General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI have been an AARP member for 14 years, I'm done with them after this
Sunday's Omaha World Herald, page 3.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
rzemanfl
(31,082 posts)many years ago.
SARose
(1,822 posts)"The problem is the federal government's not the answer for everybody's funding issues, you know, we need to make decisions at the federal level and prioritize what really is a core duty," Fischer said.
Snip
More
Well my my my…
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)
travelingthrulife
(4,355 posts)About as stupid as saying the churches will provide for the needy.
Rebl2
(17,343 posts)my parents used to attend closed or I should say was sold to another church. It was mainly elderly people, not exactly a rich congregation. Those smaller churches may help as much as they can, but they can’t afford much.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)I like them. They do good work and I value my membership benefits and the AARP magazine.
With such a large membership, they cannot be "everything to everybody" ... and during the course of someone's membership, it seems unreasonable to expect to agree with every decision that they make. It seems equally unreasonable to give them the middle finger for their efforts to show appreciation or to give praise to a Republican senator. It was a "thank you" ... not an endorsement.
AARP's public statements often explain that its policy positions are determined by what is best for the 50+ population, based on research and member feedback, not partisan considerations. It engages with lawmakers from both parties who support its priorities. While AARP may endorse or oppose specific pieces of legislation, it does not officially support or oppose candidates or parties. However, given its long history of advocating on politically charged topics, the perception of partisanship remains strong for some.
AARP has repeatedly emphasized that it does not endorse or give money to political candidates. Fact-checking organizations like PolitiFact and USA Today have corroborated that AARP does not donate to either political party.
As you know, AARP is one of the most powerful and well-funded lobbying organizations in Washington, D.C. Its active engagement in federal policy debates (with spending that can reach tens of millions of dollars a year) so I guess that reinforces the perception that it is a highly political entity.
angrychair
(11,640 posts)They are, very literally, starving millions of people to death because Democrats in Congress won't let them strip healthcare from millions of people.
That's just what is happening right now. The list of their crimes against humanity are long and vulgar.
I say this with my whole chest: I wouldn't piss on a Republican, any Republican, if they were on fire right in front of me and I had a full bladder.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)That's not their job or their mission. If people adjusted their expectations to fit more with reality, then their consternation and anger would diminish, and they could concentrate their efforts on others areas, rather than focusing on things that simply do not matter.
"Snub Republicans to make you happy?" Is that how you see this?
QueerDuck
(905 posts)so I guess it all works out in the end. When a respectable organization like AARP is hated by both extremes, then they're doing something right. Obviously, it all depends on one's perspective and where they happen to be sitting on the political spectrum when they start shouting at a non-partisan group AARP for being "too right" or "too left".
I remember that some disgruntled rightwingers hated AARP so much that they started their own organization... a right-wing alternative to the AARP called the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC). Another, lesser-known, group with a similar rightwing mission is the American Seniors Association (ASA).
There are, however, specific organizations that align more overtly with progressive or liberal viewpoints, the most prominent of which is the Alliance for Retired Americans (ARA). People are always have the freedom of association and they can choose ineffective organizations for vanity and virtue-signaling reasons, or they can work with respectable organizations like AARP that have a history of success. Personally, I choose AARP for their long history of success in advocating/lobbying-for issues and programs that make the lives of Seniors better, healthier, and more affordable.
I don't focus on petty grievances like whether an "evil" Republican (gasp! horrors!) was publicly acknowledged with positive words or appreciation.
Cirsium
(3,313 posts)False equivalency.
"When a respectable organization like AARP is hated by both extremes, then they're doing something right."
That right there is the reason we are in such crisis. Criticism from the Left is not equivalent to criticism from the right in any way, shape or form , and the so-called "middle" doesn't exist. Promoting that illusion is just a way to compromise with the right wing.
They want to starve all of us, rob from all of us, police all of us. There is no "middle" ground. Starve half of us? Beat half of us? Steal from half of us? No.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)We've covered our perspectives on the AARP's role and the challenges of political compromise, and it seems we're going around in circles. My position remains that political action inherently involves compromise ... a realistic approach that moves the needle forward, even if incrementally.
