About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Ben Stein on Fox:  Obama admin. about "social control," hoaxes, and making country a "socialist paradise"

November 29, 2009 1:06 pm ET

From the November 28 edition of Fox News' Cavuto on Business:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by roland (November 29, 2009 1:33 pm ET)
      19 1
      I don't get it. Are conservatives proud of the fact that 47 million Americans have no health care insurance, or do they just not think it's a problem?

      And where were they all when Bush frittered away a budget surplus by giving away $2.48 trillion dollars in tax cuts?

      Is this entire country afflicted with short-term memory loss?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 29, 2009 1:41 pm ET)
        15 2
        Nah, only about half of it. People like Stein know they can profit from this condition if they can scare those people to the polls.

        I still don't have Ben Stein figured out. I used to consider him a reasonable guy, just one who had bought into the right wing economic philosophy, i.e. convincing the average American that if they cut taxes for those making hundreds of times what they earn (like Stein), it will trickle back to them through some sort of pyramid scheme.

        Then I watched his film Expelled a while back and Stein seems to be a full blown ,Kool Aid drinking wingnut propagandist. If he's not a True Believer, then he's a very committed businessman.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (November 29, 2009 3:04 pm ET)
          10 2
          I think that too many of these seemingly "edumacated" wingnuts are just parroting what the base wants to hear about social and Jesus oriented causes. Stein is a Nixon Republican, corrupt as hell, and willing to ride any wave and go to any length to keep himself in the public's eye.

          I have DirecTV and wanted to add a new DVR. I couldn't add one unless I extended my contract with them. I looked into Comcast cable. I weighed the +'s and -'s of each system and what swayed me into staying with DirecTV was the Comcast ads featuring Ben Stein.

          My hostility twoards Ben Stein outweighed any News Corpse connection with DirecTV.

          That's how much I detest this man.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (November 29, 2009 3:26 pm ET)
          5  
          You know, he otherwise seems pretty clever. He must have figured the Hannity swill is where the big bucks are.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bilbo_dies (November 29, 2009 7:09 pm ET)
            5  
            You know, he otherwise seems pretty clever. He must have figured the Hannity swill is where the big bucks are.

            That and hawking for one of the "free" credit report sites.
            I have to give him credit. The ad he is in has to be the dumbest one yet that I have seen for these rip off sites.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (November 29, 2009 4:07 pm ET)
        1 19
        A
        re conservatives proud of the fact that 47 million Americans have no health care insurance, or do they just not think it's a problem?


        Well first of all let's clear up this little (big) left wing slight of hand.

        A full one-third of the 47mil are people who are eligible for existing government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP) but haven't or wont apply. Nearly half are transitioning between jobs and a fourth are Illegal Immigrants. Now that number isn't as onerous.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by soze169880 (November 29, 2009 4:27 pm ET)
          1  
          Oh, look, no sources and various assertions that you would have no way of actually knowing. AND the implication that it's okay for everyone left over to die. How shocking.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (November 29, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
          8 1
          Your sources on this would be?
          Where is your onerous tripline on unisured americans? Medical expense related foreclosure and bankrupties? How many are you willing to say have no excuses and/or deserve their fate?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 29, 2009 4:57 pm ET)
          10 1
          Impressive, Koko. You've accounted for over 108% of the uninsured with your solidly-backed stats. Do you have any more quotes attributed to the wrong person you could add here, or are you not falling for that stuff anymore?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by New Frontier (November 29, 2009 5:09 pm ET)
          9  
          Now that number isn't as onerous.
          Politifact says "46 million" is "mostly true".

          Of course, if you subtract non-citizens, it's possible that it's only a paltry, miniscule 36 million. Not onerous at all!...
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Tbone Slickens (November 29, 2009 8:07 pm ET)
            2 11
            Well I notice Politifact sets a number but no breakdown. Why?
            Ask and ye shall receive

            Even Barry changed his tune on the 47 mil number. You girls didn't get the memo I take it?

            Hey, I'm going to let you in on a little secret...shhhhhh...don't tell anyone or the word will get out.....there is this new fangled thing call "The Google". It makes debunking liberal hogwash a breeze.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by soze169880 (November 29, 2009 8:25 pm ET)
              1  
              Oh, look, you link to a far-right Republican who ALSO doesn't provide any sources.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by New Frontier (November 29, 2009 11:58 pm ET)
              9 1
              Ask and ye shall receive.
              Well, actually if I was to ask, I'd ask for something reputable and researched--like Politifact. Politifact does, in fact, breakdown some numbers--most importantly in a fair amount of sourced detail. What I receive tho is, unsurprisingly, a Republican Senator's sh!tty-looking pie chart, which of course is unsourced.

