Category: Politics


Can’t go very far today on social media and not find a reference to, or a conversation about “Civil War 2”.

In fact, a repeat of the Civil War has been the topic du jour for the last couple of weeks.  I have given the potential of one a lot of thought, only because I find the idea very disturbing.  It’s not easy to comment on, or write about.  I have been a student of military history for most of the last 30 years.  I have read many books on World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and going back to the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, and even before that, the Austro-Prussian conflicts of the 1860’s.  I am not an expert. I don’t consider myself one. I am, however, well read on the subject, and I do know what I am talking about.  I understand diplomacy, power politics, and influence.  I also understand how wars come about, and I also understand how they can be stopped.

So, back to the subject at hand.  The reason many people are talking, Tweeting, writing, and Facebook-posting about the possibility of a second Civil War, is because this country, at this point, is as about as divided as it was back prior to the first Civil War.  The political divide in this country right now, appears to be deep and wide.  Well, it is if you are on social media.  It seems that the most intense arguments about it are on Twitter, or Facebook, or Gab.ai.

The most common arguments I see regarding the Civil War, and the potential winners and losers, comes from many a right-wing person, based on the assumptions that because the Left is so anti-gun, that, they would have no idea how to operate a firearm, and the good patriots on the Right would be able to defeat the Left without working up a sweat.  Then there is the Left, where they assume everyone on the right is a simpleton, and incapable of having enough brain power to figure out how to fight.  Granted, those are broad, general statements, but they are true in that broad, general sense.

I will get back to the above premise in a bit, but first a discussion of the possible catalyst that would start this war.   First of all, lets look at the last decade or so.  We spent eight years under an administration that, at best, was questionable in it’s respect for America, and it’s people.  We were “bitter clingers” or, as coined by possibly the most unlikable presidential candidate in history, “a bunch of deplorables.”  We spent eight years being lectured to, told our values were silly, and stupid, that we had no idea about anything, and that we were racist, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, and on and on.  Middle class, blue collar, white America was bad. In fact, we were so bad, as to be beyond redemption.  It was this kind of attitude many Americans, me included, were tired of hearing. Donald Trump, as we all know, was elected simply because everyone was just sick and tired of the condescension from the people on the Left who considered themselves our moral, and ethical betters. (full disclosure, I am not a Trump fan, nor did I vote for him)   So far, it is Trump, or rather, the Left’s reaction to Trump being elected that is driving most of the Left’s fits at the moment, and many of them cannot see their way past it.  Right now, their hopes are on a “blue wave” in November taking Congress from the GOP, and “fixing everything that is wrong” including impeaching Trump.  Would that be the event that starts the conflict?  The thing is, on some levels, the conflict has started, and has been for a number of years now, it’s just a matter of if and when the first shots will be fired. Right now, it is a war of words, and is being fought on Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets.  Many folks are content to lob insults at one another, spread “fake news” and generally be disagreeable.  Right now, the discussion is all hypothetical, and I hope it stays that way.

What would that conflict look like?  Who would be on what side, and how would the sides (there would be multiple sides in this, trust me) organize, and along what lines?  First of all, lets make one thing clear:  The Left would have the advantage in the early part of the conflict, simply because they are organized.  Very organized.  It’s undeniable, and if you dismiss that organizational ability, you do so at your own peril.  The Left, at the very least, would be able to pull together an organized front initially.  In fact, many Lefties on Twitter, and Facebook, are certain that they would be victors without firing a shot, simply because their ability to organize and bring many resources to bear on a given issue, or event, or place, would discourage the Right, and bring even more people to the Left’s cause.   On some level, that may be true.  However, the one thing the Left does, is they believe in their own intrinsic superiority, both moral, and intellectual, and they believe the Right is incapable of having even the basic knowledge needed to fight back.  A large majority of the Left is college educated, and from that is where they draw the assumption that they know better.  What they continually underestimate is the fact that people on the Right are also capable of organizing.  Also, there are many people on the Right who are more than capable of bringing together large numbers of people to a cause.  The Right does not organize like the Left does, they never have.  The only part of the Right that does have any organization, and can put large numbers of people “in the streets” are the Pro Life groups.  Look at the “March for Life”. It brings upwards of several hundred thousand people to Washington to march in support of ending abortion.  Additionally, there are other marches in other cities across the country, each one organized locally, by other anti-abortion groups, that are part of the national movement.   The Right, while at a disadvantage initially, would be able to ramp up an organization in a fairly short amount of time.

I have been reading quite a few articles, and tweets, and FB posts about the potential for such a conflict, and the one thing that strikes me is the dismissive attitude both sides display toward their would-be opponents.   The Left assumes the Right is a bunch of uneducated rubes, incapable of organization, and they can defeat the Right at their leisure.  Conversely the Right believes the Left is a bunch of “soy boys” that are too afraid to pick up a gun, and if they did, they wouldn’t know what to do with it.  The Right also assumes that because many veterans tend to lean to the Right of the spectrum, that they have a distinct advantage as far as tactical, and strategic knowledge, and therefore would be able to defeat the Left at their leisure.  Furthermore, the Right also believes that if armed conflict were in the offing,  many on the left would run scared, unable, or unwilling to stand up and fight.  It’s dangerous to make those assumptions, about either side.  In general, when it comes to war, there is an old axiom: “No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy”.  That means, that any plans, assumptions, ideas, or knowledge of your enemy’s intentions, as well as any strategies for taking on the enemy go out the window, and need to be revised as soon as the fighting starts.  Both the “Right” and the “Left” are going to be surprised at what their opposite numbers bring to to the battlefield, as it were.

So, lets now look at the premise that many on the Right think fighting the Left would be easy, because so many are afraid of guns, very few of them have military experience, and, they would be less than willing to engage in a pitched battle of any kind.

First of all, on the subject of guns, shooting, and learning how to shoot:  Learning how to shoot a gun, in all honesty, is not hard.  My oldest son, a six year Army veteran, and combat veteran as well, could take any group of people who know nothing about weapons, and teach them the basics in one morning.  By afternoon, he could have them shooting.  Within a week, they would be shooting well enough to hit their target at least 50% of the time. Within two weeks, it would be 75% of the time, and 50% of the hits in the “X” ring on the target.  To be honest, in combat, that could be good enough.  Shooting is like anything else, the more one does it, the better one becomes.  Anyone on the Left who is skittish about guns, could have those reservations overcome within an hour.  The same with anyone on the Right as well.  The operation of many semi-automatic rifles is pretty simple from the standpoint of the user.  Load the magazine.  Insert it in the weapon. Pull the charging handle to chamber a round.  Take off the safety.  Aim.  Squeeze the trigger. “BANG!”  In an afternoon’s time, most anyone unfamiliar with a rifle, would be familiar enough to operate one without guidance.    Let’s also remember that ANTIFA, for the moment is aligned with the Left.  The Left, in addition to being supremely organized, also has their “militia” if you will, in the form of ANTIFA.  ANTIFA is the left’s street brawlers.  ANTIFA is the core, they are the “true believers”, and it would not be a big transition to go from pipes and baseball bats, to AR-15’s and AK-47’s.  They would be the first to fight, and they would fight with zeal.  If all of ANTIFA, however many members they have, were to be turned loose, they would be a force to be reckoned with. Many of the members are hard liners, and committed communists.  If the country ever got closer to a conflict igniting, ANTIFA would require little in the way of provocation.  The Right has no such organization.  One may be inclined to include neo-Nazi groups as “Right-Wing” but, those groups are so small, and would actually, in my opinion would serve their own goals in such a conflict.  The same could probably be said for ANTIFA, but at the outset, the would be aligned as much as they could with the rest of the Left.

The US Military.  How would they figure in this conflict?   I would leave that to people out there who have served, and know their fellow servicemen and women.  However, in a general sense, and based on what I have witnessed while visiting my son at various Army bases (Ft Hood, Ft Sill, Ft Benning, etc)  and heard from my son, as well as friends and other acquaintances who have served, the military would most likely stand with the American people.   For the most part, military personnel tend to lean right, they all come from different backgrounds, and there is no guarantee that all military members would align with the right.  There are many people in uniform, and veterans, that align to the left.  It’s a given.  Remember Spencer Rapone, the West Point cadet, who had “Communism will win” written inside his hat, and he displayed that for a photo which quickly went viral?   Right there, that is proof that not all members of the military have the country’s best interests in mind.  That leads us to the veterans.  Again, same thing.  I know one veteran, a former Marine, who is a hard-core leftist.  He spent 8 years in the Corps, leaving in the mid 1990’s.  If there is one, there are many more like him.  I still think, however, that many vets would align with the side that wants to preserve this country as it has been, vs the side that would wish to transform it to something else.  Many of the vets that I have met over the years (I met quite a few, actually) have always been supporters of America, the Constitution, and the people.  To a large number of them, the oath to “Defend the Constitution” is sacred, and is something they committed themselves to, even after hanging up the uniform.

