Bill Clinton: More Republicans Than Democrats Stay on their Parents’ Insurance Thanks to Obamacare

clinton-obamacareOne of my biggest problems with the Republican party has always been their hypocrisy.  I can disagree with someone on an ideological difference, but blatant hypocrisy is something that I just can’t stomach.

Whether it’s the myth that they’re a party for “small government” while constantly pushing legislation which expands government for policies they support, or it’s the fact that every Republican president in the last 60+ years has grown our national debt while claiming to be the party for “fiscal responsibility” — their hypocrisy is almost endless.

My favorites are the ones who seem to constantly complain about the government, while being highly dependent on the government.  

I’m sure many of you have seen the anti-Obamacare protesters that hold up signs like, “Keep your government hands off my Medicare!”  These people are completely unaware that Medicare is government health care.

And even when it comes to the Affordable Care Act, Republican hypocrisy is on full display.

I’ve seen quite a few polls where “Obamacare” was broken down into parts and polled separately to gauge reception to individual parts of the bill.  In most of these polls, both Republicans and Democrats viewed most parts of the bill favorably.  Parts such as requiring coverage for people with pre-existing conditions or expanding the age limit so that children can remain on their parents’ health insurance longer.

Yet if you group all these parts together and call it “Obamacare”—then suddenly most Republicans oppose the law.

Well, Bill Clinton had some choice words which Republicans might not want to hear.  Words that were fact-checked as “True” by Politifact.

It seems more Republicans are remaining on their parents’ insurance than Democrats.  Not just more, drastically more.  

The poll found that 63-percent of young Republicans polled were staying on their parents’ health insurance, a number that tops young Independents at 62-percent, and largely trumps young Democrats with 45-percent.

But I thought Obamacare was so terrible?

Well, it seems a lot of Republicans are enjoying it just fine.  Then again, isn’t that what Republicans tend to do?  Whine and complain about something that they are either participating in or benefiting from.

But when they do it—it’s different.

It’s like the millions of Republicans who are living on government assistance, voting for a political party which vilifies those who live off government assistance.

Because when they use these programs they aren’t the “lazy moochers.”  That’s everyone else.

It’s the same with “Obamacare.”  For most Republicans, they’ll call it a horrible law that’s going to destroy this country.  Well, except for the provisions within the bill that they enjoy utilizing.  But like with much of everything else Republicans do, enjoying the benefits of Obamacare will have nothing to do with Obamacare.

Because to them, no matter what facts or reality prove, Obamacare will always be something terrible.

Even when they’re reaping the benefits from it.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Darkthunder

    Hypocrisy at it’s finest. Let’s call it: The Republican Way.

  • Marie

    Great article and almost the exact conversation I had with my fiancee this morning!

  • Sunny

    Truer words were never spoken!

  • WirelessCobra

    Gee, do you think for a minute that the Republican ‘parents’ are employed and have insurance that their kids can participate in – versus the Dem ‘parents’ who are unemployed and without insurance leaving their kids at the mercy of gov. assistance. Let’s examine that statistic before condemning the Republican lot. Also, wasn’t Bill Clinton against Obamacare before he is now, for it?

    • klhayes

      It’s “Obamacare” that is allowing those kids to stay on their parents insurance.

    • William Carr

      You SERIOUSLY think that the unemployment gap between Republicans and Democrats is that wide?

      Tell me why ?

      Why would it happen? Remember, we’re not talking about multi-millionaires, we’re talking about a random sample of the population.

      So, you now have to justify your claim that Republicans are more likely to be employed than Democrats.

      Otherwise, your claim is bogus.

  • MrWereman

    Nice info! More ammo for my debating arsenal when I am at work (I work retail) and some psycho blames something retarded on that “Damned Obama.” Seriously… I have complete strangers come up to me and say shit like, “Man that’s a high price, must be because that idiot we have for a President.” Or some other purely unrelated nonsense.

    Truly unfortunate that some of the most zealot Americans are ignorant Republicans… Would be nice to have them on our side.

    • Bine646

      Youre right, our president is not directly related to our economy- must be why he keeps saying he will fix it but hasnt.

      All the article is saying is that more republicans choose to remain on their parents healthcare until the age of 26. They are still paying for the insurance, they are not looking for govt assistance to help w the cost- they are merely choosing to continue to pay for healthcare. Sooo, i really do not see that as any sort of ammo. Insured remaining insured is not the issue, it will be the millions added which will further burden our already broken medicaid/medicare system

      • William Carr

        Actually, the article is saying it’s ironic that Republicans are more eager to sign up for the benefits Obamacare offers than Democrats are.