              Maybe you should let the Senator in on your secret about "The Google".

              Even Barry changed his tune
              Thanks for the link, as I see "Barry" in one case was referring to those who "cannot get" insurance---and in the other case, the "uninsured".

              Tone deafness seems to be a common wingnut ailment.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (November 30, 2009 2:49 am ET)
                6  
                I like the part of the pie chart showing people making 75k as not counting. Obviously, they're "wealthy" and can afford insurance. Funny that when it comes to taxes, people making three or four times that are struggling.

                I also like the condescending advice to "use The Google" from the wingnut who, within the past week or so, was suckered into posting Dan Quayle quotes attributed to Al Gore on some right wing propaganda site. Priceless.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by Marker (November 29, 2009 6:20 pm ET)
          7  
          And to think you did that with no sources and pretty much just pulled that out of thin air, bravo repug, bravo.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mjh (November 30, 2009 2:21 am ET)
            4  
            "And to think you did that with no sources and pretty much just pulled that out of thin air, bravo repug, bravo." -- Marker


            Trust me, Marker -- T-boned indeed pulled it from somewhere, but the air in the place was considerably mustier . . .


            Report Abuse
        • Author by phredicles (November 29, 2009 6:43 pm ET)
          7 1
          "transitioning between jobs" - that's Wingnutspeak for "unemployed", maybe with "newly underemployed" thrown in, isn't it?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by roland (November 29, 2009 10:40 pm ET)
          1 2
          Of course, it's still terribly onerous. You make it sound as if it's okay if people choose not to enroll in programs for which they are eligible. The problem is that those people are making the rest of us pay more to cover them when they end up getting expensive services in emergency rooms (that includes illegal immigrants).

          It is impossible to "opt out" of the medical system for the simple reason that we do not allow people to die simply because they have no health insurance. It's the same reason we make it illegal to drive without liability insurance. One can "choose" not to drive a car, but one cannot "choose" to have a heart attack in a restaurant or an accident on the street and not have an ambulance come pick them up and take them to an emergency room where they will be taken care of.



          Report Abuse
      • Author by Sharpe (November 29, 2009 5:12 pm ET)
        6 1
        if its not them without the healthcare they just dont care about other people,
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jjamele2880 (November 29, 2009 5:57 pm ET)
        7  
        They'll tell you with a straight face that they are proud to live in a country where "everyone" has the "freedom" to go out, work three jobs, and get health care insurance, and also the "freedom" to "choose" to go without said insurance.

        The freedom to lose your house to bankruptcy trying to keep up with medical bills, the freedom to make obscene profits denying coverage, etc.

        God Bless America.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Mapache (November 29, 2009 7:55 pm ET)
          1
        You are wrong. There are not 47 million Americans without health care. 100% of people residing within the borders of the USA have health care available to them. What is at stake is coverage for said health care.

        In addition, a good majority of the 47 million figure are illegal aliens (maybe half?). Of the remaining ACTUAL Americans, there is an even greater majority of Americans who do not have health care coverage, due to their own choice. 100% of them have insurance plans available to them for purchase. Many, if not most of them have made the conscious choice to NOT purchase insurance coverage, and rather purchase things that are not necessary (i.e. entertainment, travel, simple luxuries, not to mention cigarettes, alcohol, or, in some cases, illegal drugs)

        I contend that if people did not ignore health care coverage, and see it as one of life's "optionals", and give up life's true "optionals", they would certainly have enough money to purchase their own insurance coverage.

        After all, why would anyone sacrifice anything if someone is going to give them a "no strings attached" handout? (sarcasm intended...)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by j238 (November 29, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
      14 1
      Ben, you bought into the creationism hoax.

      Be quiet until you have something to say.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (November 29, 2009 2:19 pm ET)
      11 1
      Let's cut to the chase, Ben. You are a has-been/never-was actor/comedian who is reduced to doing credit-report commercials and trolling the right-wing tinfoil-hat media to earn a paycheck. In other words, you are about as significant to the national policy debate as dust bunnies are...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by dmhack (November 29, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
      14 2
      "Bueller. Bueller."

      (The only smart thing Ben stein has ever said... and even that was written for him.)
      Report Abuse
    • Author by cugagcmu805031 (November 29, 2009 3:45 pm ET)
      9 1
      Ben, dear,
      SD & STFU. You've already proven three things about yourself: you're greedy, dishonest, and have no principles.

      Aren't you the one who broke your contract with a major newspaper by making misleading ads for a free credit report advertisement?