Let’s also be real here for a bit.  Much of the clamoring, writing, and speaking about the possibility of a Civil War, leaves out the reality of what such a conflict would bring.  For starters, any kind of conflict that starts, is likely to spread unless the military is called out to put down the insurrection, and put it down quickly.  Once the violence spreads, it would be difficult to contain, especially if it is over something that has inflamed the passions of both sides.  We can count on a few things:  Food shortages would be almost immediate.  The inner cities would be the first to run out, followed by outlying areas.  The rural areas where the food is grown, would be set upon by mobs of city dwellers looking to feed themselves, and their families.  Street fights, and fighting in urban areas would be intense. Many people would be killed, simply trying to escape.  As the conflict spread, there would be widespread damage to infrastructure. Initially it would be the buildings in the neighborhoods, and as the fighting became more organized, and the sides began to align, damage to infrastructure such as roads, railroads, bridges, power and water distribution, oil and gas facilities would increase as each side sought to deny the use of such facilities to the other.  Additionally farms would be destroyed, crops burned, livestock killed in order to prevent the other side from having an adequate food supply.  The destruction of farms would resort in massive food shortages almost immediately,  and a famine in very short order. In short, if the conflict were to last more than a year, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people would be dead. Hundreds of thousands more would be injured. Millions would be displaced.  The numbers would only increase as the fighting went on.  The continued fighting, would only draw more and more “ordinary” people in to the conflict as a means of providing for themselves and whatever is left of their families.  In order to survive, many Americans would align themselves with which ever side offered them the best chance of surviving without having to fight.  Its a normal human instinct to seek out shelter, and sustenance in times of trial.  Many people fight for it, others acquiesce to whatever power is in charge in order to survive another day.

At the outset the fighting, once started, would be contained, if you will, to the groups of “true believers” on both sides.  Many average Americans would do their best to avoid conflict, for the simple reason that many of us are not willing to pick up arms against our neighbors.  I could not see myself holding my neighbor and her husband at gunpoint.  This is a lady, despite her politics, bakes my family Christmas cookies every year, and is one of the nicest people I know.  I couldn’t see myself facing down the gentlemen who own the auto repair shop behind me, or opening fire on them.  Could I really shoot Mr. Carson down the street?  Would  Bob and John and their wives be combat ready if I were to call on them to join me in attacking our neighborhood enemies?  What about Leon and his kids? Would they launch pre-emptive attack against the rest of the neighborhood?   I can’t comprehend a battle between people, that despite some differences, are actually friends.  These are people that share back porch cookouts, walk their dogs  together, and cheer on their kids on the local high school sports teams.  This is where the ultimate price would be paid.  Those who push the prospects of another civil war, are those who are ignorant of it’s costs, and assume it would be an easy victory.  Whatever victory there would be, it would at best be Pyrrhic, and far from “easy”

That leads to another consideration.  IF American were to plunge into all out Civil War, the international community would hardly stand by and watch.  By that I mean there are several countries, China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea to name a few,  that would actively do what they could to continue to sow chaos, ramp up the fighting, and even support the Left with weapons and materiel.  Any one of the above mentioned would cheer at the prospect of a divided America, fighting itself, and leaving itself open to eventual conquest, or, at the very least, destroyed so much, that it becomes the worlds largest 3rd world country.  The price to be paid, should such a thing happen, is unfathomable.  This is where I have my issues with those who talk so openly, and casually about a “2nd Civil War”.  Of all I have read, no one has given any consideration to what would happen once the international vultures started circling the American corpse.   It would be inevitable that our enemies would love nothing more to carve up what is left of this country, and erase American influence and culture from the world.  The Chinese would most likely be the first to arrive, only because they have the most capabilities in that regard.  Moving troops by air, or by sea, is something they have the logistics for. China’s influence would either take the form of support for the left leaning forces, or as an outright belligerent.  Taking over and subjugating the American continent, would allow China to dominate the world. Europe, pretty much prostrate already, wouldn’t have much to say in the matter.  What about Iran?  Iran would, and if you don’t believe it, you are foolish, use it’s Hezbollah-linked mosques and other groups to carve out it’s own sphere of influence, perhaps even mobilize, and import jihadists to join the fight in an effort to defeat both sides, and spread Islamic dominance to the Western Hemisphere.

Speaking of the Western Hemisphere, an American Civil War would have lasting, and powerful economic impacts on the rest of North and South America.  What would Canada do?  Close its borders to refugees?  Americans wishing to avoid the violence and conflict would be streaming both north and south to get away.  Imagine a war in a country of 340 million people, and the sheer number of refugees that it would produce.  It would overwhelm both Mexico and Canada, and their respective Immigration ministries. Both countries would have to close their borders with the US within a few months of start of hostilities because of the sheer number of people trying to get to safety.

Yes, this is a doomsday scenario, but, a renewed Civil War could not be anything but that.  It wouldn’t happen in a vacuum.  It wouldn’t be a lark, or something that would be settled in a couple of weeks.  The first Civil War lasted four years, and consumed vast amounts of treasure, as well as millions of lives.  In today’s USA, it would be even worse, because of the much larger population, and it’s diversity, as well as the changes in the world in the 150+ years since the first one began.  In 1861, China was far from a world power, Russia was  a European Power of sorts at the time,  and Iran was known as Persia, and was a monarchy.  In the last 150 years, China is the most populous nation in the world with the largest military.  Russia is resurgent, and flexing muscle worldwide.  North Korea is a hermit kingdom, but, if given the chance, would love to have some influence, and Iran is the regional power player in the Middle East, and is more powerful than it ever has been, and is looking to expand it’s influence.   These are the countries that would not only benefit from an America in chaos, but would also be the ones most likely to take a piece of the continent for themselves.

So, how about this.  Let’s stop pretending a renewed Civil War would be a minor conflict, that would be easily won by one side or the other.   Let’s look at it for what it would really be: Wholesale destruction and death on a scale never seen in this country before.  It would be end of the United States of America, and when the smoke cleared, it would be a nation of destroyed cities, starving and decimated people, and a  powerless government, with the real possibility that a large chunk of the country being occupied by a foreign power.  Let’s quit kidding ourselves, and lets get off of the stupid path toward conflict many seem to be eager to set us on.  Let us start calling out those who wish to put us on that path.  A country that is headed toward a civil war, has a dark, and dangerous future that nothing good will come from.  At best, it would wreck the United States of America for at least a century.  Does anyone really want that?  I know I don’t

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

I rarely interact on Social Media, especially on Facebook.  I hang out on Twitter, comment from time to time, but I avoid arguments, and disagreements at all costs.

Why?

I am tired of it.  Since November of 2016, I do little more than read others people’s FB posts, I almost never post to my timeline.  For me, there is precious little that is worth reading any longer, and, add to that, there is nothing worth responding to.   All I ever see is the latest “I hate Trump” or “MAGA” type post. Or the latest “Anti gun” or “Pro 2A” post.  The problem with the posts are not the content, but, rather the attitude with which they are served up.  It’s a “this is what I believe, and f*** you and go to hell if you don’t agree”  No one has rational discussions any longer, and I do mean no one.

I am also tired of the conspiracy theories surrounding, well, you name it; Las Vegas, Parkland, Newtown, etc. etc.  The worst part about all of this, is these posts are coming from people that I know to be intelligent, and, I thought, reasonable.  Many of them old classmates, and others that I have known for 30 years.  Politics, and one’s political views have become the yardstick, (and with some people the only yardstick used to measure someone’s worth.) .  I have witnessed lifelong friendships come to an end, over a vote, or a political stance.  There is no “opinion” any more, there is “My post is irrefutable fact, and f*** you if you don’t think it’s true”.  People post things that they find, somewhere in the deep, dark bowels of the internet, as truth.  Not only truth, but incontrovertible, irrefutable, truth, because their favorite website, blogger, or pundit said it.  In this day and age, it’s not “for” or “against”, no.  It’s “you must believe or you are a heretic, and must be destroyed”.  It happens on both sides.

If you are pro 2nd Amendment, you are branded a “baby killer”, an “NRA Terrorist” or you “Support the murder of children” and the ownership of “weapons of war”.  If you want support Gun Control, then you area “gun grabbing communist” or a “traitor”, or an “anti-freedom leftist”.  No quarter is given in these arguments.  There is no discourse, only insults, and if it’s a woman posting her support of  2A, it’s the most vile sexual type of insults I have ever seen.  There are threats, and more insults.  Hashtags are thrown around like so many bean bags.  Frequently posts are in all caps, as people become more and more unhinged.  Eventually the donnybrook loses steam, and everyone is on to something else, but not before feelings are hurt, anger flairs and relationships are strained, if not broken.  I am amazed at the hurtful things people, especially family members, say to one another over a discussion of politics.  Isn’t family supposed to be better than that?  It is the disagreement that severe that some stop talking to siblings or parents?  How crappy is that?  I don’t always agree with my brothers, or my sister, but I would never, ever stop talking to them over their stance on something.  My dad, if he were still among us, would not stand for it.  I feel bad for those people who feel that a relationship, especially a long-term one, be it familial or romantic, has to end, because of a political opinion.

I hate all of the stupid fighting, and when one side presents the other with facts, then the arguing switches to whose “facts” are more factual.  We get our news and information from many sources these days, unfortunately, we all know about “fake news”, and in many cases, the “facts” as presented, depending on which “side” is presenting them can vary.  In more than a few cases, news sites will post a story, and include facts that only support their side of the argument, then other people quote that source as being proof that they are right, while the other side of the argument cites a story about the same issue from a news site, or blogger, or pundit, that includes information that supports what they have to say.  It’s exhausting.  Woe to the person who enters into the fray, in an attempt to be reasonable, cites a balanced story on the issue, then they get torn into from both sides.  The worst part about all of it, are the vile insults that people hurl at one another, either strangers they don’t know, or people that they do.  It’s unreal, and it almost hurts to watch it.

An example of what I describe above, goes like this:  I will use the latest raging debate over guns, that is burning up social media.

