The Blaze79%

House narrowly passes SAVE America Act as rider to trillion-dollar spending bill 60%

By Carlos Garcia64%

7/22/2026, 11:26:27 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Quote-first Misdirection, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 22.2% saturation with 72 hits. Analysis detected 518 faulty-reasoning hits from 324 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 55.9% and a BS Rank of 60% (8,879 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.40% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump was finally able to pass his SAVE America Act through the U.S. 
House, but it may not make it through the Senate. 
The House narrowly passed a massive $1.15 trillion defense spending bill on a 216-212 vote with the SAVE America Act as a rider. 
'In an increasingly dangerous world, we are reminded of President Reagan's admonition that freedom is not passed along in the bloodstream.' 
Six Democrats voted to pass the National Defense Authorization Act, and seven Republicans voted against it. 
The bill will raise service member pay by 5% to 7%, increase education and child care availability for military families, and spend $1.8 billion for barracks and housing costs. 
Republican Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana praised the bill by claiming it would "ensure America maintains the most lethal, most dynamic, most capable fighting force in the world." 
Senate Democrats were able to block one version of the bill last week. 
"In an increasingly dangerous world, we are reminded of President Reagan's admonition that freedom is not passed along in the bloodstream," Johnson continued. 
"It must be fought for and protected so the next generation may enjoy the same level of security and opportunity we have known. 
And that starts in Congress." 
One sticking point in the bill was the expansion of collaboration between the Israel's defense forces and the U.S. military on weapons and intelligence development. 
Progressive Rep. 
Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) excoriated the bill in a scathing statement. 
"Time and again we are seeing from this administration, and their Republican yes-men in Congress, that they simply do not care that working people are struggling," she said. 
"I refuse to support that agenda and will continue working to stop this funding and actually invest in our people and our communities," she added. 
If the bill is approved by the Senate, it will go to Trump's desk for approval. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.7%Carlos Garcia: 4.1%Blaze Media: 5.6%Confirmation Bias12.7%This article: 7.1%Carlos Garcia: 0.7%Blaze Media: 0.7%Anchoring Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 3.4%Blaze Media: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.6%Blaze Media: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.0%Blaze Media: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 11.1%Blaze Media: 9.6%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.2%Blaze Media: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Carlos Garcia: 0.7%Blaze Media: 1.6%Pessimism Bias7.1%This article: 20.4%Carlos Garcia: 12.1%Blaze Media: 9.8%Negativity Bias20.4%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.6%Blaze Media: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.2%Blaze Media: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Carlos Garcia: 1.8%Blaze Media: 2.7%In-Group Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.0%Blaze Media: 1.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Carlos Garcia: 1.7%Blaze Media: 2.6%Halo Effect8.6%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.1%Carlos Garcia: 1.1%Blaze Media: 1.1%Recency Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Carlos Garcia: 3.4%Blaze Media: 2.6%Ad Hominem8.6%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.8%Blaze Media: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 3.6%Blaze Media: 3.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 3.1%Carlos Garcia: 1.4%Blaze Media: 2.4%False Dilemma3.1%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.4%Blaze Media: 1.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.6%Carlos Garcia: 5.1%Blaze Media: 8.9%Hasty Generalization8.6%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.6%Blaze Media: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 1.0%Blaze Media: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 22.2%Carlos Garcia: 10.5%Blaze Media: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion22.2%This article: 1.5%Carlos Garcia: 0.9%Blaze Media: 1.5%Begging the Question1.5%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 2.1%Blaze Media: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.7%Carlos Garcia: 1.1%Blaze Media: 1.0%Burden of Proof7.7%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 2.3%Blaze Media: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.7%Carlos Garcia: 2.1%Blaze Media: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.7%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.5%Carlos Garcia: 3.9%Blaze Media: 2.8%Unattributed Quote6.5%This article: 13.6%Carlos Garcia: 3.9%Blaze Media: 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection13.6%This article: 8.6%Carlos Garcia: 6.5%Blaze Media: 10.6%Biased Writer Voice8.6%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 2.3%Blaze Media: 4.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 0.9%Blaze Media: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 5.7%Blaze Media: 7.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Carlos Garcia: 3.6%Blaze Media: 2.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

324 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers44%attributed speech182writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMike Johnson • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMike Johnson • 23 words • 100.0% coverageMike Johnson • 23 words • 0.0% coverageMike Johnson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coveragePramila Jayapal • 10 words • 0.0% coveragePramila Jayapal • 28 words • 0.0% coveragePramila Jayapal • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pramila Jayapal

100%flagged-word coverage
63 attributed words44% of attributed speech52% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Unattributed Quote-11.5 ptsWriter: 11.5%Pramila Jayapal: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-11.5 ptsWriter: 11.5%Pramila Jayapal: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.