In this episode- The Democrats want to take away your healthcare and they will make it a signature issue in the 2020 presidential election. https://www.google.com/amp/amp.nationalreview.com/article/446689/canadas-single-payer-health-care-system-cautionary-tale https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-single-payer-siren-song-1505256839 California leads the nation in liberal voters, it also leads the nation in poverty. http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article172973181.html The Democrats' attacks on Trump are blowing up in their faces. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/13/teflon-trump-democrats-messaging-242607 This is a creepy drone story. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/09/12/man-charged-after-drone-hovers-outside-high-rise/ Please get rid of this terrible Obama-era initiative on public school discipline. https://www.wsj.com/articles/another-obama-policy-betsy-devos-should-throw-out-1505256976 Massive numbers of people are "cutting the cord." http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/cord-cutting-2017-estimates-cancel-cable-satellite-tv-1202556594/
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
They've been tweeting to me, Bongino's a nut, Bongino's a blanker, blanker.
The Dan Bongino Show.
Everywhere big government gets bigger, corruption grows bigger, and these liberals just keep going on and on and on about how great big government is, and they can't prove to you any examples of how wonderful big government is almost anywhere.
Get ready to hear the truth about America.
Young kids, you are too stupid to figure out your health insurance needs, so we're gonna hammer your cabooses to death until you figure out that the government knows what's best and you're an idiot.
On a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Alright, welcome to The Renegade Republican with Dan Bongino.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Hanging in there, Dano.
Hanging in.
Hey, so my wife and kids made it back yesterday from Maryland, all safe and sound.
No problem.
They didn't run out of gas.
But, you know, funny thing with my five-year-old.
She is... Gosh, I love her to death, Amelia.
She's so cute.
She's on the plane.
They took Spirit Airlines on the way back, which is a no-frills airline.
You know, you pay for a seat.
That's it.
You're not getting anything.
No drinks, no nothing.
So we're on the way back, and my five-year-old is in school, and they do snack time.
And she's used to flying on a plane, and there was no snacks.
She goes, Mommy.
She wakes up.
She was sleeping, my five-year-old.
She goes, Mommy, did I miss snack time?
She was so, she, you know, snack time on a, that's how kids think.
That's how kids snack time on a plane.
I love it.
They're almost like liberals.
It's funny.
Like they, they just expect things to happen.
Gosh, I love her.
I couldn't, I couldn't get out of it.
Like your kids are so cute.
You just want to like hug them.
And they're so, uh, Mommy, did I miss snack time?
All right, a lot to get to.
So much going on.
So we have more 8 Minute Abs, Joe.
8 Minute Abs!
Yes, it's happening again.
Shout out to the Wall Street Journal for bringing it up.
Is it James Freeman over there?
How liberals, how their constant eight-minute ab sales pitches about free stuff are blowing up in their face.
We covered this a couple weeks ago in the eight-minute ab show, which I strongly encourage you to listen to, but Joe, it's happening again.
Now, the gist of that, for those of you who missed that show, is that the liberals for so long have been selling us on nonsensical things like eight-minute abs, which are never, remember the video?
You know, eight-minute abs, you can get abs in training eight minutes.
Something that is impossible and is never gonna happen, that liberals have been doing it so long That other liberals can now upend the eight minute abs people by saying, look, I'm going to do seven minute abs and six minute abs.
And you know, my, my cop friend, uh, uh, who called me recently and said, you missed the point of that, that eight minute abs thing from something about Mary.
The funniest part is that the guys like when, when Ben Stiller tells them, well, why not six minute abs?
He's like, You can't do abs in six minutes!
The whole point of the thing is that selling videos, which the liberals do, in selling policies like eight-minute abs, which are impossible, encourages people to one-up you on more impossible stuff because you're never telling people the truth, so the truth doesn't matter.
Interesting piece today in Politico, otherwise known as Bulltico, because, you know, they rarely, if ever, tell the truth on anything.
But an interesting piece, nonetheless, I saw about what they're calling now the Teflon Don.
Talking about Donald Trump.
Now, that Teflon Don's been used for many people, including John Gotti in New York, when he kept getting away from criminal prosecution from the feds.
But one of the things that's confounding Dems, Joe, and this is a really, really fascinating piece, I gotta tell you.
It's something I think you and I kind of alluded to quite a bit is that nothing the Democrats are doing right now is working.
Like Trump's approval yet isn't sky-high right now.
I get it.
I mean the Republican Party's been a total disaster, a sham.
They can't get anything right.
Can't repeal Obamacare.
You know, the floundering on the tax cuts.
It's just kind of a disgrace right now.
The swamp Republicans.
But nothing that's going on against Trump is working, and the Democrats are flummoxed.
They're perplexed.
They don't know what's going on.
They've tried Russia.
They've tried impeachment.
They've tried the Maxine Waters approach.
They've tried the Hillary Clinton approach.
Nothing's working, Joe.
Trump's base is still there.
And generally speaking, the Democrats' approval ratings aren't going anywhere either.
And folks, I'm not redoing an old show here.
I'm just telling you how much I love the 8-minute abs analogy.
This is the reason why.
There's a reason all of this is happening.
And the why matters here.
