Mr. Obama, maybe folks are mad because you’re a liar

Dear Mr. Obama,

Congratulations on getting 7.1 million people enrolled in Obamacare before the March 31st deadline!

Not to muddy the festivities by harping on technicalities, but I thought I’d pass along just a few corrections, in case you plan on giving anymore speeches or anything:

Alright, by ‘March 31st’ you mean ‘sometime in April,’ and by ‘deadline’ you mean ‘suggestion which is subject to change.’

And, obviously, by ‘enrolled’ you mean ‘people who have filled some information out on a website.’

And by ‘7.1 million’ you mean ‘probably like 858 thousand or something.’ 

In your speech on Tuesday, when you said that Obamacare is ‘the law’ and ‘it’s here to stay,’ you really meant that Obamacare is ‘a fluid and constantly adjusted set of unconstitutional decrees, which can be imposed or withdrawn by the Executive Branch at any point, for any reason, up to 21 times and counting.’ And by ‘here to stay,’ you actually meant to say that ‘most of it is neither here nor staying, because you don’t want America to feel the full brunt of it until after the midterm elections.’

You claimed that ‘more than 3 million young adults have gained insurance’ by staying on their parents’ plan. Even if that were true, it seems to take for granted that there’s anything remotely positive about the government forcing insurance companies to treat 25-year-old men and women like children. But, more importantly, it isn’t.

Indeed, when you said ‘more than 3 million,’ you really meant ‘extrapolations based on faulty estimates conjured up by Health and Human Services almost two years ago have brought us to the dubious conclusion that we can claim 3 million, because nobody will understand how we arrived at that figure, and most everyone will be too lazy to even attempt to check our numbers.’

You appeared to venture into the vicinity of truth when you stated that Obamacare is ‘doing what it’s supposed to do,‘ but then you forgot to stipulate what, precisely, that happens to be.

It has not, nor was it meant to, make insurance cheaper and more accessible — but it has stripped away choice and freedom, and made more people dependent on the government.

It has forced single men and elderly couples and nuns to pay for maternity care and birth control. Likewise, it has compelled everyone to purchase coverage for psychiatric illness and drug addiction treatment, even if we aren’t necessarily psychiatrically ill or addicted to drugs (though, with your help, the pharmaceutical industry will soon get us all under one or both of those umbrellas).

And, while you spiked the football in the Rose Garden, you still failed to indicate how many people have purchased and paid for a plan, as opposed to just checking some boxes. And you forgot to tell us how many of the Obamacare ‘enrollees’ were only inclined to enroll in Obamacare because your law forced them off of their original plans.

You celebrated a ‘law’ that will supposedly ‘insure the uninsurable,’ even though most of the people now insured by Obamacare aren’t actually yet insured, but they were insured before Obamacare made them uninsured under their original insurance.

Of course, this is all after you famously told us we can ‘keep our plans’ if we ‘like them,’ while omitting that by ‘keep’ you meant ‘watch as it is demolished in front of our eyes,’ and when you said ‘like’ you didn’t include the disclaimer that we’d all be legally obligated to adjust our affections in the direction of the type of plan you think we should like.

Whew. My head is spinning.

You’re a slippery one, Mr. Obama.

I feel like I’m beginning to learn your language, although I haven’t deciphered the entire code. I do know that, essentially, when you say a certain thing, what you really mean is anything but the thing you just said.

Honestly, I’m starting to think that you’re doing this on purpose.

I’m starting to think that you’re… lying.

You’re a liar.

Yes, that explains it. You’re either enormously inaccurate and oblivious in ways that just so happen to suit your political goals, or you’re a scheming, conniving liar.

I’m going with the latter. You lie. That’s all you do. You’re a liar.

I know, in this day and age of ‘civil discourse,’ we aren’t allowed use words like ‘liar’ anymore. It’s such a harsh and startling term. It upsets people. It makes them sad. It makes them feel all icky inside. But, Lord forgive me, I’d rather call a spade a spade and a liar a liar — as opposed to your strategy, which is to call a spade a tortoise, or an apple, or a three toed sloth, or anything but a spade.

I would label you pathological — as deception seems to drip like putrid sewage from every single word and phrase that escapes your lips — but I know your lies are calculated, not compulsive. You can’t be a pathological liar for the same reason that an effective diamond thief can’t be a kleptomaniac. Your lie, like his heist, requires careful planning and plotting. You’re very aware of the truth, which is what makes you so adept at avoiding it.

Still, I’d like to, for your sake, take you seriously on one count.

In your speech, you said this:

“I’ve got to admit, I don’t get it.  Why are folks working so hard for people not to have health insurance?  Why are they so mad about the idea of folks having health insurance?” 

Why are folks mad at you? Well, as you’ve pointed out in the past, it’s probably because you’re black.

Yeah, that’s gotta be part of it. I’m sure cancer patients would be excited about having their plans abolished and their out-of-pocket expenses skyrocket, if only it had come at the hands of a white dude.

But, beneath the racism, maybe there’s something deeper going on.

Maybe, Mr. Obama, we’re all just tired of the lies.

Maybe we’re mad because you used the IRS against your political opponents, and lied about it. And you spied on everyone’s phone records (after specifically condemning that sort of practice), and lied about it. And you sent your Justice Department after journalists and whistleblowers, and lied about it. And you funneled weapons to drug cartels and terrorists, and lied about it. And you assassinated American citizens and drone bombed hundreds of innocent civilians, and lied about it. And you filled your administration with lobbyists, and lied about it. And you armed a terrorist insurrection in Libya, then orchestrated a cover-up once the terrorists murdered our ambassador, and lied about it. And, in general — whether it’s wiretapping, or Guantanamo, or deficit spending, or Obamacare, or whatever else — we’ve seen you do everything you said you wouldn’t, and little of what you said you would.

We’ve heard you lie. Over. And over. And over. And over again.

Maybe that’s why folks are so mad.

Maybe you’re a liar, and we know it.

And so do you.

I hope this helps clear up your confusion.


Matt Walsh


Find me on Facebook.

Find me on Twitter.






This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

877 Responses to Mr. Obama, maybe folks are mad because you’re a liar

  1. Pingback: » April 5, 2014

  2. What I don’t understand is that people who don’t have insurance will be fined if they don’t sign up for Obamacare. Socialism or communism…? This isn’t “freedom”. He has lied about everything.
    Your letter was excellent, thank you.

    • kathy says:

      Does it also bother you that all people who drive cars are required to have insurance?

      • becky says:

        No, it doesn’t. When people get behind the wheel, there is a potential for them to hurt others and/or their property. Making people have carry insurance is safeguarding against that. Not having health insurance had nothing whatsoever to do with anyone but yourself. It should be your own choice if you want health insurance or not.

        • David Armor says:

          In a society where we guarantee the infirm will be given treatment and not left to die, the same negative externality is placed on others under these circumstances. When an uninsured 24-year-old skateboards through twelve sheets of glass, it is the property of you and I that will fund his cure if he is uninsured, whether you like it or not. As such, this law forces the 24-year-old to internalize the costs of his own recklessness by paying ahead of time an insurance premium to cover his own troubles.

      • Boffo97 says:

        The big difference? If you’re absolutely opposed to car insurance, you have the option of not having a car.

        There is no way to avoid this health insurance requirement.

      • Katherine says:

        You’re only required to have liability insurance – to cover person(s) you may injure, property you may damage. You are NOT required to have comprehensive insurance.that pays for your own injury or damage to your own property.

        • Scott C says:

          Comprehensive insurance has nothing to Do with your Own Injury…Zippo….it is for Losses Unrelated to Collisions like Fire, Windstorm and the like to your Car….and IF you have a Loan on that Car You Are Required to have it….just to be fair.

          Great article Matt!

      • Not all people are required to purchase cars or have insurance on cars. You can walk, you can ride a bike, you can take public transportation. All people must however breathe air and breathing air is not optional and all who breathe are are “required” to comply. The car argument is old and stupid, I know plenty of people who don’t have cars.

        • How about going to ER. By law ER doctors have to treat you whether you can afford or not. If you don’t have issuance, the bill will be paid by other people who have issuance. So you are taking advantages of those people (Their issuance premiums keep going up).

      • martin says:

        Yes. Seriously, what did we do before the nanny state? We thrived and built the most prosperous and powerful nation in history.

        Period. End of argument. Get the government out of our lives.

      • Aric Payne says:

        Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe car insurance is controlled by individual state governments, and not the federal government “forcing” people to have it. The federal government wasn’t created to control what individual states do, but has done so with health insurance…

    • Katherine says:

      Because Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rewrote the law to make the penalty a TAX.

    • Katherine says:

      Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rewrote the law to make the penalty a TAX. Obamacare WILL lead to socialized medicine which works NOWHERE.

      • Kevin says:

        Except in every 1st world nation on earth.

        • Scott C says:

          Name one and please have some facts to go along with it?

        • Tony says:

          It was working pretty well in Germany for a bunch of years, a vast majority of their population worked even though they didn’t have to because they had pride in their country. In recent years however, they’ve had more an more people taking advantage of the system and now they are starting to have issues. It’s a great country to look at as an example of the golden example of what a nanny state could accomplish, and what actually happens when it’s implemented. But at least Germany did have a few good years with it.

      • Don says:

        The supreme court does not rewrite law, it analyzes the issues and renders a judgement as to how the law is to be applied as written based on the Constitution. The SCOTUS does not write law but sets precendents based on their decisions.

    • RJH says:

      No, I don’t think he’s lied about “everything” c’mon. What else? BTW: President John Adams signed a bill into law that mandated that sailors (seamen) serving on ships purchase health insurance. Yes, that’s right. you can read the fact check here: Being one of our founding fathers, what does that say about our founding fathers, and the way they thought? Tea Partiers? If Adams, why not Obama?

  3. Elise says:

    Cue the accusations of racism because you said “spade.”
    Because, naturally, it’s NOT racist to presume that the word, used to mean… you know… what it actually means, in other contexts, is being used in a racist context simply because you happen to be talking about a person who happens to be black.

  4. Thanks for this great post Matt! Funny how the victims of the ACA are the ones being dragged through the mud and called liars on the Senate floor 😉

    Our family’s ACA nightmare is featured in a new ad by Americans For Prosperity, and I receive dozens of hateful messages from lefties, every single day. Not one of them knows my story… But each one calls me a liar (sometimes liar, is the nicest thing they call me!). Just because I dare speak ill of this monsterous 15,000+ page juggernaut called the ACA…

    I’m going to start sending all of the haters this link 😉 I think they’ll find it a good read! Ha!

    • RJH says:

      So far, I’ve only seen the AFP ads fact-checked as untrue? Am I missing something? Please elaborate on which ad is true. I must have missed that needle in a haystack. really, please do.

