As Dick Cheney taught us during the Bush years, “deficits don’t matter.” And Bush and Cheney showed us just how much they didn’t matter by taking Bill Clinton’s useless surplus and–thanks to two wars, massive, unfunded tax cuts, and one huge crash/big-bank-bailout later–turning it into a healthy $1.41 trillion deficit.
Clearly, Obama didn’t get the memo that the only thing that can save us is more wars and more tax cuts for the rich.
Instead, he’s killed Bin Laden, ended foreign wars, brought healthcare to more than 20 million, created 9.9 million jobs in a record 53-month streak of job growth. And to top it all, the economy is now growing at a 4% rate.
He’s done it all with out any help from the GOP. No wonder Republicans are mad at him.
Back before Obamacare was passed, good conservative Republicans made MANY DIRE PREDICTIONS about all of the things that would go wrong with Obamacare if it was made into law.
Well, most of Obamacare has now been implemented, so let’s see how accurate these predictions were! Specifically, the Commonwealth Fund has released the results of a new survey to find out what people’s real, true, actual experiences with Obamacare have been.
PREDICTION 1: Obamacare won’t really cover any new people!
Republicans were making the sensible prediction that all Obamacare would do is make lazy people even lazier by making the taxpayers pay for their insurance, but it would not actually insure more people.
(About 9.5 million adults gained new coverage, and that figure does not include children.)
PREDICTION 2: The coverage provided by Obamacare will be worse!
Republicans predicted that people will be worse off with Obamacare plans than they were before, because Obamacare is socialist and socialism is always bad.
(Fifty-eight percent of those who signed up for Obamacare — either for Medicaid or private insurance — said that they were better off than they were before than had their new insurance plan.)
PREDICTION 3: People will hate the Obamacare plans!
Republicans were frantically going around finding people who didn’t like their new Obamacare plans in order to prove that everyone hated it.
(78% of the people surveyed reported being satisfied with their new Obamacare insurance.)
PREDICTION 4: People signing up won’t even use the coverage!
Obamacare will be forcing people to buy coverage that they won’t even use!
(Three out of five enrollees have used their new insurance — most were people who couldn’t afford care before.)
PREDICTION 5: Obamacare will cause long lines and wait times, nobody will be able to get appointments!
Just like in Canada, right!?!?
(More than a third were able to get appointments within a week, more than half were able to get appointments within two weeks.)
SO WHAT IS THE VERDICT?
The Republican predictions about the failure of Obamacare are…. well, just look at the graphs!
I think “Close Enough!” pretty much captures it, don’t you?
Hobby Lobby says they are Christian. They say they love God. They claim that the reason they don’t want to pay for employee health insurance is that some of that money might end up paying for someone’s abortion, and they hate abortion. This is their argument:
1) If we pay for health insurance for our employees, that money goes into a pool of money that the health insurance company has to pay for things.
2) If that health insurance company covers abortions, then they might take some money out of that pool and give it to a hospital that performed an abortion.
3) Therefore, if we pay for health insurance for our employees it is the same as if we were paying for abortions.
As a result, they object, because they don’t wantto pay for abortions.
This style of argument is common. This is the same logic that we use to deny public funding to Planned Parenthood, even though only a teeny tiny fraction of what Planned Parenthood does has anything to do with abortion. The logic is like this:
1) If public money goes to Planned Parenthood, then it goes into a big bucket with all of their other money.
2) Some part of the money in that bucket might get used to pay a doctor who performs an abortion.
3) Therefore, if any public money at all goes to Planned Parenthood in any way, then it is the same as if we are paying for abortions.
As a result, we object to public money going to Planned Parenthood, because we don’t want to pay for abortions. As you can see, the logic is impeccable.
Unfortunately, THERE IS A PROBLEM!!!!
Hobby Lobby buys some of its materials from Chinese companies! Now, everybody knows that Chinese companies pay money to the Chinese government in taxes, and the Chinese government forces women in China to have abortions.
Notice, this follows exactly the same logic:
1) If Hobby Lobby pays companies in China for their products, then that money goes into a big pool of money owned by the Chinese company.
2) If that Chinese company pays taxes, then some of their tax money will go toward GOVERNMENT-FORCED ABORTIONS IN CHINA.
3) Therefore, when Hobby Lobby buys products from China it is exactly as if Hobby Lobby is FORCING CHINESE PEOPLE TO GET ABORTIONS.
Clearly, as you can see, the logic is the same.
So, Hobby Lobby, I ask you this:
Why do you hate babies?
