You Didn’t Build That 2014

Remember this from the last campaign season..

and the dead on Parody of it…

Well it’s back!

The Liberal Meme about how everyone and everything is not only dependent on Government, but that Government creates everything anyhow.

So Government running your life is not only good, but it’s the way the universe should work and anyone who says differently is an evil, capital, elite corporate “hater” of middle class and poor Americans!

Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.

“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Clinton said, which elicited loud laughs from the crowd.

That would be the arithmetic of When in Debt Spend EVEN More!! And when you take in more in taxes than ever before, you spend even more!

Now that’s Liberal Math!

I bet she forgets her husbands Budget Deal with the Devil in the late 1990’s. It was a satanic deal, after all, and ruined the economy.

So what if this President will spend more than every President combined, at least he’s not a Corporate America Hack who just want to suck your life’s blood from you for his own ends! 🙂

Corporate America is Evil!

Only Government is GOOD!



There’s a word for complete government control of everything….


In a totalitarian society, all control of public and private life are government run.

Because YOU Didn’t Build That! 🙂

totalitarianism, Mussolini, Benito [Credit: H. Roger-Viollet]form of government that theoretically that seeks to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government.

YOU Didn’t Build that! You don’t Create Jobs!


Pelosi 2010: Unemployment Checks Serve As “Job Creator”

“It injects demand into the economy,” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said of unemployment checks.

“It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”

Pelosi calls unemployment checks a “stimulus” that is a “double benefit” helping “those who lost their jobs” and at the same serves as a “job creator”

“It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say ‘we’re not going to have unemployment benefits,'” Pelosi said.


Government did! 🙂

We are From the Government and we are here to help you!




Brazil Nuts

Dependency: A Brazilian economist has shown a near-exact correlation between last Sunday’s presidential election voting choices and each state’s welfare ratios. Sure enough, handouts are the lifeblood of the left.

Much of the attention in Brazil’s presidential election has been on the surprise rise of Aecio Neves, the center-right candidate who bolted to second place in the space of a week in the first round of Brazil’s election last Sunday, putting him in a face-off against leftist incumbent Dilma Rousseff at the end of the month.

Neves won 34% of the vote, Rousseff took 42% and green party candidate Marina Silva took about 20% — and on Thursday, Silva endorsed Neves, making it a contest of free-market ideas vs. big-government statism.

But what’s even more telling is an old story — shown in an infographic by popular Brazilian economist Ricardo Amorim.

In a Twitter post, Amorim showed a near-exact correlation among Brazil’s states’ welfare dependency and their votes for leftist Workers Party incumbent Rousseff.

Virtually every state that went for Rousseff has at least 25% of the population dependent on Brazil’s Bolsa Familia welfare program of cash for single mothers, given for keeping children vaccinated and in school.

States with less than 25% of the population on Bolsa Familia overwhelmingly went for Neves and his policies of growth.

The World Bank and others praise Bolsa Familia’s “poverty alleviation.” Problem is, “some experts warn that a wide majority cannot get out of this dependence relationship with the government,” as the U.K. Guardian put it.

And whether it’s best for a country that aspires to become a global economic powerhouse to have a quarter of the population — 50 million people — dependent on welfare and producing nothing is questionable.

The cash payouts amount to a half percentage of GDP and 2.5% of government spending. Money spent on welfare is money that can’t be put to use in creating jobs.

Amorim points out that Brazil’s 2% average GDP between 2011 and 2013 is the second lowest in all Latin America, topping only El Salvador, another country with a sizable welfare population — and millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Fact is, the left cannot survive without a vast class of dependents. And once in, dependents have difficulty getting out.

So Brazil’s election may come down to a question of whether it wants to be a an economic powerhouse — or a handout republic.


The Dole: New data on federal public assistance programs show we’ve reached an ignominious milestone: More than 100 million Americans are getting some form of “means-tested” welfare assistance.

The Census Bureau found 51 million on food stamps at the end of 2012 and 83 million on Medicaid, with tens of millions of households getting both. Another 4 million were on unemployment insurance.

The percentage of American households on welfare has reached 35%. If we include other forms of government assistance such as Medicare and Social Security, almost half of all households are getting a check or other form of government assistance. The tipping point is getting closer and closer. (IBD)

And it’s not for a lack of trying on the Democrats part.