  5. Excellelent post. Not surprised that someone would read racism into a term that has been around for years just because the Pres. happens to be 1/2 black. I prefer to call a half a spade a half a spade, ok?

  6. John Jerome Wuthnow says:

    Mr. Walsh: Found your April 2nd post witty, biting, and lucid. Please honor me by checking out my Obama parody on youtube titled ” fibbing puppet “. Pass it on to other lovers of liberty if you think it funny. John Jerome Wuthnow

  7. James says:

    Obummer, how Many more lavish vacations do you and your wife and all of your extended non American folks plan on taking at the expense of the American people just because you can?

  8. Noel Petit says:

    And by government estimates there were 44 million Americans without health coverage (this is not insurance, it is a program to spread the cost of health care). How does signing up 20% of those required to enroll count as a victory?

    • Kevin says:

      Here’s a nifty idea, how about you conservatives come up with something to insure those who can’t afford health insurance, something other than “just die”. Mind you, some of you don’t have insurance yourselves.

      • J says:

        Open up the state borders for insurance companies. If I can get cheaper insurance in CA when I’m in OH, it will force insurance companies to lower their rates, making it more affordable to the uninsured. Just one alternative.

        • RJH says:

          And when customers from one state get into a disagreement with their insurance company based in another state, how is that resolved? The insured’s state board of insurance wouldn’t have any jurisdiction. I can see that insurance companies would all flock to the state with the lowest set of consumer protections. Obama has said that he would seriously consider that, if there was a set of national, basic consumer protections in place. BTW: the CBO has said it would only lower the cost of care in the U.S. at most by 2-3 % or something like that.

      • Tony says:

        “Mind you, some of you don’t have insurance yourselves.”

        Yeah, back in the glory days when we were free to not buy something. I miss those days.

        Oh right you asked for an alternative:

        Just as a heads up, CNN and MSNBC don’t report on things that make liberals look bad, might want to spice up your news sources.

      • Don says:

        I have an idea Kevin, let individuals decide what coverage they need and stop forcing me, who cannot and does not want children to pay for something that I don’t want or need?

  9. I find your Obama hate… disturbing.

    Some of the things Obama has “lied” about might have been sincere promises at the time, but were simply found to be impossible to fulfill when he actually got into office or when the ball started rolling. It happens all the time, so why are you choosing to write about Obama like he’s the antichrist?

    I’d like to think you aren’t a liberal hater or a racist, but your speech just sort of leans that way, even if that’s not what you intended. I, personally, don’t understand why you hate someone who’s actually trying to, wait, “HELP PEOPLE.”

    He’s not trying to make himself rich (Republicans), or step on the poor (Republicans), or insist that everyone who is toeing the poverty line is doing so because they’re just lazy idiots (Republicans), he’s actively trying to help people. And now, 7.1 million people who didn’t have healthcare now have it. Yes, some people’s policies probably have changed, but based off of what I’ve read, it’ll change for the better for MOST people.

    You sound like the Kentuckians. The Affordable Care Act has lowered their uninsured rate by a whopping 47%, yet 49% of the state still wants the law thrown out. Obamacare is HELPING them, has literally given them options for healthcare that a great deal of them didn’t have, but they are STILL insisting on shooting themselves in the foot and for what? To proudly stand up and say that they CHOSE to be uninsured instead of forced to get something that helps them in both the short and long run?


    That’s American pride and arrogance at its finest. No wonder other countries despise us.

    Obama is not perfect, I’m not his biggest fan, but seriously, there are worst people out there to demonize. And another thing: You can’t keep saying you’re a Christian while sprouting hate against liberals, gays and Obama. You’re starting to make us look bad.

    There’s actually a ton of great reasons to vote liberal as a Christian, even if you don’t agree with a great many things that they do. Same for voting Republican: It’s all based on everyone’s individual understanding of the scriptures. But there’s no way, NO WAY, you can minister to gay people if you hate them. The Bible says that a brother offended is harder to be won than a city strong city. Needless to say, your posts are offensive.

    These people are DECEIVED, but the Lord still loves them as much as he loves you or anyone. Until the day they take their last breaths, Christ still has a chance to change their hearts and he is MORE than able. That’s why he told us to love, not to judge. Our love is what will draw people to Him, not hate and shame. Does that mean we condone what they do? No, but don’t make them hate Christians because of YOUR actions, your words. After all, did not Christ dine with and eat with those that the scribes despised?

    You write several posts about how tough and not-nice Jesus is, but you don’t put much emphasis on how MERCIFUL He is, especially to those who didn’t deserve it INCLUDING you and I. His mercy and His love FAR outweighs his anger.

    As for despising our president, if you hate him because you think he’s a liar, STOP looking at the news. Stop looking at movies, stop watching CNN and FOXX, stop reading ANYTHING (after all, how do you know what they’re saying is actually true?), most of all, stop respecting yourself.

    Because we all lie. Whether they are small or big, we lie.

    I challenge you to do this: Name one thing Obama has done that every other president before him HASN’T done (doesn’t make it right, but at least then when you write posts in this vein they’ll look like this: “Obama, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Reagan… etc are LIARS”). As a matter of fact, pick something worse that Obama has done. Because as far as I’m concerned, there’s nothing worse than owning slaves. That knocks out like the first five presidents.

    And don’t forget: Theodore Roosevelt was reviled for the New Deal which includes many of the social programs we have today. Now, years later people with sense appreciate them. It’ll be the same with the Affordable Care Act. They’ll hate it now, but years down the road when they can afford to go to the Dentist and have their teeth fixed (pain in your mouth causes EXCRUCIATING pain), a parent can go and get glasses for their kid because hey, they can afford it (as someone who’s needed glasses from a very young age, the importance of this can’t be overlooked), or they can actually get regular checkups instead of suffering at home in silence, they’ll look back and think, “Why the heck did people react so badly?”

    One last thing before I’m done: You have a very popular blog here. A very popular one. By your own admission your blog is getting hits in the millions. At this point, you can be considered a teacher because of the sheer amount of people you reach. I’m sure you’re aware of what the Bible says about teachers, that their judgment will be stricter because of their ability to impart information to the masses aka God’s sheep.

    You have a lot of sheep and I mean the word “sheep” in all that it implies.

    I just want to caution you. Be careful of what you write, be careful how you feed the sheep. You may be called to account for the words that you type.

    That’s all.

    • That guy says:

      I don’t believe Matt has ever spouted hate against anyone. He has spouted severe and scathing criticisms of numerous people and policies, but I wouldn’t classify that as hate.

      This post was about Obama and his signature law Obamacare. You can’t claim that he didn’t know what he was doing or talking about when he made promises regarding Obamacare. He promised over and over in numerous publicly documented events that people could keep their doctor and their health plan if they liked. It has since been proven, that’s absolutely proven, that Obama and many of the people in the know for Obamacare knew ahead of time that this was absolutely impossible. They knew it, and they still chose to lie about it.

      Regarding the unconstitutional law itself, it may be helping some people but I guarantee you that it’s hurting more people. Look here’s the link to one of Matt’s blogs from later last year with many stories of what Obamacare has done: Matt Walsh didn’t write those letters to himself, there’s too many and it wouldn’t be cost effective for the time he would have had to spend writing each and every story versus the blog hits he would get. Even if he did write every single letter featured there, I know other people in my own life who have been very negatively impacted by Obamacare. The intent was not to help people. You don’t help people by forcing them to buy into your system or face severe monetary penalties. You don’t help people by treating 25 year old adults like children.

      As for past presidents I would put up George W. Bush’s record against Obama’s. Bush made some terrible decisions as president. He put No Child Left Behind into place, he bungled the Katrina disaster and he got us involved in Iraq searching for weapons of mass destruction (although this was based on faulty intelligence and not entirely Bush’s fault) among other things. Under Obama our national debt has shot through the roof, we’ve become militarily involved in more foreign nations like Syria and Lebanon, No Child Left Behind was replaced with the even worse Common Core curriculum, republicans and democrats have become so divided that it’s virtually impossible for them to get anything done and Obamacare has negatively impacted lives directly with it’s absurd pricing and indirectly impacted lives with it’s forced mandate of complete birth control coverage. The Hobby Lobby debate was a direct result of Obamacare. Without Obamacare, Hobby Lobby would have kept paying for all the other forms of birth control they DO support and they wouldn’t be filing for religious exemption. At the very least, Bush never stood in front of the American people and blamed all his administrations problems on Clinton. Finally, Obama has ordered the execution of American citizens. No other president before him has done so. Andrew Jackson killed a man in a duel, but that was an agreed upon situation in which both parties knew that one of them would almost certainly die.

      • How do you classify something as hate? I base it off of pointed and deliberate posts condemning a person or a group of people over and over while painting them as a cross between Judas and Satan.

        See? Hate. But okay, let’s call it “severe and scathing criticism.”

        Now, for your comments. You said it’s absolutely proven that he knew, but where are your sources? I’m almost afraid to see them because if it’s the “nutcases” *cough*, I mean “news people” then I’m not inclined to believe their sensationalism anyway. I’ve lost so much respect for those who are SUPPOSED to be reporting the truth that it’s hard for me to believe anything they say.

        Now, since Matt is incredible biased against Obama and his healthcare act, I wouldn’t normally believe anything he says either. BUT let’s assume that all of that is true. Did you truly expect there to be no collateral damage rolling out a law like this? Name one law that’s been passed in which SOMEONE hasn’t gotten the short end of the stick. Is it right? No. Is it fair? No. But it happens. It’s called life.

        Now, measure those people who have, regretfully, gotten shafted to those who have been blessed by the law. Which group has more people? If say, 1,000 people were negatively impacted by the law, but say, 5,000 people were positively impacted, you would justify pulling the law for 1,000 people? What about the other 5,000? Do we ignore them? No, but you seem to have done that.

        Newsflash, anything that passes into law forces people to do something. If you’re going to complain about the healthcare law, complain about speed limits, seat belts, laws regarding theft, murder, and etc. They’re ALL forcing someone TO do, or NOT to do something. So, essentially, we’re treated like 25 year olds in all aspects of our lives. Heck, look at the issue of permits. The government is basically making YOU pay to put something on YOUR land.

        Complain about that too.

        As for your last point, that’s so biased and convoluted that I’m not even going to address it. If you’re going to sit in your chair, in your office or room and tell me that the younger Bush was a better president than Obama, then I have no business even answering your response.

