may be partially right in one way, since you are from Cali, your vote

wont count....but almost every other State has a chance to finally

toss your beloved party out.