Dependence is good for the country, after all. Remember, Unemployment is Job Stimulus! 🙂

We are from the Government and we are here to help you…. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy


Michael Ramirez Cartoon

If You Like Your Plan…

President Obama’s famous promise that “you can keep your plan and your doctor, no matter what” was not the only misleading argument he made for his health care plan. There is yet another controversy, with even bigger consequences, brewing for Americans who already have health care.

Analysts predict that as ObamaCare takes hold, it will mean the end of employer-provided insurance, with former Obama adviser Zeke Emanuel predicting that80 percent of such plans will disappear within ten years.

It’s nothing I didn’t predict.

“For a worker making only $15 an hour, typical employer coverage for a family costs $15,000 or $16,000, that’s more than half of that worker’s annual wage,” explained health care economist John Goodman.

“So lots of employers,” he argued, will “find it attractive to send their low income employees to the exchange.”

In his first presidential campaign, well before the law passed, Obama argued employer coverage was too important to change, saying anything that would weaken it would be wrong.

In his second debate with Republican nominee John McCain in 2008, Obama said, “This would lead to the unraveling of the employer-based health care system. That, I don’t think, is the kind of change that we need.”

He was referring to a proposal from McCain in 2008 offering every American a $5,000 tax credit instead of tax-free insurance only for those who get coverage at work.

In the same debate, Obama said, “Now, Senator McCain has a different kind of approach. He says that he’s going to give you a $5,000 tax credit. What he doesn’t tell you is that he is going to tax your employer-based health care benefits for the first time ever.”

But now, analysts predict ObamaCare will go even further and actually eliminate those plans altogether.

Goodman noted that Obama “accused John McCain of trying to undermine employer-provided health insurance. And now we find that ObamaCare is having the very impact that Obama warned against. It may completely erode health insurance provided by employers.”(FOX)


Federal, state and local governments will spend a total of $1.4 trillion on health care this year, which will account for a record-high 46% of the nation’s total health care tab, according to spending data released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

That’s up from the government’s 39% share just a decade ago, and the share is expected to hit 48% by 2023, as government programs continue to grow faster than the overall health care economy, the report found.

If this trend continues, government will pay for more than half of the nation’s health costs by 2028.

ObamaCare is fueling some of this spending surge. This year, federal spending on health care is expected to climb an eye-opening 14.7%. And its growth rate will exceed that of private spending for at least the next 10 years, the data show.

CMS also expects Medicaid spending to shoot up 18.4% this year, thanks largely to 28 states’ expansion of the Medicaid program under ObamaCare.

New Ideas Needed

To Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former head of the Congressional Budget Office and now president of the American Action Forum, this trend is troubling.

“You are basically saying, we want to put a lot of the health sector’s future innovation in the hands of government programs,” he said, adding that the government doesn’t have a good track record when it comes to innovation.

ObamaCare is also likely behind the $1 billion drop in out-of-pocket spending this year — something that happened only three times before since 1960.

Out-of-pocket costs as a share of health spending have been dropping steadily for decades. In 1960, consumers paid 48% of the nation’s health care costs out of pocket; this year, it will be 11%.

But ObamaCare will accelerate this trend by driving more spending through insurance companies and government programs. By 2023, as a result, direct spending will account for less than 10% of the nation’s health tab.

While that drop in out-of-pocket costs might seem like good news, some health care economists say it will fuel health care inflation.

These economists point out that the less consumers are aware of the cost of health care, the more they’ll likely demand, which has contributed to cost spikes in the past.

Outside of ObamaCare, employer-provided health care has been shifting toward health savings accounts.

HSAs combine high deductibles with a tax-free savings account to cover out-of-pocket costs. They’ve been widely credited with contributing to the slowdown in health spending over the past five years.

Drug Affordability

This year, 17.4 million are enrolled in an HSA plan, says America’s Health Insurance Plans, up from 1 million in 2006.

CMS data also show that prescription drugs accounted for 9.5% of health spending this year.

The insurance industry has mounted a series of attacks on the drug industry for what it claims are outrageous prices on new specialty drugs, particularly Sovaldi, which offers a cure for hepatitis C but costs $80,000.