        This is, after all, a benefit that would be impossible without Obamacare.

        As for the Economy; when Obama came in, there was a $1.4 Trillion dollar Deficit, and we were losing about 750,000 jobs PER MONTH.

        The Stimulus was passed, against Republican opposition, and the job losses STOPPED.

        The Deficit has been cut in HALF.

        The Wall Street recovered years ago; the Job Markets are recovering too, and we’ve had 41 straight months of job growth.

        Now, if you could talk to somebody that lived through the Great Depression, and ask them “how long did it take for America to come back from the Crash of 1929 ?”… what would they say?

        Fifteen years?

        Hoover reacted to the Crash by cutting spending and waiting.

        Two years later the banks began to collapse.

        TWO YEARS !

        No banks means no capital to invest. No capital means businesses start to lay off people unless they’re in a REALLY high demand sector.

        FDR was rushed into Office two months early by Amending the Constitution, (Inauguration used to be in March), and he set about using Keynesian Economics to repair the damage.

        And it worked. Until the 7 of 9 Conservative Supreme Court Justices started striking down his New Deal legislation.

        He butted heads with them and they backed down.

        But America was only coming back to a healthy Economy by World War II.

        That last punch of War Spending was the Stimulus that clinched it.

        Always works.

        So, Obama brings us back from a 1929-level CRASH, in five years… and Conservatives bitch about him not doing enough.

        Well… funny coincidence… just as FDR was blocked by the Supreme Court Conservatives, Obama has been blocked by the Republicans in Congress.

        So far there have been 428 Filibusters blocking Jobs Legislation.

        And the Tea Party candidates that ran on the platform “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!” ?

        They haven’t sent a single Jobs bill to the Senate.

        Just attempt after attempt to privatize Medicare, Social Security, and defund ObamaCare.

        And they insist that these are “Jobs” bills. Even though… they aren’t. Nothing to do with Jobs.

        Like Hoover, today’s Conservatives believe in doing nothing.

        The “Free Market” will fix everything !

        Except it doesn’t.

        Bush cut taxes on the Rich, and produced ZERO net jobs over eight years.

        Let me explain. If you believe in “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs”, then you need to support Tariffs and Fair Trade, not Free Trade.

        You need to take away the tax deduction for breaking down an American company and shipping the equipment overseas… and yes, that was a Democratic Bill, and yes, it was Filibustered.

        You need to actually CREATE jobs… even temporary ones, that get college students needed on-the-job training.

        Say, a tax credit for companies that hire a college student, keep them for two years, and train them.

        There are dozens of things we COULD be doing… but all the Conservatives will vote on is repealing ObamaCare… despite knowing they can never succeed.

        The current tally is that $50 Million dollars has been wasted on that ridiculous repeal campaign so far.

        Despite the Conservative Supreme Court validating the Law.

      • Charles Vincent

        “As for the Economy; when Obama came in, there was a $1.4 Trillion dollar Deficit, and we were losing about 750,000 jobs PER MONTH.”

        This is a fallacy. We didn’t lose that many jobs per month in 2009.
        Jan: -794,000
        Feb: -695,000
        Mar: -830,000
        Apr: -704,000
        May: -352,000
        June: -472,000
        July: -351,000
        Aug: -210,000
        Sept: -233,000
        Oct: -170,000
        Nov: -21,000
        Dec: -220,000

        That’s roughly 582,000 a month average jobs lost. This isn’t even close to your claim either way.

        “The deficit cut in half.”
        Wrong again. Do you know the difference between debt and deficit?
        Bush deficits by year 2007-2009.
        2007: -161 billion
        2008: -458 billion
        2009: -1.4 trillion
        Grand total: -2.019 trillion in deficits for bush
        Obama deficits by year 2010-2012.
        2010: -1.3 trillion
        2011: -1.5 trillion
        2012: -1.1 trillion
        Grand total: -3.9 trillion in deficits for Obama.

        This isn’t even close by light years to being half and anyone with third grade level math skills can do the math and see that.
        All my facts and figure came from the bureau of labor and statistics for the labor numbers and the CBO for the deficit numbers. In both cases above you’re either uninformed or lying.

