Jan
17
2016
0

#Trump2016: Let’s Frisk The #DarlenaCunha/@parentwin Insanity

The insanity that is Darlena Cunha knows no bounds and we are about this see that in action. In her article on Time, she is about consistent as a meth addict, have erratically disjointed thoughts, and makes contradictory arguments.

Let’s frisk this article and see if she has a point, if any:

It’s wrong to burden children with a public political message when they don’t understand the implications.

That is a nice ideal to aspire, but we all know that parents try to pass down their values and ideas to their children. That is why we have them, so that they can continue what we started or what was passed to us.

Again, nice ideal but most everything she says later pretty much invalidates this first sentence altogether.

Thursday night, my two 7-year-old daughters stayed up to watch some of the Republican debate. Needless to say, I had a lot of questions to answer.

This quite literally comes right after the last line! Darlena Cunha doesn’t believe in “burden(ing) children with a public political message(s)” and yet she lets her 7-year-olds watch the GOP Debate?

“Mom, why do all these men hate Hillary Clinton so much? Is she going to be our next president?”

“Mommy, is that Donald Trump? I don’t like him. Why does anyone like him? Yuck.”

Do they understand the “implications” of what they said here? Do you they really think GOP candidates “hate” Hillary Clinton? Be honest now! Let’s come back to this later.

Kids have agency. They have opinions. They say the darndest things, and they mean them.

No, they don’t. This is why the legal system doesn’t hold them responsible for crimes committed as kids and why we have “age of consent” laws.

At the time.

This is the very next sentence! Does Darlena Cunha believe that kids have agency or what?

But their framework for those thoughts come from their parents. Their life experience and ability to parse complex governmental, political and legal issues are limited. I am a firm believer in encouraging youngsters to learn about our political process and partake in the discourse surrounding our cultural standing. To awaken a thirst within them for knowledge about our country and their role in our democracy is one of the key roles of parenting.

This was my point when I last wrote on USA Freedom Kids. Parents are responsible for their children and it is only natural to pass down their values, as is EVERY PARENTS RIGHT. This includes conservative parents too. We’ll get to that later.

That said, they are going to pick up what we, the parents, are putting down. And we cannot be objective all the time. We are laying down the foundation upon which we believe our kids will grow best. For my family, that’s a world that doesn’t include Donald Trump as president.

Okay, repeating your thoughts from the last thoughts and thinking you’ve changed gears when you have not. Moving on.

Look, I wish I lived in a world that doesn’t include Barack Obama as president. However reality keeps getting in the way of that, so I have learned to live in reality. How is Darlena Cunha and her children going to deal with living in a President Trump world?

So when I saw three little girls, barely older than my daughters, proudly belting out pro-Trump lyrics in front of a 10,000-strong crowd, I honored their right to their opinions. But there is a huge difference between politics talk in the home and the politics-for-pomp that one of the girls’ fathers, Jeff Popick of Pop Media Network LLC, is peddling.

The three are part of a five-girl group called “The USA. Freedom Kids,” and Popick said the girls “are so dedicated, so intensely patriotic.” The girls are between the ages of 8 and 12. Do they know what “patriotic” means to them, yet? Do they have firm opinions on which candidate they should stump for based on their own life experiences? Do they understand what they are saying? Do they understand the implications of what they are getting into? They aren’t, after all, old enough to vote, some by a decade.

Does Darlena Cunha’s children 7-year-olds know what “patriotic” means? Do they have firm opinions on Hillary Clinton so that they can praise her and condemn GOP candidates who just doesn’t agree with her? Do they understand the implications of supporting a candidate that has very likely broke several federal laws?

Popick has said he “enjoyed providing them an opportunity” and was happy to “watch them seize it.” He gave them an opportunity to sing political jingles, and, sure, there will be fans of the group and positive feedback. But he also opened them up to ridicule, mean comments and public flaming. Are they old enough to consent to that?

Did Darlena Cunha’s 7-year-old daughters give consent to being opened up to ridicule, mean comments, and public flaming by being included in this article? They are 7-years-old, how could they? No, Darlena Cunha gave consent on their behalf.

I bet anyone anything, if you just ask him, Jeff Popick got consent from their parents. The fact that only 3 out of the five-member band showed up to this event, one could logically concluded two of the band’s member parents were not thrill with appearing at the Trump event.