“We cannot have affordable health care in America without affordable pricing,” AHIP CEO Karen Ignagni said in a statement. “As health spending increases, all segments of the industry must work together to reduce costs.”

Despite these complaints, drug spending will account for a lower share of health spending this year than it did a decade ago, when it was 10.1%. Drug spending today is even lower than it was in 1960, when its share of health spending was 9.8%.

And CMS expects drug spending’s share to continue falling, hitting 9.4% by 2023.

In contrast, the “net cost of private health insurance” — which is industry revenue after paying claims — is on its way up.

CMS expects these insurance costs to account for 6.6% of the nation’s health spending by 2023, up from 6.4% this year and only about 2.4% in 1960. (IBD)


Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Tipping Point


The Dole: New data on federal public assistance programs show we’ve reached an ignominious milestone: More than 100 million Americans are getting some form of “means-tested” welfare assistance.

The Census Bureau found 51 million on food stamps at the end of 2012 and 83 million on Medicaid, with tens of millions of households getting both. Another 4 million were on unemployment insurance.

The percentage of American households on welfare has reached 35%. If we include other forms of government assistance such as Medicare and Social Security, almost half of all households are getting a check or other form of government assistance. The tipping point is getting closer and closer.

So much is shocking and dismaying about these numbers. How is it that the number of recipients and the price tag for many of these programs kept skyrocketing though the recession officially ended in 2009? Normally, you’d expect welfare caseloads to fall in a recovery as the unemployment rate dips, but this time welfare participation keeps expanding.

Perhaps this is because this administration and many Democrats in Congress, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi, have told Americans that welfare benefits are a stimulus to the economy (sic). Apparently, the left believes that if every family were on food stamps, the economy would return to its glory days.

The feds have also created outreach programs — including radio and TV ads in multiple languages — to encourage people to sign up for the dole because, as one ad put it, this “helps the local community.”

The new statistics also highlight how limited work requirements are for welfare benefits. In 1996 when a Republican Congress and President Bill Clinton enacted landmark welfare reform laws, the old-fashioned cash welfare assistance (AFDC) was replaced with a time-limited assistance program (TANF) that required work for benefits.

This was a huge policy success as millions of former welfare recipients — more than half that were enrolled in the program — moved on to the economic ladder by getting jobs. But that program today is only 5% of the welfare safety net. Most of the other dozens of programs do not require work, so welfare reform has been effectively eviscerated.

Another shocking feature of these statistics is that they don’t even include income-transfer programs such as unemployment insurance and disability. These two add another $250 billion to the cost of welfare and are two of the most abused and scandal-ridden dispensers of federal cash.

On top of that, the 2012 numbers exclude most of the 3 million Obama has added to the ranks of Medicaid due to ObamaCare. The dependency problem is getting worse, not better. And by the way, in most states these programs don’t require work. In fact, the benefits end once an individual moves into a job.

Putting all these programs together, a family can get a package of benefits equivalent to a $35,000 a year job in 11 states, and in Hawaii the benefits can exceed what a $60,000 a year job would offer, according to a Cato Institute analysis.

Is it any wonder we’re having trouble moving people out of welfare into work? Half of all low-income households today have no one working at all.

Staying on this course is a recipe for social chaos and economic decline. “The days of the dole are numbered,” Lyndon Johnson optimistically declared when he launched the War on Poverty. That was 50 years ago, and the welfare state continues to grow in size, cost and lives lost to the trap of government dependency.

Rep. Paul Ryan had the right idea when he called for turning many of the welfare programs such as Medicaid and food stamps back to the states so they can find ways to expeditiously move people back into work.

In the 1990s, innovative governors, including Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, John Engler of Michigan and William Weld of Massachusetts, helped turn around lives through smart and effective welfare reforms.

With 100 million Americans on welfare, we have a genuine crisis on our hands. It’s time again to let the states find solutions where the federal government has indisputably failed or hasn’t even tried. (IBD)

In Dependence 2014

Since the 1960s, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) has provided a list of all federal subsidy programs. That includes subsidies to individuals, businesses, nonprofit groups, and state and local governments. The CFDA includes subsidies for farmers, retirees, school lunches, rural utilities, the energy industry, rental housing, public broadcasting, job training, foreign aid, urban transit, and much more.