Friend A; (a long time friend of mine) Posted a story about a study done by two criminologists, citing the number of times a gun is used to defend life and property, and stops a crime in progress.  He posted his comments, as well as a link to the study, so anyone reading his post can avail themselves of the information, and read the study in it’s entirety.   Several people posted comments after reading the story, and the study.  The comments are all positive.

Stranger A:  this person pops up in a comment, after a news story that this person believes “debunks” the study by the two criminologists.  The news story takes the study to task, and selectively cites facts that support the gun control side of the argument.  So Stranger A, goes off on a paragraph long screed about the NRA, and evil corporations funding gun companies, buying politicians, and etc, etc, etc.  Friend A politely asks Stranger A to read the study.  Stranger A replies he doesn’t need to because the article he read speaks for itself, and he knows the study was funded by the NRA and the gun makers (it wasn’t) so, of course it is going to back up their claims.

It’s this kind of attitude, the “If you are against gun control, you are for the deaths of children” is really rather tiresome, and it is a tactic used by many in an argument to deflect from their arguments shaky ground.  It is also used as a way to end the argument, because the tactic forces the other person to argue that they are not “for the killing of children”, which then puts the anti-gun person on the offensive.  Or, it forces the other person to walk away from the argument, because it just got stupid.  The tactic is designed to shut down debate, and silence opposition.  People on both sides use it.  It’s not a “left” or “right” thing.  So, the above exchange over the study went back and  forth, but the problem is, everyone wound up arguing with Stranger A about how they are not for the killing of children.  It was several comments before someone else got the argument back on track.

The point of the anecdote above is an example of what typically happens on social media.  The other phenomenon is the habit among many to read the headline of a posted story, and then comment on the inaccuracy of the story   It is embarrassing when someone I know, and always figured was intelligent, decides to go off on an article they did not even read, and puts their intellectual laziness on display.  It is amazing to me how little there is in the way of critical thinking.  What ever happened to analysis, reading comprehension, and logical thought?

It is indeed sad, that the current level of debate on Twitter, and Facebook resembles an argument between a bunch of 12 year old kids on the school playground.  It really is.  The crises that face this nation are not going to get solved by emotional outbursts, name calling or finger-pointing.  The problem is, no one wants to hear the other side out.  It is as if we all want our side to be the only one that prevails.  When you get right down to it, the truth to just about any of the issues is much more nuanced, it hardly black and white.  In the studies mentioned in my anecdote, each one can, when facts and passages in the study are cherry-picked and taken out of context, support either the pro-gun, or the anti-gun side of the argument.  However, that kind of cherry picking does little to shed light on the problem of violence in this country, and what effective steps can be taken to curb the violence.   The same could be said of any study, on any of the issues that face the nation.  The sad fact is, that any side in an any argument wants to be the “only” side that is right.  It’s as if being right, and defeating one’s enemies is more important than solving, or working towards solving an issue.  “All or nothing” rarely works.  When one takes a position that the only way to solve an issue is an “all or nothing” solution, then people on the other side of the issue, are going to be unwilling to talk, much less compromise, or reach an agreement.  This is also how fights start, because once an argument gets to the point where one side feels compelled to use force to convince the other side, then all is lost.

All I know is, and I urge my kids to do this all of the time;  If you are going to debate a question, come to the table with facts, and research, and also come to the table with an understanding demeanor.  Disagreement is not a personal attack.  One can understand the other side’s point of view, without resorting to personal attacks, name calling, and the like.  If you have made your point, and the other person, or group, still disagrees, then, move on.  You have made your point, you stood by your argument, and that’s it.  One cannot change another’s mind, well, can rarely change it.  The most that can be done is “agree to disagree” and move on.  There is nothing wrong with that, either.  Everyone has different beliefs on everything, from the big issues of the day, to the question of whether or not a hot dog is a sandwich. (it’s not.  Stating my position right now) or whether or not ketchup belongs on that same hot dog (It doesn’t, at least if you bought it from a hot dog stand.  If you made it at home, then, ketchup is permissible).  It is those differences that make us who we are, and one is not “less” because one believes differently than someone else on any given subject.  We sometimes forget we are human, and we should never dehumanize someone else over a disagreement  Ever.  It’s wrong, and leads to all kinds of scary things on a larger scale.

For those interested.  The link posted by my friend is below.  Read it and decide.  The article cites at least 3 studies and has links to them.  Read it.  Thank you.  Article my friend posted  I offer no opinions here.

For the average, run-of-the-mill guy, such as me, the political and national events that have taken place since the 2016 election have been quite a bit to follow.   I have been through at least 8 elections since  I was old enough to vote, so I have seen quite a bit of politics, and political theatre since then.  I have also been around people long enough to be disheartened, if not downright scared of the divisions in this country.

What makes all of this worse, is the fact that everyone, on all sides of the political spectrum are like two people having an argument, and both are shouting at the same time.  No one is listening, and that’s not to say that “listening” is the cure-all here, but, it’s a senseless way to be, and completely pointless.  The winner of any of the political argument these days (if there is such a thing) is not one that presents the facts, makes their point, and persuades the other person the validity of their position;  no, it is the side that yells the loudest.  In this year, we have had a scandal-riddled presidency since day one, heck, since before Day One.   But, what are the meat of these scandals.  Are they real? Are they not? Does any one know what the facts are?  I am not picking a side here, mainly because I don’t know what is right, who is right, and whatever.  Is Trump acting, well, badly?  Yes, he is.  Are those that dislike him acting badly?  Yes, they are.  The problem is, it is so hard to separate what is real, and what is “Fake News” that many people like me walk around in a state of confusion trying to figure out if the next Washington Post “bombshell” is exactly that, or is it just another “I know a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a girl, whose cousin’s wife’s sisters’s fiance knew someone who works in Washington and they saw something in a memo, but only read part of it.”

In any other place or time, something like that would not stand up to even the most cursory scrutiny.  Making accusations based on a sliver of a rumor would anyone laughed out of anywhere, and their integrity seriously questioned.  But, enough about the media, fake news, and the lot.  It’s been covered enough, and quite frankly, I don’t want to wade through that.

Today, Senator John McCain came back to Washington to vote on the motion to move the GOP healthcare bill for debate.  Vice President Pence had to break the tie.

And the left lost it’s collective mind.  (Or, what was left of it)

What astounds me is the intellectual dishonesty from the Democrats.  They were all over Twitter, and other media outlets talking about how now “people are going to die”.

Because of a debate?

It’s the same old tired rhetoric they have trotted out for the last two decades.  They, the party of “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” are now accusing the Republicans of obfuscation.  The whole thing is a joke, and the dishonesty from both sides is unreal.  The party of “Repeal and Replace” has been acting like the party of “We’ll take out the things we don’t like….maybe”.  They tried to repackage it, and rename it, and just keep the ACA in tact.  None of which made any sense.  But, now, the Republicans, by the slimmest of margins have moved their bill to debate.  Progress?  Maybe.

Nothing has been passed.  Nothing.  It’s being debated on, and we are a long way from passage of anything.  Add to that, my Twitter feed (such as it is) as well as Facebook were full of people clamoring for a “single payer system”.

Let us examine that for a moment.

I am not here to argue the economics of it or anything like that, there are others out there who are far more qualified to analyse that than I am.   I do not understand how anyone in their right mind would want a government agency in charge of one of the most personal things that we have as people.  Our health.  Why would anyone want to give control over how they are treated for an illness, or an accident, or a terminal disease even, to the government?  What is it about someone, or a group of people that desires outside control of their lives?   I find the calls for “single payer” is more indicative of what those who express that view, want for the rest of us.  Not for themselves, necessarily, but for the rest of us.  That elusive “them” or “the other guy”  I go back a bit to one my earlier writings “What Do We Want?  Tyranny!  When Do We Want it? NOW!” from last summer, where I talked about how the various groups of people across the political spectrum want revenge against “them”.  “Those people” whomever “Those people” may be.  When they express the desire for this country’s medical system to be “run like Canada’s” I honestly think they haven’t given it much thought.  So intent are they on implementing a system that would punish the rich, and tax to death everyone else, in other words punish “them”, they haven’t given much though to how it would affect themselves.

I am an independent thinker, I always have been.  One thing that will get me angry, and desirous of picking a fight, is someone telling me what to think, how to think, or what to say.  Or, even worse, someone trying to control my life.  I am not talking about being told what to do at work by my boss.  That is totally different.  My job is something entered into willingly on my part, and the part of my employer.  They pay me, I do the work I am assigned.  Do I disagree, perhaps, with policies?  Sometimes, but, in my disagreement, I come up with a solution to make it better.  Maybe they listen, maybe they don’t, but they are paying me to do a job.

However, someone telling me what to say, or think, or telling me what I must believe is totally different.  That is an imposition.  A totalitarian government is not something that most of us enter into willingly.  It is something that is imposed, something that is forced, and complying is mandatory, or punishment is handed out.  That is where I bristle, that is when my back gets up.   The thing about going to a single-payer system, is that it immediately becomes a  politicized single-payer system.  What you get treated for and for how long, or, if at all, is going to depend on your politics.

That should frighten any reasonable person.  It should frighten anyone, in fact.

I can’t even conceive of anyone telling me that I cannot have an illness, or worse, one of my children cannot have an illness treated.  That would make me insane.   A person, not my doctor, but, a person from some government agency,  a bureaucrat from a government agency is going to approve, or deny my treatment, based on how expensive it is, how many years I may have to live, and, yes, even my politics.  In fact, I would gather, in a very short period of time, (about 5 minutes after the legislation is passed) it will be the only deciding factor.

