Why is AARP deliberately spreading lies?

In the September 2009 AARP Bulletin, the organization ran an article titled The Assault on Truth. Unfortunately, the only assault on truth emanates from AARP itself.

In its prefatory remarks to the article, AARP states: “[S]omething new has entered the political arena — a tsunami of rumors, myths, fear-mongering and misinformation about the proposals that surges around the internet in nanoseconds.“

Something new? Surging around the internet in nanoseconds? Who does AARP think it’s kidding?

First, the “rumors, myths, fear-mongering and misinformation” line could have just as easily been authored by the DNC. Second, it was the Democrats and Obama that harnessed the internet during the successful 2008 election cycle. Third, the organization’s use of FactCheck.org in the article’s second paragraph is problematic. Despite its assertion of being non-partisan, the organization still has some explaining to do in its analysis of Obama’s Second Amendment position. Contrary to what Obama and FactCheck asserts, it matters not what the president states is his view on the constitutionality of individual firearm possession, because the president’s party can and has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to attack the Second Amendment and limit individual gun ownership over the years. Moreover, the NRA had every right to deduce from “facts” (Obama’s voting record) to construct its 10-Point piece on Obama’s intent. It’s known as logic.

Could the rumor-mongering affect the outcome? Recent violent interruptions at lawmaker’s town hall meetings suggest it might. AARP Bulletin

The quote above is laced with partisan language and blatant falsehood. First, the use of so-called “rumor mongering” is inflammatory and specious. Secondly, the only violence at the summer’s Town Hall meetings resulted from Obama’s SEIU thugs attacking citizens exercising their First Amendment rights and, most recently, an Obama healthcare reform supporter bit-off another citizen’s finger, while said citizen was exercising his First Amendment rights. The hypocrisy of AARP engaging in the same “inference” its sacrosanct FactCheck finds offensive with the NRA is normative for a liberal organization. In other words, “don’t do as we do, do as we say.” And lest anyone think that this is the classic “guilt by association” logical fallacy, it is not. AARP holds out FactCheck as non-partisan, despite FactCheck’s partisan illogic with respect to the NRA analysis.

As proposals are refined into a single bill, which could happen this fall, Americans will get a better handle on what matters to them — AARP Bulletin

The above statement is about as disengenuous as it comes. First, the Democrats’ original intent was to ram the healthcare bill through congress before the August recess. Only the Blue Dogs prevented this and, after a summer recess filled with anger over healthcare, ballooning deficits, nationalized industry, a failed stimulus, and unemployment soaring above Team Obama’s projections, Obama and the Democrats are re-grouping for a frontal assault on Republicans, even though the real issue is public anger over the aforementioned issues and the Democrats’ arrogant behavior since Inauguration Day.

As the article progresses, it finally comes to what AARP terms “persistent myths.” Unfortunately, these so-called myths are anything but, and it’s only AARP that is engaging in folklore and fantasy. The five so-called “myths” follow.

Will the government take over health care so we end up with socialized medicine? AARP Bulletin

AARP says no, but what are the facts? Medicare is already socialized medicine in some areas of the country, with HMOs providing patient care. As a current TriCare beneficiary, I detest the socialized medicine aspect of my “retired military” HMO. Not only am I at the “back of the line” when it comes to patient care, I almost never see the same practicioner — even though I’m assigned a Primary Care Manager (PCM). Of course, this PCM can be a doctor or a Physician Assistant or a Nurse Practitioner, and the patient has no say in the matter. Moreover, the HMO can switch the patient’s PCM at whim, and I’ve been through eleven different PCMs within the space of seven years. And, yes, I have to pay for my health insurance, and it goes to a private insurer. The Veterans Administration is infinitely worse. TriCare and the VA are the two “government run” systems, and both of them are broken — even with private insurance participation in the TriCare program. Why are they broken? Because the federal government is involved!

In attempting to veil the obvious logical deduction from the plain language of the current bill, AARP states, “The House and Senate health committee bills propose a national public plan to compete with these plans and meet the same requirements.” Nonsense! All the government has to do is cut its premiums and Americans will have no choice but to flock to the government plan. And the government can do this because it has what it perceives as a “never-ending well” of tax revenue. Thus, the government makes-up its losses with tax dollars, the undercutting drives private insurers out of business, people then have to sue to join the “limited-enrollment government plan,” which leaves more people uninsured than are currently without health coverage. The factual basis of this logical deduction is predicated on (1) the government’s past taxing behavior and (2) the current administration’s megalomaniacal policies it has implemented since January 2009.

These last two facts answers the second AARP false denial in answer to its question, Will private insurance be outlawed or wither on the vine?

Will the government encourage euthanasia to save costs? AARP Bulletin

Not just yes, but a resounding “Hell Yes!” Jennifer Rubin lifted the veil on Obama’s closest advisers on this issue and she quotes David Brooks in the New York Times blog:

“I’m pro-death panel. We spend so much money on end-of-life care we have to have some way of talking about it.”

For AARP to deny the existence of “death panels” being part of ObamaCare is to engage in the most egregious form of falsity. AARP is lying to the most vulnerable class of Americans and AARP knows it! However, there is the issue of how to pay for ObamaCare that AARP and the Democrats consistently avoid.

Will Medicare be eliminated or gutted to pay for reform? AARP Bulletin

AARP says no, because “[i]t’s inconceivable that any lawmaker would commit political suicide by proposing to get rid of Medicare.” Obviously AARP still believes that Medicare is the “third rail” of American politics. Well, today’s reality is far different. Obama represents a new breed of voter who lacks morals, logical thought, any respect and honor for senior citizens, and is willing to engage in “ageism” to advance their personal agendas. Today’s young Americans know it is mathematically impossible to fund Social Security and Medicare for Baby Boomers without an extraordinary tax increase. In their minds, reducing benefits to the aged is a “fast track” to reducing the mandatory tax hike to pay for the Baby Boomers and/or eliminating said hike altogether. Why else would we continually hear Obama talking of a $500 million cut to Medicare funding, but no details on exactly how these cuts can be achieved, while simultaneously increasing Medicare beneficiaries in the next couple of years? One has to ask whether the writers at AARP are just shameless shills for the Democrats and Obama or they are merely senile.

Will the government ration care? AARP Bulletin

AARP says no and claims the so-called “myth” comes from “playing on often inaccurate beliefs that countries with national health systems severly ration care.” Wait a second, why is AARP talking about “national health systems” if ObamaCare only represents an “insurance program”? And what about AARP’s claim that the beliefs are “often inaccurate”?

The reality is this: Healthcare is rationed in countries that have national health systems, and the same would happen here under Obama’s ever “evolving” healthcare reform plan. No more than a week before AARP mailed its bulletin, the NHS in the UK came under intense scrutiny for women giving birth in hospital bathrooms due to budget cuts. And this was only one of the issues with the UK’s system. As Dan Miller notes in his article, “under the public option there would definitely be rationing and cutbacks. The amounts paid for anesthesia, for example, would be cut by more than 50 percent. Other similar cuts would also be made.“

Once again, AARP gets it wrong, but it’s not just an oversight. AARP has made a decision to mislead its members. And this member is returning his card. In the meantime, maybe the AARP folks can attend the same Jack Webb class on ObamaCare the POTUS received. It couldn’t hurt.