        Banks collapsed because the fed cut the monetary supply not because Hoover cut spending.

      • Pipercat

        If you are going to engage in quote mining, you should make sure you are not creating your own fallacies when calling out other fallacies. For example:

        You mined his statement about when Obama came in and the number of about 750,000 in job losses. You extrapolated this to extend for the entire year of 2009 and the average job loss per month for said year. Obama was inaugurated in January of 2009. When he came in. Your own numbers for January and February come to about 750K. I’m not sure what the numbers were for November and December of 2008, but that’s more of exact relation for ,creating averages, when he, “came in.”

        Next you basically are guilty of not knowing the difference between debt and deficits in your own right. The grand totals are not total deficits, they are the total debt accumulated for the time frame given. (Which does not actually show total amounts of actual debt since the Federal Government uses cash instead of accrual accounting.) Now. Mr. Carr was a little sloppy and did not precisely articulate that the projected deficit for FY 2013 (which ends September 30) is projected between 640 and 750; hence, the deficit “will be” cut in half from FY 2009. You basically created a red herring by calling debt accrued, total deficits; which does not follow his sloppy assertion of half sized deficits.

        Actually, both of you are guilty of cherry picking fallacies. All of this means nothing in the grand scheme of things since the Federal Government, like its state and local counterparts, do their accounting using smoke and mirrors. The same goes for the unemployment numbers. These contemporary times are different from the times of the 2000s and both are different from the 1990s not to mention the 1930s. There a similarities, but no correlations; only the temptation to create one’s own fallacy by cherry picking the past.

      • Charles Vincent

        I didn’t cherry pick I used the congressional budget office numbers on deficit and those numbers I listed are the deficits for those years. None of our yearly deficits were cut in half. The 2009 deficit is George bush’s deficit I didn’t list obamas deficits until 2010 you need to learn to read. Furthermore we are on pace to hit a similar deficit for FY 2013. Now as to your assertion I don’t know the difference here’s is the simple version, any money spent past the revenue made for a particular time period is deficit. That deficit is added to debt at the end of the fiscal cycle.

      • Pipercat

        Then why did you create the Grand total fallacy? What does that ultimately prove in relation to Mr. Carr’s original assertion? By the way, the cherry picking fallacy does not assert that you made the numbers up, it suggests that you misinterpreted the numbers or fashioned them in a way to prove fallacious point. You quote mined Mr. Carr, another logical fallacy, then you fashioned your response in a way to manipulate a feckless attempt to compare FY 2009 to FY 2013. Also, explain to me why putting FY 2010 in some certain grouping proves anything (again in relation to) regarding Carr’s original assertion.

      • Charles Vincent

        Gand totals were to illustrate the point that they weren’t cut in half in any conceivable manner. I was not comparing 2013 to 2009, I was comparing it to the three years that the CBO credited to Obama in that we are on pace to put up similar numbers of deficit for 2013 to further illustrate that the deficits are still not half.
        I picked the points he made that were incorrect in order to tie my reply together.

        “Also, explain to me why putting FY 2010 in some certain grouping proves anything”

        I didn’t group them the CBO did I just related their information. They list 2010 and later as obamas deficits, and likewise the list 2009 earlier as bush.

        “Now. Mr. Carr was a little sloppy and did not precisely articulate that the projected deficit for FY 2013 (which ends September 30) is projected between 640 and 750; hence, the deficit “will be” cut in half from FY 2009.”

        This is incorrect the 2013 deficit is projected to be ~1 trillion by the CBO I can post their writing verbatim if you like.
        Some of the other erroneous stuff in both your replies seem to be attempts to obfuscate and or distort/misrepresent the point I was making.

      • Pipercat

        Quote mining again, tsk, tsk. You may want to look up CBO publications: 44495, 44172. The were the ones that came up with the 640 number. Since the deficit for FY 2013 is still projected, the proverbial jury is still out, and we’ll just have to wait and see, yes? Remember, deficits only apply to individual fiscal years. The point that accumulated debt was 3.9 trillion vs 2.019 does not prove anything about yearly deficits and is a complete red herring. I’m not arguing accumulated debt, you are in the guise of yearly budgetary outcome. As for obfuscation, that’s exactly what I’m calling you out on. I’m sticking to Carr’s original assertion, then low and behold, all these numbers, debt, misapplied grand totals. A bunch of fallacies too.