That should frighten anyone, regardless of your political stance.  Tyranny is not good under any circumstances.  It doesn’t matter if it’s a right wing dictator, or left wing.  The whole “If my side is doing it, its okay” argument is stupid, and pointless.  No one should want someone from the  government deciding if they get well, or get sicker, or even worse, if they live or die.    I hear stupid arguments like “Well, if the GOP does single payer, it will at least get done right.”

What the hell does that even mean?

Neither side could do it right, and you cannot convince me otherwise.  The best system we had in this country was the system we had prior to Obamacare.  Don’t get me started on that.  I know way, way too many people who, once they were forced to the exchanges were paying premiums that were higher than their mortgages in some ways, with unbelievable deductibles, and care that was so limited it was a joke.  I don’t want to hear that god-awful abomination of a “health care plan” was a good thing.  I know better, I know too many people, middle class people, who had to sell cars, and houses, and what not just to afford basic health care.

Yes, the previous insurance system in this country had it’s flaws, but, the fact is undeniable, it did work, and it worked for a large majority of Americans.  Spare me the stories of over crowded inner city emergency rooms.  Try to remember that the overcrowded emergency rooms were not the fault of the insurance companies, but, the fact that many of these people were on Medicaid, or it’s state-level equivalent.  I am also not saying the over-crowded emergency rooms didn’t happen, I know they did, I was an EMT for a private ambulance service, and paid many a visit to hospitals and saw the overcrowded emergency rooms for myself.  Yes, they were miserable, but, what is the solution?  Let’s also remember, by and large, no one was turned away, and treatment was not denied.  So,again, what is the solution.  The fact is no one knows, but the politicians of this country seem to be willing to gamble with all of our lives in an effort to fix something that was never really broken to begin with.

The problem with single payer systems, is that those who advocate for one honestly believe that a single payer system is the only solution, and it is somehow magical, and will fix everyone’s problems.  It is those people who tend to be the ones who advocate for it the strongest, and they are generally the ones who understand it the least.   It is that lack of understanding that makes their arguments so untenable.  Everyone of those who advocate for single-payer always point to Canada, or Sweden as an example of single payer success.   Unfortunately they aren’t successful as their proponents wish they were.

Try showing someone who sings the praises of single payer success in Canada the following articles, and see how fast you are accused of showing them “Fake news”.

Healthcare Wait Times hit 20 weeks in 2016: Report”  20 weeks. Can you imagine waiting 20 weeks for a procedure?  A test? An MRI that might detect a disease process, but at 20 weeks might be too far advanced?  I cannot even comprehend that.   Follow that with this  “Canada Has the Worst ER/Referral Wait Times of 11 Developed Countries“.  Facts take no note of wishes, however, but that doesn’t deter the ‘governement-can-solve-everything’ crowd.   This oft-quoted study by The Frasier Institute just adds more fuel to the fire.  Now, if the average time from referral-to-procedure in Canada is 20 weeks, then, obviously there are those who get care sooner.  At the same time there are those who get it later.   Yes there are this who get treated sooner, but, that does not take away from the fact that on average, for any procedure, the average Canadian can expect to wait 5 months for it to be performed.   Imagine going to the doctor.  You, or a family member has an issue that cause the doctor concern, could you imagine waiting?   If it is something serious (Cancer, etc) five months is an eternity.

Single payer makes no sense to me, neither did Obamacare, and so far, the the stuff being proffered by the GOP.

I don’t want a health care system run by the government.  I want my doctor and I making medical decisions about me, or my family.  Not some bureaucratic pencil pusher.  I don’t want to have to wait months for a test or a procedure.  I also don’t want the government telling me what to eat, or what is good for me, or bad for me.   I also don’t want a judge, or a court, deciding when my life ends (if you think that won’t happen, Charlie Gard should be a wake up call for you) or if I have become “too expensive” and need to be put on an “end of life path”

I just want the government to leave me alone, and let me live my life the way I see fit. I also wish the same thing for everyone else.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

“Out There”, “Flyover country”, “beyond the lights”.  I have heard those terms with varying frequency, at various times over the past, oh, twenty years or so.  They are terms that many in politics, and media, especially media, use to describe the rest of the country.  The country beyond the Beltway, between the coasts, the places beyond the city lights of the cosmopolitan urban centers.  It’s a disparaging term, and used as a pejorative to describe anyone not from those privileged, comfortable, and sophisticated bubbles of “civilization”.  You know those places, where they absolutely lost their minds when Donald Trump won the Presidency, those same people, bearers of the double standard, spewed nasty, spoiled-rotten-brat rhetoric about Hillary Clinton losing the election, about how she was cheated, it was misogyny, it was sexist, racist, homophobic, or whatever label they decided they wanted to stick on it.  They called the rest of the country “rubes” and “uneducated”, or “bigoted”.  They acted as if they alone knew what was right for us, and how DARE we decide we want something else. (For the record, I did not vote for either candidate, I found them both odious) So, a large portion of this country, mostly on college campuses, urban areas, and inside the Beltway, had a collective temper tantrum that almost six months later, is still going on.  News outlets engaged in stories designed to defame, discredit, and  de-legitimize the election of Donald Trump.  Now, all of the sudden, after 8 years of worshiping at the Altar of Obama, the press decided that they were journalists again.  The words “Fake News” quickly gained currency, and networks, newspapers, and cable news outlets, were routinely putting up stories about the so-called “Collusion with Russia”, and then, were having to correct themselves, issue retractions, or straight up apologize.  Trust in the media, already in the toilet, was sinking even lower.  No one in these elite, liberal, college educated bubbles could understand what was going on.  They all asked “What is wrong with the American people?” instead of asking what was wrong with themselves.   I know, introspection, and self-awareness is hard.

Meanwhile, on Twitter, if you are not a user of the social media platform, then you missed it, there was a minor revolution, or even, a revelation of sorts brought to us by a couple of reporters.  Real reporters.  Journalists who went out, and sought out the people of the United States, what some people call “Real America”, to find out the reasons that Donald Trump got elected, and how that happened.  One of these reporters, a Salena Zito with the Washington Examiner, routinely posts stories about the people she talked to, the places she visited,  and what she found.  It was a revelation of sorts.  (Of course, those of us here in “Real America” already knew about it) Salena actually reported on what she found, no spin, no slant, just actual stories about what the people who live in this country actually thought, and what they thought about the election in general, and what their communities are going through.  They were stories about jobs, the opioid crisis, the economic woes still felt by many small towns across the country. They were stories about the people, they weren’t about what either reporter thought. They didn’t editorialize, or inject their politics, they listened, and they wrote.  With all of the garbage in the news, or, what passes as news, stories by Salena Zito, and another gentleman, Chris Arnade,  put a face on a nation of people dismissed by Hilary Rodham Clinton as a “Basket of Deplorables”.  The unique thing was that these two people at different times, climbed into their cars and traversed the back roads, highways, and  byways of this country, to find their stories (Yes, folks, they drove, they got on the road to go find these stories).  No pretense, no pomp, no qualifying, just reporting, and good reporting at that.   The stories brought to the fore the people of this country.  I am one of them.  I live near one of those “urban bubbles” if you will, and what I read from both Mrs. Zito and Mr. Arnade served to confirm what I already knew.

Here is why Trump won: People like me, and I can only speak for me, got sick and tired of the constant message from our elected officials, and from the media, and Hollywood, that the things we hold dear, our beliefs, values, rights, and ideas needed to be changed.  We were rubes, we were “bitter clingers” “deplorables’ and routinely called “racist”, “homophobic” and what ever other kind of “-phobic” they decided to stick on us.  In the weeks leading up to the election, Clinton and her campaign and her media enablers were acting as if she was not a candidate, but rather “President in waiting”.  It was disgusting, and it was enough to inflame anyone.  The display of arrogance and ego was astounding to me.  I got sick of it, I got tired of being told I was evil, or bad, or somehow mean for expressing my views, holding fast to my values, and wanting to just be left alone so I could live my life.  I did not want Hilary to win, I shuddered at the thought of her being president (I shuddered only slightly less at the thought of Donald winning)  So, now, here we are.  The “rest of America”, since November 8th, has somehow become the riddle that needs to be solved.  So, not to be outdone, the liberal media (because they are) has decided they are going to go out and find “America”.  the Huffington Post has decided to send a busload of their journalists on a 23 city tour of America, to do (in their mind) what Salena Zito and Chris Arnade have already done.  However, they are doing it by bus, and they are going to 23 cities, and the cities they are visiting, not surprisingly, were cities that Hilary won a majority of votes in.  So, in essence, this has become the Huffington Post “bias confirmation tour”.  Its amazing, and it is as if the liberal media has not learned a thing, nor do they understand just how despised they are.  The fact that they are going to cities, and not the rural, suburban, and semi-rural areas the other reporters went to, shows that they are merely going doing this so they could say “me too”.   Talk to Trump voters?  No, several of the reporters in this entourage have stated they are not going to talk to any Trump voters.  What they are doing, is going out to find Hilary supporters and have a good cry together, and share some mutual outrage, but try to mask it as an attempt to find “real Americans”.  This whole thing has inspired a Twitter hash tag #HuffPointheHeartland, and it is hilarious.  Instead of finding some integrity, and acting like the reporters they claim to be, and going out and objectively pursuing a story, they are going out to find stories, and people that agree exclusively with them, and of course, find people who have been negatively impacted by the Trump Administration, or the GOP, or both.  I also expect they will make something up if they can’t find it.   They are despised, and they just don’t understand it.  I am not sure whom I dislike more, Hollywood types with big mouths, idiotic politicians, or reporters and media types.  None of these people are even remotely qualified, regardless of their education level, to tell me how to live my life, what to think, or what to say, or what is right for me.  Yet, they seem to think that doing that is their job.  I hope one of these HuffPo reporters decides to walk into a diner in Southern Illinois, and start talking down to the folks that are there, and winds up wearing a plate of mashed potatoes.  I also hope one of the locals records it on their iPhone.

