When Trump announced limits on travel to Cuba, he was actually executing a clever move to undercut his rivals in the hotel industry that have built new hotels in Cuba.
Under the new Trump policy, Americans can still travel to Cuba, but they have to stay in AirBNB, often squalid residences. They can’t stay in the new American built hotel.
Clearly, if Trump owned a hotel in Cuba, American policy would encourage tourism and big hotels.
I went to Cuba in 2013. It was a fascinating experience. Cuba is an impoverished country. The best way to bring about the collapse of the antiquated regime is to open normal trade relations and allow the Cuban people the opportunity to achieve a higher standard of living.
Trump’s approach will entrench the old guard.
Too bad Cuba does not have a Trump hotel. That is now the cornerstone of American foreign policy. That is why Trump is supporting Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in their battle with Qatar. He has hotels in Saudi Arabia and the USR, but none in Qatar.
So what if Qatar is home to America’s biggest air base in the Middle East? It doesn’t have a Trump property.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
All of America prevented from travel to Cuba because Trump doesn’t have a hotel there? Straw, thy name is clutch.
LikeLike
B.T.,
Why is Trump siding with the Saudis–source of the 9/11 terrorists–against Qatar, which has the only US base in the Mideast? It can’t be because of the Trump hotel in Riyadh!
LikeLike
It’s long-standing U.S. policy to side with the Saudis.
LikeLike
It is long standing US policy that we have 30,000 troops in Qatar .
This is complicated the Saudis the sponsors of Al Qaeda and ISIS or Qatar who is in bed with Iran and Hezbollah.
Actually I simplified too much . My head is spinning .
LikeLike
It is incorrect to state the AirBNB residences are often squalid places to stay. We were in Cuba 2 years ago and stayed in several very charming residences in Havana at a price of about $35 per night, which included private rooms and bathrooms, all with air conditioning and use of the kitchen. This winter we spent a month in Cuba and again found the same to be true of the Air BNB places. They are very clean and comfortable, and a much better deal than an overpriced hotel.
LikeLike
Lucky for you. I stayed in one in the countryside and it was squalid.
LikeLike
Where is the page about the Kentucky school choice? It disappeared and shows a 404 error.
LikeLike
The author asked me to take it down because it was not meant to be public.
LikeLike
Message received, sadly. I am delighted that my native state is considering the concept. I cannot predict the future, but I believe that it will be “rough sledding”, for any proposal to go through. There is too much opposition in the rural areas.
LikeLike
Donald Trump gave up 175 company leadership positions in order to run for president, that was just for starters! The liberal left’s rant that he ran so he could make more money rings hollow. If you want to know more about his financials go look it up. He filed his financial report already, even though it was NOT DUE UNTIL MARCH 2018.
Business can still be done with Cuba, as long as their oppressive government and military are NOT involved. If the Cuban government wants that to change they have to advance the lack of humanitarian rights that currently exist.
Now travellers are encouraged to use hotels, restaurants, etc owned by the people of Cuba, not the big hotels that are working with the government and sustaining the oppressive regime.
The President has not limited contact with Cuba, quite the opposite. Now Americans have a clearer path in order to directly help the people that need it the most, rather than funneling money to an oppressive COMMUNIST regime.
LikeLike
Linda,
I have been to Cuba. I suspect you have not.
The AirBNB rooms are in impoverished homes. The good hotels, even the second-rate hotels are owned by the government or in partnership with the government. I stayed in one of them. It was truly a nice hotel, largely owned by a Spanish company. There is private enterprise in Cuba. Especially restaurants. Many people yearn for the chance to operate their business in the open. Fidel is dead. Raul wants to leave the past behind. Raul’s daughter Mariela is a champion of gay rights. Cuba wants to rejoin the world. It was full of tourists when I visited–from Europe and South America. Very few Americans.
Trump is an idiot.
LikeLike
Well said.
LikeLike
Please Linda get on the space craft . We have supported the most repressive regimes in the World The Saudis execute people for heresy. Pinochet killed 3500 and tortured another 38,000 . If Kissinger shows up in Chile he is a dead man.
LikeLike
Gee Linda Giffin, when do we embargo COMMUNIST COMMIE COMMIE China? Having dealings with a communist authoritarian police state is OK with US capitalists. Irony with a capital I.
LikeLike
There is a list of thirty countries around the world that the U.S. currently has sanctions against. (PR) CHINA is on that list. Sanctions are specific to certain things and do not eliminate all contact. That concept ended in 1971 when Nixon lifted the total embargo against China.
President Trump was very specific that supporting the businesses of the people of Cuba and NOT those that benefit the communist regime or their military is the aim of his change to the Obama program.
Did any of you actually watch the President speak on this subject, or did you just take the word of filtered news?
LikeLike
Linda,
There is no point listening to Trump. Everything he says is a lie.
LikeLike
That’s totally false. Why in the world has the US been watching over China for over 30 years about South China Sea and even a tiny island that concerns no one but selected number of right-wing politicians in Japan?
LikeLike
LG,
Nice try! When will Trump release his income taxes?
LikeLike
When he releases the tapes.
LikeLike
Abigail,
Your question to Linda on when will he release his tax report – Why in the world would you still be interested in his taxes? A business man for years tax return is a lot different from a politician’s and politicians know how to do a construct to eliminate any concerns.
I remember in the debate Hillary posits that maybe Trump won’t release his tax returns because he’s trying to hide that he hasn’t paid anything. With the alternative minimum tax, there isn’t anybody who pays nothing. In fact, of the $38 million, $35 million, whatever that number is that Trump paid in taxes, $31 million of it is the alternative minimum tax, which is a tax created to make sure that people could not use loopholes and end up paying no tax. It was originally targeted to hit two, five, whatever percent of the population. Now it’s hitting more and more of the population, and every year politicians tell us this is unsupportable and we’re going to repeal the alternative minimum tax, and they never do. It is collecting too much money.
Hillary said it. It’s true. And their/your hatred and resentment of Trump compounds. And every time Trump says he won’t release his tax returns ’til his audit is finished, the hate compounds again with the belief he’s hiding something. And if somebody says, “Yeah, the tax returns show he worked with the Russians,” they believe that.
Clinton says Trump might be avoiding releasing taxes to hide that he’s paid nothing. Then there were other times she said maybe he hasn’t earned anywhere near as much, maybe he’s not as rich as he claims to be.
In MHO this whole business of politicians releasing their tax returns is a scam designed to keep outsiders from running. And politicians know how to prepare their tax returns structure their lives that their only income appears to be their congressional salary
Remember the interview with Stephanopoulos? Trump slammed wasteful government spending while not shying away from how he tries to pay as little in taxes as possible.
“They take our tax money and they throw it down the drain,” Trump said. “They spend $4 trillion in the Middle East and we can’t fix a road or a bridge and I fight very hard. I consider it an expense because, frankly, our country doesn’t know what they’re doing with our tax money and that’s part of the problem. So, I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible.”
There’s nothing super special on it, ’til they leave office, then all of a sudden you find out how much land they own and — or when they’re so incumbent entrenched, they can’t possibly be beaten, like Harry Reid.
The outsider’s tax return as measured against Congressman X, Congresswoman Y, is going to, by definition, look more complicated and different, particularly if that private sector person’s been successful.
The tax return of a private citizen, businessman in business for decades — a 21-year-old tax return — is now being used to disqualify or try to disqualify Trump on the basis that it doesn’t look like a politician’s tax return.
By definition, Trump, no matter what is on his tax return, it’s going to look different than anybody in politics. And that difference is going to be pointed to by people in politics, including the media, to discredit and disqualify the outsider.
One should worry more about job creation, economy and the policies proffered by Trump and what successes he has and if he has met some of his promises than a tax return you don’t have in hand – let IRS evaluate it and determine any inconsistencies – Im sure they will go after it like pitfalls.
LikeLike
The financial disclosure that the President did NOT have to submit until March 2018 has ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED, go read it.
Hillary Clinton submitted her tax returns, but they did NOT disclose here holdings listed in the PANAMA PAPERS. Or, the benefits given to her by her foundation … like the $145 MILLION from the sale to Russia of 20% of the U.S. URANIUM HOLDINGS.
Does YOUR tax return tell the comp”eye picture of you?
LikeLike
Where are Trump’s tax returns, Linda?
For 40 years, every presidential candidate has released their tax returns.
What is he hiding?
LikeLike
The “uranium sale” has been debunked a billion times, yet it refuses to die, because enough people are willing to repeat things that they don’t understand.
LikeLike
“A business man for years tax return is a lot different from a politician’s and politicians know how to do a construct to eliminate any concerns.”
Please explain to me how that’s different than Trump? You don’t think he can do the same thing? Please.
LikeLike
Don’t ask. You’ll just get word salad cut-and-pasted from some Brietbartish web site.
LikeLike
Another example of him trying to make money of the office of POTUS, it’s against the F king law.
LikeLike
Can you supply any factual data to support this claim?
LikeLike
Maybe the silver lining to this cloud is that it creates more EVIDENCE for grounds for his impeachment!
LikeLike
The US has been bullying and trying to micromanage Cuba for over 100 years. We still maintain a mini colony on Cuban territory, the Guantanamo naval base. We supposedly have been leasing the base from Cuba for more than 100 years. Very strange lease: it can only be terminated if both parties, Cuba (the landlord) and the US (the tenant) agree to end the arrangement. We refuse to leave and Cuba is in no position to evict this 800 pound gorilla from its real estate.
LikeLike
dianeravitch
Cuba bad ,bad , bad , perhaps not as bad as parts of Kentucky. Parts of Newark or Detroit …, .
Well Cubans in Miami sure do have a higher standard of living . But how does Cuba compare to Guatemala , Honduras , El Salvador, Haiti. How is Puerto Rico doing these days Remittance payments excluded . Any of those nations have an American embargo quite to the contrary. So pick a country other than little Havana (JOKE). you would rather live in . Now how does Cuba look.
