Ed Schultz Shrugs Off Cost of ObamaCare Mandate: 'Who Cares About the Money?!'
Something tells me this isn't an argument that Supreme Court justices will hear this week.
Unhinged MSNBC circus clown Ed Schultz continues to unintentionally help conservatives, making a claim to a caller on his radio show Monday that was inane even by the epic standards for inanity established by Schultz. (audio clip after page break)
The caller was criticizing a specific mandate of the dishonestly named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, that of allowing adult children to remain on a parent's health insurance policy until age 26. (audio) --
SCHULTZ: Let's go back to the last caller if we can, Billy. Did you hear what Jeff had to say about his son being covered? This was one of the provisions in the health care bill, that, you know, under 26 you can get on your parents' policy. I mean, he didn't have the money as a student to get, go out and get health insurance after the age of 21, so this extension helped him. How, why would you be against that?
CALLER: Somebody's still paying for that. His parents are still paying ...SCHULTZ: Who cares about the money?! ... His parents are paying for it through the policy!
CALLER: They're paying for it through their policy and if they bought him an individual policy too, Ed. It's just ...
SCHULTZ (lamely): No.
Uh, yeah, Ed. Just saying a caller is wrong is feeble defense against the accuracy of what the caller said -- this specific mandate increases the cost of the parents' insurance coverage just as surely as if they extended coverage to their adult children before the health law took effect.
Beyond that, Schultz's retort -- "who cares about the money?!" -- is inherently laughable and hence entirely in character for Schultz. It also neatly encapsulates liberal economics. Utopian scheme too costly? Print more money! It's nothing more than paper anyway, right? Angered by rising food and gas prices, tax hikes to fund ObamaCare, property taxes that invariably go higher -- take comfort, it's only money. This I know because Ed Schultz says so.
Given the affluent Schultz's cavalier attitude toward currency, I humbly ask that he send me a check, for whatever large amount he deems sufficient, to help pay for my children to attend college. Seeing how Schultz is indifferent to money, he undoubtedly won't miss it.
Then again, was Schultz actually referring to other people's money, those with opinions he abhors, as liberals are robotically inclined to do?
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Who cares?
Submitted by Slyrr on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 11:49am.
After 3 years of Obama's failed policies, I'd say this pretty much packs the liberal left's thinking into one rancid, moronic nutshell.
They don't care about the money. Their reckless spending has proved it. Literally trillions of dollars of our taxes - that the liberal left has been throwing around like monopoly money. Blowing it on Obamacare, on Solyndra and all the other 'green energy' sinkholes. Wasting it on reparations disguised as 'social justice'.
The liberal left's legacy is one of reckless spending with no results, and in the face of their failures and the economic destruction their policies create, Ed Schultz sums it all up perfectly.
They just throw up their hands, smile and say, 'Who CARES?'
Who cares about the money?
Submitted by rhondacoleridge on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 11:57am.
That being said, I would imagine that this disgusting pig would have no objections to being taxed at 99% to help pay for it. After all, who cares about the money?
Certainly not the politicians
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:33pm.
That's why our national debt is blooming exponentially -- they don't care about the money.
It's like the kid who runs up the charges on the parents' credit card because sooner or later, the parents will find some way to pay for it.
Special Ed is reprentative of that segment of Baby Boomers who grew up accustomed to getting things on demand with little or no sacrifice. He rants and rages when things don't go his way, like a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum expected.
Certainly, not all liberals are not like this, but we can find more examples of this type on Daily Kos and similar blogs.
Who was it who said "A few
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:26pm.
Who was it who said "A few billion here, a few billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money?"
OTOH, Ed is probably right....if even it allows only one person to get some pills or a procedure that he wouldn't have been able to afford, it's worth it, right?
That's the liberal standard, isn't it? If it saves even one life.......
Money doesn't matter?
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 3:09pm.
I think it was Sen. Everett Dirsksen who said, "A million here. A million there. And pretty soon, you're talking about real money." This being 40 years or more later, we can rightly adjust for inflation. :-)
What Special Ed avoids -- either through sheer ignorance or not so clever deceipt -- is that health care will be rationed by the government; that's what the national advisory board is about. It will select 'appropriate care' for each person, based on their age, pre-conditions, and lifestyle. When Ed's mother needs a heart transplant, she may find herself ineligible regardless of whether her insurance can cover it, or her son is willing to pay for it outright.