The bottom line is this.  This effort by the Huffington Post is just another attempt by the liberal media to make people believe they care, and they are in tune with the people.  What it actually is, is a tour of safe spaces, where they won’t be challenged, but can feel like they accomplished something.  If anything of any substance comes out of this, I will be truly surprised.

(Note. Salena Zito is also a CNN, and New York Post contributor.  You can find her on Twitter @SalenaZito. Chris Arnade is on Twitter as @Chris_arnade, and at The Guardian)

Trump. Again.

“The Donald” has won New Hampshire, and now, the din has become almost deafening.  In fact, on both sides of aisle, as socialists celebrate Bernie Sanders crushing of Hillary Clinton.

Trump won New Hampshire, rather handily, in many ways it was expected.  However, one primary does not a nomination make.  (Although, with the crows and cries from the Trump supporters, you would think he just won it all)

What is it about Trump supporters? Why, in many cases, are they so virulent, so vocal, so “in your face”?   I like Trump supporters to this:  Picture a Trump’s campaign, even, Trump the person, as a banquet, a banquet laid out by someone to satisfy a group of hungry people.  Now, on that banquet table, are carefully prepared favorites, things that the preparers know the hungry people want to eat.  However, also on that table, among the platters of delicious foods, are platters of things no one would eat, and many would find disagreeable., in fact, they may even be garbage, they smell so bad.  The hungry people arrive, and decide, “well, we are here, lets eat, at least at this banquet, there is stuff we can eat.”  So, everyone decides to get their fill, but in the process, have to reach over, around and aside of the platters of garbage, from which the emanating odors mingle with everything else, making it hard to smell the good stuff.  Still and all, once they navigate around the foul inedible, they pronounce the banquet as “The best” and “delicious”, despite warnings, and even, evidence, that the presence of the garbage at the table is going to harm them, despite all of the good food they have eaten.   In the meantime, the banquet goers are being told by others to take a step back, and look at the entire table.  For if they did, they would find the whole thing unappetizing, and walk away, despite the presence of their favorite foods.   And some, continue to eat, hoping that someone comes along, and cleans up the garbage, and gets rid of it, so all that is left is what everyone wants to consume.

I see tweets, and FB entries, praising Trump, talking about how he is a “leader” and “what this country needs”.   Now, I also understand what has given rise to Trump, and on the other side, Sanders.  It is an electorate that is fed up, finished, and angry, citizens who feel betrayed, and even, sold out.   People that are tired of “politics as usual” and the empty promises and hot air that comes out of Washington.

I get it, I am one of those people.

We are tired of the threat that is being posed to us by terrorism, unrestrained illegal immigration, a President who acts more like a dictator than the leader of a nation.  Tired of do-nothing Senators, and Congressmen.  We need, no, we want someone to do something about that.  Someone who will stand up and say “No more, this has to stop”.

Unfortunately no one has.  Well, except for Donald Trump.

The problem with Donald, and there are many. (take your pick) is that he is not, and never has been a Conservative, even a moderate one.  He is in it for himself, he is not in it for the country, the people, or our sovereignty.  He is in it for his ego.   His speeches on immigration, and terrorism strike a chord with many, because that is what people want to hear, he knows this, and he speaks to it.  It is little more than populist nonsense, with no real substance behind it.  It is what is selling though, and it is what is getting people to support him.  What most Americans want, is their country back, a sense of security, and the knowledge that Washington is not actively trying to run their lives.  Most of us just want to be left alone to pursue our version of the American Dream.  For various reasons, many Americans believe Donald Trump is, or can be, the man that does that.  Many of us disagree with that notion, and disagree with much of what Trump has to say.

Nonetheless, people are paying attention, taking it in, and following him.  In a speech just before the NH primary, Trump offered more of the same, talking points, and applause lines with very little substance, or policy behind them.   When I ask Trump supporters what he offers, I get very little in the way of responses that either point out what it is that he has, or, even make any sense.  I did get one reply on Facebook from a FB friend who is a Trump supporter, and she said “Trump is saying what we want to hear”.

That, folks, says it all.

Trump actually had his own, on the mark critique of his supporters, when he quipped during a speech recently in Iowa, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,”.  Which to me, is telling commentary on what he thinks of his supporters, and of himself.   In that one line, he is saying that his supporters blindly follow and support him, and it matters not what he does, they are so loyal, they wouldn’t abandon him.  Additionally he is saying that he is also above the law, and that if he shot someone, it shouldn’t matter.   There is not an ounce of humility in that man, and certainly, no respect for the people that support him.

Furthermore, the number of racist, white supremacists that support Trump, as well as Nazi, and other anti-Semitic types is more than a bit disturbing to me, and something that, I would think, any candidate would want to distance himself from.  It would seem, that Trump, while never acknowledging the support from these people, has also never disavowed it, and has never distanced himself from it.   Every extreme is present in every presidential election, in the past the extremism has always had little effect on the out come of the Presidential race.  This is the first election, in the 50 years I have been on this planet, where it seems that extremism has a much louder voice, and, while certainly not being courted, it is being tolerated, which should disturb just about anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or, in 2017, because the election is going to make us wait.

The other night, a group of old white folks got on a stage, and said a bunch of stuff, I am sure you saw it, The Democrat Debate.  Yes.  That one.

So, over the last several months, we have one candidate on the Republican side, and at least two on the Democrat side, that are saying the things the masses want to hear.  All night, during the debate, we heard about how the candidates were going to give us everything our heart desires.  Free Healthcare, Free College Tuition, Free Birth Control, Free this and “Free” that.  But, what was conspicuously absent from their promises of rainbows and unicorns for everyone, was any talk about freedom, liberty, and our Rights.

Why does it seem to me, that any discussion of our Rights under the Constitution these days, results in people sidestepping the issue, or acting as if talking about those Rights is bothersome, and an annoyance.  “Why confuse the issue with Rights” a co-worker said one night at work.  As we go along in this election cycle, which is taking on a decidedly surreal aura about it, it seems like there are more fist-shakers, rabble rousers, and snarling, sign waving people than I have ever seen in my life.  I am old enough to remember the protests of the 70’s, and I don’t ever remember an election cycle where the American people seem so distant from the vision that our founding fathers had.

It seems, that in this America, we are focused on revenge, on sticking it to “the other guy.”  whoever that might be.  We are about reclaiming what we perceive as lost, and  what we perceive as “ours”, and not seeming to care if bloodshed  winds up being part of the equation.  Now, I am not talking about bloodshed for a noble cause, or in the defense of something we hold dear.  I am talking bloodshed in the name of “I am taking back what is MINE!”, leaving the definition of what “mine” means, to whatever fits the bill at the moment.  In every issue, from Illegal Immigration, to Gun Rights, to Abortion Rights, the undertone of the threat of  violence, is slowly starting to become less of an undertone, and more of an overtone. The riots in Baltimore, and Ferguson, MO, are a glimpse of what is to come if things slip further out of contriol.   It is as if, we want these candidates of ours, the ones that we believe believe as we do  to be in control, it seems, but so long as it is the “other guy” who is being controlled.   We want the Illegals thrown out, guns taken away, abortion on demand, the sanctity of life be damned, and whatever we want when we want it. Listening to our candidates, they say the things that fire people up, and get the fists shaking, and it’s not in a good way.  Throughout history, tyrannical governments have found their way to the fore when the people, tired of whatever malaise is infecting the nation, want a change, and they want a big change, and they want the change to serve, not the nation, but their self interests.  They want that “other guy” who is responsible for all of the aforementioned malaise, to be punished.  In the eyes of most conservatives, it is the liberal, Socialist Left, and in the eyes of many liberals, it is the Conservative, Christian Right.

What many people seem to be forgetting, is that the institution of an authoritarian government affects them as well.  Does anyone out there think that the people running for President, especially Sanders, Clinton, and Trump are running because, as President, they would put country first?  Put the people first?  Their rhetoric is about punishing those nebulous “others” however they choose to define them, be it illegal immigrants, gun owners, the rich, or what have you.  It is a rhetoric of class division, racial division, and economic division, designed to pit people against one another, and take our focus off of the important issues. In this day and age of the “low information voter” getting people fired up with rhetoric that doesn’t require much thinking isn’t very difficult. Heck, these days, outrage is manufactured by those wishing to move an agenda forward.  Photos and news footage of angry, fist shaking people shouting slogans, and threatening violence tends to project the image that there are large numbers of angry people agitating for change.  These days, it doesn’t even have to be true, just make it a hashtag, and pretty soon people latch on to it, without even thinking about the facts, or, even considering what the facts are.  The “Hands up Don’t Shoot” is a perfect example.  People are so mired in their insular, self absorbed social-media-pop-culture world that real news, and real events, important events don’t make it past the latest Kardashian gossip, cute kitty video, or viral photo.  Remember #thedress from earlier this summer?  It was the lead story on “Good Morning America”, a stupid story about a dress that is/was perceived to be different colors by different people, was all over the news.  A story, about a dress… something that, even 10 years ago would have been fodder for “Inside Edition” or something similar was the lead story on a morning national news program.  When people are focused on the trivia, the minutiae, and the unimportant, and it masquerades as the important, then anything that really matters (world events, the economy, etc.) gets shunted aside. Additionally, with the ever present “social media” on our phones, and in our faces now, 24/7, the trivial becomes important, because it’s the first thing we see.  It’s distracting, and that, ultimately may be the goal.  Today’s social media, is the equivalent of putting the  comics on the front page of the newspaper 30 years ago, followed by the TV listings, the gossip columns, and then “cute photos” sent in by readers, with the news, and the important stories being the last section.

