Obamacare Is Taking Credit for Numbers That Aren't Theirs

A reported 20 million people gained healthcare coverage under the Affordable Care Act, but dig a little deeper and that number is skewed. Both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have said that 14.5 million of the 20 million were under Medicaid or CHIP, the children's version of Medicaid.

"But somewhere between a quarter and a half of that 14.5 million were already eligible for Medicaid even before Obamacare took effect. So these numbers that they're taking credit for, first of all, a lot of it is Medicaid and not the standard Obamacare we always talk about," Co-host Stu Burguiere said Wednesday on The Glenn Beck Program.

In fact, many were already eligible for existing programs, but they just weren't on them. In actuality, about three million new people gained new coverage because of Obamacare.

"So, you lost your doctor for three million people. Why didn't we just design something for those three million people?" Glenn asked.

It's estimated that five to seven million people lost their preferred provided due to Obama's Affordable Care Act.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: So last night they had the debate. And you're looking at the fact-check. Anything big come out of the fact-check that one of them was wrong on?

STU: There's a ton of this stuff that, you know, you can nitpick. One of the things I did like was one thing that Cruz said that was rated true. Was Cruz's -- Rand Paul said this as well.

About 14 -- most of the Obamacare people are actually covered by Medicaid. 14.5 million of the 20 million that gained coverage were under Medicaid or CHIP, which is the children's health care version of it. But somewhere between a quarter and a half of that 14.5 million were already eligible for Medicaid even before Obamacare took effect. So these numbers that they're taking credit for, first of all, a lot of it is Medicaid and not the standard Obamacare we always talk about.

GLENN: Sure.

STU: And secondly, a decent amount of those people were already eligible for programs that existed. Just weren't on them. That's a pretty significant thing.

PAT: That's huge.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: So that number of 20 million goes down to about 3 million very quickly.

GLENN: And so everybody -- you lost your doctor for 3 million people.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Why didn't we just design something for those 3 million people?

STU: Right. And that's what a lot of the Republican plans are trying to do now.

PAT: And five to 7 million people did, lose their health care that they liked.

STU: That was another one that they fact-checked. So Cruz said 6 million people had their insurance cancelled because of Obamacare. They are -- CNN -- or, excuse me, PolitiFact is the one doing this. They are saying that independent researchers estimated it was only 2.6 million.

GLENN: That's a lie.

STU: And then only 1 million ended up with no coverage at all. Of course, that wasn't the standard at all.

GLENN: Right.

STU: The standard was, "Would you lose your coverage?" So they're saying -- but even like the fact-check on it is saying only three million people were actually told they were going to lose their insurance.

GLENN: Guys, I went to the doctor yesterday for the first time. I had to pay a 45-dollar copay. Our copays used to be free.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Then they were $10.

PAT: Then it was 20.

GLENN: Then it was 20. Now it's $45. Why?

PAT: Sometimes more than that, depending on where you go.

GLENN: Because of Obamacare. Because they changed this and the insurance companies no longer even provide the insurance that I want to provide for the staff.

PAT: And we went from no deductible to deductibles, so...

GLENN: Right. So don't tell me that it was only 7 million or 3 million that lost their coverage. We are all covered. But we're all covered in ways that are much more expensive and not as good.

STU: Yeah. And premiums have risen by -- and this is in the fact-check. Cruz said they're skyrocketing. Premiums have risen by an average of 25 percent across the states that use the federal exchange.

GLENN: Imagine.

STU: Highest increases in Arizona. 116 percent. Oklahoma was 69 percent.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Jeez.

STU: But, like, I love this little disclaimer they put at the end: But it's important to note that 81 percent of consumers qualified for subsidies to help blunt the cost of their care.

PAT: So the rest of us are paying for it.

STU: Right. The rest of us are still paying for it. It still costs a lot more. It's just now you have other people that are footing the bill for it. That doesn't mean you're saving money.

GLENN: It costs a lot more, and your taxes will have to go up, or our debt goes up because somebody has to pay for that. That's crazy. It's absolutely crazy.

We've finally heard some news on the migrant caravan. Some of the migrants have given up and gone back home, but some are still there waiting at the border. A leader representing the group has decided to step forward, and he's made out a list of... demands. Remember when I said back in October that this caravan was originally formed as a Leftist act against the Honduran government by people with ties to Venezuela and Cuba? Well what do you know… wait until you hear who this guy is.

RELATED: BOMBSHELL: Filmmaker Ami Horowitz blows the lid off media's deceit about the migrant caravan

Alfonso Guerrero personally walked into the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana, Mexico with a list of demands from the caravan. Get a load of this. The caravan is demanding that if they're not granted immediate asylum they want the following:

  1. Fifty thousand dollars in cash for every caravan member (which would be a total of tens of millions).
  2. The immediate removal of all U.S. economic and military assets in Honduras.

Failure to comply to these demands will result in the caravan continuing to try and penetrate the U.S. border.

I mean, if you're trying to appear like some grassroots movement for migrants that are just escaping the dangers of their own country, you might want to - oh I don't know - tone down the crazy Leftist freedom fighter schtick. I'm just saying. Demanding millions of dollars AND the removal of the U.S. military from Honduras kinda just screams, "Hey check me out. I'm a Marxist terrorist." It would have been basically the same thing if he just charged up to the embassy wearing a beret and shouted "Viva la Revolution!!" while firing off an RPG.