Why do you hate God?
Don’t you realize that the only way to be Godly–using the logic that you are using to deny employees health insurance–is to make everything yourself and not interact with the world economy at all?
Honestly, Hobby Lobby. I thought you were better than this.
If you’ve been reading my column on Liberal Bias, you probably think you have me figured out. I’m just a dyed-in-the-wool conservative patriot who knows that the Democrat party and their atheist Muslim leaders from China would take us over if it weren’t for the courage of corporations that protect us from having healthcare by cutting our hours.
So I know what you’re thinking: “Zach must love Ted Cruz! He’s standing up for my right to not have health insurance because I have a pre-existing condition!”
Well you would be WRONG. I do not like Ted Cruz one bit. You want to know why? Because Ted Cruz is a LIBERAL.
By the time this is published, the government will have shut down because the Republicans in the House of Representatives will have done the right thing by letting the Democrat party foolishly believe that you enact change by winning elections.
They’ll cry because it is “insane” to hold the government hostage in order to repeal a law because “that’s what elections are for.”
Just because this is not how it is supposed to be done means nothing! We are innovators…no, liberators!
Despite what the liberal skewed polls say, the American people will see us as liberators, and if they don’t, we will just have to remind them that the Iraqis were supposed to see us as liberators, and look what happened to them! Do the American people want to be sucked into another neverending war? I didn’t think so.
Many are arguing that this beautiful government shutdown couldn’t have happened without Ted Cruz. I will give him credit for that; 94% of the EPA has been furloughed while only 18% of the Department of Defense has. There has arguably not been more freedom in America during this government shutdown since Ronald Reagan gave us eight of the best years out of the 6000 years we have been on God’s favorite planet.
In the days leading up to the shutdown, Cruz spoke on the Senate floor for 21 hours, obstructing his fellow liberal Harry Reid from doing his job as Senate Majority Leader. Normally I would love this, but I see what’s really going on here.
To know who Ted Cruz really is, you have to know where he came from. According to NBC News, Ted Cruz was born in CANADA. Normally I wouldn’t cite any “news” source that isn’t World Net Daily (I will reveal next week how Fox News has been infiltrated by the Democrat party, stay tuned!), but if anybody would know who is a Canadian socialist, it’s NBC.
If there is any place worse than Kenya, it’s Canada. There, healthcare is treated like a basic human right, and treatment is free. This atrocity is known as a single-payer system, and it is the result of socialism taking over and transforming them from our neighbor to the north into the worst thing you could ever be: FRENCH.
So why would a socialist like Ted Cruz want to destroy Obamacare? There is only one possible explanation. While the Affordable Care Act is the equivalent of 860 billion September 11ths, it’s NOTHING compared to what they have in Canada.
Like it or not, there are still a few things good about Obamacare. The insurance companies will make more money now than they ever have now that they have millions of more customers. That sounds way better than what Ted Cruz would try to push if he was successful getting rid of Obamacare. Can you imagine a system where anyone who needs healthcare can just walk in and get it? Where our tax dollars go toward making sure nobody would be turned down for care? What a nightmare.
AND ANOTHER THING, I’m not even sure that Ted Cruz is really who he says he is. Have you LOOKED at him? He looks like somebody wearing a Ted Cruz mask. It wouldn’t surprise me if he were a member of the Reptilian Elite. I mean… JUST LOOK AT HIM!
There has been a lot of good news for Obamacare lately, which is obviously bad news for people who support Freedom, Liberty, and other capitalized words.
So in the interest of being fair and balanced, we have decided to present to you a side-by-side comparison of some good news headlines and quotes about Obamacare next to the bad news headlines and quotes about Obamacare. When you look at it this way you will see that Obamacare, much like Global Warming and Evolution, is something with two points of view and obviously every perspective is valid so it’s impossible to decide anything, ever.
Pro Obamacare: “8.5 million people got an average of a $100 in rebates last year.” — CNN
Pro Obamacare: “In South Florida, 83,700 young adults have been able to stay on their parents’ insurance plan, 75,800 senior citizens are getting discounts on their medicine, and 1.4 million patients are getting preventive care without co-pays or deductibles.” — Sun-Sentinel
Pro Obamacare: “The number of double-digit rate increases requested by health insurers has plummeted over the past four years.” — Washington Post
Anti Obamacare: “Obamacare is going to make the emerging doctor shortage in America a lot worse.” — EndOfTheAmericanDream.com
Anti Obamacare: “[Obamacare] will destroy the very health and wellbeing of… millions of hardworking Americans.” — National Review
Anti Obamacare: “The Ohio Department of Insurance predicts premiums in 2014 will rise by 88 percent, a direct result of President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” — Independent Journal Review
As you can see from these examples, there are just as many negative effects as there are positive effects of Obamacare. It’s pretty much up in the air, undecided, and indeterminate. Who can decide?