Also, who is ridiculing, saying mean comments, and public flaming these “USA Freedom Kids” members? No one is doing that, that I know of at least.

No.

You cannot use children as public figureheads in political movements or protests. They are too young to give consent, and you may be putting them in danger. Who knows if these kids will be followed by stalkers or become the victims of bullying or harassment because of an extreme stance they haven’t actually taken.

Like when Darlena Cunha put her kids in this article?

While the girls are clearly talented, exposing them to the type of inflammatory reactions Trump elicits from both sides isn’t fair to them.

Again, who is insulting these girls? Could Darlena Cunha give me examples?

The lyrics are accusations. “Cowardice, Are you serious? Apologies for freedom – I can’t handle this!” It is wrong to burden young children with such a message, to face the public, when they don’t really know what they are signing up for.

Actually, these lyrics are quite harmless compare to some of the other slightly troublesome lyrics later on. However this is not directed at children, but adults who are already fans of Trump.

I will concede to that they might not know what they are singing about, but their parents do and signed off on this performance. Consent is with the parents. Agency is with them.

This goes even when you might agree with the message. I very much loved President Barack Obama when he was elected into office in 2008. But my kids will never sing about him in a public way that puts money in my pocket. That is ethically wrong. The school children in this pro-Obama video were almost as exploited as the U.S.A. Freedom Kids are – a large difference being that the educators and producers involved didn’t pocket profits. Still, they instructed a group of children who couldn’t properly decide for themselves on political rhetoric that they then released to the country at large.

Here comes the moral equivalency argument. Darlena Cunha thinks the “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” educators were wrong too, but we should still forgive them because their hearts were in the right place and they were not looking to profit off these kids. There are huge difference between “USA Freedom Kids” and the “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” event.

  1. “USA Freedom Kids” was at a campaign event, where people came voluntarily. “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” was done at a school where the kids were FORCED to attend.
  2. “USA Freedom Kids” was clearly meant to entertain people who are already Trump fans/supporters. “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” is a jingle purposely written to indoctrinate other kids.
  3. “USA Freedom Kids” was done on Trump’s dime to Pop Media Network LLC and, in turned, to the kids. “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” was done on the taxpayer’s dime and time (when they should be learning facts, not opinions), and kids were also not fairly compensated in any way.

The nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind has long been a source of endless fascination to me. And Darlena Cunha is no exception. Darlena Cunha is perfectly okay with teaching her kids to hate GOP candidates because they disagree with Hillary Clinton, but bulks when “USA Freedom Kids” are fairly compensated to open a campaign event for Donald Trump (whether the owner agrees with Trump is irrelevant). When faced with the “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” contradiction, Darlena Cunha makes a moral equivalent leap in logic and then pardons them for having the right morality or something.

This is about not children’s agency, but parent’s agency. Darlena Cunha clearly believes in her agency when it comes to her children, but she completely forgets that “USA Freedom Kids” have parents and they have just as much agency too or doesn’t believe in conservative parents should have agency.

Whatever the case may be, Darlena Cunha’s half-baked rant cannot be said to be coherent in any way shape or form. How that gibberish mess got publish on Time.com is beyond me.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Jan
15
2016
0

#Trump2016: About That @USAFreedomKids’ @realDonaldTrump Jam

Now I have my issues with Donald Trump, but everyone is losing their damn minds over a …campaign rally song:

Where do I begin… Oh yeah, right: IT’S A SONG PEOPLE! THERE ARE PLENTY OTHER THINGS TO BASH TRUMP OVER THE HEAD WITH, THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM!

Look, this is no different than getting a famous singer writing and preforming a song for any other candidate.

Allahpundit equates this with “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama”, which I have problems with his logic:

If there was one thing missing from this primary, it was a Trump-nationalist version of the “mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama” video from 2009. Finally, that hole has been filled.

No it has not. I completely disagree with Allahpundit for a number of reasons.

  1. This was at a campaign event, not at a school.
  2. This was clearly meant to entertain people who are already Trump supporters, not to indoctrinate other kids.
  3. This was done on Trump’s dime, not the taxpayer’s dime.

In fact, USA Freedom Kids has five members and I only see three. I could be wrong, but I can only assume that two of the five parents were not okay with this and they were pulled. This only seems healthy to me.