      • Charles Vincent

        The numbers you quotes are from may 2013 the numbers I used are from June/July and they don’t incorporate the impact on the deficit of starting a conflict in Syria. I use quotes so its clear what my replies are tied to if you don’t like that I am sorry. Adding the deficits together in the context I did doesn’t make the numbers debt it’s a total of the deficits in a given period, had I been addressing debt the numbers would have been 10.5 trillion in public debt and 4.9 trillion in government debt. If you don’t like the total I used disregard it, it still doesn’t change the fact that Mr. Carr used bogus data to support a fallacy. My numbers were clear I do not see how they were obfuscatory.

      • Pipercat

        44495 is dated August 7, 2013 for July of this year. Which in fact, projects a 606 billion deficit for FY2013. Syria, really? Using just mined quotes is also called, contextomy and does not take into account its (the mined quote) relationship to the whole argument. I must confess, I like them just fine as they make my side of the argument easier. I am disregarding the total, as a matter of fact, because it is a fallacious counter argument to the unsubstantiated assertion by Mr. Carr. Mr. Carr’s assertion was not backed up by any reference. I guess it only goes to show you, two wrongs don’t make a right; but, a fabulous example of illogical thinking. An unverified quote does not make the assertion, fallacious. Just, well, unsubstantiated.

      • Charles Vincent

        Ahahahaha I see the disconnect here. You’re talking deficit to date, I am talking total deficit for the year.
        “The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on Wednesday estimated the federal budget deficit to be $606 billion through the first 10 months of fiscal 2013.”

        The CBO still estimates the deficit total for fy 2013 to be ~975 billion which is still not half and neither is 606 billion half of the previous years 10 month mark.

      • Pipercat

        I have no idea who you are citing, but here is the first paragraph of CBO publicaction, 44495. Dated August 7th, 2013.

        The federal government’s budget deficit was slightly more than $600
        billion in the first 10 months of fiscal year 2013, CBO estimates,
        almost $370 billion less than the shortfall recorded for the same period
        last year. Revenues have risen by about 14 percent, accounting for much
        of the decline in the deficit. The results through July suggest that
        total outlays and revenues for the fiscal year will both be slightly
        less than CBO projected in May, when it estimated a deficit of $642
        billion for the year.

        You can start from there. Fascinating read!

      • Charles Vincent

        Yes I read it the pertinent part is; “The federal government’s budget deficit was slightly more than $600
        billion in the first 10 months of fiscal year 2013, CBO estimates,”
        The important part is this is for 10 months, yes it’s less than the previous year at 10 months, but it’s not half of the amount. There are still 2 months in this fiscal year which is why not only involvement in Syria is important economically speaking if our government involves us and there are still two full months of spending in this fiscal year in which they CBO estimated that the deficit will be ~1 trillion or a bit less possibly the first under a trillion since 2008.

      • Pipercat

        Well, the August report should be interesting, yes?

      • Charles Vincent

        Yes it will be as will the final numbers, and whether or not we become embroiled in Syria.

      • Charles Vincent

        A military conflict in Syria would cost money and would change the CBO deficit estimate to be larger that what they currently estimate. Will we start a conflict who knows, but the effects of starting one would drive the deficit higher than the current estimate from the CBO. Only a ninny hammer would claim different.

      • Charles Vincent

        “and we’ve had 41 straight months of job growth.”
        Wrong yet again. Obamas longest stretch is only 33 months not 41. Bush had 39 months.

      • christian

        well said…

      • Bine646

        The fed has quadrupled its debt since obama has taken office- recently breaking 2 trillion (last month). Economy shrank last yr for first time since recession and jobs report released today shows lowest job numbers since 1978. Not to mention gallop poll shows 35% of americans approve of the economy- guess you are part of that low percentage.

        As for the that one part of obamacare which republicans r taking advantage of- all they are doing is continuing to pay for their children till 26. What a privilage

      • mgraham

        Bine 646, where are you getting your data from (Faux News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Drudge Report, etc.)? Did you include what Bush put on a credit card (Iraq, Afghanistan, Medicare Advantage)? Where did you earn your degree (Trump U)?