Of course, some people might point out out that the good points about Obamacare are things that actually have already happened, while the bad points about Obamacare are all speculations about what might or might not happen in the future.
But we don’t listen to those people… they just have liberal bias.
A very interesting article appeared today on ProjectMillenial.org, explaining why it is critical for the GOP to stand up for the rights of a terribly down-trodden group in our society: upper-middle-class and upper-class young white males.
First, let’s examine what this graph tells us. This shows the number of single, childless adults who are in the individual health insurance market, divided into three broad age groups: 19-25, 26-30, and 31-35. These groups are important, because it has long been known that the people who will see the biggest increases in their rates under the Dreaded Obamacare are young (19-25 year old) males.
This is part of a very well-known phenomenon: “Obama’s war on bros“. Over and over again, good conservatives have pointed out that 25 year old men will bear the brunt of the Obamacare rate increases.
If you are paying very close attention, you might ask this question: “Where does “upper-middle-class” enter the picture? Isn’t Obamacare a war on all young people?”
Well, not really. This is where the red bars in the above graph come into play. The differently-colored bars indicate different income levels, and the red bars represent those people who have income that is low enough that they qualify for government assistance under the terms of Obamacare.
As you can see, it turns out that most young people who are part of the individual health insurance market also quality for government assistance, because they make less than 138% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL), which is the cut-off for people in this group to receive the Medicaid Expansion proposed as part of the Obamacare package.
Of course, everyone knows good conservatives hate government assistance, and hate Medicaid in particular. So much so, in fact, that almost all of the good conservative states have opted to not implement the Medicaid expansion (PDF).
Which means that these conservative states could shield these young people from the dreaded Obamacare Rate Increases, simply by implementing the Medicaid expansion portion of the Obamacare package…
“…..but, you know what?,” Republican Governors across the country have said, “We’re not gonna do that.”
Because in the end, the amount that we hate “government assistance” far outweighs the amount that we care about poor young people. (After all, most of them aren’t even white!!)
So, in conclusion: Republicans really, really care about the terrible burden that Obamacare will create for young, non-poor white guys. This will make a great rallying cry for 2014.
What do Americans really care about? Do they care about the economy and government spending? Or the fear that radical homosexual elites will take away their freedom? Google trends gives us an answer.
When there is an issue sticking in the American craw, they turn to the Google machine to find out more. Peaks in search volume on a particular topic or keyword usually correspond to news stories related to that topic. The more of a “spike” in search volume a news story gets, the more it shows that the American people as a whole are keyed in to that issue.
That is why the above graph is so fascinating. This graph compares search volume on two somewhat unusual terms that have appeared in big political news stories in the past year: “chik fil a” and “sequester”.
If you will recall, there was an incident in mid-2012 where the head of the “Chik Fil A” restaurant chain put a statement out saying that he hates the gay people, which of course all good conservatives know is perfectly reasonable and not prejudiced at all. This then caused radical homosexual activists to protest against Chik-Fil-A. This in turn lead to a counter-protest called “Chik-Fil-A Appreciation Day”, where good conservatives all over the country showed the world important it is to allow people to hate gay people by gorging down on fried chicken.
That appreciation day took place on August 1, 2012, coinciding exactly with the large peak on the above graph.
Over the last several months, the big political topic that has been in the news has been this thing called the “sequester” that started a few days ago. The sequester is a fancy and somewhat awkward name for a set of government spending cuts that reduce or eliminate large portions of our government, including funding for the military, education, and health care. In particular, federal financial support for health care will be one of the items hit the hardest, with the government cutting back on immunization programs, payments for medical screenings, mental health programs and disease tracking program. In anticipation of receiving less federal money, hospitals have already begun laying people off.
There were some news stories about it last December, because law-makers were doing complicated things in government to delay the sequester until March 1. March 1 has now come and gone, and the sequester has been the topic of almost every news and talk radio show for the last week or so.
Yet for some reason, the current spike in web searches on “sequester” has less than one fifth the magnitude as the “Chik Fil A Appreciation Day” spike last August.