So the why I'm trying to get to is why seemingly after everything that's gone on with Trump, all of the Democrats just disingenuous attacks.
Why is none of this working and why aren't the Democrats approval ratings going up correspondingly and why aren't their chances And, you know, in some areas, isolated areas, they are, but overall they aren't.
Why is none of this working?
And the reason is the 8-Minute Abs thing.
And it's a fascinating piece because it describes, Joe, some facts and data, which is rare for Politico, but things we like in the show.
And they're doing some focus group data and some surveys, and what they're finding out, Joe, is that the 8-Minute Abs approach is failing grotesquely.
The Democrats' major party platforms, things that they think they're gonna run on to beat Donald Trump and the Republicans, Joe, are falling flat on their face.
So, they go through a number of things.
Free college, free healthcare, and free is how I'm framing it, how they, you know, they're asking it in the survey, obviously nothing's free.
But free college, free healthcare, minimum wage, their open borders immigration stuff, and it's not polling well at all.
It's not even polling well, Joe, here's the kicker.
It's not even polling well with Democrats.
Like even Democrats are starting to believe it.
And the reasons given often, they don't think it's going to happen.
People know it's a lie.
8 Minute Abs!
They know it's BS!
Now folks, the 8 Minute Abs thing, right?
If 8 Minute Abs worked, if you bought that video and everybody was walking around with the six pack of abs, then why isn't 8 Minute Abs still a thing?
The reason is because people bought it like liberals bought all this nonsense years ago about minimum wage was going to increase wages when it didn't.
You know, Obamacare was going to save health care when it didn't.
You know, public schools were going to save education when it didn't.
The government giving student loans was going to lower the cost of college for people when it didn't.
People bought the eight minute app just like it bought the policies and they found out that it didn't work so they're not believing it anymore.
So the polling data is fascinating and you know for those of you who I know this may sound like kind of a pessimistic story, but I don't think you should take it that way.
I think this is a very optimistic story about how for as much as sometimes we look at liberal voters and Democrat voters and we say, oh my gosh, they're destroying the country.
They're killing us here with all this crap policies.
It's good to know that at least on an individual level, policy-wise, Joe, free college, free health care, minimum wage, you're starting to get it that this stuff is all chimerical.
It's all nonsense.
It's fairy tales.
It's Teddy Ruxpin stories.
It's made up.
And it was interesting that this appeared in Politico, because Politico's a left-wing rag.
It's, you know, it's a nonsense outfit.
But the fact that Politico wrote this piece, you know, folks, this should be, this is kind of a good sign.
I say this to the loyal conservatives and libertarians out there, and even the good Republicans, not the swamp rats, but this is a good sign that Americans are generally We're more politically astute people than I think a lot of people in the media give us credit for.
The eight minute abs thing is not working.
Now, why do I bring that up today?
I mean, I did this show before.
But one, I saw the story, but secondly, folks, I'm worried, a little bit worried.
So that was the optimistic note.
The optimistic note is even Democrats are waking up that free stuff isn't free.
And by the way, one of the common questions asked by the focus group people asked about free college was, well, who's gonna pay for it?
Well, if you're asking that about free college, you've obviously not accepted the premise, Joe, that it's free!
If you're asking who's going to pay for it, when someone gives you something free, air quotes, you assume that it is without cost to you.
When someone says who's going to pay for it, that means even Democrats are wising up to this nonsense.
I bring this up today because here's what I just kind of threw that in at the last minute, right?
As I was prepping for the show, Joe got caught in some traffic and I saw this political piece.
I'm like, all right, I just throw that in quick to give people a little note of optimism.
Here's the pessimistic note for the show.
This is what I wanted to start off with.
I'm a little worried.
Single-payer healthcare, in other words government-run healthcare, is going to turn into, mark my words, remember the beautiful thing about podcasting is this will all be recorded and people will go back and in 2020, when I'm still doing this, in the presidential election cycle, someone's going to listen to this show and I guarantee you we're going to be right.
The signature issue for the Democrats in 2020 is going to be single-payer healthcare.
Something that Democrats in the United States traditionally ran from.
Not liberals.
Liberals always love single-payer.
But Democrats overall always ran from government-run health care.
Because Americans are a very independent, entrepreneurial people, Democrats included.
They do not want the government controlling their health care.
They just don't.
They don't mind a safety net, Joe.
They certainly don't mind, obviously, Democrats I'm talking about, not Republicans.
They certainly don't mind a government footprint in health care.
But they definitely don't want government-controlled health care.
It's never polled well.
It's never done well.
We're just different in America.
We're an entrepreneurial-minded, independent-minded people.
We do not want the government controlling our health care.
Nobody likes it.
As I've always said, you don't like going to the DMV for your driver's license, but all of a sudden people have no problem with a government bureaucrat, what, dictating how your chest is going to get cracked open in the event of a heart attack?
No good!
8-minute abs!
Don't think so.
Don't want it.
So it's never polled well.
That's changing.
Now, why is that changing?
Because there has been a dramatic shift in the Democrat Party base.
The base of the party, Joe, which was largely composed in the past of Bill Clinton Democrats, more moderate types, when you look at the polling data, that's switched.
It used to be liberals were roughly about 20 to 30 percent of the base of the Democrat Party.
That is now switched.