But yes I did read the analysis that he seems to love those countries he has financial interests in. He does not have property in Russia they have property in him.
LikeLike
Diane,
The impact means nothing to the average Cuban citizen. We are led to believe the point of this Castro Regime is to make everybody equal. Not at the lowest level, but by lifting everyone up.
What is the point of a communist regime? It is to deny every bit of that. A communist regime is built on so many frauds. It’s built on the fraud that everybody’s the same. It’s built on the fraud that everybody can be the same. It’s built on the fraud that every outcome can be made equal and that everybody can be upper middle class. It’s built on the fraud that everybody can have what they want and there will be total freedom, and there are no wants and no desires and most importantly, there will never be any competition. Communism is built on the belief that utopia is possible and can be provided by benevolent people running it.
Communism accomplishes just the exact opposite by design. Communism by design is designed to make everybody poor,
to make everybody miserable,
and make everybody the same. It’s designed to provide a system whereby the leaders are the only ones who get and have what they want.
So, once again, what are we back to? We’re back to good intentions. Communism fails every time it’s been tried. And what are the good intentions? That everybody’s going to be elevated.
Were you upset like Trump was that Raul Castro was not at the airport to meet Obama?
This little Raul just let Obama have it. He has called on Obama to lift even more restrictions on the blockade. That’s what the Castros call the embargo. They call it the blockade. Cuban people think there’s actually Navy ships out there blockading anybody from getting into Cuba, and then he demanded the return of Guantanamo Bay
Castro lecturing Obama that his efforts to remove the blockade have been insufficient. Much more could be done if the US blockade were lifted. He recognizes the position of President Obama and his administration against the blockade and his repeated appeals to Congress to have it removed. The most recent measures adopted by his administration are positive, but insufficient.
Castro has told the poor Cuban people ever since 1962 that the reason they’re poor is the American blockade. The only reason they do not have jobs, the only reason they do not have parts for their ’57 Chevys, and the only reason why their buildings are falling apart.
There are a lot of Americans, a lot of liberals who think that Raul Castro and Fidel are right, that it’s our blockade, the embargo which has limited Cuba and deprived it of economic opportunity.
We are the only country in the world that does not trade with Cuba. The only major country that does not trade with them. And yet that is portrayed as the reason why the Cuban people are still living in poverty.
And of course it would makes sense for the Castros to say this. They’re not going blame themselves, and they obviously are not going to blame communism. They blame America for it, for standing in the way. But they’re able to trade with Saudi Arabia, they’re able to trade with the UK, every nation in Europe, they trade with Canada, they trade with the ChiComs, they trade with everybody.
The only reason the Cuban people are poor is the Cuban government. The only reason the Cuban people don’t have any freedom or economic upward mobility is communism. it is striking to have to still explain this. It amazes me to think of the number of people to whom the truth and realities of communism is news that they’ve not heard before. And yet many blame Trump’s decision to change the Obama regs.
I remember that there was a period of time in the first Clinton administration where the Clinton administration began talking about lifting the embargo. And do you know what, any time that happened — and it wasn’t just that one time. There have been many instances in the last 30, 40 years where an American official here or there publicly speaks about the proposition it’s time to lift the embargo. You know what Castro did in every instance? The one involving the Clinton administration, he shot down a little Cessna 172, some charity flight.
It was a single-engine prop plane that was flying charity goods from software to Cuba, he shot it down, thereby stopping all talk of lifting the embargo. The last thing they want is lifting the embargo. If the embargo is really totally lifted, they’re out of excuses. The Cuban people are not going to begin prospering. The Cuban people are not going to experience upward economic mobility. If we totally eliminate the embargo it isn’t going to happen, because it’s still going to be a communist country. And old Raul and his Regime clearly know that.
LikeLike
jscheidell,
The fastest way to get rid of the Communist regime in Cuba is to open it up to normal relations with the U.S.
Why do you want to preserve communism in Cuba?
LikeLike
The Financial Disclosures Trump filed to run for office provide information over and above what 12,000 pages of tax return would provide. In addition the U.S. TAX CODES are DESIGNED to avoid paying any more IN taxes than one has to pay. In all his years Trump has not been accused of “evasion” which is illegal.
The fixation on this issue is comical by comparison to Elizabeth Warren, who made MILLIONS buying foreclosed homes during the recession. Then we have our resident socialist, Bernie Sanders. Socialism is all about the redistribution of wealth to the needy. How do you square that with his three homes and the fact he is now a member of the RICHEST 2% OF THE POPULATION OF AMERICA?
Face NOTHING is all one way. There are pros and cons to EVERYTHING. When you loose site of that you become narrow-minded and are more easily led into following than to leading.
LikeLike
Linda,
What about Trump’s dementia? What about his sycophant attitude towards Putin? Surely you can explain that?
LikeLike
Dementia … like Nancy Pelosi who has had issues remembering that Bush is no longer president. That could be her drinking, however, because $100,000+ for alcohol on the plane is a lot.
Putin? The only connection there is in the mantra from the left. Unlike Obama’s hot Mic moment where he was caught saying he would have more leeway as prez to work with Russia. Or, Clinton’s sale of 20% of the U.S. uranium reserves to Russia which netted her foundation $145 million. Or, Maxine Waters who has holding in at least one Russian company.
Those things and more are factually documented. But, even Comey has said there was no collusion between Trump, any of his people and Russia. But the lie still spreads among the left. Some people will believe anything … for example Shaq is among those that still believe the Earth is flat…go figure.
LikeLike
Linda,
I see your hero attacking the mayor of London, criticizing NATO, joining Saudi Arabia in knocking Qatar where we have a Mahon air base, but I don’t hear a word of complaint about Putin, who murders critics in broad daylight.
LikeLike
As he is with most of his problems as POTUS, Trump is responsible for the public’s fixation on this issue. If he had just released his returns, nobody would need to speculate about what was in them. If he had divested himself of his business interests, nobody could argue he was profiting from his office. There is a reason people talk about the need to avoid even “the appearance of impropriety,” and this is it.
LikeLike
Flerp!,
The public is not fixated on what is in Trump’s taxes. No, they are fixated on the economy, the tax changes promised and jobs. They are probably watching the stock market reach new horizons in the DOW and 500 and the increases in their 401’s since the day of Trump’s election. No, the only people I see fixated on his taxes are those who continue to chant ‘resistance’ and the ‘impeachment” mantra – 11 months of using every Democratic tactic in the book to bring him down hasn’t and isn’t working – causing the hatred to bubble up sending some to meditate to lower the blood pressure. Take a look at the latest election – the polls predicted a 6-7 point loss to Handle by a guy, Ossoff, who didn’t even live in the district after spending 20 plus million in outside support – The Democrats are still “putinized” – Jay is in front of Congress still doubling down on the fact that Putin didn’t have an effect on the voting numbers – but how many times from different people will it take to accept that Hillary loss legitimately and Trump won legitimately – after awhile the public is ignoring the Dems and the lame stream media who is a driving force – they still haven’t offered solutions and policies for our economy etc. – except Sanders and Warren who are looking to go to socialism.
And yet we have “expert” psychologists and psychiatrists who avoid their ethics to try to prove he has mental illness and they haven’t interviewed him to verify the challenges. One should look at the polls that demonstrate the top issues that the public confronts daily – it’s not his taxes.
LikeLike
According to the polls I’ve seen, a majority of the public thinks Trump is a liar who doesn’t care about the average American or share their values. They don’t like the way he’s handling the economy, the environment, or immigration. And they think he’s hiding something illegal or unethical with respect to his relationship with Russia.
LikeLike
Flerp!
The question to look at is what one should look at “polls that demonstrate the top issues that the public confronts daily…”
LikeLike
Well, I suppose in a poll like that, my top concern is whether I can get everything done that I need to get done before I have to leave work. Other top concerns include when the subway train is going to arrive and whether it’s running on a modified schedule. Today my top concern is whether I can get away from the office long enough to see my daughter’s eighth grade commencement speech. I would have those concerns regardless of who was President. That doesn’t mean I’m not concerned that the President of American is a idiot, a scumbag, and an asshat.
The question is why does Trump consistently do the thing that is most likely to increase the appearance that he has something to hide?
LikeLike
Huh, weird, looks like polls conducted around April 15 this year show a majority of the public (in the case of one poll, 60% of Republican respondents) think Trump should release his tax returns. Go figure.
LikeLike
Go figure those polls – I might be wrong but just about every poll had Trump losing and Hillary a winner. And the recent polls for the last 4 special elections called it wrong.
The media will not let go of the ghosts of Putin and the press presses on. Take the interview today of Jphnson: They’re back at it again today with another congressional hearing. And Jeh Johnson, another vaunted Obama administration guy brought back up, and he was being asked today about what they knew about Russians tampering and hacking with the election.
Mike Conaway from Texas: “One of our purposes this morning was to reassure the American public with aren’t to the 16 election and also secondly look at what we do in future elections going forward. You said in your opening statement, in your prepared remarks that to your knowledge there was no vote tallying changes, that no one’s vote was voted one way and recorded some other way. Is that still your opinion with respect to the 16 election,” the intrusions, whatever they might have been, by whoever, the vote was not affected?
JOHNSON: Based on everything I know, that is correct. I know of no evidence that through cyber intrusions, votes were altered or suppressed in some way.
So when do the Dems give up on Putin? In every one of these elections, the media told the nation that this was the election where the American people, filled with rage and buyer’s remorse over Trump, were going to express their disgust with Trump. And this was going yo be the method by which the American people admitted their mistake.
Except it hasn’t happened yet. The people who continue to lose elections are Democrats. They do not know how to beat Donald Trump.
The Dems are beginning to search for morsels of salvation: Take Maddow the other night and another excuse from the campaign.
Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff’s congressional campaign,Jessica Zeigler told Slate, complained that many of his constituents are hard to reach because they still live at home with their parents.
Rachel Maddow – “Steve, let me ask you one last question on this. If there was a turnout effect from the bad weather today in the district, does that have any partisan implications that you could foresee in terms of what was expected for same day Election Day voting rather than the early vote?”
Did you know that rain was partisan? Did you know that there are partisans implications in rain showers? Did the bad weather have partisan implications by virtue of the fact that it might have kept Democrats at home? Election Day turnout, could it have been very poorly affected, negatively affected, Steve, by virtue of the bad weather, does the bad weather have a partisan implication?
Politico reports:
“At DeKalb-Peachtree Airport, which sits in the state’s 5th District but is close to a heavily Democratic part of the 6th District, 4.58 inches of rain fell between noon and 4 p.m. Eastern Time — almost as much as typically falls in the entire month of June. But in Cobb County, home to more Republican voters, far less rain has fallen.”
So, you see, the weather gods made it rain four-and-a-half inches on the Democrat side of the district and the weather gods made it just sprinkle on the Republican side of the district, and therefore Karen Handel got a last-minute endorsement from the weather gods.
25 years ago we’d see this and make jokes about it, we would laugh ourselves silly. Not realizing these people take it all seriously and believe it.
To Rachel Maddow, there were partisan implications in the weather.
The media and polls – how much trust can you put in them now?
LikeLike
If polls are fake news, why did you tell me to go look at them? What’s the new basis for your assertion that nobody cares about Trump’s taxes — your gut?
LikeLike
Flerp!
Please note that Trump’s taxes are no where, I repeat no where as a concern. The Dems need to review a couple of areas – leadership i.e.. is Pelosi Warren Schumer and Sanders viable for next election and getting the party to deal with the concerns of the public.
I thought I was referring to major issues the public was concerned with so I went back and checked my notes:
‘What Do You Think Is the Most Important
Problem Facing This Country Today?’
By GREGOR AISCH and ALICIA PARLAPIANO FEB. 27, 2017 -NYTIMES
Since the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Gallup polling organization has asked Americans an open-ended question: “What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?”
February 2017➤➤
The biggest problems cited by Americans this month:
Budget
Economy in general
Unemployment
Poverty
Inequality
Wages
Dissatisfaction with government
Unifying the country
Religious and moral decline
Health care
Immigration
Civil rights and race relations
Other domestic issues
Education
Environment
Judicial system
Crime
Media
National security
Terrorism
Other foreign issues
Foreign relations
Fear of war
Other/No answer
Economy/Domestic issues/International issues
The top response was dissatisfaction with government, a sentiment Mr. Trump harnessed during his populist campaign.
I add the following Gallup chart:
What do you think is the most important problem facing the country today?
May 2017 Apr 2017 Mar 2017 Feb 2017 Jan 2017 Dec 2016 Nov 2016
ECONOMIC PROBLEMS (NET) 21 24 26 20 30 29 31
Economy in general 6 8 8 9 11 12 14
Unemployment/Jobs 6 5 9 6 8 9 9
Federal budget deficit/Federal debt 4 3 4 2 4 4 3
Gap between rich and poor 2 3 2 1 2 2 2
Lack of money 1 * 1 — 3 1 1
Wage issues 1 1 1 1 2 1 1
Taxes 1 2 1 * 1 1 1
Corporate corruption * 1 1 * 1 * *
High cost of living/Inflation * 1 * * * * 1
Fuel/Oil prices — * * * * * *
Foreign trade/Trade deficit — * 1 * * * *
NON-ECONOMIC PROBLEMS (NET) 78 78 75 78 72 73 70
Dissatisfaction with government/Poor leadership 18 21 18 19 11 9 8
Healthcare 18 9 7 5 9 4 10
Immigration/Illegal aliens 7 8 12 13 4 6 5
Race relations/Racism 6 4 6 7 10 12 10
National security 5 3 4 5 3 3 3
International issues, problems 4 1 3 2 1 1 *
Unifying the country 4 7 6 10 3 6 6
Ethics/moral/religious/family decline 4 4 3 2 4 5 3
Poverty/Hunger/Homelessness 3 2 2 2 2 3 2
Wars/War (nonspecific)/Fear of war 3 2 * 1 * * *
Education 2 3 5 3 4 2 2
Terrorism 2 5 3 5 5 5 2
Crime/Violence 2 3 1 1 3 4 1
Lack of respect for each other 2 1 3 2 3 6 5
Judicial system/Courts/Laws 2 1 4 2 2 1 2
Environment/Pollution 2 4 3 2 2 3 3
Situation with North Korea 1 1 * — — — —
Drugs 1 1 1 * 1 1 1
Lack of military defense 1 * * * * 1 1
Welfare 1 2 1 * 1 1 1
Abortion 1 * — * * * 1
The media * * 2 1 * * *
Situation in Iraq/ISIS * — * * 2 1 1
Situation with Russia * * — — * * *
Guns/Gun control * 1 * * 1 1 *
War/conflict between Middle East nations * 1 * * * * —
Foreign policy/Foreign aid/Focus overseas * 3 1 1 2 2 2
Social Security * * * * * * *
Energy/Lack of energy sources * — * * * * 1
Situation in Syria * 1 — — — — —
Children’s behavior/Way they are raised * * * * 1 1 *
Care for the elderly/Medicare * * * * 1 * *
Overpopulation * * — — * * *
Elections/Election reform * 1 * * 8 8 11
Gay rights issues — * — — * * —
Natural disaster response/Relief efforts — — * — — — *
Other non-economic 3 5 5 6 4 4 3
No opinion 5 6 3 4 3 5 4
Total 123% 128% 124% 117% 126% 129% 124%
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
Trump’s taxes matter because there is reasonable suspicion that he makes decisions to enrich himself, not protect the country.
If he has nothing to hide, he should release them.
Polls are irrelevant.
LikeLike
Diane,
Maybe the Dems should listen to the voters and the constituents they serve about what is important to them – they might do better in elections….I can’t fathom why his taxes are more important than the issues listed….in some of the research polls involving the question of what were the top issues, one can find topics which concerned various group – Hispanics for instance. His taxes don’t improve your position any any of the issues listed.
Suspicious minds? Rachel Maddow has conjured up all kinds of conspiracy theories with no support to voice them – throw them to the wall and see what sticks is the mantra of the Dems searching for the ghost that takes Trump down.
LikeLike
Jscheidell, the Founding Father’s wrote something in the Constitution called the emoluments clause to protect the nation against corrupt officials. Trump violates it every day because he won’t relinquish control of his international business.
If you want to argue that the Constitution doesn’t matter, as compared to polls, that’s a different discussion.
LikeLike
Just because he doesn’t release his taxes should not lead to a guilty charge of hiding something.
“The question is why does Trump consistently do the thing that is most likely to increase the appearance that he has something to hide?”
So he can have a good laugh – and for 11 months the jokes keep coming!
I looked at the Jeh Johnson questioning by Gowdy and low and behold the humor of the Dems compounds. It’s been common knowledge, and it’s been stated countless times by Admiral Rogers at the NSA. We’ve had CIA directors. We’ve had Comey. Any number of people have said that the Russians could not and did not hack, tamper, or involve themselves in the voting and therefore there was no tampering with the election.
That question he had from Trey Gowdy yesterday Goedye said, “I don’t understand. You say that your servers and the network at the Democrat National Committee were hacked, and yet the Democrats wouldn’t let the FBI in there to examine forensically the network or the computers. Why is that? I mean, if you’ve had a crime take place, why wouldn’t you want investigative authorities as good as the FBI in there to try to find out who did it?”
And he said, “I’m not gonna argue with you about it, Congressman,” clearly agreeing with Gowdy. Now we get the joke from Debbie Schultz…
She started accusing Jeh Johnson of lying about this. Schultz said, “We weren’t hacked. Nobody got in. We didn’t tell the FBI they couldn’t look at our servers!”
This is great – everybody knows the Democrat servers got hacked. But here is Debbie Schultz now denying that and denying that they didn’t let the FBI in to look at the servers.
The humor in this? For eight months, minimum, we have had this intense, never ending investigation into Trump and his collusion with Russia. And it turns out that the only election rigging that took place was within the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party rigged the election, Hillary Clinton with Debbie. That’s why they didn’t want the FBI to look at the servers to find out evidence of this. It would lead to the bathroom server in Hillary’s basement that was off-the-grid.
Nice try rewriting history?
But basically Trump likes to torque you and he is doing a nice job.
LikeLike
You might want to inform the lame stream media that their polls are irrelevant – they live by them – polsters make money on their predictions – I think they might be unemployed if they keep misleading the public, ultimately disappointing their base –
reasonable suspicion? or do you refer to another constructed conspiracy theory by Maddow?
“If he has nothing to hide, he should release them.” this to me is like saying if you takes the 5th in questioning that you are hiding something…and you are guilty by omission or not answering the question.
I love the lame stream media – as the talk about the health care bill starts and hasn’t been published yet, the senate is coming out with a push poll – saying how much the American people hate it. They don’t even know about it yet, but our friends in the media have got a push poll out; Americans think that the Republican health care bill will kill people and hurt people.
It hasn’t even been presented officially yet. When that happens, McConnell says there’s going to be debate, there will be amendments offered. But the lame stream media – they were waiting for this because the news leaked that the health care bill was coming. So they were able to denounce it before McConnell even started speaking.
AP and Reuters, the New York Times, the Washington Post unanimous in saying that the Republican bill in the Senate is “mean-spirited,” that it will hurt people, and that it won’t work. The same people who told us that Obamacare was brilliant. The same people that told us, along with Obama, if you like your doctor, you get to keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you get to keep your plan.
The same people that told us that Obama’s health care plan was brilliant and it was gonna insure the uninsurable, and it was gonna heal the unhealable and it was gonna make well the sick.
