AARP v. AMAC

For months now I have been hearing about the Association of Mature American Citizens or AMAC - they say they are the conservative alternative to the AARP.

AARP is a horrible organization.  It is a construct of fantasy that somehow is able to contact every person in the US at age 50 to tell them of all the benefits that it offers to "seniors."   When I turned 50 I wrote the then CEO of AARP and argued that they were a bunch of "greedy bastards" intent on bankrupting the country.   I knew the CEO then and he wrote me back a personal note, complimenting me on my moderation from when I knew him when he worked for Chuck Percy.   But I was not joking.  AARP claims to represent all people over 50 but fundamentally and dogmatically represents only the left of the spectrum.   Want to privatize part of Social Security like Chile and a host of other countries did?  No, that would be wrecking Social Security.   Want to balance the budget?  Not on the "backs of seniors."  The AARP is all of what is wrong with Washington politics.

AMAC was developed as a conservative alternative to AARP.  They present a more conservative approach to issues including support for balancing the budget.  And at the same time they offer a raft of services to seniors similar to the group buying programs of AARP.

But I have chosen not to join.  Were I forced to choose between the looney left of AARP and AMAC, I would, of course choose AMAC.   But I fundamentally disagree with the need to be represented as a senior.   Shouldn't we be trying to reduce the size of government by all reasonable means?  I really do not want my concerns presented to Congress - what I really want is Congress to reduce its intrusions into my life.