Sadly, the "my way or the highway" and "all or nothing" philosophies that are being promoted only serve to shut down the process before it even starts. It hasn't worked so far, so we have no reason to believe it will suddenly start to work if we just stick with it a little longer.
My key takeaway is the importance of finding common ground and working towards practical, achievable solutions, rather than engaging in performative rage or attempts to attack and "sabotage" respectable organizations like the AARP.
I've made my points, and this conversation has become repetitive and unproductive. We've reached an impasse. It's clear to me that further exchange will not be fruitful. I am finished with this discussion. Please, continue, but without me. Goodbye.
More like a realistic approach that moves the needle backward, sometimes quite quickly.
Yes, politics usually involves compromise, but not when you are dealing with fascists.
JonAndKatePlusABird
(363 posts)Obviously text is a subpar medium for conveying tone, but I’m getting a whiff of the same thing I see in lots of media. The Republican POV is the “correct”, “default”, “adult” one, and those emotional Democrats just don’t know how the world really works and are met with an
angrychair
(11,640 posts)Deb Fisher is a Nazi. Literally one of the biggest sycophants for Mango Mussolini in the Senate. When organizations like the AARP praises her, it gives her and her actions, legitimacy.
It's called "white washing". You do a small act to get perceived legitimate organizations to say something nice about you and then use that as cover for the 99% of the things you do that are shitty and evil.
Anyone, any organization, that praises a Republican for any reason, is literally part of the problem.
Republicans, including Fischer, want to starve people to death, including lots of older people that are members of AARP, because Democrats won't let them strip away the healthcare of other AARP members and their respective families.
I could not disagree more with your position on this. Who organizations like AARP give public recognition too matters a lot.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)They never have and they never will. They don't withhold praise or gratitude as "punishment" for some other unrelated policy matter. They are not an organization that is in the business of "hating republicans because they are republicans" and it's unrealistic for anyone to expect them to do so.
That kind of binary thinking serves no useful purpose. There is always going to be (or needs to be) middle ground, compromise, recognition, gratitude if there is to be any kind of PROGRESS made at all. The all or nothing, black or white, good or evil, us/them and tribal way of looking at things is a very simplistic view and only serves to perpetuate problems and divisions that could otherwise be resolved... or at least moved the needle a little closer to something that's better than before.
If anyone genuinely and actually expects AARP to behave like a partisan far-left organization, then they should not support the AARP... *and* at the same time, they should not be surprised or disappointed when the AARP does happen to praise or thank someone who has done something, said something, or supported some policy... and that they deserve recognition for doing so.
There's also a bit of greasing the wheels going on here to, I suspect. Creating goodwill and letting someone know in a public way when they've done something good is a way to encourage the same from them again, or to encourage others to follow suit.
I'm grateful that AARP's board is filled with reasonable and level-headed people so that they can continue their work and valuable services.
angrychair
(11,640 posts)Could not disagree more. To imply it's "binary thinking" is intellectual insulting. Reducing it to partisanship is vulgar.
The "big picture" of what they are doing in Washington absolutely matters. To say we should pat the Nazi on her head and say "who's a good Congress critter" for some small thing while she is actively trying to starve old people and children to death and/or take their healthcare, is one hell of a take.
The AARP has absolutely been leaning more right over the last couple of years. Far more inclined to praise Republicans than Democrats. When was the last time they took out a full page color ad for a Democrat?
QueerDuck
(905 posts)I think what we have here is a matter of respect, so that when someone is as far left as they can be, everything else seems far right. In reality AARP is not one way or the other. Not left not right. I remember not long ago there was a bunch of maca people saying that the AARP was too far left, LOL. They were so upset with it that they even decided to create their own organization. I don't know what happened to it, it was kind of a laughable exercise and futility. I'd be surprised if they still existed. They certainly do not have the influence or clout that AARP does..