      • Bine646

        Thats my favorite part about liberals hahaha you hit them w data they have never seen then they start w the jokes bc they cannot refute- never fails haha. First try looking up the debt for the federal reserve- their are a bunch of unbiased sites monitoring our nations debt. Websites like RT offer a view which is different from lets say a Fox or Cnn. As for the gallop poll- go check it out forself- they have a website aswell nugget.
        The economy shrank last yr n thats a fact- the white house blamed superstorm sandy- not the inflated markets or crumbling dollars

      • Bruce Montross

        You have no true facts but some sort of fantasy statistics!

      • Bine646

        Prove them wrong then champ- dont worry ill wait

      • tifosies

        Call with the GOPoutrage when the Dow hits 7,00o0 and we’re bleeding 700,000 jobs/mo.

      • Bine646

        Obama is president

      • tifosies

        Indeed, and the deficit is shrinking the fastest since WWll, 42 consecutive months of job gains.
        Your guy broke it, our guy’s cleaning it up. 🙂

      • Bine646

        That is 100% false- feds debt has just broke two trillion- stop w the jokes

      • Bine646

        36% approve of the economy n obamas job w it- guess you are part of that minority

      • tifosies

        Actually, I don’t approve of it. The R’s have held their throats on the neck of the economy while Obama’s in office. The House holds the purse strings.

      • Bine646

        I hope you really do not believe that

      • tifosies

        Read about the Luntz meeting during Obama’s inauguration. The economy was just a casualty. The Republican credit downgrade of 2011 is about to be repeated.
        Any investments in the American economy AT ALL are dead in the House~no infrastructure, no smart grid, no research or technology. There’s way too much evidence not to believe it.

      • wkLeon

        [citation needed]. Stop beating around the bush with liberal bashing. You put these claims, YOU back them up.

      • Bine646

        I just told you the sites to go to- Google FRED- federal reserve economic data and this website contains all the data and graphs you need. This site will not let me post links and such. You can also google federal reserve breaks two trillion in debt and the articles will pop up- from sites like rtdotcom.
        Any investor knows the markets are inflated- especially the bond. The fed has been printing money and any fear of them stopping cause as drop in the market. Market crashed 56% in 2008 after record profits- seems similar to what is happening today

      • Drape

        Stats are good, who you chose to blame for them is where your ground gets shaky.

      • 2mycallie

        Anyone who uses the terms debt and deficit interchangeably should not comment on economic issues.

      • Bine646

        Trillion dollar deficits add to our debt lady- good job proving the data wrong- typical

      • 2mycallie

        Your responses show that you have no idea what the difference between deficit and debt is. ECON 101

      • Bine646

        Debt is accumulated deficits, have fun trolling someone else

      • 2mycallie

        So the deficit has been reduced by 1/2 under our current president. But unless the Congress decides to actually pay down the debt (which is long term problem as opposed to the deficit which is not), that will have NO effect on our current debt. So as I said the relationship between deficits and debt are much more complicated than your Google searched answer reveals. What the GOP is proposing will destroy our economy and the world economy as well because the spoiled brat caucus in the House or Representatives doesn’t like the LAW of the land that was passed by both houses of Congress, signed by the President,and upheld by the Supreme Court. This LAW has actually helped 5 million people to date and is one reason that the deficit is falling. Sorry, no trolling by me, only FACTS, .

      • Bine646

        U know your botox will still not be covered by the new health care- sucks right. Heres another thing my “google” search found- seems you are wrong again troll. The highest deficit under Bush (who brought us out of a surplus) was 459 billion in 2008. Current deficit is over 750 billion. Judging by your profile pic you were most likely in home ec, not math class.

      • 2mycallie

        I will not stoop to your level of personal attacks about my looks or age. Those comments having nothing to do with this discussion. FACTS . . . When Bush left office the actual deficit was $1.3 Trillion. It is now $850 billion. Shutting down the government or failing to pay our debt will wreck the world economy. I will not engage your trolling, sexist insults and distortions any further. Have fun. Buh bye and have a great weekend.

      • Bine646

        Nothing to do with the deficit but it is still true haha. I do not know where you are pulling your numbers but if you are gonna discuss ECON101 maybe you should try a reliable website- like the governments which says 648 billion deficit in 2008. Obama brought us to the trillion dollar deficits

      • 2mycallie

        CBO, Jan. 2009: The federal fiscal situation in 2009 will be dramatically worse than it was in 2008. Under the assumption that current laws and policies remain in place (that is, not accounting for any new legislation), CBO estimates that the deficit this year will total $1.2 trillion, more than two and a half times the size of last year’s.