Well, it turns out this isn't the first time Mr Guerrero has tried to claim asylum. Back in 1987 he claimed asylum in Mexico after being suspected by the Honduran and U.S. government for - wait for it - left wing terrorism… Jeez, you know you really can't make this stuff up. This is INSANE. Here's the story…

This is ridiculous. Can we all now agree that this entire charade is a fraudulent scam?

In 1987 Honduras was ground zero for U.S. and Soviet proxy forces fighting the Cold War. The Contra rebels were actually based there, and leftists terrorists would sometimes carry out operations in the country in response. On August 8th a bomb was thrown into the China Palace restaurant, just a few miles from the U.S. military base in Honduras. Six American soldiers were injured in the blast. Alfonso Guerrero was the primary suspect. He escaped to Mexico and claimed asylum. The Reagan Administration charged the Mexican government for quote "harboring a terrorist" for granting Guerrero protection.

But all the caravan wants is a better life in the United States… oh and millions of dollars AND a list of political demands for their home country. This is ridiculous. Can we all now agree that this entire charade is a fraudulent scam? This is a Leftist political stunt. It has been since the very beginning.

TRANS-INSANITY: Not everyone is bowing down to the PC culture


Here's an incident that you won't hear about anywhere else. It doesn't fit the mainstream media's transgender narrative, their fairy tale of infinite genders, where any criticism is viewed as transphobic and taboo and certainly not something that the majority of Americans think or feel.

Last week, in West Point, Virginia, a high school French teacher named Peter Vlaming was fired after a five-and-a-half hour hearing that centered on his refusal to use a transgender student's specific gender pronouns. Vlaming said that doing so violated his religious beliefs.

RELATED: There is no truth anymore

Vlaming's lawyer Shawn Voyles told reporters:

Tolerance is a two-way street. Unfortunately, tolerance on the part of the school division has been noticeably absent. It chose to impose its own orthodoxy on Mr. Vlaming and fired him because he didn't relinquish his rights protected by the First Amendment.

School administrators fired Vlaming "due to this insubordination and repeated refusal to comply with directives made to him by multiple WPPS administrators."

The school justified the firing by pointing to a set of policies aimed at curbing misgendering of transgender students.

Vlaming's lawyer disputed this, saying that the policies include no such mention of transgenderism, adding that:

My client respects the rights of all students, including this student's rights; he simply asked that his rights be respected as well. Unfortunately, the school division refused to consider any solutions that would respect the freedoms of everyone involved.

There is a ray of hope in all of this, though. The students. A group of students from the school immediately staged a walkout in protest of Vlaming's firing.

One student told reporters:

I feel like everyone should have the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion as well.

Students lined up outside the school with signs that said, "Free Vlam." Another included a quote from Ben Shapiro: "Facts don't care about your feelings." Another read "You can't impose delusion onto us."

You can sigh a sigh of relief. There's hope for the future yet.

Whether it's a 'War on Christmas' or just progressivism run amok, the song 'Baby It's Cold Outside' has been firmly in the crosshairs this holiday season. Here are just a few of the headlines making the rounds:

Should radio stations stop playing 'Baby, It's Cold Outside'?

They range from the previous as questioning and then roll right into the following and assume facts not in evidence.

'Baby, It's Cold Outside,' Seen As Sexist, Frozen Out by Radio Stations

It may be seen as sexist but according to one radio stations polling, only about 5% do. Then they go from saying it's sexist to straight up claiming it as a rape song.

Radio Bans 'Baby It's Cold Outside' Over Claims It's A Rape Song, English Teacher Explains Its Real Meaning

And then they just flat out call for its retirement.

Is it time to retire 'Baby, It's Cold Outside'?

The left might think they are woke and on the right side of history in the wake of the #MeToo movement — but how shocked do you think they'd be if they knew Glenn beat them to the punch over a decade ago? Don't believe me? Take a listen to this clip from our audio vault from 2008.

Christmas has arrived early for mainstream media. They have their first sentencing of a major player in President Trump's inner circle. Yesterday, Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen was sentenced by a federal judge in Manhattan. How did it come to this and how did Cohen explain himself to the judge? We start there next…

President Trump's former attorney, 52-year-old Michael Cohen, is going to jail. Well, it will probably be one of those federal prison camps with a dorm that's more like a college campus. But he's going to be locked up. A federal judge sentenced him to three years in prison for financial crimes, and two months for lying to Congress. He also ordered Cohen to pay $2 million in financial penalties. The judge called Cohen's misdeeds a "veritable smorgasbord of criminal conduct."

RELATED: Michael Cohen's plea deal won't lessen Trump's support. Here's why.

The judge said:

As a lawyer, Mr. Cohen should have known better. While Mr. Cohen is taking steps to mitigate his criminal conduct by pleading guilty and volunteering useful information to prosecutors, that does not wipe the slate clean.

Cohen pled guilty in August to eight criminal charges in two different cases. One brought by special counsel Robert Muller for Cohen's lying to Congress about a potential Trump Tower project in Moscow. The second was for bank-fraud, tax, and campaign finance violations brought by federal prosecutors in New York.

President Trump said recently that Cohen has simply been lying to get a reduced sentence for crimes that have nothing to do with him. Cohen was very emotional as he apologized to the judge, saying:

It was my own weakness and a blind loyalty to this man that led me to choose a path of darkness over light. Time and time again I felt it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds rather than to listen to my own inner voice and my moral compass.

The left thinks that Cohen's sentencing marks the beginning of the end for Trump's presidency. They may be ultimately disappointed in that regard. But this does intensify the long national nightmare of the Muller investigation that seems to have no end in sight.