Limbaugh criticizes health care reform as "a civil rights bill" and "reparations"
February 22, 2010 1:21 pm ET
From the February 22 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
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.
















Under the Senate proposal, insured group health plans must comply with the nondiscrimination requirements for self-funded plans (IRC Sec. 105(h)(2)), including rules that the plan does not discriminate in favor of highly compensated individuals as to eligibility to participate or to benefits provided under the plan.
Since the discrimination rules for self-funded plans were issued in 1980, employers have adopted fully insured plans to provide executives and key employees with tax-free reimbursements for out-of-pocket medical, dental, and vision expenses. These new prohibitions against discrimination in fully insured plans will compel employers to use other methods to reward executives.
Basically it's saying that you can't provide extra incentives to the executives that you don't provide to everyone. In what way is that wealth redistribution?
Randy
Good point. It's not wealth redistribution. As an HR professional, I never did like these executive medical plans because I always felt that they were discriminatory despite what the law indicated. These executive medical plans pick up the slack and cover everything the regular plans do not. In addition, both the base medical plan and the executive medical plan are often times offered at no charge to the executives, while the regular workers have to contribute anywhere from 20%-25% on average towards the cost of their medical plan out of their paycheck. Those contributions are separate from the copays and deductibles employees have to meet should they utilize the plan (Gasp)!
I find it ridiculous that the rich executives financially need these plans and pay nothing for them while making millions of dollars. Why can't they pay for their own medical costs out of their own pocket just like their hero Rush?
If the average employee knew the amount of money their company pays towards these executive plans (both in contributions and in claim expenses), they would be appalled.
And so it goes, round and round. One stooge says something racist, another stooger defends it as not being racist, then another stooge says something racist....
Good lord, don't these clowns (yes Beck, y'all are a bunch of clowns) ever get together and compare notes?
--My apologies to the Three Stooges.
Annnndddddd, here comes MagCynic in three...two...
I have no problem calling strong health care reform (which we are not likely to see, in my opinion) a Civil Rights Bill. Because I happen to believe that Health Care is a Civil Right. But I can understand why someone who loathes the idea of Civil Rights would attack Health Care reform this way.
- claim you're only here for a discussion
- ask a poster to explain why THEY think its racist
- after they explain, continually insist that it isn't
- tell everyone they're stupid for thinking it's racist
- when someone responds in kind, castigate them for being an "internet coward"
- claim this site is filled with "white liberals" who THINK they speak for all blacks
- say that you just wanted a discussion, but are sick of people who don't tolerate a different opinion, and are done posting here {until next time}
- invite everyone to visit your Facebook page
Poor Becky, he has his moment in the sun, and it is eclipsed by Limbaugh's massive ego.
Freedom of Speech does mean that people like Beck and Limbaugh should on a daily basis fill our airwaves with lies and racist rants.
Comparing healthcare for millions of Americans of all colors with something to do with slavery is crazy.
Freedom of Speech does mean that people like Beck and Limbaugh should on a daily basis fill our airwaves with lies and racist rants.
Comparing healthcare for millions of Americans of all colors with something to do with slavery is crazy.
Redistribution of wealth is not inherently a bad thing. But it does depend on your perspective. If you are poor or middle class and the money taken from you is being returned from the super-rich who have been hoarding it, it looks like a good idea. If, on the other hand, you are wealthy and have stock piled more than you could ever spend, it looks terrible.
I'm just amazed that Christians linked up with that latter group considering what Jesus said consistently on the issue.