Granted the lyrics are a little eye-rolling, but by losing your minds over this song is even more eye-rolling and will force Trump supporters to just further circle the wagon. If you had a stronger case of indoctrination, I would side with you.

I mean, this is a nothing burger people! You people are annoying me that I have to defend Trump here! We dress our kids in our own favorite sport teams, we take our kids to see candidates, we home school our children to teach them our values, and we somehow have a problem with this?

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , ,
Jan
10
2016
0

#Election2016: …This #Birtherism Nonsense Isn’t About #TedCruz Anymore

This Birtherism nonsense isn’t about Sen. Ted Cruz anymore. At least, I don’t think it is about Sen. Cruz anymore. This has become about scoring cheap points or who hates who more. Dumb nonsense like this is why this whole thing isn’t about Sen. Cruz:

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who recently ended his own presidential bid, couldn’t help but laugh when asked if Canadian-born candidate Ted Cruz is eligible to be president.

“I just want to say, I think Ted is qualified to run for president of the United States,” Graham said on the Kilmeade and Friends radio show on Friday. “I think he is a natural-born citizen. I am sure.”

Did Sen. Lindsey Graham say this out of the goodness in his heart? I don’t think so:

“Whether I’m right or not I believe that to be so. I don’t want Ted to be the nominee. I don’t dislike Ted, but I don’t think that issue disqualifies him,” he added.

Asked if he was surprised the issue was being discussed, the South Carolina senator began to laugh.

“No, not by Trump, no not at all,” he chuckled as he said. “I thought it was pretty clever on his part actually.”

What is going on here? I thought Sen. Lindsey Graham didn’t like Donald Trump at all? Sen. Graham isn’t taking a stand on this issue because he thinks it is the right thing to do. I think it has to do with Sen. Rand Paul joining the Birtherism bandwagon (for purely political reasons, I am sure):

Rand Paul said on Wednesday that he’s not sure if his Canadian-born rival for the Republican presidential nomination Ted Cruz is eligible to be president of the United States.

If you don’t remember, Sen. Lindsey Graham got into the race because he wanted to counter Sen. Rand Paul in a foreign policy debate. Smacking Sen. Paul around would give Sen. Graham no end of joy.

What is interesting is that Sen. John McCain has come down on the side of Donald Trump:

Arizona Sen. John McCain said he doesn’t know if the Canadian-born Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas is eligible to be president, saying the Supreme Court might have to decide if Cruz is eligible to be president.

This is notable because we now know Sen. John McCain’s hatred of Sen. Ted Cruz overrides his hatred of Donald Trump. Noted.

I come down against this nonsense, because it is nonsense. Any honest reading of statue confirms that Sen. Ted Cruz (when matched up with his history) is more eligible to be president. I am not going to debate the merits of the law or if someone born out the U.S. should be able to run for POTUS.

I don’t know anymore. All I know is that it is clear to me people are taking a stand on this issue for other reasons than their stated reason.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Jan
07
2016
0

#Trump2016: Not Defending @realDonaldTrump/@AnnCoulter #Birtherism Nonsense

I told you I’d criticize Donald Trump if he crossed the line. Well, here it is (via SooperMexican):

Donald Trump said in an interview that rival Ted Cruz’s Canadian birthplace was a “very precarious” issue that could make the Texas senator vulnerable if he became the Republican presidential nominee.

“Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?” That’d be a big problem,” Trump said when asked about the topic. “It’d be a very precarious one for Republicans because he’d be running and the courts may take a long time to make decision. You don’t want to be running and have that kind of thing over your head.”

Trump added, “I’d hate to see something like that get in his way. But a lot of people are talking about it and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport.”

*face palm* I can’t defend this nonsense. I can’t. There is no reason for me to go step by step to prove Cruz is one, you can do that yourself. Ted Cruz was born a citizen. Period. Full stop. End of story.

Even Ann Coulter knew Ted Cruz could be President before going full retard herself (Never Go Full Retard).

Okay, I am ready for Fighting Ted Cruz to slam El Trumpo into his place and- and… He’s not going to fight back, is he?

Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Cruz, declined to comment Tuesday.

Fuck me! This is why I can’t get behind Ted Cruz either. A perfect time to blast Donald Trump and he refuses. I mean, Trump went after him first and Cruz would be completely justified in defending himself. Tweeting the Shark Jumping scene from Happy Days is not defending yourself, that is mocking. Cruz later, and fearfully, explained his tweet. If Cruz isn’t going to defend himself against Trump, why should I defend Cruz?

