So, About This “Granny Off The Cliff” Ad…

We’ve received a rather breathless alert from the Agenda Project Action Fund:

Today, Paul Ryan’s hometown TV station WMTV refused to air the NEW Granny Off A Cliff: Part 2 Video from The Agenda Project Action Fund. The new Granny video was set to air today in Madison and Janesville, Wisconsin the hometown of vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan.  WMTV- Madison refused to air the video “due to content.”  Paul Ryan’s hometown station is the only station to have refused the ad.  When asked to clarify their reason for rejecting the ad, the station said that their lawyers had advised them not to offer any further explanation…

The new video – which highlights VP candidate Paul Ryan’s anti-Medicare stance – hit airwaves this week across the country in Ohio, Florida and Colorado.  It has aired on national cable networks and generated buzz on Hardball with Chris Matthews (“Favorite Campaign ad of 2012″) ABC’s George Stephanopoulos (27:35), The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Salon, Fox Business’ Varney and Co., Fox and Friends, Fox and Friends Sunday, Fox Business’s Money with Melissa Francis, NBC’s KOAA, Examiner, Fox News, among others.

We weren’t lucky enough to catch this spot’s showing on KOAA-TV in Colorado Springs, but for all of us who don’t live in the El Paso County media market, here’s the ad as shown in Colorado and now rejected by a station serving Rep. Paul Ryan’s residence in Wisconsin:

Yikes! As you can see, the title “Granny Off The Cliff” is, um, accurate as hell.

The apparently very small buy in Colorado was more about getting it on the Youtube radar–and now that a station has refused to air it, we’d expect them to try again somewhere in Colorado and further capitalize on the reaction. In terms of defending this ad, or condemning the decision of a broadcaster to not show it? We’re going to leave that to the consensus view of our readers.

It’s possible we lack the intestinal fortitude needed for these trying times.


Full story: So, About This “Granny Off The Cliff” Ad…

40 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Theosuphus Jones says:

    right away!  

    This is an outrage!  Let’s all talk about it.  

    Thanks God Rmoney won’t have to talk about his tax returns, because he would never release them to You People anyhow!  So there.  

    If you must ask–and you should not, since it is very rude to ask the super wealthy about their money, because they are job creators (and Willard saved the Olympics!  Why do you hate our Olympic athletes???)–13% OK, 13%.  And don’t ask him to prove it? That is so gauche.    

  2. Aaron Silverstein says:

    Much like all trying times…

  3. Diogenesdemar says:

    why Granny’s putting up all that fuss?  Those R-Ayn survival vouchers are supposed to be fantastic parachutes.  Why, I’ll bet that with a little rubber cement and a few baggies she can even use them to fashion some really fine water wings.

    Also, is there really any good reason someone this bat’s age hasn’t learned to swim yet?  Well, it’s sink or swim time now, sister moocher.  The good news? — When these lessons are over you just know she’s gonna be the first to thank R-Ayn for finally getting her ass into the water (. . . if she lives).

    Tomorrow’s R-Ayn survival skills lesson:  Give granny a fish and she’ll eat for a day, teach granny to noodle and she’ll have catfish for life.

  4. ArapaGOPArapaGOP says:

    I rarely say this, but I’m glad Pols isn’t offering the usual 100% defense of anything Democrat.

    • Fidel's dirt nap says:

      Paul Ryan has that faux sincerity thing down though.  Kind of like the local insurance salesman who jams some shares on you then never returns your calls.  He really is a rather fresh-faced middle class ass rapist.

    • parsingreality says:

      …about Johnson’s ad, above.

      Truth hurts, doesn’t it?  

    • BlueCat says:

      You know. Like saying replacing Medicare with a coupon is like throwing Granny to the wolves.  Or like setting Granny adrift on an ice flow. Or like leaving Granny up a creek without a paddle. Would you prefer one of those?  

      You do know that Medicare was created because private insurers didn’t want to insure expensive old folks, right?  And since they plan to repeal ACA as well, insurance companies can go back to not insuring anyone they don’t care to insure and barring people because of pre-existing conditions which most Grannies have managed to acquire.

      Now, saying that Obama is cutting your Medicare benefits….that’s not a visual metaphor. Just a plain old blatant lie.

      And what you, Arap, ought to find disgusting is the way all but the wealthiest seniors will be unable to afford quality health care if the Romney/Ryan plan goes into effect and ACA is repealed.

