Mr. Priebus’s Neighborhood
National Republican Committee Chairman Reince Preibus
It’s not a beautiful day in the neighborhood this morning kids. The Supreme Court has dashed our hopes of repealing “Obamacare” and now we must ramp up our misinformation campaign to get voters to vote against their own self-interests yet again, We had hoped that our efforts would have convinced you that this law is not beneficial for our elderly and you poor kids that live outside our neighborhood, and here’s why.
Welcome to my neighborhood. Pictured ID’s required
We sent out a message to frighten warn everyone about how this law would tax new babies, people who have heart attacks and even sick puppies. How cruel can someone be. Yes, it may be a stretch for some of you who don’t buy into our hyperbole to see how this law can have adverse affects on the powerless in this country so let me twist apply reasonable thinking to help you with this.
We sent out this 90 second video for you to try to comprehend. The first 80 seconds of rambling distortions, outright lies and rapid images did stream by pretty fast but we slowed it down at the end so you could understand what steps to take to prevent these things from happening, if indeed our fantasy take on this becomes realty.
Notice on the front of end of the video we allude to the tax on heart attacks, new babies and sick puppies. Didn’t catch it? You may have to replay it over a few times. Sorry, we had so much crap information to lay on you in such a short time because we know most of you who repeat our bogus talking points have very short attention spans so we wanted to get to you before the ads for breast implants and penile erection distracted you.
Where do we get this information about such cruelties? We manufacture it from the real data that’s out there. Some may call this mining or cherry picking information. But we see it as a necessary public service to ensure that the GOP’s primary agenda and goal - limiting Obama to one term – remains on target.
The people over at FactCheck.org have supplied the truth details about such cruelty so all of you who doubt our sincerity will understand how we came to this unbelievable unique conclusion:
The video doesn’t mention it, but what it is referring to is a provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Sec. 9009) that spells out excise taxes on manufacturers of medical devices. In order to help pay for the expansion of health coverage for the uninsured, the law includes a 2.3 percent tax on certain medical devices starting in 2013. It’s expected to bring in $20 billion over 10 years. Proponents say device makers will sell more devices and reap more profits when an additional 30-some million potential customers gain health coverage and can afford them.
Not all medical devices are taxable. Those sold retail (directly to the consumer), for example, are exempt. So are device manufacturers that bring in revenues under $5 million a year.
Among the devices that are taxable: cardiac defibrillators, pacemakers, stents (“heart attack”-related devices) and ultrasound equipment (“new baby”-related). Most experts, including the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, expect at least some of the cost of the tax on manufacturers of medical devices to be passed on to consumers via higher health insurance premiums.
So what about taxes on “sick puppies”? This also relates to the tax on medical devices. The NRCC passed along a report from the Internal Revenue Service that addressed the issue of whether veterinary devices would be subject to the tax. The gist of it is that taxable devices are those “intended for humans.” So if a medical device is exclusively used for veterinary medicine, it would not be taxable.
But there are also medical devices used in veterinary practices as well as in human medicine. The IRS says those would be taxable. SOURCE
We have been accused ourselves of being monsters by wanting to privatize Social Security that would allow us to get our grubby hands on people’s investment to be placed in the volatile stock market rather than the Social Security Trust fund, depriving low-income families from providing nutritional meals for their children for simply wanting to give them the freedom to use their own low-income wages without the aid of food stamps, and putting families on the streets who have lost their job in this recession by limiting needed unemployment benefits to see them through these hard times. It’s un-American to expect bailouts from the government, unless you’re a bank too big to fail.
Clearly these hurtful notions have been spread by people who don’t bother to read and watch programs and blog sites that adhere to our message. But one thing is clear! We have never included sick puppies into our efforts to defend freedom and the free markets, although some may define the Koch brothers as sick puppies for their efforts to protect the fossil fuel interests they profit from.
Billionaires Charles and David Koch
Snoring Dog Studio
Gawd, these shameless lying R’s make me sick. Their behavior is beyond reprehensible. We’ll be hearing these and more lies until the election and beyond. Sadly, their constituents will never bother to read the ACA themselves or get the facts from a reputable source. Can they not see that their elected officials are treating them as gullible idiots?
lbwoodgate
“Can they not see that their elected officials are treating them as gullible idiots?
They actually choose not to see it. That why many of them feel “compromise” is a dirty word. To approach policy issues objectively and consider all sides is anathema to the dominant element with the GOP these days – the backward thinking Tea Party types.
They’re part of the conceptual realists group defined in this article as opposed to perceptual realist.
Conceptual realists, contrarily, take their ideas to be prior, and reality must be made to conform with their ideas. “Ideologues” judge beliefs and ideas by conceptual realism. They decide beforehand that they “know” how reality is, then they interpret everything in the real world so that it conforms to their “worldview”. You cannot change their ideas by showing them facts that contradict their beliefs, because they will simply interpret those facts in ways that support their preconceived beliefs. Just as perceptual realists reluctantly abandon their favored ideas to preserve the sanctity of evidence, conceptual realists readily abandon contradictory evidence to preserve the sanctity of their cherished beliefs.
Hansi
Can’t believe it was upheld. Thanks for editing some of the above, loved it