The chart below shows that the number of federal subsidy programs has almost doubled since 1990, reaching 2,282 today. The genesis of the CFDA was the explosion of hand-out programs under President Lyndon Johnson. Members of Congress needed a handy guide to inform their constituents about all the new freebies.

(so they’ll vote for them, in other words- BRIBES!! with their own money, btw)

The growth in subsidies may be good for the politicians, but it is terribly corrosive for American society. Each subsidy program costs money and creates economic distortions. Each program generates a bureaucracy, spawns lobby groups, and encourages more people to demand further benefits from the government.

Individuals, businesses, and nonprofit groups that become hooked on subsidies essentially become tools of the state. They have less incentive to innovate, and they shy away from criticizing the hand that feeds them. Government subsidies are like an addictive drug, undermining American traditions of individual reliance, voluntary charity, and entrepreneurialism.

The rise in the size and scope of federal subsidies means that Americans are steadily losing their independence. That is something sobering to think about on July 4.

Which subsidies should we cut? We should start with these.

The Politics of Food

In January 2009, there were 31,939,110 Americans receiving food stamps; in November 2012, the number rose to 47,692,896, almost a 50% increase. And it increase again in January 2013.

Not content with having more Americans on food stamps than people in Spain, the Obama administration is ringing the dinner bell for illegal aliens. We’ll feed you and not check your status.

As we wrote last July, just as food stamp use has skyrocketed here under President Obama, so have marketing efforts to Hispanics under a partnership with Mexico.

We dubbed the program “Fat and Furious” after the administration’s gun-running program that also seemingly had worthy goals but had unclear motives and pernicious effects.

“USDA and the government of Mexico have entered into a partnership to help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance,” the USDA explained in a paragraph on its “Reaching Low-Income Hispanics With Nutrition Assistance” Web page. “Mexico will help disseminate this information through its embassy and network of approximately 50 consular offices.”

Now the watchdog group Judicial Watch has obtained Spanish-language fliers through a Freedom of Information Act request.

It announced Thursday that the “promotion of the food stamp program, now known as SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), includes a Spanish-language flier provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA.”

The interesting thing about this flier is a statement advising Mexicans in the U.S. that they don’t need to declare their immigration status in order to get aid. Emphasized in bold and underlined, it reads, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”

They get the carrot, we get the stick! Up our “collective” asses!

This is a huge carrot to incentivize illegal immigration at the same time the Obama administration is pushing what is called “comprehensive immigration reform” designed to assimilate those illegal aliens already here.

But don’t worry about the Border Security and the flood of illegals. Just because in 1986 it was 3 million and now it would be at 12 Million it can’t happen again… 🙂

An administration unwilling to secure our borders is ringing the dinner bell for anyone able to sneak past the U.S. Border Patrol.

Then with Amnesty they can vote for more Democrats!

“The revelation that the USDA is actively working with the Mexican government to promote food stamps for illegal aliens should have a direct impact on the fate of the immigration bill now being debated in Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These disclosures further confirm the fact that the Obama administration cannot be trusted to protect our borders or enforce our immigration laws.”

Indeed it should, for it is contemptible that an administration that has run the U.S. economy into the ground and increased legitimate demand by legal U.S. citizens for food aid to be actively recruiting foreign nationals to further burden American taxpayers who have their own families to feed. (IBD)

But you don’t want children to starve do you? you heartless, mean, cruel, nasty old racist! 🙂

Rep. Tom Marino, R-PA, introduced the SNAP Transparency Act on Friday, which would require the USDA to publicize what food stamps pay for.

“SNAP is a perfect example of how our government spends too much money with too little oversight and accountability,” said Marino in a statement.

A 2012 Yale study estimated Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program benefits, formerly called food stamps, pay for $2 billion in sugary drinks alone every year. A 2010 study by the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that spending was even higher, estimating soda companies reap as much as $4 billion each year in SNAP money. (WE)

So Liberals want to regulate what foods you can get and what you can drink. How about starting here. 🙂

Oh, sorry, these are the Once and Future Democrat Dependent Majority for life, can’t screw with them…No waste, fraud or abuse here! 🙂

Food stamp fraud has more than doubled since Barack Obama took office in 2009. In 2011, according to the USDA, food stamp fraud was approximately $750 million. The type of fraud noted was derived from selling Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to food retailers for cents on the dollar.