It is this kind of dumbing down, this kind of media slight-of-hand, that is keeping people from learning and understanding what is going on.  This is where tyrrany starts, it is when ordinary people allow someone else to do their thinking for them, and then mindlessly repeat what they hear without giving it a second thought.  It seems to me, in some ways, that there are people in this country who want someone to think for them, and want more government controls, they want “someone” to take care of things that they could, and should normally do themselves.   Think about the advent of the “self driving car”….  Cool, new, “cutting edge”, technological, and one more thing that does something that the average person generally should have no problem doing.  Promoters of the self driving car, are saying things like:

“Safer than having people drive”

“It can avoid accidents, and, indeed, prevent them from happening”

“Can go anywhere, while you ride along in comfort”

Does anyone see a problem with this?  I would not, under any circumstances, want a self driving car.  However, people are all ga-ga over them, and can’t wait to own one.  I like the fact that I get in to my car, and go where I want, not where the car decides to take me. I don’t want to be a passive participant.  And that is the point.  Too many people want to be passive participants.  They want others to think for them, to tell them where to go, and how they should get there.  A self driving car?  Really? So, once you get in it, you are now at the mercy of whomever controls the programming for the system that controls the car.  I find no merit in such a vehicle, none whatsoever.  Yet, it is promoted as a “safety solution” and something that will put an end to the high number of deaths every year from automobile accidents.  That is how anything that ultimately takes away a bit of your freedom, or your control is promoted.  It is promoted as something that promotes “safety” either for children, or the elderly, or ourselves.  Think about that for one moment.  A car, that is programmed, and even if it is programmed by the owner to travel, the destinations, the routes, and the dates and times, are saved in a computer network somewhere, somewhere, where someone else can get access, and see where you have gone, and how often, and how long you spend there. It is just more information about you, that, can be used against you.  Add to that, how easy would it be for someone who wants to, to change where you are supposed to go? How much power would you have to override that?  What comes next after that? “Smart houses” that record what goes on in them, under the guise of crime prevention? Domestic violence prevention? Fire prevention?

Giving up control over our own personal vehicles and personal space to others, so we can feel “secure” is the wrong road to go down. Technology is cool, and does great things, but those great things are hardly innocuous, or neutral.  They can be used as weapons against us, when they wind up in the wrong hands.  Right now, so much of our lives depend on technology, whether it’s our smart phone, our computer, or our vehicle’s GPS navigation system, that we are exposed in every possible way.  Giving up control over what we hold as freedoms, to those who promise to be better stewards of it than we are, is frivolous, dangerous fantasy.   Many people, however, desire the control, but they want to be on the sidelines watching, they want the control, just so long as it is on others, not on them.  That is not, and never will be the case.  Once an enemy is identified, isolated, and the blame for the societal issues of the day placed on that enemy, it makes it easier for those who wish to exercise power and control.  The people become focused on the “enemy” that they don’t realize that the control is also applying to them.  In their zeal to find a politician who will isolate, and control the “enemy” people don’t realize that they are giving up their freedoms and their rights.

See, it’s not about the “other guy” or “them”,  It is about us.  It is about our society. It is about our country, and all of the citizens that live here.  We cannot afford to elect anyone who desires to take away rights, subjugate a portion of the population, or curtail our personal, and private activities, or worse, subject them to the scrutiny of someone or some group who is given the power to decide if it is an activity that we should be allowed to partake in, based on whatever agenda they happen to be running.   Regardless of whether or not you disagree with abortion, gun ownership, homosexual marriage, or any of the the other issues in our society today, it does not give you, or anyone, the right to prevent those folks from expressing opinions, protesting, or celebrating those issues by using violence, imprisonment, or the threat of such. It seems, however, that these days, there are people who seem to think that using violence is the only way, and don’t seem to shy about expressing that.

Illegal immigration.

Next to Hillary’s emails, and the Planned Parenthood fiasco, it is the one issue in the current election cycle that resonates with everyone in this country.

Every day, in this country, we have people spilling over our borders, entering through our ports, airports, and unguarded seashores, and, even, being packed into freight cars by criminal human traffickers. We have nearly unsustainable levels of people in this country looking for and getting hand outs from the government . It is an issue that is very important to many citizens, it is about our way of life, it is about National Security, and it is about economic security as well.

But, what are we going to do about it?

Well, what can we do about it?

On the second question, as well as the first there are several “schools of thought” if you will on how to handle the crisis.  From the Left, they want open borders, on the Right, secure borders and tougher laws. From Americans in general, there is a “send them all back” sentiment.   Neither side can offer a constructive plan on how to  deal with it, because Americans of all stripes are demanding something be done NOW!

Let’s be honest with ourselves about this issue; and, before you go making assumptions about me, let me spell this out:  I don’t like illegal immigration, and I fully agree it must be stopped, and our border secured.  I understand, that although there are many people coming here to make things better for themselves, there are also large numbers who are here to cause problems, break laws, and do nefarious things, not to mention the very real possibility there are ISIS-types among those illegals. I worked 9-1-1 in a Law Enforcement environment, in a town that has a rough reptuation, as well as being a haven for gangsters, and criminals of all stripes. Telling me that there are serious criminals coming here illegally, is like saying water is wet. Prior to the Obama Administration, ICE was a regular visitor to our lock up.  I remember quite often running names and coming up with criminal histories marked “previously deported alien”.   However, not all of them are criminals, not all of them are bad, and not all of them are from South America, Central America, and Mexico.  Illegals come from China, Russia, Germany, Jordan, Israel, Cameroon, South Africa, Korea, Malaysia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Canada, India, Pakistan, and, well, you get the picture.  People enter this country illegally every year, from all over. One of the principal points of entry is in the Southwestern United States. but, they enter everywhere.

As solutions go, there are none that will solve the problem quickly.  It is too far gone, and too far advanced to turn around on a dime, and fix.  Regardless of what Trump and his supporters might think, there is simply no way to come to a fix that isn’t going to take a lot of time, energy and money. Fixing the problem, which should be a priority, will be expensive.  It needs a multi pronged approach, there has to be action on three things: Securing the Border, dealing with the millions who are already here, and preventing more from coming in.

Shouts of “Build a Wall” or “Send them all back” are neither practical, or real solutions.  We can’t send back millions of people.  How would that be done?  Do you really want the world to see train and bus loads of people being forcibly removed from the country? Do you really want this country portrayed like that? The “Land of the Free,” packing people in to freight cars, a la, Nazi Germany for deportation to another country?  Look, I know they broke the law, but, seriously, how could anyone with a sliver of humanity in them see that as nothing but barbaric. Who would round them up? Do you want to go there too?  How would you avoid any violence? Because violence would surely result from any kind of forceful measures, and would quickly spiral out of control.  If you are one of those who think it wouldn’t, your are delusional, and devoid of any logical thought. So. lets remove the “send them all back” option from the equation, except for those convicted of crimes.  The criminals can go, we don’t need them.

So, what do we do then?  Path to Citizenship? Mentioning that is like saying someone in the room has the measles.  Is that a “reward” for breaking the law? Perhaps.  But, what is worse; Giving a segment of the illiegals citizenship, or, being seen as a human rights violator right up there with China, Iran, and some other nations?

At this same time, current Immigration laws would have to be enforced, vigorously. The borders, including our ports, coasts and airports, as well as the long border crossings between us and Mexico as well as us and Canada would have to be secured. There would have to be immediate deportation of those that are caught crossing the border illegally.   I have no problems with those borders being patrolled by heavily armed border guards in armored vehicles. Remember, this is OUR country, and we can choose who we wish to let in.

Along with strengthening the border and other points of entry, there should be a comprehensive effort to remove the criminal element, and deport them back to wherever they came from.  Immigration and Customs should be beefed up, and be available whenever law enforcement comes upon someone who has a criminal past, and is here illegally, or, is here illegally, and has committed crime. Upon arrest, and the determination that the individual does not belong here, ICE agents should be on call to take the person into custody, and to a central location where they will be sent back to wherever they came from. Many other countries around the world have strict immigration laws, we need to have them too.  This country belongs to those of us (regardless of where anyone came from) who are citizens, whether they became a citizen last year, or their ancestors did two centuries ago.

Comprehensive, strict, and enforceable immigration laws, and a system to enforce those laws is what we need to enact.  Fixing the problem will take time, probably on the order of ten or fifteen years, but it can be done.  We won’t make the country impervious to illegal aliens, but we sure can make it tougher for them to try to get in, and, make it tougher for those who do manage to get in to stay. We also need politicians not afraid to act, and put the interests of the country above the interests of the party.(whichever party they belong to) Donald Trump does not qualify as “not afraid to act”, his bombast is worthless, his plan nativist and isolationist, appealing only to the xenophobic, and racist among us. Enacting any plan the requires the removal of large amounts of people, would require enacting a police state in this country, which is anti-thetical to anything and everything this country was founded on.