        As far as I’m concerned, you’re beyond reason. No, but seriously. This goes beyond Obama’s supposed lies. You too, like many I’ve talked to, have some serious underlying prejudice. It might be unconscious but it’s there. Because no one in their right mind would compare Bush to Obama and then insist that Bush was a bigger man when stepping into office for not blaming things on Clinton (although Clinton, relatively speaking, was a fine president and left us with a financial SURPLUS… which Bush summarily destroyed in his time in office) while condemning Obama for consistently reminding the Americans people that he didn’t make the mess, he was just trying to clean it up.

        And Obama has ordered the execution of American citizens. So? Americans don’t deserve to die? Just because they were born on this piece of land, they are exempt from punishment for their actions? But no, I guess it’s better to force a human being to live in hell as a slave right?

        I really, really don’t understand the Obama hate. If you didn’t hate Bush or the numerous presidents before who screwed us over, then no one has any business hating Obama. What it is is there’s something wrong there, something more is behind this. Like I said before, it may be unconscious and not the person you want to be but it’s there.

        • That guy says:

          Okay, here’s a well-sourced list of Obama lies:

          Here’s a video interview where Obama admits that people will not be able to keep their doctors:

          One of the biggest problems I have with Obamacare is the unconstitutional, literally so, tax, that Obamacare forces on people who don’t sign up. It doesn’t matter if people can’t afford to pay the plans Obamacare lays out for them. If people fall into the gap between the people who can afford the much increased health insurance costs and the supports for low-income workers then they are just screwed.

          Another big problem is that Obama, despite his symbolic act of signing up for his signature act, refuses to lower himself to actually following. He has granted numerous exemptions to himself, his family and his followers. I’m not going to cite a source for this as it’s pretty much common knowledge at this point.

          Here’s a cost analysis of what Obamacare is costing young people (approx. 20-30 years of age) in four different states:

          Here’s something from the Washington Post about how the ‘7 million newly insured’ numbers are completely exaggerated from much lower numbers:

          Something from an award-winning journalist about the Washington Post article:

          Concerning W. Bush vs. Obama, would like something on how Obama has added much more to the American national debt in a shorter time than Bush?

          Do I even need to state that Obama has not only allowed Bush’s Patriot Act to continue NSA spying but increased it as well?

          I’d say that Obama

          And the Americans whose deaths were, in your admission, justified? Yeah, they were assassinated, without due process or any sort of trial, as part of a hit-list that Obama compiled.

          I’d say Obama and his administration deserve any and all scathing criticism (call it hate if you must) directed at them. The previous presidents were not saints by any measure of the word, but at least they were better than Obama.

        • That guy:

          Okay: Your reply was long but I’ll try to keep this short.

          You mentioned a lot of things like the Affordable Care Act’s tax, the Patriot Act, Obama’s lies etc.

          I encourage you to read the response I sent to Allie in regards to the Affordable Care Act, the Patriot Act and Obama’s lies. As far as Obama basically getting away with murder by killing Americans, you can’t possibly think he simply ordered the hit and that was it? There are so many people in politics waiting to crucify Obama that such an action would be a direct path to impeachment. Common sense would tell you that there was much more to it, things they’re not telling us. Which is not unexpected: They’re not going to tell the American people everything.

          In closing, I’m not trying to get you to like Obama. There are plenty of things Obama has done that I don’t like. But the hatred and criticism toward him from a Christian (Matt) at this level is unwarranted, especially when no one REALLY knows what’s going on in our government or with our finances or even how the Obamacare will do us in the future. We only know what we know through the news which are, in their most complicated forms, biased second and third hand sources whose only care is to make a buck.

          Obama hasn’t ordered mass killings, he hasn’t tried to oppress the poor, he just passed a healthcare bill that he hoped would help people. That’s all. He might not have done it the way you wanted it, but I think people would at least be able to appreciate what he’s TRYING to do.

          All in all, even though I don’t agree with you, I thank you for remaining civil with your comments, I really appreciate it.


        • That Guy says:

          Suffice it to say I disagree with you on a few things regarding Obama and his administration. That being said I too must thank you for the civil discourse. All too often on message boards such as this one, especially this one, comments can descend to the level of name calling from both sides. In your responses to me you have never descended to this level, so I politely and metaphorically extend to you the hand of respect and move on.

        • That guy says:

          Edit: Concerning W. Bush vs. Obama, would like *you* something on how Obama has added much more to the American national debt in a shorter time than Bush?

        • Tony says:


          The point Matt is trying to make is that with so many lies coming from the administration, what the the odds that the ACA is actually put in place to help people?

          I personally find it unlikely with the way it’s built. So far, everything that the “law” (it’s actually a tax code) has done could have, and was, easily predicted by basic economic principles, and it’s highly likely it will continue to progress along those same lines.

          Here’s what the law does:
          1) Makes insurance companies to compete
          2) Makes insurance companies increase the amount of items covered as a minimum
          3) Gives people money to help pay for the insurance if they are in lower income brackets

          It’s obviously much more complicated by about 20,000 pages, but when you break it down to bullet statements, that’s pretty much the gist of the ACA.

          So what’s the effect of those three things? Here you go:

          When companies compete, it drives down prices because it’s one of the ways to gain business, watch any car insurance commercial, it’s basically all they advertise, how much money you’ll save, not what services they actually provide.

          So there’s 1 in the positive column.

          Adding to the minimum coverage is just making the insurance more costly by necessity. If more is being covered by insurance, more money going to have to be paid to cover the costs.

          So there’s 1 in the negative column.

          However for the first two, it’s really just cost adjustments, and it’s unclear what the overall affects on price is going to be, in my opinion the decrease due to competition will offset the increase due to services added and be a net 0 change.

          So the last one, the one that is actually going to have the largest affect, there’s a couple of economic principles that I’ll hopefully quickly explain.

          Supply vs Demand. How much people will buy a product can be plotted on a chart and it basically looks like this: If it costs nothing, everyone will buy it, if it costs 1 billion dollars, nobody will buy it. How much companies will supply a product can also be plotted. If it sells for nothing, nobody will provide it, if it sells for 1 billion, everyone will provide it. So it creates roughly an ‘X’ on a chart and the point where they cross is the equilibrium resting point, which is basically the average price you’ll find that product for on the market.

          So what does #3 do to this chart? Well it adds a bunch of money to the demand side, it’s giving lots of money to people to allow them to purchase health insurance. So how does this affect the demand line? Well it will drive the demand line up, just picture grabbing the demand line and pushing it up the page. As you do this, what happens to the spot that it crosses the supply line? Well it pushes it to the right and up. What does that mean?

          It means the number of people that will have insurance will go up.

          It means that the price that people are getting the product for will go up.

          And both of these things have already happened, 6 million lost insurance, and 7 million have at least created an account and shown that they want insurance, so if we assume that all of them eventually finish the process, that’s a 1 million gain in people covered.

          And there have been many polls and studies done on costs, reading the individual stories of people that have great experiences or horrible ones are a waste of time, not only are they usually outliers, but 1 data point should never be used to judge a market. If you actually look at data taken of market averages, the cost of health insurance has gone up considerably.

          There is just one story, there are many. If you want to get accurate stories, look at ones that go after market averages as reported by insurance companies, look for what the companies say they are charging on average for everyone. Don’t pay attention to individual stories, sure they might be heartbreaking, but they don’t depict what the market is doing at all.

          If you want a historical similarity to see what happens when the government adds money to a market, look at college tuition due to the government deciding that everyone should go to college. Here’s a good article explaining it all:

          Sorry for the length.

        • Thank you for your response and being so civil.

          I personally don’t care if a person dislikes Obama’s law or the way he’s doing things, but the whole point is the excessive nature of Matt’s hate especially from a self professed Christian. My thing is this: You can’t hate Obama this much but respect Bush or Reagan or any other politician. That tells me you have issues about Obama that are not related to politics because ALL politicians lie. They’re all the same. They’re all pretty much terrible (with a few notable exceptions).

          That’s my argument; any other issues regarding the specifics of Obama’s law and someone disliking that is not my concern. Just the HATE is.

          As far as the Affordable Care Act, I think the law needs time as the negative side effects that are occurring is new with any law. Anything that anyone says about the future of this law is speculation at this point because no one knows what’s going to happen. Analysts have been wrong before. Like I’ve said before, some people are hurting, but some are benefiting, but that’s to be expected from a new law.

          It all boils down to this. I have not seen any other posts from Matt lambasting anyone but Obama. His posts are always specifically venomous to our president. So, there’s NO ONE else in our country, in the world who also deserves your scathing regard? No one?

          Sounds personal to me.

          Obama’s president but he’s not the only one running the country, he’s president but the worst thing you can say about him is that he’s a liar? Come on, man. Really? I’m not saying he’s a saint, I’m not saying he’s perfect, I’m saying CALM DOWN.

          That’s all I’m saying in a nut shell. But thank you so much for being so nice. Believe it or not, I can well understand people’s concerns but as I said before, it’s all speculation at this point. Pure sensationalism. New stations and “analysts” are only as good as the people backing them.

          Time, more than anything, will tell how this thing plays out. I think we should allow it that.

      • RJH says:

        It does seem kind of hateful to me. You said, “Regarding the unconstitutional law itself, it may be helping some people but I guarantee you that it’s hurting more people.” Where is objective documentation for that. Has anyone talked to me? My premiums are down $220 a month. deductible down $500. I’m happy. the last time I went out shopping for an individual policy, I almost couldn’t get a policy because of a pre-existing condition. There’s also a lot of stuff you don’t hear too much about in the ACA that I think is good… like comparative effectiveness studies, etc. Again, if there are better ideas for health care reform, what are they? Do you favor single payer system? I applaud the guy for getting the job done despite such resistance from the other party and the right-wing media’s regurgitation of lies (like “death panels”) from the likes of Glenn Beck, Rush, McConnell, et al.

        • That Guy says:


          This right here is a prime example of how Obamacare/ACA is NOT working. In my home state of Illinois health care premiums for people in my age group are up 117%. In 11 states, out of the 46 that the, numbers were available in, health care premiums have increased over 100%. The ACA is Obama’s baby and he’s not taking responsibility for the problems that are inherent in it. He’s going around crowing right now about the 7 million sign ups reached by the deadline which don’t amount to anything at all. Those 7 million sign-ups are just people putting their name on the website, and those numbers are inflated anyways (don’t ask me for a source because I’ve already given one elsewhere on these comment). How many of those 7 million people will actually pay their bills? How many of those 7 million people will actually have the ability to pay their bills? I have numerous problems with the ACA, three big ones being:

          1. The tax on people who DON’T sign up. I get that people don’t want a bunch of freeloaders going into the ER without insurance and forcing their bills on others, but surely there has to be a better way to deal with that than forcing people to pay money when they can’t afford to pay the money for a regular insurance plan. Some people can’t afford to pay $300 a month for insurance, so instead they pay a tax for not having insurance. This doesn’t fix any problems, it’s another unreasonable tax. Anyone remember WHY the Boston Tea Party took place? Unreasonable taxes.