BS.
The headline of the Reuters story: “Most Americans Say Republican Healthcare Plan Will Be Harmful.”
I gues you could say you right that the polls are irrelevant – but to the uninformed, low informed voter – they wouldn’t take the time to decipher. Reuters is literally apoplectic. “Senate Health Care Bill Expected to Cut Back Medicaid Expansion.” — Forty-one percent of American adults oppose the House plan, while 30 percent support it. Another 29 percent said they ‘don’t know.’” When you add the Senate bill to it, the American people are scared to death.
LikeLike
I hope you don’t lose your health insurance.
LikeLike
Flerp,
A lot of support for a gut feeling – when researching ask the question
What Do You Think Is the Most Important
Problem Facing This Country Today?’
LikeLike
Diane,
Trump has been in office for 6 months and this emolument issue has not surfaced in any of the left;s media or concerns – Putin still on the table – Jarred’s security clearance, who is leaving or position adjustments but not emolument.
The Emoluments Clause has apparently never been litigated, but it has been interpreted and enforced through a long series of opinions of the Attorneys General and by less-frequent opinions of the Comptrollers General. Congress has also exercised its power of “Consent” under the clause by enacting the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which authorizes federal employees to accept foreign governmental benefits of various kinds in specific circumstances. Trump, to date he seemingly hasn’t crossed the line.
LikeLike
I think Trump has so many conflicts of interest and so many violations of the emoluments clause that no one can keep track. If he released his tax returns, the conflicts would come to light. What is he hiding? Why doesn’t he release the returns from years where he is not being audited?
His lease on the building known as the Old Post Office, now a Trump Hotel, is a simple way for foreign governments to pay him off. The lease should have been canceled because it explicitly that no government official may be a party to the lease or collect profits from it.
LikeLike
Diane,
Although you keep asking ‘what he is hiding’ by not giving his tax report – I again say – this is like Congressional hearings where the 5th amendment is invoked – do you call that individual guilty for not giving an answer? Just because previous presidents have done so doesnt mean he has to – it’s a ploy to control those who might want to run for office. It is frustrating to say the lest for those looking for some morsel to bring him down – I guess one will have to wait for IRS to go after him for mistakes in his filings.
In a POLITICO article back in March noted the following: Feds approve deal to insulate Trump from Post Office hotel
The president agrees to take no cash from project while in office.
By JOSH GERSTEIN and ISAAC ARNSDORF 03/23/2017 03:37 PM EDT Updated 03/23/2017 05:21 PM EDT
The government agency serving as a landlord for the Trump hotel that sits on federal property in downtown Washington has approved an arrangement where President Donald Trump will maintain a financial interest in the project but agree not to receive any profits or other funds while he serves as president.
The General Services Administration concluded that Trump’s pledge not to take money from the Old Post Office project resolves concerns that language in the lease declares that no government employee should be permitted to benefit from the lease.
The GSA’s letter never explicitly states that Trump was required to make any changes to its financial structure in order to come into compliance with the lease. In fact, the agency notes that some legal and contracting experts said the clause might not limit Trump’s ownership under the current circumstances.
Some specialists in the area panned the GSA’s new finding.
“Not only is the conclusion unexpected and unpersuasive, as a matter of law, but, as a matter of policy, it is harmful to the integrity — and thus credibility — of GSA, the Presidency, and federal procurement process,” said George Washington University law professor Steven Schooner. “It is deeply troubling that the contracting officer’s letter makes no reference to the underlying conflicts of interest, which, of course, undercuts any suggestion that he (the contracting officer) engaged in independent analysis.”
Democratic Reps. Peter DeFazio and Elijah Cummings, ranking members of the House committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Oversight and Government Reform, respectively, said the GSA letter “provides a completely inadequate explanation for its decision.”
“GSA changed the position it held before President Trump took office,” DeFazio and Cummings said in a statement. “This new interpretation renders this lease provision completely meaningless — any elected official can now defy the restriction by following this blueprint. … This decision allows profits to be reinvested back into the hotel so Donald Trump can reap the financial benefits when he leaves the White House. This is exactly what the lease provision was supposed to prevent.”
Other analysts said it was notable that the agency never publicly indicated whether the lease provision actually restricted Trump’s involvement with the project.
“They conspicuously left that as an open question,” said Kevin Fullington, an attorney with New York law firm Herrick Feinstein.
The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which complained to GSA about Trump’s ownership, called the decision disappointing because it failed to resolve the conflict of interest.
“Donald Trump still owns the hotel, still will benefit from payments and still has a vested interest in its success,” executive director Noah Bookbinder said in a statement.
Trump lawyer Sheri Dillon claimed in a February letter to GSA that no changes to the hotel’s financial structure were required and she initially indicated no plans to go beyond Trump’s pledge to give up involvement in directing the project. However, after further discussions with GSA, Trump’s team sent the agency a letter Monday containing the promise the president would not take funds from the project during his time at the White House.
David Drabkin, a contracting expert who had raised doubts that the lease precluded Trump’s ownership, still expressed dismay at the outcome and called on Trump to divest.
“I’m concerned about the ability of anyone in GSA, at this point, to fully represent the interests of the U.S. government on a lease in which the president is the lessee,” he said. “President should lead by example and divest himself of his interest in the hotel.”
It’s unclear how significant a sacrifice, if any, Trump is making by forgoing payments from the Washington hotel project. Construction of the hotel was financed with a $170 million loan from German lender Deutsche Bank. Most of the revenue generated by the hotel in its first years would likely go to the bank.
Under the 2013 lease, a Trump-connected firm is paying $250,000 a month to the federal government in exchange for the right to operate the luxury hotel, which opened last September.
I guess this will keep you suspicious and hope Drabkin keeps the doubts in the fore front – but if you have a concern as you noted – write a letter to the GSA
LikeLike
Of course the Trump organization is enriched by owning the Trump hotel nbear the White House. Under Trump’s agreement, he can withdraw money from the organization whenever he wants. And he doubled the fee to join Mar-a-Lago from $100,000 to $200,000.
A family of grifters.
LikeLike
Now here is another investigation “The Tarmacgate” – but not on Trump — glad it is bipartisan –
If the news since Comey dropped the bomb about Lynch asking him to drop the term investigation to a “matter” has been building. June 11th – Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein called for the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate former attorney general Loretta Lynch instructing James Comey to mislead the public about the Clinton email investigation. Comey cited Lynch’s request as one of the reasons he felt compelled to hold a press conference announcing the results of the Clinton email investigation. He also cited Lynch’s private meeting with Bill Clinton on her airplane as another reason for trying to keep the FBI investigation independent from the DOJ.
“What makes it egregious is the fact — and I think it’s obvious that it is a fact — that the attorney general of the United States was adjusting the way the department talked about its business so as to coincide with the way the Clinton campaign talked about that business,” Mukasey said.
A bipartisan group of Senate Judiciary Committee leaders is examining former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s alleged interference in the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
The group is seeking details about Lynch’s communication with a Clinton campaign aide, Amanda Renteria, as well as copies of documents and information about whether the FBI investigated the alleged communication.
The letters, sent Thursday, are signed by Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley, ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein, as well as Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon White House, the chair and ranker on the subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Loretta Lynch to explain her actions surround the FBI’s 2016 investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails.
Diane,
what is interesting is the fact that Meuller and Comey are best friends, and add that to the fact the Meuller is hiring lawyers who worked for Hiillary…is a recusal in the future – justice tainted?
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
I find it interesting that Mueller is a Republican and was appointed by GW Bush.
LikeLike
He’s probably just regurgitating talking points he saw on Hannity’s show.
LikeLike
Just because the expansion of Medicaid is being cut does not mean certain people will suffer … that is fear mongering. Continuing the expansion at rates we have seen in recent years is UNSUSTAINABLE. Unless of course your aim is to have government take all your money and then dole it back as it sees fit … socialism does NOT work. Look at the current conditions in Venezuela after twenty years.
Self determination, independence and freedom of choice is what the goal being worked towards happens to be. The fact is some people will NOT make good choices no matter what, but we do not take away the freedom of choice from everyone because of those few knuckleheads. Obamacare was mandatory yet many still did NOT buy insurance. That is the choice some will aways make.
LikeLike
Linda,
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 23 million Americans will lose their health care if the GOP bill passes. This won’t be because Medicaid expansion is curtailed, but because of deep cuts to Medicaid.
You are ok with that. I am not.
http://www.epi.org/publication/millions-of-people-have-a-lot-to-lose-under-the-ahca/?utm_source=Economic+Policy+Institute&utm_campaign=50e819bfcb-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_06_23&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e7c5826c50-50e819bfcb-55912853&mc_cid=50e819bfcb&mc_eid=efc5546f61
LikeLike
The CBO also said we would have 23,000,000 insured by now, yet it is only 10-11,000,000. The CBO may be able to predict costs fairly well, but they need to work on their forecasting.
Has the CBO done any cost analysis or Obamacare recently? That would be interesting, considering 40% of the U.S. counties will have one, or less, insurer next year.
Obamacare was put through by slight of hand in violation of the law quite frankly. The ACA originated in the Senate. It included no less than 42 taxes. Only the HOUSE has the power to establish taxes, NOT the Senate.
Much of the actual repealing of Obamacare will come directly from Dr. Price as head of Heath and Human Services. Much of the ACA was written that way and can therefore be dismantled the same way … something in excess of 400+ pages will go quickly after the replacement framework is established.
The ACA was written because the architects felt American’s were to stupid to be self determining. The fools have even bragged about it multiple times.
LikeLike
Linda,
Insurers are leaving ACA because Of uncertainty created by Trump.
Trump is knowingly destroying healthcare for millions of people.
Does he have horns? I bet they are there under his orange mane.