      Now, tell me again why anyone should listen to anything you have to say?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Handyman (November 29, 2009 3:59 pm ET)
      8 1
      Poor Guy - he has been hanging out too much with Chuck Norris, Andy Williams, and Fred Thompson - guilty by association!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Boxer1979 (November 29, 2009 5:00 pm ET)
      8 1
      Ben Stein on Fox: Obama admin. about "social control," hoaxes, and making country a "socialist paradise"

      Hey its the Visine commercial guy! Remember his other claim to fame besides being a nutjob on FOX Snooze? Bueller? Bueller? I liked that 80's movie! Who knew his later life would consist of negative talking points. SMH!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jjamele2880 (November 29, 2009 5:11 pm ET)
        7 1
        Ben Stein has spent most of his adult life pretending to be super-intelligent. Not BECCOMINg super-intelligent, just pretending to be. Why on Earth he should be taken seriously by anyone when he discusses ANYTHING other than perhaps acting is beyond me.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by JonnyS (November 29, 2009 11:49 pm ET)
            1
          Ben Stein does actually have some pretty impressive credentials. We should stick to the issues, and not attack the man.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ProgLib (November 30, 2009 8:56 pm ET)
               
            does doing commercials for visine qualify someone for good credentials?
            Report Abuse
    • Author by MrLoki (November 29, 2009 7:11 pm ET)
      1  
      Obviously Mr. Stein is a hoax as an economist. As to whether he is human we will have to get a DNA sample. Often there are Rats who run around as Human imposters.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (November 30, 2009 2:28 am ET)
      4  
      Ben Stein on Fox: Obama admin. about "social control," hoaxes, and making country a "socialist paradise"


      Ben Stein claiming the Obama Admin about "hoaxes"??

      This IS the same Ben Stein who was a NIXON SPEECHWRITER, right??

      Ben, you're an OK kinda guy when you;re hawking eye drops, hosting a cable tv game show, or writing a column for Playboy. You should stick to those instead of trying to masquerade as a serious pundit . . .

      Report Abuse
    • Author by retiredinsf (November 30, 2009 9:28 am ET)
        4
      I have a serious question for you left wing fringers: If Obamacare isn't implemented until 2013 (although the cost increases take effect immediately), why must a 2,000 page Bill be passed before Christmas?

      I await a reasoned response - other then it’s convenient for Obama to be re-elected in 2012 before the rest of the population (only 40% or so are for it) realize how inept and costly government healthcare turns out to be.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Handyman (November 30, 2009 11:42 am ET)
        4  
        good morning retiredinsf - guess I will take a shot at it.

        I assume you mean by "implemented in 2013" that it will be at full capacity and functioning as was intended. There are a few steps that need to be taken to reach that goal including the conversion of all medical related documents to a national digital format system. I don't think this will happen overnight and will probably take years to complete.

        Then there is also the formation of co-op's if that bears fruit and is included in the final bill. This will undoubtably take a considerable amount of time since private industry will be the providers in the co-op.

        Then there is the revising of the existing Medicare System to eliminate some of the redundancy that is currently happening. Formulation of procedures, etc. which will take some major effort.

        There is a long list of steps that will need to be taken before the Health Care System is fully reformed and operational. However, before any steps can be taken the bill must be passed, that's step #1.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (November 30, 2009 12:59 pm ET)
        2  
        If you don't understand that Congress doesn't pass tough bills during election years, then that's your failing.

        If you don't understand that the rightwing talking point that this initiative hasn't been talked about enough is a total fraud, then that's your failing.

        If you don't understand that private healthcare insurance is inept and too costly, and that getting the govt involved to help insure most of the uninsured and get discounts from healthcare providers, as Obama has done, then that's another one of your failures.

        I have yet to see you make one lucid and relevant point. And no, I don't believe you when you say you're simply asking a question.

        Do you know how long 'simple' bills are? Do you have any idea how complex it is to change healthcare? Are you aware of how many different programs will be affected by these changes, and therefore how much legal language has to be included to protect Americans?

        Carping about the length of this bill is a fraudulent rightwing talking point.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mjh (November 30, 2009 2:44 pm ET)
          1  
          "Carping about the length of this bill is a fraudulent rightwing talking point."


          You're right, Dolly -- but you gotta remember, for rightwingnuts, if it takes longer to read than a bumper sticker, it's too long {and probably "socialist"} . . .




          Report Abuse
      • Author by Boxer1979 (November 30, 2009 1:32 pm ET)
        1  
        I await a reasoned response

        No need I will answer you quick. I am not a public option fan. I am for single-payer.

        If it is public option like I knew it would be. It needs to be strong and not watered-downed.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by ProgLib (November 30, 2009 8:53 pm ET)
         
      good lord, what an annoying voice. i liked him better in those eye drop commercials and the new comcast ad with shaq. thats funny ben stein, and this is obnoxious ben stein.
      Report Abuse