You’ve Heard the Fox news, Republican Tea Party/Evangelical Lies So Please Take 30 Minutes and Listen to the Truth

There is a steady stream of lies pouring from evangelical and other far right media about the Affordable Care Act. The right has lied and obstructed. Please take 30 minutes and open yourself to the truth about the Affordable Care Act. There are actually Republican governors sacrificing their people out of spite against the president. Are they racists, evil or just more deluded evangelicals of the kind I describe in my new book exploring the roots of American religious delusion And God Said, “Billy!? Maybe you know a reasonable Republican. There use to be many of them like my late close personal friend Congressman Jack Kemp. Today the Tea Party/evangelical-led right would not let them run. Please watch this:


Frank Schaeffer is a writer. His latest book — And God Said, “Billy!exploring the roots of American religious delusion, and offering another way to approach true spirituality, is on Kindle, iBook and NOOK for $3.99, and in paperback.

About Frank Schaeffer

Frank Schaeffer is an American author, film director, screenwriter and public speaker. He is the son of the late theologian and author Francis Schaeffer. He became a Hollywood film director and author, writing several internationally acclaimed novels including And God Said, "Billy!" as well as the Calvin Becker Trilogy depicting life in a fundamentalist mission home-- Portofino, Zermatt, and Saving Grandma.

  • SC

    Can we at least agree that we don’t need any more political leaders who use our money to create greater levels of government dependence? It might sound noble to say we’re providing health care for all, but without fundamental ideological changes, in the end Obamacare will be another top-heavy, inefficient program used to create more dependence on government. It will become another burden (perhaps the largest one ever) on the shoulders of Americans, and will bury us more deeply in debt.

    I am pleading with you to put aside party loyalty and recognize this truth. It doesn’t take special powers of observation to see it. We will not turn things around unless we can get enough people to move beyond partisanship to see through the sham and shame of big government ideology.

    • gimpi1

      SC, may I ask, how is it that every other advanced nation on earth can provide health care for their citizens at a much lower cost than we currently spend, yet you are sure we can’t? Do you think we’re somehow inferior to, for example, Canada or Germany?

      • Raymond

        Hey, maybe he has something! When the Government builds roads, that just makes us dependent on the Government to help us get around. Better by far if we pave the roads around our houses, and businesses pave roads that lead to their buildings, and the rest can just go away.
        And Defense too! If we depend on Government to defend our counry, or the police to prevent crime, that just makes us dependent sheep – easy to conquer is the Government decides to implement martial law. Better by far to just buy all the guns you can so you can protect yourself!
        Makes perfect sense!

        • Raymond

          That didnt need /sarcasm tags did it?

          • gimpi1

            Not for me :)

            That’s also pretty-much how I feel about it, Raymond. Back in the day, private roads and bridges, private police forces and such were common. As technology advanced, they proved inadequate to the tasks society had. We changed. Now, anyone suggesting that we do without interstate highways, public bridges or municipal policing would be a laughing-stock.

            Medicine has re-invented itself several times since the discovery of germ-theory. Our current model of health-insurance was created for a 1930s-1960s style of medicine. As technology advanced, it now proves inadequate to the task society needs – providing access to medical care for our citizens without bringing them financial ruin in the event of major illness. We need to change. Other countries look at our overpriced, poorly-performing health-care system – with medical costs savaging the lives of so many families – and regard us as a laughing-stock. Deservedly so.

            There are different models all over the world that we can look at for ideas on what form that change should take. The one model no advanced nation that I know of uses is the one many conservative people seem to favor: Just leave everything up to the marketplace, and if someone can’t afford care, let them become disabled and/or die. I don’t regard not using such a model as “increasing dependence.” I regard it as being rational.

          • cole

            Just leave everything up to the marketplace, and if someone can’t afford care, let them become disabled and/or die ……………thats exactly what it all boils down to….all the other stuff doesn’t seem to matter when it is your loved one dying from lack of medical care

        • SC

          Your sarcasm is what hurts rational dialogue. No one is recommending removal of all government but a far more efficient and responsible government that encourages as much individual and community ownership as possible. If you cannot recognize damage of the reckless financial mismanagement and overspending and the pervasive top heavy bureaucratic philosophy, you’re operating in the very blind partisan loyalty that we must overcome.

          • Raymond

            OK, then which services would you want to continue and which would you want to remove? I think there would be as many lists as there are people, and there would be those who would be in favor of cuting exactly the services that I mentioned whimsically.