          2. Obama claimed numerous times “if you like your doctor you can keep him and if you like your plan you can keep it”. People in the Obama administration knew that this wasn’t true. They knew it was a flat-out lie. Whether or not Obama himself knew it was a lie I don’t have time to search for proof one way or another right now, but caught on camera in interviews is Obama’s response to people not being able to keep their doctors or plans (look for the video I posted in response to writtininstone). Basically Obama’s reaction is “Oh, that’s too bad. Deal with it.” That’s not what I expect from a President. I expect some sort of compassion or empathy for the common person.

          3. Obama is such a big fan of his own 2,000 page baby that he’s granted official pardons to himself, his family and many of his top aides. This is common knowledge. If he’s so proud of his baby why can’t he use it himself?

          A slightly less irritating point for me is the forced coverage of birth control and maternity leave for everybody. I am That GUY. I am male. I have no need for birth control or maternity leave. I’m not even in a relationship right now. I don’t want to pay for something I don’t need.

          In my own personal opinion, Obama is NOT getting the job done. It seems to me that the ACA has just made a bigger mess of an already messy situation. I can’t offer any alternatives for health care reform. I’m an English teacher. I haven’t studied health care law, insurance law or health care and insurance history, but that’s not my job. I haven’t tried to fix the health care system. I haven’t tried to be President of the US. If I tried I probably would be worse than Obama, but at least I would try to be forthright and honest about what I was doing. In my own opinion, Obama hasn’t even tried to be that. So I believe he deserves every amount of scathing criticism that Matt Walsh or any other writer, reporter or layman would heap on him.

        • RJH says:

          First off, look at the source of the link that you provide- the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank that openly wants to see the ACA’s demise. I would look at them as potentially biased and not the best source of information. It’s worth noting that the core ideas (including the mandate) of what is called Obamacare came right out of this very same think tank. Republican senators (20 of them, I think) voted for many of these very same ideas as an alternative to the Clinton Health plan in 1993. Interesting now that they are heavily critical of what were once their own ideas.

          (interview with one of the bill’s sponsors Senator Durenberger (R) :
          (and be sure to catch what he says around 7:47 into the interview)

          I also can see that the chart you linked to is dated October of 2014. So, is this opening day of the exchanges? A lot has happened since then. Take a look at the objective fact checking web site
          (make sure to read the next to last paragraph). That is, we won’t know the overall effect until more time has passed. And that was written in December. Also, are they comparing apples to apples. Are the plans they are examining comparable to the plans people will buy now. Did people have just cheaper, castatrophic coverage then, and now have a much more robust plan?

          Personally the plan I have now (from the exchange) is $220/month cheaper and my deductible is down $500. My max out of pocket expenses is $1900/year. It’s a Humana plan. I also have a pre-existing condition that caused me to be told there would be an exclusion for that when I applied with Blue Cross before the ACA passed. I asked for my money back then and ended up in a fight with them just to get my 1st month’s premium money back which I had to give them when I applied. And the policy hadn’t even gone into effect. I don’t doubt that some will see a premium increase but some, like me will see the opposite. All in all, this whole thing will settle out over time and we’ll see whose rates are up and whose are down… As for lowering costs? I’d go for single payer myself, and totally eliminate the insurance companies taking a cut of the pie. I don’t see the value of what they provide. I’m limited to their networks. I think a Medicare-type system would work much better and a single payer entity would be able to negtiate much lower prices for stuff. Also, some corporations are really sort of gaming the system for huge profits at our expense. I went to high school with someone who is now a health care consultant and he tells me there is a lot in the ACA that people don’t even talk about, that should reform our system in numerous ways.

          In other points you brought up, “…but surely there has to be a better way to deal with that than forcing people to pay money when they can’t afford to pay the money for a regular insurance plan.” What I would say to that, is that that is what the subsidies are for, to make it affordable, or to expand Medicaid in some instances, so everyone can get coverage.

          You say, ” Basically Obama’s reaction is “Oh, that’s too bad. Deal with it.” That’s not what I expect from a President. I expect some sort of compassion or empathy for the common person.” What evidence do you have that Obama’s attitude is like that? Did he ever say anything like that? in terms of compassion, I think the passage of the bill shows compassion in that it will allow many millions of Americans to get health insurance coverage that otherwise couldn’t. I might ask, “Where’s the opponents of the law’s compassion?”

          You say, “he’s granted official pardons to himself, his family and many of his top aides. This is common knowledge.” Where did you hear this, can you source it so I can follow up. There’s been talk of exemptions. Again I turn to a reputable fact checker and this is what I find (about the 9th question down, but you might read the other questions as well)

          And in terms of this birth control thing, insurance is all about pooling risk. I think every policy I’ve ever had, had coverage for pregnancy, and I’m a guy.

          But I do think he should get dinged for saying no one would lose coverage. I understand he was maybe referring to those policies that were bought before the law passed and met the minimal standards though. But still either he should have known that or one of his aides should have told him.

    • Kmilliorn says:

      Just a few corrections:
      1) Franklin Roosevelt, not Theodore Roosevelt, instituted the New Deal.
      2) Of the 7.1 million “signed up” for insurance according to the administration, at least 2 million had been previously insured (& so were not “newly insured”)–that means they were not among the 49.9 million in the 2010 census who had no healthcare insurance at all. The 2 million figure comes from a Rand corporation study quoted in the LA Times on 3/31. The same study estimates that 4.5 million were added to states’ Medicaid rolls, 3 million to Medicaid, & 9 million (almost all previously insured) had obtained individual private insuranc, as well as 6 million signed up via the ACA websites. The Rand study newly-insured adds up to 9.5 million–which still falls far short of the 49.9 million found to be without insurance in 2010. If you deduct the estimated 2 million previously insured from the 7.1, that leaves at most 5.1 million newly insured (assuming all have paid their premiums).
      3) as far as what Obama has done that others have not? He has treated the Constitution & Bill of Rights as suggestions that he may or may not enforce, depending on their inconvenience. He has touted his own ACA, then remodeled it frequently, choosing to enforce some parts & postpone others (whose postponement looks suspiciously to be politically motivated). I can recall no other recent president who has treated the constitution as such a “malleable” peace of law. A Chief Executice & head of the Executive Branch, enforcement of the laws–ALL of our laws–is his prime responsibility, which he has abdicated.

      • Oop! Sorry. What a rookie mistake. Thanks for correcting me. =]

        So, it may be 5.1 million instead of 7.1 million… okay…? So? There are still 5.1 million more people who have healthcare that didn’t before. Doesn’t change my argument. And did those people who have it previously get better coverage? That’s the question we need to know, because that could mean that in a way, they are “newly insured.” If they had regular checkups only but are now getting dental and vision, they ARE newly insured. Those procedures are incredibly expensive without insurance and are just as important as regular checkups.

        For your third point: I can name several presidents who have treated the Constitution as a “malleable” piece of law. Did I not mention the first what, five presidents? Wait, I’m sorry. That’s wrong. How about talking about TWELVE of our presidents, eight of whom owned slaves while PRESIDENT? Some of them helped write the $*#*$ constitution insisting that ALL men were created equal and had certain rights… then went home to free human labor, denying their dark brethren even the basic human rights?

        There is no greater hypocrisy.

        Your argument doesn’t fly and you’ve, yet again, ignored what I’ve said. How can you refuse to ream those presidents for what they’ve done while demonizing Obama? NOTHING that he has done can compare to what has been done previously. I can also name several Presidents who worked WITHIN the law while STILL screwing us to high heaven. Bush 2–I don’t even have to go into that, then there’s Reagan whose Reaganomics plunged us into so much financial turmoil that he TRIPLED our national debt.

        Your problem with Obama is NOT his politics. Nothing he has done is new. Nothing he has done is ANY worse than what has already been done. Your problem with him is different. I can’t say what it is, but maybe you should examine yourself and deal with what is probably unconscious and unacknowledged prejudice.

        • Allie L says:

          Ok, isn’t this exactly what Matt is saying in his entire post? That instead of actually acknowledging that some people might actually object to the policies that are being implemented, those who are for Obama immediately assume that, no, the people who disagree with Obama can’t possibly have different beliefs. It must just be that they’re racist bigots who have to “deal with what is probably unconscious and unacknowledged prejudice.” This is the whole freaking problem. It’s so presumptuous and insulting to assume that just because someone disagrees with you it must be because they’re racist.

          Just because Obama wasn’t involved in this country’s greatest atrocity doesn’t mean he hasn’t done anything wrong. How irresponsible is it to say “Well, Obama didn’t own slaves, but those guys did! Obviously anything he does flies under the moral radar because at least he’s not as bad as them!” What’s wrong with looking at something that is objectively wrong, such as denying an American citizen the Constitutional right to a fair trail before sentencing and subsequent execution, and saying “This is wrong. We cannot let this happen. We must do better.”? Just because other presidents have done things that are not morally acceptable doesn’t make it ok for this president to do so. If we don’t hold our politicians to a high standard, then democracy is meaningless and the freedom for which our predecessors fought and died is hollow.

          The point of the government is to protect the inherent rights of law-abiding citizens. If it implements a law that infringes upon the rights of even one person, then the law must be called into question because it is doing the exact opposite of what the American government is supposed to do. Obamacare, in all its glory, infringed upon the rights of millions by taking away their right to decide which healthcare was best for them. You can argue that those who lost their plans received better plans all you like. It’s not true, and even if it were, the government still cannot be allowed to infringe upon our rights. There is no quantifiable measure by which you can say the loss of freedom made Obamacare worth it. America was founded upon the ideal that a life without freedom is no life at all. The cancer patients who now have to wait months to receive the vital care they need after being displaced by Obamacare from their plans now face a future without life or freedom. This is why some people are not fans of Obama. I’m not a racist, but I’d be surprised if you in your own unacknowledged prejudice will have the intellectual responsibility to believe me.

        • Okay, Allie, I was not mean or nasty in any of my posts, but your last comment was unnecessarily hostile and rude. If you can’t comment with civility, then don’t.

          Now, when I talk to Christians, I’m not talking to people with different beliefs, I’m talking to people with the SAME beliefs. Those beliefs should transcend RACE, AGE, GENDER and SOCIOECONOMIC CLASSS. But that’s not what’s happening here. Many times, not all the time, but MANY times, people who have plenty usually don’t approve of social safety nets. Not only is that selfish, more importantly, it’s not even BIBLICAL. If a person talks about cutting social programs to help the poor and then claim they’re a Christian, I’ll call him/her a liar to his/her face because that’s in DIRECT contrast to the Word of God.