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)They should have, since they thanked her on this issue.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)Again this is binary thinking that does not acknowledge reality. I can understand however how any organization that is moderate, or centrist, or nonpartisan, might falsely appear to be right wing to someone who's sitting on the far left. It's all a matter of perspective. I think it's amusing that the folks on the far right think that AARP is a liberal organization. Again, perspective.
And it's also a matter of expectations, clearly you were expecting something but it was unreasonable.
NoRethugFriends
(3,647 posts)lostincalifornia
(4,891 posts)drop AARP, and not buy their supplemental insurance. That is is fine if someone wants to drop AARP, and their supplemental insurance through UHC through them, but that is a PERSONAL decision based on someone’s situation.
While I have no doubt that some have had issues with AARP and UHC under them, I have not, and in fact have not had any issues with them, and I will be darned if I will cut my nose off to spite my face because someone did not have a good experience, or worse, because they see an AARP ad they disagree with.
People need to do what is best for themselves and their family. I have had no issues or denials of coverage for me and my family, and it would be foolish in my case to drop them because I disagreed with an ad.
choie
(6,528 posts)It’s a money making operations.
NoRethugFriends
(3,647 posts)From the post for certain forums
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)a family member for home care.
I'd love for Dems to have the seats to promote/improve this stuff, but we don't.
EdmondDantes_
(1,317 posts)It eats you up inside.
hvn_nbr_2
(6,746 posts)
Chemical Bill
(3,034 posts)but never said to starve kids so the wealthy can get more money. I hardly think anybody here is just like them.
questionseverything
(11,529 posts)angrychair
(11,640 posts)For theoretically placing a vote helping older people with home care while they are actively advocating for, in some cases, for those very same older, handicap or young children, to starve to death and/or lose healthcare all together. Because that is very literally the official position of Deb Fischer: "old and sick people need to die".
So while they are taking out full page ads praising her she is, very literally, screwing over the very people AARP is supposed to advocate to protect.
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)I'd curse her on most issues, though.
angrychair
(11,640 posts)She doesn't have to literally say "old people should die" her Party's position, her position, is to let SNAP benefits expire tomorrow.
Her Party's position, her position, is to let ACA subsidies expire.
Both of the positions are, in fact, saying "old people should die".
I don't know of any other way to interpret it.
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)because we lost. Better take what we can get.
maccafan
(154 posts)When you take out a full page ad in the state's largest newspaper with her picture and name in full print it IS a political statement. She has voted with Trump on almost everything in the Senate and has not supported the people of Nebraska in most everything she does. She doesn't deserve this kind of coverage.
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)maunagirl
(14 posts)Is that a Republican and they thanked her or is there more to it?
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)They ignored ALL the bad things she has done, like the BIG beautiful bill that cuts Medicaid.
OS
Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #14)
Post removed
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)Welcome to the DU.
Hospitals don't close because they can't treat illegal immigrants or trans surgeries for minors.
OS
maunagirl
(14 posts)what you wrote but haven't hospitals been privitized?
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)Medicaid is a good-sized portion of hospital budgets. Take that away and many (especially rural) will close.
QueerDuck
(905 posts)🙄
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)And you know it!
QueerDuck
(905 posts)Many different members not just you. Not just Democrats.
Omaha Steve
(108,339 posts)Thanking a US Senator for ONE thing she has done crosses the line. I don't see the library getting into politics.
Are you an AARP member?
OS
QueerDuck
(905 posts)However in your case it may be the only one that you're aware of, therefore it seems from your perspective to be something new, unusual, out of the ordinary. Senator Fisher is from nebraska, the ad appeared in a Nebraska newspaper, it really doesn't make sense for them to thank a Nebraska senator in the Miami herald does it? By the same token, if they had some other local politician that they wanted to praise or thank for their hard work, they would do that in that politicians hometown paper, not yours, correct? Would this help to explain why you have seen no other recognition of this type in the past? Not everything is a conspiracy. But you do you. That kind of binary tribal thinking does not help to solve problems, it just drags them on indefinitely.
