A couple of items I commented on have been called into question. Rightly so. I could have made myself clearer.
1) A correction. Recently I wrote about being mad at future “Con Ed” bills. My bad. I should have said, in regarding Indian Point, that it is owned by Entergy. However, Entergy does not do the billing; Con Ed bills me for my electric service. So, even though Entergy owns Indian Point, its closing will affect your energy bill whether it is Con Ed or any other provider.
2) In the first stimulus bill—you know, the trillion-dollar “shovel-ready” bill—a panel was created and funded that would in the future decide based on cost, quality of life and life expectancy what medical procedures would be allowed. In fact, and I have written about this before in the runup to the passage of Obamacare, during a town hall in San Francisco, a lady asked President Obama that if her 88-year-old mother needed a hip replacement, would it be covered? He answered that because of her advanced age, it probably would not be, that she would be given medication to ease her pain. This is the panel Sara Palin dubbed “death panels.”
3) When I wrote about Obamacare taking $500 million from Medicare and giving it to Medicaid, it did not mean that the government wrote a $500 million check. It scales back Medicare spending by $500 million and the monies not spent there are directed to Medicaid. By not spending Medicare dollars that people contributed all their working lives, this is where the panel in point 2 comes in. So any specifically prohibited discrimination in the Medicare law is no longer a discrimination but deemed not necessary by lack of funds, quality of life or life expectancy by the above-mentioned panel. That is the new law.
4) When I submit a column, where necessary I cite my sources for the editor to verify. It is then included in the printed column when the editor deems it necessary. Point is, opinions are mine; however, what I opine on comes from a verifiable source, it is not made up out of whole cloth.
5) I am not against all abortion, nor have I ever advocated for the elimination of all abortions. I wrote repeatedly that I do not believe Roe vs. Wade would ever be repealed. I say this because Roe vs. Wade is based on “the right to privacy,” which is not in the Constitution but made up entirely by the Supreme Court to justify Roe vs. Wade being constitutional. The “right to privacy” is an implied right, not an enumerated right. So to actually repeal Roe vs. Wade, five people in black robes would first have to find there is no right to privacy.
As there have been rulings since then on other topics besides abortion based on this implied right, it would cause legal chaos should it be found to be no longer a right. This is why I continue to conclude Roe vs. Wade is not in danger of being repealed. Those who believe one way or the other about the future of Roe vs. Wade are wasting their time. So my opinion on abortion regarding Roe vs. Wade is not important which is why I do not address that point of the argument.
6) What I am against is the expansion of abortion to the point where the baby, because of the advance in medicine, can survive outside the womb. I will not call it a fetus at this point because it is a life, and life is the first endowed right by our creator in the Declaration of Independence. At this point, I view it as infanticide, which it is.
7) I am extremely troubled when I hear Sen. Schumer or any other Democrat declare that this Republican nominee or elected official (Trump, DeVos, Sessions, etc.) is outside the mainstream of America. As I wrote, since 2010, Democrats have lost 1,500 elective offices all the way down to mayor. Democrats control only five states out of 50. There are 34 Republican governors. Donald Trump won three quarters of all the counties in the United States. He even won 200 that voted for Obama in ‘08 and ‘12.
Hillary Clinton’s majority of popular votes came from three specific areas: Los Angeles County, New York County and Chicago.
The Democrat Party is now, for all intents and purposes, a bicoastal party. If any party is now out of the mainstream, it is the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party is a shrinking and dwindling hate group. That’s literally what they have become. Think about it for a minute. Richard Nixon, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Donald Trump. Take your pick. They are or were hated; not just opposed.
The national Democrat Party has become the hate party. They thrive and subsist on it. You can see it in these protests. You can see it in these so-called acts of dissent, which are nothing more than riots. If it were Republican supporters acting like this, it is exactly what it would be called, be honest about it for a minute.
They act like they are the most compassionate and tolerant and peaceful and understanding people on Earth; that they care. It is just a bunch of cow pies. The American people who voted for Trump are hated. The Republican Party is hated. The conservative media is hated. Look at your college campuses. This is NOT mainstream. It is fringe and they are in no position to judge what is or is not mainstream.
I know that the beauty of this country is you are allowed to disagree and peacefully protest. However, until they can conduct themselves with some semblance of decorum, put a sock in it.
This is what I say. What say you?
The opinions expressed herein are the writer's alone, and do not reflect the opinions of TAPinto.net or anyone who works for TAPinto.net. TAPinto.net is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the writer.