LikeLike
You can’t blame Trump unless your head is in the sand. In April, 2016 insurance companies started pulling out f Obamacare. By July, 2016 the insurance co-ops started going bankrupt in alarming numbers. Everyone was already declaring Clinton the winner. It was another 7 months before the election that put Trump in the White House.
LikeLike
Linda,
Are you okay about the 1.4 million elderly people who will be thrown out of nursing homes because of the GOP bill to cut Medicaid? Even your hero said the House bill was “mean” and the Senate bill is very similar.
I hope you don’t have a parent or grandparent on Medicaid.
LikeLike
Medicaid is NOT BEING CUT! It is the RATE OF EXPANSION that is being REDUCED. Medicaid is still being funded. There will not be the unsustainable growth rate of recent years.
Medicaid was originally intended for children, elderly, disabled … NOT those that can get insurance through an employer. The number of insured climbed in recent years because of Medicaid expansion and NOT Obamacare coverage.
The liberals choice to use fear mongering rather than facts is tiresome. The state’s want more flexibility with the Medicaid money. Their needs are NOT a “one size fits all” issue. One state may need more care for the elderly and less to opioid addiction. The new law addresses more of the individual states needs than Obamacare ever thought of doing.
Let me repeat … the claim that Medicaid is being cut is a LIE. It will still be funded. It is the expansion INCREASE that is being cut and even that will not be eliminated.
LikeLike
Linda,
Do you think the Republicans should hold public hearings on their bill? Yes or no.
LikeLike
Linda,
Just listening to a discussion by health experts.
GOP bill cuts Medicaid by billions, to fund tax cuts for the rich. Not only cuts for Medicaid expansion, but cuts for people on Medicaid right now
LikeLike
I would not be okay with such a scenario IF IT WERE TRUE. Yours is false and at 70 I checked it out carefully.
I am not a fan of nursing homes after having dealt with them for my grandmother and both parents. You need to stay on top of them to get even moderate care for loved ones. They have a tendency to “enable” a decline in an individual’s independence. Even simple things like fresh water is easily “overlooked”. Urinary tract infections are common and often categorized as dementia. They are, however, easily treated and a pesky condition after bladder cancer. Inaccurate medical records within the facility , either accidentally or by design, often leads to mistreatment of residents.
I have dealt with no ess than 7 facilities to date. The greatest issue is brewing in the wings. I mentioned the frequency of urinary tract infections and inaccurate record keeping .. now Oregon is working on a law saying it is okay to starve “dementia” patients to death. There are numerous conditions that appear to be dementia, but are not.
I wonder how many elderly would be “safer” if they weren’t in a nursing home? But I say again … the proposed healthcare bill does NOT reduce Medicaid, only the amount of EXPANSION. Medicaid was established to be there to care for the elderly and other vulnerable citizens.
Can you show me any factual data within the bill that supports your claim?
LikeLike
Linda,
Ask the CBO.
LikeLike
Diane,
I agree that is interesting – but doesn’t minimize relationship of Hillary lawyers and Comey relationship….
I liked the comedy note and the pics – good likenesses!
and Flerp! Regurgitation? I also listen to CNN, Read WAPO and NYTIMES and give a rare, very rare, visit to PMS-NBC to laugh at Maddow to hear what the left resistance club gives. so I guess you could also include – puke –
But I notice if the info doesn’t fit your narrow vision your retort has offers little meaning –
And to add to the comedy responses – Obama had a hard time deciding how to respond to Putin – yes, Putin, who they knew was trying to hack the voting issues – according to insider on the debate in the WH at the time – called it “we choked”
Flerp! don’t you just love Trump’s tweet “James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!” Talk about the left calling him stupid. Pressure on Comey to tell the truth? Water gate tape issues reminiscent of Nixon.
USAToday – yes, I scan the left “journalism” pages – headlines and comments – The only way to avoid a tainted investigation or a political explosion is another counsel to investigate possible obstruction of justice. The article noted that He has a disqualifying conflict of interest regarding a large part of his work involving a choice between investigating or relying on former FBI director James Comey, a longtime close friend -15 years – of Mueller’s.
They also called for – ” if he doesn’t resign, Attorney General Jeff Sessions should appoint another special counsel to take over the obstruction-of-justice part of the investigation, where Mueller is disqualified.”
As Bill Otis wrote in these pages last week noted, “Comey and Mueller have been friends for nearly 15 years. They were partners in the episode that defined Comey’s professional persona more than any other in his public service. It would be surprising if it had not also forged a permanent bond with Mueller”
Add the following article that even CNN had an article – “Mueller and Comey have a history”
By Eli Watkins, CNN
Wed May 17, 2017
LikeLike
Mueller and Comey have something in common that Trump has never had: a reputation for integrity, rectitude, and trustworthiness.
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
You might want to read this, then ask yourself why you trust a congenital liar:
LikeLike
jsheidell, I long ago found that you’re an inveterate cutter-and-paster of other people’s ideas. I have no doubt that when you don’t find a rebuttal that fits your needs on one web site, you’ll look to others.
LikeLike
Flerp!
More sources to choose from – besides Blaze
Hillary Clinton on Twitter: “Forget death panels. If Republicans pass …
https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/878366918243233792 – 357k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … @HillaryClinton. Wife, mom, grandma, women+kids advocate, FLOTUS, Senator, SecState, hair icon, pantsuit aficionado, 2016 presidential …
HILLARY TWEET: GOP is death party – Dennis Michael Lynch
http://dennismichaellynch.com/hillary-tweet-gop-death-party/ – 81k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … Two time loser (when counting presidential races) Hillary Clinton took to Twitter on Friday afternoon to share her message about the Senate …
Hillary Clinton desperately seeks attention with ‘DEATH PARTY’ tweet
http://therightscoop.com/hillary-clinton-desperately-seeks-attention-with-death-party-tweet/ – 205k – Cached – Similar pages
1 day ago … Yesterday, @HillaryClinton tweeted that should the GOP pass their healthcare bill, “they’re the death party.” pic.twitter.com/fBGUWkpqKg.
Hillary Clinton calls Republicans ‘death party’ if health care bill passes
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/23/clinton-calls-republicans-death-party/103150428/ – 357k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … Hillary Clinton had some strong words on Friday for Republicans over … In a tweet, Clinton said the GOP would be “the death party” if the bill …
HILLARY TWEET: GOP is death party – Spinzon
http://spinzon.com/hillary-tweet-gop-death-party/ – 65k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … The former presidential candidate blasted out the following tweet: “Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they’re the death party.”.
Clinton: If Republicans pass ObamaCare repeal, ‘they’re the death …
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/339251-clinton-if-republicans-pass-obamacare-repeal-theyre-the-death-party – 246k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … She blasted Republicans in a tweet over the Senate GOP’s recently unveiled bill to repeal and … If Republicans pass this bill, they’re the death party. https://t.co/ jCStfOaBjy. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) June 23, 2017.
Hillary Clinton Gets Wrecked on Twitter For Saying the GOP is ‘The …
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/06/hillary-clinton-gets-wrecked-twitter-saying-gop-death-party/ – 180k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … Hillary Clinton Gets Wrecked on Twitter For Saying the GOP is ‘The Death Party’ … If the Republicans pass this bill, they’re the death party.”.
Hillary Clinton Attacks Healthcare Bill, Calls GOP the ‘Death Party …
http://www.tmz.com/2017/06/23/hillary-clinton-attacks-gop-healthcare-twitter-death-party/ – 147k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … The former candidate said the GOP will be “the death party” if they pass the proposed healthcare measure. In her tweet, she referenced an …
Hillary Clinton tweet shamelessly attacks Republicans, gets brutal …
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/23/hillary-clinton-tweet-shamelessly-attacks-republicans-gets-brutal-response/ – 321k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … US Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton addresses a campaign … Clinton’s “death party” tweet was met with ire on social media, …
Hillary Clinton says Republicans will be “death party” with …
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/24/hillary_clinton_says_republicans_will_be_death_party_with_obamacare_repeal.html – 86k – Cached – Similar pages
2 days ago … Hillary Clinton: Republicans Will be “Death Party” if Obamacare … Clinton has been using Twitter to speak up against the health care bill over …
12345678910Next
Listen to something else other than the rubber room stations sometimes….
LikeLike
This was excellent cutting and pasting here, jscheidell. Right in your wheelhouse.
LikeLike
Flerp!
Let me “regurgitate” this from Clinton’s tweet
Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton snubbed the call for a bipartisan de-escalation of heated rhetoric and instead tweeted a message calling Republicans the “death party” Friday. “Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they’re the death party.”
And I didn’t get it from Hannity!
I wonder if this will help the Dems in the 2018 elections….
Social media of the left adds more perspective to her tweet to the rubber room bubble…
LikeLike
Even Hillary has freedom of speech.
LikeLike
Absolutely correct
But when does it cross the line – like not calling “fire” in a theater etc?
And I remember grandma in a wheelchair being pushed off a cliff…
I see part of the problem on campuses today where disallowed “free speech” and discourse are fostering these extreme comments. This will have long term cultural issues, but also liberty and learning will suffer.
IMHO, if colleges were more interested in spurring intellectual debate and discussion, professors and commencement speakers would be a lot more ideologically diverse offering the possibility of a different view to students and exposing them to a serious argument advancing conservative ideas.
LikeLike
If you recall, Hillary lost the electoral college. I personally think the election was rigged by hacking, thanks to Putin. There is a reason Trump never insults Putin as he does our closest allies.
Since she lost the election, and this dirty old man is president, why keep complaining about her and threatening to prosecute her? Are we a Banana Republic yet?
LikeLike
Diane, there has been NO EVIDENCE of collusion between the Trump White House and Russia. This has been confirmed by multiple dems in the intelligence departments.