Now, let me make this clear: I am not talking about a blanket amnesty, if there were feasible, agreeable path to citizenship, then it would have to include getting oneself off of welfare, finding stable, productive employment, and staying out of trouble with the law (x number of misdemeanors, or one felony conviction within x amount of time gets one deported, perhaps) .  Once staying on illegally, whether it’s a border-jumper, or someone who over stays their visa, is made riskier, and less attractive, that may force many to head back where they came from.  LIke I said, it’s not going to be done quickly.  The only way to do that is to violate the civil and human rights of millions, and that will just lead to violence, and that is not a solution either.

Also, the next thing that would be necessary, is a stable, and growing economy, and a lean toward energy independence, which would create jobs as well.  A growing economy in Mexico, and South and Central America would also help, as many of the people who come here are poor and with little means.  But, again, this all takes time.   At this point, what we have to deal with is this:

Porous borders, anywhere from 11 to 20 million illegals.  A system the is broken, and has been allowed to languish under the current administration, as well as an administration that has sought to make it easier for people to get here illegally. That is what we have to deal with, and even if we “fix” the system, we will still have millions of people here, that are here illegally, and a solution is needed for them as well.   The very idea of forcing millions of people out of the country is appalling to me.  I don’t like the fact that they are here illegally and have taken advantage of my country, but, at the same time, I don’t like the idea of rounding up people by the millions (and, honestly, how would we tell who was who?) and shipping them off either, so I am at an impasse.  There has to be a workable middle ground here, and it needs to be found. Internal and external security needs to be rebuilt, illegal immigration needs to be brought under control.

Shouts, slogans, screams for mass deportation are not going to solve the illegal immigration crisis in this country.  The only thing that can, is a solution that addresses every avenue in this issue, and takes into account the security, well being, and needs of  American citizens first and foremost.  It has to be that way.  We are a sovereign nation.  We have the right to secure borders, and a secure homeland.  It’s really that simple.

The first debate is over, and the 2016 Republican Nomination race is in full swing.

Donald Trump, is leading in the polls, although latest reports have his lead shrinking, and his popularity declining, and some other candidates are moving up, notably, including Carly Fiorina, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, and Ben Carson.

The one characteristic about this race, so far, is the seething anger, much of it from Trump supporters.  Now, I have to sympathize here momentarily.  I understand their anger.  Mainly, they are angry, not so much at the current administration, but more so at the current Republican leadership in Congress who were elected on big promises, but, once in office, failed to deliver on them, and caved to the Democrats at almost every opportunity.  In fact, I will gladly state, that I am angry right along with them.  To say I am pissed off at the current state of affairs in Washington is a bit of an understatement.

Anger aside, however, the viciousness with which Trump supporters attack their opponents, is, I think, a bit overwrought.  Yeah, fine, he’s your candidate, but he’s not the Magic Man, and he certainly isn’t this nation’s savior.  Trump critics everywhere meet criticisma like this with expletive ridden, factless bombast anytime anyone comes out against The Donald.   Over at Red State.com, Erick Erickson, who runs that site, dis-invited Trump from Red State Gathering 2015, that took place in Atlanta back on August 6th-9th.  He caught much in the way of the above described vitriol.  He describes some of it in this post here.  He also admits that his dis-invitation of Ben Carson was a mistake.  (I get the Trump dis-invite, but not the Ben Carson one, but he explains it, and admits he is wrong, so that’s good enough for me)  The contrast between those who disagreed with his Trump snub, vs, those who disagreed with the Ben Carson snub is, as he stated, “…..and the reaction about Trump was 80% expletive filled rage.” . There is passionate disagreement, I know, I can be that way, when it comes to things I am passionate about.  But, blind, anger filled rage, aimed at someone just because they disagree with, or don’t like someone that you put on a pedestal, serves no purpose, and actually does little to advance an argument.

I may be among the angry, but I am not among the Trump supporters.  Several reasons. First of all, he has no solutions.  He has soundbites and slogans.  Second of all, he is not a conservative in any way, shape or form, and was never a Republican.  In fact, it is documented that he was a donor to Hillary’s senate campaign.  He is here to play spoiler, and that is about it.  Furthermore, I am thinking this is a bit of dust up as well, and as the dust settles, so will Trump’s poll numbers. Additionally, his appeal comes from the fact that he is talking about sticking a thumb in the eye of the political establishment in Washington, and right now, that is what many voters want to hear, and are rallying around the guy whose thumb is extended, and is just looking for a target.

But, what about all of those angry voters?  Well, they are there, and they are, for the moment, rather vocal about it and don’t care who knows.  But, what is driving the anger?  For starters, it is the fact that many are tired of the Republicans saying one thing, and doing another.  They are tired of a President who seems more concerned with golf, celebrities and vacations, than the serious business of running the country. Many are tired of what appear to be threats to their rights, and their way of life  As I have said before, these political times are like nothing I have experienced in the 35 years or so, since I was old enough to understand the political process.  What will happen to the anger?  Well, that remains to be seen.  Anger can only sustain a candidate, and their base of supporters for so long.  Clear, well thought out statements on their plans should they get elected need to be forth coming.  Because when everyone is done shaking their fists, the angry voters are going to start thinking, and then they are going to have serious questions for not only “their” candidate, but all of them.  The candidates that are going to rise to the top, are the ones that are going to have clearly articulated goals, as well as be brave enough to take on the establishment, both within in the party, and within the opposition.  Once that candidate comes to the fore, then the voters will find common ground.  However, that candidate is going to need to be strong, as well as clear, articulate as well as “angry”, and will have the American people’s back.  All of us. Because right now, across many segments of our society, people feel betrayed by Washington, their party, and their politicians.

Outside of Donald Trump, one of the biggest issues that seems to take up most of my Twitter and Facebook feed, is gun rights, and the associated Second Amendment legislation stuff that goes along with it. For much of my life, I never paid very close attention to Second Amendment rights, and things like that, always figuring they would always be with us, it’s not that I am against guns, or I didn’t care, I just didn’t pay attention.

Now, guns have never been a part of my life, outside of the odd BB gun.  My dad never owned any, but I did have an uncle who had a few guns.  However, even though guns were never part of my life, I was pretty familiar with them.  Being a military historian, and avid student of World War II, becoming familiar with guns, at least on paper, is part of learning about the history of the conflict.   That being said, I had always wanted to shoot a gun for real, however, being that I grew up here in Illinois, my dad couldn’t just go out to the local sporting goods store, by a .22 and bring it home for me to plink away with.  As I grew up, and became of age, I did manage to get a Firearm Owner’s ID card, but never bought a weapon, because money was always needed for something else.  Anyway, the upshot is, I never really paid much attention to 2nd Amendment stuff, but I did know that anti-gun types were rather irritating.

Fast forward twenty years, and things have changed.  Still not a gun owner, but,  I was gaining a better understanding of what the “gun grabbers” were up to, and what gun rights supporters were doing to counter that.  I began to understand that 2nd Amendment rights dove-tailed with First Amendment rights as well as all of the other rights in the Bill of Rights.  Even more so, I have also had a very strong belief that everyone has the right to defend themselves, by what ever means necessary, and, if that self-defense includes a gun, well, then, so be it. Honestly, a person gets shot breaking in to another person’s house, the, that person had it coming.   Don’t want to get shot? Then don’t do things that will lead to that happening.  Harsh? Well, yeah, but that’s how it goes.  If one intends to harm someone, and that individual gets hurt, or killed, because their intended victim put up a fight, well, then, there is no sympathy, or excuse.   But, enough of that.

A couple of years ago, as my two oldest sons became of age, they relocated to Texas (one because Uncle Sam said so) and, I had always heard that Texas, as far as guns went, was considered by many to be a “free state” in that regard.  Certainly, less restrictive than Illinois.  Two years after they both moved down there, okay, one was stationed there, and the other moved there, figuring he would do better making a living than he would in Illinois (He was right).  We decided to take a vacation to Texas to see both boys, and see the sights.

And get in a bit of shooting.

Yes.  That was the main reason outside of seeing my sons (one of whom was back from his second tour of Afghanistan): Getting a chance, finally, to shoot a gun for-real.

I had never handled a gun, a real one, but, in the late 80’s I was building model guns from model kits that our local hobby shop sold.  They were expensive, but, when finished, they acted like their real life counterparts.  On our first trip to the range, I was about as excited as a kid at Christmas.  I was looking forward to shooting both rifles and handguns, and my better half an I agreed that the kids (my two youngest were in Junior High at the time) if they were allowed to shoot at all, we would rent them .22 caliber handguns.  Full disclosure:  I will admit that I found the fact that one can rent a gun at a range rather interesting, because I had never heard of that before. (Remember, I was rather naive on the “gun culture”) At the first range we went to, we were warmly welcomed.  The employees were super friendly, and they went over the range rules with the seriousness that they required.  The range also had a gun store, and that is where we paid for, and rented the guns, signed the paperwork, and got our lessons on how to load, hold and shoot the 9mm Beretta, .45 M1911 and the .22 Ruger for the kids.  After that it was into the range.