            In addition, one danger is that people will be in favor of services that they receive and against services that they do not receive. Or that they oppose because of blind partisan loyalty. (Are you in favor of defense cuts? The defense budget is chronically mismanaged and bloated.)

            Many politicians are against services for the poor and elderly because they personally are wealthy, but are in favor of (for example) farm subsidies, because they have farms.

          • SC

            My point is not as much a pick-n-choose what you want the government to do with our money but a need to demand more accountability and refuse more control and spending until responsibility is demonstrated with what is already given. This is what any wise parent would do with children. But we should understand that anyone who says, “I think the government should support, spend ….” ” is really saying, “I think the government should take our money and support, spend…”

          • Raymond

            That’s nice. No specific recommendations, but those other guys over there should make better decisions. I would tend to agree with that generally, but defining what you think those better decisions are specifically would help your case.

          • SC

            You seem to be dancing around the primary point. Please offer your opinion on the state of government use of our money.

          • Raymond

            You’re the one who said we need “major reforms and ideological shifts”. But you are also the one who won’t name em.

          • SC

            So you feel our government is doing a good job handling our money and you’re ready to give them more and trust them to be responsible with it?

          • gimpi1

            You didn’t ask me, SC, but I’ll answer:

            The government is far from perfect, but I don’t have the massive mistrust you do. I see about the same amount of bureaucratic snafus and general mess-ups as I see in large private-sector organizations. Most likely because both sectors are staffed by people, and people mess up. I don’t expect perfection in anything we do, because people aren’t perfect. Refusing to do something because it can’t be done perfectly is a sure way to do nothing at all. I refuse to let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

            Private-sector companies are often bureaucratic and inefficient. I have worked for some that meet that definition. They don’t get weeded out by the marketplace, contrary to belief. They often do just fine for generations, coasting on old-boys networks, informal monopolies, back-room agreements and inertia. As to corruption, remember Enron?

            Before the ACA, insurance companies would conduct “reviews” of anyone who had gotten a diagnosis that might prove costly to treat. Remember the woman who was denied treatment for breast cancer because she had “failed to disclose that she had been treated for acne as a teenager” and they decided that was a pre-existing condition that disqualified her for coverage (after she had been paying premiums for years)? Remember the changing “lifetime limits” that would suddenly drop to $10,000 or less after a diagnosis? Remember cancer-survivors being locked out of both the insurance market and the job market – since insurance companies didn’t want to have to cover a potential relapse? I regard these examples as corruption. How do you feel about them?

            I’ve tried to answer your question. How about mine? Why do you feel that every other nation in the world can come up with a way to provide medical care for all citizens at much less than we pay, but we are incapable of pulling that off? Do you think we Americans are uniquely stupid?

          • Mark

            So, the parts of the government (defense, maybe roads…) that you like should stay, and the rest should go? We could save a lot of money if we drop Medicare and Social Security. People have certainly become dependent on those programs, and nobody can argue the inefficiency there. And maybe we should just stop the stimulus – just pull the plug on it, and let the economy react, and to hell with it.

      • SC

        It’s as simple as looking at our track record. What does government control that does not become too costly and inefficient? This is why I said we would need some major reforms and ideological shifts before we could reasonably trust our government with something as big as national health care. The only way you can deny this is to deny the facts in blind partisan loyalty.

        • gimpi1

          What about the interstate system? That seems to work pretty well, or it did until we started cutting maintenance in order to cut taxes in the 1980s. The space program worked pretty well, as I recall. Rural Electrification made the modern age possible, outside of cities.

          As to our current health-care system, it pretty much defines costly and inefficient. We spend almost twice as much per capita, for poor results. You know this. I’m looking around the world, and seeing much better results, pretty much everywhere. I simply refuse to believe that we in the states are more stupid, greedy or helpless than everyone else in the world.

          I don’t really have much partisan loyalty. I just hate like heck to see people suffering, being bankrupted and dying with our current system.

          • Ross

            If you are looking around the world, please tell everyone how they have funded it… not Obama’s swindle.

  • NewHampshire

    The legit tea party formed in 2007 has nothing to do with the GOP or the evangelical right. They want nothing to do with either. Please when you report stories, get your facts straight.

  • SC

    If we hope to fix our national problems, we must stop using the phrase, “The government should pay for…” and instead say, “You and I should pay for…”

    Instead of saying, “The government should pay for XYZ,” try saying, “You and I should pay for XYZ” and see if this changes your opinion.

    The government does not “make” anything, and it “creates” no wealth. It simply takes from those who labor, and redistributes the wealth to others.

    Government doesn’t give you anything unless it first takes it from you. The only way politicians get money is to take it from taxpayers.