Lie of the year, 2011 yeah it's democrats

[Quantum Windbag]

Israel's statement that Republicans voted to "end Medicare" was not necessarily factually inaccurate. It is reasonable to claim (though impossible to prove) that the vote Republicans took, if it had been made into law, would have ended or fundamentally altered (Republicans could argue "improved") Medicare.

However, Politifact awards its "pants on fire" and "lie of the year" ratings to statements that are widely heard, inflammatory and deceptive, not just to those which are the most factually inaccurate. Politifact, in describing how they chose the lie of the year (PolitiFact | How we chose the 2011 Lie of the Year) describe their choice as the "most significant" falsehood rather than the greatest one. Indeed, Politifact describes their choice for lie of the year as only "clearly inaccurate" while others that were rejected as less significant were "clearly false". By choosing "inaccurate", which can mean "inexact" or "faulty" as well as "untrue" (Inaccurate | Define Inaccurate at Dictionary.com) Politifact seems to acknowledge that there is a case to be made that the statement is not actually counterfactual.

I think this underscores how important it is to read Politifact's analysis rather than just their ratings. I've never caught them in an inaccuracy, but I've often felt that their bare ratings were misleading.

I have caught them in what I consider to be inaccuracies, but I think that rating opinions and political hyperbole as true, or false, is highly inflammatory.

 

[Greenbeard]

It is not a voucher program, it is a premium support program.

Guess that word isn't in vogue anymore:

"My proposal preserves the current Medicare system for those individuals who are 55 years or older. While the program’s fiscal crisis demands change, I do not believe it is appropriate or necessary to force these reforms on seniors who are retired or nearing retirement. For those who are under age 55, my proposal restructures the way in which beneficiaries interact with Medicare to provide them with more direct control over health care decisions while fulfilling the program’s of health care security.

"Beginning in the year 2019, Medicare will provide seniors who turn 65 that year with a voucher of at least $9,500 to purchase a health care plan of their choosing. For those seniors who are sicker, the amount of the voucher will be increased to account for the increased medical costs they will incur. Additionally, low-income seniors will also receive additional assistance to cover their out out-of-pocket costs. Seniors will receive a booklet of Medicare approved plans along with their voucher to assist them in deciding which coverage option to choose. This will be similar to the Medicare & You pamphlet that beneficiaries already receive each year under the current program. Seniors would not be limited to the plans listed in this manual, but would have the freedom to choose any plan they find that fits their needs. Beneficiaries would receive a new voucher every year with its value increasing to keep pace with changing medical costs. "

--Paul Ryan, as late as May 27, 2010 (after which he started to scrub the word from his website)

"Premium support" refers to an actual concept and RyanCare ain't it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It is not a voucher program, it is a premium support program.

Guess that word isn't in vogue anymore:

"My proposal preserves the current Medicare system for those individuals who are 55 years or older. While the program’s fiscal crisis demands change, I do not believe it is appropriate or necessary to force these reforms on seniors who are retired or nearing retirement. For those who are under age 55, my proposal restructures the way in which beneficiaries interact with Medicare to provide them with more direct control over health care decisions while fulfilling the program’s of health care security.

"Beginning in the year 2019, Medicare will provide seniors who turn 65 that year with a voucher of at least $9,500 to purchase a health care plan of their choosing. For those seniors who are sicker, the amount of the voucher will be increased to account for the increased medical costs they will incur. Additionally, low-income seniors will also receive additional assistance to cover their out out-of-pocket costs. Seniors will receive a booklet of Medicare approved plans along with their voucher to assist them in deciding which coverage option to choose. This will be similar to the Medicare & You pamphlet that beneficiaries already receive each year under the current program. Seniors would not be limited to the plans listed in this manual, but would have the freedom to choose any plan they find that fits their needs. Beneficiaries would receive a new voucher every year with its value increasing to keep pace with changing medical costs. "

--Paul Ryan, as late as May 27, 2010 (after which he started to scrub the word from his website)

"Premium support" refers to an actual concept and RyanCare ain't it.