Polls out this morning show more that 54-65% of potential voters are tired of hearing about this since NOTHING has been found in ANY of the ongoing investigations. Even democratic leaders are telling members to dial it back. Schumer even came out this weekend to downplay Russia and to let everyone know that within a month the dems will have a PLATFORM! A little late since they have had none, which aided in the loss at the poles last November and in the following specialist elections since then.
Votes want to hear about the economy. They are also beginning to ask some serious questions about the lack of appropriate education of our children. Why are are kids practicing the SEVEN RULES OF RADICALS devised by Saul Alinsky rather than a deeper understanding of our country’s history and Constitution?
LikeLike
Linda,
We will find out whether there has been collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia when the special counsel Robert Mueller concludes his investigation.
It is a matter of record that his first campaign manager worked as a consultant to the pro-Russian party in Ukraine.
So, we will see.
LikeLike
So the FBI investigation started almost a year ago doesn’t count? There were 100+ people on that investigation. Why do we continue to pay them if we are going to dismiss their conclusions as false?
LikeLike
True, you cut and pasted this one from theblaze.com.
LikeLike
Diane,
Well, I guess the complaint by many to investigate the Tarmac-gate incident and Hillary email obstruction, possibly going to expand elsewhere
The only thing I can find as fact regarding Putin hacking is the DNC servers and Potesda – Every person infront of Congress has confirmed that Putin did not change one vote nor did he enter into any voting machine.
I am not prosecuting her nor threatening to do so –
its a bipartisan investigation
Senate judiciary probe may review possible obstruction … – CNN.com
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/19/politics/senate-judiciary-committee-investigation/index.html – 185k
Feinstein want it it as well Dianne Feinstein Wants Investigation Into Loretta Lynch |
http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/11/dem-senator-wants-investigation-into-lynch-interference-on-clinton-email-investigation/
Jun 11, 2017 … Dem Senator Wants Investigation Into Lynch Interference On Clinton Email … too, ” Feinstein admitted in a Sunday morning interview on CNN.
I am sitting back with a good drink waiting for next investigation….
Banana republic? IMHO the Dems are doing a good job of it.
LikeLike
The GOP has the presidency and a majority of both houses yet are unable to accomplish anything. Sad. And they are trying so hard to take Medicaid away from millions of poor people to give a tax cut to the rich. Sad. I hope they stay deadlocked.
LikeLike
Diane,
I don’t believe what the left tries to convince us that businesses, industries don’t care about us. They’d just as soon you’d die. They don’t care if your policies or their products kill you.
So if they’re getting out of the insurance market, it means they don’t care if you get sick. It means they don’t want to pay to help you. They don’t want to pay to keep you healthy!” A lot of people think this because that’s what the left has fostered for a decade in their anti-capitalist and anti-corporate lens.
But there’s a reason these insurance companies are getting out. And that is, people cannot afford the premiums they’re having to charge. They just can’t afford them. And if people are not buying policies, you can’t make any money by offering things people don’t buy.
“Sad. I hope they stay deadlocked.”
I wonder if you disbelieve the dire disaster of Obama Care and what is happening to the public in the states and exchanges?
I guess the ultimate desire – single payer govt control of your life is OK with many, be aware of the ultimate cost – worse than what is present, by Pelosi and Obama, who wanted a vote without reading it to find out what is in it, At least you can read it and you are seeing what a democratic process is suppose to look like – debate disagreements alterations etc – and hopefully something better than the old botox hag, Pelosi offered the public.
But, more importantly, and I know many who read your discourse here, I would like you to explain how they are well off based on insurance companies backing out of exchanges – for instance:
Medica… a Minnesota based health insurer, released a statement suggesting it was close to following two larger carriers in deciding not to sell such policies in Iowa for 2018, due to instability in the market.
Tens of thousands of Iowans could be left with no health insurance options next year, after the last carrier for most of the state announced Wednesday that it likely would stop selling individual health policies here due to instability in the market
And the insurance industry, even with a federal mandate couldn’t stay in business. To give you an idea of how bad Obamacare is, with the entire adult population of the United States as a market which must buy their product, they still can’t stay viable.
USANEWS – Aetna, retaliating in part against a Department of Justice lawsuit, announced Monday that it was leaving exchanges in 11 states, following a string of similar announcements earlier this year that came from other large insurers like UnitedHealth and Humana. Roughly 670,000 people who had Aetna in June will lose their plans and will need to choose new ones, or they can go uninsured or pay more for policies by buying plans outside the exchanges. But their new plans might not cover the doctors they’ve been seeing for years or the hospital they would prefer. If they are in the middle of treatment at a particular facility, they might also have to transfer all their medical records.
3.Exchange customers in rural Knox County, Missouri, are likely to have only one health insurance company to choose from, given that they’re losing Aetna and UnitedHealth Care. Anthem is the only insurer that plans to operate in the area, but its executives have also hinted at backing out in light of a Department of Justice lawsuit blocking a proposed multibillion-dollar merger between the company and Cigna. Large health insurers have said they need to merge because of growing health costs.
a Kaiser Family Foundation report published in May found that about 1 in 5 counties will be down to one insurance provider, and that 70 percent of one-provider counties are rural. 3. Georgia suggest that multiple counties will have only one health insurance option.
Blue Cross Blue Shield will be available in every North Carolina county, sometimes as the only health insurance option. For next year, it has requested to increase the cost of individual policies 18.8 percent on average. While most of these increases won’t be felt by consumers because they receive tax credits, that isn’t the case for everyone. Blue Cross Blue Shield has faced multiple system failures in the state, and has also suggested it might drop out of the exchange.
On Monday, The New York Times reported that Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield announced their intention to leave Iowa’s Obamacare exchange next year 2018, because they lost $90 million in three years due to most of their enrollees having “expensive medical conditions.” Anthem and Wellmark will join Humana, Aetna and UnitedHealth as insurers who have fled Obamacare exchanges, reaffirming that the Obamacare death spiral is real and will only worsen from here.
6.Humana announced on Tuesday that it would no longer offer health insurance coverage in the state marketplaces created under the federal health care law, becoming the first major insurer to cast a no-confidence vote over selling individual plans on the public exchanges for 2018.
Just a few of the companies – what do you say to these constituents, resist? Deadlock is good for you? Explain that when they have nothing or their insurance tribles because they only have one or to the Iowans who have none.
LikeLike
One provider is better than having no health insurance at all.
Millions of poor people will lose Medicaid under the GOP Bill.
LikeLike
Wrong … one carrier is a MONOPOLY which leads to higher prices. The more insurance carriers you have the lower your premiums will be. Look at your auto insurance as an example. I get notices all the time claiming I can save 400-600/year on my insurance policy. I find it funny because I don’t spend that much in a year to begin with. THAT is what marketplace competition will do for us with healthcare insurance as well.
LikeLike
Diane,
If I remember there were a couple of studies – Harvard and MIT on Medicaid – that threw the media into a fit.
It amazes me that the Senate version just came out and the Dems and media were claiming we are all going to die and here you are claiming seniors will be thrown out the door odf nursing homes –
Has everyone forgotten the process of Congress? First the House bill then a Senate bill comparison, adjustment additions and the a vote – so what we read in the papers and here from UpChuck Schoomer and Warren/Sanders crowd claims of death to us all – let us see how democracy works and then complain on the items of a final submission to the President. But that doesn’t fit the Den’s narrative.
Medicaid is flawed first of all.
Avik Roy noted the following regarding the overwhelming literature describing Medicaid’s flaws is ignored. A recent Harvard study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, argued that Medicaid indeed does save lives compared with having no insurance at all. The debate is over, according to the NYTIMES. “The new study should lay that canard [of Medicaid’s poor outcomes] to rest.”
As you search under the hood of “…the Harvard study, it reveals a different story. The authors compared three states that expanded their Medicaid programs — Maine, Arizona, and New York — with neighboring states that did not — New Hampshire, Nevada and New Mexico, and Pennsylvania. The Medicaid expansion was associated with increased mortality in Maine, and with decreased mortality in Arizona and New York. That’s hardly a definitive outcome. Indeed, demographic differences between New York and Pennsylvania could explain the entirety of the “benefit” that the authors ascribed to New York’s Medicaid program. Yet the authors’ conclusion — that Medicaid saves lives — hinges entirely on the comparison of New York with Pennsylvania. Without it, the authors would have shown no difference in outcomes between those with Medicaid and the uninsured, because the results in Maine and Arizona would have canceled each other out.”
“The study lacked rigor in other ways, too. The Harvard economists looked only at county-level data about mortality and Medicaid; they had to make assumptions about which patients had enrolled in the program, and when. The extensive clinical research showing Medicaid’s poor outcomes, such as the UVA study, has reviewed millions of individual patient records to learn what happened to specific patients with specific forms of health insurance. Medicaid’s problems are not that hard to understand. Medicaid is the largest line item in most states’ budgets, and it continues to grow at a faster pace than tax revenues. In theory, the program is jointly run by the states and by the federal government, so states have the ability to rein in costs. But in reality, Washington bureaucrats veto most reforms that states seek to make in their Medicaid plans. ”
“By and large, the Department of Health and Human Services blocks states from curtailing eligibility for Medicaid, and the 1965 Medicaid law prevents states from raising co-pays or deductibles for many services. So states are left with one option: paying less to doctors and hospitals. In many states, Medicaid pays doctors a fraction of what private insurers pay. In 2008, in California, a doctor made 38 cents on a Medicaid patient for every dollar he made seeing a privately insured one.”
In New Jersey, a doctor made 33 cents. In New York, 29. And states continue to decrease Medicaid physician fees, because it’s the only lever they have. As a result, most doctors choose not to see Medicaid patients, because they can’t keep their practices alive if they do. That, in turn, makes it hard for Medicaid patients to get doctor’s appointments for annual checkups, routine care, and even urgent medical problems.
“A 2011 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that many doctors refuse to see Medicaid children complaining of seizures, uncontrolled asthma, and even broken arms.”