Liberals, far-left liberals, are now between, depending on the polling data you look at, 35 and 45 percent and they're starting now at number moderates.
Now what does that mean and what does this have to do with government-controlled health care in the 2020 election and why this has become a big issue?
Well, when you're the base of the party, Joe, who turns out in primaries?
The base!
The most active people in the party.
The base.
Yeah, the base.
The base of the party turns out.
When you're running a presidential primary, that presidential primary for the Democrats and the Republicans, but let's stick with the Democrats for now, the only people in the majority of states who can vote in a Democrat primary are...
Democrats!
Right!
And in primaries, which are not clearly general elections, where you just get to pick the candidate who runs in the general, the people who turn out, this is all fact-based, database stuff, the people who turn out in large proportions, Joe, are the most active Democrats.
The most active Democrats, follow me for a second here, are usually people in the base.
The base, the active four by four voters.
In other words, having run for office, you know, you deal with these kind of numbers all the time.
In other words, people who voted in the last four primaries and last four generals.
Super active voters.
Those also happen to be now, Joe, liberals.
Whereas in the past, they were moderates.
So now the calculation in 2020 by these major party presidential candidates, the Democrats and By the Democrats, not the major parties, I should say.
By the Democrats, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, the senator from California, they are going to be candidates most likely for president in 2020 again.
Elizabeth Warren, they are going to be running on a single-player government-run platform because they are going to need those voters that are now showing up in greater proportions in Democrat primaries to win the presidential nomination.
Folks, this is a big deal.
Single payer would be a disaster for the United States.
So, in an effort to, and just so you know, because I always relate the show to current events, this is not...
Although it seems at times, as some of our older shows were, this is not an evergreen show, which is a media term for shows that are, you know, you can do now that are good five years from now.
So if we like did a show on gun control, you could listen to it five years from now.
But that's not what this show is designed to be today.
I'm bringing this up today because Bernie Sanders is getting ready to introduce a single payer health care bill in the United States Senate.
This is a big deal.
I know it's not getting major coverage, but it's going to, and it is going to become a litmus test for Democrats to get the 2020 nomination.
Where do you stand, Ms.
Harris, on single-payer?
I think it's great!
This is going to be it.
And as one journalist said, forgive me, I can't remember who it was, it's going to become the repeal and replace for the Democrats.
In other words, if you ran for office in the last three or four election cycles, Joe, and you didn't want to repeal Obamacare, you were not getting the Republican nomination.
On the other side, this is what's going to happen with the Dems.
Are you for Bernie Sanders' single-payer bill?
You better say yes if you want those liberals to show up.
But folks, this is a disaster.
You're going to hear your college professors talking about it, you're going to hear the media talk about it, and you have to go into this debate armed with the facts.
Because what they are going to come back with, Joe, is what they hit you with every single time.
What, you don't care about poor people?
You don't care?
You want to die?
You want people to die?
You throw granny off a cliff?
Liberals don't have anything.
They don't.
I'm sorry.
They don't have anything.
I'm sure some have care about people.
Most of them just care about control and power.
But they never ever come to a debate on facts.
And I heard Ben Shapiro on Fox this morning and he made a great point which I've heard him make before that The reasons liberals are such poor debaters, and folks, they are, I'm telling you, I do talk radio all the time, fill in for Levin and Hannity, and I always leave a line open for liberals, because it's, it's just so, I mean, it's just so easy.
I mean, Joe, you've been in talk radio like your entire adult life, right?
Seriously, I mean, a serious question for you.
Do you remember a liberal ever calling in and winning a debate with Tom Marr or Sean or anyone?
I mean, Joe's been in, how long you been in radio, 20 years?
Easily, yeah.
So he's probably listened to 10,000 liberal phone calls over the years.
And Tom Marr, God rest his soul, was a conservative host at CBM.
And Sean and Frank do The Morning Show.
I listen to it when I live up there.
I still listen to it now in the app sometimes.
And it's interesting because Liberals call in all the time and they never win an argument.
When you hit them with the facts, where do they go?
Because one of Shapiro's other lines is, facts don't care about your feelings, and they just don't.
There you go.
So when liberals call in and they say things like, well you don't care about old people, and you hit them with facts about how single payer actually hurts older people, their only response is, well you're a racist, and then they hang up the phone.
And I've challenged some very smart people on talk radio.
So, I am going to arm you with some facts.
Now...
piece in the Wall Street Journal I'll put in the show notes.
Thank you for all the people by the way subscribing to my show notes and my
email list at Bongino.com. It's growing dramatically now so thank you. I
will email you every day with the show notes and the podcast. So these are
articles I find which I think are terrific that'll have these facts in them so don't
worry about taking notes during the show if you want to remember this stuff I'll
send it right to you. So this is how these are facts from William Galston at
the Wall Street Journal today and a bit of an older piece in April of 2017
from Candace Malcolm at National Review but really good pieces on both
single-payer and Canada and the reason I'm using Canada although to be fair
single-payer exists in a lot of wealthy countries all around the world you have
you know you've United Kingdom obviously you have most of Europe where
single-payer dominates.
I'm using Canada specifically in his example of the single-payer government
run health care failure for for one reason.
It's when you want to generate a sample size, Joe, that replicates the real world.