Ryan calling it a voucher does not make it a voucher, just like him calling Obamacare socialism doesn't make it socialism.

But I do thank you for playing.

 

[Full-Auto]

Really? why don't you go to the site you used and find out?

There isnt any need to. Your side is culpable in murder of a border agent and you low life cant even apologize. Never came clean about being paid off by big insurance and Pharma or British petroleum.

 

[ladyliberal]

I have caught them in what I consider to be inaccuracies, but I think that rating opinions and political hyperbole as true, or false, is highly inflammatory.

If you can think of any particular inaccuracies I'd love to see them. I'm sure there are some, but I haven't noticed any and I'm curious about them.

Some of the statements Politifact rates are indeed, as Kyl would put it, not intended to be factual statements. Again, though, I think that if you read their full analysis you'll generally end up better informed about the facts, even if the statements themselves pass beyond the factual. I certainly wouldn't consider what Politifact does to be more inflammatory than general reportage.


The Economist, in their analysis of Politifact's decision (Politics and lies: Fact-checking the fact-checkers | The Economist) also points out that an inaccuracy is not necessarily a deliberate inaccuracy (although "lie" does imply intent to deceive).

 

[EriktheRed]

Well, I didn't think this would happen, but I utterly disagree with PolitiFact on this one. Saying the GOP voted to end Medicare is an accurate statement.

The only way it isn't an accurate statement is if you think getting rid of your dog named Spot and replacing it with a chair named Spot means the chair can suddenly fetch.

I like another analogy I read even better: they steal the Mercedes out of your driveway and replace it with a Chevy with the Mercedes hood ornament on it and say, "See, it's still there".

 

[EriktheRed]

PolitiFact | Lie of the Year 2011: 'Republicans voted to end Medicare'

Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.

Democrats pounced. Just four days after the party-line vote, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a Web ad that said seniors will have to pay $12,500 more for health care "because Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Gee, what a surprise, NOT, the CON$ervative "Lie of the Year" is a lie!

The GOP ended Medicare and replaced it with a voucher system to buy a private health care insurance policy but the vouchers don't cover the whole cost and are tied to the cost of living rather than the cost of medical care, which is greater than the cost of living, so each year the vouchers will pay less and less of the cost of the private insurance. The GOP are calling their voucher system "Medicare" to claim they didn't end Medicare, but in reality they ended Medicare and replaced it with something completely different by the same name that requires seniors to pay more and more each and every year or die.

Uh, you're right, except for one thing: they didn't actually DO this. not yet, anyway.

 

[edthecynic]

From your fucking article:

Under the Ryan plan, future beneficiaries would be given a credit and invited to shop for an approved plan on a Medicare health insurance exchange. It received overwhelming support from Republicans in a House vote on a budget blueprint.

That would make it a "voucher" program.

The entire reason medicare started was because old people couldn't get help. You Republicans really disgust me. The majority of your dirty party is over 60. You're gonna need medicare more than anyone else and you talk about turning it into a "voucher" program with would make it NOT medicare.

What is wrong with these Republicans? Are they fucking BRAIN Damaged?

It is not a voucher program, it is a premium support program.

Well, if you really want to be accurate, it is a PARTIAL premium support program. Only part of the premium is supported and that part gets smaller and smaller every year because the support is tied to the cost of living, not the cost of health care.

 

[bripat9643]

Well, I didn't think this would happen, but I utterly disagree with PolitiFact on this one. Saying the GOP voted to end Medicare is an accurate statement.

The only way it isn't an accurate statement is if you think getting rid of your dog named Spot and replacing it with a chair named Spot means the chair can suddenly fetch.

According to the liberal definition of the term making any change in Medicare means "ending Medicare as we know it." In other words, Democrats have stated their intent to fight tooth and nail any attempt to reform the program and save this nation from bankruptcy.

That's not a position I would want to defend.

 

[bripat9643]

Just another money grab to privatize, privatize, privatize... every time they do.. it makes some people millions and many people poorer.

Care to provide an example of that?

 

[rdean]

Just another money grab to privatize, privatize, privatize... every time they do.. it makes some people millions and many people poorer.

