Financial investors have a liberal bias!

Obamacare investment funds have a liberal bias.

Everybody knows that Obamacare must be repealed, and will be repealed. Either Rand Paul will veto it when he’s elected President in 2016, or Michelle Bachmann will strike it down with her sword of Christian righteousness, or Ronald Reagan will miraculously rise from the dead and pronounce it unconstitutional. But one way or another, Obamacare will be repealed!

So how come this stupid graph shows that investors are overwhelmingly betting their money on the idea that Obamacare will not only stay the law of the land, but will be a success?

From the article in Business Week:

A new online broker, Motif Investing, is offering Obamacare’s friends and foes alike a chance to put their money where their mouth is… “A lot of people think conceptually about investing,” [co-founder Hardeep Walia] says. “We take ideas and translate them to what we call a ‘motif’—an intelligently weighted basket of up to 30 stocks, built around an idea that people can understand.” […]

Two of the hottest motifs right now are Obamacare and repeal Obamacare, Walia says. They represent, respectively, the idea that the law will succeed and that it will fail. The Obamacare motif is made up of hospitals, generic-drug makers, pharmacy-benefit managers, and companies specializing in electronic medical records, all of which stand to gain from the Affordable Care Act’s emphasis on cost control and its guarantee of payment. […]

Repeal Obamacare is composed of companies that would benefit from the law’s demise, mainly medical device manufacturers, which the ACA saddles with a 2.3 percent excise tax; assisted-living and home health-care providers, which will suffer from reduced Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates; and medical diagnostics equipment and services providers, which may encounter reduced demand as a result of the law’s efforts to curb unnecessary testing.

The Obamacare motif is up 46.9 percent in the past year, doubling the performance of the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index (up 22.8 percent). The repeal Obamacare motif has risen just 13.8 percent in the past year.

What’s most striking isn’t the performance of the two funds, but where investors are choosing to place their money. “We don’t have convictions or views on the law itself,” says Walia. “We give you both sides of the equation.” But one is clearly more popular: He says Motif investors have bet 45 times more money on Obamacare’s success than on its failure.


As a conservative, I used to think that investors were always smart and perfect and the only people that really matter in the economy. But NO MORE!!

Obviously, if these stupid, dopey, nasty, poo-poo head investors are betting that Obamacare will succeed, it can only mean one thing: they have LIBERAL BIAS!!!!!


5 graphs that Teaparty conservatives will LOVE, proving Obama has destroyed everything!

Income gap soars under Obama

We present to you 5 graphs that conclusively prove, visually and beyond a doubt, that Obama has pretty much destroyed everything and failed America. How can graphs lie?

The inspiration for this list has been passed around by conservatives and Tea Party Republicans for the last several days. It shows that income inequality was flat under Bush, but grew under Obama and Clinton. It is graph number 1.

1. Income gap soars under Obama!

Income gap soars under Obama
NOTE: This graph was NOT created by us as a parody. This graph was actually created by conservatives to “prove” that the income gap has soared under Obama.

Now, before we get to our list, you need to look really hard at this graph. Take it in. Appreciate the fullness of its beauty and meaning.  Now that you have done that, you will also be able to appreciate the following graphs… all of which absolutely prove that Obama is a failed President in every possible way.

2. Stock markets stagnate under liberals!

The stock market just SOARED during Bush’s terms in office. By contrast, once you account for the after-effects of H.W. Bush that were impacting the beginning of Clinton’s term and the natural “rebound” from recession after W. Bush’s term, the increases in the stock market during Clinton and Obama were just pathetic!  Look at these trend lines:

Stock Market under Obama failed president

3. Obama has completely exploded unemployment!

We actually published a version of this graph before, but clearly in that version we simply had not drawn the correct trend lines. Here, we have added good, conservative trend lines to counteract any liberal bias!

You should also note that we have re-classified a teeny tiny portion of 2008 as blue instead of red, putting it under “Obama”. This is because Once Obama took office, he obviously retroactively became responsible for the entire unemployment rate. Plus, Sean Hannity has postulated that the unemployment rate skyrocketed pre-emptively because employers were scared that Obama might become president. Which seems completely plausible.

Unemployment under liberals

4. Obama has completely exploded the deficit!

This is one of the MOST well-known facts about Obama: he has exploded the deficit completely! This graph proves it. As you can see, Carter and Reagan/Bush kept the deficit pretty much flat during their terms. Clinton and W. Bush both decreased the deficit slightly. But WHOAH OMG can you see that trend line we drew for Obama!!??  It just goes up and up!

