Freedom Works (and Head Tea-bagger) Dick Armey

[Nbadan]

This exclusive clip is from the latest episode of "Bill Moyers Journal," which airs tonight. In the episode, Moyers goes after FreedomWorks Chairman Dick Armey -- one of the key figures using large industry donations to fund "Tea Party" rallies around the country, such as the the 9/12 march in Washington DC last week.

"Here's the catch," Moyers says after showing video clips with protesters decrying "the lies" coming from the Obama administration. "Something these marchers who came to Washington at Armey's urging could hardly be expected to know. For most of his adult life, their leader has benefited from just the kind of government tax-supported health care he's fighting to keep them from having too."

It's a fascinating run down of Armey's adult life working in universities and for the government, made comfortable and secure by state-funded health care -- "the Cadillac of coverage."

"Dick Armey is the epitome of those people with power and privilege who are insured against the vicissitudes of life and want no government assistance for any suffering except their own," Moyers says.


Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/18/bill-moyers-tea-party-org_n_291625.html

[boutons_deux]

yep, another Repug dick got his, now make sure nobody else gets theirs, slam the door shut.

Dick Nixon, Dick Cheney. Juan Boner's another one.

[mogrovejo]

This is nonsensical. Political views are political views, not life philosophies. This is like accusing Georges Soros or Warren Buffet of being hypocrites because they support the Democratic Party and higher taxes even though their companies do a lot of fiscal planning to pay as little taxes as possible. For example, how many Huffington Post writers praise the public education system and yet enrol their children in private schools? Can't a socialist work for a private company or own his business? Should all the troops against the Afghanistan war leave the military or refuse the fight? Should judges refuse to apply laws with which they don't agree?

I don't think the government should own colleges but I studied in one and worked in another one. I don't think the public health care system should exist but I've used it (and don't use it more often because it sucks and I could be dead already. Yesterday I was with tooth pains, called the local health centre and the sooner I could get an appointment to the dentist would be in 9 months. But quality is the only reason I don't use it more and buy private insurance - besides paying taxes to fund the national health service I rarely use). I'm against government subsidies to private companies but in the company I work for we try to get our hand in every subsidy that may be available - in fact, a few months ago I was simultaneously working on getting a particular fund and on an article defending the thesis that that exact same subsidy shouldn't exist.

If the guy works for the government, then of course he's going to use the health care plan his boss provides to its employees. That has nothing to do with his political views.

[Nbadan]

Dick Armey has had his government, tax-supported health care dating all the way back to when he was a University teacher in Texas, and then as a US Congressman and then as a retired government worker.

When his Medicare kicked in, he wanted to keep his own tax payer subsidized insurance and SSA/Medicare wouldn't let him - if you give up Medicare you give up SS retirement and vice versa. He wanted a government option! He couldn't get out of Medicare without losing his SS.

So now he's joined a suit charging the SSA and HHS (Brian Hall, et al. v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.) challenging the agencies' decision to deny Social Security benefits to seniors who refuse to accept Medicare coverage.

His main beef? Lack of government option to choose the medical services that best meet their needs.

Via Bill Moyers, Bill Moyers on the Man Behind the March: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2009/09/bill_moy...

Medicare Lawsuit


Filed on Oct.9, 2008, in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Brian Hall, et al. v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al. charges the Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with improperly adopting illegal and coercive policies that deny otherwise eligible retirees their rightful Social Security benefits if those retirees choose not to enroll in Medicare.

Lead plaintiff Brian Hall and plaintiffs Richard “Dick” Armey, John Kraus, Lewis Randall, and Norman Rogers seek a restraining order and a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting SSA and HHS from implementing policies that force American citizens to participate in Medicare, the federal government’s voluntary health insurance entitlement program.

In addition to the legal, due process, constitutional and discrimination issues raised in Hall v. Sebelius, the lawsuit also affects the freedom of individuals to choose the medical services that best meet their needs.

~snip~