This is an important lesson for conservative law-makers everywhere. The Washington D.C. Republicans are out of touch with the average American conservative. While politicians debate about things like “spending” and “health care” and “poor people”, it is obvious that the real American conservative responds to these issues with a big ol’ YAWN.
But when the Radical Homosexual Elites threaten to mess with his Fried Chicken, the average American Conservative sits up (the best he can) and pays attention.
Something to think about for 2014.
Graph Data Source: Google Trends Graph Created By: LiberalBias.com
This graph shows that the number of double-digit health insurance rate hikes has dramatically dropped since Obamacare took effect. This must be a lie, since it contradicts conservative values.
According to a report from the Obama administration, in both 2009 and 2010 more than 70% of health insurance rate hikes were in the double digits (i.e. more than 10%). However, in 2011 a portion of the Obamacare legislation kicked in that required all health insurance companies to get approval for any rate hikes more than 10%. As you can see in the graph above, this is when the number of actual double-digit rate hikes began a dramatic decline.
The problem with this graph is that is seems to suggest that Obamacare is actually helping. Some people might look at this graph and think that the new government regulation was actually having a positive effect, by making fewer health insurance companies jack up their prices by huge amounts.
Conclusions like that are, obviously, unacceptable.
Instead, you should simply ignore this graph and focus on the fact that THERE EXISTED SOME rate hikes that were more than 10% in the past year. After all, if there are at least some of these double-digit hikes, then that means that Obamacare didn’t stop the problem completely and therefore is a total and utter failure in every way.
There is now mounting proof that the ultra-left wing so-called “real world” is part of a massive liberal conspiracy. New evidence: people who have been indoctrinated by liberal propaganda live 10 years longer than good, anti-elite conservatives!
Now, I can already tell there will be some objections to this graph.
“That’s not fair,” you might say, “Not all conservatives are high school dropouts, and not all high school dropouts are conservatives! You should not be saying that they are the same thing!” Some people might even say it’s biased to equate “educated” with liberals and “uneducated” with conservatives.
Nothing could be farther from the truth!
My fellow conservatives, here are some things that you really must remember:
Herman Cain said that people should just “educate themselves the old fashioned way” instead of going to school.
Rick Santorum said that anyone who thinks kids should go to college is an elitist snob.
Michele Bachmann said parents know better than schools what children need to learn.
Rand Paul said that the public school system is nothing more than a “propaganda machine”.
Again and again and again, our great leaders have told us what the conservative movement represents: not going to school. So it’s time for us to just embrace it, fellow conservatives. We Republicans ARE the anti-education party!
We must be, right?
I mean, if we weren’t… well, then it would be just stupid to keep electing these people to office, now wouldn’t it?
graph data source: “Health Affairs” research study, graph by Kevin Drum graph found via: Daily Kos
This is a classic example of the liberal bias that elitist things like “statistics” and “numbers” can have. This chart was posted yesterday on a leftist website. This website weirdly implies that this chart is evidence that the American healthcare system delivers inferior quality care that is more expensive than in other places in the world.
That is obviously ridiculous, since America is the best, period. Any chart that implies otherwise is clearly wrong.
But even more ridiculous is this: the website even provides several proofs that this chart is wrong, but somehow poo-poos them and discounts them. Here are some examples of the proofs:
Proof #1: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell once said about America’s health care system: ” It is already the finest health care system in the world!”
Proof #2: House Speaker John Boehner once said that we have: “the best health care delivery system in the world.”
Proof #3: Governor Rick Perry once said: “We’ve got some of the finest health care in the world.”
Proof #4: Sean Hannity constantly said that we have: “a health care system that is the envy of the world.”
And so on.
LOOK AT ALL OF THAT PROOF!!! What more proof could you possibly need???
To any good conservative American, this is obviously enough evidence that the chart is wrong and that America is truly NUMBER ONE in terms of healthcare, freedom, liberty, and other things that nobody knows how to measure properly.
There is really only one conclusion that can be reached.
When liberal “facts” seem to contradict conservative values… well know where the fault really lies…
The facts have been infected by the liberal bias!!!!!
Graph Data Source: Calculated by the Commonwealth Fund based on 2007 International Health Policy Survey, 2008 International Health Policy Survey of Sicker Adults, 2009 International Health Policy Survey of Primary Care Physicians, Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System National Scorecard; and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD 2009.
This is a truly despicable graph. As you can see, this ranks several of the tax increases that have happened over the last 60 years or so, and measures them as a percentage of GDP. According to these liberally biased facts, Obamacare is somewhere in the middle, whereas the Bush Tax Increases of 1980 and the Reagan Tax Increases of 1982 were both larger than the Obamacare Tax Increase.