Now, some of you might think we took some liberties with that trend line. For one thing, we sort of started it in 2007, but everyone knows that this is because of the pre-emptive problems caused by Obama. Some say it might even have been the influence of his time machine (the same one he used to go back in time to plant fake birth certificates in Hawaii). But either way, what matters is that trend line that we drew: LOOK AT IT! Disgusting, huh?

Deficits under liberals what a failure Obama sucks

5. Attacks on diplomatic targets reach unprecedented heights under Obama!

Of course, we can’t forget about Benghazi! This graph shows that the number of attacks on diplomatic targets has just completely gotten out of control under Obama. Obviously something is very wrong. Obama is projecting an image of weakness which explains why that attacks have INCREASED SO MUCH during his presidency. Just look at these trendlines!

In fact, you better only look at the trend lines with this one. The graph isn’t much help, because it doesn’t truly illustrate the conservative philosophy of the real importance of Benghazi. We have added our own annotation to the graph for this… but really, just look at the trendline arrow. Isn’t it awful???

Benghazi disaster emphasizes US diplomatic attacks and Obama failure

So, clearly you can see what we mean. All it takes is a few well-drawn trend-lines, and the conservative message becomes crystal clear!

This graph DARES to suggest that “trickle-down” doesn’t work!

Profits, Wages and the Stock Market

Profits, Wages and the Stock Market

Ronald Reagan was an advocate of trickle-down economics. Ronald Reagan was perfect in every way. Therefore, this graph is wrong.  That’s just logic.

For those of you who don’t know, “trickle-down economics” is the very sensible conservative view that the most important thing in the economy is rich people.  When rich people do well, they buy stuff that you make and hire you to fix their boats and airplanes and take away their garbage.  In other words, everyone is happy, because you should thankful to even be employed at all, you lazy bum.

Ronald Reagen did not invent trickle-down economics. In fact, as a theory it has been around since at least the 1890’s, when it was called the “horse and sparrow theory” of economics. The idea is that if you feed a horse enough oats, it will eventually shit them out onto the road, and then the sparrows will be able to eat the oats from the road.

The Reagan administration wisely decided to use the term “supply-side economics”. It is basically the same concept.  However, they rarely, if ever, mentioned sparrows eating horse shit in their economic discussions.

At any rate, the point is that when rich people are better off, they make everyone better off. When the horse eats more oats, the sparrows get more oats. That’s a core bedrock principle of conservative economics.

Yet somehow, inexplicably, the above graph seems to indicate otherwise.  In this graph, you can see that the horses have been eating more and more oats over the last four years: corporate profits and stock value are going up and up and up.  Yet somehow, the sparrows are not getting more oats: the earnings of workers are staying about the same.

Where are your oats, Liberal Graph?

As conservatives, we take as axiomatic that trickle-down theory must be correct; therefore, the only possible conclusion is that this graph is just wrong.

Yet another case of numbers and statistics having liberal bias!!!


graph data source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
graph found via: The Huffington Post

S&P 500 stock market index has a liberal bias!

No recovery!!!

No recovery!!!

Obama is terrible for business. We have unskewed the above graph of the S&P 500 stock market index in order to make sure that you understand this fact.

The stock market has been blatantly and flagrantly contradicting our “there is no economic recovery” and “Obama is bad for businesses” message, and on behalf of conservative radio and television commentators everywhere, we here at have to say: we’re OVER IT.

It was less than a week ago, for example, that Sean Hannity had the usual pair of guests on his radio show: a timid and meek liberal and a loud and abrasive conservative (heck yeah!). The timid and meek liberal dared to talk about the fact that the Dow Jones has skyrocketed under Obama, so of course the loud and abrasive conservative interrupted and said:


(Yes, even on the radio you could tell he was speaking in all caps.)

Well, apparently this conservative radio guest was not aware that the S&P500 is also in on the conspiracy.

On the remote chance that some of Sean Hannity’s want to look up a graph of the S&P 500, we are providing the above graph as CONFIRMING EVIDENCE that there is no recovery under the Obama administration.  As you can see, in our unskewed graph, the stock market has remained completely flat during the Obama presidency.

Take that, Obama.


original graph source: Business Insider

Liberal statistics predict no effect of tax hikes on the stock market

Taxes Versus Stocks.

Everyone knows that the tax hikes always completely destroy the economy. Yet somehow, these statistics show that there is no historical relationship between tax hikes or cuts, and changes in the stock market.