          So no, I’m talking to people with different beliefs, and as a Christian, I speak to them when I think they’re wrong in hopes that they’ll at least THINK about what I say. There was NOTHING I said that was wrong in my previous posts, nothing I said that was out of line. YOU just didn’t like.

          And I don’t recall saying that Obama didn’t do anything wrong or that he was a saint just that this level of hatred toward him is completely unwarranted ESPECIALLY if you’re a Christian and ESPECIALLY since there’s not ONE political party in this country that is without fault for the abominable situation this country is in.

          If Obama was truly as bad as you guys make out, America would have impeached him by now because that’s what we DO. Or perhaps, you think the many people in politics are protecting him because they “LOVE” him so much. NO! We can both say without a shadow of a doubt that this is NOT happening because there are people in the White House who dislike him just as much if not more than you do!

          No, what’s happening is that YOU disagree with him and now, when I ask you WHY and you give me all these facts that are no different from the actions of any other politician who you don’t hate NEARLY as much, you try to pull the moral high ground card. It’s NOT working.

          You say that Obama is doing things that are morally wrong, that this law is wrong. But wait, did you forget that our SUPREME COURT said that this law was CONSTITUTIONAL? Did you forget that memo? Did you not get the email? Well, okay, let me inform you.

          OUR SUPREME COURT, the highest judicial body in the land, the experts in interpreting and upholding the constitution said that it DID NOT violate the constitutional rights of Americans.

          What I don’t understand is why you can believe random reporters from CNN, FOX and CSNBC and anyone who has an official looking news blog but you can’t believe the people who have trained all their lives in law.

          Obama did not ram this law into being without going through the proper channels. He did EVERYTHING he was supposed to do to get a law passed and IT PASSED. So, no, he’s not stepping on the rights of American citizens, he’s stepping on your delicate sensibilities. YOU don’t like it, so he’s the antichrist. YOU don’t like it, so now he’s a monster, YOU don’t like it, so now the law is infringing on our rights.

          The sob story that you wrote was an archetype and I admit, a very good one, but for every bad story you have, I have a good one, where the Affordable Care Act has truly helped someone.

          It’s as I said before. Obama is being so reviled but he’s not trying to make himself rich, he’s not trying to step on the poor, he’s trying to HELP people. Yes, there will be bumps along the way but that’s to be expected with any new law, any new implemented system. I feel for those people who are getting shafted, I really, REALLY do. But if you looked at this thing objectively, you’d be able to understand that this is not anything unusual. And until the system has a few years on it, it will remain shaky and unsteady much like a newborn child.

          This is one thing people don’t realize, a trap you’ve fallen into: You’re quick to say what is true and untrue, but the truth is, you have NO FREAKING IDEA what the truth is. You have no clue what’s going on. NONE. All you know is what you’ve been told from biased second hand sources. It’s for this very reason that I give presidents the benefit of the doubt.

          We have no idea how complicated and intricate being president is. We have no idea how convoluted and difficult it is to manage the finances of a whole country. We have no IDEA, no CLUE. But the difference between you and I is that I KNOW that I don’t know anything, I acknowledge it and I sit back and trust God.

          But YOU.

          You go about your day driving in your car and riding the bus with the only cares on your shoulders being those in your life and in the lives of your love ones. You sit in your living room and watch the news stations of your choice rake Obama over the coals and then you smile and nod and agree with them, all the while bashing the person who’s been ELECTED the leader of our country. But you don’t know how many people Obamacare has helped, not really, you don’t know if the security laws have saved Americans from tragedies like 911. You don’t know if Obama is really a good person or not. You just sit at home, in your car, or wherever in judgement as though you see and know ALL.



          I declare, where has the respect gone in this country? Because even though I thought Bush II must have been scraped from the bottom of the moron barrel and then washed down with stupid juice, I never disrespected him the way you guys disrespect Obama. I acknowledged him as president and prayed for him, that the Lord would lead him, guide him and but most of all PROTECT this country despite what Bush did. Because for whatever reason, God allowed him to be elected.

          Allie, I’ll end here. If you don’t like Obama, just say you don’t like him. Don’t try to paint him as any more of a monster than anyone else by standing on your constitutional-dependent moral high ground. If you told me, “Petra, I don’t like Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, because etc” and then listed all the messed up stuff ALL these people have done, then I’d nod my head in understanding and not say a thing to you.

          But that’s not what you’ve done, that’s not what you’re doing. You’re treating Obama like he’s the worst president we’ve ever had without just cause and without acknowledging that he’s not BECAUSE of the history of this country. THAT’S why history is brought into play. If you did not revile Bush like this, if you did not sit in history class and DOG OUT every slave owning president, if you don’t glare at the horrible people in your political party, then you should not be treating the leader of our country this way.

          THAT’S my problem with this. THAT’S my problem.

          But I’ll concede you one point. Perhaps it was presumptuous to say that they have some deep seeded racial issues… but, taking my argument into consideration, what else could it be?

          I know that there are people out there who genuinely dislike the things our president have done, that’s understandable. I felt that way about Bush, but I did not do what you guys are doing, I didn’t take it personally. So WHAT could cause such a reaction as the one that Obama’s getting?

          Food for thought.

        • Billy says:


          Well said. It’s funny, these conservatives who love to spew their hate at Obama for literally everything under the sun, but seem to forget all the horrid transgressions of past presidents such as Bush 43 and Reagan. And while ACA might have a whole bucket full of problems…it’s a start at the goal of having people not DIE cuz they can’t afford to go to the doctor ever for check ups. It’s the beginning, and hopefully it gets better as it is reformed. What did Bush 43 do to actually try to help anyone? A $150 tax rebate… great, thanks, that’s dinner and the movies for the whole family. Now what? Lame. History exists people… go read about it. It’s all online.

        • Billy:

          Thank you so much for your comment. It’s nice to see someone who understands where I’m coming from.

          You want me to be honest? Answering so many people that harbor such unreasonable dislike is a bit tiring. I honestly don’t understand why they hate Obama more than any other politician: That’s actually the whole basis of my argument. Besides, Obama is not trying to get over, he’s trying to help people.

          It boggles my mind. I really don’t understand it. I’m literally staring at my screen in confusion right now. Even if they didn’t like HOW he was doing it, if they are Christians, they should be able to appreciate the spirit of it.

          But okay! Thanks again for your comment. It was refreshing. =]


        • mo says:

          @ writtinstone

          “Writtininstone, Well said. It’s funny, these conservatives who love to spew their hate at Obama for literally everything under the sun, but seem to forget all the horrid transgressions of past presidents such as Bush 43 and Reagan. And while ACA might have a whole bucket full of problems…it’s a start at the goal of […]”

          LOL! Thank you so much for proving Matt’s point!

          Even when the lies of this wicked, corrupt man Obama are listed, anyone who doesn’t agree with him is still accused of hatred!

          Which of this man’s lies listed here did you find to be inaccurate? If they are all accurate, why do you still defend him and accuse those of us who point out his lies of “spewing hate”?

          Explain to me how it’s spewing hate to simply bring to light someone lies?

          Also, in case you did not notice, this post was about OBAMA, and not anyone with the name of Bush.

          Answer my questions. I’d love to hear it directly from an Obama worshiper why it is you continue to defend this liar.

        • Mo:

          It’s clear that you’re spoiling for a fight but I’m not going to give you one. Also, it’s obvious when you say things like “Obama worshiper” and such nonsense that you have not really read my previous responses I’ve given: the answer to your very rude and disrespectful questions is there. No, you want to take your unreasonable Obama hate out on me but I don’t encourage such people by engaging in extended discussion with them: They tend to be ridiculously unreasonable and disrespectful (Read: You). So, I will not respond to any more of your emails until you get your act together and can talk with civility.

          Now, look, guy. Don’t act like a sheep and follow Matt mindlessly. He’s not God, he’s just a man with an opinion. Just seems I’m one of the few people willing to challenge him. Before you start throwing insults and throwing stones, READ what I’ve read. Like I said before, I’ve said nothing wrong and nothing offensive, and if you continue to disagree, it’s because you simply didn’t like what I said.

          So, please, get yourself together. Such behavior is really unattractive and does nothing to foster unity and it just makes you look really bad.

          Hope you can deal with your anger in a more constructive way in the future.


        • mo says:

          @ writtininstone

          So, no examples of Matt’s supposed hate. Nor do you have any explanation of how pointing out a liar’s lies is “hate”.

          Just more self-righteous condescension. (Funny, I am always told by liberals that judging is a bad thing. But they have no problem doing it to others, while ignoring the questions I posed to you.)


        • No examples? Did you read his post? What conveys hate? Tone, multiple posts about the same things, scathing and pointed criticisms with no acknowledgement of good even though it IS there. You know what I’m talking about. Please don’t be deliberately obtuse.

          Mo, I don’t expect you to understand if you’re not a Christian. And self-righteous condescension? You’re right, that’s totally me. After all, I was so rude and disdainful right? I mean, giving examples supporting my point and politely asking them to look at them and think about their actions in a different light is horrible.

          I’m truly a monster.

          This is my last response to you. Just as I thought, you’ve made up your mind about anyone who doesn’t think Obama is a monster and nothing but a Damascus experience is going to help you. But that’s okay. It can happen.

          Peace and good will to you.


        • mo says:

          @ writtininstone

          So, again, no examples of Matt’s supposed hate. Nor do you have any explanation of how pointing out a liar’s lies is “hate”.

          “This is my last response to you.”

          Glad to hear it. I get weary of asking the same things over and over and receiving no response.

    • Heather G says:

      Writtininstone, Democrats aren’t anymore for poor people than the Republicans. In fact there are more D’s in the top 10 wealthiest members of congress than R’s.
      If Obama was really trying to help poor people why does he keep pushing parts of this great plan back??? Well if you look at timelines of many of the dates he’s changed they seem to indicate wanting to win elections for his team. And where are these magical lower rate numbers you are talking about? I know many a Kentuckian who have not seen them.

      • Heather G.

        I think we both know that that isn’t true. Are all Democrats for the poor? Probably not, but as a whole, they support social programs that help the poor.

        As far as I’m concerned, that means being for the poor. Being rich doesn’t exclude a person from caring about someone who is less fortunate. So, saying that there are more Democrats in the top 10 wealthiest members of congress means nothing if their party fights to provide a safety net for the many Americans struggling to make ends meet. Actually, that’s even more admirable in my book because that means they have compassion for the poor, they don’t justify leaving the poor to struggle on their own by demonizing them. The logic you are using to condemn rich Democrats is incredibly faulty. It just doesn’t fly.

        You know, you could answer your own questions if you would just look at Obama like another person. Setbacks happen. Being President doesn’t change that.