        That $1.2 trillion projected deficit — the result of bills signed by Republican President George W. Bush —

        Bush was at the helm for the financial fall in the fall of 2008. By the time he left office he had signed laws that resulted in the largest deficit in U.S. History. We had $200 B SURPLUS (thank you Mr. Clinton). Now the deficit is down to pre- 2008 levels those are the facts.

      • Jeffrey Zamora

        Haha I love how this guy talks about how an argument is lost once you go into pointless insults, then makes some off the wall botox statement. Not that it wasn’t obvious this guy was clueless and defeated long before that.

      • Bine646

        Defeated? I merely presented the facts- refute them- prove them wrong- cali couldnt and either can you. Guess thats why they are called facts

      • Bine646

        Start with the website FRED- federal reserve academic data- that will have the graph n the numbers to show u how the debt has quadruptled since 2009 (aka not Bush’s fault)

      • Bine646

        Fred- federal reserve economic data haha not academic

      • Drape

        I like how republicans pretend that Bush’s effect on the economy ended when he left office, as if decisions President’s make have a shelf life that ends when they step out of office. His decisions had lasting effects. So will Obamacare, which is why Repos want to Repo it now. Once its in place and giving the uninisured insurance, they’ll never repeal it and it’ll have lasting effects.

      • tifosies

        Take it to your Repub Reps in Congress who hold the country hostage to shrink jobs. We have a loss in public sector jobs (you know, those government jobs that flourish under Republican administrations) as the ‘job creators’ are sitting on their record profits.

      • Bine646

        Yes the gop controls the majority n their main purpose is to crush the avg american hahaha- sureeee. Obama is president, he kept burnanke n has brought others onboard to continue down this path. Markets r inflated n can thank the fed. Now threat of another conflict, obamacare regulations suspended fpr 1 yr for businesses as we are forced to burden the expense. At a time when we face ever increasing taxes- something obama said would never happen

      • tifosies

        Which tax has he increased?

      • Bine646

        You recieve a paycheck?

      • tifosies

        Every two weeks.

        Read up. The temporary tax break, which was extended once despite Repub opposition, expired in Jan ’13 because they don’t support it. It was a temporary tax break anyway, It returned to previous rates, no higher. btw.
        In fact, Huckabee joked on his show how measly that $13/wk cut was when Obama passed it, then whined and gnashed teeth to his ignorant audience when it expired.

      • Bine646

        Yawnnnn, getting tired of your republican spin- getting old and predictable. Lets hear them for the cig tax or new obamacare taxes- republicans supporting obamacare all of a sudden- pffff

      • tifosies

        LOL. Typical.

      • Bine646

        Obamas purposed 2014 budget has 1.1 trillion in new tax increases- whats your excuse w that? Republicans write his proposals for him now too?

      • tifosies

        “All tax increases are not created equal.”
        Tax increases due to closing loopholes and tax benefits for big oil (et al.) are fine with me.

      • Bine646

        Thatd be sweet if that is what was happening- think you need a history lesson in income taxes and other federal taxes- income has only been around since 1913 so it wont take you that long to catch up.
        You could take all the 1% money n only pay our debt fpr approx 6months- where is that money going to come from? The corp which can move overseas, the poor who have nothing or the middle class thru taxes? Its not rocket science, theyve raised taxes already n we havnt even begun to pay back our debt- how high you think they will go until we do? 70-80 percent like 1950-60s level?

      • lundc2

        You do understand that the debt this country owes it to it self right? If so, do you understand what that means?

      • Bine646

        Haha you are wrong. 1) the federal govt doesnt not print its own money- we are in debt everytime we print (look into that- roth childs) 2) i understand how debt works- not a very hard concept. However some of our debt is taken by foreign govts- so no you are wrong again

      • lundc2

        Exactly what kind of drugs are you on???

      • Bine646

        Instead of dishing insults prove me wrong? Dont worry ill wait

      • Jeffrey Zamora

        Do you mean like you dishing insults about botox to a woman because she schooled you with facts? You’re an embarrassment.

      • Bine646

        No i used the botox bc its true and she refuted none of my facts or data- appeara you havnt aswell. Ill wait

      • Mtman1944

        @william_carr:disqus rr – Awesome history lesson and statement of facts! Hard to argue the facts, but I am sure that some of these folks will do their best to respond by either ignoring the facts, or distorting them to fit what Faux news just told them. Perception is reality, and these idiots have a very distorted perception.