So if I want to see if a drug works, say a drug for cholesterol, I want to generate an experimental group of, say, 500 people I'm going to give the drug to, but I want that group to be representative of what the United States would look like, or the world in general, so that I can generalize those results.
So I don't pick a pocket of people who are whatever, you know, Asian-American or black or Hispanic or white from... you don't want to do that.
You want to pick people with various genetic makeups so that you can generalize the applicability of the results, right?
Sure.
The reason I'm picking Canada is the same reason.
Although it's not a...
A direct correlate, obviously, the United States.
The only thing that would represent the United States is the United States, and we don't have single-payer, so it's impossible to run an experiment.
Canada is obviously in North America, and it's the closest experiment we got, and it shares a border with us, obviously, up north.
I mean, this is nothing dramatic here, but it's the best we have of what single-payer would look like in the United States.
That's the reason I'm using Canada.
First, from the Galston piece, some facts about single payer in case you're perplexed and you believe the liberal narrative that this is somehow panacea and we're going to save old people and puppies and dogs and kids and everybody's going to go to the doctor whenever they want and it's going to be great and it's going to be free and everybody's going to be healthy and nobody's going to get cancer or Alzheimer's and the doctor and you are going to sing down and sit down and rub each other's backs and roast marshmallows and tell each other medical stories.
If you believe that, I've got a bridge over the lagoon here in Palm City I'll sell to you super cheap right now.
So here's some facts from the Galston piece.
This was tried in Vermont.
Vermont, which is a state in the United States, for you liberals out there.
Vermont is a state... Vermont tried this.
Vermont is a deep blue state, by the way, run by Democrats.
So you would think if single-payer healthcare was ever going to work and be supported by a large group of people, it would happen in a deep blue state where a large group of people are liberal, and liberals tend to support single-payer.
They're not Democrats, not overall Democrats, but liberals do.
So, Joe, this should work seamlessly in Vermont.
Well, Vermont tried this, or actually, it didn't institute it, but they did some studies on what it would take to institute single payer.
In other words, where if you live in Vermont, you're a resident of the state of Vermont, healthcare is free, Joe.
And as P.J.
O'Rourke said, if you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's free.
Vermont tried this and found out that they would need a payroll tax.
A payroll tax.
Meaning like a Social Security, Medicare tax, like a FICA tax you get on your pay stub now.
You would need additional payroll tax of 11.5%.
So if you make $100,000 a year, you're upwards of between $6,000 and $10,000 a year in additional taxes in Vermont, depending on how they institute it.
That's really nice.
But it's supposed to be free!
No, it is.
It's free, Joe.
It's just free.
It's only going to cost you thousands of dollars, of course.
But that's the definition of free.
When you're a liberal, you don't want to do any additional homework.
They found out that the income tax hike, they'd have to hike the income tax by 9.5 percentage points just to make this thing work.
And Joe, this one's a killer.
This is free.
This is how expensive free stuff is.
It gets better.
They found out that it would increase the Vermont state budget by 45%.
Wow, that's really cheap and free.
That's really cheap for free stuff.
It increased the state budget by 45%.
The thing flopped immediately.
It flopped immediately.
Now, from the Galston piece, Another data point.
And the liberals, again, don't let any of these facts and data get in the way of your argument that this is not going to cost anybody anything.
That it's free.
Joe, is that not the definition of free without cost?
Free, yes, that's free.
I mean, folks, do me a favor.
Someone out there.
I never, like, want uh you know free stuff or anything but if someone has a spare dictionary running around can you send it to Armacost like an older dictionary and we'll label like we have Jay's abacus Jay who sent us the abacus to do math for liberals we're gonna need a dictionary for liberals as well we'll name it after you go ship it to Joe's well we'll give you like the station address or something and you can just put your name on the front whatever your name is Donnie or or Joey Bagadonas and we'll go to Joey Bagadonas dictionary
And I'll say, Joe, can you please, you're going to have to earmark the page, Joe, because we're going to go back to it often.
We're going to go back to the F's and we're going to put it free.
And I'm going, Joe, go back and please read the definition of free.
I guarantee you it says something meaning without cost.
Now, for something without cost, this is pretty damn expensive for something designed to cost you nothing.
That's just incredible.
It's like walking in a furniture store, right?
And you go, man, Look at that!
An ottoman?
Is that a word?
I'm not even, like, I'm not a furniture guy.
Like, I've never seen anything.
What is an ottoman?
Well, it was an empire.
Yeah, I know the Turks, I mean, but I'm not, like, a photo shoot dude.
It's a piece of furniture you put your feet up on, I think.
Yeah, yeah, the feet thing.
All right, so you go in, there you go, the ottoman, a guy goes, so you see a sign outside that says, free ottoman, right?
Now, this is called the bait and switch, which you would probably be arrested for if you actually did this, but free ottoman.
So you walk in, you're like, you want to throw your dogs up on something, and you're like, Hey, um, I got my truck out back.
Can I take that free Ottoman?
They're like, oh, that'll be 10 grand.
Wait, I thought you said it was free.
It is!
It's free when you give me $10,000.
Like, dude, dude, that's not free.
Like, free means it's without cost.
No, it is without cost, after you give me the 10 grand.