“A study by two MIT economists found that three-quarters of physicians receive lower fees for treating Medicaid patients than they do for the uninsured, because the uninsured pay in cash for routine health expenses. Cash is hassle-free. Medicaid, on the other hand, requires doctors to fill out tons of time-consuming paperwork, and if they make any errors at all in their form-filling, they risk being denied payment after the fact. It may well be that Medicaid does offer a modest benefit to some people at the bottom of the income ladder.”
But it’s also true that Medicaid offers worse health care to the millions of low-income Americans who today enjoy high-quality private insurance, and often lose that coverage when states expand Medicaid. Most important: Is a “modest benefit” the standard we expect of a program that costs taxpayers $450 billion a year, squeezing out spending on education and national defense? Before we expand Medicaid, we should reform it, by handing the program fully over to the states, or directly to the people it is meant to help. Those who claim to care most about the poor should be at the forefront of reform, instead of doubling down on the broken status quo.
Again, at least we don’t have to vote on something sight unseen before we know what is in it!
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
Do you think the Republicans should conduct public hearings on their health care bill–which will reshape 1/6 of our economy–before passing it?
LikeLike
The draft is online for public discussion right now and has already had one rewrite. It will never be perfect … there is no such thing.
I find it comical that dems were claiming “death” lurked in its pages BEFORE they even read it. Closed minded…which is counterproductive to the needs of the citizenry. Since the bill was released their comments have not changed. Have any of them even read the bill and compared it to what their constituents want in healthcare?
LikeLike
Linda,
Do you think there should be public hearings on this bill that will affect 1/6 of the economy? Yes or no.
LikeLike
Diane,
I think Trump should hire an independent counselor to investigate Mueller – which he can do regarding the relationship to Comey ….no that will torque a few on the left.
LikeLike
Linda Giffen,
Your observation on medicaid has support.
James C. Capretta, a resident fellow who holds the Milton Friedman chair at the American Enterprise Institute clarifies – better than I – so Flerp I do go, unapologetically, to those capable of expressing it better than I ever could – rather than regurgitate the lame stream, apoplectic scare tactics and comments of death…so as he explains better than I…
Senate bill makes two main changes to Medicaid.
First, it lowers the federal matching rate for the Affordable Care Act’s expansion population from the enhanced level of 90 percent to the regular, state-specific rates that apply to most Medicaid spending… States would be allowed to continue full Medicaid coverage of the expansion population, with very significant federal support
Second, the bill would impose new, per-person limits on the growth of Medicaid spending for five different program eligibility groups. This was a proposal dating back to Clinton. States would be allowed to continue full Medicaid coverage of the expansion population, with very significant federal support.
There’s nothing that would force states to drop coverage of low-income elderly and disabled persons, or poor women and children, as so many of the misleading attacks on the plan have implied.
The changes would be phased in very slowly. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that, under current law, the federal government will spend nearly $5.2 trillion over the next ten years on Medicaid. If the emerging GOP plan cuts federal funding by $0.9 trillion over a decade, which is possible, that will still mean the federal government will spend $4.3 trillion on the program over ten years. CBO estimates enrollment in Medicaid in 2026 would be about 71 million people under the House-passed Medicaid provisions (which are similar to those in the Senate bill), or 4 million more than were enrolled in the program in 2011.
The Senate bill provides a new, refundable tax credit to anyone who has a low income or is poor and is not eligible for Medicaid. Under this provision, households with incomes below the federal poverty line (FPL) are guaranteed that they can enroll in an insurance plan with a premium that does not exceed 2 percent of their annual income. For a person with an income at the poverty level, this means his maximum premium for health coverage would be about $20 per month.
If states choose to impose stricter rules for program eligibility, more people would become eligible for the federal tax credit, which would allow them to enroll in private health-insurance coverage. The Senate bill strengthens and expands the health-insurance safety net by providing a realistic option for insurance enrollment to millions of people who were left out of the ACA’s Medicaid expansion.
The Senate bill would impose a stricter growth limit on per capita spending than the House bill by indexing the caps, after 2024, to the full Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather than to the medical-care component of the CPI. The practical effect of tying the caps to general consumer inflation is to lower the growth rate in the per-person caps by about 1 or 1.5 percentage points each year.
Under current law, the federal government provides matching payments to states without any upper limit whatsoever. States have strong incentives to maximize the amount of federal money coming into their Medicaid programs. Moreover, the incentive to cut Medicaid at the state level is undermined in part by the requirement that about 60 percent of all savings must be returned to the federal treasury.
There are many examples of tight budget restraints planned for future years that are delayed, modified, or repealed altogether before they go into effect. For instance, in 1997, Congress put in place the notorious “sustainable growth rate” formula for Medicare physician fees, which was delayed repeatedly beginning in 2002 and then ultimately repealed in 2015
The Senate can be criticized for its willingness to impose budget discipline on Medicaid, which serves low-income people, while doing nothing to reform Medicare and or employer-based health care. Federal subsidization of Medicare’s drug benefit and coverage of physician services is growing just as rapidly as Medicaid, and yet congressional Republicans are steering entirely away from changes in that program.
Further, the Senate bill, like the House version, delays the implementation of the ACA’s “Cadillac” tax, which would impose a new fee on expensive employer-sponsored insurance plans.
Linda. IMHO the only people throwing granny off the cliff and kicking grandpa out of the nursing home would be the Dems who created and support the Obama bill and knowingly continue to do nothing about assisting in correcting their “death” tax law before total implosion.
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
The CBO said 22 million people would lose health insurance under the Senate bill. One of them will be your granny.
LikeLike
This is for jscheidell and Linda Giffin, who like to post here in support of Trump and of the GOP healthcare bill. They insist that the latest Senate bill will not remove insurance from anyone now on Medicaid, it will only restrict expansion of Medicaid.
I hope they will read this article, which includes a link to the full CBO report.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/6/26/15875528/cbo-score-senate-health-care-bill
According to CBO, 15 million Americans now receiving Medicaid (including millions of children) will lose Medicaid in 2018. This is not expansion; this affects people currently receiving Medicaid. By 2026, 22 million fewer Americans will have health insurance.
But there is a huge tax cut for the rich!
I recall candidate Trump saying that everyone would be covered under his health plan, at lower cost. False.
LikeLike
Diane, Linda
I followed the link and read the analysis.
I hope you can read the analysis by Heritage – ‘Better Than Status Quo’
http://click.heritage.org/f00vs0e0we00LH3lMrTQU05
The review of medicaid provides the good, bad and provides suggestion for improvement – as it does for each subsection….
Ensuring Medicaid Helps Those Most in Need
Medicaid is a means-tested health care and social services program for low-income children, pregnant women, and aged or disabled individuals. Obamacare expanded Medicaid eligibility to include able-bodied adults without children. Indeed, the Medicaid expansion has accounted for over 80 percent of the net increase in total (both public and private) health insurance enrollment since Obamacare’s coverage provisions went into effect at the beginning of 2014.15
Edmund F. Haislmaier and Drew Gonshorowski, “2015 Health Insurance Enrollment: Net Increase of 4.8 Million, Trends Slowing,” Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 4620, October 31, 2016, http://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/report/2015-health-insurance-enrollment-net-increase-48-million-trends-slowing.
The Senate bill rightly takes steps to better target Medicaid’s safety net to those who most need it to ensure that Medicaid reforms work for the long haul and provide access to better care.
What the Senate Bill Gets Right.
The Senate bill (like the House bill) would end the open-ended entitlement of states to federal Medicaid funding. It would cap federal contributions to Medicaid spending, with the federal government instead allocating federal monies to state Medicaid programs on a set, per capita basis16
Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, § 133.
for the different covered Medicaid populations: children, the elderly, the disabled, and able-bodied adults, including those made newly eligible for Medicaid under Obamacare. The per capita funding amounts for a state would be determined based on average spending by the state for each category of enrollees, with total funding reflecting the number of enrollees in each category in the state.
The Senate’s per capita cap funding approach is a major reform, consistent with policies recommended over the years by conservative health policy experts.17
See, for instance, the recommendation for reforming federal Medicaid financing in The Heritage Foundation, Blueprint for Reform: A Comprehensive Policy Agenda for a New Administration in 2017, Mandate for Leadership Series (2016), p. 55, http://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/blueprint-reform-comprehensive-policy-agenda-new-administration-2017.
It represents a major improvement over existing federal payment arrangements and allows states greater flexibility in the administration of the Medicaid program. The per capita approach also offers the benefits of giving states stronger incentives to eliminate waste and fraud in the program; preventing states from gaming federal reimbursement formulas; and better targeting resources to the needy and most vulnerable to improve results.
The Senate bill also does more to maximize flexibility for state officials who wish to pursue new, innovative, and imaginative solutions for the care of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society. In Medicaid, it facilitates the approval of Medicaid waivers. For example, any state with a “grandfathered” managed-care waiver can continue that waiver as long as it is budget neutral and any modified managed-care waiver would be deemed approved unless the Secretary of HHS not later than 90 days [after the date of application] denies the waiver application or requests more information.18
Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, § 136.
Likewise, the Senate bill encourages fast-track approval of home and community-based waivers if a state determines the waiver would “improve patient access to services.”19
Ibid.
The Senate bill also encourages cooperation and coordination with state officials by requiring the Secretary to establish a “process for soliciting advice from state officials that administer a state Medicaid plan.”20
Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, § 137.
Additional Steps the Senate Should Pursue.
There are several ways the Senate should improve the Medicaid provisions to ensure the program helps those most in need.
First, Medicaid tends to provide less access to providers and poorer quality of care than private insurance. Many Medicaid enrollees cannot find a doctor to take care of them because the reimbursement rates and the regulatory system discourage physician participation in the program. Low-income able-bodied adults cycling on and off of Medicaid as their employment and incomes fluctuate experience disruption in their health care coverage. Enabling those individuals to instead access mainstream private insurance coverage would improve continuity of coverage and access to higher quality care.
