Have you ever wondered why you vote the way you vote? It seems it is a little more complex and a little less comical than some would like to make it.
Take the recent study by National Media Research Planning and Placement suggesting there might be a link between Republicans, Democrats and the type of alcohol they prefer. The study seems to be nothing more than an amusing diversion at best. Seems a better analysis would include having bartenders use the information to do some predictive analysis about which patrons are more likely to pay for their own drinks as opposed to those who might try to get their drinks for free.
Or how about the new study which will probably make the rounds on late night comedy shows from The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science which found that felons favored Democrats six-to-one in three states which allow felons to vote, post incarceration, according to the Washington Examiner. more >>
Like the sun rises in the East or that Kanye loves Kanye. Another indisputable truth is that - after its passage and being upheld by the Supreme Court, and after its implementation and subsequent unilateral changes by President Obama and his administration - you still don't know what this law is, how it works or why you should even care. By this time, you're disgusted; you just want to start again.
That Administration doesn't want to start again. They want to pretend that all is well while they make unlawful (see, illegal) changes to the law to fit their political need. Recently, they changed the individual mandate - the heart and soul of Obamacare. If you had a plan cancelled, like millions have across the nation, you can now register for a bare bones policy (the kind that is illegal under Obamacare, but now Obama says you can have one, so just keep it on the down-low, cool?) But, it only applies to those under 30 or those with a hardship. I'm not sure what they mean by hardship, but it could be something like, "Hey! This damn website don't work worth a crap! Now what the hell am I supposed to do?"
Since its inception, the Obama Administration has unilaterally changed the law more than a dozen times. These changes did not make their way through the House and Senate with major debate and recorded votes to await and eventually get the signature of the President. Those are laws. Here's an instructional video for those of you who may not be familiar with how our system of government works: more >>
2013 was the year of Obamacare whoppers. But the nastiest truth about the health law is still to be exposed – the tightening hold the federal government will have over your doctor, even if you're paying with private insurance. Obama said "you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making." It was a lie from day one, just like the president's other sales pitches.
President Obama's often repeated claim that "if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan" was the obvious whopper of 2013. Over six million people had their plans cancelled already.
Then, on December 20th, the president brushed aside reporters' questions about the latest changes to Obamacare by brazenly claiming "the basic structure of the law is working." That's a lie too. more >>
Massachusetts and Vermont have suspended payments to CGI Group, the same contractor behind Healthcare.gov. A policy expert argues that CGI's failures are due to the complexity of the Affordable Care Act, also known as "Obamacare."
"The problem is the complexity of the laws," Ed Haislmaier, senior research fellow for Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation, told The Christian Post in an interview Friday. Haislmaier argued that Obamacare required excessive regulation for the subsidies, causing the famous Healthcare.gov backup and the state backups as well.
The scholar turned to Massachusetts as a prime example. "Massachusetts has been running a similar program for subsidizing people to buy coverage since 2007," and this program was "politically in sync with the administration." Nevertheless, the state's exchange allegedly experiences so many problems that it has decided to publicly reprimand CGI, withdrawing money from the company. more >>
With skyrocketing tuition, there is no denying that college is too expensive. My friend, Professor Richard Vedder of Ohio University, has produced a lifetime of work showing that colleges' hefty price is directly related to students' easy access to Federal Pell grants and student loans. Those taxpayer-subsidized funds allow universities to handsomely compensate tenured professors who rarely teach and ensure administrators at state institutions remain the highest paid public employees in America.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out this model is unsustainable. With student loans already surpassing $1.2 trillion, this is a financial bubble ready to burst. And the failure will be another burden on taxpayers because these loans are backed by the government. That is why we must insist that public colleges and universities model their business practices after private industry, such as incentivizing schools to reduce the time it takes to graduate and to reduce budgets by outsourcing services which can be performed better and more economically by the private sector.
Privatized dorm buildings, food services, and busing contracts are some good examples of public colleges and universities contracting services to save taxpayers money. But one important outsourcing idea is under attack by the Obama administration and government bureaucrats. more >>
Christian scholars agree that the unequal distribution of income is not inherently unChristian or unjust, so long as the poor can produce enough wealth to sustain themselves.
"I think that a good, short statement of a biblical definition of economic justice is that God wants every person and every family to have access to the productive resources, so that if they act responsibly they can earn their own way and be productive members of society," Ron Sider, distinguished professor of Theology, Holistic Ministry & Public Policy at Palmer Theological Seminary, told The Christian Post on Wednesday. "I am not arguing for equality of income and wealth," Sider stated, bluntly.
Jordan Ballor, research fellow at the Acton Institute and executive editor of the Journal of Markets & Morality, agreed with Sider that income inequality is not inherently unbiblical. "The challenge is distinguishing natural inequalities, which arise out of the variety of human gifts and talents, from unrighteous and unjust inequality," Ballor explained. more >>