Like, does this, if you're a liberal listening, does this ever bother you?
Like, does it ever bother you that what you say makes absolutely no sense at all?
That the word free, that people who say free healthcare That it's a bait and switch of the worst kind, because you're relying on one of two things.
You're assuming that, number one, it's either one of two things.
You're not assuming anything.
Number one, you're just a liar.
You're just lying to people.
You have to know it's not free.
Or number two, you're really not smart.
So you're either lying to people about it being free, or you're really not smart enough to figure out that when people have to pay a large amount of money for something, that it's not free.
Moving on, because I just get frustrated and I start losing my marbles on liberals.
From the Galston piece as well, Bernie Sanders proposed Medicare for All, or single-payer system, which sounds cute.
It's government-run healthcare, folks.
Suckers believe in single-payer.
Because you're the payer and the government controls everything.
Like you're getting totally suckered.
Instead of you paying and controlling your own health care, you're paying even more and you're giving your health care over to the government.
A study by the Urban Institute, no bastion of far-right values by the way, this is a left-leaning think tank, found out that it would cost 2.5 trillion dollars in federal spending the first year this was implemented.
Holy Moses is that an expensive ottoman!
Eight-minute abs!
Eight-minute abs, folks!
2.5 trillion in the first year!
The entire federal budget's four trillion dollars and we're still about, what, a half a trillion in debt every year?
So we're spending $4 trillion.
We're between $500 billion and $300 billion in debt every single year.
We have $20 trillion in accumulated liabilities and national debt.
And in the first year alone, you're going to add $2.5 trillion more, plus the $500 billion, you're going to be short anyway.
So you're talking about $3 trillion in debt in the first year to pay for a free program.
Joe.
Joe.
Yes.
So we go into Joey Bagadona's furniture for the free ottoman, and now we go in there, we pull up at my Ford Raptor in the back, we're like, hey Joey, can you roll that in baby?
Roll that ottoman in, I'm here for my free ottoman.
Yes, no problem.
Cut me a check for ten thousand bucks.
I thought you said it was free.
It is.
Give me my $10,000.
Then you go home and you find out that, okay, you bought the ottoman, you borrowed the $10,000, and you already owe $20,000.
So the free ottoman, on top of the $20,000 you already owed to your credit card, costs you $10,000 more, which you're going to pay interest on.
So the free ottoman ultimately is going to bankrupt you.
It's amazing how free does that when you're a liberal.
We don't even have the money now!
And you want to spend almost the entire federal budget on a program that's supposed to be free?
This is insane.
Folks, this is the definition of insanity.
You have to be a total sucker to believe this.
All right, I want to move on.
I didn't even get to Canada yet, because Canada actually has a single payer health care system.
And I want to give you some examples from this.
And I got a couple of other things I want to get to, so I'm going to move along quick.
But today's show brought to you by BrickHouse Nutrition.
Thanks again for all the positive feedback.
I know I say that a lot, folks, but I'm not kidding when I tell you that our audience has grown substantially.
You supporting my sponsors means a lot.
We're very careful with who we take on as a sponsor.
Joe and I use the products.
We like the products.
It's really good stuff.
Brickhouse has been with us from the beginning.
They have two products that I really enjoy.
They have Foundation and Dusk to Dawn.
You know, today I'm gonna give them a plug for Foundation because I talk about Dawn to Dusk a lot, which is an energy product.
Mm-hmm.
But if you're interested in just looking better, feeling better, and having more energy as well, especially in the gym, Foundation's a great product.
It works differently than Dawn to Dusk.
Dawn to Dusk is an energy-type product.
It's a time-release energy product that's great.
We get tons of feedback.
But Foundation, if you're a recreational gym-goer, if you're a gym rat, A mixed martial arts guy, a boxer, weightlifter, crossfitter, cop, fireman, military person, and you're looking for a little bit of energy in the gym to get past those sticking marks, and you want to look better.
No one's beating his pride.
Quick story.
He didn't give me permission to share it, but he won't care.
I won't use his name.
My nephew's a good guy, and he lives down in South Florida, so I get miles from Brick House Nutrition, sends me bottles of this stuff.
I had a few extra bottles laying around the house, so he lifts weights, and I said, hey, daddy-o, give this a shot.
I kid you not, he was taking a trip up north, he goes, hey, can I stop at your house for more of that stuff?
It's amazing.
Just do the mirror test.
Try this stuff.
It's called Foundation.
Go to BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Give it about seven days to work and then look in the mirror after seven days.
You'll be impressed.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Give Foundation a shot.
Okay, back to Canada here.
This is an article.
I'm getting this data from National Review.
Candace Malcolm.
It's a good piece I have bookmarked, actually.
I read it a while ago, but I thought this is a good time to bring it up.
I'll put it in the show notes today.
A couple months old, but no less relevant now.
Canada's a great example for us, again, because they're our northern neighbors, and we share a lot in common, including a border.
So, a study by the Fraser Institute, which, again, these aren't like right-wing think tanks by any stretch, Found out that free, free again, there's that term, we're going to need that dictionary, free health care up in Canada.
With that, 52,000 Canadians a year, based on a study that they know about, flee, with an L, not free, flee Canada to come to the United States for health care.
So let me get this straight.