Obviously this is impossible. These facts cannot be correct.
How do we know?
1) Obamacare is the biggest tax increase in the history of the known universe. I know this is true because Rush Limbaugh said it, and Rush Limbaugh has been documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time. I don’t really know how this was measured, but he said it once on his program so I’m sure it’s true.
2) Reagan is a paragon of conservative virtue and would never raise taxes. Anyone who says that he did is deceptively not paying attention to the time he lowered taxes, which is what they should be doing instead. Obviously.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, STUPID HISTORICAL TAX INCREASES? WHY ARE YOU CAUSING ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS?
There is obviously only one possible explanation. You know who some random dude in a robe suddenly “decided” that the Obamacare costs are now taxes, even though Congress previously said they were not?
Well, if they can do it, so can we: Obviously, the “Reagan Tax Increases” were fees and not taxes. In fact, it’s pretty clear to anyone who thinks about it for a moment that all of the so-called “taxes” on the above graph that are bigger than the Obamacare increase are actually fees and not taxes.
This allows us to conclude that Reagan never raised taxes, and Obamacare is the biggest tax increase ever.
If anyone tells you anything else…. well, that’s just liberal bias!!!
This graph has been used by liberals to deceptively suggest that there is something wrong with the United States healthcare system. According to this graph, the United States pays by far more than any other country per capita on health care, even though it is fairly low on the list for average life expectancy. Even worse, the Unites States and Cuba have almost the same average life expectancies, even though the United States pays the most per capita and Cuba pays the least!
Mark my words, now that the liberally-biased Supreme Court has upheld the anti-freedom Obamacare law, liberals will be parading around stuff like this as an argument for Obamacare. “Look!” they will say, “Cuba is spending almost nothing and life expectancy is just as high there as it is here! We should adopt Obamacare because it is socialist and anti-freedom, just like Cuba is!” Those will probably not be their exact words, but that will be what they really mean.
At any rate, this graph is clearly misleading in a number of ways. First of all, “life expectancy” isn’t nearly as important as things like Freedom and Liberty. Sure, America pays more than 10 times what Cuba pays per capita, and sure people in both countries live to be about the same age on average (77 years), but here we have LIBERTY, and in Cuba they do not. So that makes it all ok.
Plus, this graph doesn’t take into account the fact that everyone in the world is jealous of us. I don’t really know what that means, or how it can be proven or measured. But every time the topic of health care in foreign countries comes up, Rush Limbaugh makes sure to say that other countries are jealous of our system. Therefore, I know that it must be both true and relevant.
In the end, it’s clear that “life expectancy” is one of those wishy-washy, ambiguous, touchy-feely outcome measurements that doesn’t really matter. What really matters is FREEDOM, not life expectancy, and when you put FREEDOM on a graph, you can see that America is BEST!
Anyone who says any differently is just giving you liberal bias….
It is time to address the shady and deeply suspicious connections between the radical anti-Amercian liberal movement, and children.
You should find it deeply disturbing that liberals have so consistently tried to push legislation that would specifically help children. Consider the following:
Liberals, under the tyrannical leadership of Michelle Obama, have been trying to exert an unholy control over children’s diets in order to reduce obesity and get children to be healthier.
Liberals are constantly trying to force reductions in student loan payments down the throats of poor, innocent banks, for no reason other than to make life more affordable for students.
President Obama’s proposed 2010 budget included millions of dollars for a “Children’s Savings Account” program, that would give the children of lazy poor people free money just so those children could get a head start in paying to for their educations.
And now, in the above graph: Obama’s Socialist Healthcare is obviously designed to specifically benefit children the most.
The pattern is so consistent, one has to ask: what is their real purpose here?
Why would liberals be so focused on helping children? It’s very counter-intuitive, since children can’t vote. Clearly something dark and under-handed is afoot.
Could it be that liberals are targeting children in order to indoctrinate them early into their godless, communist, anti-freedom ways?
Could it be that it is part of a plot to turn more children homosexual by making their lives easier? (Don’t laugh! It’s a real connection: making life easier means you have to work less hard, which makes you a sissy and therefore homosexual. Simple logic!)
Could this all just be a preamble to a secret upcoming liberal plot to lower the voting age to 12?
It is frightening to think of all of the possibilities. We must obviously oppose, in every way possible, the Liberal Agenda to help children.