Care to provide an example of that?

Aetna?

Cigna?

Did that help?

 

[Greenbeard]

In other words, Democrats have stated their intent to fight tooth and nail any attempt to reform the program and save this nation from bankruptcy.

The Democrats already passed a series of Medicare reforms, nearly two years ago.

P.S.

On the other hand, growth rates in Medicare claim costs hit yet another low, rising at an annual rate of +1.97% as measured by the S&P Healthcare Economic Medicare Index. The S&P Healthcare Economic Hospital Medicare Index also posted a record low annual rate of +0.71% in the year ending September 2011. This is a staggering 7.59 percentage points lower than the highest annual growth rate of +8.30% recorded for this index just two years ago in August 2009.

 

[francoHFW]

PLEASE run on the Ryan Plan. Got us a Dem for the first time ever.

Politifact really blew this- just trashed themselves in the eyes of all non brainwashed dittoheads...

Compared to the "Global Warming Hoax", the evolution "theory" and all the whoppers in my sig- unbelievable...

 

[NYcarbineer]

It wasn't a lie.

Just because you keep the name of something it doesn't mean you haven't ended it.

It would be like transforming the Marines into a totally non-military government agency, but still callling them the Marines.

 

[bripat9643]

Just another money grab to privatize, privatize, privatize... every time they do.. it makes some people millions and many people poorer.

Care to provide an example of that?

Aetna?

Cigna?

Did that help?

Aetna and Cigna have always been private companies. When were they "privatized?"

 

[NYcarbineer]

Care to provide an example of that?

Aetna?

Cigna?

Did that help?

Aetna and Cigna have always been private companies. When were they "privatized?"

He's talking about private companies getting their hooks into more and more of the senior healthcare business.

It's about the 80 year old grandmother having to fight tooth and nail (or have someone fight for her) to get her healthcare bills paid by companies whose business model, whose means of making as much profit as they can,

is based on collecting as much premium as possible and paying as few claims as possible.

 

[Stephanie]

Well we all should realize the left here knows more than Politifact..

how funny. they would shove politifact on us as if they were the gospel truth...

NOW LOOKIE..

 

[Cuyo]

PolitiFact | Lie of the Year 2011: 'Republicans voted to end Medicare'

Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.

Democrats pounced. Just four days after the party-line vote, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a Web ad that said seniors will have to pay $12,500 more for health care "because Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Don't you guys always say Politifact is a left-wing site?

Oooooh, is that only when they point out your side's falsehoods?

 

[Steelplate]

Just another money grab to privatize, privatize, privatize... every time they do.. it makes some people millions and many people poorer.

Care to provide an example of that?

Yeah... look at the explosion of Health Care cost to the Consumer. Big Pharma has a hand in it(for profit), Med Tech(for Profit), Most hospitals(for Profit), Doctors' offices(For Profit), Health Insurance(For Profit)..... all those entities(and probably some I missed) want to cash in on other people's illnesses. As a result, the every day people get hosed.

We are up to what? 12-15K for Health Insurance Premiums for families nowadays(if you want something other than they very bottom rung insurance)? Wow... let's put that perspective along side the Family that only brings in $30k per year... You still want to bitch about them NOT PAYING TAXES?

You are idiots if you think those rates are because "Mexicans are visiting ER's, or because we need "tort reform". This is yet another money grab by the private sector and then pointing the finger at government and our citizenry for the blame.

 

[bripat9643]

Aetna?

Cigna?

Did that help?

Aetna and Cigna have always been private companies. When were they "privatized?"

He's talking about private companies getting their hooks into more and more of the senior healthcare business.

So "privatized" means trying to grow your business?

It's about the 80 year old grandmother having to fight tooth and nail (or have someone fight for her) to get her healthcare bills paid by companies whose business model, whose means of making as much profit as they can,

is based on collecting as much premium as possible and paying as few claims as possible.

So the fact that they don't give it away for free means they are evil?

Is the grocery store evil because grandma has to "fight tooth and nail" to get food? Can you name one company who's business model doesn't include making as much as they can while keeping their expenses as low as possible?