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , ,
Dec
16
2015
0

#Trump2016: @realDonaldTrump, #PoliticalCorrectnessKills, And #Hypocrisy Abounds

I want to apologize to Donald Trump. He is not Ego, he is the ID. Trump is unfiltered. Trump is unbound. Trump is incoherent.

The fact that Donald Trump is the Id, scares a lot of people. I understand that sentiment. You see, The Left is Ego (where Political Correctness comes from) and The Right is Super-Ego (where Morality comes from).

However, The Right wants to (at the same time) embrace and dismiss the Id too.

What do I mean? Recently, The Right floated the hashtag #PoliticalCorrectnessKills. The basic idea is that Political Correctness will keep you from doing what is right, because you do not want to be shamed. The San Bernardino shooter’s own neighbor thought Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik were acting suspicious, but did nothing because he did not want to be called a racist. We bitch and moan that President Obama is not doing enough to screen people coming into the United States and destroying ISIS. Then we turn around and condemn the Id, I mean Donald Trump, for speaking out as he does.

Like I said, I understand not being rules by the Id. However I think it is height of hypocrisy to summon the Id and then recoil when it rears its head.

Look, we are talking about war here. The whole point of war is to keep hitting someone until they say stop or stop moving. The idea is that we need to win the next five wars while winning the current war. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a horrific thing to do, but a prolonged invasion of Japan would have been even MORE horrific. The bloodshed, rape, and destruction across Japan would also not have sit well with anyone. It also showed the world the horrific nature of Nuclear Weapons in general. If we didn’t have those images from the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I personally don’t think we could have come out the other end of the Cold War.

I am not saying we should nuke the Middle East, what I am saying is that we need to stop being politically correct about war. Donald Trump is not saying wants to put Muslims in concentration camps, he wants to pause Muslim immigration until we can get a better screening process to root out Radical Islam (YOU DO NOT HAVE CONSISTULTIONAL RIGHT TO MIGRATE OR VISIT THIS COUNTRY). Donald Trump wants to take the hand-cuffs off the US Military and stop pussy-footing with ISIS/ISIL (THEY DON’T GIVE TWO CENTS ABOUT OUR FAMILYS, WHY SHOULD WE?).

We need to either embrace political correctness and welcome our doom, or reject political correctness and defeat Radical Islam once and for all. I am exhausted from hearing from people talking both ends on this subject.

I am going to leave you with the best part of the video called Darth Vader, which actually matches more than the other parts of the video. Come to the Dark Side, we have Trump Steak!

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
15
2015
0

#Trump2016: The @realDonaldTrump Is Starting To Annoy Me

Matt Walsh pretty much sums up my current annoyance with Donald Trump:

So to review: Trump is currently in favor of affirmative action, tax hikes, single payer health care, and the State seizing private land.

Let’s not forget ethanol subsidies. I am not going to defend these stances. I am not in the Cult Of Trump.

However, on the issues, I tend to agree with Donald Trump more than disagreed. I will continue to oppose Trump on the issues that I disagree with him on. I am not a single issue voter, I tend to look at the overall take on issues and a potential leader. I can find no other his equal.

As much as I have criticize Donald Trump over these past months, he has set the debate. Trump is quite literally the center of gravity right now. Everyone reacts to Trump, not the way around.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
13
2015
0

#Election2016: Proof #BigCorn/#BigEthanol Is A #PaperTiger After All

I want to start here that I am actually on Ted Cruz’s side than Donald Trump on ethanol subsidy, and I do not like Trump’s Cruz Birthism.

However Donald Trump does bring up a good point:

“He’s a nice guy. I mean, everything I say he agrees with me, no matter what I say,” Trump began. “But with the ethanol, really, he’s got to come a long way.”

He added: “If Ted Cruz is against ethanol, how does he win in Iowa? Because that’s very anti-Iowa.”

Ted Cruz does opposed the Renewable Fuel Standard’s ethanol subsidy, yet he is raising in the Iowa polls? How can this be?