      And as of last night (not sure about today), Romney was back to saying his plan is  pretty much identical to Ryan’s after starting out with his plan being really different, then the next day almost the same, then the next day… different, ending with “identical” yesterday.

      Where he’s trying to pin that tail on the donkey today, I’m not sure. Have been out with visiting family at the Botanic Gardens enjoying the much cooler weather. Hours seem to make a big difference on Romney’s positions.

      Must be a really tough few days for you, trying to keep up.  Do you you get paid every time he changes the message?

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        fabulous ads.

        . . .  like throwing Granny to the wolves.  Or like setting Granny adrift on an ice flow.  Or like leaving Granny up a creek without a paddle.

        “Granny ad’s” could become a whole new genre of political advertising.

        Others?. hmmmm . . . putting Granny in front of the bus . . .  Granny’s tied to the roof of car . . . no, wait, that’s the family pet one.  

        • harrydobyharrydoby says:

          In honor of Romney’s empty promises and vague generalities (not to mention outright withholding of vital information), recall the good old days:

          • Pam Bennett says:

            When the Wendy’s ads were running the senior citizens were all outraged. It was funny and effective. Effective because at the time the “meat” patties at McDonalds and Burger King were shrinking.

            It does bring back memories. My first LTE that was published was about this very commercial. I wrote that it was only a commercial and we do know that the elderly are not like that. Lighten up people. It was published in the paper of no fame TV guide booklet.

    • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

      in the context you use it. But you, being the petty, objectionable, asshole you enjoy being, must use your little contrived insult in all cases, even when it displays your monumental ignorance.

      Why? Because you and your brethren are hateful little minds, trying to appear clever. Your devotion to simple-minded insult as a political tactic is a dead giveaway of your moral and ethical deprivation.

      The fact is, you dimwit, you are a joke on these pages. You somehow think that some readers are convinced of something by your juvenile mental masturbation and your specious, dishonest, posts.

      You are beneath contempt.

  5. VoyageurVoyageur says:

    Ryan’s proposed slashes in Medicare probably don’t throw Granny off a cliff.  It’s his Medicaid cuts that toss Granny.  Medicare does not paying for long-term care but, for the indigent, Medicaid does.  

      So, it’s Ryan’s Medicaid cuts that put Granny out on the ice floe, except that, due to global warming, there aren’t any steekin’ ice flows any more.

    • BlueCat says:

      My mother-in-law went into a nursing home after breaking a hip at 93. Doctors said most folks that age don’t live more than 6 months past a broken hip.  Well that 6 months turned into over 12 years.  

      Nowhere near enough money for all those years so many were paid for by Medicaid. She needed 24 hour supervision that we couldn’t have provided at home (she’d lived with us for years prior) because you couldn’t trust her not to do things like jump out of bed without using her walker.  Lots of falls but she rolled well and none kept her from dying in her sleep at 105 without the fuss of going to the hospital or being hooked up to anything. Thank God for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  

  6. RegisteredRepublican says:

    “If you look at the numbers, Medicare in particular will run out of money, and we will not be able to sustain that program no matter how much taxes go up.”

    -President Barack Obama, July 11, 2011, The Washington Post

    Something different needs to be done.  The status quo, as Barack Obama pointed out, will not save this program.  Dems need to stop pretending it will.  

    • harrydobyharrydoby says:

      But that would be too efficient and effective.  And they couldn’t skim 20% off the top.

      Administrative Savings

      Harvard researchers estimate that administrative costs consume 31 cents of every health care dollar in the U.S.  Slashing that to Canadian levels would save $400 billion annually, enough to cover all the uninsured and to improve coverage for everyone else.  A study by the General Accounting Office estimated that single payer would save 10 percent on total health care costs by slashing administrative waste, enough to cover all the uninsured.

      Cost Containment

      Single payer is the only plan which features effective cost control measures like global budgeting, negotiated fees, bulk purchasing, and capital investment planning.  As a result single payer can reduce the growth of health spending.  Whereas health spending is projected to increase to 20 percent of GDP by 2020, if single payer were adopted in 2012 it could contain costs to 17 percent of GDP (Friedman, Dollars and Sense, 4/2012).  A study by the Congressional Budget Office also projected that single payer could reduce health inflation.

      • BlueCat says:

        per capita on health care than we do.  I believe He cited 18% of GDP for us and 8% for them, noting that Israel seems to be a pretty healthy country.  He could have made similar comparisons with all the other modern industrialized countries who, like Israel, have universal health care. He failed, however, to take the step of connecting the obvious dots.