        And you say you know a many a Kentukian who have not seen the benefits, but have they signed up? Besides, if you don’t know at least 10% of the uninsured, the sample of people you know is way too small.

        The problem when people are trying to justify their prejudice is that they juice their numbers or refuse to look at the situation critically. Saying ‘many a Kentuckian” means absolutely nothing. How many is that? 5? 10? 20? Do you really think that’s enough to call the Affordable Care Act a failure?

        I think not.

        I don’t want to argue with you or antagonize you, but I’m really trying to logically understand the basis for you guy’s Obama hate and resistance to the new health care law.

        • Don says:

          Hey writteninstone, she gave you a website that shows facts not speculation. Democrats care no more about the poor than the Republicans. The biggest difference is that the Republicans don’t feel the middle class should pay the way and wait for it, are more conserative in their views. I am very much an idependent and think political parties are for the birds because the only one’s they truly care about are themselves.

    • SteveS says:

      Wow. Pithy. Pungent. Trenchant, even.
      As we say in Kentucky, though, “that dog won’t hunt.” Your Dear Leader IS a congenital, deliberate liar. He deserves every bit of bile and venom this blog post exhibits and then some.

      • I’m sorry that you think that way and I’m equally sorry that you either didn’t read my whole post or you refuse to acknowledge that Obama isn’t any more a monster or liar than any of our other presidents or politicians.

        I usually don’t engage in conversations with people who hate and/or are extreme. They tend to be unreasonable. If you don’t see one good thing that a person has done or can acknowledge that they’re not the worse person in the world, then you probably fall into one or both of those categories.

        So I hope you can let go of some of your hate because it blinds you. Don’t be blind and don’t let hatred destroy you.

        • Mom from MN says:

          Well, sounded like the beginning of your post was rather hateful regarding republicans. I don’t consider myself a republican, but many republicans I know regard it as their responsibility to help the poor and disadvantaged, and that this responsibility shouldn’t just be abdicated to the government, like it is over in Europe. I’ve also read somewhere (Time magazine?) that Republicans donate more of their income to charity than Democrats, so how does them make them less caring?

        • I’m sorry that you felt as though I was being hateful toward Republicans, but what I’ve stated is actual fact.

          The Republican presidents that I’ve mentioned DID the things that I said and Republicans, generally, are known for doing the things that I listed. But I also stated that Democrats weren’t perfect and that there were good reasons for voting for each side. So, if you’re attempting to catch me in that, “you’re doing what you’re condemning people for thing” it just means you didn’t read my post.

          Donating money to charity means nothing to me. I have no clue where that money goes. Not only that, how do we know that it’s not THEIR charity meaning that a great deal of the proceeds are going to their own pockets? We don’t. Besides, before you try to help the people in Africa (morally praiseworthy though it may be) or help the animals (whose rights have its place) WHY NOT help the people in your own country? Why give to charity while dogging out the poor in the place that you live? How much sense does that make?

          I am glad, though, that you have Republicans friends that do good. Contrary to what you seem to think, I’m not surprised that there are some decent Republicans out there. I made really good friends with a Republican and she was one of the sweetest, most honest people I’ve met. We just had different ideas on what Christian voting meant. Besides, I’m not talking about them. I’m talking about Republican politicians. So, no, it’s not all Republicans, which I think I said. But if I didn’t, let me clear that up: It’s not all Republicans that are horrible, greedy monsters. But as a WHOLE, GENERALLY speaking based off of the things that Republicans have said and done and based on the precepts of the party at this point in time, Republicans are seen by a great many people as hating people of color and the poor.

          That you have to concede to. It’s why they lost the elections. They’ve alienated those groups so much that people look at POC and the poor when they vote Republican.

          Also, you highlighted a big difference between Democrat supporters and Republican supporters: The size of government and the role one thinks the government should play in the lives of everyday citizens. Republicans think that the government should, for the most part, have only a cursory roles in the lives of the people while Democrats believe that more government intervention and regulation is key.

          I for one, agree with the Democrats which is just one reason I vote Democrat. (Although, as I said before, there are many, many things, as a Christian, that I disagree with, the points I’m talking about should be obvious.)

          Give me at least five instances where less government was beneficial to the people because I can give you twenty where it wasn’t. Give me five instances where big government was more harmful than less government and I’ll give you thirty examples where it wasn’t. People always scream less government but what does that mean? That means that you have no one to make everyone do what is right. My mama always says, “People won’t do right unless you make them.” And that’s TRUE.

          This “trust people to make the right decision” thing that Republicans have going on DOESN’T WORK. It never has, it NEVER WILL. Look at what happens every time the government deregulates. We have people getting sick because food wasn’t prepared properly in factories or we have companies dumping massive amounts of waste into the oceans because they wanted to make a buck and didn’t care how they were affecting our planet (After all, it’s so EXPENSIVE to do it the right way. Don’t want to hurt our bottom line, do we?), AND because they had no one to tell them that they COULDN’T. So, they did. Better yet, we have WALL STREET CRASHING, plunging our whole country into economic turmoil.

          Does more deregulation still sound good to you?

          And state’s rights? Don’t EVEN get me started on that. If you look at it, the Federal government is always softer on the people than the state government. The state government would tax you until you couldn’t afford to feed your children, they would toll all your roads and segregate everyone in the land if they didn’t have the Federal government to tell them they COULDN’T do those things. Think I’m lying? Look it up! It’s HISTORY. I’m not making this stuff up! It’s BEEN DONE. In THIS country.

          Are you a Christian? Because less government or supervision isn’t even BIBLICAL. God watched Israel like a hawk and laid down VERY specific rules for them. He instilled rulers and supervisors over EVERY tribe, gave them ALL jobs. THAT’S how closely God regulated Israel.

          Honestly I think I’m at the point where I need to stop answering comments because seriously, where do you guys get this stuff from? I’m convinced that half you guys say things without even thinking about them or that you really just repeat what you’ve heard, figuring that it sounds good.

          *Deep breath* Sorry, I almost went into irritated rant mode.

          I’m going to end here but I do indeed challenge you to look it up. Is deregulation REALLY better? The Bible says that, “In a multitude of council there is security.” What do you think our government is? Eliminating the government’s role would put the power in the hands of a few, because it would be private corporations and groups running the country. Who, exactly, would stop them from mistreating us? You expect those men to do what’s right? REALLY?


          It’s called an oligarchy which is just a step away from a dictatorship. Look those up to. They’ve LOVELY. (That’s sarcasm in case you didn’t get that.)

          Okay, enough of this. I hope you do look those things up. It’s easy to cling to our beliefs when we have no facts against the contrary or we’re surrounded by like minded people. That’s why diversity is important: You get to look at things from a different perspective.

        • Chester11 says:

          These people are infected with straight hate, writtininstone. They are absolutely incapable of seeing it; completely bereft of self-awareness. They are extremists, helping nothing. There are militant extremists on the left. These are their counterparts on the right. I have seen very few objective posts here and Matt Walsh seems angry and bitter…all the time. Everything is dripping with a nasty dose of sarcasm. I think you’re wasting your time, bud.

        • Chester11:

          Thank you for your comments.

          I understand how you can feel that way, it does seem like Matt’s post is full of anger, but that’s why someone DOES need to gently and respectfully inform him and all his followers that they’ve gone off the deep end.

          They might not even realize it.

          So… just like I try to have mercy on those who know they’re living contrary to God’s word, I’d like to have mercy on those who THINK they’re doing God’s word.

          The big thing is getting a different, less extreme point of view out there and see if they’re willing to listen to reason.

          When I put it out there, it’s up to them how they take it or not.

          Believe it or not, talking to Christians that have set minds is just as hard if not harder than talking to secularists. Or maybe you can believe it, lol.

          But once again thank you for your comments! They mean a lot. 🙂


        • RJH says:

          Right on.

    • Don says:

      So explain your racism statement??? Where did you pull that out of this blog? HELP PEOPLE??? When did it become my job to help people that don’t want to help themselves? When did it become my job to try and make a better life for myself only to pay more in taxes so that I can be kept in debt??? I forgot that the American Dream and the Constitution said some where in it that “If you are poor it is the obligation of the American People to take care of you and provide for you in those times of need.

      Now onto a serious note, I have no problem with welfare or making healthcare affordable, what I have an issue with is being lied to and being made to pay for coverages I don’t need because the government thinks its in my best interests. I hate being told that insurance will be cheaper when in fact it has gone up because guess what? Again you can’t afford it so someone has to pay for it since we have to provide it. And while I am at it, let me say that we could have made it illegal to refuse policies for those with pre-exising conditions and that would have been a lot easier to swallow rather than forcing me to buy insurance I don’t want or need.

      Don’t bring God into this conversation, he or she has nothing to do with it. I have done nothing in my life that I am ashamed to face whatever maker there is and I will hold my head just as high in front of them as I do here on earth. I can see from your post that you are on the extreme left of politics and probably big into social services. Let me ask this, do you like the idea that they want to take God out of everything when our very country was founded on those pricipals? It is helping no one and has only cost people time and money to get what they already had. The federal government has no right to mandate what I have to have. I have an idea why don’t we just mandate healthcare is free and let the governmnent administer it. Maybe they can do a better job than they did with the VA, I know myself and the millions of others veterans would love to get in on some of that action.

      • I apologize, but I’m not going to go into a lengthy response to your comments. I’m basically weary of repeating myself.

        One thing I do want to say though, for a true Christian, God IS in everything, He IS everything. As a matter of fact, even if you’re not a Christian this is true. You just don’t know it to be true. But you will.

        One day.

        Other than that, please read my responses to other people. That should address any of your concerns.

        Have a blessed day. 🙂

  10. Katcynth says:

    Check your facts, I live and work in KY and rates have NOT gone down and will most likely go up to cover the new taxes and from the cases I’ve heard ACA is NOT working for the people. One person was having arm pains went to the doctor and was told we need to get an MRI… it took them 3 weeks to get the approval.. he was about to go to the emergency room which is a waste of time and money then when a doctor orders the tests. Another lady told me she took her son to get glasses on the weekend at the end of the month and was told her son had been dis-enrolled and would be re-enrolled on Monday. That this was something they always do. What a colossal waste of resources if that is true. The Amish have paid cash since the beginning. There are other ways but you may have to give up your luxury items that have become so called necessities. Perhaps people should work more at having healthier lifestyles. How dare you pass judgement on anyone’s opinion that this isn’t working. Back when Teddy created this social programs system people had a better work ethic. The social programs were there to assist, not support. Calling out this president is no worse then all the others who caught flack for crap they did and lied about. You sir, (guessing your a sanctimonious male with your tone) are the racist that can’t keep his color out of the argument. I didn’t approve of this idea when the Clinton’s wanted it. Also your religious argument is off base. You are basically saying that because someone doesn’t agree with you they are obviously wrong? You as a christian are a bit judgmental there so i would suggest going back to church for some guidance of your own before calling others names and degrading their opinions and thoughts.