Another big supporter of the ethanol subsidy, Mike Huckabee, sits at 3% in Iowa. It is looking more and more likely that Big Corn/Big Ethanol is a paper tiger after all. I am not going to sit here and try to convince you that I understand polls. However Ted Cruz is doing something over there to gain a lot of support overnight and someone needs to figure out what.

However this hasn’t move the needle nationally for Ted Cruz or in any other state poll. Again, I am looking for leadership and being the “Rebel For Life” is not leadership (see: Ron Paul/Rand Paul).

My main point here is that, we need to stop being afraid of Big Corn/Big Ethanol. It won’t hurt or help you.

(UPDATE): A new poll shows Trump back on top in Iowa. So what do I know?!

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
07
2015
0

#Trump2016: @BarackObama Endorses @realDonaldTrump Too

I, like many others, watched President Obama’s speech last night. There are many things to pick apart about the speech. I am going to leave that great task to others. However one statement just jump out at me as being completely tone deaf and a sign that President Obama is completely out of touch with reality. One or two other insightful people may have picked up on brief tour of absolute insanity and I am sure I will not be the last. This is what President Obama said:

We’re working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria.

*facepalm and then a scream of frustration*

And there we have it. The final and clinching proof that God currently smiles wonderfully in Donald Trump’s direction. As the sun rises in the east and then sets in the west, the slow realization of this will drive some people insane. I, for one, am not fighting the insanity anymore. In an insane world, you have to be insane to be sane.

If Donald Trump doesn’t pick up this gold nugget and run with it, then Trump doesn’t deserve to be in the White House himself. I mean, the talking points from Trump pretty much write themselves at this point in time:

“Obama wants to secure Turkey’s southern border with Syria in the name of Terrorism, why can’t (he or I) secure our southern border with Mexico in the name of Terrorism?”

It is over people. The writing is on the wall. Everything beyond this point is simple formalities. You are now officially throwing good money after bad supporting any candidate other than Donald Trump.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Dec
01
2015
0

#Trump2016: The #ParisAttacks Is Why I’m Endorsing @realDonaldTrump …For Now

I want to state first and foremost, that I do not think Donald Trump is the right person for the job. That honor goes to Scott Walker. However, as much as I hate to say it, Donald Trump may very well be the only person who can be President right now.

At the start of November 2015, I thought I could sit out the GOP primary without endorsing anyone. When the Florida primary came around I would vote for Scott Walker as a write-in and take pop-shots at Hillary Clinton whenever I could. The Paris Attacks woke me up and told me I could not very well sit on the sidelines anymore. So I sat down and went through the candidates.

I like Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, but I can’t endorse them. Ben Carson lacks ego. Carly Fiorina has ego and drive, but lacks everything else. I honestly think they would make better Senators.

To be brutally honest, I can’t endorse any Senator running because of Barack Obama. I would make an exception for Marco Rubio, however I rather he become Florida’s next governor and THEN become President.

The only governors I would have endorsed, were Rick Perry and Scott Walker. Of course they dropped out and we as a nation lost big time when they did.

I dismissed Donald Trump out of hand. I distrust the guy. Trump is a loud mouth, unrepentant egomaniac. Until a few years ago, Trump was also an unrepentant liberal. In fact, he still sometimes spews liberal nonsense. Trump latched onto the crazy Birther nonsense and would not let go.

Yet President Obama’s unbelievable response to the November 13th’s Paris Attacks made me take a second look at Donald Trump.

So I decided to sit down and list what are Donald Trump’s positives: Here is a guy who turned a million dollars, into billions of dollars (which is honestly no small feat). Here is a guy whose mantra is to “Make America Great Again” and that is great goal no matter how you spin it (whether or not he has the right policies or not, is up for debate). Here is a guy that says some things I agree with (even if I don’t agree how he says it).

You know, I did not endorse Florida Governor Rick Scott in the GOP primary when he ran in 2010. Yet I gritted my teeth and I voted for him in the general election that year. I have call him out many times, especially on Sun Rail. However not once have I regretted voting for him. He has not been the best governor ever, but Rick Scott is clearly not the worst governor. Through sheer force of will alone Rick Scott has moved Florida forward, for good or ill.

I am not a single issue voter. Nor am I looking for someone who totally matches my world view. I’m looking, first and foremost, for a leader to move America. A leader is someone who moves his followers, not the other way around. The only person I keep coming back to who could move America forward through sheer force of will alone, is Donald Trump. This is not done lightly or without a lot of prayer. So, for now, I am endorsing Donald Trump for President of The United States.