The healthcare system is so free and so great in Canada when the government pays for it and runs it, that 52,000 Canadians a year, which is what we know about by the way, I'm sure there are more paying in cash who are not subjected to this, you know, don't fall in the study's customer survey base there, whatever it may be.
52,000 Canadians a year are fleeing Canada to get away from free health care to pay again in addition to the taxes they pay in Canada from the United States.
And to the liberal kooks, because I already know the response, I know it, I had a big argument with Twitter with a guy, on Twitter with a guy over this.
He's actually a good guy, this guy Sean up in Maryland, but he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to health care.
His point was that, oh that's only the rich people doing it.
One, that's not actually right.
If you read the piece in the show notes, the study points out conclusively, Joe, that it's actually a lot of middle class people as well.
But let's play the liberals game for a minute.
Let's say for a second, those 52,000 people fleeing free health care in Canada.
Remember, they've already paid for it in their taxes, and they're now paying again in the United States to get actual health care.
Let's assume they are all rich.
Joe, Do you see the problem here?
Like, how does that make your point?
Yeah.
So let me get this straight.
Healthcare sucks so bad in Canada.
Free healthcare that only rich people can escape it.
And that's the system.
Let me get this straight.
That's the system you want here.
Even if your point was accurate, which it's not, and I'll send you the piece in the show notes, read it yourself, it links to the study.
Again, but Libs, I know that hurts, like facts and data are like, it's like a virus to you, it's like you avoid it at all costs.
Read it yourself!
Even if your point was accurate, you're still making a fool of yourself.
Ask your college professor to explain that.
Why are 52,000 Canadians here that we know about fleeing Canada's free healthcare system to pay for it again here?
I guarantee you, it's only the rich ones that can afford it.
So what, only rich people want good health care?
I mean, Joe, how is that an analysis that defends your liberal point of view?
It makes no sense.
I have those clicker pens and I click it so I don't write on my face and I scratch my head with the pen because I'm like, it's like a nervous tick sometimes when I deal with this liberal stupidity because I don't know You know, I really sometimes I'm bothered because I don't know how to break through.
It's like this show is designed for persuadable people who are looking for the real world facts and data and information you can use to defend your position in the real world.
But there are some people out there who are just not interested.
There is nothing you can say to them to get them to believe that 3 plus 3 equals 6.
Nothing.
They're insistent that it equals 7.5.
You can do like the abacus, you can take out six potatoes and break them into groups of three and three.
Nothing is going to change their mind.
Okay, now that's just one piece, the 52,000 Canadians a year.
Here's another one.
The largest province in Canada.
A study was done, so it's a pretty good sample size.
The largest province in Canada has figured out that 80% of its entire budget is going to be consumed by single-payer, quote, free healthcare Joe, by 2030.
Up from 46% in 2010.
2030 up from 46% in 2010. The entire budget. Now you may say to yourself, "All
right, so what free healthcare costs a lot of money." Which is
obviously makes no sense.
But if you're a liberal, you'd say, well, free health care costs a lot.
But these countries all around the world, they do so much better than the United States in health care metrics.
Folks, one that is total, complete garbage.
Those studies do not measure survivability rates from cancer.
What they do is they skew the numbers.
By measuring live births differently, so making it out like the United States has a higher mortality rate.
In other words, we're not using the same measure for live births.
One will measure viability after a certain amount of days, while the United States does it at the time of birth.
So what it does is it skews the statistics.
Anytime you hear something from the liberal left that sounds crazy, it probably is.
When they say things like, oh, well, all the studies of quality of healthcare around the world show the United States is at the bottom.
That's total garbage.
You're telling me 50 plus thousand Canadians a year are paying twice for health care because our system sucks so bad?
Does that make any sense?
Of course it doesn't make sense, it's a lie.
When you look at actual studies of health care though, this is interesting Joe, this is from the Candace Malcolm piece.
She writes, when it comes to the final metric, quality of care, because she goes over a few metrics in the piece, Canada lags behind most other developed Western nations.
A 2014 report by the Commonwealth Fund ranked Canada 10th out of 11 wealthy countries ahead of only the United States in health care quality.
Remember, you got to be very careful with how they skew this stuff.
But this is even using their own data, okay?
And dead last in timeliness of care.
The report showed that 29% of adult Canadians who fell ill and needed to see a specialist waited two months or longer and 18% waited four months or longer compared with 6% and 7% of Americans respectively.
Interesting, because this lefty research report says we're worse than them but then proceeds to point out how the Canadians are far worse than us.
In other words, you have a damn good chance of having your care rationed to the point where you're dead.
I read a report once about how 5% of UK doctors report knowing someone who died on a waiting list.
Those are the ones who admit to it.
So 5 out of 100 doctors in the United Kingdom admit to knowing someone who died on a waiting list, compared with 6% or 7% of Americans waiting two months or longer for a specialist.
This is the irony of these studies.
Here's another quote from the piece.
She talks about the costs here.
The costs of these systems are typically hidden, folks.
People still believe this stuff is free.
So she says, second, the systems costs are hidden.
Many Canadians and many progressives abroad like to think that the health care is, quote, free in Canada, when in fact Canadian taxpayers pay, on average, $10,500 per year for all their health care needs.