The USDA stated, “In 2011, program costs totaled $75.7 billion. Using the most recent data on trafficking available, USDA estimated that trafficking would be 1 percent of $75 billion, or approximately $750 million.” (Breitbart)

But if you propose “cutting” this out, or tightening the rules to save money, you’re just a asshole who wants kids to starve!

Don’t you dare touch The Dependent Democrat Majority For Life! These are there voters. Their power base. How dare you want to touch them in any way.

Think Progress (a far left “think tank”): Rather than looking for cuts in the food stamp program, perhaps lawmakers could instead focus on crop subsidies that fuel the junk food industry.

Narrow minded, partisan ,anti-capitalist attack instead of cutting The Once and Future Dependent Democrats, wow, what a shocker!

The Politics of Food. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon 043013

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Food Stamp Nation

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Heather Ginsburg (townhall): With yesterday’s job report, many are trying to pretend that this is a sign that America is on its way up and out of the recession. Liberals are trying to explain that jobs were added, they somehow forget to include that thousands of people left the job market too. And we are now seeing another sign that perhaps, this Obama economy really isn’t helping the American people all that much. 15% of Americans are now on food stamps! This doesn’t seem like a recovery to me!

The number of Americans on food stamps this January was 1.8% higher than January 2012. The food stamp program is now the government’s largest social welfare program. It was no surprise that this program grew when the economy was shrinking, but now that it is supposedly growing, why aren’t people moving off of assistance?

WSJ: Since 2008, enrollment has increased by 70 percent, reaching a record 47.8 million this past December. Funding for the food stamp program—or, as it’s now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—has doubled since 2008, hitting nearly $80 billion in fiscal year 2012.

In 2009, as part of the stimulus bill, the Obama Administration suspended food stamps’ work requirements for able-bodied adults. The suspension was to be only temporary and end in 2010. However, Obama’s last two budgets called for a continuation of the suspension. Instead of waiting for Congress to act, the Administration began issuing work requirement waivers.

So another reason for the Democrats not to pass an actual Budget, for real.

The government’s welfare system has continued to expand in size since the “War on Poverty” began in 1965. Total government welfare spending is nearly $1 trillion annually, and under current projections will continue to climb. Yet, while a larger government welfare system may mean more aid to address the symptoms of poverty, the welfare system fails to address the underlying causes of poverty and can often lead to a trap of dependence. (WSJ)

But if the trap is intentional? Because then the trapped rats vote for the person with the most Cheese for them, aka Democrats. 🙂

Add in “undocumented” Democrats (illegal aliens) and you have the makings of great dependent peasant class for the elitist Democrats to Lord Over and to Rule.

What could be better, from a Liberal point of view. 🙂

With 47.3 million Americans, or nearly 1 in every 7 people, now receiving food stamps from the government, it seems quite clear that the recovery isn’t getting down the chain to everybody.

Illinois was the only state to see a double-digit year-over-year jumps in use, while Oregon, Maine, Missouri, Texas, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Idaho, North Dakota, Utah and North Carolina all posted annual drops.

Mississippi was the state with the largest share of its population relying on food stamps — 22% — though Washington, DC was a bit higher overall at 23%. One in five residents in Louisiana, Tennessee and George also were food-stamp recipients. Wyoming had the smallest share of its population on food stamps — 7%.

So when liberals try and pretend that red states are the worst and are receiving the most assistance, let’s just look at the facts, Washington, D.C. receives the most assistance. Washington, D.C. is also one of the bluest areas in this country. Yes, Mississippi is the second highest and is also traditionally red, but also look at all of the historically red states that were able to shrink their number of users. Illinois, the President’s home state, saw double-digit year-over-year jumps? Obviously something isn’t going right there. Not only do we know they have problems with their gun violence, yet strict gun laws, but now we also know that perhaps the Democrat policies there are not all that helpful to its residents.

The constantly growing number of recipients of food stamps is getting out of hand. Until there is a serious reform of this system, we will continue to see abuse. Additionally, until President Obama realizes his economic reforms are not helping every day Americans we will not see this number shrink.

And Obama will never realize that. EVER.

He is far too arrogant, elitist, and politically motivated to ever bother with such analysis.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

stay jobless

Your Brain on Liberal Socialism

Your Brain on Liberal Socialism