Therefore, the Senate should convert existing Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) funding for able-bodied adults and children into a premium-support program so those beneficiaries can enroll in private health insurance plans—and thus be able to secure access to the same doctors and medical professionals as their fellow citizens. This would help them obtain the same basic coverage and care as more affluent individuals, while also augmenting efforts to create more stable insurance markets. Such a reform would increase their access to the quality care that they need, and would increase the number of younger and healthier persons enrolled in the nation’s private health insurance pools.
Second, an effective per capita approach requires that federal contributions grow over time at rates that are realistic and consistent with achievable expectations for the ability of states to moderate future spending. If the indexing formula is too generous, the incentives for states to better manage their programs will weaken over time.
From the years 2020–2024, the Senate bill would index federal Medicaid payments under the per capita cap system by medical inflation for different groups. From 2025 onward, it would be based on Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), a conventional measure of inflation. This is a blunt instrument on both counts, possibly resulting in overpayments or underpayments for very different categories of Medicaid beneficiaries based on the timeframes.
A better policy is to calibrate spending increases for different categories of beneficiaries based on projected spending for their services, and the use of inflation indexes should reflect those differences. Therefore, the Senate should revise the indexing provisions in the bill to better match them to the historic and projected growth rates of the different beneficiary groups, as reported in the accompanying table.21
Variations in growth rates largely reflect variations in the mix of services consumed by different groups of beneficiaries. While per capita growth in the cost of acute-care medical services reflects changes in medical technology and practices, growth in the cost of personal care services is almost entirely a product of changes in wage rates. Thus, costs have grown the fastest for non-elderly, non-disabled adults and children because Medicaid is paying mainly for acute medical services for those individuals. Conversely, Medicaid costs have grown the slowest for aged enrollees because the program is mainly paying to provide them with social services (with all of their acute medical care separately paid for by Medicare).
Average Annual Growth Rates
Third, the Senate should go further to ensure states have the flexibility they need to manage their Medicaid programs. The Senate should take such steps as giving them explicit authority to set and manage eligibility for their Medicaid programs through a range of means such as asset tests.
Moreover, the Senate should ensure that Medicaid focuses—as soon as possible—on the most vulnerable by removing Obamacare’s excess federal funding for newly eligible able-bodied adult recipients. Under the Senate bill, on January 1, 2021, the enhanced federal match rate goes to 85 percent for all enrollees immediately. The House bill, in contrast, takes the better approach of grandfathering the extra federal funding for expansion enrollees until January 1, 2020, as long as they remain continuously enrolled—and only in states that had expanded Medicaid by March 1, 2017, with federal funding for any new expansion enrollees set at the applicable per capita amount.22
Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, § 131.
Importantly, the Senate should recognize that the current bill’s proposal to give states an option for setting work requirements on able-bodied Medicaid recipients will not be particularly effective.23
Ibid. Pregnant women, persons 19 and younger, and married persons not yet 20 years of age who are in job-related programs are exempted.
Most states will simply ignore the option. Its enforcement is very difficult in a society that provides emergency medical care to all. Medicaid work requirements could be circumvented easily by simply dropping out of the program and seeking emergency medical care when needed, at which point the individual would be re-enrolled in Medicaid, with the potential to repeat the cycle again. There are far better options for pursuing work requirements in other welfare programs that have been consistently ignored by Congress.24
Robert Rector, “Work Requirements in Medicaid Won’t Work. Here’s a Serious Alternative,” http://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/work-requirements-medicaid-wont-work-heres-serious-alternative.
I wonder about the CBO number – although they can only deal with the numbers given – regarding number of enrollees – how many will choose not to join since it is not mandated, or will pay out of pocket and deal with catastrophe insurance, which would be cheaper if pay by cash…
The mistake IMHO is the fact that the Republicans had 7 years to craft their bill and didn’t Shame on them…
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
I suggest you watch George Will explain why the GOP bill is not a conservative bill at all.
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/george-will-gop-asked-to-walk-the-plank-with-health-care-bill-977614915555
LikeLike
Jscheidell,
Sorry, but I don’t give credibility to anything from the Heritage Foundation. It is a megaphone for the far-right billionaires, who don’t believe in any social responsibility. They despise the poor and sneer at the middle class. They want a dog-eat-dog world, in which the top dogs are the richest.
LikeLike
Diane
I saw the clip, one of the rare moments cruising lame stream media.
First, we do not have a GOP bill – not brought to the floor and reconciliation hasn’t taken place yet.
In will’s review of history on health care back to Clinton era and up to now, he hit an important factor – Obama knew he was talking to a nation where 85% had insurance and that 85% were happy with the system and quality. Obama made it a “moral imperative” to change the system. It needed to be congruent with his democratic values of redistribution which he saw as the nature of govt.
So we now have a failed system in Obama care in which the Republicans are “asked to walk the plank” for something they do not believe in. Entitlements once given are hard to pull back on – the nature of socialistic medicine is in conflict with human nature and self-interest when people are forced to work for the benefit of others human nature.
Will sees the problem in the employer health care not being taxed and the inability to cros state lines to compare ins companies and their policies. He calls it the “original sin”
I agree – and now as he sees it – we have 2 choices 1. a democratic system of regulations, subsidies and mandates and 2. a republican view of subsidies regulations and mandates.
The difference – the amount of generosity.
Entitlements and the possible loss creates the “death mantra” of the left. 1/6 of our economy is going to be based on free stuff and redistribution of wealth – a system the govt created and now can’t get out of.
Talk about a president who foresaw the problem we have today – Reagan – “One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.”
Reagan “criticized Social Security for supplanting private savings and warned that subsidized medicine would curtail Americans’ freedom” and that “pretty soon your son won’t decide when he’s in school, where he will go or what he will do for a living. He will wait for the government to tell him.”
The other problem I see is how the division of moderates and conservatives in the party have seemingly differences of opinions on what do. The solution to these issues will be interesting to watch and then evaluate the outcome –
LikeLike
Diane,
trust the CNN or just call them FNN ?
Language is from the Veritas U-tube
Published on Jun 26, 2017
In the recent video footage obtained by Project Veritas, John Bonifield a Sr. Producer at CNN, admits to several beliefs that are in direct conflict with the official CNN narrative that Trump has colluded with Russia, and that Russia has interfered with the 2016 election. Bonifield expresses clear doubts that there is a fire behind the Russia smoke, stating, “I haven’t seen any good enough evidence to show that the President committed a crime.” He also confirms suspicions that CNN staff is ideologically biased against Trump, stating, “I know a lot of people don’t like him and they’d like to see him get kicked out of office…”
Bonifield even further confirms CNN’s bias against the President, stating, “I think the President is probably right to say, like, look you are witch hunting me…you have no real proof.”
Bonifield exposes that Russia has been great for CNN’s ratings, and that orders from CEO Jeff Zucker himself have directed CNN to pursue Russia leads at the expense of other stories. Bonifield states “And the CEO of CNN said in our internal meeting, he said ‘good job everybody covering the Climate Accords, but we’re done with it let’s get back to Russia.’”
He further comments on Russia, “it’s mostly bullshit right now. Like, we don’t have any giant proof…if it was something really good, it’d leak.”
I think the American public is getting tired of Putin and Russia, and now journalism comes up short in ethics….
LikeLike
I am biased against Trump too. He is a liar and a phony. The news today (real news) is that his first campaign manager, Paul Manafort, belatedly registered as a lobbyist for the pro-Russian faction in Ukraine and acknowledged that his firm was paid $17 million to lobby for them in the U.S.
Trump is holding a meeting today to celebrate “Energy Week,” meaning fossil fuels, coal, oil, gas. Are you glad that he withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Accord? We join Nicaragua and Syria as the only nations on earth unconcerned about climate change.
How you can defend this miserable ignorant liar-in-chief is beyond me
LikeLike
Diane,
Happy Birthday!
Yes, Im glad we withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement. The cost vs the impact on the gains of degree is a major waste of our tax payer money and secondly, China doesn’t do a thing for 30 years – by that time we will be dead and the agreement won’t matter. We would be subsidizing the poor countries- basically redistribution of wealth to make us all equal.
LikeLike
But my grandchildren won’t be able to breathe clean air. Neither will Trump’s.
LikeLike
Diane,
Tell your grandchildren not to travel to China or India otherwise they’ll need gas masks – at least for the next 20 years and a period after that time since it will take a while to start the clean up but they now have a heavy investment in coal.
LikeLike
My grandchildren lived in Hong Kong for two years. They are now ardent environmentalists, and they are furious thT Trump pulled out of the Paris Accord. He wants to burn coal!
Did you know a massive iceberg in breaking off in Antarctica right now? Nothing important. Why worry?
LikeLike
Diane,
Your choice of PMSNBC over Heritage is your choice – but I find that station a megaphone competing with CNN, in fostering lies – It is a megaphone for the left billionaires, who don’t believe in a govt controlling the lives of us all – that is their social responsibility – govt control – at all costs – as recently evidenced by CNN problem. Bernie Sanders – wife lying isn’t helping him, Warren, Pelosi, Reid – the millionaires and billionaires running the media – justifying their lies and their issues of resist and the anger pushed by their coverage.
Ill take Heritage any day.
LikeLike
You take Heritage. It’s a free country.
LikeLike
Diane,
well aware of the iceberg calving. These glaciers Larsen A and B and C are the remnants of the last Ice Age which ended about 10,000 years ago, the planet has been gradually warming since then. Ice Ages and Warm Periods have been happening for eons and will continue to do so regardless of what humans do. Warming seas also contribute to the thinning process.
Traveled to Alaska and at Glacier Bay the cruise ship stopped engines off and we listened to the thunderous roar of the blue ice calving. Amazing event.
LikeLike