    • RJH says:

      I think you can expect some disrutption in our health care system when you pass legislation that tries to bring harmony to a mess that is reponsible for 18% of our GDP. Like they say, “You can’t remodel the kitchen without some inconvenience.” Fact is, the Dems settled on an appoach to healthcare reform that conservatives themselves created, and formally introduced as legislation in 1993 by 20 Republican senators. Hey, You gotta start somewhere. Now let’s make it better.

  11. Mike says:

    you folks really need to step back and take some meds. chill the f** out. while I am sorry if you had an ACA “nightmare”, there WAS NO CHOICE before this. ACA is federal oversight of a healthcare still letting the STATES set prices, opt out of Medicare, and administer EXCHANGES for PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES MAKING THE PROFITS. I tried getting a health plan for years when I was between jobs. God forbid you ever took prescription anything (written by the doc to save me money at the pharmacy) for even a stomach virus, you were labelled as potentially having a stomach disease and rejected. MEDICAL FACT is that a stomach virus has nothing to do with, or make you more likely, to get a disease. That is the type of crap that has been going on for years. You’ve had 21+ years since Hillary brought up healthcare in the Clinton admin to come up with more options, more regulations, a better market place, or fix what was broken. On the right, you DID NOTHING except let big pharma, doctors, TPAs, and insurance companies RAPE the American public over and over. Middle class people everywhere were sent into debt because they couldn’t afford thousands of dollars in medical bills for routine medical events without insurance. And WHO paid those costs? ME. That’s right. So f*** you for advocating healthcare be a “choice.” I want it, so i have to pay for all of the care given to you, your friends, illegal immigrants, and those too poor, stupid, or careless to have coverage? So MY rates go up? MY premiums go up? I’m subsidizing a borderline redneck idiot state where your waistline expands as your smoking increases sending you into the emergency room unable to pay thousands in debt? Republicans, and most of Congress, had 20+ years to come up with something. Shame on you. This is what we got. Better than nothing. A start. Not great. Good. And thankfully, IT IS fluid and changeable. And last, thankfully our President isn’t RIDGED and praying for guidance to stick with gut in a decision like this; he’s open minded and fixing mistakes to HEAL people and our country. Unlike the last President who did the same thing and ended up with thousands of our soldiers’ deaths on his hands in the name of violence and aggression in a country we had no place in, period. Oh, and FYI…5,000 out of 6,000 hospitals in this country ARE non-profit. We could have gone to a single-payer system. And if you REALLY want to tout the right wing agenda and get the “government off the backs” of the people you should know, fact, that Obamacare is NOT a federal program…it’s a federal law placing oversight letting the STATES set prices, opt out of Medicare, and administer EXCHANGES for PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES MAKING BILLIONS IN PROFITS. If you want goverment off the backs of employers, then I dare you to lobby the right to pass legislation making it illegal for any employer to offer healthcare. You want a free market, competitive landscape, then take healthcare off the backs of employers. Start there. Like Romney did. But you won’t, because you have no clear alternative worth a cent that was ever passed, legislated, or signed into law. Nothing.

  12. Mike says:

    Oh, and I don’t argue with people who need their church or pastor to tell them how to live. Grow a set, grow a brain, and think for yourself. It’s working. It has been working for 3 years since people could stay on their parents’ insurance until 26.

    • Chester11 says:

      Harsh but true, Mike. Healthcare has been broken for decades. People have gone bankrupt, lost everything due to insanely high surgery and hospital costs. People have been unable to even OBTAIN health insurance due to something from 10 years ago.
      And the GOP has sat by and done nothing. The powerfully righteous Christians on this blog and Matt Walsh himself – done nothing.
      And now they want to complain constantly. Obsessively. And then pretend it’s not a form of anger and hate.

  13. Duane Gilbert says:

    At 74 years of age I am so pleased to read a young mans opinion that has his head screwed on straight!!

  14. BsktWvr says:

    So true. It’s time for a change.

  15. AmandaM says:

    All of these issues with the ACA could be very easily solved….take some money away from the ridiculously bloated defense budget and put it towards a single-payer healthcare system. Healthcare provided for ALL, included as part of the taxes you are already paying.

    • RJH says:

      I agree that single payer would lower our health care costs considerably. Maybe some day we will realize that insurance companies don’t offer any real value, they just take a slice of the pie.

  16. Alice McFarland says:

    In the posts I read, I did not see very much mentioned about those of us that have been able to keep our insurance, but at an extreme cost. I am a retired teacher, and while I was teaching had my insurance paid for as part of my salary, which was great. However, when I reached retirement, after 30 years of teaching, I was obligated to pay for my own insurance. When I retired 5 years ago it was approximately $350.00 a month, with a $500.00 deductible. Now, it is almost $500.00 per month with a $3,000 deductible. That comes to just about 25% of my monthly income, and if I end up paying all of the deductible, at the end of the year it has reached 33% of my income. And I feel that I am one of the lucky ones. Because even though it is hard, it is still manageable. I have 3 more years before I can get on Medicaid and I am sure my premiums will continue to rise. And even then, by the time I buy a supplement I understand it will be close to what I am paying now. What happened to the promise to lower the cost of healthcare for everyone? Shouldn’t that also include insurance premiums?
    I have written to my congressperson, and got a nice form letter in reply. Everyone I talk to speaks of the same thing. I am not alone in feeling the way I do. And for those people who have any doubts about what the ACA really entails…dig deep. Look at what it says about those of us that are rapidly approaching our twilight years. “Quality of Life” decisions will be made about whether our cancers or heart problems are really worth fixing, or maybe we have lived long enough, and really don’t need the care that a younger person would get. Or it would cost too much to give us the intense care we might need. This whole program scares me to death. And everyone I talk to have the same fears. Please, Please people speak up!!!!!! When all of this goes into effect, and the SH**** really hits the fan, there will be a lot of scared and deceived people. I just hope everyone who voted for this thing, and endorse it will finally understand what has happened.

    • Kevin says:

      Now just stop, think and ask yourself, “what was healthcare cost doing before the ACA?” “How much would I have been paying if there was no ACA? It’s a known fact that since implementation of the ACA, the cost of healthcare has risen at a lower rate. Cost go up because “our greatest healthcare in the world” (I’m still trying to figure out how 37=1) is a for profit business and we got this worthless/useless entity called Wall Street that tell a company that they must not only turn a profit, but it must get higher and higher each year, which is fundamentally and mathematically impossible.

      • Alice McFarland says:

        Again, back to my comment about the cost of healthcare: Yes, it was going up at astronomical levels. Has that turned around? If it has I am not seeing it. And saying that although it is still going up, it is not going up as much as it was, is not a help to people who are paying for it. I would like to see the congresspersons, and other government officials have to face the same difficulties most of the rest of us do. Why not have healthcare for the senators and congressmen cost more than 25% of their monthly income? The main goal of the healthcare act SHOULD have been to lower healthcare costs. Everyone would have benefited from that, not just the people who get it for free, or at a much lower rate than I have to pay. Thanks for your input.

        • RJH says:

          The ACA as originally conceived would have had the public option- that is, a government entity that would function like an insurance company does. Senator Joe Lieberman killed that off. He was the 60th vote and he didn’t want it. The government could have had cheaper administrative costs, similar to how admin costs are cheaper for Medicare vs. typical health insurance company (5% vs. 10-20%) because the government doesn’t have to put a profit in shareholder’s pockets. That was supposed to lower costs overall. But I’m affraid, the more I read, that to make healthcare cost less in this country is going to be a battle, mostly with private companies who make money off our system. The ACA sets a “medical loss ratio,” that is, the amount of money that insurance companies collect in premiums, 80% of it, has to actually go toward paying medical expenses as opposed to them just pocketing a higher percentage for profit and admin costs. There are all sorts of ways businesses are gaming the system at our expense and that’s how we get to 18% of our GDP being spent on health care in America. The next highest percentage of GDP from a country with universal health care is (I think still) Switzerland, at 12%. That 18% doesn’t go down a black hole, it ends up as some business’ bottom line. the New York Times ran a special report series of articles about just that. It’s truly amazing how much some companies are raking in at our expense. We’ve got to do better. You can see some here (notice other links on the left):

        • Alice McFarland says:

          I am impressed with the depth of your knowledge about the situation. And this comment may show my ignorance but here it is…..Mr. Obama has said repeatedly that if the congress would not work with him, well, he has this pen…….If he can make an executive decision to implement his plans for our country, why not use it pull into line the lobbyists, and the big insurance companies to put a cap on costs? And again, maybe I am just naïve.
          On another subject…..please discuss this most dangerous of all the side effects of the ACA…..The reduction of hours and pay for millions of Americans by their employers so they do not have to provide insurance for them? I, myself, personally know of dozens of people who have had their hours cut at their jobs to less than 28 hours a week, plus lost their insurance to boot. One of these is a manager at a McDonalds (lost his insurance)…one of them is my daughter-in-law (hours cut and lost her insurance). And one is a friend I have known for years, a wonderful, hard-working woman who had her hours reduced at one job, so she got another one and is now working two jobs at little more than minimum wage to make ends meet for her family. And still does not have healthcare. I could give you many more examples. I have another friend who is working hard to get a second Master’s Degree in Physical Therapy, and all of the jobs she has applied for are part-time. There are very few full-time jobs available anymore. When the ACA specified that companies who had employees working less than 28 hours a week were exempt from providing insurance, it opened this fine can of worms. And don’t get me started on what happens to all of us when we reach the age of 75. Ever heard of the movie Soylent Green? Cue the Shark music…….