The UK is already rationing some health care administered through its National Health Service, and about to ration some more. Costly cancer treatments for the elderly will got on the 'prohibited' list if bureaucrats have their way.
So, he can rant all he wants about money not mattering. Even in Europe, the money does matter.
Allow me to add...
Submitted by Unsane on Thu, 03/29/2012 - 6:42am.
In your scenario with Ed and his mom, it's actually more sinister than what you depict. He won't care at all; he'll just fly to another country and get the procedure done there. Because government babying is for "the little people", dont'cha know.
If this crappy law is declared constitutional, just wait. Another industry will blossom in this country: medical tourism.
And like everything else, government run medicine is NOT about the people. It is about one thing: entrenchment.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Well Ed
Submitted by KornKing on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:12pm.
If the money doesn't matter, why don't you set up a website for all these 22 to 26 year old "children" to apply to have YOU finance the purchase of their health insurance.
And while he's at it . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:36pm.
. . . drop all the commercial sponsors from his radio and MSNBC shows.
That is slowly happening
Submitted by Tom Paine on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 1:43pm.
That is slowly happening anyway...
Typical liberal BS
Submitted by NOLAgirl on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:13pm.
The money doesn't matter, as long as it's OTHER people's money.
Why
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:03pm.
Is this rancid, fleshy, bag of gound-up meat still on the air? His voice is simply the methane from the decomposing meat that is his blubbery inner-self, so why is he still permitted to spout his insane diatribes?
But, just in case there are several still-functioning brain cells contained in all the rotting meat, I'll say this -
Yes Special Ed, people DO care about the money, especially those of us who don't have unions throwing hundreds of thousands of dollars at us, and have to actually budget our money to put food on the table, gas in the car, pay for mortages, utilities, and taxes, put our kids through college, AND STILL PAY FOR OUR OWN FRACKING HEALTH INSURANCE! So why don't you go away somewhere where your methane-based vomit doesn't offend real people?
To say, "who cares about the
Submitted by ForeverOnTheRight on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:32pm.
To say, "who cares about the money", is like saying of the dangers of smoking, "who cares about the cancer"! What an idiot this Schultz!
Constitutional brainiac...??
Submitted by wahappened on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 12:56pm.
Just heard this mental midget along with that other legal Einstein, Mike Pap-smear, argue on behalf of the "common good" clause of the United States constitution.
Hey Ed, that's an idea in the COMMUNIST MANIFESTO!!!
parents have no choice
Submitted by dmacleo on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 1:21pm.
iirc its the CHILD that makes the choice to stay on policy, if I am wrong please correct me.
I seem to remember this being touted in the fiasco during passage.
When you're a screaming,
Submitted by Mrs. Vito on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 5:48pm.
When you're a screaming, incoherent liberal who's on the union payroll, why should you care about money?? Give this guy enough rope, and he'll eventually hang himself.
Exactly!!
Submitted by GregE on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 6:17pm.
What's $16 trillion in debt? Run this beeotch up to 25 or 30 and let's get this party started.
What a moron.
My rant at Ed
Submitted by Unsane on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 8:46pm.
I don't know Ed. Maybe one of the reasons the price at the pump is so high is because your buddies just keep using the national credit card like there's no tomorrow (thus devaluing the currency)?
Where do you think it comes from, Ed? Does it just grow on trees? Is there a Barrel of Endless Money somewhere that we don't know about?
Government does not exist to baby people, especially with services people are truly better off going out to get all by themselves. I'm uninsured (somewhat) and yet got all sorts of medical services anyway, because I simply paid for it. You know, as I pay for things like food, water, clothing, and shelter. AND get this! The last time I was in a hospital, they chopped my bill by 65% when they saw I was uninsured (in many ways) BUT had a MSA at my disposal!
Leave me the f*** alone to pay for my own doctor, Ed. If you are that filled with guilt over those who won't or can't get to a doc, get off your fat ass and start a charity.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Should MSNBC Fire Ed Schultz?
Submitted by redbourn on Thu, 03/29/2012 - 7:46am.
Back in August 2011 Ed Shultz was caught red handed after he selectively edited a video clip to paint Rick Perry as racist.
Then he was suspended for a week for calling rival pundit Laura Ingraham “a right-wing s***” during a radio broadcast the day before.
Now He’s Has Admitted To Taking Big Money From Unions
So Should MSNBC Fire Ed Schultz?
http://tinyurl.com/cl4wqkn