Shooting was fun, I was nervous at first, but was able to handle the weapons with confidence, and I found I also enjoyed helping the rest of the family with loading, and clearing the guns.  Like I said, I had never used one, but I had  accumulated knowledge on how they worked, so I was ready to put my “book” knowledge to real life use. We had a great time interacting with the range staff, and some of the other shooters that were there. I also enjoyed talking shop about the various weapons with the range staff, as well as some other folks there.

It was this trip that moved me from being a passive 2nd Amendment guy, to an active one.  I gained a deeper understanding about guns, the people who own them, and how important those rights are to us.  Not only that I learned that shooting is fun, and it’s a worthwhile activity.  But, I began to understand the Second Amendment even more.  I am a holder of a gun card again, here in Illinois, but after a second trip to Texas this year to see my sons, and my brand new daughter in law, and for some more shooting, I am thinking that moving to Texas would be a great idea……

So, now, I stand for the 2nd Amendment, and I am not passive any longer. I follow what is going on with gun laws around the country, as well as legislation, and I pay attention to those politicians who wish to restrict our rights.  I know now, its a never-ending battle, because, fighting for one right, means fighting for all of them.  I am actively aware of things that go on now regarding gun rights, as well as encroach on free speech, and other rights.   To those who are passive on the issue, or or those who would say “Well, I am not a gun owner, so it doesn’t matter”. I say this:  As Americans, we should be vigilant in protecting all of our rights, fighting for all of them, not just the ones we feel we “are part of”. Because if we fight for one, and not others, we stand to lose them all.

The View From Here.

I guess I can say that we live in “unique”, for lack of a better term, political times. Never before in my life, do I remember this kind of dynamic between people and politicians.  Growing up, and in my youth, I learned that politicians are the people who run things.  Not always trustworthy, always glad handing, speaking, and making promises, but people who ran things all the same.  There was then, as now, a certain level of cynicism regarding the process (especially since I live in the Chicago area) but, you could generally count on the politicians to go to Springfield, or Washington and “bring home the bacon” as it were.  You voted for the guy who got that done, and that pretty much was the way it went, or, it was my perception of it,  There was also the sense that the person in office, be it in Springfield, or Washington, was part of the place he or she came from. You knew where that person grew up, what Chicago neighborhood, or suburb they came from.   That person carried with them some of the traits from where they grew up, one could identify with them, one could actually feel, that that elected person, knew from whence they came. It was comforting in a way, because the person that everyone elected was “one of them”.  If you lived in the same town, or neighborhood where an elected representative was from, you got to hear stories from the people who knew that person as a child, or student, or altar boy, or cheerleader, or whatever.  They may have been a politician, but they were “your” politician.

Not only that, you could count on seeing them at the local neighborhood festival during the summer, or at the County Fair, Village Picnic, or “Gathering on the Green”, walking around shaking hands, swapping stories, greeting old friends, and neighbors.  In many cases, whether forced, or sincere, these elected officials acted as if they were still part of the old neighborhood.  You could actually talk to them, shake a hand.  Perhaps they walked about with a couple of assistants, but they were there and they were visible.

Yes, it was still politics, and yes, they were still politicians, doing what politicians do, but at least, back then, they gave the impression that they wanted to talk to their constituents, and remind the voters that they  themselves came from the same place, and they were their champion in Washington, or the state capitol.  As I stated, in a way, it was comforting, if I cast my vote for my Congressman, or State Representative, I felt more or less, that they would take my interests to Springfield, or Washington with them.  Of course, it wasn’t always the case, but, hey, these were politicians, we expected this from them. There was still corruption, scandal, and all of that, let’s be honest, politics has always been that way.  Back then, however, I always had the impression that most politicians devoted some effort to connecting with their constituents.  It’s never been perfect, and never was, but back then, 25, 30, 40 years ago, it was different in some ways.

That was then, this is now.

Back then, the impression I got, was that my elected representatives were accessible, on some level.  If you spoke to them, wrote them a letter, sometimes you got a form letter, other times, you got a personal response, but, you got a response from them.  These days, I am not so sure.

Regardless of the charm they try to exude, many of our elected officials come across as fake, and arrogant, and above the rest of us.  Condescension seems to be the norm.  We are dismissed with a pat on the head, and a condescending form letter reply to our concerns.  Sometimes, we don’t even get that.  We might get a tweet, or even, a Facebook response with an emoticon.  It feels like a brush-off, a “Get away from me boy, you bother me”.   In Springfield, as in Washington, we have  elected people who just don’t mesh with us anymore.  Summer Festivals?  Sure, their staff is there, with pamphlets, and a booth, and brochures touting accomplishments. Questions?  Concerns? “Sure, the Congressman is on Twitter, and Facebook, be sure to “Like” us!”  The elected representative might even show up at the event for some photo oppurtunities, with other local politicians, and perhaps labor, or civil rights leaders, but not with the people who put them in office.

What has been even more transforming over the last twenty years or so, is their transition from “politicians” to “Ruling Class”.  It started with Bush and Clinton back in the early 90’s.  You  could see it, the sense among the elected, that they were there, because somehow, they knew better than us.  The attitude is prevalent on both sides of the aisle.  There are no more “men and women of the people” in our Statehouses and especially in Washington.   We are given the brush off, we are spoken to like wayward children.  Even campaign literature has a note of condescension to it.  They are, for the most part, Ivy League educated, or products of elite universities. Taught by the same professors, the same theories, and develop the same attitudes and outlooks. In the “Ruling Class” Democrat and Republican are indistinguishable. Through the 90’s the Clinton’s and their ilk began to solidify the “Ruling Class” as it were.  If there were starting point for the elite arrogance that pervades these people, it would have to be the Clinton Administration.  Yes, the first Bush Administration had it too, but the Clintons and their ilk brought it home.  They institutionalized it in Washington.  They made it part of the landscape.  The attitude, however, infects every one of them in Washington, even to the lowliest intern.   The Clintons were the first to tie the bonds between Washington and the Hollywood Left.  No longer did we matter, here in the rest of the nation, we became “Fly-over Country”.   Hollywood’s big and powerful slept in the White House, hung out with the Cliintons, testified in Congressional hearings (remember the whole Alar thing? Actresses giving speeches to Congress on the dangers of the chemical, because they played a farmer in a movie) Spoke on Climate Change (then “Global Warming) policies.  All of the sudden, we had Hollywood types telling us to listen to Washington because they knew better.

Through the Bush Administration, it ease off, but not much. Hollywood may not have been visiting as much, but the arrogance and elitism were still there. Government became bigger, and more bloated, and more bureaucracy  With Obama’s entry into the White House, it only got worse.  Hollywood was back in the White House, bigger than before.  The arrogance grew in volumes, and politicians turned their backs firmly on the American people, and began a process of dividing us against one another, and also beginning to show shades of the tyrants they wish to be.  Obama began acting like the emperor that he wished he could be, what he displayed he wanted to be with his “I have a phone and a pen” comment.

What also changed was everyone’s perception of the government.  Instead of being ‘the government” they became “The Government”.  Back in my formative years, Washington was viewed with a bit of disdain, and cynicism.  Why not?  Bureaucracy moves slowly.  Getting anything done requires massive amounts of time, energy and paperwork.  Washington was an annoyance, something to gripe about, but not really worry too much about. We could go about living our lives without worrying about the government doing anything to us for the way we lived, unless, of course, we ran afoul of the law, and got the FBI’s attention.

That is definitely the one thing Obama changed.

I never used to fear the government.  I do now.

Are they going to come kicking my door down, and take me away somewhere? No, I don’t think they will, but I live with the fact that now, it is much easier to run afoul of the government than it was at any time in the past.  More regulations, more rules.  Special interest groups that used to be fringe organizations, are now sitting in the White House helping to draft policy. Groups that want to take away our rights to speak our minds, to own guns, to travel where we wish, even groups that want to regulate the lunch you send with your kid to school. It was never like this. I didn’t have to worry about my barbecue grill and it’s capacity to pollute.  Now I do. I never had to worry about “Carbon foot print” or “thought rape” or “hate thoughts” or “white privilege”. I have to now, however.  I don’t want to do that anymore.  I don’t want to have to worry about my grill, and the smoke it emanates, or if something I say is going to come back to haunt me in some way, or even worse, demonize me for simply having an opinion.

As an everyday American, I feel less like a citizen, and more like a subject.   When looking at the broader landscape, it is not hard to see how a Bernie Sanders and a Donald Trump are rising now.  Many people see Washington the same way I see it: Overbearing, intrusive, and bigger than it needs to be, as well as totally disconnected from the needs of this nation.   American citizens are wary, suspicious, and cynical, and we feel like no one in Washington even knows we are here. Crisis come and go, people die, and the President picks and chooses where he is going to get involved.  His disdain for American people is evident in the way speaks, and his actions while in office.  A crisis finds him on the golf course more often than not. Only the plight of certain people and groups in this country garner his attention, and then, it’s fleeting at best. There is no leader in Washington.  The Republicans we elected have waffled and caved, disappointing use even further.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are packing in the crowds, garnering TV time, and dominating news cycles. I do not support either Sanders, or Trump.  But, I fear either one of them could get into office, simply because a sick and tired America wants someone who will do something to fix what is wrong with this country, and not really care how it is done, just so long as someone pays attention to us, and fixes some things. Or, at the very least, kicks most of the elites out of Washington.

On the GOP side, we need to dispense with The Donald and his Circus.  We need to take on Hillary, and Bernie, and repudiate their ideas.  We need to unite everyone as an American, and find a way to begin healing this nation.  Four years of Trump, Hillary, Biden, or Sanders will just make things worse.