        In fact it has to be awkward for all the righties who claim to be such huge fans of Israel, a country just as far toward the socialist end of the scale as any of the European countries for which their idea of “real” Americans are supposed to have so much disdain.  But media types never ask them to explain.

  7. RegisteredRepublican says:

    The Federal government is the last entity I’d trust to prevent waste and fraud.  Remember the $600 hammers and the $400 toilet seats?  Private industry, at least, has the motivation to stop such obviously ridiculous expenses.  

    • parsingreality says:

      While $600 hanmers is a headline grabber, private industry is the source of that matter.

      The head of Social Security, for decades, makes something like $200K a year.  Year after year, no crisis, no scandal.

      The CEO’s of private health care companies make that in a few days,

      What’s the problem?

      • RegisteredRepublican says:

        The head of Social Security, for decades, makes something like $200K a year.  Year after year, no crisis, no scandal.

        Democratic and Republican presidents and members of Congress have raided this fund for decades.  That, plus the increasingly number of baby boomers moving into retirement, guarantees that a crisis, and maybe even a scandal, is soon forthcoming.

    • Medicare, Medicare, and Tricare are the most efficient health insurance programs in the country.  They regularly update the costs of medical services in their fee schedule, and they have been ruthless at weeding out fraud (which, given a program as large as Medicare, is not insignificant…)  They caught Florida Governor Rick Scott’s former company at it, in fact.

      This isn’t the Pentagon, with its single-sourced contracts, military-to-industry corruption.  And note, it’s not the Pentagon that’s at fault for those $400 toilet seats (aside from the lack of oversight) – it’s greedy corporations and the people running them who are ripping off our country.

      • Medicare and Medicaid are unable to negotiate the cost of pharmaceuticals – they have to rely on the average cost of those drugs to other insurance companies, and those costs are reported by the pharmaceutical companies themselves.  Oddly, Big Pharma seems to have been lying to the government and overcharging them…

        Democrats wanted to fix this problem back when the PPACA was passed, but it was blocked by Republicans and a few blue dog Democrats doing the bidding of corporations.

      • BlueCat says:

        It also ranks high on quality/efficiency compared to private sector insurers in spite of some problems.

        All of the public sector systems in place are, in fact, more efficient and score higher in bang for buck than private insurers who are universally top heavy and force doctors and hospitals to employ large staffs simply to deal with all the different systems and codes.  

        By any objective measure the public health care systems already in place here are more efficient than those provided by private, for profit insurers.  All the other modern industrialized countries deliver better care to all, not just some, of their people for between about a third and half of what it’s costing us while our stats put us on a par with the third world in many areas and people with private insurance go bankrupt because of health crises.

        No matter what RegisteredRepublican says, those are the facts.  

        • Diogenesdemar says:

          doing everything they can, almost daily, to forget the VA system . . .

          “Nothing’s too good for our boys in the trenches.”

          “I guess that’s why they get so much of it, General.”

          Hawkeye Pierce

    • Diogenesdemar says:

      who do you think sold those proverbial $600 hammers and $400 toilet seats to the military?  Private industry induced the fraud, Einstein.

      • VoyageurVoyageur says:

        were evidence of a weird system of procurement at the pentagon.  As to the toilet seats, the private company probably lost money on them.  They were a very limited edition for a few B-1 bombers, not the kind of thing you buy at home Depot for $10.   By the time you get a special fiberglass mold designed, etc, it’s not hard to spend $50,000 on a project that can only be amortized by 100 units or so.  

          As to the hammers, it’s hard to explain but essentially, the Pentagon was amortizing overhead for Research and Development over each part of the plane, not in proportion to the cost.   If it takes $10 billion to develop an extremely advanced plane that has 10,000 parts, the process tended to amortize that overhead on a per unit basis: a $1 million for a jet engine (too little) and $600 for a hammmer: too much.   The grand total was more less reasonable and not a ripoff.  But the accounting was ludicrous, overpricing wrenches and underpricing engines.

          Pentagon procurement has been cleaned up considerably since then, but the legends live one.

    • sxp151 says:

      and it’s evidence that government can’t work? Sounds to me like Republicans are just incompetent and corrupt.

      “Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work, and then they get elected and prove it.”–P.J. O’Rourke

    • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

      are you taking? What possible “motivation” does the private sector have to “stop such obviously ridiculous expenses”? Um..loss of profit, perhaps? That’s a big corporate motivator, I am sure.

      Maybe you should stop listening to selfish dolts like Ben Stein.  

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.