This endorsement is not meant as support for everything Donald Trump has done or said. In fact, I will continue to be one of Trump’s biggest critics when I disagree with him. I will not join the Cult Of Trump, so I will not jump down your throat for any reason. I will lay down the marker that I will vote for the GOP nominee, whoever he or she might be.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Written by BigGator5 in: Politics | Tags: , , , , , ,
Sep
28
2015
0

#Election2016: #EatTheRich And Defining #TrumpCare Before They Do

If there is ever a chance for conservatives to defeat ‘The Don’ and send him away forever, here it is. ‘The Don’ just outted himself as a “big government” progressive Republican. On his newest populist nonsense pitch, ‘The Don’ wants to eat the rich:

Scott Pelley: Who are you going to raise taxes on?

Donald Trump: If you look at actually raise, some very wealthy are going to be raised. Some people that are getting unfair deductions are going to be raised. But overall it’s going to be a tremendous incentive to grow the economy and we’re going to take in the same or more money. And I think we’re going to have something that’s going to be spectacular.

Scott Pelley: But Republicans don’t raise taxes.

Donald Trump: Well, we’re not raising taxes.

To paraphrase Megan McArdle: An AADHD day trader with a cocaine habit has considerably more consistency than ‘The Don’ here. The man likely doesn’t have “consistency” in his personal vocabulary.

This is nonsense on sticks. ‘The Don’ wants to lower taxes on the middle class and then instead of offering a spending cut to go along with that, he wants to raise taxes on the rich. Basically he wants to “Eat The Rich” to push a tax cut on the middle class. That is populism and you know how much I hate populism.

Bill Whittle made a video on how bad of it of an idea “Eat The Rich” was and still is:

Amity Shlaes wrote in Bloomberg in 2013 about effective rates:

Official rates matter, but so do effective rates, the percent of income that people actually pay in tax. The Internal Revenue Service reckoned that the effective rate of tax in 1954 for top earners was actually 70 percent.

Or lower. Marc Linder, a law professor at the University of Iowa, has shown that a more comprehensive interpretation of income that includes capital gains suggests the real effective tax rate for millionaires was 49 percent in 1953. The effective rate dropped throughout the decade, reaching 31 percent by 1960. That 31 percent is just slightly higher than the 29 percent level a Congressional Budget Office report figures the average effective tax for the top quintile will be in 2014. And that number for 2014 doesn’t include taxes in Obama’s health-care law.

A second fantasy about the 1950s is that government soaked the rich. Joseph Thorndike and Martin Sullivan in Tax Notes magazine took a look at the tax distribution of the decade. They found that those earning more than $100,000 paid less than 5 percent of the taxes collected in the U.S., a far smaller share than the wealthiest shoulder today.

We really don’t have to tax the rich more or less. What we need to do is get out of big and small business’s way to create jobs. Deregulation is the key, not higher or even lower government!

Oh yeah, almost forgot. Speaking of ObamaCare, ‘The Don’ wants to relabel ObamaCare and wants to start his own TrumpCare. I am not joking. Here is Gabriel Malor ripping TrumpCare apart:

According to Trump, uninsured people are going to get coverage because he’s going to “make a deal with existing hospitals” and “the government’s gonna pay for it.” There’s a word for this exact proposal: Medicaid. Trump probably doesn’t know this, but Medicaid expansion was a huge part of ObamaCare. The “deal with existing hospitals” is so unfavorable for doctors and hospitals that many of them do not accept Medicaid patients because it would put them out of business. Does Trump know this? Meh, he doesn’t care.

But that’s just the uninsured. Trump goes on to say that “for the most part,” his plan will be “a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition.” If this idea also sounds strangely familiar, it is because this too is already part of our healthcare framework. Trump described the ObamaCare exchanges just like Obama did, as increasing competition in the private insurance markets by providing lots of options.

So TrumpCare is just ObamaCare rebranded. We must now define TrumpCare before he or his batshit crazy supporters (ie: Ann Coulter and Breitbart.com) define it. It is everything we have been fighting against. It is big government and it is a further intrusion.

Well, see ya’ later!
(more…)

Theme: TheBuckmaker.com WordPress Webdesign
(Note: Website No Longer Works. Removing Link.)