        • RJH says:

          First off, I want to say something about the nice, respectful and humble tone of your response to me. I appreciate that and it makes me what to respond to your questions even more. I think many times we lose that on web sites or TV or wherever. It’s refreshing. Let me take your comments/questions one at a time:

          you: “If he can make an executive decision to implement his plans for our country, why not use it pull into line the lobbyists,”
          me: I’d love it if he did that. Unfortunately lobbyists are a fixture in Washington. And I feel that the way we fund out campaigns leaves many Americans cynical. Congressmen and women and senators spend a great deal of their time there, seeking money. Lobbyists are the way they often get it. But the lobbyists always want something in return, don’t they? But I don’t know that lobbying is a bad thing. That’s our system, we get to lobby our legislators. What I don’t like is that I feel those who give money are listened to or have more access than most Americans do. If I offered my Congressman a large bundled contribution could I get a face to face meeting with him? Probably could. Could I get that face to face without giving him money. I doubt it. I don’t know how you could make that change with executive order. I supported the Democratic Party’s attempt at campaign finance reform on 2010 when it passed the House but got filibustered by Republicans in the Senate, did you?

          you: “…and the big insurance companies to put a cap on costs?”
          The Obamacare law does cap health insurance companies profits. That is called the medical loss ratio. They have to use at least 80% of the money they get in the form of premiums to pay actual medical expenses. I’d personally like to see the day we just get rid of them. I don’t see what value they offer in our whole system. They just take a cut of the money and limit my choice of who I can see that’s in my network. My thinking is that American companies have learned how to make money off our system. And it can’t go on. We can’t keep on spending about 18% of our gross domestic product on health care, it’s simply unsustainable.

          you: “The reduction of hours and pay for millions of Americans by their employers so they do not have to provide insurance for them?”
          me: Economists and the Congressional Budget Office have said that job losses or scaling back hours (though predicted on a very small scale) would likely be a result of the health care law. For a good source on that I’d look at this fact check article:

          I sympathize with anyone who’s in that boat. I think that one of the things many people (economists and health policy experts) agree on when it comes to our health care system is that we don’t want employers to bear the responsibility of managing health care plans for employees. I’d bet eventually we’ll move away from an employer-based system. Why should employers have to be concerned about health plans? That’s not what they’re in business for? Why should the quality of one’s health plans be dependent on the generosity or lack of generosity of one’s employer? To have made that change this time around would have been a lot though as some 60% of working Americans get their health care insurance through their employer.

 by the way is a good resource for seeing is stuff you read or hear in the media is true. Another is For news and studies on health care in American I’d recommend the Kaiser Family Foundation

          you: “And don’t get me started on what happens to all of us when we reach the age of 75. Ever heard of the movie Soylent Green?”
          me: You’re going to have to spell it out for me. What do you know about what happens when you turn 75?

        • Alice McFarland says:

          From what I am understanding from an excerpt taken from the new law…heroic measures for people over the age of 75 will become a thing of the past. It is known as the “Quality of Life” measure. And I have heard many people verify this part of the new law, including some doctors. Physicians will consider the age of the patient before they approve treatment for cancers, heart diseases, and many other illnesses which will affect many of us eventually. And not only will doctors not treat, but insurance companies won’t pay. So, basically once you hit 75, your “Quality of Life” will depend on your own longevity and health. If any of us contracts an illness which proves to be costly, they will simply deny us coverage, and if we are unfortunate enough not to have the funds to pay for it ourselves, Oh, well. And I personally have knowledge of a friend of mine who has already been denied echocardiograms because he is in his 70’s. I am afraid that is what we will all face. At this time, I am 62 years old. I am a retired teacher, paying for my own insurance. I have had cancer and a faulty aorta valve due to a birth defect. My insurance so far has covered everything in a timely manner. However, what happens when I am 75….will they consider that since I have both of these things in my past, that it is just not worth the expense and trouble to treat me again? I have a pig valve where my valve used to be, and I was a bit of an experiment, because I was an otherwise healthy person with no arterial disease. However, the normal life of one of these valves is 10-12 years. Since I was originally healthy, and did not have the other problems usually associated with valve replacements, they have no idea how long it will last. What happens when I am 70, and need another replacement? I think these are questions worth asking. All of us are aging. I think I am only around 10 years older than Mr. Obama, if I remember correctly how old he is. Will he face the same problems I will? Or any of the other members of congress? I am sorry, I have rambled a little bit while writing this. I have wanted to share my views and opinions on these matters, and I appreciate having this platform to do so. Thank you for your time.

  17. Pingback: Lightning Round -2014/04/09 | Free Northerner

  18. firegodjr says:

    Thank you for posting this. I wish the news stations weren’t so full of liberals that Obama can say and do anything he wants and not get media attention. This really needs to be public knowledge. How many people would still be following Obama loyally if they knew how many times he has lied to them?

    • RJH says:

      Obama should get dinged for saying people can keep their policies. Shouldn’t have made a promise eh couldn’t keep. In a way he was right though, in that, they could have, if they hadn’t gotten policies that originated after the ACA became law or didn’t meet a minimal standard. The other lies? I don’t know of what you speak.

  19. ruletti opas says:

    We’re a group of volunteers and opening a new scheme in our community.
    Your web site provided us with valuable information to work on.

    You’ve done an impressive job and our entire community will be grateful to you.

  20. Bobby says:

    Common sense would say ” the things going on in our government and country couldn’t be like this unless it was being done on purpose!”

  21. Pingback: I don’t respect the president or his office, and neither should you | The Matt Walsh Blog

  22. Pingback: Read Matt Walsh | John C. Wright's Journal

  23. Pingback: Matt Walsh’s EPIC response to liberals who say, “Respect the office” | Young Conservatives

  24. RJH says:

    You say, “Why are folks mad at you? Well, as you’ve pointed out in the past, it’s probably because you’re black.” And the link in that sentence refers to something Obama said, where he said some probably like him because he’s black, some probably don’t like him because he’s black. But putting that quote as a link in that sentence is ridiculous. It has no context to what your post is about. Your just snarking. But maybe that’s just what you want to do, and maybe that’s why people come here to read you for. It’s a free country. But to make it a better country, I think we need to have more integrity and be more respectful than that. Right now you just seem like one more smart-ass. BTW: there were a lot of people angry with the law before people were losing their insurance because of it. That sort of undermines your whole post, does it not? I think some of that anger is what opponents and right-wing media have incited in folks. Obamacare is in it’s essence, an approach to health care reform that came out of the conservative Heritage Foundation and first proposed by 20 Republican senators back in 1993 as an alternative to the Clinton health care plan. Then a state version was signed into law by Governor Mitt Romney in 2006. How bad could it be? And what are your ideas to make our unsustainable, messed up system (w/o Obamacare) better. That’s the conversation we should be having. More BTW, I’m paying $220/month less because of it than I was before. My deductible is down $500. The last time I went on the individual market for a policy, I almost couldn’t get one because of a pre-existing condition. So it’s been a godsend for some folks.

    • Alice McFarland says:

      I just wanted to make a quick reply to the racism remarks which seem to be flying around on this site. One question: Would any of you vote for a person just because he or she is white? Why would you vote for a person just because he or she is black. When, oh, when will we ever become a nation that votes for someone because of his views, and ideas, and platforms and not even look at the color of his skin. Martin Luther King had it right….he dreamed of a day that men would be judged by the content of their character, not by the color of his skin. Okay, that being said…..How is Obama’s character? That is the real question we should be asking.

      • RJH says:

        I agree with you. I’m not sure if you were taking issue with what I said or not. But I was pointing out that Matt dishonestly referenced something Obama said as if it were his excuse for why some are mad at him. Obama’s comment, by the way, is probably true. And I, like you, don’t think we should like or vote for, or not like or not vote for, someone based on their race. But sadly I think there are some that do just that. I hope you understand my reference there was about Matt’s dishonestly.

    • S C says:

      Thank you for this response. My good friend linked to this blog (not this post in particular, I was just reading more posts to get a sense of his writing/person), so was hoping for something that was balanced, and instead found him to be, as you said, just another “smart-ass.”

      I’m a Christian, and I don’t hate Obama or the ACA. (I certainly don’t think Obama is a “liar” any more than any politician that goes through Washington.) I have benefited extremely from the ACA – my husband and I pay $188/month less for health insurance and have MUCH more coverage than previously. We are covered for annual check-ups. We wouldn’t go bankrupt if we got pregnant. We have so much more peace of mind about possibly getting hurt, or having a medical emergency, and not having to pay out the wazoo for an accident.

      It’s unfortunate that many of us aren’t aware of how our existing, subconscious biases contribute to their political opinions. If some ACA opponents had grown up in Australia, they’d be yammering on about how Americans are stupid and ridiculous for NOT having universal healthcare system. I say this because I’ve witnessed it firsthand in my first few days of living in Australia. Someone I barely knew thought it was their responsibility to inform me of how the US has horrible healthcare and education systems.

      My aunt, an educated (Georgetown University) woman, recently asked me, “Just tell me this. Why does he have to be so egotistical about it? I mean, he named it after himself – ‘Obamacare’?” (She has also said, unashamedly, “I just think Michelle Obama is so ugly. Why does everyone think she is so pretty?”) When it comes to discussing American politics, it seems that critical thinking skills go out the door. We love to argue what we already believe in, not taking a step back to ask ourselves 1) where our info comes from, 2) what biases we already have, 3) what makes productive conversation.

      • RJH says:

        Absolutely, right on, sir. Please let me know if you find that place where people go without agendas to discuss the issues of the day respectfully and honestly.

  25. mo says:

    @ Chester11

    “These people are infected with straight hate, writtininstone. ”

    Hilarious! More talk of “hate”, with zero examples. This man Obama’s lies are all listed and documented here. I haven’t seen one commenter yet (at least, the ones that have responded to me) refute any of them! Just whining about perceived “hate”.

    This is the behavior of liberals. For reasons that I cannot comprehend, any type of disagreement with them on ANYTHING, even when claims are backed up by facts, is labeled “hate”.

    Grow up already. Learn how to discuss an issue on its merits, instead of acting like a baby and calling everyone hateful just because they either disagree with you, or they point out FACTS that you don’t like.

    Good grief, do liberals and Obama supporters not hear how utterly childish you sound? You cannot seem to have a rational discussion about any topic without sulking and stamping your feet and whining, “You’re being mean to me!”

    Grow up!

  26. grepolis says:

    At this moment I am ready to do my breakfast, when having my breakfast coming again to read additional

  27. Pingback: This Guy Said:” Dear Mr. Obama, Maybe Folks Are Mad Because You’re A Liar.” Why??? | Myresharespace

  28. My brother recommended I might like this website.
    He was entirely right. This posst truly made my day.

    You cann’t imagine just how much time I had spent for this information!

  29. Hurrah, that’s what I was exploring for, what a information!
    present here at this webpage, thanks admin of this

  30. adobe says:

    Pretty element of content. I just stumbled upon your web site and in accession capital to say that I acquire actually enjoyed account
    your blog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your feeds and even I
    success you get entry to consistently quickly.

  31. Please let me know iff you’re looking for a writer for your blog.
    You have some really good posts and I think I would bbe a good asset.
    If you ever want to take some of the load off, I’d really like to write some material for your blog in exchange for a link back to mine.

    Please shoot me an e-mail if interested. Thanks!

  32. Asking questions are genuinely good thing if you are not understanding anything completely, except thus article presents
    good understanding yet.

  33. I am actually thankful to the owner of this web page who has shared this
    great piece of writing at at this time.

Comments are closed.