      • Drape

        They are saying that it’s hypocritical to enjoy the benefits of the law while bashing it in its entirety. Go back to the sites that justify your own world view or learn to think critically.

    • RacerX996

      I had a coworker telling me the other day how with all his traveling he was “spending his retirement” but “That’s okay, hasn’t Obama promised to take care of all of us in our old age?” I simply replied: “No, that was Franklin D. Roosevelt.”

  • Harold

    All that means to Me is that more Republicans are working and have insurance. Ya can’t be on Daddy’s policy if He doesn’t have one……

    • klhayes

      Obamacare is what allows them to stay on the insurance…without it they would have been kicked off.

    • Melanie

      Or maybe the democrats kids already have decent jobs that give them healthcare. Like the military. Schmuck.

      • Harold

        Melanic–typical… Make up an answer and follow it up with an insult.

      • tifosies

        You found a way to put 2 made up comments and 3 insults in your comment. Projection much?

    • Lillie Vaden

      With Obama care, you can keep your health ins .if you lose your job

  • DJD11

    Nice article, Allen. Concise and right to the point.

  • Donna Cafora Shepard

    Well yeah! Parents have to be working for their kids to be on their health care! OF COURSE there are going to be more Republicans! More Democrats are on Medicade!

    • Pipercat


      • Donna Cafora Shepard

        Sorry, it’s not a word I’m familiar with. I come from a family that has always worked.

      • Pipercat

        Familiar enough with the word to make fabulous Red Herring Meunière with a fine garnish of l’analphabétisme!

    • lestye

      Actually, Donna, your assertion really doesn’t fit with the fact that red states , as a general rule, take more aid from the Federal government than they pay in taxes.

      • Charles Vincent

        Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.
        You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.
        It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.
        Given that Krugman is aware of the Gellman-Paradox, he should have reported the individual level data first instead of wasting everyone’s time with state-level aggregation that we already know is wrong. Instead he acknowledged that state level data is probably wrong (to get cover), then goes ahead and relies on the wrong method anyway, since it produces the results he wants. The false impression that Republicans use more welfare is already spread around the internet by liberals who still trust Krugman.
        Share of Recipients of each program that self-identified as supporters of Republican party in 2004-2007 Maxwell Poll:
        Gov. Subsidized Housing 12%
        Medicaid: 16%
        Food Stamps: 20%
        Unemployment Compensation: 21%
        Welfare or public assistance: 22%
        Disability benefits from government 25%

  • Oldfart

    It seems reasonable to assume that there are more adult children of Republicans living at home in their parent’s basement without a job or insurance than there are adult children of Democrats doing the same thing. Thus the large difference between Republicans taking advantage of Obamacare and putting their adult children on their insurance and Democrats doing the same thing. Because, as we all know, Republicans make the most noise and are also the largest moochers.

  • Bruce Montross

    If the president submitted a bill stating the sky was blue, the republiscums would oppose it. Even if they had proposed it last month.

  • Bythepeople

    Hahaha you guys crack me up.
    You actually believe anything either side tells you!
    How do you know a politician is lying ? His lips are moving !
    It’s funny how easily we are distracted from what really matters. So go ahead and argue about the small stuff so all politicians can continue to rob us of our rights, liberties, and freedoms.
    I also find it funny that Obama care is good enough for the American people but not our politicians …… Hhhmmmm

  • lisa

    The only reason my son is still on our health care is because he was in college for 7 years getting his 5 year bachelor’s degree of science then his Masters Degree. Now he has graduated and can not find a job in his field of Real Estate Development because this administration has failed in getting our economy and housing market back on track.
    So, Mr Clinton, with all due respect, my family works very hard running 2 small businesses . We work 24/7 and have earned our own money to pay for our sons education without any government assistance whatsoever, while sacrificing family time, vacations and anything else that wasn’t a necessity unlike our current administration!
    We also have been paying our own health care for our own family for over 30 years 100% out of pocket , again asking my government for no help whatsoever! Now because of Obamacare our rates have skyrocketed, our coverage has decreased and our deductible has more than tripled! Not too mention we no longer will be able to hire anyone else or risk going out if business due to all the outrageous fees and taxes associated with the so called ‘affordable health care act’! Its not affordable by any means but none of you in Washington would know that since you have all voted to exempt yourselves from it!!