Anyone who uses good conservative common sense knows what to expect of the stock market when the government fiddles with taxes. We have heard the argument hundreds of times, on Fox News and our favorite radio talk shows. When the government raises taxes, rich investors panic and freak out and get mad and start selling everything in a huge panic, because they are dainty delicate little flowers. This causes markets to crash.

By contrast, when the government cuts taxes, investors use all of their extra money to invest in American companies, which causes the stock market to go up.

The logic is completely irrefutable. This is one of the biggest arguments for making sure that we don’t go over the fiscal cliff of 2012: allowing taxes to go up will make the stock market collapse.

BUT GIVEN ALL OF THAT… why are the above statistics completely contradicting this air-tight conservative reasoning?

Of the 15 times that taxes were cut since 1927, the stock market increased twice as many times as it decreased; however, weirdly, of the 12 times that taxes were increased, the stock market increased three times as often as it decreased!

There is a similar story with capital gains taxes: there is no clear relationship between increases or decreases in capital gains taxes and the stock market, except that maybe the stock market has increased even more often when taxes were increased than when they were cut!


Of course, there are some who suggest that the effect of taxes on the stock market is so small that is doesn’t really matter. These people suggest that no matter how good or bad the “logic” is, the simple fact is that other factors matter a lot more to the stock market than tax rates. Some even go so far as to say that people who base their investment decisions on their tax rate are obviously not very good at making investment decisions to begin with.

But we obviously disagree.

Clearly, all investors care only about their tax rates and nothing else, and increasing taxes will always completely tank the stock market, and if these so-called “statistics” seem to contradict this, then it is only because they have become infected with the liberal bias!!!!!


table data source: Fischer Investments Research
table found via:

Will the stock market re-elect Obama?

 Landslide Elections and the Stock Market.

Robert Prechter, the head of the Socionomics Institute, recently published a paper with some very distressing statistics that may just predict the end of the world as we know it, a.k.a. the re-election of President Obama. According to his study, a booming stock market usually leads to a landslide re-election. And as we have already reported, our liberally biased stock market is booming right now, despite the evil incompetence of our foreign socialist President.

After extensive statistical analysis, using a number of different methodologies, Prechter and his colleagues found one conclusion that consistently showed up when looking at re-elections going back all the way to the very beginning of the United States as a country: the margin of victory of an incumbent facing reelection is positively related to the percent change in the stock market over the prior three years before the election.  As a result, the elections that were held after the largest three-year increases in the stock market lead to landslide re-elections of the incumbent, while elections that were held after the largest three-year decreases in the stock market lead to landslide ousters of the incumbent and election of the challenger.

This statistical result is surprisingly robust, with the same pattern showing up over the entire history of the country and even when special efforts are made to remove other possible factors, such as the GDP and employment.

If we take this statistical pattern seriously, it spells big trouble for the upcoming election. Even though President Obama is a Kenyan Muslim socialist who plays basketball and hates successful people, the fact remains that from November 1, 2009 to September 28, 2012 the Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen by 50%.

Does this really mean Obama is destined to win?  And possibly in a landslide victory?

Or is it just one more example of statistics and numbers exhibiting a disgusting liberal bias????

We report, you decide.


graph source: “Social Mood, Stock Market Performance and U.S. Presidential Elections: A Socionomic Perspective on Voting Results” by Robert R. Prechter Jr., Deepak Goel, Wayne D. Parker, and Matthew Lampert.
graph found via: Social Science Research Network

Stock growth has a liberal bias!

Liberal Stock Growth

This graph provides further proof that the stock market is steeped–STEEPED–in liberal bias.

The average annualized return on $10,000 invested in the S&P Market has been 8.9% under Democrats, and 4.7% under Republicans… that’s if you exclude Hoover. With Hoover, the difference is even worse. This suggests that investing under Democrats (who are bad for business) would give you a greater return on your investment than investing under Republicans (who are good for business).

This makes no sense. Obviously, the Liberal Stock Market suffers from liberal bias!!!

Source: Bloomberg Financial Markets
Via: NY Times

The stock market has a liberal bias!

Liberal stock market

Like all liberals, Obama has been crushing business and making it impossible for capitalism to thrive.

So how is it possible that the stock market has been continuously growing since Obama took office?

Something is clearly not right here. This so-called “statistic” , the stock market, seems to be one of those elite “facts” that is really nothing more than liberal bias!!!!


Source: Stock Exchange, NASDAQ 100 Index, 12/1/2011
: CNBC Realtime Quotes