This entire thread has crossed the threshold into absurdity, and there's no point in continuing further. Clearly we have reached an impasse, and nothing further can be gained by continuing this exchange. But I know that reasonable people understand that AARP it's not the evil organization that you're making them out to be. Nor is it the evil organization that the far right makes them out to be.
leftstreet
(38,739 posts)QueerDuck
(905 posts)Last edited Sun Nov 2, 2025, 01:07 PM - Edit history (1)
AARP is a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization with a stated mission to empower Americans aged 50 and over through advocacy and providing resources. AARP does not have owners and works to advance the interests of its members in areas such as health security, financial stability, and personal fulfillment.
AARP operates with several affiliates, including some for-profit subsidiaries like AARP Services, which handles the oversight of products and services offered through the AARP network. This complex structure can make it seem like the organization is driven by profit.
There will always be haters and critics that assume the worst because AARP isn't as far-left (or as far-right) as some would like. There's not much I can do about that other than to point out that a non-partisan organization always appears to be "right" or "left" when it's being targeted from from the extremes of the political spectrum. It's all subjective and depends on someone's perspective.
They are an honorable organization, but petty-grievance hunters will always find some perceived flaw to amplify or exaggerate. It's unclear to me what useful purpose this behavior serves, but I'm sure it must make someone feel like they're accomplishing something important.
Oh well.
leftstreet
(38,739 posts)You're a dedicated and passionate defender of AARP, but maybe Google around a bit...
QueerDuck
(905 posts)Thank you.
dflprincess
(29,139 posts)Because of its relationship with UHC.
I find it amusing that now that UHC is getting bad press about it's Advantage plans AARP is suddenly pushing UHC supplements.
Faux pas
(16,067 posts)when they turned into nothing but advertisements for big business and special interests. 
Prairie_Seagull
(4,590 posts)released a statement condemning stumpy for his apparent threat to SS and Medicare.
leftstreet
(38,739 posts)Why Is AARP Boosting Medicare Privatization?
Meanwhile, AARP has been reaping the financial benefits of its own Medicare Advantage plan, which it has been offering in partnership with the for-profit insurance giant UnitedHealthcare since 2003. Starting in 2021, AARP also launched a lucrative partnership with the major Medicare outsourcing firm Oak Street Health, which is a participant in the ACO Realizing Equity, Access, and Community Health (REACH) program that privatizes Medicare benefits for seniors without their consent, as reported by Kaiser Health News in June.
In 2021, AARP earned $814 million in “royalties” for its health care work, according to a recently released financial statement reviewed by The Lever. That figure is more than double what the organization collects in dues, and is 20 percent higher than 2018.
“At the direction of the third party insurance carriers, the plan pays AARP, Inc. a portion of the total premiums collected for the use of its intellectual property, which is reported as royalties in the consolidated statements of activities,” AARP explains in its latest tax filing.
https://www.levernews.com/why-is-aarp-boosting-medicare-privatization/
DFW
(59,697 posts)It seems to be mostly ads, some of them for United Health care, who my employer dropped many years ago for refusing to cover just about any claim submitted to them.
Maybe there is something useful in that magazine of theirs, but if so, they keep it well-hidden.
Any publication that accepts ads from UHC is wasting paper if they continually send me issues containing those ads.
Besides, I'm only 73, and I'm not retired in the first place. A colleague of mine here in Germany, who is 75 and also not retired,
told me that in our line of work, retirement comes when the last nail is hammered into the coffin. I have not yet woken to the sound
of nails being hammered in all around me, so I guess I'm not retired yet. Besides, if I want a health insurance company that has
no intention whatsoever of paying any claims, I'll just sign up with "Great Benefit" and make John Grisham happy.
Bayard
(28,390 posts)I saw absolutely no, "benefits." I quit, but they still took the money out of my checking account, and I had to raise hell to get it back. I still get their emails and magazine, even though I've told them multiple times to take me off their mailing list.
I don't see where they advocate for seniors politically either.