Canadians simply have no concept of how much the services they consume cost since the CHA, that's the Health Care Act in Canada passed in the 80s, prohibits providers from ever showing patients the bill.
Folks, this is not free.
This is costing tens of thousands of dollars to every Canadian a year to sit on a waiting list when you could have paid for it yourself in the United States, a system, by the way, flawed in and of itself.
And many of them choose to come here and pay for that again.
It's a total disaster.
Now, I could go on for days about how bad single payer is, but folks, I'm telling you, this is going to be an argument in the coming days.
All right, I got a couple other things I want to get to here.
Moving on.
Hey, have you signed up yet for CRTV?
I read a report today, Joe, on Drudge.
2017, 22 million people are expected to cut the cord on cable.
That is amazing.
We're a country of only 330 million people.
Think about that, Joe.
22 million are planning on cutting the cable cord.
Now, what are they doing?
They're doing what we're doing at CRTV.
They're giving you conservative content for a far cheaper price than you can watch anywhere.
You can watch it on your smartphone, you can watch it on your computer, you can watch it on your iPad, you can sling it to your TV.
Why pay $200 a month for cable even more in some cases?
Why?
Go to CRTV.
With my promo code, promo code Bongino, my last name, B-O-N-G-I-N-O, B-O-N-G-I-N-O promo code, you'll get it for less than $10 a month.
You get this conservative content, you don't have to worry about any of this other garbage out there.
There's so much junk.
Just go to crtv.com, subscribe today, promo code Bongino, and you'll get it for less than $10 a month.
You don't have to worry about any of this crap.
You can watch it anywhere.
So yeah, the cord cutters are growing in number.
All right.
I saw one story I wanted to bring up quick and cover.
It's a nice piece in the Wall Street Journal by Jason Reilly, who does some good work over there.
He's talking about one of these Dear Colleague letters.
These Dear Colleague letters was a phenomenon that happened in the Obama administration where they didn't want to write anything into law because they knew it wouldn't pass, it would be grossly unpopular.
So they would write these letters called Dear Colleague letters, which would basically threaten people and institutions, but they wouldn't make anything law.
So one of the things they did, Joe, is they said, hey, listen, we're looking at these public school suspension policies, and we're not really digging them.
Like, you guys are suspending people, and a lot of these people happen to be black.
Okay, a lot of these schools were run by principals who were black and teachers who were largely minority.
Keep in mind, no one made any reference to what people were suspended for.
So the dear colleague letter from the Obama administration to the public schools around the country said, we're really not concerned about why you suspended them.
We're concerned about disparate impact.
In other words, we're concerned about what percentage of people suspended are black or Hispanic compared to white.
So nobody cares about the reasons, Joe.
Right.
And by the way, nobody cares about the victims either.
Kind of similar to the looting argument liberals make.
Like, let's not worry about people stealing from other people with looting, like goofball Lisa Hymus over at whatever, Media Matters, that clown joker who calls everybody a racist who talks about looting.
Don't worry about the victims of looting.
Worry about the race of the people who loot, because you're a racist, Lisa Hymus.
That's all you are.
I mean, you've always been a racist your whole life.
That's all you can do.
Because when you talk about looting, Lisa Hymus thinks black people.
No one else thinks that but her.
So that's her thing.
But don't worry about the victims.
In other words, so you get a kid in class who's disruptive, beats up another kid, won't let any other kids learn.
Let's worry about the proportion of people in minority classes who are suspended rather than why people are suspended.
Again, the very essence of racism.
The Obama administration is saying when you talk about suspensions, obviously we're talking about black people.
No, no, you're doing that, not us.
We're talking about kids in school who want to learn.
So they sent these letters saying, hey, you better be concerned about this.
If you're suspending more black or Hispanic kids than white kids, you better look at this policy.
So what happened, Joe?
Of course, suspensions went down.
Now, amazing, because we do facts and data on the show.
Jason Reilly writes, now, after that, what happened?
Of course, a liberal policy, which is supposed to, quote, help, just like, quote, free, you know, again, another word completely made up.
We'll have to go to the dictionary in the future for that, is, of course, hurting people.
So Riley writes in the journal today, after the LA school district, where more than 82% of students are Latino or black, ended suspensions for non-violent offenses, the district reported that the number of students who said they felt safe in school dropped to 60% from 72%.
Oh, that's great!
Great policy, Obama!
Really nice work there!
Really nice work.
So let's not suspend kids who are causing a disruption in class, and then the percentage of kids who feel safe in school goes down.
Nice work there.
When Chicago curbed suspensions, students and teachers felt the increased disorder.
And following New York City's reforms making it more difficult to keep disruptive kids out of the classroom, the schools that showed increased fighting, gang activity, and drug use tended to be those with the highest percentage of minority students.
Again, Not getting rid of drug dealers in school and other things.
I mean, how again is this helping the black community?
Again, another example of liberal nonsense.
Oh, it's affecting more kids who are black and hispanic.
Folks, conservatives don't care about the race of the people suspended.
They care about why they were suspended and the other kids in the classroom.
More liberal crap.
Now, One of the things, and Riley points this out in the piece, that they're saying has something to do with this, the Obama administration that is, is, well, it promotes this school-to-prison pipeline.
Once you suspend the student, he's more likely to have that stigma, that Hester Prynne scarlet letter over his entire career.
But there's no evidence of that at all, Joe.
Riley says, in fact, a March paper posted by the University of Arkansas found that students who had been suspended were actually doing better in math and reading after one year.
Suspensions were correlated with improved academic outcomes, the opposite of the chain of negative effects that liberals are reporting.
Folks, again, for libs out there listening to the show, don't let any of this get in the way of your arguments, your disingenuous ones.
Well, suspensions could send people right to prison.
Do you believe in that?
Do you do any kind of homework at all?
The answer is no, Joe.
Of course, they just make this up because, remember the narrative.
Remember the narrative.
We need the narrative.
The narrative is conservatives are racist.
Everything they do is racist.
We're going to put out this Dear Colleague letter and we're going to let conservatives fight it.
Because when conservatives fight it, what's the liberal point going to be?
They're not going to bring up any of the data.
They're going to be like, you guys are racist.
You want black kids to be suspended.
Just like when we talked about looting and this idiot Lisa Hymus wrote the piece like, oh, they must be talking about black people.
No, no, you were talking about black people.
We're talking about looting you imbecile.
Are you this dumb?
This is what we're talking about.
Suspensions.
You're talking about black kids being suspended.
We're not talking about any of that.
You're talking about that.
That's a liberal thing because they're racist.
It's unbelievable.
All right.
What else?
Drone.
Here's kind of a weird story, and I'll wrap it up.
I got one more thing after this, but... Oh, by the way, one more 8-Minute Abs thing.
Headlining drudge today, California, the most liberal state in the country, the highest poverty rate in the country, 20.5% compared to the nationwide rate of 14.7%.
8-Minute Abs!
8-Minute Abs!
Don't let that get in the way of your narrative.
My narrative.
My narrative.
California, Very liberal?
California.
Very poor.
Don't worry, folks.
Don't make the correlation, liberals.
Just move along.
Ignore that.
It's on Drudge today.
I'm just going to float that one out there.
You can chew on the cut on that one, folks.
All right.
This is kind of a creepy story.
I saw Drudge today.
Just quick.
Some lady was in her apartment in Chicago on a high rise on the 22nd floor, and some drone was creeping in her window.
This thing has creeped me out for a long time.
Yeah, and I've kind of wondered about this.
If you live in one of those New York City or big city high rises, you have windows everywhere, which most of them do.
That's kind of creepy, folks.
People get in their house, they're in their own private time, they do their own thing, whatever.
I'm not getting into that, but you get out of the shower, you don't have a towel on, all of a sudden there's a drone outside your window.
That's kind of creepy.
So the dude got arrested when the drone made its way back to the third floor.
They must have had some kind of landing, but it's kind of creepy.
A story I saw, I figured I'd put that out there.
That's worried me for a long time.
One last thing I wanted to get to.
You know, my book is out again.
I know a lot of people hate it when I mention my book.
I'm sorry.
I'm very proud of it.
I wrote it.
It's not available on Amazon now.
It'll be in bookstores September 19th, but I'm just bringing it up because...
Obviously, I'd like you to buy it and read it.
I put a lot of work into it, but Hillary's got this book out now, What Happened, which is a total piece of crap.
You know, Mitt Romney never wrote a book about their loss.
McCain didn't write a book about the loss in the election.
I mean, you just move on and shut up after an election.
It's just kind of a jerk move.
Or write it five, six years from now.
I mean, just move on, Hillary.
She can't do that.
But you know, Hillary, it's kind of funny because in the book I address that medical incident she had on 9-11.
I mean, that's not funny.
I mean, I don't wish anybody ill will on anybody.
I'm not talking about Hillary for that.
But I mean, it should say ironic.
I'm talking about how she now is blaming everyone.
But it's interesting how in the book I cover what should have happened from the Secret Service side when she had that medical incident.
And it's kind of ironic, like, she's a blame person, and yet she would have been to blame if that would have broken bad, and I explain why, for all of the potential negative medical outcomes.
And thank God she was fine.
Again, I don't wish ill health on anyone, even my worst political enemy, God forbid, but I don't wish that.
But if something would have broken bad during that medical incident, I explain how behind the scenes this would have been a disaster, and I guarantee you she would have blamed the Secret Service.
And it's really a shame, because this woman has no sense of shame at all.
And I discussed one more thing in the book that's come up recently, given a lot of the lawsuits and the focus on the DOJ's looking at the discrimination against Asian Americans in colleges.
I discussed the diversity initiatives within the Secret Service, and I'm using air quotes, diversity, and folks, How this should really scare you.
There are things going on, you know, affirmative action-wise and diversity-wise behind the scenes in the Secret Service that, one, are totally unnecessary.
There's more than enough good quality female, black, Hispanic, Asian candidates, but that are actually putting the president in danger.
I think it's a real eye-opener.
So go pick up the book today.
It's called Protecting the President, and thanks.
We made it a bestseller a couple times already on Amazon.
It's not even out in the bookstores yet, but it is available on Amazon now, and I'll ship it to you in a couple days.
So, thanks again for tuning in, thanks for all the reviews on iTunes, I really appreciate it, and I will see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud.
